ArticlePediatric cardiology2026
Treatment Options Offered to Infants with Single Ventricle Physiology and Genetic Aneuploidy: A Survey of US Pediatric Intensivists, Cardiologists, and Cardiothoracic Surgeons.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We sought to examine what treatment options were offered for patients with isolated single ventricle physiology (iso-SVP) versus patients with single ventricle physiology and concomitant genetic aneuploidy. Pediatric intensivists, cardiologists, and congenital heart surgeons from the United States were surveyed about treatment options offered to patients with iso-SVP or SVP with concomitant aneuploidy (trisomy 21 [t21-SVP] or trisomy 18 [t18-SVP]). For each scenario, respondents were also queried about what they would hypothetically choose for their own child. Analyses were performed on responses from 171 pediatric intensivists, 69 cardiologists, and 44 congenital heart surgeons. For iso-SVP, nearly all respondents would offer a staged surgical procedure (268/269 [99.6%]) and half would offer comfort care (130/269 [48.3%]). For their own child with iso-SVP, respondents were divided between surgery (137/266, [51.5%]) and comfort care (130/266 [48.9%]). For t21-SVP, respondents almost always offered staged surgical procedures (243/267 [91.0%]) and half of respondents would offer comfort care measures (137/267 [51.3%]). For their own child with t21-SVP, a majority would opt for comfort care (191/266 [71.8%]). For t18-SVP, only 21.8% (58/266) would offer staged surgical procedures, and virtually all (252/266, [94.7%]) would offer comfort care. Comfort care was almost unanimously chosen for their own child (276/277 [99.6%]). Respondents offered comfort care for children with iso-SVP and t18-SVP at a rate concomitant with their own preferences. However, for t21-SVP, only half of respondents offered comfort care, whereas 70% would want it for their own child. This raises ethical questions around respect for parental decision-making authority and informed consent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41746323What 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.