Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28332098›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in cardiovascular medicine2017

Acute Aortic Syndromes: Update in Current Medical Management.

Jacqueline H Morris, Doran Mix, Scott J Cameron

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Diagnosis and acute management of type A aortic dissection.The British journal of cardiology · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Predictive value ofJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Acute aortic syndromes and aortic emergencies.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jacqueline H MorrisDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 679, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Doran MixDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Rochester School of Medicine, Box CVRI, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Scott J CameronDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 679, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA. Scott_Cameron@URMC.Rochester.edu.
University of Rochester · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementAdvances in medical therapy and non-surgical percutaneous options to manage the specter of acute aortic syndromes have improved both patient morbidity and mortality. There are key features in the patient history and initial exam which physicians should be attuned to in order to diagnose acute aortic syndromes such as aortic dissection, penetrating aortic ulcer, and intramural hematoma. Once recognized, early initiation of the appropriate pharmacologic therapy is important, and further appreciating the limitations of such therapy before considering a surgical approach is critical to improve patient outcomes. For the undifferentiated patient with acute aortic dissection presenting to facilities who do not routinely manage this condition, adding pharmacologic agents in the correct sequence assures the best chance for a satisfactory outcome.

Indexed as

Acute aortic syndromeNon-surgical optionsTherapyVascular disease

Identifiers

PMID28332098
OpenAlexW2603961311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.