ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2025
Emergency Department Blood Pressure Management in Type B Aortic Dissection: An Analysis with Machine Learning.
Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute aortic dissections (AAD) have a high morbidity and mortality rate. Treatment for type B aortic dissection includes strict systolic blood pressure (SBP) and heart rate (HR) control per the American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines. However, predictors of successful emergency department (ED) management of SBP have not been well studied.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the records of adult patients presenting to any regional ED with type B AAD between 2017-2020 with initial SBP >120 mmHg and HR >60 beats per minute (bpm) and were subsequently transferred to our quaternary center. Primary outcome was SBP <120 mmHg based on both the 2010 and 2022 AHA guidelines and HR <60 bpm (based on the 2010 guideline), or HR <80 (2022 guideline). We used random forest (RF) algorithms, a machine-learning tool that uses clusters of decision trees to predict a categorical outcome, to identify predictors of achieving HR and SBP goals prior to ED departure, defined as the time point at which patients left the referring ED to come to our institution.
resultsThe analysis included 134 patients. At the time of ED departure, 26 (19%) had SBP <120 mmHg, 96 (67%) received anti-impulse therapy, and 40 (28%) received beta-blocker or vasodilator infusions specifically. The RF algorithm identified higher triage SBP and treatment with intravenous labetalol as the top predictors for SBP >120 mmHg at ED departure, contrary to AHA guidelines. Pain management with higher total morphine equivalent unit, as well as shorter time to computed tomography as predictors for HR <60 bpm and <80 bpm, were in concert with AHA guidelines.
conclusionMany patients with type B AAD did not achieve hemodynamic parameters in line with 2010 or 2022 AHA guidelines while being in the ED prior to transferring to a quaternary care center for further evaluation and management. Patients with higher heart rate and systolic blood pressure on ED arrival were less likely to achieve goals at the time of departure from the referring EDs. Those receiving more pain medications prior to transfer were more likely to meet certain AHA goals.
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.