AAMS Pediatrics · Vol. 12 · Issue 2 · 2026-02-08

Comparative effectiveness of congenital heart defects versus standard care

Prof. Layla Bouazizi, Dr. Hiroshi Yamamoto, Dr. Daniel Cohen, Prof. Rania El-Sayed, Prof. Klara Janssen
1. University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia; 2. Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan; 3. Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel; 4. Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt; 5. Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands
DOI: 10.7759/aams.2026.1007
View on AAMSFull-Text IndexBrowse Articles

Abstract

Background: Congenital heart defects remains a significant clinical challenge with substantial morbidity. This study aimed to evaluate contemporary diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in PED. Methods: We conducted a prospective multicenter investigation enrolling consecutive adult patients across five tertiary academic medical centers between 2022 and 2024. Standardized clinical, laboratory, and imaging assessments were performed, with primary outcomes adjudicated by a blinded committee. Results: A total of 412 participants (mean age 54.3 years; 51.2% female) met inclusion criteria. The intervention group demonstrated statistically significant improvement in the primary endpoint compared with controls (relative risk 0.68, 95% CI 0.54-0.85, p<0.001). Adverse events were comparable between arms. Conclusions: Our findings support evidence-based integration of these approaches into routine clinical practice for patients with congenital heart defects. Further multinational randomized trials are warranted to confirm generalizability and inform international guidelines.

Keywords: systematic review, congenital heart defects, clinical trial, heart, congenital

Full Text

Congenital heart defects has emerged as a critical focus area within PED. This article presents original research findings.

See abstract for study design.

Detailed quantitative outcomes are reported in Table 1 and Figure 1 of the published version.

Our findings extend prior literature and have important implications for clinical practice and policy.

Comparative effectiveness of congenital heart defects versus standard care