ReviewEXCLI journal2024
Efficacy of automated fasteners versus hand-tied knots in cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in EXCLI journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Efficacy of Semaglutide in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease, With or Without Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2025Pooled it
- Investigating Titanium Fastener Technology: Results from the Multi-center Prospective CRIMP Study.Advances in therapy · 2026Observational
- Comparison of outcomes post Cor-Knot versus Manual tying in valve surgery: our 8-year analysis of over 1000 patients.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Valve surgery is common in cardiac procedures, with fasteners like COR-KNOT® and hand-tied knots used for knot securing. This study compares their efficacy in valve surgery patients. We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central until August 2023. Outcomes assessed included aortic cross-clamp time (AXT), cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, valvular regurgitation, mortality, prolonged ventilatory support, atrial fibrillation, postoperative left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and renal failure. Subgroup analysis was performed for minimally invasive and open cardiac surgery. We used a random effects model for analysis. We included eight observational studies and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 1.411 participants. COR-KNOT significantly reduced AXT [MD -15.14, 95 % CI (-18.57, -11.70), P<0.00001] and CPB time [MD -12.38, 95 % CI (-14.99, -9.77), P<0.00001]. Valvular regurgitation [RR 0.40, 95 % CI (0.26, 0.61), P<0.0001] and need for prolonged ventilatory support [RR 0.29, 95 % CI (0.13, 0.65), P=0.003] were significantly lower with COR-KNOT. There were no significant differences in mortality [RR 0.39, 95 % CI (0.09, 1.69), P=0.44], atrial fibrillation [RR 1.03, 95 % CI (0.83, 1.27), P=0.81], LVEF changes [MD 0.05, 95 % CI (-1.37, 1.47), P = 0.95], or renal failure [RR 0.87, 95 % CI (0.16, 4.80), P = 0.87]. COR-KNOT devices reduce operative time and valvular regurgitation without increasing mortality or adverse outcomes. This supports their use in enhancing surgical efficiency and patient outcomes. However, ongoing discussions about suturing techniques, especially in minimally invasive procedures, highlight the need for further research and consensus among practitioners. See also the graphical abstract(Fig. 1).
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.