ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Development of a scoring system for the involvement of supra-aortic vessel in patients with type A aortic dissection.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stroke is one of the most severe postoperative complications in patients with acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). This study aimed to develop a novel scoring system to supplement existing classification systems and evaluate its association with postoperative stroke and other complications. Methods: A total of 257 patients were included in the study. The degree of involvement of the innominate artery (IA), left common carotid artery (LCCA), left subclavian artery (LSA), and right common carotid artery (RCCA) was assigned a score. These scores were then combined, and a grid search was used to determine the coefficient for each variable. The bootstrap method was applied to assess the performance of the scoring formula. The area under the curve (AUC) and odds ratio (OR) were used to evaluate the associations between the score and outcomes, such as stroke. Results: The AUC of the scoring system was 0.811 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.713-0.909], and the mean AUC from the bootstrap evaluation was 0.813 (95% CI: 0.721-0.903). The optimal cutoff score was found to be 15. The ORs for stroke associated with the score and cutoff score were 1.21 (95% CI: 1.14-1.29) and 10.13 (95% CI: 4.36-23.58), respectively. After adjusting for non-anatomical risk factors, the adjusted ORs were 1.22 (95% CI: 1.14-1.31) and 13.30 (95% CI: 5.21-33.93). The scoring system and its cutoff value were also identified as significant risk factors for postoperative death and delayed awakening. Conclusions: The newly developed scoring system effectively evaluates the risk of postoperative stroke in patients with ATAAD and provides additional predictive value for postoperative death and delayed awakening.
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.