ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2023
Midterm outcomes of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in a heterogeneous valve pathology cohort: respect or resect?
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive mitral valve repair revisited: Respect or Resect? Amidst competing risks.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Outcomes of robotic repair for the degenerative mitral valve: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Gender-Tailored Heart Team Decision Making Equalizes Outcomes for Female Patients after Aortic Valve Replacement through Right Anterior Small Thoracotomy (RAST).Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
- Recurrent mitral regurgitation after repair of Barlow's disease in a single-center retrospective cohort study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Statistics in the Operating Room: A Cardiovascular Surgeon's Guide to Numbers That Matter.Cureus · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIV) through a right lateral thoracotomy has become the standard of care at specialized centers and might soon will be the only acceptable surgical treatment option in the future era of interventional procedures. The aim of our study was to analyze the outcomes of our MIV-specialized, single-center, mixed valve pathology cohort with regard to morbidity, mortality and midterm outcomes comparing two different repair techniques (respect versus resect). Methods: Baseline and operative variables, postoperative outcomes and follow-up information about survival, valve competence and freedom from reoperation were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The repair cohort was divided into three groups (resection, neo-chordae and both) and compared for outcomes. Results: Between July 22 Conclusions: Despite a heterogeneous cohort with mixed valve pathologies, there is a high reconstruction rate, low short- and midterm morbidity, mortality and need for re-intervention with comparable outcomes of the resect and respect technique in a specialized MIV center.
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.