Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 615

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What is the appropriate size criterion for resection of thoracic aortic aneurysms?

Open access
Coady, Michael A., Rizzo, John A., Hammond, Graeme L., Mandapati, Divakar, Darr, Umer, Kopf, Gary S., Elefteriades, John A.·1997·The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Abstract

Although many articles have described techniques for resection of thoracic aortic aneurysms, limited information on the natural history of this disorder is available to aid in defining criteria for surgical intervention. Data on 230 patients with thoracic aortic aneurysms treated at Yale University School of Medicine from 1985 to 1996 were analyzed. This computerized database included 714 imaging studies (magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, echocardiography). Mean size of the thoracic aorta in these patients at initial presentation was 5.2 cm (range 3.5 to 10 cm). The mean growth rate was 0.12 cm/yr. Overall survivals at 1 and 5 years were 85% and 64%, respectively. Patients having aortic dissection had lower survival (83% 1 year; 46% 5 year) than the cohort without dissection (89% 1 year; 71% 5 year). One hundred thirty-six patients underwent surgery for their thoracic aortic aneurysms. For elective operations, the mortality was 9.0%; for emergency operations, 21.7%. Median size at time of rupture or dissection was 6.0 cm for ascending aneurysms and 7.2 cm for descending aneurysms. The incidence of dissection or rupture increased with aneurysm size. Multivariable regression analysis to isolate risk factors for acute dissection or rupture revealed that size larger than 6.0 cm increased the probability by 32.1 percentage points for ascending aneurysms (p = 0.005). For descending aneurysms, this probability increased by 43.0 percentage points at a size greater than 7.0 cm (p = 0.006). If the median size at the time of dissection or rupture were used as the intervention criterion, half of the patients would suffer a devastating complication before the operation. Accordingly, a criterion lower than the median is appropriate. We recommend 5.5 cm as an acceptable size for elective resection of ascending aortic aneurysms, because resection can be performed with relatively low mortality. For aneurysms of the descending aorta, in which perioperative complications are greater and the median size at the time of complications is larger, we recommend intervention at 6.5 cm.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-5223(97)70360-x

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 615

Metadata

Authors
Coady, M. A., Rizzo, J. A., Hammond, G. L., Mandapati, D., Darr, U., Kopf, G. S., & Elefteriades, J. A.
Venue
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-03
Volume
113
Issue
3
Pages
476-491
ISSN
0022-5223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2020360951
Cited by
615
References
6
FWCI
16.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What is the appropriate size criterion for resection of thoracic aortic aneurysms? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0022-5223(97)70360-x
The paper
Coady, M. A., Rizzo, J. A., Hammond, G. L., Mandapati, D., Darr, U., Kopf, G. S., & Elefteriades, J. A. (1997). What is the appropriate size criterion for resection of thoracic aortic aneurysms? The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5223(97)70360-x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.