ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Protective Effect on Spinal Cord Injury of Prophylactic Cerebrospinal Fluid Drainage in Extensive Aortic Arch Repair for Type A Aortic Dissection: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Frozen elephant trunk: a narrative review of global and temporal trends.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Comparable Outcomes in Redo Total Arch Replacement for Previous Aortic Dissection vs. Other Cardiac Surgeries: A Single-Center Pilot Study of the E-Vita Open Hybrid Prosthesis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Origin of prefabricated frozen elephant trunk.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Review
- Influence of a Collapsed True Lumen in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) is commonly used to manage spinal cord injury (SCI) after aortic surgery. However, there is still limited evidence regarding its effectiveness in patients with type A aortic dissection undergoing total arch replacement plus frozen elephant trunk procedure.
methodsA total of 1931 patients were retrospectively enrolled between 2010 and 2023. Patients with high-risk postoperative SCI (N=445) were divided into 2 groups: with or without prophylactic CSFD to evaluate the protective effect of prophylactic CSFD. Patients with postoperative SCI (N=119) were divided into 3 groups, without CSFD, therapeutic CSFD, and prophylactic CSFD, and analyzed to compare the treatment effect of different CSFD strategies.
resultsProphylactic CSFD significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative SCI in high-risk patients (26.9% versus 17.7%,
conclusionsA prominent protective effect on SCI occurrence and recovery after the total arch replacement plus the frozen elephant trunk procedure was observed with prophylactic CSFD use in patients with type A aortic dissection. However, the effectiveness of therapeutic CSFD fell short of significance.
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.