ArticleCureus2024
Incidence of Clinical Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Valvular Surgery at the Ignacio Chávez National Institute of Cardiology.
Article 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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of comorbidities on surgical outcome and mortality in minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: a systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
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
Minimally invasive cardiac valve replacement surgery (MICS) is a technique that has reported equivalent rates of mortality and reintervention when compared to conventional median sternotomy (CS). Additionally, MICS has inconsistently been reported to be associated with fewer postoperative complications, better cosmetic outcomes, and shorter hospital stays at the expense of longer surgical time, aortic clamp time, and extracorporeal circulation time. When comparing populations undergoing MICS vs CS at the Ignacio Chávez National Institute of Cardiology (INCICh), it was proven that there is a longer surgical, extracorporeal circulation, and aortic clamp durations in the MICS intervention, but no statistically significant difference in global mortality. MICS was also associated with a shorter hospital stay and less surgical discomfort. MICS can be considered an alternative and equivalent approach to CS for patients undergoing aortic and mitral valve replacement surgery in the Mexican population.
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.