ArticleScientific reports2025
Preoperative prediction of major adverse outcomes after total arch replacement in acute type A aortic dissection based on machine learning ensemble.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- CT angiography features of organ malperfusion and imaging biomarker for postoperative adverse complications in acute type A aortic dissection.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2026Article
- Machine learning approaches for risk prediction in aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence as a Prognostic Tool in the Management of Acute Aortic Syndrome and Aneurysm: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Machine learning-based analysis of factors influencing surgical duration in type A aortic dissection.Frontiers in public health · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A machine learning model was developed and validated to predict postoperative complications in patients with acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) who underwent total arch replacement combined with frozen elephant trunk (TAR + FET), with the goal of improving postoperative survival quality and guiding clinical treatment. We retrospectively analyzed data from 635 ATAAD patients who underwent TAR + FET surgery at our institution between January 2018 and October 2023. Based on the International Aortic Arch Surgery Study Group definition of Major Adverse Outcomes (MAO), the entire dataset was divided into 160 patients with MAO and 475 patients without MAO. We utilized 66 variables to train 190 machine learning models. The SHAP method identified 11 strong predictors to create a simplified model. We evaluated the predictive performance and clinical utility of both models using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, precision-recall curves (PRC), calibration plots, and clinical decision curves. The combination of Random Survival Forest (RSF) and Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) was identified as the best predictive model. Both the full model and the simplified model achieved an area under the ROC curve above 0.85 and an area under the PRC curve above 0.703. The Brier values for the simplified model's calibration outcomes in the training and validation sets were 0.124 and 0.138, respectively, with a clinical utility risk threshold probability range of 0.2 to 0.9. A web-based simplified prediction model was developed (https://pmodel.shinyapps.io/pmodel/), enabling the prediction of complication risk in ATAAD patients undergoing TAR + FET surgery, thereby guiding clinical treatment decisions. The combination model of RSF and GBM effectively predicts the risk of postoperative complications in ATAAD patients, helping surgeons identify high-risk individuals and implement personalized perioperative management.
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.