Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 581

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Predicting Death in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection

Mehta, Rajendra H., Suzuki, Toru, Hagan, Peter G., Bossone, Eduardo, Gilon, Dan, Llovet, Alfredo, Maroto, Luis C., Cooper, Jeanna V., Smith, Dean E., Armstrong, William F., Nienaber, Christoph A., Eagle, Kim A.·2002·Circulation

Abstract

Background — Given the high mortality rates in patients with type A aortic dissection, predictive tools to identify patients at increased risk of death are needed to assist clinicians for optimal treatment. Methods and Results — Accordingly, we evaluated 547 patients with this diagnosis enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between January 1996 and December 1999. Univariate testing followed by multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of death. In-hospital mortality rate was 32.5% in type A dissection patients. In-hospital complications (neurological deficits, altered mental status, myocardial or mesenteric ischemia, kidney failure, hypotension, cardiac tamponade, and limb ischemia) were increased in patients who died compared with survivors ( P <0.05 for all). Logistic regression identified the following presenting variables as predictors of death: age ≥70 years (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.05 to 2.77; P =0.03), abrupt onset of chest pain (OR 2.60; 95% CI, 1.22 to 5.54; P =0.01), hypotension/shock/tamponade (OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.83 to 4.81; P <0.0001), kidney failure (OR, 4.77; 95% CI, 1.80 to 12.6; P =0.002), pulse deficit (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.25 to 3.29, P =0.004), and abnormal ECG (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.06 to 2.95; P =0.03) (area under receiver operating curve, 0.74; Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic, P =0.75). Conclusions — The in-hospital mortality rate in acute type A aortic dissection is high and can be predicted with the use of a clinical model incorporated in a simple risk prediction tool. This tool can be used to educate patients with dissection about their predicted risk and in clinical research for risk adjustment while comparing outcomes of different therapies.

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 · 10.1161/hc0202.102246

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.

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

Cited by

See all 581

Metadata

Authors
Mehta, R. H., Suzuki, T., Hagan, P. G., Bossone, E., Gilon, D., Llovet, A., Maroto, L. C., Cooper, J. V., Smith, D. E., Armstrong, W. F., Nienaber, C. A., & Eagle, K. A.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2002-01-15
Volume
105
Issue
2
Pages
200-206
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2168333054
Cited by
581
References
0
FWCI
13.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Predicting Death in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/hc0202.102246
The paper
Mehta, R. H., Suzuki, T., Hagan, P. G., Bossone, E., Gilon, D., Llovet, A., Maroto, L. C., Cooper, J. V., Smith, D. E., Armstrong, W. F., Nienaber, C. A., & Eagle, K. A. (2002). Predicting Death in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/hc0202.102246

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.