Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39534352›Full record

ArticleJTCVS open2024

Importance of surgeon's experience in practicing valve-sparing aortic root replacement.

Kavya Rajesh, Megan Chung, Dov Levine, Elizabeth Norton, Parth Patel, Yu Hohri, Chris He, Paridhi Agarwal, Yanling Zhao, Pengchen Wang and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JTCVS open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Kavya RajeshDivision of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.
Megan ChungDivision of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.
Dov LevineDivision of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.
Elizabeth NortonDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga.
Parth PatelDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga.
Yu HohriDivision of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.
Chris HeDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga.
Paridhi AgarwalDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga.
Yanling ZhaoCenter for Innovation and Outcomes Research, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Pengchen WangCenter for Innovation and Outcomes Research, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Paul KurlanskyCenter for Innovation and Outcomes Research, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Edward ChenDivision of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.
Hiroo TakayamaDivision of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) requires a unique skill set. This study aimed to examine the influence of surgeon's procedural volume on outcomes of VSRR. Methods: This retrospective study included 1697 patients from 2 large, high-volume aortic centers who underwent aortic root replacement (ARR) between 2004 and 2021 and were potentially eligible for VSRR. Surgeons were classified as performing <5 ARRs or ≥5 ARRs annually. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the independent association of surgeon volume and the decision to perform VSRR. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to match patients who were operated on by <5 ARR surgeons or ≥5 ARR surgeons and compare long-term survival probability. Cumulative incidence curves with mortality as a competing risk were plotted to compare the rate of aortic valve reoperation. Results: Of 1697 patients who met the study inclusion criteria, 944 underwent composite-valve conduit ARR and 753 underwent VSRR. The median age of the cohort was 57 years (interquartile range, 45-66 years), and 268 (15.8%) were female. Aortic insufficiency was present in 1105 patients (65.1%), and 200 of the procedures (11.8%) were reoperations. The indication for surgery was aneurysm in 1496 patients (88.2%) and dissection in 201 (11.8%). Among the 743 patients who underwent VSRR, 691 (92%) were operated on by ≥ 5 ARR surgeons and 62 (8%) were operated on by <5 ARR surgeons. In multivariable logistic regression, ≥5 ARRs (odds ratio, 3.33; 95% confidence interval, 2.34-4.73; Conclusions: In the setting of a high-volume aortic center, patients who undergo ARR are less likely to receive VSRR if operated on by a <5 ARR surgeon; however, VSRR may be safely performed by <5 ARR surgeons.

Indexed as

aortic root replacementinverse probability treatment weightingsurgeon volumevalve-sparing root replacement

Identifiers

PMID39534352
PMCPMC11551295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.