ArticleThe British journal of surgery2026
No increased risk of cancer death after endovascular aortic repair in a nationwide population-based cohort study.
Article in The British journal of surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe short-term benefits of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) compared with open repair for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients are well established. However, concerns have been raised regarding a potential increased long-term cancer risk associated with EVAR, related to procedural and surveillance-related radiation exposure. The aim of this nationwide population-based cohort study was to evaluate whether EVAR is associated with an increased long-term cancer risk compared with open repair.
methodsAll patients undergoing primary AAA repair for an intact AAA (ICD-10: I71.4) from January 2005 to February 2024 were identified from the Swedish National Patient Register. Previous and subsequent cancer diagnoses, as well as previous co-morbidities, for this cohort were recorded. Cause of death was retrieved from the Cause of Death Register. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied using propensity scores derived from baseline characteristics and co-morbidities. Weighted Cox regression models, with EVAR as the sole regressor, were then fitted for the event of a new cancer diagnosis and cancer related death.
resultsSome 15 509 patients were identified (mean age of 73 years, 16.8% female, and 23.7% with a previous cancer diagnosis). After weighting, standardized mean differences for co-morbidities, age, sex, and recent hospital admissions were all within ±0.1. The median survival was 8.7 (95% c.i. 8.4 to 8.9) years for EVAR patients and 9.4 (95% c.i. 9.1 to 9.6) years for open repair patients. The median follow-up time was 4.9 (interquartile range (i.q.r.) 2.3 to 8.4) years for new cancer and 5.9 (i.q.r. 3.0 to 9.4) years for cancer-related death. Freedom from new cancer was lower in EVAR patients (HR 0.92 (95% c.i. 0.86 to 0.98)), whereas cancer-related survival was similar (HR 0.93 (95% c.i. 0.85 to 1.02)).
conclusionEVAR was not associated with an increased risk of dying of cancer, but with an increased risk of being diagnosed with a new cancer. This should be interpreted carefully, as there is a clear risk of detection bias of otherwise unknown tumours due to routine imaging during EVAR surveillance.
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.