ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Study on preoperative treatment of acute Type-A aortic dissection with endotracheal intubation combined with deep analgesia and sedation.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic value of a non-contrast CT-based radiomics model in patients with Type-B aortic dissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Successful management of acute type A aortic dissection in late pregnancy: a case report.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Radiomics-Based Machine Learning in the Diagnosis of Type-B Aortic Dissection on Computed Tomography Images.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the efficacy and safety of endotracheal intubation combined with deep analgesia and sedation in the prevention of preoperative dissection rupture in acute Standford type A aortic dissection. Methods: This study evaluated the impact of preoperative endotracheal intubation combined with deep analgesia and sedation on acute Stanford Type-A aortic dissection. Conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of the University of South China's cardiac intensive care unit from June 2018 to December 2021, 134 diagnosed patients participated. They were divided into experimental (n=42) and control (n=92) groups. Data collected included clinical details, biochemical markers, VAS and SAS scores, and preoperative dissection rupture occurrences. Criteria involved acute Stanford Type-A aortic dissection diagnosis and complete data. Exclusions encompassed rupture, vital sign instability after vasoactive drugs, or prolonged coma. Standardized methods were used for sample collection and analysis. The study's design, duration, and location ensured comprehensive evaluation of the intervention's effects on patients. Results: The experimental group showed significantly fewer deaths due to dissection rupture compared to the control group (P < 0.05). Initial VAS and SAS scores (T0) were similar between groups (P > 0.05), indicating good comparability. However, at T1, T2, and T3, analgesia and sedation were significantly better in the experimental group (P < 0.05). By T4, patient numbers were too low in both groups for a significant difference (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Preoperative endotracheal intubation combined with deep analgesia and sedation in patients with acute Stanford Type-A aortic dissection can produce good analgesic and sedative effects, effectively reduce the incidence of preoperative dissection rupture, and create conditions for subsequent surgical treatment of patients.
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.