ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2024
Reoperative aortic root surgery: single-center long-term outcomes and literature review.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Posterior Teflon-Felt-Reinforced Coronary Button Anastomosis in a Modified Bentall Procedure: Early Outcomes in a Single-Center Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Redo aortic valve replacement in twin pregnancy: navigating high-risk cardiac surgery with maternal and fetal success - A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
- Simplified Surgical Conversion of Mechanical to Bioprosthetic Bentall With Leaflet Fracture Technique.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Hybrid transcatheter aortic valve replacement for mechanical valve dysfunction in a patient with Marfan syndrome and previous Bentall procedure: A novel approach.JTCVS techniques · 2025Article
- Coronary button pseudoaneurysm following valve-sparing aortic root replacement.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Reoperative aortic root surgery has become more and more common over the years and is considered high-risk, with significantly worse outcomes compared to first-procedure root surgery. At our institution, this kind of surgery is frequently performed. The aim of the present review is to describe currently available literature on reoperative surgery on the aortic root in terms of patients' population, indications for surgery and outcomes and to present our center's experience on the matter. Methods: A literature review was performed in order to identify pertinent studies. They were then compared and described. We also described preoperative characteristics, operative strategies and outcomes of all the patients who underwent redo aortic root surgery from January 1986 to December 2022 at our center. Key Content and Findings: Our literature review identified 12 pertinent studies, with a total of 16,627 considered patients. The most frequent indications for redo surgery were endocarditis (35.5%), aneurysm, dissection and pseudoaneurysm. Mean cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cross-clamp times were 218 and 152 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 12%. When analyzing our center's data, 344 procedures were identified. Aortic root dilation was the most frequent indication (36.9%). Mean CPB and cross-clamp times were 218.0±78.8 and 158.2±49.7 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 9.6%. Survival at 5 and 15 years was 76.1% and 51.4% respectively. Freedom from further aortic reintervention was 88.1% after 5 years and 64.9% after 15 years. Conclusions: Reoperative aortic root surgery is a difficult cardiac procedure which is linked to significantly higher mortality than first-time root replacement. If it is performed by experienced surgeons with a careful preoperative planning its result can still be satisfactory. Our results showed acceptable rates of mortality and reinterventions at follow-up. Endocarditis, however, was linked to worse outcomes.
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.