SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2024
Prevalence and clinical implications of the rare arc of Bühler using computed tomography angiography and digital subtraction angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Knowledge of the rare arc of Bühler (AOB) is limited but clinically important. At present, there is no publication of systematic review and meta-analysis on AOB in computed tomography angiography (CTA) and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) examinations. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the pooled prevalence and clinical implications of the AOB by using CTA and DSA examinations. Methods: The PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Google Scholar, CBM, CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and Baidu Scholar databases were comprehensively searched for AOB-related literature. Stata 17.0 software was used to conduct the meta-analysis. Results: Eleven publications with 3,837 patients and 65 AOB cases were included. The pooled prevalence of AOB was 1.9% (95% confidence interval: 0.8-3.2%). CTA showed a pooled prevalence of AOB of 2.0% (95% confidence interval: 0.5-4.3%) and DSA showed a pooled prevalence of AOB of 1.8% (95% confidence interval: 0.5-3.9%). Conclusion: AOB is a rare anatomical variant, with a pooled prevalence of 1.9% in the general population. General surgeons, vascular surgeons, and interventional radiologists should consider its existence when performing relevant abdominal procedures to avoid intraoperative difficulties, visceral organ ischemia or bleeding, and other complications.
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.