ArticleJTCVS techniques2025
Superiority of antegrade cardioplegia over continuous hypothermic retrograde cardioplegia in myocardial protection during isolated aortic valve replacement.
Article in JTCVS techniques, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The efficacy of antegrade cardioplegia delivery (ACD) versus retrograde cardioplegia delivery remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intermittent and isothermic ACD (IIACD) with continuous and hypothermic retrograde cardioplegia delivery (CHRCD) in patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods: This retrospective study reviewed 164 patients who underwent isolated AVR. After propensity score matching was performed for age, sex, body surface area, European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation, operation time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and aortic crossclamp time, 62 patients were assigned to either the IIACD or CHRCD group. Myocardial injury was assessed using peak levels of creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) level within 1 week postoperatively. Echocardiographic changes and clinical outcomes were also evaluated. Results: Postoperative peak CK-MB and AST levels were significantly lower in the IIACD group. CK-MB levels were 31.4 ± 51.8 ng/mL (IIACD) versus 49.8 ± 37.2 ng/mL (CHRCD), Conclusions: Despite the use of continuous hypothermic cardioplegia in the CHRCD group, IIACD provided superior myocardial protection. ACD may offer a safer cardioplegia strategy during AVR.
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.