Den här översättningen är inte klar ännu. Den här sidan är just nu på engelska.

Gå till den engelska sidan

Which Brain-Saving technique works best in aortic tear emergencies?

NCT ID NCT07043777

What the study statuses mean

This study's is highlighted.

Recruitment status, easiest to join first

Recruiting now
This trial is taking on new participants right now.
Not yet recruiting
Registered, but not yet taking participants.
By invitation only
Not open to general applications. Only people the study team invites can take part.
Paused
Paused for now. It may or may not start again.
Ongoing
Running, but no longer taking on new participants.
Completed This study
The trial has finished. Results may not be published yet.
Stopped early
Stopped early, before it reached the end. That can be for many reasons, including safety.
Cancelled
Cancelled before anyone took part.

Expanded access (not trials)

Expanded access
Not a trial. This treatment can be requested outside a study, case by case, for people who qualify.
Expanded access (paused)
Not a trial. The treatment can normally be requested outside a study, but is unavailable right now.
Expanded access (ended)
Not a trial. The treatment could once be requested outside a study, but no longer can.
Approved
The treatment has been approved, so it is available normally rather than through this programme.

When the status isn't known

Details not published
The full record has not been published yet, so there is little to show here.
Status unknown
This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.

First seen Jul 01, 2026 · Last updated Jul 02, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This study looks at two ways to keep the brain supplied with blood during emergency surgery for a life-threatening tear in the aorta (the main artery from the heart). One method delivers blood to all three major arteries in the head, while the other uses only the right armpit artery. Researchers reviewed records of 201 adults who had this surgery at one hospital between 2021 and 2025 to see which approach led to fewer strokes and better survival.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.

What this could lead to
If one method proves safer, it could guide surgeons on the best way to protect the brain during this high-risk emergency surgery.
What could go wrong
This is a small, single-hospital review, not a randomized trial. The two groups were treated by different surgeons, so results may be due to skill rather than the method itself.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Study facts

What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.

Participants

201 people

The number who actually took part.

Started

Jan 2021

Finished

Jun 2025

Lead sponsor

Other sponsor

The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.

Who can take part

This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.

Who is studied

Consecutive adult patients who underwent emergency total arch replacement for acute type A aortic dissection at China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, between 1 January 2021 and 30 April 2025. The analytic population was restricted to patients who received either direct three-vessel antegrade cerebral perfusion (MACP) or unilateral right axillary antegrade cerebral perfusion (uACP).

Ages

18 years and older

Sex

Anyone

Healthy volunteers

Not accepted

This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.

Show the full entry requirements

Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.

Inclusion Criteria: * Adults aged 18 years or older. * Patients who underwent emergency total arch replacement for acute type A aortic dissection at China Medical University Hospital between 1 January 2021 and 30 April 2025. * Patients who received either direct three-vessel antegrade cerebral perfusion (MACP) or unilateral right axillary antegrade cerebral perfusion (uACP). Exclusion Criteria: * Incomplete key clinical, operative, or outcome data precluding analysis. * Preoperative modified Rankin Scale score of 4 or higher. * Ischemic stroke within 30 days before surgery. * Remote prior stroke history or unavailable prior-stroke status. * Patients managed with cerebral perfusion strategies other than MACP or uACP.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Acute type A aortic dissection are added.

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • China Medical University Hospital

    Taichung, 40447, Taiwan

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.