SynthesisJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2025
Early and late clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of aortic valve replacement using the Inspiris Resilia bioprosthesis : A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the RESILIA tissue valve for pulmonary valve replacement: Early outcomes and hemodynamic performance.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2026Article
- Outcomes of mechanical and bioprosthetic surgical valve replacements in egypt: evidence from a narrative review and experts' survey.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Review
- Global, regional, and national burdens of non-rheumatic calcific aortic valve disease in middle-aged and elderly populations from 1990 to 2021 and predictions up to 2050: trends, predictions, and health inequity.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Outcomes of aortic and mitral valve replacement with Dafodil™ pericardial bioprosthesis over 5-years: Dafodil™-1 trial.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe present study aimed to critically revise the published literature on clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of Inspiris Resilia valve.
methodsThis work was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Full text research articles discussing clinical or cost-effectiveness aspects of Inspiris Resilia bioprosthesis published in English were included in this analysis. Studies were excluded if they weren't exclusively conducted on patients submitted to surgical aortic valve replacement using the Inspiris Resilia bioprosthesis.
resultsThe technical success rate was almost perfect in all studies. Reported complications included severe prosthesis-patient mismatch, reoperation, endocarditis, and paravalvular leak. In almost all studies, there were significant improvement of NYHA at the end of follow up as compared to baseline. In all studies, there were significant improvement of one or more hemodynamic parameters at the end of follow up as compared to baseline.
conclusionsSurgical aortic valve replacement using Inspiris Resilia tissue valve appears to be safe and effective with low rate of aortic valve and systemic complications and mortality. Its performance appears to be equal to or better than many other bioprosthetic valves. As compared to mechanical valves, its use is suggested to be more cost-effective.
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.