ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2023
Postoperative results of the in situ fenestrated open stent technique for acute aortic dissection type A.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2023. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Unilateral vs. Bilateral Selective Cerebral Perfusion for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection with Frozen Elephant Trunk: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Total Arch Replacement with Ascyrus Medical Dissection Stent Versus Frozen Elephant Trunk in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Outcomes of fenestrated frozen elephant trunk technique in 150 patients with acute type A aortic dissection.JTCVS techniques · 2024Article
- Endoleak after use of the fenestrated frozen elephant trunk technique to treat acute type A aortic dissection.Journal of surgical case reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTotal arch replacement is commonly used for acute aortic dissection type A at some facilities, especially since open stent grafting became commercially available in Japan. Left subclavian artery (LSCA) reconstruction involves deep view manipulation, is difficult to expose and anastomose, and involves the risk of complications and surrounding vascular injury.
methodsWe evaluated 137 patients (mean age 73.8 ± 15.6 years) who underwent total arch replacement for acute aortic dissection type A, at our hospital between September 2014 and March 2022, and divided them into two groups: 70 patients for total arch replacement with fenestrated open stent technique (FeneOS), and 67 for conventional total arch replacement with the reconstruction of three-branch cerebral vessels. We performed FeneOS by deploying the graft from the entry of the left subclavian artery into the descending aorta and fenestrating the LSCA side of the stenting portion. The four-branched artificial vessel was then anastomosed between the left common carotid artery and LSCA.
resultsThe surgical results of FeneOS were satisfactory and enabled significant reductions in operative time, selective cerebral perfusion time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and lower body circulatory arrest time. Long-term observation (mean follow-up = 5.5 years) showed no left recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy or postoperative problems with left subclavian artery blood flow.
conclusionsFeneOS can minimize LSCA exposure because there is no need for LSCA reconstruction, reducing operation time and avoiding the risk of left recurrent laryngeal nerve injury and bleeding problems associated with LSCA exposure and anastomosis during left subclavian artery exposure.
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.