ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2025
Application value of central venous-arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure difference in postoperative cognitive dysfunction in patients with acute aortic dissection.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to investigate the clinical application value of the central venous-arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure difference (Pv-aCO2) in postoperative cognitive dysfunction(POCD) in patients with acute aortic dissection.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on the general data of 236 patients. Blood gas samples were collected from the arterial and venous lines at various time points during the surgery, including before and after the initiation of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), immediately after CPB initiation, before and after deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, 30 min after rewarming, and 5 min before weaning from CPB. The partial PV-aCO2 was calculated. Based on the average PV-aCO2 value, patients were divided into an observation group (PV-aCO2 > 6 mmHg, n = 112) and a control group (PV-aCO2 < 6 mmHg, n = 124). The perioperative data and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores were compared between the two groups to assess the incidence and severity of POCD. Additionally, the expression levels of peripheral serum S100β in the two groups were compared 6 h postoperatively.
resultsThe incidence of POCD was higher in the observation group compared to the control group, while MMSE scores and serum S100β levels were lower in the observation group. Additionally, the observation group patients with POCD had lower MMSE scores and serum S100β levels compared to the control group patients. In addition, logistic regression analysis revealed that advanced age, serum S100β levels, female gender, CPB time, unilateral brain perfusion time, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and smoking history were all independent risk factors for postoperative POCD (all P < 0.05).
conclusionPv-aCO2 can effectively reflect the intraoperative cerebral metabolic level in patients with acute aortic dissection and can serve as an intraoperative warning indicator for cognitive dysfunction. Its clinical recommendation for use is warranted.
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.