ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2018
Comparison of open surgical versus hybrid endovascular repair for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms with distal arch involvement.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent Patents of Stent Grafts for Intravascular Aortic Repair.Recent patents on biotechnology · 2026Review
- Efficacy and safety of debranching technique with zone 1 thoracic endovascular aortic repair in high-risk patients with distal aortic arch lesions.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Asymptomatic Giant Aneurysm of the Arteria Lusoria Treated by Debranching and Aneurysmal Resection.Vascular specialist international · 2022Article
- Hybrid Repair versus Conventional Open Repair Approaches for Aortic Arch Disease: a Comprehensive Review.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2021Review
- Comparison of Open Repair vs. the One-Stage Hybrid Extra-Anatomic Technique for Distal Aortic Arch Disease Treatment: Mid-term Outcomes With a Risk-Adjusted Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur aim was to compare the efficacies of conventional open thoracotomy and hybrid endovascular technique in patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysms involving the distal arch.
methodsBetween January 2005 and December 2015, 125 consecutive patients with descending aneurysms involving distal arch underwent open repair via thoracotomy (n=79) or zone 1/2 hybrid endovascular repair (n=46). Surgeries entailing total arch replacement by elephant trunk technique (with sternotomy) and Zone 0 hybrid arch repairs were excluded. Early and late outcomes were compared using propensity scores and inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting (IPTW).
resultsIn-hospital mortality rates for open repair (10.1%) and hybrid repair (6.5%) did not differ significantly (P=0.49). Major adverse outcomes included stroke (11.4%
conclusionsHybrid arch repair conferred a significantly lower incidence of pulmonary complications, without benefitting perioperative mortality and stroke. However, open repair proved more reliable, showing greater durability. Long-term investigations are needed to confirm the viability and safety of hybrid repair as an alternative treatment in this setting.
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.