SynthesisInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2025
The impact of recurrent mitral regurgitation after surgical or transcatheter mitral valve repair: a comprehensive review and a meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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.
- Free Margin Running Suture Repair for Bileaflet Mitral Valve Prolapse in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction: A Mid-term Follow-up Study.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecurrent mitral regurgitation (MR) is typically defined as MR that is moderate or severe on follow-up echocardiography after the intervention. This meta-analysis summarizes the results of all available studies on the impact of recurrent MR on clinical outcomes after the intervention.
methodsMedline, EMBASE, PubMed and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 to August 2024 for original studies reporting outcomes about the clinical impact of recurrent MR. Five clinical outcomes were analysed: reoperation, cardiovascular deaths, readmission, heart failure and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classification. The summary odds ratio (OR) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to assess the risk of clinical outcomes.
resultsA total of 22 studies were included in the final analysis, involving 5,804 patients, of which 960 had recurrent MR. The overall pooled incidence of recurrent MR is 16.54%. Secondary or primary patients with MR with recurrent MR after an intervention had higher rates of reoperation [(OR = 6.25, 95% CI, 2.95-14.41; P < 0.001) or (OR = 22.54, 95% CI, 14.96-33.98; P < 0.001)]or of cardiovascular death [(OR = 5.26, 95% CI, 2.35-11.77; P < 0.001) or (OR = 1.68, 95% CI, 1.32-2.14; P < 0.001)]. The rates were also high for readmission (OR = 3.95, 95% CI, 2.56-6.10; P < 0.001), heart failure incidence (OR = 2.87, 95% CI, 1.75-5.11; P < 0.001) and the number of NYHA functional class III/IV (OR = 5.40, 95% CI, 3.01-9.70; P < 0.001) for recurrent MR of secondary MR. However, no significant association was found between recurrent MR of primary MR and the incidence of NYHA functional class III/IV (OR = 1.02, 95% CI, 0.47-2.22; P = 0.96).
conclusionsRecurrent MR is associated with higher rates of reoperations, readmissions, cardiovascular deaths, incidences of heart failure and NYHA functional class III/IV numbers. However, recurrent MR of primary MR is not correlated with NYHA functional class III/IV.
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.