ArticleAnnals of medicine2025
An AI-driven machine learning approach identifies risk factors associated with 30-day mortality following total aortic arch replacement combined with stent elephant implantation.
Article in Annals of medicine, 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.
- Machine learning models for predicting postoperative paraplegia in acute type A aortic dissection patients.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Machine learning approaches for risk prediction in aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- An AI-driven machine learning approach identifies risk factors associated with 30-day mortality following total aortic arch replacement combined with stent elephant implantation.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDuring emergency surgery, patients with acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) experience unfavourable outcomes throughout their hospital stay. The combination of total aortic arch replacement (TAR) and frozen elephant trunk (FET) implantation has become a dependable choice for surgical treatment. The objective of this research was to utilize a machine learning technique based on artificial intelligence to detect the factors that increase the risk of mortality within 30 days after surgery in patients who undergo TAR in combination with FET.
methodsFrom January 2015 to December 2020, a total of 640 patients with ATAAD who underwent TAR and FET were included in this study. The subjects were divided into a test group and a validation group in a random manner, with a ratio of 7 to 3. The objective of our research was to create predictive models by employing different supervised machine learning techniques, such as XGBoost, logistic regression, support vector machine (SVM) and random forest (RF), to assess and compare their respective performances. Furthermore, we employed SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) measures to allocate interpretive attributional values.
resultsAmong all the patients, 37 (5.78%) experienced perioperative mortality. Subsequently, a total 50 of 10 highly associated variables were selected for model construction. By implementing the new method, the AUC value significantly improved from 0.6981 using the XGBoost model to 0.8687 with the PSO-ELM-FLXGBoost model.
conclusionIn this study, machine learning methods were successfully established to predict ATAAD perioperative mortality, enabling the optimization of postoperative treatment strategies to minimize the postoperative complications following cardiac surgeries.
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.