ArticleBJS open2024
Evaluating current acute aortic syndrome pathways: Collaborative Acute Aortic Syndrome Project (CAASP).
Article in BJS open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shared Sheath Rupture, an Uncommon Presentation of Acute Aortic Syndrome: A Case Report and Literature Review.Cureus · 2026Article
- The Role of Biomarkers and Clinical Prediction Tools in the Diagnosis of Acute Aortic Syndromes: A Literature-Based Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Delayed Diagnosis and Outcomes in Acute Aortic Dissection: A 10-Year Single-Center Retrospective Study.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiagnosis of acute aortic syndrome is challenging and associated with high perihospital mortality rates. The study aim was to evaluate current pathways and understand the chronology of acute aortic syndrome patient care.
methodConsecutive patients with acute aortic syndrome imaging diagnosis between 1 January 2018 and 1 June 2021 were identified using a predetermined search strategy and followed up for 6 months through retrospective case note review. The UK National Interventional Radiology Trainee Research and Vascular and Endovascular Research Network co-ordinated the study.
resultsFrom 15 UK sites, 620 patients were enrolled. The median age was 67 (range 25-98) years, 62.0% were male and 92.9% Caucasian. Type-A dissection (41.8%) was most common, followed by type-B (34.5%); 41.2% had complicated acute aortic syndrome. Mode of presentation included emergency ambulance (80.2%), self-presentation (16.2%), and primary care referral (3.6%). Time (median (i.q.r.)) to hospital presentation was 3.1 (1.8-8.6) h and decreased by sudden onset chest pain but increased with migratory pain or hypertension. Time from hospital presentation to imaging diagnosis was 3.2 (1.3-6.5) h and increased by family history of aortic disease and decreased by concurrent ischaemic limb. Time from diagnosis to treatment was 2 (1.0-4.3) h with interhospital transfer causing delay. Management included conservative (60.2%), open surgery (32.2%), endovascular (4.8%), hybrid (1.4%) and palliative (1.4%). Factors associated with a higher mortality rate at 30 days and 6 months were acute aortic syndrome type, complicated disease, no critical care admission and age more than 70 years (P < 0.05).
conclusionsThis study presents a longitudinal data set linking time-based delays to diagnosis and treatment with clinical outcomes. It can be used to prioritize research strategies to streamline patient care.
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.