ReviewEJVES vascular forum2026
Endo-Bentall Repair for Inoperable Aortic Disease: Balancing Innovation and Ethical Responsibility.
Review in EJVES vascular forum, 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
Objective: To evaluate the ethics of introducing the Endo-Bentall (a novel high risk procedure) in the context of compassionate care and to make practical recommendations to support its incorporation into practice. Methods: A seven step ethical framework was systematically applied to three clinical vignettes involving the Endo-Bentall procedure. Ethical issues identified across cases were synthesised and used to develop practical recommendations for clinical practice. Results: Decision making regarding the Endo-Bentall procedure is challenging in the absence of robust outcome data. Patients amenable to treatment represent a highly heterogeneous population, with a high degree of variability in procedural risk, likelihood of technical success, consequences of failure, and uncertainty of long term durability. Despite this, ethical justification may be achievable in carefully selected cases where anticipated benefits proportionately outweigh risks, particularly in the context of otherwise limited therapeutic alternatives. Conclusion: Ethical implementation of the Endo-Bentall procedure is possible in select patients. However, structured safeguards are necessary. These include enhanced informed consent processes with explicit disclosure of the learning curve, limited validation, and unknown long term outcomes; mitigation of potential conflicts of interest through independent or external case review; formal oversight mechanisms despite its classification as compassionate or innovative care; and integration within a learning health system framework with ongoing data reporting and outcome monitoring.
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.