ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Outcome Analysis of Speed Gate Cannulation during Standard Infrarenal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing Femoral Access in Emergency EVAR with a Decision-Making Algorithm.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is generally performed with bi/trimodular stent-grafts requiring retrograde contralateral gate cannulation (CGC). In the case of tricky CGC, an increased EVAR procedural time and radiation exposure have been reported. Herein, we compare the outcomes of conventional CGC and CGC using the speed gate cannulation (SGC) technique in standard EVAR for a propensity-matched cohort.
methodsA total of 371 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria were fulfilled in 172 patients who underwent propensity score matching. Primary outcomes included operative time, CGC time, mean contrast medium, fluoroscopy time, and CGC fluoroscopy time.
resultsAfter matching, 78 patients were included in each group (SGC vs. standard). Primary outcomes registered a significant reduction in CGC time (4 [1-6] vs. 8 [6-14] min;
conclusionsIn this preliminary experiment, the use of SGC was feasible with no significant registered postoperative complications. A significant reduction in contrast medium usage, radiation exposure, and CGC time was observed with the use of SGC. SGC is a simple adjunctive technique, and its use should be considered in standard EVAR, especially in emergency scenarios, where time is of the essence.
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.