Interdisciplinary Expert Consensus Document on Management of Type B Aortic Dissection

Triple barreled aortic dissection: The Mercedes-Benz sign

Triple barreled dissection is an extremely rare form of aortic dissection with only a few cases reported in the literature. It is characterized by 3 lumens separated by 2 intimal flaps, resembling the appearance of the 'Mercedes Benz' sign. We present an unusual case of triple barreled aortic dissection in a 71-year-old patient with history of hypertension. Chest radiography showed a widened mediastinum. The CT images showed a thoraco-abdominal type B aortic dissection with three lumens giving the appearance of the 'Mercedes Benz' sign. As the CT-scan showed no complications of the aortic dissection, the patient received medical conservative treatment.

MiR-1909-5p targeting GPX4 affects the progression of aortic dissection by modulating nicotine-induced ferroptosis

OBJECTIVE

Aortic dissection (AD) is a prevalent and acute clinical catastrophe characterized by abrupt manifestation, swift progression, and elevated fatality rates. Despite smoking being a significant risk factor for AD, the precise pathological process remains elusive. This investigation endeavors to explore the mechanisms by which smoking accelerates AD through ferroptosis induction.

METHODOLOGY

In this novel study, we detected considerable endothelial cell death by ferroptosis within the aortic inner lining of both human AD patients with a smoking history and murine AD models induced by β-aminopropionitrile, angiotensin II, and nicotine. Utilizing bioinformatic approaches, we identified microRNAs regulating the expression of the ferroptosis inhibitor Glutathione peroxidase 4 (GPX4). Nicotine's impact on ferroptosis was further assessed in human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) through modulation of miR-1909-5p. Additionally, the therapeutic potential of miR-1909-5p antagomir was evaluated in vivo in nicotine-exposed AD mice.

FINDINGS

Our results indicate a predominance of ferroptosis over apoptosis, pyroptosis, and necroptosis in the aortas of AD patients who smoke. Nicotine exposure instigated ferroptosis in HUVECs, where the miR-1909-5p/GPX4 axis was implicated. Modulation of miR-1909-5p in these cells revealed its regulatory role over GPX4 levels and subsequent endothelial ferroptosis. In vivo, miR-1909-5p suppression reduced ferroptosis and mitigated AD progression in the murine model.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data underscore the involvement of the miR-1909-5p/GPX4 axis in the pathogenesis of nicotine-induced endothelial ferroptosis in AD.

Mid- and long-term results of open repair for chronic type B aortic dissection in endovascular era

Medical management is the standard treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection (CTBAD). However, the roles of open surgical repair (OSR) and thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) in patients with CTBAD remain controversial. Thus, this study aimed to assess and compare the mid- and long-term clinical outcomes of OSR via left thoracotomy with that of TEVAR for CTBAD. The data of 85 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for CTBAD from April 2007 to May 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups: Group G, which included patients who underwent OSR, and Group E, which included patients who underwent TEVAR. Groups G and E comprised 33 and 52 patients, respectively. Preoperative and postoperative computed tomography (CT) studies were retrospectively analyzed for the maximum diameter. The mean duration of the follow-up period was 5.8 years. Operative mortality did not occur. There was no difference in complications, such as stroke (G: 2 vs. E: 0, p = 0.30), paraplegia (G: 1 vs. E: 1, p = 0.66), and respiratory failure (G: 2, vs. E: 0, p = 0.30). The difference in preoperative factors was observed, including the intervals between onset and operation (G; 4.9 years vs. E; 1.9 years, p < 0.01), maximum diameter in preoperative CT (G; 59.0 mm vs. E; 50.5 mm, p < 0.001), and maximum false lumen diameter (G; 35.5 mm vs. E; 29.0 mm, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the mid- and long-term survival rates (p = 0.49), aorta-related deaths (p = 0.33), and thoracic re-intervention rates (p = 0.34). Postoperative adverse events occurred in Group E: four cases of retrospective type A aortic dissection, two cases of aorto-bronchial fistula, and one case of aorto-esophagus fistula. Aorta-related death and re-intervention rates crossed over in both groups after seven years postoperatively. Although endovascular repair of CTBAD is less invasive, the rate of freedom from re-intervention was unsatisfactory. Some fatal complications were observed in the endovascular group, and the mid- and long-term outcomes were reversed compared with those in the OSR group. Although OSR is an invasive procedure, it could be performed safely without perioperative complications. OSR has more feasible mid- and long-term outcomes.

Outcomes of Patients with Acute Type B Aortic Dissection and High-Risk Features

BACKGROUND

Recently the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and Society for Thoracic Surgeons (STS) published contemporary guidelines clearly defining complicated versus uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections (TBADs) with an additional high-risk grouping. Few studies have evaluated outcomes associated with "high-risk" TBADs. The objective of this study was to assess differences in demographics, clinical presentation, symptom onset, and outcomes in high-risk patients that underwent either thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or best medical management for acute TBAD compared to those with complicated and uncomplicated acute TBAD.

METHODS

Patients admitted with acute TBADs from a single academic medical center from October 2011 to March 2020 were analyzed. Per the STS/SVS 2020 guidelines, high risk was defined as refractory pain/hypertension, bloody pleural effusion, aortic diameter >4 cm, false lumen diameter >22 mm, radiographic malperfusion, and early readmission, and complicated was defined as ruptured/malperfusion presentation. Uncomplicated patients were those without malperfusion/rupture and without high-risk features. The primary end-point was inpatient mortality. Secondary end-points included complications, reintervention, and survival.

RESULTS

Of the 159 patients identified with acute TBAD, 63 (40%) met the high-risk criteria. In the high-risk cohort, 38 (60%) underwent TEVAR (HR-TEVAR), with refractory pain as the most common indication, while 25 (40%) were managed medically (HR-medical). Malperfusion or rupture was present in 63 (40%) patients (complicated TBAD (C-TBAD)), all of whom underwent TEVAR. An additional 33 patients had no high-risk features and were all managed medically (uncomplicated TBAD). There were no differences in age, body mass index, and race between groups. Among the 4 groups, there were variable distributions in sex, insurance status, and incidence of several baseline comorbidities including congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and renal dysfunction (P < 0.05 for all). C-TBAD had increased length of stay (12, interquartile range [IQR] 9-22) compared to HR-TEVAR (11.5, IQR 7-15), HR-medical (6, IQR 5-8), and uncomplicated TBAD (7, IQR 5-10) (P < 0.01). C-TBAD had decreased days from admission to repair (0, IQR 0-2) compared to HR-TEVAR (3.5, IQR 1-8) (P < 0.01). C-TBAD patients had worse 3-year survival compared to other groups (log-rank P < 0.01), although when in-hospital mortality was excluded, survival was similar among groups (P = 0.37). Of patients initially managed medically, outpatient TEVAR was performed in 6 (24%) HR-medical and 4 (12%) uncomplicated patients, with no difference between rate of intervention between groups (P = 0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

High-risk features, as defined in updated SVS/STS guidelines, are common in patients presenting with acute TBAD. High-risk patients had acceptable outcomes when managed either surgically or medically. High-risk patients that underwent TEVAR had improved perioperative outcomes and mortality compared to those undergoing TEVAR for C-TBAD, a finding which may help guide preoperative risk stratification and patient counseling.

Postdissection aortic aneurysm sac enlargement after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

Aneurysm sac changes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FBEVAR) for postdissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (PD-TAAs) are poorly understood. Partial thrombosis of the false lumen and endoleaks may impair sac regression. To characterize sac changes after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs, this study examined midterm results and predictors for sac enlargement.

METHODS

FBEVARs performed for PD-TAAs in 10 physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2008 to 2023 were analyzed. The maximum aortic aneurysm diameter was compared between the 30-day computed tomography angiogram and follow-up imaging studies. Aneurysm sac enlargement was defined as an increase in diameter of ≥5 mm. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were used to evaluate sac enlargement and midterm FBEVAR outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 3296 FBEVARs, 290 patients (72.4% male; median age, 68.4 years) were treated for PD-TAAs. Most aneurysms treated were extent II (72%) and III (12%). Mean aneurysm diameter was 66.5 ± 11.2 mm. Mortality at 30 days was 1.4%. At a mean follow-up of 2.9 ± 1.9 years, at least one follow-up imaging study revealed sac enlargement in 43 patients (15%), sac regression in 115 patients (40%), and neither enlargement nor regression in 137 (47%); 5 (2%) demonstrated both expansion and regression during follow-up. Freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement was 93%, 82%, and 80% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Overall, endoleaks were detected in 27 patients (63%) with sac enlargement and 143 patients (58%) without enlargement (P = .54). Sac enlargement was significantly more frequent among older patients (mean age at the index procedure, 70.2 ± 8.9 years vs 66.5 ± 11 years; P = .04) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year (74% vs 52%; P = .031). Cox regression revealed age >70 years at baseline (hazard ratio [HR], 2.146; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.167-3.944; P = .010) and presence of type II endoleak at 1 year (HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.07-4.79; P = .032) were independent predictors of sac enlargement. Patient survival was 92%, 81%, and 68% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Cumulative target vessel instability was 7%, and aneurysm-related mortality was 2% at 5 years. At least 42% of patients required secondary interventions. Sac enlargement did not affect patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Aneurysm sac enlargement occurs in 15% of patients after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs. Elderly patients (>70 years at baseline) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year may need closer monitoring and secondary interventions to prevent sac enlargement. Despite sac enlargement in some patients, aneurysm-related mortality at 5 years remains low and overall survival was not associated with sac enlargement.

Delivery-First Strategy Followed by Endovascular Repair to Treat Pregnant Woman With Acute Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Objective

Aortic dissection, a rare but serious condition, requires timely diagnosis and treatment.

Case report

A case report involving a 33-year-old female with Stanford type B aortic dissection at 32 + 3 weeks gestational age highlights the importance of being alert to the symptoms and signs of this condition, particularly in patients with hypertension or a history of connective tissue disorders. The case report suggests a delivery first strategy followed by TEVAR procedure as the preferred approach for managing aortic dissection in pregnancy. This approach can alleviate pressure on the aorta, reduce the risk of rupture, and provide time for stabilization and preparation for the TEVAR procedure.

Conclusion

The case report emphasizes the criticality of recognizing and treating aortic dissection in pregnant patients promptly, given its potential life-threatening impact on both mother and fetus.

Predicting Aneurysmal Degeneration in Uncomplicated Residual Type B Aortic Dissection

The formation of an aneurysm in the false lumen (FL) is a long-term complication in a significant percentage of type B aortic dissection (AD) patients. The ability to predict which patients are likely to progress to aneurysm formation is key to justifying the risks of interventional therapy. The investigation of patient-specific hemodynamics has the potential to enable a patient-tailored approach to improve prognosis by guiding disease management for type B dissection. CFD-derived hemodynamic descriptors and geometric features were used to retrospectively assess individual aortas for a population of residual type B AD patients and analyze correlations with known outcomes (i.e., rapid aortic growth, death). The results highlight great variability in flow patterns and hemodynamic descriptors. A rapid aortic expansion was found to be associated with a larger FL. Time-averaged wall shear stress at the tear region emerged as a possible indicator of the dynamics of flow exchange between lumens and its effect on the evolution of individual aortas. High FL flow rate and tortuosity were associated with adverse outcomes suggesting a role as indicators of risk. AD induces complex changes in vessel geometry and hemodynamics. The reported findings emphasize the need for a patient-tailored approach when evaluating uncomplicated type B AD patients and show the potential of CFD-derived hemodynamics to complement anatomical assessment and help disease management.

Discussing on the Aortic Coverage in Type B Aortic Dissection Treatment: A Comprehensive Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to investigate and address the question surrounding the determination of the optimal endograft length of coverage during TEVAR for type B aortic dissection (TBAD), with a particular emphasis on the distal landing zone (DLZ).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were used.

METHODS

The PRISMA-ScR statement was followed.

RESULTS

Several variables can contribute to the length of coverage during TEVAR in TBAD patient. Baseline patient's characteristics, TBAD-related features, the type of endoprosthesis, and postoperative graft behaviour may contribute to the choice of coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

No robust data have been published regarding the optimal length of TEVAR. Therefore, reporting the percentage of covered aorta and improving computational studies should be valorised to improve postoperative outcomes.

Interventions in Acute or Subacute Phase for Type B Aortic Dissection

The treatment strategy for acute and subacute Stanford type B aortic dissection has changed significantly since the advent of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Indication for invasive treatment: In addition to the conventional complicated cases (rupture or malperfusion case), the indication for invasive treatment now includes cases with refractory hypertension, persistent or recurrent pain, large aortic diameter, and other conditions that are considered to have a poor prognosis with conservative treatment. Treatment methods: TEVAR is the first choice for acute, subacute, and early chronic-stage treatment, and when this is not possible, other techniques (fenestration and graft replacement) are chosen. Treatment timing: The timing of invasive treatment should be emergent in life-threatening conditions (for rupture or malperfusion case) and immediate in symptomatic cases, while in other cases, preemptive TEVAR is considered appropriate on a scheduled timing within 6 months of onset. (This is a translation of Jpn J Vasc Surg 2023; 32: 157-163.).

Navigating clinical appropriateness: A review of management strategies for type B aortic dissection

Aortic dissection is a catastrophic, life-threatening event. Its management depends on the anatomic location of the intimal tear (type A v B) and the clinical presentation in type B aortic dissection. In this article, the current evidence supporting clinical practice, gaps in knowledge, and the need for more rigorous research and higher-quality studies are reviewed.

Volumetric analysis in primary and residual type B aortic dissection treated with stented-assisted balloon-induced intimal disruption and relamination technique can predict aortic reintervention

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the mid-term results of stented-assisted balloon-induced intimal disruption and relamination (STABILISE) in patients with aortic dissection with the implementation of volumetric analysis.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. From May 2017 to September 2022, 42 patients underwent STABILISE for acute complicated or subacute high-risk aortic dissection. STABILISE was completed with distal extended endovascular aortic repair in 24 patients. A computed tomography scan was performed at baseline, before hospital discharge, and at 1, 3, and 5 years. Perfused total aortic, true lumen, and false lumen volumes were assessed for thoracic, visceral, and aorto-iliac segment. The ratio between false lumen and total volume was named perfusion dissection index (PDI). Complete remodeling was defined as PDI = 0, and positive remodeling as PDI ≤0.1.

RESULTS

Technical success was 97.6%. No 30-day deaths, spinal cord injuries, or retrograde dissections were observed. Mean follow-up was 44 ± 19.4 months. Thoracic diameter was lower at last available computed tomography scan (36.7 vs 33.0 mm; P = .01). Aortic growth >5 mm was observed in 9.5% of the patients. Thoracic and visceral aortic complete remodeling were 92.8% and 83.3%, respectively, with no difference between acute and subacute group. Distal extended endovascular aortic repair significantly increased complete remodeling in the aorto-iliac segment, compared with STABILISE alone (69.6% vs 21.4%; P < .001). Freedom from vascular reinterventions at 3 years was 83.1% (95% confidence interval, 71.5%-96.6%). Total PDI ≤0.1 at first postoperative control was a predictor of vascular reinterventions (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

STABILISE is a safe and feasible technique associated with high mid-term rates of complete remodeling in the thoracic and visceral aorta. Volumetric analysis allows the quantification of aortic remodeling and represents a predictor of aortic reinterventions.

Staging reinterventions for remodeling of residual aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study

Objective

Inadequate remodeling of residual aortic dissection (RAD) following repair of Stanford A or B aortic dissections has been identified as a significant predictor of patient mortality. This study evaluates the short- to mid-term outcomes of staged reinterventions for RAD at a single center with prospective follow-up.

Methods

Data were retrospectively collected from patients with RAD who underwent staged reinterventions or received none-surgery treatment in the Cardiovascular Surgery Department of our hospital between July 2019 and December 2021. The cohort included 54 patients with residual distal aortic dissection post-primary surgery, comprising 28 who underwent open surgery and 26 who received thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent staged stent interventions for distal dissection [staged reintervention (SR) group] and those who did not undergo surgery (non-surgery group). For the SR group, second or third staged stent interventions were performed. The study assessed distal remodeling of aortic dissection between the groups, focusing on endpoints such as mortality (both general and aortic-specific), occurrences of visceral branch occlusion, necessity for further interventions, and significant adverse events. Morphological changes were analyzed to determine the therapeutic impact.

Results

The study encompassed 54 participants, with 33 in the SR group and 21 in the non-surgical control group. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were statistically comparable across both groups. During an average follow-up of 31.5 ± 7.0 months, aortic-related mortality was 0% in both groups; all-cause mortality was 3% (one case) and 5% (one case) in the SR and control groups, respectively, with no statistically significant difference noted. In the SR group, a single patient experienced complications, including renal artery thrombosis, leading to diminished blood flow. An increased true lumen (TL) area and a decreased false lumen area at various aortic planes were observed in the SR group compared to the control group.

Conclusion

The staged reintervention strategy for treating RAD is safe and provides promising early results.

Natural history of visceral branch artery dissections and the influence of concurrent aortic dissection on overall and intervention-free survival

OBJECTIVE

Visceral branch artery dissection (VBAD) is uncommon and may occur with or without an associated aortic dissection (AD). We hypothesized that isolated VBAD would have a more benign clinical course than those with concurrent AD and compared survival outcomes stratified based on aortic involvement.

METHODS

VBAD over a 5-year period were identified using International Classification of Diseases codes. Data related to patient demographics, comorbid conditions, clinical presentation, management (including procedural interventions), and survival were obtained from medical records. Anatomic imaging studies were reviewed to characterize anatomy, including the presence or absence of concurrent AD. Overall survival and intervention-free survival were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 299 VBAD were identified, 174 of which were isolated VBAD and 125 were associated with concurrent AD. Seventy-one percent of patients were men, 77% were White, and 85% were non-Hispanic. The mean age was 61.1 ± 14.4 years. The mean follow-up was 53.2 ± 50.0 months. The estimated overall survival was 88.2% and the estimated overall intervention-free survival was 55.6% at 12 months. Isolated VBAD had better overall survival than those with concurrent AD (69.2% vs 32.4%; P < .001). Concurrent AD was also associated with inferior intervention-free survival (57.5% vs 7.3%; P < .001). Acute presentation was associated with decreased intervention-free survival (86.1% vs 13.4%; P < .001). Acute presentation was also associated with decreased overall survival in patients with isolated VBAD (60.8% vs 80.0% at 180 months; P < .001) and inferior intervention-free survival (48.4% vs 69.5% at 180 months; P < .001) in the subgroup of patients with isolated VBAD. Multivariable Cox models identified that age (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, standard deviation [SD]: 0.02; P = .001) was associated with inferior survival and renal dissections (HR: 3.08, SD: 0.99; P = .001) or mesenteric and renal dissections (HR: 3.39, SD: 1.44; P = .004) were associated with inferior intervention-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Isolated VBAD has superior overall and intervention-free survival to those associated with concurrent AD. The absence vs presence of aortic involvement is useful for risk stratification and may support tailored approaches to the frequency of imaging surveillance.

Early and mid-term outcomes of open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair after thoracic endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the early and mid-term outcomes of open repair in patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

This was a retrospective single center study. Data were retrospectively collected and analyzed for consecutive patients undergoing open TAAA repair (TAAAR) after TEVAR from November 2016 to June 2021. Indications for TAAAR included aneurysm progression due to endoleak, persisted false lumen perfusion, proximal/distal disease progression, and aorta rupture. The risk factor of operative mortality was analyzed by multivariable logistic regression model and the survival was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients who met the inclusion criteria for the study were identified. The mean age at TAAAR was 41 ± 12 years and 43 (68.3%) were male. Marfan syndrome (MFS) was presented in 39 patients (61.9%). 60 (95.2%) patients presented with post-dissection aneurysm and 3 (4.8%) patients with degenerative aneurysm. The extent of TAAA was Crawford I in 9 (14.3%), II in 22 (34.9%), III in 23 (36.5%), and IV in 9 (14.3%). Emergent TAAAR was done in 10 (15.9%) patients, and deep hypothermic circulatory arrest was used in 22 (34.6%). Endograft was explanted in 31 (49.2%). Operative mortality was 11 (17.5%). Stroke, paraplegia, and acute kidney failure occurred in 5 (7.9%), 7 (11.1%), and 6 (9.5%) patients, respectively. Pulmonary complications occurred in 19 (30.2%) patients. The estimated survival was 74.8 ± 4.9% at 5 years. Late reoperations were performed in 2 patients at 2.5 years and 1.3 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this series of TAAA after TEVAR, TAAAR was related with a high risk of operative mortality and morbidity and the midterm outcomes represented a durable treatment and were respectable.

One-Year Results of a Low-Profile Endograft in Acute, Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

The safety and effectiveness of the RelayPro endograft (Terumo Aortic) was assessed for the treatment of acute, complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

A prospective pivotal trial analyzed a primary end point of all-cause mortality at 30 days. Secondary end points included technical success, major adverse events (disabling stroke, renal failure, and paraplegia/paralysis), endoleaks, patency, rupture, device integrity, false lumen perfusion, reinterventions, aortic expansion, and migration evaluated to 5 years.

RESULTS

The study involved 22 United States centers and enrolled 56 patients (mean age, 59.5 ± 11.4 years) from 2017 to 2021; of whom, 73.2% were men and 53.6% were African American. TBAD was complicated by malperfusion of the kidneys (51.8%), lower extremities (35.7%), and viscera (33.9%), and rupture (10.7%). Dissection extended proximally to zones 1/2 (14.3%) and zone 3 (78.6%) and distally to the iliac arteries (67.3%). Most procedures were percutaneous (85.5%). Technical success was 100%. Median hospitalization was 7 days (interquartile range, 5-12 days). All-cause mortality at 30 days was 1.8% (1 of 56; upper 95% CI, 8.2%; P < .0001). Seven major adverse events occurred in 6 patients (10.7%), consisting of paraplegia (n = 3), paraparesis (n = 2), disabling stroke (n = 1), and renal failure (n = 1). All paraplegia/paraparesis resolved with lumbar drainage. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated a freedom from major adverse events of 89.1% at each interval from 30 days to 3 years. There was 1 endoleak (Type Ia), 2 retrograde dissections, and aortic diameter growth occurred in 2. There has been no rupture, fistula, component separation, patency loss, stenosis, kinking, twisting, bird beak, loss of device integrity, or fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

RelayPro is safe and effective in acute, complicated TBAD. Follow-up is ongoing to evaluate longer-term outcomes and durability.

Acute Type B Aortic Dissection Complicated With Spinal Cord Ischemia and Paraplegia Treated With Endovascular Scissor Technique

Spinal cord ischemia leading to paraplegia is a rare, life-limiting complication of acute type B aortic dissection. We report a case of spinal cord ischemia occurred in a young woman treated with endovascular scissor technique in urgent setting. The patient had an uneventful post-procedural course. After 4 months, computed tomography angiography confirmed false lumen reperfusion and major symptoms were regressed. In selected cases, this procedure is a tool to improve false lumen perfusion in type B dissections, and demonstrated to be helpful in our case of spinal cord ischaemia.

Late Referral and Patient Transfer is Associated with Worse Outcomes for Patients Presenting with Initially Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissections

BACKGROUND

Acute type B aortic dissections (TBADs) can become complicated at any time point, necessitating surgical repair. We sought to investigate the effect of interhospital transfer on the development of delayed complications in acute type B aortic dissection (dcTBAD).

METHODS

All patients who presented with acute TBAD to a tertiary aortic center from 2015 to 2019 were analyzed. Patients were divided into initially complicated type B aortic dissection (icTBAD) (0-24 hours from symptom onset), dcTBAD (25 hours to 14 days), and uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (ucTBAD) groups. Criteria for complicated dissection were aortic rupture, malperfusion, or rapid aortic growth. Demographics, patient history, the timing of presentation, imaging findings, and clinical outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Of 120 acute TBADs included, 27 (22%) were initially complicated (aortic rupture, n = 9; malperfusion, n = 18). Twenty-one (18%) developed delayed complications (aortic rupture, n = 3; malperfusion, n = 14; rapid growth, n = 4) at a median of 7.0 [4.0, 9.0] days from symptom onset. Seventy-two (60%) remained uncomplicated. Overall, 111 (93%) presented as transfers from outside hospitals (icTBAD, n = 25; dcTBAD, n = 21; ucTBAD, n = 65). Of those, dcTBADs were more likely to have a prolonged delay between presentation to the outside hospital and referral to the tertiary center compared to ucTBADs (median = 1.00 [0.0, 5.0] days delayed vs. 0.00 [0.0, 0.0] days delayed; P < 0.001). Initially uncomplicated patients referred for transfer ≥24 hours from presentation went on to develop dcTBAD more often than those transferred in <24 hours (73% vs 13%; P < 0.001). Of dcTBADs, 38% had no high-risk features on initial imaging. Patients with dcTBAD had significantly longer length of stay (median = 12 vs 7 days; P = 0.006). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in dcTBADs than ucTBADs (9.5% vs 0%; P = 0.047). In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between dcTBADs and icTBADs (9.5% vs. 11%; P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence and consequence of dcTBADsare not insignificant. Late referral and transfer to a tertiary aortic center (≥24 hours from initial presentation) was associated with dcTBADsrequiring surgical intervention. The development of dcTBADwas associated with increased length of stay and increased in-hospital mortality.

Neurological event rates and associated risk factors in acute type B aortic dissections treated by thoracic aortic endovascular repair

OBJECTIVES

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair is the method of choice in patients with complicated type B acute aortic dissection. However, thoracic endovascular aortic repair carries a risk of periprocedural neurological events including stroke and spinal cord ischemia. We aimed to look at procedure-related neurological complications within a large cohort of patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

Between 1996 and 2021, the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection collected data on 3783 patients with type B acute aortic dissection. For this analysis, 648 patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair were included (69.4% male, mean age 62.7 ± 13.4 years). Patients were excluded who presented with a preexisting neurologic deficit or received adjunctive procedures. Demographics, clinical symptoms, and outcomes were analyzed. The primary end point was the periprocedural incidence of neurological events (defined as stroke, spinal cord ischemia, transient neurological deficit, or coma). Predictors for perioperative neurological events and follow-up outcomes were considered as secondary end points.

RESULTS

Periprocedure neurological events were noted in 72 patients (11.1%) and included strokes (n = 29, 4.6%), spinal cord ischemias (n = 21, 3.3%), transient neurological deficits (n = 16, 2.6%), or coma (n = 6, 1.0%). The group with neurological events had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality (20.8% vs 4.3%, P < .001). Patients with neurological events were more likely to be female (40.3% vs 29.3%, P = .077), and aortic rupture was more often cited as an indication for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (38.8% vs 16.5%, P < .001). In patients with neurological events, more stent grafts were used (2 vs 1 stent graft, P = .002). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that aortic rupture (odds ratio, 3.12, 95% confidence interval, 1.44-6.78, P = .004) and female sex (odds ratio, 1.984, 95% confidence interval, 1.031-3.817, P = .040) were significantly associated with perioperative neurological events.

CONCLUSIONS

In this highly selected group from dedicated aortic centers, more than 1 in 10 patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair had neurological events, in particular women. Further research is needed to identify the causes and presentation of these events after thoracic endovascular aortic repair, especially among women.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for hyperacute, acute, subacute and chronic type B aortic dissection: Meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data

Since the optimal timing for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in the context of type B aortic dissections (TBAD) remains an open question, we performed a systematic review with meta-analysis to evaluate outcomes of TEVAR according to the phases of TBAD - hyperacute, acute, subacute and chronic. We carried out a pooled meta-analysis of time-to-event data extracted from studies published by June 2023 for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, aortic-related mortality, and late aortic reinterventions. Thirteen studies met our eligibility criteria, comprising 4,793 patients (10.3 % hyperacute, 51.9 % acute, 25.9 % subacute, 11.9 % chronic). Considering the overall population, we observed a statistically significant difference between the groups (Log-rank test, P < 0.0001) and the main differences were found in the following comparisons: hyperacute versus acute (HR 1.61; 95 %CI 1.21-2.13; P = 0.001); hyperacute versus chronic (HR 1.70; 95 %CI 1.17-2.46; P = 0.005); subacute versus acute (HR 0.78; 95 %CI 0.63-0.98; P = 0.032). Considering the population with uncomplicated TBAD, we also observed a statistically significant difference for all-cause death between the groups (Log-rank test, P < 0.0001) and the main differences were found in the comparisons for subacute versus acute (HR 0.72; 95 %CI 0.58-0.88; P = 0.002). Furthermore, we observed statistically significant differences between the groups for aortic-related death (Log-rank test, P < 0.0001) and late aortic reintervention (Log-rank test, P < 0.0001), all favoring mostly the subacute phase as the optimal timing for TEVAR. In conclusion, there seems to be a timing-specific difference in the outcomes of TEVAR for TBAD pointing to the subacute phase as the optimal timing to achieve better long-term outcomes.

Comprehensive review of aortic aneurysms, dissections, and cardiovascular complications in connective tissue disorders

Connective tissue disorders, including Marfan syndrome (MS) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), are characterized by genetic mutations affecting connective tissue structural integrity. These disorders significantly elevate the risk of aortic dissection, a life-threatening condition. This comprehensive review delves into the intricate interplay between connective tissue disorders and aortic dissection, shedding light on the clinical features, pathophysiology, genetic underpinnings, diagnostic approaches, clinical management, associated comorbidities, and prognosis, mainly focusing on MS and EDS, while also exploring rare connective tissue disorders and forms of cutis laxa contributing to aortic pathology.

Self-pay insurance status is associated with failure of medical therapy in patients with acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections are managed medically, and acute complicated dissections are managed surgically. Self-pay patients with medically managed acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections may fare worse than their insured counterparts.

METHODS

In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, demographics, follow-up, and outcomes of patients with acute type B aortic dissections from 2011 to 2020 were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 159 patients presented with acute type B aortic dissections; 102 were complicated and managed with thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and 57 were uncomplicated and managed medically. A total of 32% (n = 51) were self-pay. Self-pay patients were from areas with worse area deprivation indices (71% vs 63%, P = .024). They more often reported alcohol abuse (28% vs 7%, P < .001), cocaine/methamphetamine use (16% vs 5%, P = .028), and nonadherence to home antihypertensives (35% vs 11%, P < .001). Self-pay patients less often had a primary care physician (65% vs 7%, P < .001) or took antihypertensives before admission (31% vs 58%, P = .003). Self-pay patients frequently required financial assistance at discharge (63%), most often using charity funds (46%). Few patients (7%) qualified for our hospital's financial assistance program, and most (78%) remained uninsured at the first follow-up. Self-pay acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections patients had the lowest rate of follow-up (31% vs 66%, P < .001) and were more likely to represent emergently (75% vs 0%, P = .033) compared to insured acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections patients. Self-pay patients were more likely to follow up after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute complicated type B aortic dissections (82% vs 31%, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Self-pay patients have multiple, interconnected, complex socioeconomic factors that likely influence preadmission risk for dissection and post-discharge adherence to optimal medical management. Further research is needed to clarify treatment strategies in this high-risk group.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular vs. Medical Therapy for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time to Event Data

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) vs. medical therapy in uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (TBAD).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, LILACS, CENTRAL/CCTR, Google Scholar, and reference lists of relevant articles.

REVIEW METHODS

This was a pooled meta-analysis of time to event data extracted from studies published by December 2022 for the following outcomes: all cause mortality, aortic related mortality, and late aortic interventions. Certainty of evidence was evaluated through the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool.

RESULTS

Ten studies met the eligibility criteria (eight observational; two randomised trials), comprising 17 906 patients (2 332 patients in the TEVAR groups and 15 574 patients in the medical therapy group). Compared with patients who received medical therapy, patients who underwent TEVAR had a statistically significantly lower risk of all cause death (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 - 0.87, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low) and lower risk of aortic related death (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 - 0.62, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low) without statistically significant difference in the risk of late aortic interventions (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 - 1.26, p = .56; GRADE certainty: low). In the subgroup analyses, TEVAR was associated with lower risk of all cause death when randomised controlled trials only were pooled (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 - 0.83, p = .012; GRADE certainty: moderate), younger patients only (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47 - 0.67, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low), Western populations only (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 - 0.93, p = .001; GRADE certainty: low) and non-Western populations only (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 - 0.62, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low). For all cause mortality and aortic related mortality, restricted mean survival time was overall 396 days and 398 days longer with TEVAR (p < .001), respectively, which means that TEVAR was associated with lifetime gain.

CONCLUSION

TEVAR may be associated with better midterm survival and lower risk of aortic related death in the follow up of patients treated for uncomplicated TBAD compared with medical therapy; however, randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes and longer follow up are still warranted.

Outcomes of symptomatic penetrating aortic ulcer and intramural hematoma in the endovascular era

BACKGROUND

Although endovascular technology has resulted in a paradigm shift in treatment, medical management remains the standard of care for penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) and intramural hematoma (IMH). This study aimed to detail the short- and long-term outcomes of symptomatic PAU/IMH.

METHODS

Institutional data on symptomatic PAU/IMH were gathered (2005-2020). The primary outcome was the composite of recurrent symptoms, radiographic progression, intervention, rupture, and death from related or unknown cause. Factors associated with the primary outcome were determined using a Fine-Gray model with death from an unrelated cause as a competing risk.

RESULTS

A total of 83 symptomatic patients treated with medical management aside from ruptures and type A dissections: 21 isolated PAU, 30 isolated IMH, and 32 IMH and PAU. Adverse outcomes included symptom recurrence in 14 (16.9%), radiographic progression to dissection or saccular aneurysm in 17 (20.5%), surgery in 20 (24.1%) (17 thoracic endovascular aortic repair, 1 endovascular aortic repair, 1 frozen elephant trunk, and 1 open repair), and rupture in 4 (4.8%). Twenty-seven patients (32.5%) died during follow-up: 6 from IMH treatment complications, 8 from an unknown cause, and 13 from other causes. The 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year cumulative incidences of the primary outcome was 26.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.9%-37.0%), 44.9% (95% CI, 32.8%-56.2%), and 57.5% (95% CI, 42.4%-69.9%), respectively. IMH with PAU was associated with a significantly higher risk of the primary outcome compared with isolated IMH (subdistribution hazard ratio, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.09-4.50; P = .027) and isolated PAU (subdistribution hazard ratio, 3.58; 95% CI, 1.44-8.88; P = .006).

CONCLUSIONS

Complications from symptomatic PAU and IMH are frequent, with intervention, recurrent symptoms, radiographic progression, rupture, or death affecting 25% of patients at 30 days after diagnosis and almost one-half of patients 1 year after diagnosis. Given the high rate of adverse events in this population, investigation into a more aggressive interventional strategy may warranted, especially in patients with a combined IMH and PAU.

Selective Arterial Catheterization as a Bridging Therapy for Blunt Traumatic Aortic Injury With Intraperitoneal Organ Malperfusion

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is fatal and requires thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for its optimal management. Performing TEVAR requires multidisciplinary specialists and supportive facilities.  We report a case of an 89-year-old man who presented to the emergency department with blunt trauma. Whole-body computed tomography (CT) revealed grade II aortic injury with disrupted blood flow to the left kidney. Sudden paralysis of the left lower extremity and distal progression of the aortic dissection occurred. However, TEVAR could not be performed immediately. Therefore, an external shunt from the right common femoral artery to the left lower extremity was created with angioplasty, superior mesenteric artery (SMA) stenting, and celiac artery (CA) balloon dilatation. The patient's condition stabilized, and he was transferred to a hospital where TEVAR was performed. Selective arterial catheterization (SAC) for treating intraperitoneal organ malperfusion caused by BTAI may be an effective bridging therapy for TEVAR.

Clinical Outcomes and Factors Associated With Aortic Shrinkage After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Aneurysmal Chronic Aortic Dissection

PURPOSE

The effectiveness of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for chronic aortic dissection (AD) with aneurysmal degeneration remains controversial. We retrospectively investigated clinical outcomes and assessed predictors of aortic shrinkage after TEVAR for chronic aneurysmal AD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2010 and December 2021, 70 patients with double-barrel-type chronic AD were enrolled. Major intimal tears in thoracic aorta were covered by stent graft. Early and late clinical outcomes, and diameter change of downstream aorta during follow-up period were reviewed. Subsequently, factors associated with aortic shrinkage were assessed by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Mean age was 63 (interquartile range [IQR]: 54-68) years, 54 (80%) men, median duration from AD onset was 4 (IQR: 1-10) years, and maximum aortic diameter was 53 (IQR: 49-58) mm. Supra-aortic debranching procedure was required in 57 (81%) patients. Early aorta-related death occurred in 2 (3%) patients. Both stroke and spinal cord ischemia occurred in 1 (2%) patient. Five-year freedom rates from aorta-related death and reintervention were 96% and 51%, respectively. Sixty-four patients underwent follow-up computed tomography (84%) 1 year after TEVAR, with 33 (52%) achieving aortic shrinkage. In multivariable analysis, duration from AD onset (per year) (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82, 0.70-0.97; p=0.017) and maximum aortic-diameter ratio between aortic arch and descending aorta (per 0.1) (morphologic index; OR: 1.34, 1.04-1.74; p=0.023) were independent aortic shrinkage predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for chronic AD with aneurysmal degeneration achieved satisfactory survival outcomes, but with a considerable reintervention rate. Duration from AD onset and preoperative aortic morphology could affect post-TEVAR aortic shrinkage. Earlier intervention could lead to better aortic shrinkage.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for chronic aortic dissection with aneurysmal degeneration showed low incidence of early and late aorta-related death. By contrast, aortic shrinkage rate was low with high incidence of reintervention to the residual downstream aorta. According to the assessment of preoperative variables, chronicity and aortic morphology could predict postoperative aortic shrinkage.

Mid-term Outcomes of Endovascular and Hybrid Procedures to Treat Complex Aortic Arch Pathologies

PURPOSE

To compare the mid-term outcomes of endovascular and hybrid procedures in treating aortic arch pathologies with an unfavorable proximal landing zone, and analyze the different indications of the 2 methods.

METHODS

We collected the clinical data from 59 patients with complex aortic arch pathologies who underwent endovascular or hybrid surgery from March 2018 to April 2020 at a single center. Among the patients, 45 were treated by branched or fenestrated surgery and 14 by hybrid surgery. The clinical data of preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative results were retrospectively analyzed and compared. The main study indexes were the branch patency rate and endoleakage rate during the follow-up period. The secondary study indexes included the operation success rate, operative time, hospital expenses, complication incidence, freedom from reintervention rate, mortality, etc.

RESULTS

The operation success rate of all the groups was 100%. The hospital expenses of the hybrid group were lower than those of the endovascular group (p<0.05). The operative time of the hybrid group was longer than that of the endovascular group (p<0.05). The incidence of anatomic variants in the hybrid group was 28.6%, which was significantly higher than that in the endovascular group (2.2%, p=0.011). However, there were no significant differences in operative bleeding, ventilator use duration, and treatment time in intensive care units between the 2 groups (p>0.05). Follow-up was conducted for a period of 12 to 34 months. Four patients of the hybrid group experienced numbness of the upper limb (28.57%); the proportion was higher than the endovascular group (0%, p=0.002). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of endoleaks, retrograde aortic dissection, target lesion, secondary operation, branch patency rate, paraplegia, cerebral apoplexy, renal failure, or other complications in either group (p>0.05). The mortality of the endovascular group was 6.67% (3/45). Overall cumulative survival at 1 year was 100% in the hybrid group and 93.3% in the endovascular group. There was no statistical difference in the increase of the true lumen between the 2 groups for vascular remodeling (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The hybrid surgery costs less and proves more suitable for treating variants of the aortic arch. The endovascular treatment still has limitations due to anatomical conditions.

Contemporary outcomes of open repair of acute complicated type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

Open repair of acute complicated type B aortic dissection (ACTBAD), required when endovascular repair is not possible, is historically considered high-risk. We analyze our experience with this high-risk cohort compared with the standard cohort.

METHODS

We identified consecutive patients undergoing descending thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair from 1997 to 2021. Patients with ACTBAD were compared with those having surgery for other reasons. Logistic regression was used to identify associations with major adverse events (MAEs). Five-year survival and competing risk of reintervention were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 926 patients, 75 (8.1%) had ACTBAD. Indications included rupture (25/75), malperfusion (11/75), rapid expansion (26/75), recurrent pain (12/75), large aneurysm (5/75), and uncontrolled hypertension (1/75). The incidence of MAEs was similar (13.3% [10/75] vs 13.7% [117/851], P = .99). Operative mortality was 5.3% (4/75) vs 4.8% (41/851) (P = .99). Complications included tracheostomy (8%, 6/75), spinal cord ischemia (4%, 3/75), and new dialysis (2.7%, 2/75). Renal impairment, urgent/emergent operation, forced expiratory volume in 1 second ≤50%, and malperfusion were associated with MAEs, but not ACTBAD (odds ratio: 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.20-1.16], P = .1). At 5 and 10 years, there was no difference in survival (65.8% [95% CI: 54.6-79.2] vs 71.3% [95% CI: 67.9-74.9], P = .42, and 47.3% [95% CI: 34.5-64.7] vs 53.7% [95% CI: 49.3-58.4], P = .29, respectively) or 10-year reintervention (12.5% [95% CI: 4.3-25.3] vs 7.1% [95% CI: 4.7-10.1], P = .17, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In an experienced center, open repair of ACTBAD can be performed with low rates of operative mortality and morbidity. Outcomes similar to elective repair are achievable even in high-risk patients with ACTBAD. In patients unsuitable for endovascular repair, transfer to a high-volume center experienced in open repair should be considered.

An Evidenced-Based Review of Emergency Target Blood Pressure Management for Acute Aortic Dissection

Objective

To summarize the best evidence of emergency target blood pressure management for acute aortic dissection and provide guidance for evidence-based practice of emergency target blood pressure management.

Methods

According to the "6S" evidence pyramid model, the evidence of emergency target blood pressure management of acute aortic dissection in various foreign databases and websites of professional associations from January 1, 2010, to August 1, 2022, was retrieved, including clinical decision-making, guidelines, expert consensus, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case series. Two researchers used the corresponding document quality evaluation tools to evaluate the documents and extracted and summarized the evidence of documents above grade B.

Results

A total of 17 articles were included, including 6 clinical decision-making articles, 5 guidelines, 2 expert consensus articles, 1 systematic review article, 1 randomized controlled trial article, 1 cohort study article, and 1 case series article, forming 36 best evidences, including 9 topics, which are target value setting, management strategy, disease observation, medical history collection, monitoring methods, vasoactive drugs, nonvasoactive drugs, related examinations, and patient education.

Conclusion

The best evidence summarized provides a reference for doctors and nurses in the emergency department to manage the emergency target blood pressure of patients with acute aortic dissection. It is recommended that doctors and nurses in the emergency department follow the best evidence summarized to develop individualized target blood pressure management plan for patients.

Twenty-five years of observations from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) and its impact on the cardiovascular scientific community

OBJECTIVE

The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) celebrated its 25th anniversary in January 2021. This study evaluated IRAD's role in promoting the understanding and management of acute aortic dissection (AD) over these years.

METHODS

IRAD studies were identified, analyzed, and ranked according to their citations per year (c/y) to determine the most-cited IRAD studies and topics. A systematic search of the literature identified cardiovascular guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute AD. Consequently, IRAD's presence and impact were quantified using these documents.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven IRAD studies were identified, of which 82 obtained more than 10 cumulative citations. The median c/y index was 7.33 (25th-75th percentile, 4.01-16.65). Forty-two studies had a greater than median c/y index and were considered most impactful. Of these studies, most investigated both type A and type B AD (n = 17, 40.5%) and short-term outcomes (n = 26, 61.9%). Nineteen guideline documents were identified from 26 cardiovascular societies located in Northern America, Europe, and Japan. Sixty-nine IRAD studies were cited by these guidelines, including 38 of the 42 most-impactful IRAD studies. Among them, partial thrombosis of the false lumen as a predictor of postdischarge mortality and aortic diameters as a predictor of type A occurrence were determined as most-impactful specific IRAD topics by their c/y index.

CONCLUSIONS

IRAD has had and continues to have an important role in providing observations, credible knowledge, and research questions to improve the outcomes of patients with acute AD.

Endovascular repair of acute vs. subacute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis evaluating the optimal timing for endovascular repair of acute versus subacute uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection.

Method

PubMed, EMBASE, web of science and Cochrane Library was interrogated to identify Electronic bibliographic studies updated to January 2023 to collect studies compared the clinical outcomes of endovascular repair for Acute Versus Subacute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection. Data were aggregated as pooled odds ratios (OR) using the fixed or random effects models according to the significance of heterogeneity, Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated by RevMan 5.3 and applied with fixed or random-effect models.

Result

A comprehensive literature search found 322 citations published and finally among them 6 studies containing 3,769 patients (acute group 2,642, subacute group 1,127) were included in review. There is an increased risk of 30-day complications (OR = 1.51,95%CI,1.26-1.81) 30-day mortality (OR = 2.39,95%CI, 1.55-3.67) and 1-year mortality (OR = 1.71,95%CI,1.27-2.30) for an acute uTBAD group compared to subacute ones. Similarly, reintervention was more likely in the acute group than in the subacute group (OR = 1.42,95%CI,1.05-1.91). However, no significant differences were found in long-term mortality.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis confirmed that there was no significant difference in the long-term prognosis between the acute and subacute phases in the timing of surgery. However, considering the high incidence of complications, high re-intervention rate and one-year mortality probably caused by high intima fragility in the acute phase, endovascular repair at subacute phase appears to favorably compare with acute strategy. But future studies with adequate patient numbers and longer-term follow-up are necessary to further verify the study conclusion.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021247609, identifier PROSPERO CRD42021247609.

Impact of antithrombotic therapy on clinical outcomes in patients with type B acute aortic syndrome

Objective

Antithrombotic therapy has the potential to interfere with false lumen thrombosis. In type B acute aortic syndrome, the degree of false lumen thrombosis affects clinical outcomes. We aimed to explore the association of antithrombotic therapy with the prognosis of patients with type B acute aortic syndrome.

Methods

We reviewed 406 patients with type B acute aortic syndrome who were discharged alive with and without antithrombotic therapy. The primary outcome was aorta-related adverse events, defined as a composite of aorta-related death, aortic rupture, aortic repair, and progressive aortic dilation.

Results

Of the 406 patients, 64 (16%) were discharged with antithrombotic therapy and 342 (84%) were discharged without antithrombotic therapy. A total of 249 patients (61%) presented with intramural hematoma with complete thrombosis of the false lumen, and 157 patients (39%) presented with aortic dissection. During a median follow-up of 4.6 years, 32 patients (50%) in the antithrombotic group and 93 patients (27%) in the nonantithrombotic group had a primary outcome event. Cumulative incidence of aorta-related events at 1 and 3 years with death as the competing risk was higher in the antithrombotic group than in the nonantithrombotic group (19% ± 5% vs 9% ± 2% at 1 year and 40% ± 7% vs 17% ± 2% at 3 years, P < .001).

Conclusions

Antithrombotic therapy might be associated with an increased risk of aorta-related events in patients with type B acute aortic syndrome.

Hemodynamic Evaluation of Type B Aortic Dissection Using Compressed Sensing Accelerated 4D Flow MRI

BACKGROUND

4D Flow MRI is a quantitative imaging technique to evaluate blood flow patterns; however, it is unclear how compressed sensing (CS) acceleration would impact aortic hemodynamic quantification in type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

PURPOSE

To investigate CS-accelerated 4D Flow MRI performance compared to GRAPP-accelerated 4D Flow MRI (GRAPPA) to evaluate aortic hemodynamics in TBAD.

STUDY TYPE

Prospective.

POPULATION

Twelve TBAD patients, two volunteers.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

1.5T, 3D time-resolved cine phase-contrast gradient echo sequence.

ASSESSMENT

GRAPPA (acceleration factor [R] = 2) and two CS-accelerated (R = 7.7 [CS7.7] and 10.2 [CS10.2]) 4D Flow MRI scans were acquired twice for interscan reproducibility assessment. Voxelwise kinetic energy (KE), peak velocity (PV), forward flow (FF), reverse flow (RF), and stasis were calculated. Plane-based mid-lumen flows were quantified. Imaging times were recorded.

TESTS

Repeated measures analysis of variance, Pearson correlation coefficients (r), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance.

RESULTS

The KE and FF in true lumen (TL) and PV in false lumen (FL) did not show difference among three acquisition types (P = 0.818, 0.065, 0.284 respectively). The PV and stasis in TL were higher, KE, FF, and RF in FL were lower, and stasis was higher in GRAPPA compared to CS7.7 and CS10.2. The RF was lower in GRAPPA compared to CS10.2. The correlation coefficients were strong in TL (r = [0.781-0.986]), and low to strong in FL (r = [0.347-0.948]). The ICC levels demonstrated moderate to excellent interscan reproducibility (0.732-0.989). The FF and net flow in mid-descending aorta TL were significantly different between CS7.7 and CS10.2.

CONCLUSION

CS-accelerated 4D Flow MRI has potential for clinical utilization with shorter scan times in TBAD. Our results suggest similar hemodynamic trends between acceleration types, but CS-acceleration impacts KE, FF, RF, and stasis more in FL.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2.

[Intensive care management of acute diseases of the aorta]

Acute aortic diseases represent a group of complex severe and often fatal medical conditions. Although they are significantly rarer than cardiac or thromboembolic events, they are an important differential diagnosis to be ruled out, e.g., in the clinical work-up of acute chest pain.Treatment, especially surgical interventions, depends on the progression, extent and size of the pathology and whenever possible should be performed in specialized centers with the appropriate experience.Intensive care monitoring is advisable as a range of peracute complications can occur even in initially stable patients. Depending on the clinical presentation and affected structures, a number of severe complications need to be anticipated by critical care physicians. Additionally, a notable symptom is severe and refractory hypertension, especially in the acute phase. This article provides a summary of the most frequent clinical pictures and corresponding treatment options. Furthermore, the principles of initial patient stabilization and treatment as well as the perioperative management of complex surgical procedures on the aorta are discussed.

Optimal medical treatment versus endovascular aortic repair in uncomplicated isolated abdominal aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

To report the results of optimal medical treatment (OMT) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in patients with uncomplicated isolated abdominal aortic dissection (IAAD).

METHODS

A retrospective review of 96 consecutive patients with uncomplicated IAAD (uIAAD) managed at a single tertiary vascular unit between January 2011 and July 2021 was conducted. Standard methods for univariate and survival analyses were used. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality. Secondary end points included uIAAD progression, interventional complications, and follow-up aortic intervention.

RESULTS

Initially, 53.1% of patients (51/96) were managed with OMT. No in-hospital deaths occurred. During follow-up, three patients died, and three and two patients who were initially managed with OMT subsequently required endovascular treatment and surgical management, respectively. Initially, 46.9% of patients (45/96) underwent EVAR. One patient died during hospital admission; nine patients had an endoleak after operation and one needed reintervention. Furthermore, during follow-up, five patients died; four patients needed reoperation, one surgery and three endovascular treatments. The overall long-term mortality was 8.4%, and follow-up aortic intervention rate was 9.5% (median follow-up, 54 months; interquartile range, 33-81 months) with no significant difference between groups. Of note, 12 patients (12.6%) suffered uIAAD progression, which was higher in the OMT group than EVAR group (10 [19.6%] vs 2 [4.5%]; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

uIAAD may be managed safely by OMT with regular surveillance, despite the risk of disease progression. Compared with OMT, EVAR could significantly prevent uIAAD progression. For anatomically suitable patients with uIAAD progression and who are unresponsive to OMT, pre-emptive EVAR is a safe and feasible option.

Management of acute aortic syndrome with evolving individualized precision medicine solutions: Lessons learned over two decades and literature review

Background

Thoracoabdominal acute aortic syndrome is associated with high morbidity and mortality. We aim to scrutinize our evolving strategies for acute aortic syndrome (AAS) management using minimally invasive and adaptive surgical techniques over two decades.

Methods

This is a longitudinal observational study at our tertiary vascular centre from 2002 to 2021. Out of 22,349 aortic referrals, we performed 1,555 aortic interventions over twenty years. Amongst 96 presented with symptomatic aortic thoracic pathology, 71 patients had AAS. Our primary endpoint is combined aneurysm-related and cardiovascular-related mortality.

Results

There were 43 males and 28 females (5 Traumatic Aortic Transection (TAT), 8 Acute Aortic Intramural Hematoma (IMH), 27 Symptomatic Aortic Dissection (SAD) and 31 Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm (TAA) post-SAD) with a mean age of 69. All the patients with AAS received optimal medical therapy (OMT), but TAT patients underwent emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Fifty-eight patients had an aortic dissection, of which 31 developed TAA. These 31 patients with SAD and TAA received OMT initially and interval surgical intervention with TEVAR or sTaged hybrId sinGle lumEn Reconstruction (TIGER). To increase our landing area, we performed a left subclavian chimney graft with TEVAR in twelve patients. The average follow-up duration was 78.2 months, and eleven patients (15.5%) had combined aneurysm and cardiovascular-related mortality. Twenty-six percentage of the patients developed endoleaks (EL), of which 15% required re-intervention for type II and III. Four patients who had paraplegia (5.7%) and developed renal failure died. None of our patients had a stroke or bowel ischaemia. Twenty patients had OMT, eight of these were patients with acute aortic hematoma, and all eight died within 30 days of presentation.

Conclusion

Acute aortic hematoma is a sinister finding, which must be closely monitored, and consideration is given to early intervention. Paraplegia and renal failure result in an increased mortality rate. TIGER technique with interval TEVAR has salvaged complex situations in young patients. Left subclavian chimney increases our landing area and abolishes SINE. Our experience shows that minimally invasive techniques could be a viable option for AAS.

Acute aortic dissection: evidence, uncertainties, and future therapies

Remarkable progress has become especially apparent in aortic medicine in the last few decades, leading to essential changes in how thoracic aortic dissection is understood and treated. This state-of-the-art review article addresses the mechanisms of acute aortic dissection, explaining the role of its primary entry location, proximal, and distal dissection extension in their clinical presentation and impact on the decision-making process towards the best treatment approach. The latest evidence on novel treatment methods for acute aortic syndromes is presented, and the diverse dissection classification systems that remain uncertain are discussed, which reveals the need for shared terminology and more clarity. Finally, future aspects are discussed in treating acute aortic dissection, such as the endovascular treatment of aortic dissection Type A and biomarkers for acute aortic syndromes.

Acute aortic dissection

Although substantial progress has been made in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of acute aortic dissection, it remains a complex cardiovascular event, with a high immediate mortality and substantial morbidity in individuals surviving the acute period. The past decade has allowed a leap forward in understanding the pathophysiology of this disease; the existing classifications have been challenged, and the scientific community moves towards a nomenclature that is likely to unify the current definitions according to morphology and function. The most important pathophysiological pathway, namely the location and extension of the initial intimal tear, which causes a disruption of the media layer of the aortic wall, together with the size of the affected aortic segments, determines whether the patient should undergo emergency surgery, an endovascular intervention, or receive optimal medical treatment. The scientific evidence for the management and follow-up of acute aortic dissection continues to evolve. This Seminar provides a clinically relevant overview of potential prevention, diagnosis, and management of acute aortic dissection, which is the most severe acute aortic syndrome.

Treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysmal degeneration following aortic dissections at a single surgical center using a physician-assembled branched endovascular stent graft

OBJECTIVE

Aneurysmal degeneration of aortic dissection portends significant morbidity and mortality consequences in the subacute and chronic phases of aortic dissection. This paper describes the use of a multi-branched stent graft system for the treatment of thoracoabdominal aneurysmal degeneration of dissections with visceral segment involvement and reports upon the 30-day and one-year outcomes for the first 18 patients treated with this design configuration.

METHODS

The in-hospital, 30-day and one-year morbidity and mortality outcomes of 18 consecutive patients treated with the physician-assembled visceral manifold or unitary manifold stent graft systems between 2013 and 2022 were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients were treated for aneurysmal changes after aortic dissection. A total of 71 visceral vessels were successfully stented. There were no acute procedural failures. There were no episodes of paraplegia, reinterventions for type I or III endoleaks, patency-related events or mortalities reported in the first 30 days following treatment. One-year, all-cause mortality demonstrated 2/11 (18.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Aneurysmal degeneration of aortic dissection poses significant risks to patients with medically managed aortic dissections and those under surveillance. When these aneurysms develop in the thoracoabdominal region, treatment becomes even more challenging given the problem of visceral vessel patency, as these vessels can originate off the true or false lumens. The physician-designed endovascular stent graft system reported upon here has been successfully deployed in 18 patients with no acute procedural failures and promising clinical results. This treatment modality may offer utility to vascular surgeons whose patients with thoracoabdominal aneurysmal degeneration following aortic dissection have historically had limited endovascular repair prospects.

The Clinical Impact of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in the Management of Thoracic Aortic Diseases

PURPOSE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been described to be superior to an open surgical approach, and previous studies have found superiority in TEVAR by reducing overall morbidity and mortality rates. This study aimed to describe the outcomes of TEVAR for patients with thoracic aortic disease at a high complexity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Descriptive study, developed by a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database. Patients aged above 18 years who underwent TEVAR between 2012 and 2022 were included. Patient demographics, perioperative data, surgical outcomes, morbidity, and mortality were described. Statistical and multivariate analyses were made. Statistical significance was reached when p values were <0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 66 patients were included. Male patients were 60.61% and the mean age was 69.24 years. Associated aortic diseases were aneurysms (68.18%), ulcer-related (4.55%), intramural-related hematoma (7.58%), trauma-related pathology (1.52%), and aortic dissection (30.30%). The mean hospital stay was 18.10 days, and intensive care unit was required for 98.48%. At 30 days, the mortality rate was 10.61% and the reintervention rate was 21.21%. Increased intraoperative blood loss (p=0.001) and male sex (p=0.04) showed statistical relationship with mortality. Underweight patients have 6.7 and 11.4 times more risk of complications and endoleak compared with higher body mass index values (p=0.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.82-7.21) and (p=0.02, 95% CI=1.31-12.57), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair seems to be a feasible option for patients with thoracic aortic pathologies, with adequate rates of mortality and morbidity. Underweight patients seem to have an increased risk of overall morbidity and increased risk for endoleak. Further prospective studies are needed to prove our results.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Obesity and BMI are widely studied in the surgical literature. According to our study, there is a paradox regarding the outcomes of patients treated with TEVAR in terms of postoperative complications and mortality related to the body mass index. And shouldn't be considered as a high-risk feature in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality in this procedure.

Endovascular treatment of complicated versus uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to analyze the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair performed for complicated and uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections.

METHODS

Patients from WL Gore's Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissections were included, and data were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 5014 patients enrolled in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment, 172 underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissections. Of these repairs, 102 were for complicated acute type B aortic dissections and 70 were for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections. There were 46 (45.1%) procedures related to aortic branch vessels versus 15 (21.4%) in complicated type B aortic dissections and uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (P = .002). The mean length of stay was 14.3 ± 10.6 days (median, 11; range, 2-75) versus 9.8 ± 7.9 days (median, 8; range, 0-42) in those with complicated type B aortic dissections versus those with uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections (P < .001). Thirty-day mortality was not different between groups (complicated type B aortic dissections 2.9% vs uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections 1.4%, P = .647), as well as aortic complications (8.8% vs 5.7%, P = .449). Aortic event-free survival was 62.9% ± 37.1% versus 70.6% ± 29.3% at 3 years (P = .696).

CONCLUSIONS

In the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment, thoracic endovascular aortic repair results for complicated type B aortic dissections versus uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections showed that 30-day mortality and perioperative complications were equally low for both. The midterm outcome was positive. These data confirm that thoracic endovascular aortic repair as the first-line strategy for treating complicated type B dissections is associated with a low risk of complications. Further studies with longer follow-up are necessary to define the role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in uncomplicated acute type B dissections compared with medical therapy. However, in the absence of level A evidence from randomized trials, results of the uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection patient cohort treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair from registries are important to understand the related risk and benefit.

Initial Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair vs Medical Therapy for Acute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Importance

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has increasingly been used for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD) despite limited supporting data.

Objective

To assess whether initial TEVAR following uTBAD is associated with reduced mortality or morbidity compared with medical therapy alone.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services inpatient claims data for adults aged 65 years or older with index admissions for acute uTBAD from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2018, with follow-up available through December 31, 2019.

Exposures

Initial TEVAR was defined as TEVAR within 30 days of admission for acute uTBAD.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular hospitalizations, aorta-related and repeated aorta-related hospitalizations, and aortic interventions associated with initial TEVAR vs medical therapy. Propensity score inverse probability weighting was used.

Results

Of 7105 patients with eligible index admissions for acute uTBAD, 1140 (16.0%) underwent initial TEVAR (623 [54.6%] female; median age, 74 years [IQR, 68-80 years]) and 5965 (84.0%) did not undergo TEVAR (3344 [56.1%] female; median age, 76 years [IQR, 69-83 years]). Receipt of TEVAR was associated with region (vs South; Midwest: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.81]; P < .001; Northeast: aOR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.50-0.79]; P < .001), Medicaid dual eligibility (aOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91; P = .003), hypertension (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.03-1.54; P = .03), peripheral vascular disease (aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.49; P = .03), and year of admission (2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 were associated with greater odds of TEVAR compared with 2011). After inverse probability weighting, mortality was similar for the 2 strategies up to 5 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85-1.06), as were aorta-related hospitalizations (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.99-1.27), aortic interventions (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.84-1.20), and cardiovascular hospitalizations (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.93-1.20). In a sensitivity analysis that included deaths within the first 30 days, initial TEVAR was associated with lower mortality over a period of 1 year (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99; P = .03), 2 years (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.96; P = .008), and 5 years (aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96; P = .004).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, 16.0% of patients underwent initial TEVAR within 30 days of uTBAD, and receipt of initial TEVAR was associated with hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, region, Medicaid dual eligibility, and year of admission. Initial TEVAR was not associated with improved mortality or reduced hospitalizations or aortic interventions over a period of 5 years, but in a sensitivity analysis that included deaths within the first 30 days, initial TEVAR was associated with lower mortality. These findings, along with cost-effectiveness and quality of life, should be assessed in a prospective trial in the US population.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Early and Late Mortality Predictors in Patients with Acute Aortic Dissection Type B

BACKGROUND/AIM

Despite technological advances in diagnosis and treatment, in-hospital mortality with acute aortic dissection type B is still about 11%. The purpose of this study was to assess the risk factors for early and long-term adverse outcomes in patients with acute aortic dissection type B treated medically or with conventional open surgery.

METHODS

The present study included 104 consecutive patients with acute aortic dissection type B treated in our Center from January 1st, 1998 to January 1st, 2007. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics as well as in-hospital complications were reviewed. Univariate and multivariate testing was performed to identify the predictors of in-hospital (30-day) and late (within 9 years) mortality.

RESULTS

92 (88.5%) patients were treated medically, while 12 (11.5%) patients with complicated acute aortic dissection type B were treated by open surgical repair. In-hospital complications occurred in 35.7% patients, the most often being acute renal failure (28%), hypotension/shock (24%), mesenteric ischemia (12%), and limb ischemia (8%). The in-hospital mortality rate was 15.7% and the 9-year mortality rate was 51.9%. Independent predictors of early mortality in patients with acute aortic dissection type B were uncontrolled hypertension (HR-20.69) and a dissecting aorta diameter >4.75 cm (HR-6.30). Independent predictors of late mortality were relapsing pain (HR-7.93), uncontrolled hypertension (HR-7.25), and a pathologic difference in arterial blood pressure (>20 mmHg) (HR-5.33).

CONCLUSION

Knowledge of key risk factors may help with a better choice of treatment and mortality reduction in acute aortic dissection type B patients.