ArticlePloS one2022
Every day mitral valve reconstruction: What has changed over the last 15 years?
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal Outcomes Following Surgical Repair of Primary Mitral Regurgitation.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- Simple and Safe: Inverse Plication of the Posterior Mitral Leaflet in Everyday Mitral Valve Reconstruction with and without Concomitant Procedures.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMitral valve reconstruction (MVR) is one of the cardiosurgical procedures which cannot be substituted by any intervention owing to the quality of the quasi-anatomical, physiological repair. However, technique and strategies have changed over the years. We looked at procedural characteristics and outcome in an all-comer, non-selected cohort of patients.
methods738 out of 1.977 patients were retrospectively analyzed receiving MVR with and without concomitant procedures. The cohort was divided into three periods. P1: 2004-2009 (134 pts.); P2: 2010-2014 (294 pts.), and P3: 2015-2019 (310 pts.).
resultsEarly mortality increased from P1 to P2 and decreased from P2 to P3 (9% P1, 13% P2, 10% P3). All patients received an annuloplasty-ring. In P1 resection measures dominated. In P3 artificial chordae were dominant. Age, BMI, and risk scores correlated with early mortality. Survival rates were 66% (5-years), 55% (10-years), 44% (15-years) in P1, 63% (5-years), 50% (10-years) in P2, and 80% (5-years) in P3. Odds ratio for reduced long-term survival were concomitant venous only bypass surgery (10-years 2,701, p = 0.026). 10-year survival was positively influenced by isolated MVR (0.246, p = 0.001), concomitant isolated arterial bypass (IMA) (0.153, p = 0.051), posterior leaflet measure (0.178, p<0.001), and use of artificial chordae (5-years 0.235, p<0.001).
conclusionIndication for ring implantation remained mandatory while preference changed alongside improved designs. Procedural characteristics changed from mainly resection maneuvers to predominant use of artificial chordae. Long-term results were negatively influenced by co-morbidities and positively influenced by posterior leaflet repair and artificial chordae. MVR underwent a qualitative evolution and remains a valuable cardiosurgical procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.