Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36869667›Full record

SynthesisJournal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists2024

Systematic Review on Abdominal Penetrating Atherosclerotic Aortic Ulcers: Outcomes of Endovascular Repair.

Johannes Hatzl, Dittmar Böckler, Jonathan Fiering, Samuel Zimmermann, Moritz Sebastian Biscshoff, Eva Kalkum, Rosa Klotz, Christian Uhl

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Outcome of Endovascular and Open Treated Penetrating Aortic Ulcers.Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Johannes HatzlDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3152-7791
Dittmar BöcklerDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Jonathan FieringDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6895-9072
Samuel ZimmermannInstitute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Moritz Sebastian BiscshoffDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Eva KalkumStudy Center of the German Society of Surgery (SDGC), University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Rosa KlotzStudy Center of the German Society of Surgery (SDGC), University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Christian UhlDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DEGerman Society of Surgery · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo systematically review existing evidence on outcomes of endovascular repair of abdominal atherosclerotic penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs). MATERIAL AND

methodsCochrane Central Registry of Registered Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. The systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol (PRISMA-P 2020). The protocol was registered in the international registry of systematic reviews (PROSPERO CRD42022313404). Studies reporting on technical and clinical outcomes of endovascular PAU repair in 3 or more patients were included. Random effects modeling was used to estimate pooled technical success, survival, reinterventions, and type 1 and type 3 endoleaks. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I

resultsSixteen studies including 165 patients with a mean/median age ranging from 64 to 78 years receiving endovascular therapy for PAU between 1997 and 2020 were identified. Pooled technical success was 99.0% (CI: 96.0%-100%). In all, 30-day mortality was 1.0% (CI: 0%-6.0%) with an in-hospital mortality of 1.0% (CI: 0.0%-13.0%). There were no reinterventions, type 1, or type 3 endoleaks at 30 days. Median/mean follow-up ranged from 1 to 33 months. Overall, there were 16 deaths (9.7%), 5 reinterventions (3.3%), 3 type 1 (1.8%), and 1 type 3 endoleak (0.6%) during follow-up. The quality of studies was rated low according to the Modified Coleman score at 43.4 (+/- 8.5) of 85 points.

conclusionThere is low-level evidence on outcomes of endovascular PAU repair. While in the short-term endovascular repair of abdominal PAU seems safe and effective, mid-term and long-term data are lacking. Recommendations with regard to treatment indications and techniques in asymptomatic PAU should be made cautiously. CLINICAL IMPACT: This systematic review demonstrated that evidence on outcomes of endovascular abdominal PAU repair is limited. While in the short-term endovascular repair of abdominal PAU seems safe and effective, mid-term and long-term data are lacking. In the context of a benign prognosis of asymptomatic PAU and lacking standardization in current reporting, recommendations with regard to treatment indications and techniques in asymptomatic PAUs should be made cautiously.

Indexed as

Aorta, AbdominalAortic DiseasesBlood Vessel Prosthesis ImplantationEndovascular ProceduresUlcerAgedAtherosclerosisBlood Vessel ProsthesisHumansMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment Outcomecovered stentsendovascular repairEVARpenetrating aortic ulcerulcer

Identifiers

PMID36869667
PMCPMC11552196
OpenAlexW4323050665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.