Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Peak Wall Stress and Peak Wall Rupture Index in Ruptured and Asymptomatic Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Background Prior studies have suggested aortic peak wall stress (PWS) and peak wall rupture index (PWRI) can estimate the rupture risk of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but whether these measurements have independent predictive ability over assessing AAA diameter alone is unclear. The aim of th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the American Heart Association 2021-04, Vol.10 (8), p.e019772-e019772
Hauptverfasser: Singh, Tejas P, Moxon, Joseph V, Gasser, T Christian, Golledge, Jonathan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e019772
container_issue 8
container_start_page e019772
container_title Journal of the American Heart Association
container_volume 10
creator Singh, Tejas P
Moxon, Joseph V
Gasser, T Christian
Golledge, Jonathan
description Background Prior studies have suggested aortic peak wall stress (PWS) and peak wall rupture index (PWRI) can estimate the rupture risk of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but whether these measurements have independent predictive ability over assessing AAA diameter alone is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to compare PWS and PWRI in participants with ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Methods and Results Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify studies assessing PWS and PWRI in ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance-weighted methods. Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of findings. Risk of bias was assessed using a modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers. Seven case-control studies involving 309 participants were included. Meta-analyses suggested that PWRI (standardized mean difference, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.14-0.70; =0.004) but not PWS (standardized mean difference, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.44; =0.418) was greater in ruptured than intact AAAs. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were not dependent on the inclusion of any single study. The included studies were assessed to have a medium to high risk of bias. Conclusions Based on limited evidence, this study suggested that PWRI, but not PWS, is greater in ruptured than asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar maximum aortic diameter.
doi_str_mv 10.1161/JAHA.120.019772
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_33855866</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_dfc917762cf34b36a3a95a9ad57e6939</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2513241944</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-698f0389ad21589cb5f1204d0c71f966189fd6782a7ada8b392f35cf7f24ecff3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkktP3DAUhaOqVUGUdXeVl91kiO3Ej02liD4YRNUK-lhad_yAQBJPbQeav9FfTGYClPHG1vF3z726Oln2FhcLjBk-Oq1P6gUmxaLAknPyItsnRclzKUXx8tl7LzuM8bqYDiOcVvJ1tkepqCrB2H7272KMyXaQGo3O7W1j7xD0Bn21CfK6h3aMTUTeoe8WbtBvaFt0kYKNcUv9F8-HdRqCRcve2L-o6R8Fs-XqOHbr5Ocuyz6BTqheGd81UwdU-7DR694OYYxdfJO9ctBGe_hwH2Q_P3_6cXySn337sjyuz3JdSp5yJoUrqJBgCK6E1KvKTbsoTaE5dpIxLKQzjAsCHAyIFZXE0Uo77khptXP0IFvOvsbDtVqHpoMwKg-N2go-XCrYTNZaZZyWmHNGtKPlijKgICuYWlfcMknl5JXPXvHOrofVjtvH5le9dbtJV4pIVhI68R9mfoI7a7TtU4B2p2z3p2-u1KW_VQLzEouNwfsHg-D_DDYm1TVR27aF3vohKlJhSkosy3JCj2ZUBx9jsO6pDS7UJkhqEyQ1LU_NQZoq3j2f7ol_jA29B-h_xgs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2513241944</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Peak Wall Stress and Peak Wall Rupture Index in Ruptured and Asymptomatic Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>SWEPUB Freely available online</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Singh, Tejas P ; Moxon, Joseph V ; Gasser, T Christian ; Golledge, Jonathan</creator><creatorcontrib>Singh, Tejas P ; Moxon, Joseph V ; Gasser, T Christian ; Golledge, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><description>Background Prior studies have suggested aortic peak wall stress (PWS) and peak wall rupture index (PWRI) can estimate the rupture risk of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but whether these measurements have independent predictive ability over assessing AAA diameter alone is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to compare PWS and PWRI in participants with ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Methods and Results Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify studies assessing PWS and PWRI in ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance-weighted methods. Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of findings. Risk of bias was assessed using a modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers. Seven case-control studies involving 309 participants were included. Meta-analyses suggested that PWRI (standardized mean difference, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.14-0.70; =0.004) but not PWS (standardized mean difference, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.44; =0.418) was greater in ruptured than intact AAAs. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were not dependent on the inclusion of any single study. The included studies were assessed to have a medium to high risk of bias. Conclusions Based on limited evidence, this study suggested that PWRI, but not PWS, is greater in ruptured than asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar maximum aortic diameter.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2047-9980</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2047-9980</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.120.019772</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33855866</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: John Wiley and Sons Inc</publisher><subject>abdominal aortic aneurysm ; analysis ; Aorta, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging ; Aorta, Abdominal - physiopathology ; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - complications ; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnosis ; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - physiopathology ; Aortic Rupture - diagnosis ; Aortic Rupture - etiology ; Aortic Rupture - physiopathology ; Aortography - methods ; Asymptomatic Diseases ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; biomechanics ; computed tomography ; finite element analysis ; Humans ; imaging ; meta&amp;#8208 ; meta‐analysis ; systematic review ; Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis</subject><ispartof>Journal of the American Heart Association, 2021-04, Vol.10 (8), p.e019772-e019772</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-698f0389ad21589cb5f1204d0c71f966189fd6782a7ada8b392f35cf7f24ecff3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-698f0389ad21589cb5f1204d0c71f966189fd6782a7ada8b392f35cf7f24ecff3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5779-8848 ; 0000-0003-3843-4886</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8174183/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8174183/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,552,727,780,784,864,885,2102,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33855866$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-296423$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Singh, Tejas P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moxon, Joseph V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gasser, T Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Golledge, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><title>Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Peak Wall Stress and Peak Wall Rupture Index in Ruptured and Asymptomatic Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms</title><title>Journal of the American Heart Association</title><addtitle>J Am Heart Assoc</addtitle><description>Background Prior studies have suggested aortic peak wall stress (PWS) and peak wall rupture index (PWRI) can estimate the rupture risk of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but whether these measurements have independent predictive ability over assessing AAA diameter alone is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to compare PWS and PWRI in participants with ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Methods and Results Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify studies assessing PWS and PWRI in ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance-weighted methods. Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of findings. Risk of bias was assessed using a modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers. Seven case-control studies involving 309 participants were included. Meta-analyses suggested that PWRI (standardized mean difference, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.14-0.70; =0.004) but not PWS (standardized mean difference, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.44; =0.418) was greater in ruptured than intact AAAs. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were not dependent on the inclusion of any single study. The included studies were assessed to have a medium to high risk of bias. Conclusions Based on limited evidence, this study suggested that PWRI, but not PWS, is greater in ruptured than asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar maximum aortic diameter.</description><subject>abdominal aortic aneurysm</subject><subject>analysis</subject><subject>Aorta, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Aorta, Abdominal - physiopathology</subject><subject>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - complications</subject><subject>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnosis</subject><subject>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - physiopathology</subject><subject>Aortic Rupture - diagnosis</subject><subject>Aortic Rupture - etiology</subject><subject>Aortic Rupture - physiopathology</subject><subject>Aortography - methods</subject><subject>Asymptomatic Diseases</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>biomechanics</subject><subject>computed tomography</subject><subject>finite element analysis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>imaging</subject><subject>meta&amp;#8208</subject><subject>meta‐analysis</subject><subject>systematic review</subject><subject>Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis</subject><issn>2047-9980</issn><issn>2047-9980</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>D8T</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkktP3DAUhaOqVUGUdXeVl91kiO3Ej02liD4YRNUK-lhad_yAQBJPbQeav9FfTGYClPHG1vF3z726Oln2FhcLjBk-Oq1P6gUmxaLAknPyItsnRclzKUXx8tl7LzuM8bqYDiOcVvJ1tkepqCrB2H7272KMyXaQGo3O7W1j7xD0Bn21CfK6h3aMTUTeoe8WbtBvaFt0kYKNcUv9F8-HdRqCRcve2L-o6R8Fs-XqOHbr5Ocuyz6BTqheGd81UwdU-7DR694OYYxdfJO9ctBGe_hwH2Q_P3_6cXySn337sjyuz3JdSp5yJoUrqJBgCK6E1KvKTbsoTaE5dpIxLKQzjAsCHAyIFZXE0Uo77khptXP0IFvOvsbDtVqHpoMwKg-N2go-XCrYTNZaZZyWmHNGtKPlijKgICuYWlfcMknl5JXPXvHOrofVjtvH5le9dbtJV4pIVhI68R9mfoI7a7TtU4B2p2z3p2-u1KW_VQLzEouNwfsHg-D_DDYm1TVR27aF3vohKlJhSkosy3JCj2ZUBx9jsO6pDS7UJkhqEyQ1LU_NQZoq3j2f7ol_jA29B-h_xgs</recordid><startdate>20210420</startdate><enddate>20210420</enddate><creator>Singh, Tejas P</creator><creator>Moxon, Joseph V</creator><creator>Gasser, T Christian</creator><creator>Golledge, Jonathan</creator><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><general>Wiley</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AFDQA</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><scope>D8T</scope><scope>D8V</scope><scope>ZZAVC</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5779-8848</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3843-4886</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210420</creationdate><title>Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Peak Wall Stress and Peak Wall Rupture Index in Ruptured and Asymptomatic Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms</title><author>Singh, Tejas P ; Moxon, Joseph V ; Gasser, T Christian ; Golledge, Jonathan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-698f0389ad21589cb5f1204d0c71f966189fd6782a7ada8b392f35cf7f24ecff3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>abdominal aortic aneurysm</topic><topic>analysis</topic><topic>Aorta, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Aorta, Abdominal - physiopathology</topic><topic>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - complications</topic><topic>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnosis</topic><topic>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - physiopathology</topic><topic>Aortic Rupture - diagnosis</topic><topic>Aortic Rupture - etiology</topic><topic>Aortic Rupture - physiopathology</topic><topic>Aortography - methods</topic><topic>Asymptomatic Diseases</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>biomechanics</topic><topic>computed tomography</topic><topic>finite element analysis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>imaging</topic><topic>meta&amp;#8208</topic><topic>meta‐analysis</topic><topic>systematic review</topic><topic>Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Singh, Tejas P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moxon, Joseph V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gasser, T Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Golledge, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SWEPUB Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan full text</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><collection>SWEPUB Freely available online</collection><collection>SWEPUB Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan</collection><collection>SwePub Articles full text</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of the American Heart Association</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Singh, Tejas P</au><au>Moxon, Joseph V</au><au>Gasser, T Christian</au><au>Golledge, Jonathan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Peak Wall Stress and Peak Wall Rupture Index in Ruptured and Asymptomatic Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the American Heart Association</jtitle><addtitle>J Am Heart Assoc</addtitle><date>2021-04-20</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>e019772</spage><epage>e019772</epage><pages>e019772-e019772</pages><issn>2047-9980</issn><eissn>2047-9980</eissn><abstract>Background Prior studies have suggested aortic peak wall stress (PWS) and peak wall rupture index (PWRI) can estimate the rupture risk of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but whether these measurements have independent predictive ability over assessing AAA diameter alone is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to compare PWS and PWRI in participants with ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Methods and Results Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify studies assessing PWS and PWRI in ruptured and asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar diameter. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance-weighted methods. Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of findings. Risk of bias was assessed using a modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers. Seven case-control studies involving 309 participants were included. Meta-analyses suggested that PWRI (standardized mean difference, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.14-0.70; =0.004) but not PWS (standardized mean difference, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.44; =0.418) was greater in ruptured than intact AAAs. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were not dependent on the inclusion of any single study. The included studies were assessed to have a medium to high risk of bias. Conclusions Based on limited evidence, this study suggested that PWRI, but not PWS, is greater in ruptured than asymptomatic intact AAAs of similar maximum aortic diameter.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>John Wiley and Sons Inc</pub><pmid>33855866</pmid><doi>10.1161/JAHA.120.019772</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5779-8848</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3843-4886</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2047-9980
ispartof Journal of the American Heart Association, 2021-04, Vol.10 (8), p.e019772-e019772
issn 2047-9980
2047-9980
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmed_primary_33855866
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; SWEPUB Freely available online; Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central
subjects abdominal aortic aneurysm
analysis
Aorta, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging
Aorta, Abdominal - physiopathology
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - complications
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnosis
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - physiopathology
Aortic Rupture - diagnosis
Aortic Rupture - etiology
Aortic Rupture - physiopathology
Aortography - methods
Asymptomatic Diseases
Biomechanical Phenomena
biomechanics
computed tomography
finite element analysis
Humans
imaging
meta&#8208
meta‐analysis
systematic review
Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis
title Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Peak Wall Stress and Peak Wall Rupture Index in Ruptured and Asymptomatic Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T03%3A05%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-Analysis%20of%20Peak%20Wall%20Stress%20and%20Peak%20Wall%20Rupture%20Index%20in%20Ruptured%20and%20Asymptomatic%20Intact%20Abdominal%20Aortic%20Aneurysms&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20American%20Heart%20Association&rft.au=Singh,%20Tejas%20P&rft.date=2021-04-20&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=e019772&rft.epage=e019772&rft.pages=e019772-e019772&rft.issn=2047-9980&rft.eissn=2047-9980&rft_id=info:doi/10.1161/JAHA.120.019772&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2513241944%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2513241944&rft_id=info:pmid/33855866&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_dfc917762cf34b36a3a95a9ad57e6939&rfr_iscdi=true