Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37077590›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Acute Stanford Type A Aortic Dissection: A Review of Risk Factors and Outcomes.

Michael Chukwu, Paghunda Ehsan, Rawia N Aburumman, Shivani Ishwarya Muthanna, Swathi Radhakrishnan Menon, Vruti Vithani, Bansi Sutariya, Diana M Montenegro, Lubna Mohammed

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors.

Michael ChukwuGeneral Surgery, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Paghunda EhsanResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Rawia N AburummanResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Shivani Ishwarya MuthannaResearch and Development, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Swathi Radhakrishnan MenonPediatrics, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Vruti VithaniInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Bansi SutariyaInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Diana M MontenegroGeneral Surgery, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Lubna MohammedInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute aortic dissection (AAD) can be said to be a relatively uncommon emergency with fatal outcomes mainly due to delayed/missed diagnosis and treatment. Its ability to masquerade as other emergencies like acute coronary syndrome and pulmonary embolism makes the prognosis unfavorable in a significant proportion of patients. Patients have been seen to present to the accident and emergency department or outpatient setting with typical or atypical symptoms as we will discuss in this article. We have focused on indicators for risk and prognosis of acute Stanford type A aortic dissection in this traditional review. It is well known that despite recent developments and improvements in treatment modalities, AAD is still associated with a significant mortality rate and postoperative complications.

Indexed as

acute type a dissectionaorta repaircomplications of aortic dissectionoutcomesrisk factorsstanford type a acute aortic dissection

Identifiers

PMID37077590
PMCPMC10108894

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.