Clinical outcomes and quality of life in patients with acute and subacute type B aortic dissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Current Evidence Related to the Impact of Endovascular Repair Timing on Prognosis of Acute Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to determine whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) timing is more beneficial in the acute phase (first 14 days) than in the subacute phase (14-90 days) for the administration of acute Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in databases (EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Library) until December 2023 to identify studies reporting the results of TEVAR used for patients with acute TBAD. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated utilizing either the random-effects model or the fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies involving 4,827 individuals with TBAD (including 1,609 with subacute TBAD) met our selection criteria. Early results revealed a lower incidence of Ia endoleaks (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.03-2.33; P = 0.04) and aortic ruptures (OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 0.98-8.50; P = 0.05) in subacute TBAD. Apart from these findings, there was little difference in other incidents between the 2 groups. Regarding late outcomes, we observed significantly higher rates of retrograde dissection (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.04-4.34; P = 0.04), distal stent-induced new entry (OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.24-4.61; P = 0.009), and reintervention (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.05-1.99; P = 0.02) in acute TBAD than in subacute TBAD, whereas no significant differences were found for other outcomes between the 2 groups. Also, TEVAR appeared to yield comparable results for false lumen thrombosis and true lumen regression in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Subacute TBAD repair with TEVAR demonstrates a more effective reduction in adverse event rates compared to immediate treatment in the acute phase.

Efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus medical therapy for treatment of type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Techniques in endovascular therapy have evolved to offer a promising alternative to medical therapy alone for Type B aortic dissections (TBADs).

AIM

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare mortality and overall complications between thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and best medical therapy (BMT) in patients with TBADs.

METHODS

We included randomized control trials and prospective or retrospective cohort studies that compared TEVAR and BMT for the treatment of type B aortic dissection. Multiple electronic databases were searched.

RESULTS

Thirty-two cohort studies including 150,836 patients were included. TEVAR was associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality rate than BMT (RR = 0.79, CI = 0.63, 0.99, P = 0.04), notably in patients ≥ 65 years of age (RR = 0.78, CI = 0.64, 0.95, P = 0.01). The TEVAR group had a significantly prolonged hospital stay (MD = 3.42, CI = 1.69, 5.13, P = 0.0001) and ICU stay (MD = 3.18, CI = 1.48, 4.89, P = 0.0003) compared to the BMT. BMT was associated with increased stroke risk (RR = 1.52, CI = 1.29, 1.79, P < 0.00001). No statistically significant differences in late mortality (1, 3, and 5 years) or intervention-related factors (acute renal failure, spinal cord ischemia, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, and sepsis) were noted between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis revealed a significant association between the TEVAR group and a decreased mortality rate of TBAD compared to the medical treatment group, especially in patients aged 65 years or older. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.

Effectiveness of the 5As Model-Based Transitional Care Program among Chinese Patients with Type B Aortic Dissection Post-TEVAR: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) is the primary treatment for Stanford type B aortic dissection (type B AD). However, patients often encounter significant difficulties post-TEVAR that endanger their safety when transitioning from hospital- to home-based care. Moreover, information on the ideal transitional care for patients with type B AD post-TEVAR is scarce in China. This single-masked randomized clinical trial aimed to assess the effectiveness of the Assess, Advise, Agree, Assist, and Arrange (5As) model-based transitional care in improving discharge preparation level and transitional care quality post-TEVAR among patients with type B AD in China.

Methods

This study was conducted at a hospital in China between January 2021 and October 2021. Patients with type B AD were randomly divided into intervention and control groups. Participants in the intervention group received the 5As model-based transitional nursing care. The 5As model is an evidence-based intervention strategy comprising: (1) Assess: assessing the preoperative cardiovascular risk behavior of patients with AD. (2) Advise: making suggestions according to the risk behaviors of the patients. (3) Agree: reaching a consensus on goals and action plans by making decisions with the patients and their families. (4) Assist: assisting patients in solving obstacles to implementing health plans. (5) Arrange: arranging follow-up visits according to the actual situation of the patients and guiding them in adhering to a schedule. The control group received the usual nursing care for the same duration and number of follow-up visits. A trained research nurse collected all the baseline data of the patients on admission, assessed discharge readiness level (using the Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale) on the day of discharge, and collected transitional quality of care (by the Care Transition Measure-15) data on day 30 after discharge.

Results

Overall, 72 patients with type B AD were recruited. Discharge readiness level and transitional care quality in the intervention group were significantly superior to those in the control group.

Conclusions

This study showed that the 5As model-based transitional care program can effectively promote discharge readiness and transitional care quality of patients with type B AD post-TEVAR.

Clinical Trial Registration

The Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Center: ChiCTR2200060797 (https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=167403).

Health-related quality of life in patients with aortic dissection: An unmet need

Knowledge about the Health-related Quality of Life (HR-QoL) after Type A (TA-AAD) and Type B acute aortic dissection (TB-AAD) is still insufficient. Through this systematic review, including 22 studies (16 for TA-AAD and 6 TB-AAD -1998-2023), the entire literature on HR-QoL after surgical and/or endovascular and/or medical interventions has been investigated. In TA-AAD patients, despite overall SF-36 score was similar to the standard population, with > 80 years patients displaying a better emotional domain, the SF-12 was significant lower to controls in physical and mental well-being domains. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improved HR-QoL. In TB-AAD, vitality and mental health SF-36 scores improved after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR); long-term QoL was similar in the open surgery group compared to TEVAR. Overall, HR-QoL after AAD seems adequate irrespective of age or sex, except for some specific domains. Physical exercise and cardiac rehabilitation may improve HR-QoL in these patients. PROSPERO registry ID: CRD42023421130.

The relationship between quality of life and health promotion behavior in patients with type B aortic dissection: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

To understand the current situation of health promotion behavior and quality of life among aortic dissection survivors and the correlation between them.

METHODS

Sociodemographic characteristics were collected. T-test and variance analysis were applied for univariate analysis. Quality of life was measured using the SF-36 Questionnaire, and health-promoting behaviors were measured using the aortic dissection health promotion behavior questionnaire. The association between type B aortic dissection survivors' health promotion behavior and health status questionnaire (SF-36) scores was determined through Pearson's correlation coefficients. This association was analyzed through multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 131 type B aortic dissection survivors were evaluated through the self-developed aortic dissection patient health promotion behavior scale and health status questionnaire (SF-36). Results showed that the health promotion behavior of Stanford B aortic dissection survivors (85.05 ± 11.28) correlated with their Mental Component Summary (MCS) (55.23 ± 30.72; r = 0.359, P < 0.01). The model showed 39.00% variance shared between behavior motivation and MCS (R² = 0.390, F = 13.189, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Type B aortic dissection survivors in Zunyi, China had a lower quality of life. Medical staff can formulate intervention measures from behavioral motivation to improve the quality of life of aortic dissection survivors.

Mid- and long-term outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in acute and subacute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (un-TBAD) has been managed conservatively with medical therapy to control the heart rate and blood pressure to limit disease progression, in addition to radiological follow-up. However, several trials and observational studies have investigated the use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in un-TBAD and suggested that TEVAR provides a survival benefit over medical therapy. Outcomes of TEVAR have also been linked with the timing of intervention.

AIMS

The scope of this review is to collate and summarize all the evidence in the literature on the mid- and long-term outcomes of TEVAR in un-TBAD, confirming its superiority. We also aimed to investigate the relationship between the timing of TEVAR intervention and results.

METHODS

We carried out a comprehensive literature search on multiple electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE to collate and summarize all research evidence on the mid- and long-term outcomes of TEVAR in un-TBAD, as well as its relationship with intervention timing.

RESULTS

TEVAR has proven to be a safe and effective tool in un-TBAD, offering superior mid- and long-term outcomes including all-cause and aorta-related mortality, aortic-specific adverse events, aortic remodeling, and need for reintervention. Additionally, performing TEVAR during the subacute phase of dissection seems to yield optimal results.

CONCLUSION

The evidence demonstrating a survival advantage in favor TEVAR over medical therapy in un-TBAD means that with further research, particular trials and observational studies, TEVAR could become the gold-standard treatment option for un-TBAD patients.