ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2026
Meta-analysis of valved conduits in right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction: comparison of homograft, bovine jugular vein, and EPTFE valved conduits.
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHomograft, bovine jugular vein (BJV) and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) valved conduits are most common valved conduits for reconstructing right ventricular outflow tracts (RVOT), while the performance of those three valved conduits was still unclear. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, as well as Chinese databases of SinoMed, CNKI, and Wanfang from 1 January 2000 to 26 August 2024 to identify studies on RVOT reconstruction with homograft, BJV, and ePTFE valved conduits. We included studies reporting the outcomes of mortality, replacement rate, and the incidence of infective endocarditis. The "meta" and "metafor" packages in R version 4.2.1 were used for evidence synthesis. ROBINS-I tool was used for assessing the risk of bias. This study is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024582184).
resultsAccording to 28 retrospective cohort studies (n = 3966), there was no significant difference in mortality and replacement rate between homograft, BJV, and ePTFE. However, the IE incidence in BJV was significantly higher than that in homograft (RR = 3.63, 95% CI: 1.69-7.83, P < 0.01). Based on the pooled results of 113 case-series reports (n = 16 367), the total mortality of homograft, BJV, and ePTFE was 8% (95% CI: 6%-9%), 5% (95% CI: 4%-7%), and 3% (95% CI: 3%-4%), respectively. The replacement rate of homograft, BJV, and ePTFE was 9% (95% CI: 6%-13%), 9% (95% CI:6%-12%), and 4% (95% CI: 2%-9%), respectively. The incidence of IE for BJV was 6% (95% CI: 3%-10%), which was higher than 2% for homograft (95% CI: 1%-4%) and 1% for ePTFE (95% CI: 1%-2%).
conclusionsWhile BJV and ePTFE are viable alternatives with comparable mortality and replacement rate to homograft, the elevated IE risk in BJV necessitates cautious patient selection and monitoring.
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.