ArticleScientific reports2025
Development and validation of a predictive model for postoperative hepatic dysfunction in Stanford type A aortic dissection.
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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Risk factors and prognosis of postoperative hepatic dysfunction after Stanford type A aortic dissection repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Admission creatinine level predicts postoperative acute hepatic dysfunction in patients aged ≤30 years with acute type A aortic dissection: a multi-center retrospective study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To investigate the risk factors for postoperative hepatic dysfunction (HD) in patients undergoing acute Stanford type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) surgery and to develop an individualized prediction model. We retrospectively analyzed cardiac surgery patients with ATAAD treated at our hospital from January 2020 to March 2024, dividing them into 7:3 training and validation cohorts and grouping them into HD and non-HD categories based on postoperative liver function. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and multivariate logistic regression were used to identify independent predictive factors for postoperative HD, which formed the basis of a nomogram prediction model. We assessed model accuracy, calibration and clinical utility using C-statistics, calibration plots and decision curve analysis (DCA) curves. Internal validation with 1000 Bootstrap resamples was performed to reduce overfitting bias. LASSO and multivariate logistic regression identified key risk factors for HD in ATAAD patients, including chronic kidney disease, preoperative creatinine, international normalized ratio (INR), red blood cell (RBC) transfusion volume, peak intraoperative lactate, aortic cross-clamping time greater than 99 min, and reoperation. Based on these factors, a nomogram prediction model was successfully developed. The Hosmer-Leme show test yielded a p value of 0.952, indicating a good model fit. The area under the curve (AUC) values in the training and validation cohorts were 0.856 (95% CI 0.777-0.936) and 0.958 (95% CI 0.915-1) respectively, indicating good discriminatory power. The calibration curve shows that the bias corrected line is close to the ideal line. The DCA curve indicates that the use of the nomogram provides greater net clinical benefit. The AUC values before and after Bootstrap validation were 0.860 (95% CI 0.795-0.924) and 0.858 (95% CI 0.795-0.924), respectively, reflecting stable model performance and minimal risk of overfitting. The internally validated prognostic nomogram demonstrates excellent discriminative power, calibration, and clinical utility for predicting the risk of HD in patients who have undergone ATAAD surgery. This allows for an individualized evaluation and the optimization of clinical outcomes.
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.