ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2023
Maternal and Fetal Outcomes in Pregnant Patients With Mechanical and Bioprosthetic Heart Valves.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Critical uterine bleeding after miscarriage in a warfarin-anticoagulated patient with mechanical heart valve: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis During Pregnancy: Role of Multidisciplinary Pregnancy Heart Team to Guide Decision-Making.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- Navigating women with congenital heart disease during pregnancy: Management strategies and future directions.World journal of cardiology · 2025Review
- Navigating pregnancy with cardiovascular disease: pathophysiology, risk stratification, and maternal-fetal outcomes.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2025Review
- Progressive calcification of bioprosthetic mitral valve observed during pregnancy resulting from in vitro fertilization: a case report.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- Pregnancy complications and long-term risk of cardiovascular events in women with structural heart disease.Open heart · 2024Article
- Cardiovascular Disease in Pregnancy: Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Associated Burdens From a National Cohort at Delivery.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Cardio-Obstetrics Team-Based Management of a Pregnant Patient With Severe Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Disease.JACC. Case reports · 2024Article
- Obstetric considerations for aortopathy in pregnancy.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2023Review
- A comparison of neurological event and mortality rates between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2023Review
- Mechanical heart valves and pregnancy.JRSM cardiovascular diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Guidelines for choice of prosthetic heart valve in people of reproductive age are not well established. Although biologic heart valves (BHVs) have risk of deterioration, mechanical heart valves (MHVs) require lifelong anticoagulation. This study aimed to characterize the association of prosthetic valve type with maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnant patients. Methods and Results Using the 2008 to 2019 National Inpatient Sample, we identified all adult patients hospitalized for delivery with prior heart valve implantation. Multivariable regressions were used to analyze the primary outcome, major adverse cardiovascular events, and secondary outcomes, including maternal and fetal complications, length of stay, and costs. Among 39 871 862 birth hospitalizations, 4152 had MHVs and 874 had BHVs. Age, comorbidities, and cesarean birth rates were similar between patients with MHVs and BHVs. The presence of a prosthetic valve was associated with over 22-fold increase in likelihood of major adverse cardiovascular events (MHV: adjusted odds ratio, 22.1 [95% CI, 17.3-28.2]; BHV: adjusted odds ratio, 22.5 [95% CI, 13.9-36.5]) as well as increased duration of stay and hospitalization costs. However, patients with MHVs and BHVs had no significant difference in the odds of any maternal outcome, including major adverse cardiovascular events, hypertensive disease of pregnancy, and ante/postpartum hemorrhage. Similarly, fetal complications were more likely in patients with valve prostheses, including a 4-fold increase in odds of stillbirth, but remained comparable between MHVs and BHVs. Conclusions Patients hospitalized for delivery with prior valve replacement carry substantial risk of adverse maternal and fetal events, regardless of valve type. Our findings reveal comparable outcomes between MHVs and BHVs.
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.