ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Causal inference and mediating pathways of metabolic syndrome on calcific aortic valve stenosis: linkage disequilibrium score regression and two-sample, two-step mendelian randomization study.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent evidence regarding the role of Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) and its components in Calcific Aortic Valve Stenosis (CAVS) remains limited and inconsistent. To elucidate the causal relationship and investigate potential mediators, we conducted Linkage Disequilibrium Score Regression (LDSC) and two-sample as well as two-step Mendelian Randomization (MR) analyses.
methodsBased on genome-wide association study summary (GWAS) statistics, relevant single nucleotide polymorphisms were screened and utilized as instrumental variables (IVs). Our analytical approach included LDSC, two-sample, and two-step MR. To complement these, we employed Bayesian weighted Mendelian Randomization (BWMR) for validation and performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the robustness of the results.
resultLDSC analysis identified MetS and CAVS (rg = 0.264, p = 4.61 × 10–26). In the two-sample MR study, Mets (p = 1.39 × 10–20, OR = 1.82, 95%CI = 1.60–2.07), waist circumference (WC, p = 5.50 × 10–10, OR = 1.51, 95%CI = 1.33–1.72), triglycerides (TG, p = 2.24 × 10− 9, OR = 1.42, 95%CI = 1.22–1.65), and systolic blood pressure (SBP, p = 1.83 × 10− 6, OR = 1.04, 95%CI = 1.02–1.06) were positively correlated with CAVS. In contrast, high-density lipoprotein (HDL-C, p = 0.002, OR = 0.9, 95%CI = 0.82–0.99), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP, p = 0.002, OR = 0.78, 95%CI = 0.67–0.91) were negatively correlated with CAVS. Two-step MR analysis indicated that among 233 circulating metabolites, 19 risk factors and 3 protective factors mediated the impacts of MetS, WC and TG on CAVS.
conclusionMetS and CAVS share a common genetic architecture, with central adiposity, dyslipidemia, and blood pressure exhibiting distinct causal pathways. Small very-low-density lipoprotein particles, apolipoprotein B, and remnant cholesterol are key mediators linking MetS, WC, TG and CAVS.
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.