SynthesisInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2026
Direct Anastomosis Versus Conduit Repair for Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Reconstruction in Common Arterial Trunk: A Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.
Synthesis in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesRepair of common arterial trunk (CAT) involves establishing the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) using either a conduit or a direct right ventricle-pulmonary artery (RVPA) anastomosis (DA). Conduits offer a valved pathway but are limited by durability and availability. The comparative outcomes of these 2 techniques remain uncertain. This work assessed whether DA improves survival, reduces complications and reintervention outcomes compared to conduit repair.
methodsPubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central were searched for studies comparing conduit versus DA for RVOT reconstruction from February 20, 2025 to March 30 30, 2025. The primary outcome was early mortality; secondary outcomes included haemodynamics, recovery, and complications. Time-to-event data were reconstructed from Kaplan-Meier curves. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs), risk ratios (RRs), or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models.
resultsEleven studies (767 patients; 419 conduit, 348 DA) were included. Early mortality (RR = 0.61, 95% CI, 0.26-1.44, P = .220) and long-term survival (HR = 1.11, 95% CI, 0.61-2.02, P = .738) were similar. Reoperation was more frequent in the conduit group (HR = 1.77, 95% CI, 1.05-3.01, P = .034). Conduit repair required longer ventilation (MD = 3.44 days, P = .010) and hospitalization (MD = 4.77 days, P = .030), with comparable ICU stay and RVOT growth. Truncal valve insufficiency (RR = 0.13, P = .130 for truncal valve vs conduit) was similar in incidence following DA.
conclusionsConduit and DA repairs yield similar survival and postoperative complications in CAT, while DA offers fewer reoperations and faster recovery. Data from future prospective multicentre trials will support decision-making.
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.