ReviewCJC open2026
Sex-Based Differences in Outcomes of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis with Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.
Review in CJC open, 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
Background: Results in the literature are mixed on how patient sex impacts the outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), with a high risk of confounding bias due to different risk profiles at presentation. We aimed to assess short- and long-term outcomes of SAVR in male and female patients. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for eligible confounder-adjusted studies, including those that used propensity-score-matching, multivariable regressions, and inverse probability of treatment weighting. Meta-analysis was performed for short-term (early mortality and procedural complications) and long-term (late mortality, reoperation, and adverse events) endpoints. We compared endpoints, using risk ratio (RR) for short-term endpoints and hazards ratio (HR) for long-term endpoints. We calculated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all outcomes. A meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data was done for long-term mortality. Results: We included 13 studies (n = 159,415). In the short-term, female patients had a higher mortality rate (RR 1.25 [95% CI 1.19, 1.32], Conclusions: This meta-analysis found that, compared to male patients, female patients had higher early mortality but lower late mortality following SAVR.
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.