A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Stenting for Aortic Coarctation Management in Adults
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose:Endovascular treatment of aortic coarctation (CoA) constitutes a valuable alternative with low morbidity and mortality. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the technical success, re-intervention, and mortality after stenting for CoA in adults.Materials and Methods:The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement and PICO (patient, intervention, comparison, outcome) model were followed. An English literature data search was conducted, using PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL, until December 30, 2021. Only studies reporting on stenting, for native or recurrent CoA, in adults were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A proportional meta-analysis was performed to assess the outcomes. Primary outcomes were technical success, intra-operative pressure gradient and complications, and 30-day mortality.Results:Twenty-seven articles (705 patients) were included (64.0% males, 34.0±13.6 years). Native CoA was present in 65.7%. Technical success was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96%–0.99%; p<0.001, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup>=9.49%). Six (odds ratio [OR]: 1%; 95% CI, 0.00%–0.02%; p=0.002, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup>=0%) ruptures and 10 dissections (OR: 2%; 95% CI, 0.001%–0.02%; p<0.001, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup>=0%) were reported. The intra-operative and 30-day mortality were 1% (95% CI, 0.00%–0.02%; p=0.003, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup>=0%) and 1% (95% CI, 0.00%–0.02%; p=0.004, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup>=0%), respectively. The median follow-up was 29 months. Sixty-eight re-interventions (OR: 8%; 95% CI, 0.05%–0.10%; p<0.001, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup>=35.99%) were performed; 95.5% were endovascular. Seven deaths were reported (OR: 2%; 95% CI, 0.00%–0.03%; p=0.008, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup>=0%).Conclusion:Stenting for CoA in adults presents high technical success and the intra-operative and 30-day mortality rates were acceptable. During the midterm follow-up, the re-intervention rate was acceptable, and mortality was low.Clinical ImpactAortic coarctation is a quite common heart defect that may be diagnosed in adult patients, as a first diagnosis in native cases or as a recurrent after previous repair. Endovascular management using plain angioplasty has been associated to a high intra-operative complication and re-intervention rate. Stenting in this analysis seems to be safe and effective as is related a high technical success rate, exceeding 95%, with a low intra-operative complication and death rate. During the mid-term follow-up, the re-interventions rate is estimated at less than 10% while most cases are managed using endovascular means. Further analyses are needed on the impact of stent type on endovascular repair outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 it