ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2026
Evaluation of aortic arch branching pattern variations with computed tomography angiography images.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 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.
- Postmortem discovery of a rare five-vessel aortic arch with aberrant right subclavian artery and bilateral vertebral artery origin variants: embryological analysis and perioperative implications.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Article
- First- and Second-Trimester Cardiovascular Anomalies in Trisomy 21 Fetuses: Anatomy, Embryology, Genetics and Imaging.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
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
purposeVariations in the branching pattern of the aortic arch are highly diverse and are often encountered incidentally during routine computed tomography angiography scans. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of variations in aortic arch branching patterns in the Turkish population using computed tomography angiography (CTA) images.
methodsCTA images of 1000 patients (500 males, 500 females) who presented to the radiology clinic for various indications between May 2018 and June 2024 were evaluated. The branching variations of the aortic arch were classified into seven main types. The relationship between aortic arch branching pattern variations and sex was assessed using the Chi-square test.
resultsA normal branching pattern (Type 1) was observed in 853 of the 1000 cases, while variations were found in 147 cases. The most common variation was Type 2, in which the brachiocephalic trunk and the left common carotid artery originate from a common trunk, observed in 8.3% of cases. This was followed by Type 3 variation, where the left vertebral artery arises directly from the aortic arch, seen in 4.1% of cases. The third most common variation was Type 4, observed in 1.3% of cases, which involves both the Type 2 branching pattern and the left vertebral artery originating directly from the aortic arch. Type 6 variation, defined as an aberrant right subclavian artery, was seen in 0.8% of cases, while Type 7 (mirror image) variation was observed in 0.1%. Type 5 variation was not detected in any case. Apart from these classifications, a variation in which the left inferior thyroid artery originated directly from the aortic arch was detected in one female patient.
conclusionThere was no statistically significant difference between sexes in the distribution of aortic arch branching pattern variations (p = 0.067). Patients with aortic arch variations are at increased risk of bleeding and ischemia during thoracic surgery. Awareness of aortic arch variations is particularly important in patients scheduled for thoracic surgery or interventional radiological procedures, as it helps reduce potential risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41530281What 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.