ArticleTurk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi2026
Comparison of robot-assisted surgical and transcatheter closure of secundum atrial septal defect: A single-center retrospective study.
Article in Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Atrial septal defect (ASD) closure can be performed using either transcatheter or robot-assisted surgical approaches. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes, procedural characteristics, and complications associated with these two techniques in a large patient cohort. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 635 patients who underwent ASD closure via either robot-assisted surgery (Group I, n=290) or transcatheter closure (Group II, n=345). Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data, including procedural times, complications, and follow-up outcomes, were evaluated. In addition, patients treated after 2019 were analyzed as a subgroup and categorized as Group Is (robot-assisted surgery, n=101) and Group IIs (transcatheter closure, n=105). Results: Patients in Group I had significantly longer procedural times and hospital stays than those in Group II (p<0.001). Postoperative tricuspid regurgitation was more frequent in the transcatheter group (p=0.003). Device migration occurred in 3.2% of transcatheter cases. Overall neurological events occurred in 0.7% of Group I patients and 2.6% of Group II patients (p=0.06). No significant difference in postoperative arrhythmia rates was observed between the groups. In the subgroup analysis of patients treated after 2019, the mean hospital stay was 2.36±0.5 days in Group Is and 2.21±0.6 days in Group IIs (p=0.07). Ventilation time was 3.6±1.4 hours versus 3.1±1.9 hours (p=0.05), and intensive care unit stay was 7.8±2.9 hours versus 7.2±3.0 hours (p=0.20), respectively. Conclusion: Both transcatheter and robot-assisted surgical ASD closure are safe and effective when patients are appropriately selected. Robot-assisted surgery offers the additional advantage of concomitant tricuspid valve annuloplasty and demonstrates improved outcomes with increasing surgical experience. Larger prospective multicenter studies are needed to further validate these findings.
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.