ArticleHeart and vessels2026
Clinical outcomes of conservative management for acute Stanford type A intramural hematoma: a multicenter retrospective study.
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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal management strategy for acute Stanford type A intramural hematoma (ATAIMH) remains controversial. This study compared outcomes between conservative and surgical management and to evaluate the validity of current treatment strategies. We retrospectively analyzed 274 consecutive patients with ATAIMH and treated at six centers between April 2011 and April 2024. Conservative management was initially considered for patients with stable hemodynamics, controlled pain, AoD < 50 mm, and HT < 11 mm. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, aortic-related mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (MACCE). Survival outcomes were compared between patients managed conservatively and those who underwent surgery using Cox proportional hazards models, with surgical intervention as a time-dependent covariate. Of the 274 patients, 88 (32.1%) underwent emergency surgery, whereas 186 (67.9%) were initially managed conservatively; among these, 58 (31.1%) required subsequent surgical conversion. Surgical intervention was not an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (HR 0.986; 95% CI 0.487-1.99; P = 0.970), aortic-related mortality (HR 0.836; 95% CI 0.319-2.18; P = 0.715), and MACCE (HR 1.29; 95% CI 0.633-2.64; P = 0.478). Five-year survival rates were 83.9% in the conservatively treated group and 86.8% in the surgically treated group. The only independent predictor of aortic-related mortality was aortic diameter indexed to body surface area, with a cutoff value of 32.3 mm/m
Indexed as
Identifiers
42806093What 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.