Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41768889›Full record

ReviewEJVES vascular forum2026

Systematic Review of Renal Outcomes and Procedural Efficacy of Carbon Dioxide Digital Subtraction Angiography in Endovascular Aortic Repair.

Paolo Spath, Federica Campana, Enrico Gallitto, Chiara Mascoli, Andrea Vacirca, Rodolfo Pini, Gianluca Faggioli, Mauro Gargiulo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EJVES vascular forum, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Paolo SpathVascular Surgery Unit, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Federica CampanaVascular Surgery, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Enrico GallittoVascular Surgery Unit, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Chiara MascoliVascular Surgery Unit, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Andrea VacircaVascular Surgery, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Rodolfo PiniVascular Surgery, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Gianluca FaggioliVascular Surgery, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Mauro GargiuloVascular Surgery Unit, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Carbon dioxide (CO Data Sources: Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to December 2024 reporting the use of CO Review Methods: The review was registered prospectively in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (CRD42024580889). All papers reporting the use of CO Results: Of the 108 articles initially identified, 16 studies published between 2007 and 2024 met the inclusion criteria, reporting data on 901 patients (mean age 76 years; 89.1% men) undergoing EVAR with CO Conclusion: The use of CO

Indexed as

Abdominal aortic aneurysmCarbon dioxideContrast agentEndovascular aortic repairEVARPost-operative renal function worsening

Identifiers

PMID41768889
PMCPMC12936690

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.