ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2025
Assessment of short- and long-term outcomes of aortic valve-sparing operation at concomitant aortic root and arch repair.
Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesConcomitant aortic root and arch replacement is a complex procedure. Although valve-sparing root replacement may offer advantages over valve prostheses, the decision to spare the valve may increase the risk profile of this procedure. This study examines the safety of aortic valve-sparing operation in such settings.
methodsAll patients who underwent concomitant aortic root and arch replacement between 2004 and 2021 at two aortic centres were reviewed. Patients with aortic stenosis, endocarditis or a history of previous cardiac surgery were excluded. Inverse probability treatment weighting yielded well-balanced cohorts. The primary end-points were mortality and complications during the index hospital stay, and secondary end-points were long-term survival and aortic valve reintervention rate.
resultsA total of 764 patients who underwent concomitant aortic root and arch replacement, including valve-sparing root replacement (n = 311) or composite valve graft root replacement (n = 453), were analysed. Surgical indication was dissection in 155 (20.2%), and distal extension was total arch replacement in 50 (6.5%). Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were longer in valve-sparing root replacement (P = 0.006 and P < 0.001, respectively). Valve-sparing root replacement demonstrated comparable in-hospital mortality rates (2.5% vs 4.9%, P = 0.195) and showed higher long-term survival rates (P = 0.04) (12-year survival rate; 78.5% [71.7-86.1%] vs 64.2% [57.4-71.6%]), which was reconfirmed on multivariable Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio: 0.505 [0.348-0.734], P < 0.001). The cumulative incidence of reintervention was similar in both groups (P = 0.62).
conclusionsIn appropriately selected patients requiring aortic root and arch replacement, a valve-sparing operation may be performed safely without increased operative risk.
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.