MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913509312 · doi:10.1177/1708538119828887

The endovascular repair of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury in Asia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2019· review· en· W2913509312 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVascular · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBluntMeta-analysisAortic repairSurgeryThoracic traumaRadiologyAortaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury, the second leading cause of death from trauma, poses unique challenges in its management. However, there has not yet been a corresponding consolidated series of outcomes reported in Asia, which this systematic review aims to address. METHOD: This review was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Searches were performed on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Database for studies performed in Asia reporting the endovascular management of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analyses of pooled proportions were performed using the metaprop command in STATA. This review has been prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018083773). RESULTS: Sixteen retrospective cohort studies were included, reporting a total of 238 patients. The pooled Injury Severity Score was 32.5 (95%CI 27.8-37.1). The pooled mean time to operation from diagnosis was 39.2 hours (95%CI 24.6-53.8 hours), and operation time was 100 min (95%CI 63.5-136.5 min). The pooled rate of procedural conversion from endovascular repair to open surgery was 0.17% (95%CI 0-3.7%), and the proportion of left subclavian artery coverage was 55% (95%CI 37-72%). The pooled prevalence of intra-operative all-cause and aortic-related mortality was 0.72% (95%CI 0-4.9%) and 0.27% (95%CI 0-3.8%), respectively. The pooled prevalence of 30-day all-cause and aortic-related mortality was 2.2% (95%CI 0.16-5.6%) and 2.1% (95%CI 0-3.7%), respectively. In terms of 30-day complication, the pooled prevalence rates of type 1 endoleak, endograft complications, vascular access injury, strokes, and aortic re-rupture were 1.2%, 0.34%, 0.14%, 0.02%, and 0.01%, respectively. There were no cases of types II and III endoleak, and renal failure. CONCLUSION: Short- to mid-term results for thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury in Asia are encouraging. However, there is a distinct disparity in reporting across Asia. We propose a prospective database for outcome reporting post thoracic endovascular aortic repair in this patient population, and ongoing follow up to assess long-term efficacy of this treatment strategy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.012
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.268 · 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