ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Contemporary Management of the Aortic Arch: A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aortic arch remains one of the most complex segments of the thoracic aorta to treat, demanding strategies that safeguard cerebral and spinal perfusion while achieving durable proximal and distal repair. Contemporary management strategies include open hemi/total arch replacement, hybrid approaches such as frozen elephant trunk (FET) or debranching with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), and fully endovascular repair using branched or fenestrated devices. Updated guidelines (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association [ACC/AHA] 2022; European Society of Cardiology [ESC] 2024) emphasize multidisciplinary, patient-specific decision-making grounded in standardized imaging, genetics, and lifelong surveillance. Procedurally, selective antegrade cerebral perfusion with moderate-to-low hypothermia has replaced routine deep hypothermic circulatory arrest for most open arch operations. Zone-based planning using Ishimaru's map, complemented by the Modified Arch Landing Areas Nomenclature (MALAN), improves feasibility assessment and risk stratification, while entry-focused schemas like TEM (Type, Entry, Malperfusion) further refine management. Emerging data indicate that open repair remains the durability benchmark in younger populations and those with connective tissue disease, and FET enables single-stage treatment capability with acceptable early outcomes but requires vigilant neurologic protection and reintervention surveillance. An integrated, zone-driven approach guided by center expertise optimizes patient selection for open, hybrid, or endovascular options to maximize safety and durability.
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.