Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41658890›Full record

ArticleJTCVS techniques2026

Comparative outcomes of first-time versus redo aortic root replacement in patients with prior sternotomy: A single-center retrospective analysis.

Iverson E Williams, Alexandra Murillo Solera, Vaishnavi Karanam, Oscar Holmvard, Vani Thupili, Jean Pierre Botemps, Omar M Sharaf, Zaid Abu-Mowis, William Ricks, Daniel S Demos and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JTCVS techniques, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Iverson E WilliamsDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Alexandra Murillo SoleraDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Vaishnavi KaranamDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Oscar HolmvardDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Vani ThupiliDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Jean Pierre BotempsDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Omar M SharafDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Zaid Abu-MowisDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
William RicksDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Daniel S DemosDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Jaden JengDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Kirsten A FreemanDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Eddie W ManningDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Philip J HessDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
John R SprattDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Thomas M BeaverDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Tomas D MartinDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.
Eric I JengDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Fla.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Aortic root replacement (ARR) is a challenging procedure that requires aortic root implantation, coronary reimplantation, and concomitant aortic and valve surgery. Prior sternotomy (PS) increases case complexity for patients requiring ARR. We aimed to compare outcomes in PS patients undergoing primary ARR and patients undergoing true redo ARR. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing ARR after a PS between 2011 and 2023. Descriptive statistics were compared between the primary ARR and true redo ARR groups. Continuous and categorical variables were reported. Associations between groups were determined, with a Results: A total of 394 patients with history of PS underwent ARR, including 324 with primary ARR and 70 with true redo ARR. There were no differences in baseline comorbidities between groups, with most undergoing true redo ARRs for endocarditis (34.3%). True redo ARR patients were more likely to undergo a "modified Cabrol" for coronary management (17.9% for primary ARR vs 51.4% for true redo ARR; Conclusions: ARR in PS patients can be performed safely with good short- and long-term outcomes. Despite the challenges associated with reoperative aortic root surgery, there was no increase in adverse outcomes for primary ARR compared with true redo ARR.

Indexed as

aortic annular reconstructionaortic root replacementendocarditismodified Cabrolprior sternotomytrue redo aortic root replacement

Identifiers

PMID41658890
PMCPMC12881776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.