ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2025
Utility of GERAADA Score for Predicting Long-term Survival Following Surgical Repair of Aortic Dissection.
Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The GERAADA Risk Score for Early Mortality After Surgery for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: An External Validation in the Dutch Setting.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 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
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed to assess the long-term survival following surgical repair because of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) and the correlation with the preoperative GERAADA (German Registry for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection)-score value.
methodsWe enrolled patients who underwent emergent aortic surgery because of ATAAD from 2010 to 2022 from 9 hospitals. Follow-up information was obtained by matching the clinical patient data with a national administrative database. Discrimination and calibration of GERAADA were tested at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years. The relationship between long-term outcome and score was also tested through time-to-event methods.
resultsA total of 1110 patients were analysed: Median age was 67 years [IQR 57-75], and 30.8% of subjects were female. Median GERAADA score was 14.3% [10.2-22]. Mean length of follow-up was 4.19 years. The Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival at 5 and 10 years were, respectively, 62.5% ± 1.5%, and 48.5% ± 2.1%. Discrimination was poor but remained stable over the time (area under the curve [AUC] at 1-year follow-up: 0.66; 95% CI 0.63-0.70. AUC at 10-year follow-up: 0.64; 95% CI 0.61-0.68). Calibration plots showed underprediction until 50%-predicted probability and progressive overprediction afterward. There is a steep mortality in the first couple of months after surgery while afterward the mortality rate is constantly lower. GERAADA score was found to be a predictor of long-term mortality with a nonlinear association.
conclusionsGERAADA score showed a poor performance in predicting long-term survival.
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.