ArticleJournal of chest surgery2026
Long-term Results after Mitral Valve Replacement with Mechanical Prostheses in Children under 3 Years of Age.
Article in Journal of chest surgery, 2026. 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.
- When Survival Is Not Enough: Rethinking Mechanical Mitral Valve Replacement in Young Children.Journal of chest surgery · 2026Article
- Commentary: Revisiting the Question: Should We Avoid Valve Replacement in Children?Journal of chest surgery · 2026Article
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: This study investigated the long-term results of mitral valve replacement (MVR) using mechanical prostheses in children under 3 years of age. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 24 patients who underwent MVR with mechanical prostheses before the age of 3 years between 1996 and 2019. Underlying diagnoses included isolated congenital mitral regurgitation (n=4), congenital mitral stenosis (n=4), and various congenital heart defects (n=16). The median follow-up duration was 9.8 years (interquartile range [IQR], 7.3-13.2 years). Results: The median age and weight at MVR were 16.6 months (IQR, 5.3-24.7 months) and 7.6 kg (IRQ, 4.9-9.5 kg), respectively. The median prosthesis size was 19 mm (range, 16-29 mm). Supra-annular implantation was performed in 12 patients (50%), who were significantly younger and smaller at the time of surgery and received smaller prostheses than those receiving annular implants. Early mortality occurred in 2 patients (8.3%), and 2 late deaths were recorded. The overall survival rate was 83.3% at 15 years. Redo MVR was performed in 9 patients during follow-up. The median increase in valve size was 4 mm. The interval from initial to redo MVR was positively correlated with the increase in valve size (Spearman ρ=0.64, p=0.07). Freedom from redo MVR was 86.3% at 5 years and 75.8% at 10 years. Conclusion: MVR with mechanical prostheses in children under 3 years of age can yield acceptable long-term survival, although redo MVR is often required. Mechanical MVR remains a viable salvage option in small children when valve repair is not feasible.
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.