ArticleActa Cardiologica Sinica2021
Elective Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Modular and Unibody Type Endografts.
Article in Acta Cardiologica Sinica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endovascular treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysm using the ANKURA stent graft - one-center case series.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2023Article
- Incidence of secondary rupture after abdominal aortic aneurysms (endovascular vs. open surgical repair).Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, we aimed to evaluate the performance of modular and unibody endografts for the endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).
methodsBetween January 2012 and December 2017, 130 elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms treated in an endovascular manner were retrospectively evaluated. Sixty-six patients with the modular type (Medtronic Endurant
resultsThere was one in-hospital mortality (0.8%) in the modular group. There was no difference in postoperative first-year mortality rate between the two groups (p = 0.678). Loco-regional anesthesia was used more often in the unibody group [34 patients (53.1%)] and the use of general anesthesia was higher in the modular group [56 patients (84.8%)] (p < 0.001). While the duration of the procedure was shorter in the unibody group (p < 0.001), no statistically significant difference was found in the duration of fluoroscopy (p = 0.813) and the amount of contrast agent used (p = 0.553). The follow-up period in the intensive care unit was shorter in the modular group (p < 0.001). Moreover, the five-year survival rate was similar between the groups (84.8% in the modular group and 78.4% in the unibody group, log-rank p = 0.703).
conclusionsThe results obtained in our study show that modular and unibody grafts are effective and reliable, although there are some negligible differences in the early period.
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.