Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2009
Screening men for abdominal aortic aneurysm: 10 year mortality and cost effectiveness results from the randomised Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
68 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2023Guideline
- Guideline
- 2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2022Guideline
- Pooled it
- Risk Factors for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Population-Based Studies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Pooled it
- Seasonal incidence of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm and the influence of atmospheric pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of biometeorology · 2018Pooled it
- Recommendations on screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in primary care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2017Guideline
- Abdominal ultrasound-scanning versus non-contrast computed tomography as screening method for abdominal aortic aneurysm - a validation study from the randomized DANCAVAS study.BMC medical imaging · 2017Trial
- Final follow-up of the Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study (MASS) randomized trial of abdominal aortic aneurysm screening.The British journal of surgery · 2012Trial
- The Viborg Vascular (VIVA) screening trial of 65-74 year old men in the central region of Denmark: study protocol.Trials · 2010Trial
- Prediction model for aortic dissection, aortic aneurysm, and peripheral artery disease.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Article
- Family screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Targeting the CD47-TSP1 Axis in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Novel Immunotherapeutic Approach.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- A Comprehensive Analysis of the Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Growth Rate in the Spanish Population.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Advances in Imaging and Diagnosis of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Shift in Clinical Practice.Cureus · 2025Review
- Current Status of Diagnostic Process in Asymptomatic Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Japan.Annals of vascular diseases · 2025Article
- The global burden of aortic aneurysm attributable to hypertension from 1990 to 2021: Current trends and projections for 2050.PloS one · 2025Article
- Automatic Explainable Segmentation of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm From Computed Tomography Angiography.IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions · 2025Article
- Multidisciplinary Management of Aortic Emergencies: Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2024Review
- Ruptured AAA: bridging the gap between international guidelines and local clinical realities.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess whether the mortality benefit from screening men aged 65-74 for abdominal aortic aneurysm decreases over time, and to estimate the long term cost effectiveness of screening.
designRandomised trial with 10 years of follow-up.
settingFour centres in the UK. Screening and surveillance was delivered mainly in primary care settings, with follow-up and surgery offered in hospitals.
participantsPopulation based sample of 67 770 men aged 65-74.
interventionsParticipants were individually allocated to invitation to ultrasound screening (invited group) or to a control group not offered screening. Patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm detected at screening underwent surveillance and were offered surgery if they met predefined criteria.
main outcome measuresMortality and costs related to abdominal aortic aneurysm, and cost per life year gained.
resultsOver 10 years 155 deaths related to abdominal aortic aneurysm (absolute risk 0.46%) occurred in the invited group and 296 (0.87%) in the control group (relative risk reduction 48%, 95% confidence interval 37% to 57%). The degree of benefit seen in earlier years of follow-up was maintained in later years. Based on the 10 year trial data, the incremental cost per man invited to screening was pound100 (95% confidence interval pound82 to pound118), leading to an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of pound7600 ( pound5100 to pound13,000) per life year gained. However, the incidence of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms in those originally screened as normal increased noticeably after eight years.
conclusionsThe mortality benefit of screening men aged 65-74 for abdominal aortic aneurysm is maintained up to 10 years and cost effectiveness becomes more favourable over time. To maximise the benefit from a screening programme, emphasis should be placed on achieving a high initial rate of attendance and good adherence to clinical follow-up, preventing delays in undertaking surgery, and maintaining a low operative mortality after elective surgery. On the basis of current evidence, rescreening of those originally screened as normal is not justified. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN37381646.
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.