ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2024
Surgical aortic valve replacement etiologies, hemodynamics, and outcomes in 1346 patients from the Malaysian heart centre.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study examined the characteristics and outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) both isolated and in combination with other cardiac surgery in Malaysia from 2015 to 2021.
methodsThis was a retrospective study of 1346 patients analyzed on the basis of medical records, echocardiograms and surgical reports. The overall sample was both considered as a whole and divided into aortic stenosis (AS)/aortic regurgitation (AR)-predominant and similar-severity subgroups.
resultsThe most common diagnosis was severe AS (34.6%), with the 3 most common etiologies being bicuspid valve degeneration (45.3%), trileaflet valve degeneration (36.3%) and rheumatic valve disease (12.2%). The second most common diagnosis was severe AR (25.5%), with the most common etiologies being root dilatation (21.0%), infective endocarditis (IE) (16.6%) and fused prolapse (12.2%). Rheumatic valve disease was the most common mixed disease. A total of 54.5% had AS-predominant pathology (3 most common etiologies: bicuspid valve degeneration valve, degenerative trileaflet valve and rheumatic valve disease), 36.9% had AR-predominant pathology (top etiologies: root dilatation, rheumatic valve disease and IE), and 8.6% had similar severity of AS and AR. Overall, 62.9% of patients had trileaflet valve morphology, 33.3% bicuspid, 0.6% unicuspid and 0.3% quadricuspid. For AS, the majority were high-gradient severe AS (49.9%), followed by normal-flow low-gradient (LG) severe AS (10.0%), paradoxical low-flow (LF)-LG severe AS (6.4%) and classical LF-LG severe AS (6.1%). The overall in-hospital and total 1-year mortality rates were 6.4% and 14.8%, respectively. Pure severe AS had the highest mortality. For AS-predominant pathology, the etiology with the highest mortality was trileaflet valve degeneration; for AR-predominant pathology, it was dissection. The overall survival probability at 5 years was 79.5% in all patients, 75.7% in the AS-predominant subgroup, 83.3% in the AR-predominant subgroup, and 87.3% in the similar-severity subgroup.
conclusionsThe 3 most common causes of AS- predominant patients undergoing SAVR is bicuspid valve degeneration, degenerative trileaflet valve and rheumatic and for AR-predominant is root dilatation, rheumatic and IE. Rheumatic valve disease is an important etiology in our SAVR patients especially in mixed aortic valve disease. Study registration IJNREC/562/2022.
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.