ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
Twenty-five year experience with aortic valve-sparing root replacement in a single teaching center.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. 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.
- Long term outcomes of valve sparing aortic root replacement versus conventional aortic root replacement using a mechanical prosthesis by propensity score matching.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes in Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Reimplantation: Full Sternotomy versus Mini-Sternotomy Approach.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Aortic valve-sparing root replacement (AVSRR) is a technically demanding procedure. In experienced centers it offers excellent short- and long-term results, making the procedure an attractive alternative for aortic root replacement especially in young patients. The aim of this study was to analyze long-term results of AVSRR using the David operation in our institution over the last 25 years. Methods: This is a single-center retrospective analysis of outcomes of David operations performed in a teaching institution not running a large AVSRR-program. Pre-, intra- and postoperative data were collected from the institutional electronic medical record system. Follow-up data were collected through direct contact of the patients and their cardiologists/primary care physicians. Results: Between 02/1996 and 11/2019, 131 patients underwent David operation in our institution by a total of 17 different surgeons. Median age was 48 (33-59), 18% were female. Elective surgery was performed in 89% of the cases, 11% were operated as emergency in the setting of an acute aortic dissection. Connective tissue disease was present in 24% and 26% had a bicuspid aortic valve. At hospital admission 61% had aortic regurgitation grade ≥3, 12% were in functional NYHA-class ≥III. 30-day mortality was 2%, 97% of the patients were discharged with aortic regurgitation ≤2. In 10-year follow-up, 15 (12%) patients had to be re-operated because of root-related complications. Seven patients (47%) received a transcatheter aortic valve implantation, 8 (53%) required surgical replacement of the aortic valve or a Bentall-De Bono operation. Estimated reoperation-free survival at 5 and 10 years was 93.5% ± 2.4% and 87.0% ± 3.5%, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed no differences in reoperation-free survival for patients presenting with a bicuspid valve or preoperative aortic regurgitation ≥3. However a preoperative left ventricular end diastolic diameter of ≥5.5 cm was associated with worse outcome. Conclusion: David operations can be performed with excellent perioperative and 10-year follow-up outcomes in centers not running large AVSRR-programs.
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.