ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
Late Outcome after Surgery for Type-A Aortic Dissection.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcriptome-Based Identification of Biomarkers Associated With Sphingosine-1-Phosphate Signaling Pathway in Aortic Dissection.International journal of hypertension · 2025Article
- Spinal cord injury during selective cerebral perfusion and segmental artery occlusion: an experimental study.Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2022Article
- Incidence and Transition of Acute Kidney Injury, Acute Kidney Disease to Chronic Kidney Disease after Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Surgery.Journal of clinical 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate all-cause mortality and aortic reoperations after surgery for Stanford type A aortic dissection (TAAD). We evaluated the late outcome of patients who underwent surgery for acute TAAD from January 2005 to December 2017 at the Helsinki University Hospital, Finland. We studied 309 patients (DeBakey type I TAAD: 89.3%) who underwent repair of TAAD. Aortic root repair was performed in 94 patients (30.4%), hemiarch repair in 264 patients (85.4%) and partial/total aortic arch repair in 32 patients (10.4%). Hospital mortality was 13.6%. At 10 years, all-cause mortality was 34.9%, and the cumulative incidence of aortic reoperation or late aortic-related death was 15.6%, of any aortic reoperation 14.6%, reoperation on the aortic root 6.6%, on the aortic arch, descending thoracic and/or abdominal aorta 8.7%, on the descending thoracic and/or abdominal aorta 6.4%, and on the abdominal aorta 3.8%. At 10 years, cumulative incidence of reoperation on the distal aorta was higher in patients with a diameter of the descending thoracic aorta ≥35 mm at primary surgery (cumulative incidence in the overall series: 13.2% vs. 4.0%, SHR 3.993, 95%CI 1.316-12.120; DeBakey type I aortic dissection: 13.6% vs. 4.5%, SHR 3.610, 95%CI 1.193-10.913; patients with dissected descending thoracic aorta: 15.8% vs. 5.9%, SHR 3.211, 95%CI 1.067-9.664). In conclusion, surgical repair of TAAD limited to the aortic segments involved by the intimal tear was associated with favorable survival and a low rate of aortic reoperations. However, patients with enlarged descending thoracic aorta at primary surgery had higher risk of late reoperation. Half of the distal aortic reinterventions were performed on the abdominal aorta.
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.