ArticlePediatric research2025
Long term follow-up of patients with patent ductus arteriosus after transcatheter closure.
Article in Pediatric research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimal timing for transcatheter device occlusion of a hemodynamically significant patent ductus arteriosus in preterm infants: evidence, uncertainty, and future directions.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Review
- SCAI Position Statement on Transcatheter Occlusion of Patent Ductus Arteriosus in Premature Infants.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Patent Ductus Arteriosus in Extremely Preterm Infants: Update on Current Diagnostic and Treatment Options.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
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
backgroundTo investigate the concurrent, long-term, and future adverse events and assess the trend of adverse events in pediatric patients with patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) after transcatheter closure.
methodsA total of 1590 patients underwent transcatheter PDA closure were enrolled, including 465 patients (median age = 22 months) in the training group and 1125 patients in the validation group. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess independent risk factors associated with concurrent adverse events after closure. The chi-square test was used to evaluate the 5-year follow-up trend.
resultsMultivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that low age, female, and high pulmonary end diameter were independent risk factors for concurrent adverse events after closure. For patients without concurrent adverse events and for those who with concurrent adverse events but return to normal, the Chi-square test showed no abnormal results at the 5-year follow-up. Furthermore, the follow-up data of the validation group were not significantly different from those of the training group.
conclusionThe value of long-term follow-up of children may be limited for those who did not have a concurrent adverse event after closure nor for those who had a concurrent adverse event after closure but returned to normal during the 5-year follow-up period. IMPACT: Follow-up monitoring of adverse events tended to be recommended in pediatric patients with PDA after transcatheter closure. However, follow-up in these pediatric patients is expensive and there is a risk of sedation for echocardiography examination frequently. ·Patients who had no concurrent adverse events after closure did not show any abnormality at 5-year follow-up. ·Most of the patients who had concurrent adverse events after closure returned to normal at 5-year follow-up. The value of long-term follow-up may be limited for the above patients after transcatheter PDA closure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38877281What 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.