ArticleAnnals of cardiothoracic surgery2025
Robotic aortic valve replacement in the Middle East: reproducibility into practice with evolving complexity.
Article in Annals of cardiothoracic 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic aortic valve replacement (RAVR) has seen a rise in usage in recent years; however, follow-up data remain limited. This study aimed to assess the short- and mid-term clinical outcomes after RAVR. Methods: This study included patients who underwent RAVR between 2022 and 2024. The primary outcomes were mortality and survival at follow-up. The secondary outcomes were hospital complications and echocardiographic parameters at follow-up. Results: Fifteen patients underwent RAVR. The mean age was 38.6±14.4 years, and 86.7% were males. The median Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) score was 0.6%. Isolated RAVR was performed in 66.7% of the patients (n=10), whereas five patients underwent concomitant surgery, including mitral valve repair (n=1), mitral valve replacement (n=3), and ascending aortoplasty (n=1). Mechanical valves were used in 10 patients (66.7%). The mean ischemic time was 150±33.9 min. No sternotomy conversion was required. The median length of hospital stay was 9 days [quartile (Q)1-Q3, 4-15 days]. Four patients had on-table extubation (26.7%). One patient required intensive care unit (ICU) readmission, and one patient was readmitted for pleural effusion. The median follow-up was 24 months (Q1-Q3, 15-29 months). No mortality was reported during this period. All patients were in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I, except for one in NYHA II. There were no significant changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LEVF) at the last follow-up compared with the preoperative value (P=0.741). However, the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) was significantly lower at follow-up than preoperatively (P=0.003). Conclusions: RAVR demonstrates promising short- and mid-term clinical outcomes. Its minimally invasive nature and the ability to use durable mechanical valves may offer potential advantages over traditional surgical and transcatheter approaches.
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.