Fate of Dissected Aortic Arch after Surgical Repair of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the fate of dissected aortic arch after surgical repair of acute Stanford type A aortic dissection and to delineate dimensions of branched stent-graft prosthesis for endovascular repair of dissected aortic arch according to the true lumen anatomy. Methods: Between 2001 and 2015, among 274 patients operated for acute type A aortic dissection, 86 (aged 57 ± 13 years, 74% males) had residual dissection in the aortic arch and descending thoracic aorta on pre-discharge computed tomography (CT). Aortic arch geometry was assessed on pre-discharge and follow-up CT including diameters, lengths, dissection extension and entry localization. Median CT follow-up was 46 [10; 125] months. Results: Altogether 86 patients were included (14 with and 72 without hemiarch replacement). The largest diameter increase was observed in the thoracic descending aorta (+17% [ranging between -14% and +92%] with more than 30% increase in 9 patients. The average aortic arch diameter increase was 6% [-10%; +20%] with true lumen diameter increase of 8% [-12%; +28%]. The aortic arch length increased from 66 [35; 105] mm to 71 [39; 123] mm (+12%) along the greater curvature. In contrast, the descending thoracic aorta length did not change (127 [115; 139] mm versus 129 [117; 149] mm; +0.3%). Diameter of the ascending aortic prosthesis ranged between 21 and 32 mm (mean diameter 27 ± 2 mm), the most common diameter (in 22 patients) was 28 mm. Mean diameter of the true lumen of dissected arch was 27 [10; 44] mm immediately proximal to the origin of the left carotid artery as well as 25 [6; 40] mm immediately proximal to the origin of the left subclavian artery. Diameter of the true lumen of dissected proximal descending aorta ranged between 7 and 35 mm (mean diameter 19 ± 5 mm). Conclusion: Aortic arch residual dissection after surgical repair of type A dissection leads to aortic arch growth that may result in arch aneurysm requiring treatment. Endovascular repair of dissected aortic arch may be limited by usually small true lumen, requiring new stent design with branches to the supraaortic arteries, which will not disturb the narrow mainstream flow to the descending aorta. Table 1 Change of aortic diameters Aortic diameter at Pre-discharge (mm) Follow up (mm) P Δ (mm) Δ [%] Left carotid artery 37.2 ± 5.3 39.8 ± 5.7 0.027 2.0 ± 3.2 5.5 ± 8.3 Left subclavian artery 33.2 ± 5.1 36.8 ± 7.8 0.002 2.8 ± 5.2 6.9 ± 14.0 2 cm distal the origin of the left subclavian artery 34.6 ± 5.2 41.4 ± 9.9 <0.001 5.5 ± 7.0 15.0 ± 18.8 10 cm distal the origin of the left subclavian artery 32.6 ± 4.9 39.6 ± 11.2 <0.001 6.2 ± 7.8 17.1 ± 21.4
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".