ArticlePloS one2024
Predictors of post-pericardiotomy syndrome after native valve-sparing aortic valve surgery.
Article in PloS one, 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preventing Postpericardiotomy Syndrome: Current Evidence and Future Directions.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Correction: Predictors of post-pericardiotomy syndrome after native valve-sparing aortic valve surgery.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to determine the rate and impact of post-pericardiotomy syndrome after native valve-sparing aortic valve surgery and the perioperative factors associated with its occurrence.
methodsAll consecutive patients who underwent native valve-sparing aortic valve surgery (i.e., repair ± ascending aorta replacement, valve-sparing root replacement, Ross procedure ± ascending aorta replacement) at our institution between January 2021 and August 2023 served as our study population. Post-pericardiotomy syndrome was diagnosed if patients showed at least two of the following diagnostic criteria: evidence of (I) new/worsening pericardial effusion, or (II) new/worsening pleural effusions, (III) pleuritic chest pain, (IV) fever or (V) elevated inflammatory markers without alternative causes. A logistic regression model was calculated.
resultsDuring the study period, 91 patients underwent native valve-sparing aortic valve surgery. A total of 21 patients (23%) developed post-pericardiotomy syndrome early after surgery (PPS group). The remaining 70 patients (77%) showed no signs of post-pericardiotomy syndrome (non-PPS group). Multivariate logistic regression revealed blood type O (OR: 3.15, 95% CI: 1.06-9.41, p = 0.040), valve-sparing root replacement (OR: 3.12, 95% CI: 1.01-9.59, p = 0.048) and peak C-reactive protein >15 mg/dl within 48 hours postoperatively (OR: 4.27, 95% CI: 1.05-17.29, p = 0.042) as independent risk factors. 73% (8/11) of patients displaying all three risk factors, 60% (9/15) of patients with blood type O and valve-sparing root replacement, 52% (11/21) of patients with blood type O and early postoperative peak C-reactive protein >15 mg/dl and 45% (13/29) of patients with early postoperative peak C-reactive protein >15 mg/dl and valve-sparing root replacement developed post-pericardiotomy syndrome.
conclusionIn summary, blood type O, valve-sparing root replacement and peak C-reactive protein >15 mg/dl within 48 hours postoperatively are significantly associated with post-pericardiotomy syndrome after native valve-sparing aortic valve surgery. Particularly, the presence of all three risk factors is linked to a particularly high risk of post-pericardiotomy syndrome.
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.