ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2024
Prevalence of Genetic Variants and Deep Phenotyping in Patients with Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm and Dissection: A Cross-Sectional Single-Centre Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interdisciplinary vascular genetics evaluations in routine clinical care: insights from a five-year single-center experience.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Total Thrombus-Formation Analysis System (T-TAS) in Aortopathies: A Conceptual and Potential Framework to Spatial Heterogeneity and Regional Context.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
- Genetic factors and management strategies in aortic health: a literature review of inherited aortopathy.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Review
- Prevalence and Influence of Genetic Variants on Follow-Up Results in Patients Surviving Thoracic Aortic Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Value of Histological Examination for the Prediction of Genetic Thoracic Proximal Aortopathies.Journal of clinical medicine · 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 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is a paucity of evidence on people with thoracic aortic aneurysm and dissection. We aimed to determine the prevalence of genetic variants and their associations with phenotypes.
methodsIn this cross-sectional single-centre cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent endovascular or open-surgical repair of thoracic aortic aneurysm and dissection, genetic analysis was performed using four-stage Next Generation Sequencing, and findings were confirmed with Sanger sequencing. We collected personal and family history on comorbidities, clinical examination, anthropometrics, skeletal deformities, joint function, and ophthalmological measures. Cardiovascular risk and phenotype scores were calculated.
resultsNinety-five patients were eligible (mean age 54 ± 9 years, 70% males, 56% aortic dissection). One-fifth had a family history of aortic disease. Furthermore, 95% and 54% had a phenotype score of ≤5 and ≤2, respectively. There were no significant differences in the distribution of phenotype characteristics according to age, sex, aortic pathology, or performed invasive procedures. Genetic variants of uncertain significance were detected in 40% of patients, with classic mutations comprising 18% of all variants. We observed no significant association with cardiovascular and phenotype scores but with higher joint function scores (
conclusionGenetic variants are highly present in clinically relevant aortic pathologies. Variants appear to play a larger role than previously described. The different variants do not correlate with specific phenotypes, age, pathology, sex, or family history.
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.