ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2026
Sex-based differences in outcomes of mitral valve surgery: A meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies with reconstructed time-to-event data.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Studies indicate worse outcomes for women undergoing mitral valve surgery, but this can be biased in the context of differences in risk profiles between sexes. We aimed to assess short- and long-term outcomes of mitral valve surgery in men and women using confounder-adjusted data. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for eligible propensity-score-matched studies. Analysis was performed for short-term (<30 days mortality and procedural complications) and long-term (>1 year mortality, reoperation, and mitral regurgitation) endpoints. A pairwise random-effects meta-analysis was done for short-term outcomes, pooling risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). A meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier derived individual patient data was conducted for long-term endpoints. Cox frailty regression analysis was used to obtain hazard ratios (HR). Results: We included 12 studies (n = 55,616). No significant differences were observed in the short-term risks of death (RR 1.02; 95 % CI: 0.91-1.15; p = 0.72), stroke (RR 1.04; 95 % CI: 0.87-1.26; p = 0.65), kidney injury (RR 0.97; 95 % CI: 0.71-1.32; p = 0.85), atrial fibrillation (RR 0.96; 95 % CI: 0.81-1.14; p = 0.61), or pacemaker implantation (RR 0.93; 95 % CI: 0.84-1.02; p = 0.1). The hazards of long-term mortality (HR 0.97; 95 % CI: 0.91-1.03; p = 0.3) and reoperation (HR 1.65; 95 % CI: 0.39-6.91; p = 0.5) were similar between sexes. However, women had a higher hazard of recurrent mitral regurgitation (HR 1.61; 95 % CI: 1.08-2.37; p = 0.018). Conclusions: This meta-analysis found no sex-based differences in short- or long-term mortality, reoperation rates, or procedural complications following mitral valve surgery. A higher hazard of recurrent mitral regurgitation was observed in women.
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.