ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2019
Surgical outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection in dialysis patients.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of GERAADA score in patients with acute type A aortic dissection.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2022Article
- Surgical outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection in dialysis patients: lessons learned from a single-center's experience.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Aortic Agatston score correlates with the progression of acute type A aortic dissection.PloS one · 2022Article
- Differences in the clinical presentation, management, and in-hospital outcomes of acute aortic dissection in patients with and without end-stage renal disease.BMC nephrology · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is relatively uncommon in dialysis patients, and characteristics and repair outcomes are not fully understood. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with ATAAD (n = 960) were divided into a dialysis group (n = 19) and non-dialysis group (n = 941), depending on whether they required dialysis for preoperative end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Hospital charts and imaging data were reviewed, and characteristics and outcomes were compared between the groups. Segmental aortic wall or intima/media flap calcification in the thoracic and abdominal aorta was assessed in the dialysis patients.
resultsThe leading primary causes of ESRD were polycystic kidney disease (n = 5) and chronic glomerulonephritis (n = 5). There were no significant differences (dialysis group vs. non-dialysis group) in age (60.5 vs. 64.5 years), preoperative hemodynamics, or organ ischemia. Dialysis patients were more likely to have an entry tear in the aortic arch (42% vs. 15%, p = 0.003). These patients showed moderate-to-severe calcification (multiple focal or single focal calcification > 10 mm) in the ascending aorta (17%), aortic arch (61%), descending aorta (67%), and abdominal aorta (83%). Arch replacement was common in this group (37% vs. 18%, p = 0.030). Although in-hospital mortality was increased in this group (21% vs. 7%, p = 0.059), morbidities did not differ significantly. Six-year survival was 60.3 ± 13.4% and 78.8 ± 1.6%, respectively (p = 0.01).
conclusionsDialysis patients tend to have aortic calcification and a primary tear in the aortic arch. Outcomes are acceptable.
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.