ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2026
Impact of the frozen elephant trunk technique in operation for acute type A aortic dissection: from the Japan cardiovascular surgery database.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Arch-First Technique for Extensive Thoracic Aortic Replacement: A Case Series of Patients With Complex Thoracic Aortic Disease.The American journal of case reports · 2026Article
- Aortic reinterventions following reoperative frozen elephant trunk aortic arch replacement for the treatment of residual type A aortic dissection.JTCVS open · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe compared early outcomes of total arch repair (TAR) and ascending aorta replacement (AAR) for acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) using the nationwide Japan Cardiovascular Surgery Database (JCVSD) and examined the role of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique in TAR.
methodsOf 17,075 JCVSD patients undergoing urgent or emergent conventional surgery for AADA in 2013-2016, redo cases and those undergoing valve/root or coronary surgery were excluded (included n = 12,288). Four propensity score-matched analyses for treatment with AAR or TAR (n = 4272 each) were established.
resultsAfter matching, procedure times were significantly longer and incidences of re-exploration for bleeding (5.9 vs. 3.9%, P < 0.0001) or spinal cord injury (4.8 vs. 3.3%, P = 0.0003) were significantly higher in the TAR group than AAR group. In-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the TAR group than AAR group (9.5 vs. 7.0%, P < 0.0001). When FET was used, the incidences of some of morbidities improved and the difference in in-hospital mortality between TAR and AAR groups disappeared (8.3 vs. 7.7%, P = 0.6583). However, the incidence of re-exploration for bleeding was still high (5.7 vs. 3.0%, P = 0.0066) and the incidence of spinal cord injury became pronounced (6.7 vs. 2.9%, P = 0.0002).
conclusionsTAR was associated with longer procedure time and higher incidences of postoperative morbidities and mortality. FET holds promise for improving outcomes of TAR. However, spinal cord injury has emerged as another serious concern and its clinical role remains unclear.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40788516What 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.