MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406263991 · doi:10.1186/s13019-024-03339-w

Efficacy and safety of single-branched stent graft in the treatment of type B aortic dissection: a meta-analysis of cohort studies

2025· review· en· W4406263991 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wenxiao Lin, Xiaolei Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiothoracic Surgery · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryStentPerioperativeCardiothoracic surgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) is the most commonly employed method for treating type B aortic dissection (TBAD). One of the primary challenges in TEVAR is the reconstruction of the left subclavian artery (LSA). Various revascularization strategies have been utilized, including branch stent techniques, fenestration techniques, chimney techniques, and hybrid techniques. Among these, the single-branched stent graft (SBSG) has emerged as one of the most promising methods. This study employs a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SBSG in treating TBAD, thereby providing robust evidence to guide clinical practice. METHODS: Published literatures on the treatment of TBAD with SBSG were collected from CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. The search period ranged from the inception of each database to December 1, 2024. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: A total of eight studies involving 660 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The results demonstrated that, compared to other surgical methods, SBSG significantly reduced the perioperative neurological complication rate (OR = 0.23, 95%CI(0.07, 0.76), P = 0.02), type I endoleak rate (OR = 0.30, 95%CI(0.15, 0.61), P = 0.001), and left upper limb ischemia rate (OR = 0.06, 95%CI(0.01, 0.49), P = 0.008). Additionally, SBSG was associated with a shorter operation time (SMD = 0.59, 95%CI(0.04, 1.14), P = 0.04). However, no significant differences were observed between SBSG and other surgical methods in terms of technique success rate (OR = 1.51, 95%CI(0.55, 4.14), P = 0.42), hospital length of stay (OR = 1.51, 95%CI(0.55, 4.14), P = 0.42), aortic false lumen thrombosis rate (OR = 1.30, 95%CI(0.55, 3.07), P = 0.56), pulmonary infection rate (OR = 0.50, 95%CI(0.16, 1.58), P = 0.24), and 30-day postoperative mortality (OR = 0.41, 95%CI(0.12, 1.35), P = 0.41). CONCLUSION: SBSG demonstrates safety and efficacy in the treatment of TBAD by significantly reducing the perioperative neurological complexity rate, type I leakage rate, and left upper limb ischemia rate, while also decreasing operative time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
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 score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.055
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.233
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiothoracic SurgerySame topicAortic Disease and Treatment ApproachesFrench-language works237,207