ArticleClinical physiology and functional imaging2026
The durability of different anchoring points and anchoring types in the left ventricle in an ex vivo porcine model.
Article in Clinical physiology and functional imaging, 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
Abstract
objectiveSurgical mitral valve repair, including anchoring in different parts of the mitral apparatus, is the standard of care for severe mitral regurgitation. Various percutaneous approaches have been developed and are currently under development, but are struggling with durable results. This study investigates the durability of different anatomic anchoring points and anchoring types in the left ventricle. MATERIAL AND
methodsAnchoring was tested with PTFE sutures or a 5 mm helix at three locations: the head of the papillary muscle, the lateral wall of the ventricle, and the apex of the ventricle. An accelerated life test was performed with 300 cycles at 3 N for each anchoring. Durability was assessed by measuring compliance (strain in mm until 3 N is reached), migration (change in strain from the first to the last cycle), and the occurrence of dehiscence.
resultsThe lowest numerical strain/compliance in the first cycle was observed at the head of the papillary muscle anchoring (both surgical and helix). Migration of strain limits over 300 cycles was seen for all locations. The lowest migration was numerically for helix in the papillary muscle.
conclusionPTFE in the head of the papillary muscle is standard practice in mitral valve repair and was used as a reference in the present study. The anchoring that yielded the most similar results was a helix in the papillary muscle, whereas other anchoring points showed greater compliance and/or migration.
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.