ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
Long-term prognosis and risk factors in tricuspid valve replacement surgery: a single-center study.
Article in Frontiers in 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.
- Mechanical versus bioprosthetic valves for tricuspid valve replacement in Chinese patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tricuspid valve replacement (TVR), although accounting for a minority of heart valve surgeries, poses significant challenges, including poor patients' condition, prosthetic complications, and increased perioperative mortality rates. Despite preferences for valvuloplasty, some cases necessitate replacement. The choice of tricuspid valve type remains controversial, and there is no consensus on surgical risk factors. Additionally, long-term follow-up reports on a large number of cases are lacking. In this study, we aimed to analyze the medical records of the largest number of patients who underwent TVR surgery. Methods: Patients who underwent TVR between 1999 and 2023 were divided into mechanical (MTVR) and bioprosthetic (BTVR) groups. Risk factors for overall mortality were analyzed. Results: In total, 626 patients were enrolled. The in-hospital and overall mortality rates were 12.1% and 42.8%, respectively. The in-hospital mortality rate (7.0% vs. 14.2%), incidence of acute renal insufficiency (4.3% vs. 12.2%), and hemodialysis rate (3.2% vs. 10.4%) were significantly higher in the BTVR group than in the MTVR group ( Conclusions: MTVR was superior to BTVR regarding short- and long-term outcomes. New York heart function classification was associated with short- and long-term mortality.
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.