Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42598455›Full record

ReviewAnnals of cardiothoracic surgery2026

Endovascular technology for aortic arch repair: from innovation to integration.

Foeke J H Nauta, Pim S van Sambeeck, Nabil Saouti, Sjoerd Jenniskens, Mark Dirven, Robin H Heijmen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of cardiothoracic 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.

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

6 authors.

Foeke J H NautaDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-8298-2868
Pim S van SambeeckDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0782-9686
Nabil SaoutiDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Sjoerd JenniskensDepartment of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Mark DirvenDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Robin H HeijmenDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treatment of aortic arch pathology is one of the most challenging areas in cardiovascular surgery due to the complex anatomy and proximity to critical cerebral vessels. Open aortic arch replacement with cardiopulmonary bypass and deep hypothermic circulatory arrest remains the gold standard but can be associated with significant perioperative morbidity and mortality, particularly in elderly and comorbid patients. Over the past two decades, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the gold standard for most descending aortic pathologies. As a result, TEVAR use has expanded into the aortic arch, facilitated by hybrid approaches that combine supra-aortic vessel debranching with endovascular stent-grafting. Following this approach, TEVAR, in combination with the use of chimney and snorkel grafts, was developed in an attempt to treat the aortic arch with a complete endovascular approach. However, these techniques have been associated with complications such as stent-graft occlusion, collapse, endoleaks, and strokes. Further developments have led to

Indexed as

aortic archbranched endovascular aortic repairThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR)total endovascular aortic arch repair

Identifiers

PMID42598455
PMCPMC13470926

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.