ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2024
Long-term results of the frozen elephant trunk technique in primary chronic type B aortic dissection.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Aortic arch surgery in real-life practice: is the frozen elephant trunk always a better option than conventional aortic arch replacement?Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Predictors of Distal Stent Graft-Induced New Entry after Frozen Elephant Trunk in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2025Article
- Type B dissection with retrograde progression of intramural haematoma managed with frozen elephant trunk surgery.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Mid-term morphological changes in Frozenix.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- The impact of true lumen morphology on frozen elephant trunk technique in chronic aortic dissection.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study is to analyze long-term results of the total aortic arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique for primary chronic type B aortic dissection.
methodsAmong 322 patients who had the frozen elephant trunk technique, 43 (13.4%) patients (median age, 64.0 years) with primary chronic type B aortic dissection were analyzed. The patients underwent surgery at a median of 27.0 months after the onset of aortic dissection. The false lumen was patent in 30 (69.8%) patients preoperatively.
resultsTwo patients suffered paraplegia and another died of cerebral infarction. Complete thrombosis of the peri-stent false lumen was achieved in 36 (83.7%) patients. Overall survival, freedom from aortic events, and freedom from aortic reintervention were 83.5%, 37.2%, and 42.2% at 5 years, respectively. Survival rates of the patients with or without aortic events were 75.0% and 95.8% at 5 years (Log-rank, p = 0.22). Late aortic events occurred in 19 (44.2%) patients including distal stent graft-induced new entry, type Ib endoleak, and false lumen dilation. The ratio of the stent graft diameter to the preoperative short axis diameter of the true lumen (hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-3.59), and the maximal diameter of a postdissection aneurysm (1.07; 1.01-1.12) were the significant multivariate risk predictors of late aortic events.
conclusionsLate aortic events occurr fairly frequently, and new strategies need to be explored to enhance the effectiveness of this procedure in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38822182What 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.