ArticleAnnals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia2022
Early and Mid-Term Outcomes of Open versus Endovascular Left Subclavian Artery Debranching for Thoracic Aortic Diseases.
Article in Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Suitability of Single-Branched Thoracic Endografts for the Treatment of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection-An Anatomical Feasibility and Comparative Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of chimney technique and single-branched stent graft in a cohort of patients with type B aortic dissections: a retrospective cohort study.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Article
- Long-Term Outcomes in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection or Intramural Hematoma Depending on Proximal Landing Zone.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Comparison of surgical and endovascular left subclavian artery revascularization during thoracic aortic endovascular repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Physician-Modified TEVAR versus Hybrid Repair of the Proximal Descending Thoracic Aorta.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Comprehensive review of hybrid aortic arch repair with focus on zone 0 TEVAR and our institutional experience.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare open versus endovascular left subclavian artery debranching for thoracic endovascular aortic repair of thoracic aortic pathologies.
methodsThis is a retrospective study of patients receiving left subclavian artery debranching in our institution from October 2009 to January 2020. The primary outcome was freedom from aortic reintervention. Secondary outcomes were type I endoleaks, left subclavian artery (LSA) debranching failure, stroke, technical or clinical success, procedure-related reintervention, as well as 30-day or overall all-cause and aorta-related mortality.
resultsForty-eight patients received parallel graft-based (n = 24, ENDO; median age 75 years [70-80 years]) or open (n = 24, OPEN; median age 71 years [59-75 years]) debranching for type B aortic dissection (n = 25), degenerative aneurysm (n = 12), type IA endoleak (n = 6), suture-associated (n = 3) or ostial LSA aneurysm (n = 1), or penetrating aortic ulcer (n = 1). The median follow-up was 36 months (13-61 months). After 16 months, aortic reintervention-free survival in groups OPEN and ENDO was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79 to 100%) and 86% (73 to 100%) (p = 0.71), respectively. After 36 months, all-cause survival in groups OPEN and ENDO was 74% (95% CI: 55 to 99%) and 79% (95% CI: 64 to 97%) (p = 0.74), respectively; freedom from aorta-related mortality was 81% (95% CI: 62 to 100%) and 91% (95% CI: 80 to 100%) (p = 0.78), respectively. Group OPEN presented less type I endoleaks (OPEN/ENDO = 3/19, p <0.001) and higher technical (OPEN/ENDO = 81/36%, p = 0.003) and clinical success rates (OPEN/ENDO = 67/36%, p = 0.047). No statistical differences were found for other outcomes.
conclusionBoth strategies achieved comparable reintervention and mortality rates, but open debranching should be preferred due to its higher technical and clinical success and less type I endoleaks.
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.