Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42306054›Full record

ArticleJTCVS structural and endovascular2025

Root and arch replacements in acute type A aortic dissection suggest lower risk of open distal reintervention.

Bo Chang Brian Wu, Adam M Carroll, Nicolas Chanes, Michal Schafer, Tylor Thai, R Wilson King, Zihan Feng, Muhammad Aftab, T Brett Reece

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JTCVS structural and endovascular, 2025. 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

9 authors.

Bo Chang Brian WuDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.
Adam M CarrollDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.
Nicolas ChanesDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.
Michal SchaferDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.
Tylor ThaiDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.
R Wilson KingDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.
Zihan FengDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.
Muhammad AftabDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.
T Brett ReeceDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate how different approaches for root and arch management during the first surgery for acute type A aortic dissection impact long-term freedom from reintervention, particularly distal reintervention. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study analyzing 164 patients who underwent acute type A aortic dissection surgery from January 2009 to April 2024. Patients were stratified into root replacement (n = 75) and non-root replacement (n = 89) groups. The root replacement group was further stratified by arch intervention type. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression models were performed to assess the impact of root and arch interventions on freedom from reinterventions. Results: Root replacement significantly reduced the risk of any reintervention (hazard ratio, 0.496, Conclusions: Root and total arch replacements in acute type A aortic dissection demonstrated reduced risk of reinterventions, particularly open reintervention distal to the arch. More aggressive approaches have the potential to reduce the burden and cost of subsequent operations and improve long-term outcomes. However, although root and total arch replacements offer excellent long-term benefits, they are more complex with potentially higher perioperative risks. The decision to pursue more aggressive interventions should be based on a comprehensive patient assessment.

Indexed as

aortic dissectionarch replacementreinterventionreoperationroot replacement

Identifiers

PMID42306054
PMCPMC13244698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.