ArticlePediatric cardiology2026
Outcomes of Bovine Jugular Vein Versus Porcine Valved Conduits for Right Ventricle to Pulmonary Artery Connection.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Homografts conduits has been the gold standard for right ventricle to pulmonary artery (RV-PA) conduit. Several different types of xenograft valved conduits have been used as an alternative to homografts, due to their limited availability. In this single center, retrospective study, we analyzed the outcomes of patients with bovine jugular vein conduit (Contegra) and porcine valved conduit (Biointegral) in terms of survival and reintervention rate. Between 2012 and 2023, 44 children underwent surgical repair with RV-PA conduits using Contegra (n = 20) or Biointegral (n = 24). Patients with truncus arteriosus and patients who underwent unifocalization and Ross procedures were excluded. The operations in which other RV-PA conduits such as homografts, Gore-Tex grafts with PTFE handmade valved were used, were also excluded from the study. The median age of the patients was 19 (3-60) months and 84% of the patients (n = 37) had a history of previous intervention. Hospital mortality was 4.5% (n = 2). The median length of stay in intensive care unit and hospital was 5 (2-63) and 19 (2-145) days, respectively. 36 of the patients (82%) were followed for a median of 68 (4.8-143.7) months. There was one late death in Contegra group and five late deaths in Biointegral group. Survival analysis revealed that 1, 5, and 10-year survival rates were 100%, 90%, and 90% in Contegra group and 81%, 76.2%, and 33.9% (p = 0.047) in Biointegral group, respectively. During follow-up period, 11 patients (30.5%) needed reintervention (n = 3 in Contegra; n = 8 in Biointegral group). Freedom from reintervention rates were 100%, 94.1%, and 47.1% at 1, 5, and 10 years in Contegra group and 100% and 63.3% at 1 and 5 years in Biointegral group, respectively (p = 0.024). In this study, the outcomes of Contegra conduits were statistically significantly better than Biointegral conduits. Contegra is still the most valuable alternative to homografts. We believe that the choice of conduit in the first surgery is an important decision that directly affects survival and re-intervention rates.
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.