ArticleAnnals of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Cerebral protection strategies in aortic arch surgery: a review of techniques and outcomes.
Article in Annals of cardiothoracic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cerebral protection is a key determinant of perioperative outcomes in aortic arch surgery. Despite significant advances, optimal strategies regarding temperature, perfusion modality, and cannulation site remain controversial, with heterogeneous evidence and lack of standardized protocols. Methods: This narrative review summarizes experimental and clinical evidence from the last 15 years, focusing on the main determinants of cerebral protection: cerebral blood flow (CBF), autoregulation, perfusion pressure, temperature management, cannulation strategies, and antegrade (ACP) versus retrograde cerebral perfusion (RCP). Results: Available evidence consistently shows that any form of cerebral perfusion is superior to no perfusion during circulatory arrest (CA). Selective antegrade cerebral perfusion (SACP) has progressively emerged as the most widely adopted strategy worldwide, supported by its more physiological flow pattern and encouraging clinical outcomes. Axillary artery cannulation is currently the preferred approach and is associated with a lower stroke risk compared to femoral access, although femoral cannulation remains a valid alternative in unstable patients requiring rapid cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) initiation. Comparative studies between ACP and RCP demonstrate no clear superiority in terms of mortality or permanent neurological dysfunction (PND), particularly for short CA times. However, SACP may reduce temporary neurological deficits (TNDs). A global shift towards moderate-to-mild hypothermia combined with cerebral perfusion has been observed, with favorable outcomes. Nonetheless, substantial variability persists in perfusion parameters, including flow, pressure, and the choice between unilateral and bilateral cerebral perfusion. Conclusions: Contemporary practice is moving toward strategies that better replicate physiological cerebral perfusion, favoring antegrade flow with moderate hypothermia. However, the lack of high-quality randomized evidence and persistent heterogeneity limit definitive recommendations, highlighting the need for standardized protocols and individualized approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.