ArticleIndian heart journal
Outcomes of post myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture: Experience from an Indian tertiary cardiac center.
Article in Indian heart journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Silent post-infarction ventricular septal rupture obscured by apical thrombus formation: A case report.Journal of cardiology cases · 2026Article
- Anatomic rupture location, leukocyte levels and diabetes mellitus as factors influencing in-hospital mortality following percutaneous repair of post-infarction ventricular septal rupture: a single centre study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Transcatheter device closure of post-myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture: A single-centre experience.Indian heart journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPost myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture (MI-VSR) is a devastating complication after acute myocardial infarction (AMI); lacks uniform treatment recommendations and carries poor outcomes.
objectivesTo evaluate the outcomes of post MI-VSR, stratify based on management strategy and determine the predictors of survival.
methodsAll cases of VSR hospitalized in a tertiary referral cardiac care center over 11 years were retrospectively evaluated for various parameters and stratified based on the modality of treatment, either conservative, surgical or transcatheter closure.
resultsAmong a total of 131 cases of VSR with a median age of 65 years, hospitalized from January 2013 to December 2023, 47(35.9 %) had surgical closure, 25(19.1 %) had transcatheter closure and the rest were managed conservatively. 11(8.4 %) cases alone underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Apex was the commonest (79.3 %) site. Older patients and patients in higher stages of shock at the time of VSR diagnosis were often managed conservatively. Two-thirds of surgical patients were in SHOCK stage A or B; three-fourths of transcatheter group were in stage C or D. Overall mortality was 71 % with 100 % in conservative, 68 % in transcatheter closure and 36.2 % in surgical group. Younger age, lower shock stage, VSR closure, and delayed closure were predictors of survival.
conclusionsPost MI VSR outcomes were poor, based on the hemodynamic status. Closure of VSR is essential for survival. Surgical closure had lower mortality than transcatheter closure possibly contributed by a selection bias.
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.