Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42380305›Full record

ArticleHeart and vessels2026

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation after aortic dissection: a systematic review of exercise prescription and blood pressure-guided management.

Kiyonori Kobayashi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heart and vessels, 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

1 author.

Kiyonori KobayashiDepartment of Rehabilitation, Nagoya University Hospital, 65 Tsurumai-Cho, Showa-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 466-8560, Japan. kobayashi.kiyonori.t8@f.mail.nagoya-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4029-3373

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Survival after acute aortic dissection (AAD) has improved substantially; however, optimal exercise prescription and blood pressure (BP) thresholds during cardiac rehabilitation (CR) remain unclear. Although current guidelines recommend CR after aortic repair, evidence-based BP thresholds are undefined. A systematic search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library identified 88 records. After screening and eligibility assessment, 27 studies were included. Eligible studies investigated exercise-based rehabilitation, early mobilization, or BP-guided exercise management in patients with Stanford type A or B aortic dissection. Data on exercise intensity, BP limits, monitoring strategies, safety outcomes, and functional recovery were extracted and narratively synthesized. Most studies were observational, with only one randomized controlled trial evaluating early goal-directed mobilization. Exercise intensity was typically prescribed as low-to-moderate and frequently constrained by systolic BP thresholds; however, reported upper limits were inconsistent and often not explicitly defined or evidence-justified. Continuous or intermittent BP monitoring was commonly employed in early phases. Across studies, exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation was not clearly associated with increased rates of re-dissection or major adverse events, and early mobilization was associated with improved activities of daily living and shorter functional recovery time. Of the 27 included studies, explicit systolic blood pressure thresholds for exercise were reported in fewer than one-third, and quantitative descriptions of aortic event rates were provided in only a minority, with most studies concluding safety based on qualitative assessments; however, the absence of reported events does not necessarily indicate evidence of safety. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation following aortic dissection appears feasible when conducted under BP-guided monitoring, with no clear signal of increased aortic risk reported in the available literature. However, the current evidence remains largely qualitative and heterogeneous, highlighting the need for standardized exercise intensity criteria and prospective studies to establish evidence-based rehabilitation strategies.

Indexed as

Aortic dissectionBlood pressureCardiac rehabilitationEarly mobilizationExercise therapy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.