ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Comparative analysis of postoperative outcomes and utilization trends for valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate clinical outcomes, temporal trends, and age-related heterogeneity of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement (re-SAVR) in patients with failed aortic bioprosthetic valves.
methodsPatients undergoing ViV-TAVI or re-SAVR between 2011 and 2021 were identified from the Nationwide Readmission Database (NRD). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to adjust for baseline differences. Temporal trends in procedure utilization and patient age were assessed across calendar years. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, including in-hospital, 30-day, and 6-month mortality. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital complications, all-cause readmission, and days alive and out of hospital (DAOH). Age-stratified and interaction analyses were performed.
resultsViV-TAVI utilization increased significantly over time (p < 0.001), accompanied by a modest decline in patient age. Compared with re-SAVR, ViV-TAVI was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.71; p < 0.001) and 30-day mortality (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.43-0.83; p = 0.002), as well as lower risks of in-hospital stroke or transient ischemic attack, renal failure, and major bleeding (all p < 0.001). However, ViV-TAVI was associated with higher 30-day (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02-1.48; p = 0.031) and 6-month readmission (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.07-1.46; p = 0.006). ViV-TAVI was also associated with higher DAOH at 30 days and 6 months (both p < 0.001). Interaction analyses suggested age-related heterogeneity for selected outcomes.
conclusionsViV-TAVI use increased substantially and was associated with lower short-term mortality and fewer in-hospital complications, but higher readmission risk. Improved DAOH and potential age-related heterogeneity warrant further evaluation.
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.