ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2024
Discussing on the Aortic Coverage in Type B Aortic Dissection Treatment: A Comprehensive Scoping Review.
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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of single-branched stent graft in the treatment of type B aortic dissection: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Predictive value of great and small saphenous vein diameters for venous reflux in lower extremity chronic venous insufficiency: A segmental analysis using duplex ultrasonography.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Outcomes following extended thoracic endovascular aortic repair for Type B aortic dissection from the global registry for endovascular aortic treatment.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study is to investigate and address the question surrounding the determination of the optimal endograft length of coverage during TEVAR for type B aortic dissection (TBAD), with a particular emphasis on the distal landing zone (DLZ). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were used.
methodsThe PRISMA-ScR statement was followed.
resultsSeveral variables can contribute to the length of coverage during TEVAR in TBAD patient. Baseline patient's characteristics, TBAD-related features, the type of endoprosthesis, and postoperative graft behaviour may contribute to the choice of coverage.
conclusionsNo robust data have been published regarding the optimal length of TEVAR. Therefore, reporting the percentage of covered aorta and improving computational studies should be valorised to improve postoperative outcomes.
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.