Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

This study showed current literature comparing the interventions for chronic thoracic aortic aneurysms was dated and of limited quality, but both were successful for carefully selected patients although timing of the intervention remains challenging.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Linda Sharples 1,*, Priya Sastry 2, Carol Freeman 3, Joanne Gray 4, Andrew McCarthy 4, Yi-Da Chiu 3,5, Colin Bicknell 6, Peter McMeekin 4, S Rao Vallabhaneni 7, Andrew Cook 8,9, Luke Vale 10, Stephen Large 11

1 Department of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
2 Department of Cardiac Surgery, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
3 Papworth Trials Unit Collaboration, Royal Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
4 Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
5 Medical Research Council (MRC) Biostatistics Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
6 Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
7 Liverpool Vascular & Endovascular Service, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK
8 Wessex Institute, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
9 Southampton Clinical Trials Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
10 Health Economics Group, Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
11 Department of Cardiac Surgery, Royal Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
* Corresponding author Email: Linda.Sharples@lshtm.ac.uk

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document