ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Assessment of aortic arch involvement in ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm by three-dimensional growth mapping using CT-angiography.
Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
purposeWe investigated pre-surgical arch growth by vascular deformation mapping (VDM) and examined how well proximal arch diameter indicates arch involvement by the primary ascending aneurysm. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 123 patients who underwent elective repair of ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm (aTAA) with or without concomitant arch repair and had 2 or more pre-operative computed tomography angiography (CTA) studies with a minimum interval of > 22 months were included. We compared growth at the proximal arch measured by three-dimensional VDM analysis with standard diameter measurements in overall, dilated (≥ 40 mm), and non-dilated (< 40 mm) arch subgroups.
resultsConcurrent (hemi)arch replacement was performed in 30% of patients. In 59% of patients, VDM growth and arch diameter assessments were concordant VDM growth rate was higher in the dilated arch group (0.46 mm/year vs 0.26 mm/year, p = 0.007), however, pre-operative proximal arch diameter was similar in growth and non-growing arches among patients without arch dilation (36.2 mm vs 35.9 mm). Among non-dilated arches, 26% demonstrated significant growth by VDM but not by standard diameter measurements. Arch growth assessments by VDM and standard diameter measurements agreed with 73%; discrepancies up to 6 mm were observed. Within the post-operative subgroup, 12 (55%) patients demonstrated growth (> 0.3 mm/year) of the native aortic arch, with most (7/12, 59%) having non-dilated arches on pre-operative CT.
conclusionReliable assessment of arch involvement in aTAA by diameter thresholds is limited. VDM analysis allows for a more comprehensive analysis of arch growth and involvement by the ascending aneurysm, which may be useful to advance patient-specific surgical planning. KEY POINTS: Question Can VDM measured proximal aortic arch diameter indicate proximal arch involvement by a primary ascending aneurysm? Findings Discrepancies between arch dilation status by conventional diameter thresholds and VDM exist; over half of patients with dilated proximal arches demonstrated no growth by VDM pre-operatively. Clinical relevance Arch involvement is common in ascending aortic aneurysms, though the degree of growth is not accurately assessed pre-operatively by standard measurements. VDM is an emerging technique that provides a three-dimensional assessment of arch growth and may inform patient-specific repair strategies.
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.