ArticleScientific reports2025
Enhanced recovery after minimally invasive valve surgery - ultra-fast extubation versus standard weaning strategy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility and Safety of Operating Room Extubation After Minimally Invasive Cardiac Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Ultra-fast-track anesthesia in cardiac surgery: perioperative outcomes, patient selection, and implementation strategies-a narrative review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immediate extubation in the operating room (OR) following cardiac surgery remains controversial. In 2021, our institution implemented a fast-track protocol that incorporated ultra-fast extubation (ORE) for minimally invasive heart valve surgery. We retrospectively evaluated outcomes and cost-effectiveness in comparison to standard extubation in the ICU (ICE). We retrospectively reviewed 615 minimally invasive valve surgeries performed between 2019 and 2023. Among these, 228 patients were extubated in the ICU, if possible, within 6 h as per current guidelines, while 387 patients underwent immediate ultra-fast extubation in the operating room (ORE) at the end of the surgery. Baseline variables were compared, and case-control matching was performed based on significantly different factors: Age, BMI and cross clamp times, resulting in two matched groups of 122 each. After matching, baseline variables were comparable between groups. Patients who underwent ORE had shorter ICU and hospital stays, were less likely to require ventilation for more than 24 h, and had significantly less often respiratory failure. Rates of repeat intubation did not differ significantly between groups. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, ORE, aortic cross clamp time, and EuroSCORE II were independent predictors of prolonged ventilation (> 24 h). However, conversion to sternotomy, previous cardiac surgery, gender, and history of smoking were not significantly associated with prolonged ventilation. ORE also led to reduced costs (Standard mean difference: 10 247€, p = 0.03). Ultra-fast extubation after minimally invasive valve surgery was associated with improved respiratory outcomes and lower costs compared to standard extubation in the ICU, with no increase in re-intubation rates. These findings support the clinical feasibility and safety of OR extubation in selected patients at experienced centers.
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.