ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Right ventricular outflow tract stenting for late presenter unrepaired Fallot physiology: a single-center experience.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Right ventricular outflow tract stenting for obstructive lesions in adult congenital heart disease.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2026Article
- Urgent right ventricular outflow tract stenting in a dual risks of thrombosis and bleeding in uncorrected adult with cyanotic congenital heart disease: a case report.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Left ventricular outflow tract stenting in late presenting transposition physiology with ventricular shunt and pulmonary stenosis: a case series.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Emergency criteria and lifesaving intervention windows for high-risk critical congenital heart disease: a perspectives.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of right ventricular outflow tract stenting compared to surgical shunting in late-presenting children.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Ductal stenting vs. surgical shunting in late presenting duct-dependent pulmonary circulation: a single-center experience.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Inter-atrial Septum Stenting in Congenital Heart Disease Patient: A Case Series in Indonesia.Cardiovascular & hematological disorders drug targets · 2024Observational
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical outcome after right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) stenting in late presenter patient with unrepaired Fallot physiology. Background: In younger patients, RVOT stenting is an alternative to mBTT shunt; however, there have been few reports of this palliative technique in late presenter population, including adults. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective study of nonrandomized, palliated Fallot patients. Clinical outcomes such as left ventricular ejection fraction and saturation were measured in 32 individuals following RVOT stenting in adults ( Results: During the procedure, the average stent diameter and length were 8.84 ± 1.64 mm and 35.46 ± 11.23 mm, respectively. Adult patients received slightly longer stents than pediatric patients (43.60 ± 11.64 mm vs. 31.77 ± 9.07 mm). Overall, patients' saturation increased from 58.56 ± 19.03% to 91.03 ± 8.98% ( Conclusions: RVOT stenting is a safe and effective method for increasing saturation and ejection fraction not only in newborn infants but also in late presenters, including adults with unrepaired Fallot physiology.
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.