Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40392782›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2025

Comparative effects of transcatheter versus surgical pulmonary valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Bunchai Chongmelaxme, Kok Pim Kua, Chanokpol Amornvetchayakul, Nichapond Chawviriyathep, Thunyapat Kerdklinhom

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Comparative Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Pulmonary Valve Replacement in Adults With Congenital Heart Disease.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Article
  4. One Anatomy, Multiple Valve Choices: Interobserver Agreement in Selecting Transcatheter Pulmonary Valve.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Bunchai ChongmelaxmeDepartment of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-7750-6961
Kok Pim KuaRevolution Health Research Consulting (RHRC) Group, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-7910-4301
Chanokpol AmornvetchayakulDepartment of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nichapond ChawviriyathepDepartment of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thunyapat KerdklinhomDepartment of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTranscatheter pulmonary valve replacement (TPVR) is developed as a non-surgical, minimally invasive procedure to reduce the need for re-do cardiac surgical interventions. However, its impacts on patient outcomes are less clear. This study aims to investigate the effects of TPVR among patients with pulmonary valve or right ventricular outflow tract dysfunctions. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL Complete, and Web of Science, from database inception to March 1, 2024, to identify studies that assessed the comparative effectiveness of transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement (TPVR) and surgical pulmonary valve replacement (SPVR). The key outcomes of interest included mortality, pulmonary regurgitation (PR), infective endocarditis (IE), re-intervention, improvements in cardiac failure based on the New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classification, and adverse events. Meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed.

resultsA total of 28 studies (n = 16,150) were included. The meta-analyses depicted that when compared with SPVR, TPVR reduced risks of mortality by 36% (odds ratio [OR] = 0.64 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.43, 0.95]), but conferred a three-fold greater odd of IE over the follow-up duration (OR = 3.10 [95% CI: 2.22, 4.33]). No significant differences were observed for 30-day mortality, and the early PR, IE and re-intervention, as well as the PR and re-intervention during follow-up. Meta-analyzed results across the outcome measures varied according to geographical region, publication year cut-off, and income status of country. All patients who had undergone valve replacement showed improvements in heart function and experienced relevant post-procedural complications.

conclusionsTPVR afforded significant clinical benefits in patient survival, but nonetheless, it was associated with an elevated risk for infective endocarditis.

Indexed as

Cardiac CatheterizationHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationPulmonary ValvePulmonary Valve InsufficiencyHumansTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID40392782
PMCPMC12091831

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.