ArticleJACC. Advances2026
Mitral Valve Repair in Patients With Class I Obesity: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.
Article in JACC. Advances, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObesity may increase the technical complexity of robotic mitral valve (MV) repair, but comparative outcomes with sternotomy remain poorly defined.
objectivesThis study aimed to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of robotic vs sternotomy MV repair in patients with class I obesity.
methodsA total of 880 patients with class I obesity (body mass index 30-34.9 kg/m
resultsMedian age was 59 years (IQR: 52-66), and 81% were male. Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were longer in the robotic group than in the sternotomy group (86 vs 65 minutes and 60 vs 48 minutes, respectively; P < 0.001). Robotic MV repair was associated with shorter hospitalization (3.5 vs 5 days; P < 0.001) and a lower postoperative transfusion rate (1.5% vs 10.6%; P = 0.002). There were no operative deaths in either group. No sternal wound infections occurred. Thirty-day readmission was numerically higher after robotic repair (12.8% vs 4.3%; P = 0.064). Ten-year survival was 92% (95% CI: 87% to 97%) with no significant difference between groups (P = 0.83).
conclusionsIn patients with class I obesity, the robotic approach in comparison to sternotomy was associated with lower transfusion rates, shorter hospitalization, and comparable operative mortality and long-term survival relative to sternotomy. Although 30-day readmission was numerically higher among robotic patients, most events were minor and managed without intervention.
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.