ArticleBrazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery2024
Ascending Aortic Progression After Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement Among Patients with Bicuspid and Tricuspid Aortic Valves.
Article in Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery, 2024. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aims of the present study were to compare the long-term outcomes for ascending aortic dilatation and adverse aortic events after isolated aortic valve replacement between patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve ( TAV).
methodsThis retrospective study included 310 patients who had undergone isolated aortic valve replacement with an ascending aorta diameter ≤ 45 mm between January 2010 and September 2021. The patients were divided into BAV group (n=90) and TAV group (n=220). The differences in the dilation rate of the ascending aorta and long-term outcomes were analyzed.
resultsOverall survival was 89 ± 4% in the BAV group vs. 75 ± 6% in the TAV group at 10 years postoperatively (P=0.007), yet this difference disappeared after adjusting exclusively for age (P=0.343). The mean annual growth rate of the ascending aorta was similar between the two groups during follow-up (0.5 ± 0.6 mm/year vs. 0.4 ± 0.5 mm/year; P=0.498). Ten-year freedom from adverse aortic events was 98.1% in the BAV group vs. 95.0% in the TAV group (P=0.636). Multivariable analysis revealed preoperative ascending aorta diameter to be a significant predictor of adverse aortic events (hazard ratio: 1.76; 95% confidence interval: 1.33 to 2.38; P<0.001).
conclusionOur study revealed that the long-term survival and the risks of adverse aortic events between BAV and TAV patients were similar after isolated aortic valve replacement. BAV was not a risk factor of adverse aortic events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.