ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
The Aorta Is One Organ; Our Response Is Not: A Global Case for Systems Redesign in Acute Aortic Syndromes.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aorta is a single arterial organ, yet the clinical response to its diseases is fragmented across specialties, institutions, and nations. Acute aortic syndromes remain lethal at every stage of the care continuum: a large share of patients with type A dissection die before reaching any hospital, roughly half die before reaching a specialist centre, a substantial proportion are misdiagnosed at first medical contact, and untreated mortality has historically been estimated at approximately one to two percent per hour. Reported 30-day mortality differs across surgical registry cohorts-for example, 7.6% in the Japan Cardiovascular Surgery Database and 16.9% in the cited GERAADA cohort-but such ecological comparisons are descriptive and cannot identify the contribution of organisational, biological, clinical, or ascertainment differences. This review synthesises registry, population, and health-services data from Europe, Japan, North America, and low- and middle-income settings to characterise where the pathway fails and what each system has already demonstrated. We argue that the next material advance in aortic care will come not from any single innovation in isolation but from the architecture that connects prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up and that system redesign and technological progress are complementary rather than competing; we propose a five-pillar framework (Prevention, Presentation, Pathway, Person, and Learning) mapped throughout to published exemplars and future research priorities.
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.