ArticleJournal of chest surgery2024
Mechanical versus Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Aged 50 to 70 Years.
Article in Journal of chest surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Mechanical Versus Bioprosthetic Conduits for the Bentall Procedure: A 10-Year Propensity Score-matched Analysis of Early and Long-Term Outcomes.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Bioprosthetic versus mechanical surgical aortic valve replacement in patients ≥65 years of age.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Major bleeding complications and antithrombotic treatment after isolated surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026Article
- A "Watchful Surgery" Approach: Timing and Valve Choice for Mildly Symptomatic Mitral and Aortic Valve Disease.Journal of surgery and research · 2025Article
- Commentary: The Never-Ending Debate on the Type of Aortic Prosthesis in Patients Aged 50-70, as TAVR Peaks in Popularity: Which Prosthesis Should Be Used for Aortic Valve Replacement?Journal of chest surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study compared the outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients aged 50 to 70 years based on the type of prosthetic valve used. Methods: We compared patients who underwent mechanical AVR to those who underwent bioprosthetic AVR at our institution between January 2000 and March 2019. Competing risk analysis and the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method based on propensity score were employed for comparisons. Results: A total of 1,580 patients (984 patients with mechanical AVR; 596 patients with bioprosthetic AVR) were enrolled. There was no significant difference in early mortality between the mechanical AVR and bioprosthetic AVR groups (0.9% vs. 1.7%, p=0.177). After IPTW adjustment, the risk of all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the bioprosthetic AVR group than in the mechanical AVR group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.80; p=0.014). Competing risk analysis revealed lower risks of stroke (sub-distributional hazard ratio [sHR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.67; p<0.001) and anticoagulation- related bleeding (sHR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.23-0.53; p<0.001) in the bioprosthetic AVR group. Conversely, the risk of aortic valve (AV) reintervention was higher in the bioprosthetic AVR group (sHR, 6.14; 95% CI, 3.17-11.93; p<0.001). Conclusion: Among patients aged 50 to 70 years who underwent surgical AVR, those receiving mechanical valves showed better survival than those with bioprosthetic valves. The mechanical AVR group exhibited a higher risk of stroke and anticoagulation-related bleeding, while the bioprosthetic AVR group showed a higher risk of AV reintervention.
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.