ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
GeminiOne transcatheter edge-to-edge repair: comparative hemodynamic and biomechanical evaluation.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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.
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
Background: Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) is frequently used to treat mitral regurgitation (MR) patients. Despite its widely reported efficacy, complications such as single-leaflet device attachment (SLDA) and loss of leaflet insertion (LLI) can lead to recurrent MR, which compromises the clinical outcomes. Objectives: This study compares the acute MR reduction and leaflet anchoring stability of a novel TEER device, GeminiOne (GEM), and MitraClip (MC). Methods: In this study, Results: The results of the pulsatile flow evaluation from the DMR and FMR model demonstrate that both TEER devices effectively reduced the regurgitant fraction (DMR vs. GEM0626 vs. XTW, 59.21 ± 10.29% vs. 35.73 ± 6.62% vs. 43.50 ± 8.89%; FMR vs. GEM0626 vs. XTW, 56.99 ± 8.74% vs. 27.99 ± 11.30% vs. 28.13 ± 10.64%). However, in the leaflet stability study which compared the various TEER devices under full grasp and partial grasp conditions, the detachment force of the anchored leaflet for GeminiOne is significantly higher than that of MitraClip, especially for the partial grasp (full grasp detachment force: 7.89 ± 2.42 vs. 6.36 ± 0.96 N, Conclusion: In the
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.