ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2024
In situ needle fenestration for aortic arch conditions during thoracic endovascular aortic repair.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety and Feasibility of In Situ Fenestration in the Aortic Arch: A Prospective Single-Center Observational Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Open, Hybrid and Endovascular Management of Aortic Arch Aneurysms: Recent Updates and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Early Outcomes of a Curvature-Guided Strategy for Dual-Branch Revascularization in Zone 1 TEVAR.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Medium-term clinical and imaging outcomes of SilverFlow covered bridging stent implantation usingFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Zone 2.5 TEVAR with L-Shaped Marker-Guided Fenestration for Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection.Annals of vascular diseases · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the clinical outcomes and the validity of the in situ needle fenestration (ISNF) technique during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for patients with aortic arch conditions.
methodsA total of 115 patients with aortic arch conditions treated with ISNF during TEVAR between January 2018 and December 2021 were incorporated.
resultsThe median age of the patients was 62.0 years, and 10.4% (12/115) were female. The median follow-up time was 31.0 months. A total of 175 supra-arch branches were reconstructed. A single branch was fenestrated in 80 patients, while the left subclavian artery (LSA) and left common carotid artery (LCCA) were fenestrated simultaneously in 11 patients, and all supra-arch branches were fenestrated in 24 patients. The rate of technical success was 100%, 30-day mortality was 3.5% (4/115), overall mortality was 8.7% (10/115), and aortic-related mortality was 2.6% (3/115). Aortic-related reintervention was required in 7.8% (9/115) of patients. Among the major postoperative complications, four patients developed retrograde type A dissection requiring emergent open surgery, three patients had cerebrovascular accidents, and one patient had an endoleak. No occlusions or stenoses of the main or branch aortic stents were observed.
conclusionsThe mid-term results of the ISNF technique during TEVAR for aortic arch conditions were within the acceptable range; however, further follow-up results are needed and long-term stability and durability needs to be assessed. Related fenestration devices also require further development.
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.