ArticlePediatric cardiology2026
Lifetime Outcomes Following Intervention for Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis in Childhood.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common congenital heart lesion that can be associated with significant valve dysfunction in childhood. Surgical interventions for this condition often include pulmonary autograft (Ross procedure) or aortic valve replacement (mechanical - mAVR - or bioprosthetic - bAVR). Aortic valve repair (Rpr) was a common primary intervention for BAV with aortic stenosis at our institution during the study period. This single-center cohort study included 150 adults with BAV and aortic stenosis who underwent 197 surgical interventions during childhood. We investigated important clinical demographic differences, long-term freedom from repeat aortic valve intervention, and long-term freedom from adverse events based upon the type of definitive aortic valve surgery. We hypothesized that Ross and mAVR would demonstrate superior temporal durability, but that mAVR would have more associated adverse events, and that Ross would require more lifetime sternotomies. Ross and mAVR demonstrated superior temporal durability when compared to other aortic valve interventions by pairwise comparison (Rpr vs mAVR p < 0.001; Rpr vs Ross p < 0.001; Rpr vs bAVR p = 0.075; mAVR vs Ross p = 0.924; mAVR vs bAVR p = 0.026; Ross vs bAVR p = 0.001). Ross demonstrated superior freedom from adverse events when compared directly to bAVR (Rpr vs mAVR p = 0.755; Rpr vs Ross p = 0.033; Rpr vs bAVR p = 0.816; mAVR vs Ross p = 0.040; mAVR vs bAVR p = 0.847; Ross vs bAVR p = 0.006). Ross procedure was not associated with an increased number of lifetime sternotomies compared to mAVR. Concurrent Konno procedure was not an independent predictor of worse outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40844616What 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.