Role of Endoluminal Techniques in the Management of Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Spanos K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8490267 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4699951 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7330748 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has evolved and is now firmly established as a mainstay of therapy for acute complicated type B aortic dissection (acTBAD). However, several important issues remain unresolved including the optimal timing, sizing, graft selection, coverage length and utilization of adjunctive therapies to address false lumen perfusion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to provide a contemporary perspective on the management and results for TEVAR of acTBAD.MethodsAll TEVAR patients (N.=159) with acTBAD from a single high-volume, academic medical center were analyzed. Comparative results across time-dependent cohorts (2005-2009 [N.=43] vs. 2010-2014 [N.=56] vs. 2015-2020 [N.=60]) are presented.Results30-day mortality was 13%(N.=21) with a trend towards improvement over time (2005-2009, 18% vs. 2010-2020, 12%; P=0.1). Similarly, incidence of postoperative complications also declined: 2005-2009, 70% vs. 2010-2020, 36%(P-trend=0.08). One and 2-year freedom from aorta-related reintervention was 78±7% and 73±9% and did not differ across cohorts (log-rank P=0.5). Respective one and 5-year survival was 75±3% and 64±7%, but significantly improved with time (log-rank P<0.001). The corresponding one and five-year freedom from aorta-related mortality was 82±4% and 78±7% but did not change during the study interval (log-rank P=0.3).ConclusionsOutcomes for TEVAR of acTBAD continue to improve over time. This time-dependent analysis delineates how results have changed due to increasing experience, technologic evolution, and maturation of the peer reviewed evidence. These results along with the evidence-based review provided herein, provide an update on the management and results of TEVAR of acTBAD while highlighting specific controversies unique to the management of this challenging clinical problem.
| S-EPMC7796970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background The treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection by thoracic endovascular aortic repair has some challenges, and its long-term outcomes remain unclear. This study aimed to analyze the 5-year clinical outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair of chronic type B aortic dissection, compare the differences between patients with and without adverse aortic events (AAEs), and identify risk factors for AAEs. Methods and Results Patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair of chronic type B aortic dissection from January 2009 to June 2017 were retrospectively enrolled. The primary end points were AAEs, including aorta-related death, procedural complications, and disease progression requiring reintervention. Clinical outcomes were described at the 5-year follow-up visit. The secondary end point was the comparison of the results between patients with and without AAEs. Univariable and multivariable logistic analyses were used to identify potential risk factors for AAEs. A total of 214 patients were enrolled. AAEs occurred in 46 (21.5%) patients. Compared with patients without AAEs, those with AAEs had higher rates of residual type A aortic dissection (26.1% versus 4.2%, P<0.001) and aortic diameter ≥5.5 cm (69.6% versus 11.3%, P<0.001), and a lower rate of complete false lumen thrombosis (23.9% versus 89.9%, P<0.001). Meanwhile, the median interval from symptom onset to intervention was longer in patients with AAEs (26 months versus 12 months, P=0.004). Partial or no false lumen thrombosis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 14.71 [95% CI, 5.67-38.14; P<0.001]) and aortic diameter ≥5.5 cm (AOR, 10.16 [95% CI, 3.86-26.73; P<0.001]) were identified as independent risk factors for AAEs. Conclusions While thoracic endovascular aortic repair of chronic type B aortic dissection might be challenging in some cases, its long-term outcomes appeared promising as this treatment was effective in preventing catastrophic aortic events. Patients with AAEs showed higher rates of residual type A aortic dissection and aortic diameter ≥5.5 cm, a lower rate of complete false lumen thrombosis, and a longer median interval from symptom onset to intervention. Failure of complete false lumen thrombosis and an aortic diameter ≥5.5 cm were predictors of AAEs.
| S-EPMC9973582 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe study objective was to evaluate the management of malperfusion in acute type B aortic dissection with endovascular fenestration/stenting.MethodsFrom 1996 to 2018, 182 patients with an acute type B aortic dissection underwent fenestration/stenting for suspected malperfusion based on imaging, clinical manifestations, and laboratory findings. Data were obtained from medical record review and the National Death Index database.ResultsThe median age of patients was 55 years. Signs of malperfusion included abdominal pain (61%), lower-extremity weakness (27%), nonpalpable lower-extremity pulses (24%), and abnormal lactate, creatinine, liver enzymes, and creatine kinase levels. Confirmed hemodynamically significant malperfusion affected the spinal cord (2.7%), celiac (24%), superior mesenteric (40%), renal (51%), and iliofemoral (43%) arterial distributions. Of the 182 patients, 99 (54%) underwent aortic fenestration/stenting, 108 (59%) had 1 or multi-branch vessel fenestration/stenting, 5 (2.7%) had concomitant thoracic endovascular aortic repair, 17 (9.3%) had additional thrombolysis or thromboembolectomy, and 48 (26%) received no intervention. After fenestration/stenting, 24 patients (13%) required additional procedures for necrotic bowel or limb and 9 patients (4.9%) had subsequent aortic repair (thoracic endovascular aortic repair, open repair) before discharge. The new-onset paraplegia was 0%. The in-hospital mortality was 7.7% over 20+ years and 0% in the last 8 years. The 5- and 10-year survivals were 72% and 49%, respectively. The significant risk factors for late mortality were age and acute paralysis (hazard ratio, 3.5; both P < .0001). Given death as a competing factor, the 5- and 10-year cumulative incidence of reintervention was 21% and 31% for distal aortic pathology, respectively.ConclusionsPatients with acute type B aortic dissection with malperfusion can be managed with endovascular fenestration/stenting with excellent short- and long-term outcomes. This approach is particularly helpful to patients with static malperfusion of aortic branch vessels.
| S-EPMC7103520 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aortic dissection (AD) is a potentially life-threatening medical emergency usually encountered in the elderly. Here, we report a 9-year-old child who was incidentally detected to have asymptomatic chronic type B dissecting aneurysm of aorta when he presented with relapse of Hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) without any genetic abnormalities like Marfan or Ehler-Danlos syndrome. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of AD associated with HUS in a child without any known associated genetic or inherited risk factors.
| S-EPMC3841517 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8789584 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been chosen as a less invasive alternative for type B aortic dissections (TBADs). However, the therapeutic effect of TEVAR has been challenged by postoperative adverse events, which were induced by inflammatory response. Glucocorticoids have been widely used because of the powerful and effective anti-inflammatory properties. Nevertheless, the prognostic effect of glucocorticoids after TBAD patients underwent TEVAR remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the potential effect of postoperative glucocorticoids on the prognosis of TEVAR for TBADs.MethodsA total of 92 chronic TBADs patients underwent TEVAR with epidural anesthesia between June 2012 and June 2014 was retrospectively reviewed. The patients were stratified into dexamethasone (DXM) and non-dexamethasone group (N-DXM). The indications for TEVAR were as following: malperfusion (n = 28); contained or impending rupture (n = 17); persistent intractable chest/back pain (n = 32); refractory hypertension (n = 15).ResultsNo 30-day mortality and incision infection occurred in each group. The postoperative pain score on the second day was significantly higher in N-DXM group (3.60 ± 0.21 versus 4.83 ± 0.32, P = 0.001). The differences of white blood cell, body temperature and heart rate were pronounced in both groups judged by the peak values (13.01 ± 0.58 × 10(9)/L versus 10.04 ± 0.61 × 10(9)/L, 37.67 ± 0.08 °C versus 37.92 ± 0.09 °C and 89.06 ± 1.21 bpm versus 95.95 ± 1.70 bpm, P = 0.002, 0.04 and 0.001, respectively). The white blood cells in DXM group significantly increased on the second and third postoperative day (P = 0.009 and 0.023), while the body temperature and heart rate showed an apparent decline on the second (P = 0.001 and 0.028), third (P = 0.007 and 0.005) and fourth postoperative days (P = 0.024 and 0.018). However, the changes of false lumen volumes and the endoleak incidence at 3-month follow-up were comparable in the two groups. No significant difference of post-implantation syndrome was observed either.ConclusionsAlthough postoperative prophylactic glucocorticoids administration was unable to influence mortality, incision infection or the change of false lumen volumes, it enabled to enhance the recovery of vital signs and alleviate the postoperative pain. A prospective, randomized controlled trial has been registered (NCT02523300), which will be warranted before prophylactic administration of glucocorticoids after TEVAR procedure could be recommended in the clinical work.
| S-EPMC4807598 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe study objective was to evaluate the surgical results in patients with acute type A aortic dissection and cerebral malperfusion.MethodsFrom 2000 to 2019, 234 patients with type A aortic dissection and cerebral malperfusion were stratified into 3 groups: 50 (21%) with syncope (group 1), 152 (65%) with persistent loss of focal neurological function (group 2), and 32 (14%) with coma (group 3). Results were evaluated and compared by univariable and multivariable analyses.ResultsMedian age was higher in group 1, and incidence of cardiogenic shock was higher in group 3. The femoral artery was the most common cannulation site, whereas the axillary artery was used in 18% of group 1, 30% of group 2, and 25% of group 3 patients (P = .337). Antegrade cerebral perfusion was performed in more than 80% of patients, and ascending aorta/arch replacement was performed in 40% of group 1, 27% of group 2, and 31% of group 3 (P = .21). In-hospital mortality was 18% in group 1, 27% in group 2, and 56% in group 3 (P = .001). Survival at 5 years is 57.0% in group 1, 57.7% in group 2, and 38.7% in group 3 (P = .0005). On multivariable analysis, age, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and group 3 versus group 2 were independent risk factors for mortality, whereas axillary cannulation was a protective factor.ConclusionsPatients with aortic dissection and cerebral malperfusion without preoperative coma showed acceptable mortality, and those with coma had a high in-hospital mortality regardless of the type of brain protection. Overall axillary artery cannulation appeared to be a protective factor.
| S-EPMC9390217 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We reported a 48-year-old male patient with postoperative hemorrhage. Given his frailty, emergent interventional procedures were successfully performed and the end of the left subclavian artery was embolized by four coils. Our report provided a new therapeutic approach regarding the frail patients presenting postoperative hemorrhage.
| S-EPMC5067825 | biostudies-literature