ArticleScientific reports2024
The prognostic impact of maximal aortic diameter on acute type B aortic dissection progression in a Chinese population.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Comparison between transmural puncture combined with sensor tube technique with direct puncture in invasive blood pressure monitoring: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Red Cell Distribution Width to Red Blood Cell Ratio: A Novel Biomarker for Predicting 30-Day Mortality in Type B Acute Aortic Dissection.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Impact of aneurysm sac size on the effectiveness of endovascular coiling in patient-specific middle cerebral artery aneurysms: a computational study.Scientific reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Currently, evidence concerning the link between maximal aortic diameter and in-hospital mortality in cases of acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) is insufficient. Thus, this study aimed to explore the relationship between the maximal aortic diameter at the time of admission and the early prognosis of patients diagnosed with ATBAD. A total of 678 patients with ATBAD were included between January 2016 and December 2018, during which their clinical data was gathered. The independent variable analyzed was the maximal diameter of the aorta, while the dependent variable was mortality during hospitalization. Factors considered in this analysis included the patients' age, gender, body mass index (BMI), medical history of hypertension, stroke, diabetes, atherosclerosis, smoking habits, chronic kidney insufficiency, time until presentation, systolic and diastolic blood pressures, ejection fraction, presence of aortic regurgitation, symptoms, involvement of abdominal vessels, laboratory findings, and treatment approaches. Of these patients collected, the mean age was 56.03 ± 12.22 years, and approximately 82.45% of them were male. After analysis, it was found that the maximal aortic diameter of patients with ATBAD was positively correlated with in-hospital mortality (OR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.10). Surprisingly, a J curve relationship was detected between maximal aortic diameter (point 31 mm) and in-hospital death for patients with ATBAD. The effect sizes and confidence intervals of the right (maximal aortic diameter > 31 mm) and left (maximal aortic diameter ≤ 31 mm) aspects of the inflection point were 1.06 (1.02-1.11) and 1.03 (0.83-1.28), respectively. In addition, the stratified analysis showed a stable relationship between maximal aortic diameter and in-hospital mortality, while there was no significant difference in the interaction between different subgroups. In patients with ATBAD, a J-curve relationship was identified between the maximal aortic diameter and in-hospital mortality. Specifically, when the maximal aortic diameter exceeds 31 mm, a positive correlation with in-hospital death was observed.
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.