ArticleJACC. Advances2026
Biventricular Pressure-Volume Area Ratio for the Assessment of Left Ventricular Preparedness for Double Switch Operation.
Article in JACC. Advances, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssessing left ventricular (LV) preparedness in congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries/intact ventricular septum for the double switch operation (DSO) remains challenging. Subpulmonary LV pressure-volume area (PVA)-a ventricular workload metric-compared to systemic right ventricular (RV) PVA, may be a good index of adequacy.
objectivesThe objectives of the study were to determine if LV-PVA can be estimated (ePVA) from standard parameters and if the LV:RV ePVA ratio is associated with post-DSO outcomes.
methodsLV-PVA was measured using conductance catheters and compared to ePVA calculated with simple catheterization and volumetric variables. Agreement and bias were assessed using Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analysis. In a retrospective cohort, associations between a composite outcome (≥moderate LV dysfunction, transplant, or death) and LV:RV ePVA ratio and clinical variables were evaluated using univariate Cox proportional hazards.
resultsThe ePVA showed high agreement and low bias with measured PVA (n = 20). In the retrospective cohort, 6/42 patients (14%, median age at DSO 2.9 years) experienced the composite outcome (median follow-up 1.65 [0.12, 4.58] years). Low LV:RV ePVA and pressure ratios were the only significant associations (HR: 3.9; 95% CI: 1.5-10.0 and HR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.3-4.2, respectively), whereas LV mass indices were not. Among 8 patients with borderline pressure ratios, 5 with ePVA ratio <0.67 had adverse outcome, whereas 3 with ePVA ratio ≥0.67 did not.
conclusionsEstimation of subpulmonary LV-PVA using simple imaging and catheterization data was reliable compared to gold standards. LV:RV ePVA ratio ≥0.67 may serve as a good discriminator for LV preparedness for DSO for congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries/intact ventricular septum.
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.