Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28455148›Full record

SynthesisLancet (London, England)2017

Morphological suitability for endovascular repair, non-intervention rates, and operative mortality in women and men assessed for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: systematic reviews with meta-analysis.

Pinar Ulug, Michael J Sweeting, Regula S von Allmen, Simon G Thompson, Janet T Powell, SWAN collaborators

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Lancet (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
15.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

64 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 180 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Surgery for small asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Recommendations on screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in primary care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2017
    Guideline
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Pinar UlugVascular Surgery Research Group, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK.
Michael J SweetingCardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Regula S von AllmenVascular Surgery Research Group, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK; Clinic for Vascular Surgery, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.
Simon G ThompsonCardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Janet T PowellVascular Surgery Research Group, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK. Electronic address: j.powell@imperial.ac.uk.
SWAN collaborators
Charing Cross Hospital · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBImperial College London · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation RG/08/014/24067British Heart Foundation RG/13/13/30194Department of Health HTA/14/179/01Medical Research Council G0800270Medical Research Council MR/L003120/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrognosis for women with abdominal aortic aneurysm might be worse than the prognosis for men. We aimed to systematically quantify the differences in outcomes between men and women being assessed for repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysm using data from study periods after the year 2000.

methodsIn these systematic reviews and meta-analysis, we identified studies (randomised, cohort, or cross-sectional) by searching MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and grey literature published between Jan 1, 2005, and Sept 2, 2016, for two systematic reviews and Jan 1, 2009, and Sept 2, 2016, for one systematic review. Studies were included if they were of both men and women, with data presented for each sex separately, with abdominal aortic aneurysms being assessed for aneurysm repair by either endovascular repair (EVAR) or open repair. We conducted three reviews based on whether studies reported the proportion morphologically suitable (within manufacturers' instructions for use) for EVAR (EVAR suitability review), non-intervention rates (non-intervention review), and 30-day mortality (operative mortality review) after intact aneurysm repair. Studies had to include at least 20 women (for the EVAR suitability review), 20 women (for the non-intervention review), and 50 women (for the operative mortality review). Studies were excluded if they were review articles, editorials, letters, or case reports. For the operative review, studies were also excluded if they only provided hazard ratios or only reported in-hospital mortality. We assessed the quality of the studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa scoring system, and contacted authors for the provision of additional data if needed. We combined results across studies by random-effects meta-analysis. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016043227.

findingsFive studies assessed the morphological eligibility for EVAR (1507 men, 400 women). The overall pooled proportion of women eligible (34%) for EVAR was lower than it was in men (54%; odds ratio [OR] 0·44, 95% CI 0·32-0·62). Four single-centre studies reported non-intervention rates (1365 men, 247 women). The overall pooled non-intervention rates were higher in women (34%) than men (19%; OR 2·27, 95% CI 1·21-4·23). The review of 30-day mortality included nine studies (52 018 men, 11 076 women). The overall pooled estimate for EVAR was higher in women (2·3%) than in men (1·4%; OR 1·67, 95% CI 1·38-2·04). The overall estimate for open repair also was higher in women (5·4%) than in men (2·8%; OR 1·76, 95% CI 1·35-2·30).

interpretationCompared with men, a smaller proportion of women are eligible for EVAR, a higher proportion of women are not offered intervention, and operative mortality is much higher in women for both EVAR and open repair. The management of abdominal aortic aneurysm in women needs improvement.

fundingNational Institute for Health Research (UK).

Indexed as

AgedAortic Aneurysm, AbdominalEndovascular ProceduresFemaleHumansMalePatient SelectionSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID28455148
PMCPMC5483509
OpenAlexW2608677615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.