ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2025
Aortic valve-sparing operation at concomitant aortic root and total aortic arch replacement.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSparing aortic valve during combined aortic root replacement (ARR) and total aortic arch replacement (TAR) adds surgical complexity; however, the long-term outcomes are unknown. We examine the safety of aortic valve-sparing during these operations.
methodsTo include patients who were potentially eligible for valve-sparing procedures, aortic stenosis, endocarditis, and previous aortic valve surgery were excluded, leaving 81 patients who underwent ARR and TAR between 2004 and 2021 at 2 major aortic centers. Overall, 34 underwent valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSRR) and 47 underwent composite valve graft root replacement (CVG). The primary endpoint was uneventful recovery: a composite endpoint describing any patient discharged from the hospital without mortality or any postoperative complications including stroke, re-operation for bleeding, prolonged ventilation, or acute renal failure. Secondary endpoints were long-term survival and cardiovascular reintervention at 12 years.
resultsVSRR was more frequently performed in younger patients with connective tissue disorder (P = 0.006) and less than moderate aortic insufficiency (P = 0.002). VSRR had longer cross-clamp time (243, [200-286] vs. 216, [181-250] minutes, P = 0.032). In-hospital mortality (VSRR: 5.9% vs CVG: 10.6%, P = 0.693) and uneventful recovery (VSRR: 47.1% vs CVG: 44.7%, P = 1.000) were not different. Multivariable Logistic regression showed that VSRR was not associated with the uneventful recovery (OR 1.165, 95% CI [0.356-3.814], P = 0.801). Twelve-year survival (VSRR: 80.8% [63.1-100.0%] vs. CVG: 66.3% [47.9-91.7%]; P = 0.320) and the incidence of reintervention (VSRR: 39.0% [19.0-59.0%] vs. CVG: 39.0% [16.0-61.0%], P = 0.820) were similar between groups.
conclusionIn appropriately selected patients requiring concomitant ARR and TAR, aortic valve-sparing operation may be performed safely.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40266547What 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.