ArticlePediatric cardiology2026
A Comparison of Ductal Stenting and Surgical Shunts for Infants with Duct-Dependent Pulmonary Blood Flow: The Impact of Single Versus Biventricular Repair Pathways on Outcomes.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ductal stenting (DS) is an alternative to the Blalock-Taussig-Thomas Shunt (BTTS) as initial palliation for congenital heart disease with duct-dependent pulmonary blood flow (DDBPF). We sought to analyze the impact of intended single ventricle (SV) and biventricular (BiV) repair pathways on the outcome of DS and BTTS in infants with DDPBF. A single-center, retrospective comparison of infants with DDPBF who underwent either DS (2012-2022) or BTTS procedures (2013-2017). Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality and risk of unplanned re-intervention. Participants were divided into four groups: 1.SV with DS, 2.SV with BTTS, 3.BiV with DS, and 4.BiV with BTTS. Fifty-one DS (SV 45%) and 86 BTTS (SV 49%) procedures were undertaken. For those who had DS, mortality was lower in the BiV compared to SV patients (BiV: 0/28, versus SV: 4/23, p = 0.04). Compared to BiV DS, BiV BTTS had a higher risk of combined death or unplanned re-intervention (HR 4.28; CI 1.25-14.60; p = 0.02). In SV participants, there was no difference for either primary outcome based on procedure type. DS was associated with shorter intensive care length of stay for SV participants (mean difference 5 days, p = 0.01) and shorter intensive care and hospital stay for BiV participants (mean difference 11 days for both outcomes, p = 0.001). There is a survival benefit for DS in BiV participants compared with DS in SV and BTTS in BiV participants. Ductal stenting is associated with a shorter intensive care and hospital length of stay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38953954What 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.