ReviewCureus2024
Mitraclip Versus Medical Therapy or Surgery in Patients With Mitral Regurgitation: Long-Term Outcomes Determined by the Reconstruction of Individual Patient Data.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- [Short-term clinical efficacy of transcatheter edge-to-edge repair for moderate to severe mitral regurgitation].Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although MitraClip has been studied in numerous trials, its evidence in the long term is based on a few original studies. We used an original technique of evidence synthesis to review long-term comparative trials evaluating MitraClip. We searched the PubMed database to select long-term comparative trials of MitraClip. The endpoint was all-cause mortality (minimum follow-up, one year). Included trials were analyzed using the IPDfromKM (reconstruct Individual Patient Data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves) method to reconstruct individual patient data from Kaplan-Meier curves. Standard survival statistics were used to interpret these long-term efficacy data. The survival benefit per patient was estimated from the restricted mean survival time (RMST). Six comparative studies of MitraClip were included; 973 patients were treated with MitraClip (six arms), 717 with medical therapy (five arms), and 80 with surgical repair or replacement (one arm). In our main analysis, the outcomes observed in patients treated with MitraClip were significantly better than those of medical therapy (hazard ratio for all-cause mortality, 0.5276; 95% confidence interval, 0.4412 to 0.6309; p < 0.001); the number of patients treated with surgery was too small to make reliable comparisons. Median survival was 30.4 months for medical therapy versus not reached for the other two groups. RMST was 43.931 and 33.756 months for MitraClip and controls, respectively, yielding a gain per patient of 10.17 months (95% confidence interval, 7.47 to 12.88). In our simplified cost-effectiveness evaluation, a gain of approximately 10 months per patient compared favorably with the device cost. Our analysis provided an original interpretation of the long-term evidence available on MitraClip.
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.