1. The effect of loss to follow-up on treatment of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury 
Biniam Kidane, MD, MSc, Madelaine Plourde, MD, MSc, Sami A. Chadi, MD, MSc, Alla Iansavitchene, MLIS, Maureen O. Meade, MD, MSc, Neil G. Parry, MD, Thomas L. Forbes, MD 
Journal of Vascular Surgery 
Volume 61, Issue 6, Pages (June 2015)
DOI: /j.jvs
Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions

2. Fig 1
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram for flow of systematic review.
Journal of Vascular Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.jvs )
Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions

3. Fig 2
This forest plot for the outcome of mortality demonstrates that meta-analysis appears to favor endovascular repair. The solid squares indicate the mean difference and are proportional to the weights used in the meta-analysis. The solid vertical line indicates no effect. The horizontal lines represent the 95% confidence interval (CI), with the diamond indicating the weighted mean difference and the lateral tips of the diamond indicating the associated CIs. M-H, Mantel-Haenszel test.
Journal of Vascular Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.jvs )
Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions

4. Fig 3
This forest plot for the outcome of major complications demonstrates that the meta-analysis does not appear to favor open or endovascular repair. The solid squares indicate the mean difference and are proportional to the weights used in the meta-analysis. The solid vertical line indicates no effect. The horizontal lines represent the 95% confidence interval (CI), with the diamond indicating the weighted mean difference and the lateral tips of the diamond indicating the associated CIs. M-H, Mantel-Haenszel test.
Journal of Vascular Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.jvs )
Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions

5. Fig 4
This forest plot for the outcome of mortality represents what happens to outcome rates under the relative incidence sensitivity analysis. It demonstrates a reversal of the trend favoring endovascular and instead favors open repair overall. The solid squares indicate the mean difference and are proportional to the weights used in the meta-analysis. The solid vertical line indicates no effect. The horizontal lines represent the 95% confidence interval (CI), with the diamond indicating the weighted mean difference and the lateral tips of the diamond indicating the associated CIs. M-H, Mantel-Haenszel test.
Journal of Vascular Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.jvs )
Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions

6. Fig 5
This forest plot for the outcome of mortality represents what happens to outcome rates under the 50%/25% sensitivity analysis. Rather than favoring endovascular repair, this sensitivity analysis demonstrates no significant difference between open and endovascular repair. The solid squares indicate the mean difference and are proportional to the weights used in the meta-analysis. The solid vertical line indicates no effect. The horizontal lines represent the 95% confidence interval (CI), with the diamond indicating the weighted mean difference and the lateral tips of the diamond indicating the associated CIs. M-H, Mantel-Haenszel test.
Journal of Vascular Surgery  , DOI: ( /j.jvs )
Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions