ArticleCureus2025
Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement in a Patient With Interrupted Hepatic Inferior Vena Cava and Duplicated Inferior Vena Cava: A Case Report.
Article in Cureus, 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
We report a case of a 72-year-old female patient with severe aortic regurgitation and a rare congenital anomaly involving duplicated inferior vena cava (IVC) and interruption at the hepatic segment. She underwent minimally invasive cardiac surgery-aortic valve replacement (MICS-AVR) via right anterior thoracotomy. Venous cannulation was performed through the right internal jugular vein and right femoral vein, while arterial access was achieved through the right femoral artery. Despite suboptimal venous return, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was initiated, and the procedure was completed successfully with hypothermic support. The patient recovered uneventfully and was discharged on postoperative day six. This case highlights the importance of thorough preoperative imaging and intraoperative vigilance when dealing with vascular anomalies in MICS.
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.