ArticleEuropean journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery2022
Surgical aortic valve replacement in patients aged 50-69 years-insights from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY).
Article in European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01165827 (National Prospective German Registry for Aortic Valve Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
National Prospective German Registry for Aortic Valve Therapy
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioprosthetic vs. mechanical prostheses in patients aged 50-70 years undergoing aortic valve replacement surgery: outcomes analysis from propensity score matching.European heart journal open · 2026Article
- Durability Testing With Calcification of Surgical Aortic Valves and Transcatheter Heart Valves: An In Vitro Study.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Long-term clinical outcomes in patients between the age of 50-70 years receiving biological versus mechanical aortic valve prostheses.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2025Article
- Bioprostheses and Mechanical Prostheses for Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Aged 50 to 65 Years Offer Similar Long-Term Survival Rates.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Characteristic calcification behavior of five surgical aortic valve bioprostheses models: An in vitro study.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Mechanical valve replacement for patients with rheumatic heart disease: the reality of INR control in Africa and beyond.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Aortic Valve Replacement in the Era of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Current Status in Korea.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Article
- Mechanical versus Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement in Middle-Aged Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- Critical appraisal of a registry study: aortic valve replacement in patients aged 50-69 years.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to analyse the outcome of patients between 50 and 69 years of age undergoing biological or mechanical aortic valve replacement.
methodsData were collected from the German Aortic Valve Registry. Data were analysed regarding baseline characteristics and outcome parameters such as 5-year survival, stroke and reintervention.
resultsIn total. 3046 patients undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement between 2011 and 2012 were investigated and a propensity score matching was performed. Within this period, 2239 patients received a biological prostheses, while 807 patients received a mechanical prosthesis. Mean age in the biological group was 63.07 (±5.11) and 57.34 (±4.67) in the mechanical group (standardized mean difference 1.172). In the overall cohort, there were more female patients in the biological group (32.7% vs 28.4%) and log EuroSCORE I was higher (5.41% vs 4.26%). After propensity matching (610 pairs), there was no difference in the mortality at 5-year follow-up (12.1% biological vs 9.2% mechanical P = 0.05) nor for reoperation/reintervention (2.5% biological vs 2.0% mechanical, P = 0.546). Patients undergoing mechanical aortic valve replacement suffered from a higher stroke rate 3.3% vs 1.5% (P = 0.04) at 5-year follow-up.
conclusionsAortic valve replacement with biological or mechanical prostheses showed similar 5-year outcomes for survival and reoperation in a propensity-matched cohort, but significantly increased stroke rate after mechanical aortic valve replacement. This could influence the choice of a mechanical valve in younger patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35567484What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.