ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2026
Clinical outcomes of injectable and conventional pulmonary valve replacement in severe pulmonary regurgitation.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: Pulmonary regurgitation following tetralogy of Fallot repair is a common long-term complication requiring pulmonary valve replacement. Injectable bioprosthetic valves offer a less invasive alternative to conventional surgical replacement, but comparative data in pediatric populations remain limited. This study aimed to evaluate short-term and long-term clinical outcomes of injectable pulmonary valve replacement and conventional pulmonary valve replacement in pediatric patients with severe pulmonary regurgitation following tetralogy of Fallot repair. Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 22 pediatric patients who underwent pulmonary valve replacement. Patients were divided into injectable (n = 9) and conventional (n = 13) groups based on anatomical criteria. Primary outcomes included early postoperative parameters and long-term valve function. The mean follow-up duration was 10.5 ± 2.5 years. Results: Favorable early outcomes were noted in the injectable pulmonary valve replacement cohort, including shorter intensive care unit stay (16.8 ± 6.2 vs. 37.0 ± 23.4 h, p = 0.021), reduced mechanical ventilation duration (5.2 ± 3.9 vs. 15.4 ± 11.4 h, p = 0.019), decreased chest tube drainage (206.7 ± 108.2 vs. 513.1 ± 274.1 mL, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (5.4 ± 2.4 vs. 8.4 ± 3.1 days, p = 0.026). Long-term outcomes indicated similar valve function and right ventricular remodeling in the two groups, with excellent freedom from reintervention (100%) during follow-up. Conclusion: Injectable pulmonary valve replacement appears to be a safe alternative, offering favorable early outcomes and long-term valve performance comparable to conventional methods. However, clinical experience and precise patient selection remain critical for achieving optimal results.
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.