ArticleAorta (Stamford, Conn.)2026
Marfan Syndrome versus Loeys-Dietz Syndrome after Aortic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.
Article in Aorta (Stamford, Conn.), 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Marfan syndrome (MFS) and Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS) are hereditary connective tissue diseases, both characterized by aortic root and vessel involvement with an increased risk of aneurysms and dissections. Despite advances in surgical techniques and improved postoperative follow-up, the impact of surgery on long-term outcomes in these patient groups is still unknown. Methods: We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis to compare the postoperative long-term events. The main outcome was long-term survival. Additional outcomes were freedom from dissection and reoperation. After reconstruction of time-to-event data for the individual survival analysis, pooled Kaplan-Meier curves for the endpoints were generated. Results: A total of 1,794 studies were identified, of which 5 were included in the analysis, encompassing 1,005 patients (MFS: 778; LDS: 227). With MFS as the reference group, there was no significant difference in long-term survival between both groups, based on age (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.919; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-1.45; Conclusion: Although long-term survival is similar between MFS and LDS patients, those with LDS face a significantly higher risk of aortic dissection and reoperation. This elevated risk may be partly explained by the intrinsic genotypic heterogeneity of the LDS population. However, our pooled analysis could not fully adjust for this heterogeneity, underscoring the need for vigilant lifelong imaging surveillance and individualized surgical thresholds in LDS.
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.