ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Pacemaker implantation after concomitant maze procedure and mitral valve repair in atrial functional mitral regurgitation.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Atrial functional mitral regurgitation (AFMR) is caused by atrial enlargement and mitral annular dilation due to atrial fibrillation (AF). Although the outcomes of mitral valve surgery in AFMR have been reported, concomitant Maze procedure outcomes in AFMR remain poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and rhythm outcomes of concomitant mitral valve plasty and the Maze procedure in patients with AFMR. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 122 patients who underwent the mitral valve plasty (repair) concomitant with Maze procedure between August 2010 and June 2025. The cohort was divided into an AFMR group (n=50) and a non-AFMR group (n=72). The cumulative incidence of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation was analyzed using the Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model with death as a competing risk. Postoperative rhythm dynamics were evaluated using a continuous-time multi-state Markov model. Results: The overall cumulative incidence of PPM implantation was significantly higher in the AFMR group than in the non-AFMR group (P<0.001). While early (≤30 days) PPM implantation rates did not differ (P=0.53), the AFMR group showed a higher risk of late (>30 days) PPM implantation (P<0.001). Multivariable analysis identified AFMR as an independent risk factor of late PPM implantation [subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR) 14.963, P=0.02]. Furthermore, the AFMR group demonstrated a higher rate of postoperative junctional rhythm compared to the non-AFMR group. Conclusions: AFMR was not associated with a statistically significant difference in overall survival and the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events following the Maze procedure compared to the non-AFMR group. However, AFMR was associated with a higher risk of transition to junctional rhythm following the Maze procedure, which was associated with an increased rate of PPM implantation. Notably, the risk of pacemaker implantation was predominantly late-onset, which may be due to a progressive decline in sinus node function. Therefore, close long-term rhythm monitoring and follow-up are warranted.
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.