The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Risk Factors for Aneurysm Rupture in Patients Kept Under Ultrasound Surveillance
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate risk factors associated with aneurysm rupture using patients randomized into the U.K. Small Aneurysm Trial (n = 1090) or monitored for aneurysm growth in the associated study (n = 1167). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The U.K. Small Aneurysm Trial has shown that ultrasound surveillance is a safe management option for patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms (4.0 to 5.5 cm in diameter), with an annual rupture rate of 1%. METHODS: In the cohort of 2257 patients (79% male), aged 59 to 77 years, 103 instances of abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture were identified during the 7-year period of follow-up (1991-1998). Almost all patients (98%) had initial aneurysm diameters in the range of 3 to 6 cm, and the majority of ruptures (76%) occurred in patients with aneurysms > or =5 cm in diameter. Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox regression analysis were used to identify baseline risk factors associated with aneurysm rupture. RESULTS: After 3 years, the annual rate of aneurysm rupture was 2.2% (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.8). The risk of rupture was independently and significantly associated with female sex (p < 0.001), larger initial aneurysm diameter (p < 0.001), lower FEV1 (p = 0.004), current smoking (p = 0.01), and higher mean blood pressure (p = 0.01). Age, body mass index, serum cholesterol concentration, and ankle/brachial pressure index were not associated with an increased risk of aneurysm rupture. CONCLUSIONS: Within this cohort of patients, women had a threefold higher risk of aneurysm rupture than men. Effective control of blood pressure and cessation of smoking are likely to diminish the risk of rupture.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Erbel (2014) · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu281 · Cited by 4,451
Hirsch, A. T., Haskal, Z. J., Hertzer, N. R., Bakal, C. W., Creager, M. A., Halperin, J. L., Hiratzka, L. F., Murphy, W. R. C., Olin, J. W., Puschett, J. B., et al. (2006) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.174526 · Cited by 3,708
Chaikof, E. L., Dalman, R. L., Eskandari, M. K., Jackson, B. M., Lee, W. A., Mansour, M. A., Mastracci, T. M., Mell, M., Murad, M. H., Nguyen, L. L., et al. (2018) · Journal of Vascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2017.10.044 · Cited by 2,751
Wanhainen, A., Verzini, F., Van Herzeele, I., Allaire, E., Bown, M., Cohnert, T., Dick, F., van Herwaarden, J., Karkos, C., Koelemay, M., et al. (2019) · European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2018.09.020 · Cited by 2,326
Self-citationIsselbacher, E. M., Preventza, O., Hamilton Black, J., Augoustides, J. G., Beck, A. W., Bolen, M. A., Braverman, A. C., Bray, B. E., Brown-Zimmerman, M. M., Chen, E. P., et al. (2022) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000001106 · Cited by 2,082
Metadata
- Authors
- Brown, L. C., & Powell, J. T.
- Venue
- Annals of Surgery
- Published
- 1999-09
- Volume
- 230
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 289
- ISSN
- 0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2064995363
- Cited by
- 703
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Risk Factors for Aneurysm Rupture in Patients Kept Under Ultrasound Surveillance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000658-199909000-00002
- The paper
- Brown, L. C., & Powell, J. T. (1999). Risk Factors for Aneurysm Rupture in Patients Kept Under Ultrasound Surveillance. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199909000-00002
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.