ArticleReviews in cardiovascular medicine2022
Impact of COVID-19 on Emergency Management of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: A Single-Center Historic Control Study.
Article in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Involvement of Herpesviruses in the Pathogenesis of Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms: Passive Bystanders or Active Contributors?Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Current Surgical Management of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection in China: A Multicenter Registry Study.JACC. Asia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The present study aimed to clarify the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic on emergency management of acute type A aortic dissection. Methods: We consecutively enrolled 337 acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients at emergency room in Fuwai Hospital (Beijing, China) from January to June during the 2020 COVID-19 epidemic (n = 148) and the same period in 2019 as the historical control (n = 189). The primary outcome was defined as in-hospital death. Other outcomes included automatic discharge during emergency admission. The factors with significant differences before and after the epidemic were compared and analyzed by stages with the study endpoint to clarify their changes in different stages of the epidemic. Results: There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (35 (20.5%) vs. 23 (17.4%), Conclusions: Our study demonstrated a significant reduction in the number of ATAAD patients and surgical treatment during COVID-19 outbreak. The surgical strategy of patients changed, but the overall mortality was largely the same. Patients undergoing surgery had a trend toward longer interval from the onset to the operating room, but they tended to be normal at the end of the epidemic. Proper epidemic prevention policies may avoid COVID-19 hitting patients who are not infected with the virus to the greatest extent.
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.