ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Biomechanical Rupture Risk Assessment in Management of Patients with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of COVID-19 Infection on Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Mechanisms and Clinical Implications.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2024Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic requires a redefinition of healthcare system to increase the number of available intensive care units for COVID-19 patients. This leads to the postponement of elective surgeries including the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). The probabilistic rupture risk index (PRRI) recently showed its advantage over the diameter criterion in AAA rupture risk assessment. Its major improvement is in increased specificity and yet has the same sensitivity as the maximal diameter criterion. The objective of this study was to test the clinical applicability of the PRRI method in a quasi-prospective patient cohort study. Methods: Nineteen patients (fourteen males, five females) with intact AAA who were postponed due to COVID-19 pandemic were included in this study. The PRRI was calculated at the baseline via finite element method models. If a case was diagnosed as high risk (PRRI > 3%), the patient was offered priority in AAA intervention. Cases were followed until 10 September 2021 and a number of false positive and false negative cases were recorded. Results: Each case was assessed within 3 days. Priority in intervention was offered to two patients with high PRRI. There were four false positive cases and no false negative cases classified by PRRI. In three cases, the follow-up was very short to reach any conclusion. Conclusions: Integrating PRRI into clinical workflow is possible. Longitudinal validation of PRRI did not fail and may significantly decrease the false positive rate in AAA treatment.
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.