Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39445207›Full record

ArticleEJVES vascular forum2024

The Impact of Heli-FX EndoAnchor Application on Endograft Material: An Experimental Study.

Damir Vakhitov, Nabil Chakfé, Frédéric Heim, Arindam Chaudhuri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJVES vascular forum, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Damir VakhitovGEPROMED, Strasbourg, France.
Nabil ChakféGEPROMED, Strasbourg, France.
Frédéric HeimGEPROMED, Strasbourg, France.
Arindam ChaudhuriGEPROMED, Strasbourg, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The physical impact of the application of Heli-FX EndoAnchors (EA; Medtronic, Minneapolis, USA) on endograft (EG) material is unclear. This study aimed to examine the possible EG membrane alterations after EA implantation. Methods: Heli-FX EndoAnchors were applied Results: Of the 13 EAs applied, 12 remained in place. The mean penetration angle was 79°. The ePTFE perforations had oval openings, while PET perforations were round. After EA removal, comparisons between ePTFE and PET material perforations suggested a larger hole area ( Conclusion: During EA placement, the EG membrane undergoes local alteration and or destruction. Expanded PTFE, particularly AFX2 endocuffs (for which EA use is not recommended), are characterised by a more extensive degree of material alteration compared with PET. Additional studies are required to chronologically supplement these findings in fatigue tests.

Indexed as

Aortic endoprosthesesDegradationExpanded polytetrafluoroethylenePolyester

Identifiers

PMID39445207
PMCPMC11497439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.