MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564738940 · doi:10.1093/icvts/ivw355

Classification and outcomes of extended arch repair for acute Type A aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2016· review· en· W2564738940 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversité de MontréalUniversity of TorontoLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of OttawaToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElephant trunksMedicineSurgeryPerioperativeStentAortic archAortic dissectionAorta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Distal extent of repair in patients undergoing surgery for acute Type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is controversial. Emerging hybrid techniques involving open and endovascular surgery have been reported in small numbers by select individual centres. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to investigate the outcomes following extended arch repair for ATAAD. A classification system is proposed of the different techniques to facilitate discussion and further investigation. Methods: Using Ovid MEDLINE, 38 studies were identified reporting outcomes for 2140 patients. Studies were categorized into four groups on the basis of extent of surgical aortic resection and the method of descending thoracic aortic stent graft deployment; during circulatory arrest (frozen stented elephant trunk) or with normothermic perfusion and use of fluoroscopy (warm stent graft): (I) surgical total arch replacement, (II) total arch and frozen stented elephant trunk, (III) hemiarch and frozen stented elephant trunk and (IV) total arch and warm stent graft. Perioperative event rates were obtained for each of the four groups and the entire cohort using pooled summary estimates. Linearized rates of late mortality and reoperation were calculated. Results: Overall pooled hospital mortality for extended arch techniques was 8.6% (95% CI 7.2-10.0). Pooled data categorized by surgical technique resulted in hospital mortality of 11.9% for total arch, 8.6% total arch and frozen stented elephant trunk, 6.3% hemiarch and frozen stented elephant trunk and 5.5% total arch and 'warm stent graft'. Overall incidence of stroke for the entire cohort was 5.7% (95% CI 3.6-8.2). Rate of spinal cord ischaemia was 2.0% (95% CI 1.2-3.0). Pooled linearized rate of late mortality was 1.66%/pt-yr (95% CI 1.34-2.07) with linearized rate of re-operation of 1.62%/pt-yr (95% CI 1.24-2.05). Conclusions: Perioperative results of extended arch procedures are encouraging. Further follow-up is required to see if long-term complications are reduced with these emerging techniques. The proposed classification system will facilitate future comparison of short- and long-term results of different techniques of extended arch repair for ATAAD.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.009
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.140
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it