ReviewCureus2024
Aortic Size Index Versus Aortic Diameter in the Prediction of Rupture in Women With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.
Review in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Reference Diameters of the Abdominal Aorta and Iliac Arteries in Different Populations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) pose significant challenges in clinical management, particularly in female patients, whose unique anatomical and physiological characteristics influence rupture risk. While aortic diameter (AD) has traditionally been the primary metric for predicting rupture, its limitations, especially in women, have spurred exploration into alternative measures such as the aortic size index (ASI). This review examines the anatomy and physiology of AAAs in women, gender-specific challenges in diagnosis and management, and the comparative effectiveness of ASI versus AD in predicting rupture risk. ASI, calculated as AD divided by body surface area (BSA), offers a more nuanced assessment by adjusting for individual body size differences, potentially mitigating gender disparities in rupture rates. Comparative analyses indicate ASI's superiority in predicting adverse aortic events, particularly in women, thereby advocating for its integration into clinical practice to improve patient outcomes. Additionally, emerging techniques such as 3D volumetric measurements and biomechanical assessments show promise in enhancing rupture risk prediction, heralding a shift toward more personalized and effective management strategies for AAA 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.