SynthesisBMC surgery2025
Advanced age is significantly associated with poor outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two-year outcomes of fenestrated and branched stent grafts in patients ≤65 years: A bicenter retrospective study.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2026Article
- Prediction of postoperative delirium after cardiac surgery by the interplay between preoperative plasma p-tau181 and IL-6 and heart-brain axis related factors: results from the prospective observational study FINDERI.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Observational
- Endovascular treatment outcomes for descending thoracic aortic pathologies in octogenarians: retrospective study.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
backgroundWhether advanced age is a risk factor for poor outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the association between advanced age and outcomes after TEVAR.
methodsTo identify studies regarding TEVAR and age, the PubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched in July 2023. The associations between advanced age and outcomes of TEVAR for individuals with any types of thoracic aortic diseases were assessed according to the odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR). The ages of patients who suffered from adverse events after TEVAR were also compared. Study quality was assessed by using the Newcastle‒Ottawa Scale.
resultsA total of 70 studies with 52,605 patients were included in this meta-analysis. All enrolled studies were considered high-quality. Overall, advanced age was significantly associated with higher risk of postoperative mortality (p < 0.0001) and neurological complications (p = 0.006), especially delirium (p = 0.009), spinal cord ischemia (p = 0.02) and overall neurological complications (p = 0.007). Notably, the age of patients experiencing postoperative stroke was slightly older than those did not (p = 0.05). However, advanced age was not significantly associated with an elevated risk of postoperative overall complications (p = 0.59) or adverse aortic remodeling events (p = 0.34), including aortic dilation (p = 0.43) or false lumen dilation (p = 0.52). Moreover, patients who experienced acute kidney injury after TEVAR were significantly younger than those who did not (p = 0.04).
conclusionAdvanced age is associated with poor outcomes of TEVAR, including postoperative mortality and neurological complications, though overall complications and aortic remodeling outcomes are similar. Additionally, AKI was even more frequent in younger patients. It is important to evaluate risk and benefit before deciding to perform TEVAR on older patients. Optimized peri-operative management should be developed and provided for older patients.
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.