Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for Primary Retrograde Type A Aortic Dissection

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for Primary Retrograde Type A Aortic Dissection

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for researchers?

A: Very good


Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Excellent



Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Very good



Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Good



The subheading "Discussion" should be introduced.


Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Very good


Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Very good



The Introduction lays down the basics for taking up the present case report. The Discussion offers a thorough and detailed analysis of the findings of the present study taking all the relevant literature into account. It is well supported with briefly explained figures. A Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) was performed as an alternative to standard open repair in this case. The report is apt in concluding that an endovascular approach in select cases of retrograde Type A dissection (RTAD) will be a better option than the open approach.



Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Very good


Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Very good



Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good


Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Very good


Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Very good


Further comments on the paper

Comments: This report describes the case of a 50-year-old male patient where the patient presented with a Type B dissection complicated by retrograde propagation, resulting in retrograde Type A dissection (RTAD). This case report holds significance as there is paucity of literature in management of retrograde Type A dissection. Acute aortic dissection is believed to be an emergent and life-threatening condition.


Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Science Repository Team


Author Info

Corresponding Author
Syed F. Haider
Department of Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Article Info

Article Type
Case Report and Review of the Literature
Publication history
Received: Tue 03, Jan 2023
Accepted: Mon 23, Jan 2023
Published: Wed 15, Feb 2023
© 2023 Syed F. Haider. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Hosting by Science Repository.
DOI: 10.31487/j.SCR.2023.01.01