↓ Skip to main content

Quality of life, satisfaction and outcomes after ministernotomy versus full sternotomy isolated aortic valve replacement (QUALITY-AVR): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quality of life, satisfaction and outcomes after ministernotomy versus full sternotomy isolated aortic valve replacement (QUALITY-AVR): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-2486-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emiliano A. Rodríguez-Caulo, Ana Guijarro-Contreras, Juan Otero-Forero, María José Mataró, Gemma Sánchez-Espín, Arantza Guzón, Carlos Porras, Miguel Such, Antonio Ordóñez, José María Melero-Tejedor, Manuel Jiménez-Navarro

Abstract

During the last decade, the use of ministernotomy in cardiac surgery has increased. Quality of life and patient satisfaction after ministernotomy have never been compared to conventional full sternotomy in randomised trials. The aim of the study is to determine if this minimally invasive approach improves quality of life, satisfaction and clinical morbimortality outcomes. The QUALITY-AVR trial is a single-blind, single-centre, independent, and pragmatic randomised clinical trial comparing ministernotomy ("J" shaped upper hemisternotomy toward right 4th intercostal space) to full sternotomy in patients with isolated severe aortic stenosis scheduled for elective aortic valve replacement. One hundred patients will be randomised in a 1:1 computational fashion. Sample size was determined for the primary end point with alpha error of 0.05 and with power of 90% in detecting differences between intervention groups of ≥ 0.10 points in change from baseline quality of life Questionnaire EuroQOL-index (EQ-5D-5 L®), measured at 1, 6 or 12 months. Secondary endpoints are: the differences in change from other baseline EQ-5D-5 L® utilities (visual analogue scale, Health Index and Severity Index), cardiac surgery specific satisfaction questionnaire (SATISCORE®), a combined safety endpoint of four major adverse complications at 1 month (all-cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction, neurologic events and acute renal failure), bleeding through drains within the first 24 h, intubation time, postoperative hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, transfusion needs during the first 72 h and 1-year survival rates. Clinical follow up is scheduled at baseline, 1, 6, and 12 months after randomization. All clinical outcomes are recorded following the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 criteria. The QUALITY-AVR trial aims to test the hypothesis that ministernotomy improves quality of life, satisfaction and clinical outcomes in patients referred for isolated aortic valve replacement. Statistically significant differences favouring ministernotomy could modify the surgical "gold standard" for aortic stenosis surgery, and subsequently the need to change the control group in transcatheter aortic valve implantation trials. Recruitment started on 18 March 2016. In November 2017, 75 patients were enrolled. ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02726087 . Registered on 13 March 2016.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Other 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 23 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Psychology 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 23 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 February 2018.
All research outputs
#2,850,612
of 12,521,852 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,036
of 3,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,630
of 270,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,521,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,258 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them