ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2026
Individualized strategy of treatment for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm using causal inference model: a retrospective observational study.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study was performed to predict individualized treatment strategies in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) by estimating the survival benefit of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) based on anatomical and physiological features using a causal inference model. Methods: This retrospective study included 45 patients with de novo rAAA who underwent EVAR or OSR between 2012 and 2024. Thirty-three variables were analyzed. The model estimated individualized treatment effects (ITE) for 30-day survival. Model interpretability was assessed using Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) analysis. Five-fold cross-validation, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and calibration plots were used for model evaluation. A clinical decision tree was developed to derive simplified decision rules. Results: The mean ITE was 0.22 ± 0.42, with 33% of patients classified as OSR-benefit candidates. SHAP analysis revealed that suprarenal angle, infrarenal angle, iliac anatomy, and proximal neck characteristics strongly influenced treatment effects. However, some predictors, such as low hemoglobin and systolic blood pressure favoring OSR, conflicted with clinical intuition. ROC analysis showed an area under the curve of 1.00, but calibration suggested overfitting due to a small sample size. Treatment-matched patients had a higher 30-day mortality rate than mismatched patients, suggesting potential bias or unmeasured confounding. The decision tree identified clinically relevant features but displayed structural inconsistencies and impractical cutoff values due to the limited sample size. Conclusion: The X-learner model demonstrated the feasibility of individualized treatment prediction in rAAA but suffered from overfitting and limited generalizability. Validation with larger multicenter cohorts is necessary to confirm clinical applicability.
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.