ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
Complications after treatment of type B aortic dissection with TEVAR stent-graft deployment in zone 2.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. 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.
- Long-term outcomes of aortic arch preemptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Morphometric Aortic Remodeling and Mid-Term Outcomes After TEVAR for Acute Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Frozen elephant trunk: a narrative review of global and temporal trends.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the outcome of 147 cases of type B aortic dissection with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).
methodsWe systematically reviewed 147 patients of type B aortic dissection with stent graft deployment in zone 2 or zone 3 by TEVAR from January 2012 to December 2022. These patients were observed by computed tomography angiography after the first and third months and annually thereafter during follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed by SPSS.16.
resultsThe stent graft of 107 patients was deployed in zone 3, and the stent graft of 40 patients was deployed in zone 2. Severe dissection and surgery-related complications after TEVAR occurred in 19 patients, with complications arising more frequently in zone 2 than in zone 3 (12/40 vs. 7/107, P < 0.005). Endoleak was detected in 10 (6.8%, 10/147) cases, which included 6 cases of endoleak in zone 2, exceeding the 4 cases of endoleak in zone 3 (6/40 vs. 4/107, P < 0.05). Twelve (8.16%, 12/147) cases underwent re-intervention, and the 8 patients who underwent re-intervention in zone 2 exceeded the 4 patients who underwent re-intervention in zone 3 (8/40 vs. 4/107, P < 0.05). One case of subclavian steal in zone 2 (0.68%, 1/147). Two (1.36%, 2/147) cases died after TEVAR. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year overall survival rates were 99.3%, 98.6%, and 98.6%, respectively. The re-intervention rates were 5.4%, 7.5%, and 8.2%, respectively. The re-intervention rates in zone 2 were 15%, 20%, and 20%, respectively. The re-intervention rates in zone 3 were 1.9%, 2.8%, and 3.7%, respectively.
conclusionTEVAR is the major treatment to use if the stent graft can be deployed in zone 3. However, with the higher rate of complications and re-intervention after TEVAR, for patients whose stent graft can only be deployed in zone 2, it is not recommended that TEVAR be chosen as the preferred treatment.
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.