Search

Background: Over the past 25 years, diagnosis and therapy for acute aortic dissection (AAD) have evolved. We aimed to study the effects of these iterative changes in care., Methods: Patients with nontraumatic AAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (61 centers; 15 countries) were divided into time-based tertiles (groups) from 1996 to 2022. The impact of changes in diagnostics, therapeutic care, and in-hospital and 3-year mortality was assessed. Cochran-Armitage trend and Jonckheere-Terpstra tests were conducted to test for any temporal trend., Results: Each group consisted of 3785 patients (mean age, ≈62 years old; ≈65.5% males); nearly two-thirds had type A AAD. Over time, the rates of hypertension increased from 77.8% to 80.4% ( P =0.002), while smoking (34.1% to 30.6%, P =0.033) and atherosclerosis decreased (25.6%-16.6%; P <0.001). Across groups, the percentage of surgical repair of type A AAD increased from 89.1% to 92.5% ( P <0.001) and was associated with decreased hospital mortality (from 24.1% in group 1 to 16.7% in group 3; P <0.001). There was no difference in 3-year survival ( P =0.296). For type B AAD, stent graft therapy (thoracic endovascular aortic repair) was used more frequently (22.3%-35.9%; P <0.001), with a corresponding decrease in open surgery. Endovascular in-hospital mortality decreased from 9.9% to 6.2% ( P =0.003). As seen with the type A AAD cohort, overall 3-year mortality for patients with type B AAD was consistent over time ( P =0.084)., Conclusions: Over 25 years, substantial improvements in-hospital survival were associated with a more aggressive surgical approach for patients with type A AAD. Open surgery has been partially supplanted by thoracic endovascular aortic repair for complicated type B AAD, and in-hospital mortality has decreased over the time period studied. Postdischarge survival for up to 3 years was similar over time., Competing Interests: Dr Eagle received modest grant support from W.L. Gore, Terumo, and Medtronic. Dr Trimarchi is a consultant and speaker for W.L. Gore and Medtronic. Dr Patel is a consultant for W.L. Gore, Medtronic, and Terumo. Dr Gleason received grant support from Medtronic and is a medical advisory board member for Abbott. The other authors report no conflicts.

Importance: Early data revealed a mortality rate of 1% to 2% per hour for type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD) during the initial 48 hours. Despite advances in diagnostic testing and treatment, this mortality rate continues to be cited because of a lack of contemporary data characterizing early mortality and the effect of timely surgery., Objective: To examine early mortality rates for patients with TAAAD in the contemporary era., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study examined data for patients with TAAAD in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection between 1996 and 2018. Patients were grouped according to the mode of their intended treatment, surgical or medical., Exposure: Surgical treatment., Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality was assessed in the initial 48 hours after hospital arrival using Kaplan-Meier curves. In-hospital complications were also evaluated., Results: A total of 5611 patients with TAAAD were identified based on intended treatment: 5131 (91.4%) in the surgical group (3442 [67.1%] male; mean [SD] age, 60.4 [14.1] years) and 480 (8.6%) in the medical group (480 [52.5%] male; mean [SD] age, 70.9 [14.7] years). Reasons for medical management included advanced age (n = 141), comorbidities (n = 281), and patient preference (n = 81). Over the first 48 hours, the mortality for all patients in the study was 5.8%. Among patients who were medically managed, mortality was 0.5% per hour (23.7% at 48 hours). For those whose intended treatment was surgical, 48-hour mortality was 4.4%. In the surgical group, 51 patients (1%) died before the operation., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the overall mortality rate for TAAAD was 5.8% at 48 hours. For patients in the medical group, TAAAD had a mortality rate of 0.5% per hour (23.7% at 48 hours). However, among those in the surgical group, 48-hour mortality decreased to 4.4%.

Our aim was to analyze outcomes of patients aged 70 years or above presenting with type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD) and cerebrovascular accident (CVA). A retrospective analysis of the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) was conducted. Patients aged 70 years or above (n = 1449) were stratified according to presence or absence of CVA before surgery (CVA: n = 110, 7.6%). In-hospital outcomes and mortality up to 5 years were analyzed. Additionally, in-hospital outcomes of patients who received medical management were described. No patient presenting with CVA over the age of 87 years underwent surgery. The rates of in-hospital mortality and post-operative CVA were significantly higher in patients presenting with CVA (in-hospital mortality: 32.7% vs 21.7%, P = 0.008; post-operative CVA: 23.4% vs 8.3%, P < 0.001). Presence of CVA was independently associated with significantly increased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 2.99, 95% confidence interval 1.35 - 6.60, P = 0.007). In survivors of the hospital stay, presenting CVA had no independent influence on mortality up to 5 years (hazard ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 0.99 - 2.31, P = 0.54). In medically managed patients, exceedingly high rates of in-hospital mortality (71.4%) and CVA (90.9%) were noted. Patients presenting with TAAAD and CVA at ≥ 70 years of age are at significantly increased risk of in-hospital mortality, although long-term mortality is not affected in hospital survivors. Medical management is associated with poor outcomes. We believe that surgical management should be offered after critical assessment of comorbidities., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is common in the setting of type A aortic dissection (TAAD) repair. Here, we evaluated the association between prosthesis choice and patient outcomes in an international patient cohort. We reviewed data from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) interventional cohort to examine the relationship between valve choice and short- and mid-term patient outcomes. Between January 1996 and March 2016, 1290 surgically treated patients with TAAD were entered into the IRAD interventional cohort. Of those, 364 patients undergoing TAAD repair underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR; mean age, 57 years). The mechanical valve cohort consisted of 189 patients, of which 151 (79.9%) had a root replacement. The nonmechanical valve cohort consisted of 5 patients who received homografts and 160 patients who received a biologic AVR, with a total of 118 (71.5%) patients who underwent root replacements. The mean follow-up time was 2.92 ± 1.75 years overall (2.46 ± 1.69 years for the mechanical valve cohort and 3.48 ± 1.8 years for the nonmechanical valve cohort). After propensity matching, Kaplan-Meier estimates of 4-year survival rates after surgery were 64.8% in the mechanical valve group compared with 74.7% in the nonmechanical valve group (p = 0.921). A stratified Cox model for 4-year mortality showed no difference in hazard between valve types after adjusting for the propensity score (p = 0.854). A biologic valve is a reasonable option in patients with TAAD who require AVR. Although this option avoids the potential risks of anticoagulation, long-term follow up is necessary to assess the effect of reoperations or transcatheter interventions for structural valve degeneration., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous work has demonstrated that more than one-half of acute type A aortic dissections (ATADs) occur at a maximal aortic diameter (MAD) of <5.5 cm. However, no analysis has investigated whether ATAD risk at smaller MADs is more common with modest dilation of the aortic root (AR) or supracoronary ascending aorta (AA) in patients without genetically triggered aortopathy., Objectives: This study sought to determine if the segment of modest aortic dilation affects risk of ATAD., Methods: Using the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) database from May 1996 to October 2016, we identified 667 ATAD patients with MAD <5.5 cm. Patients were stratified by location of the largest proximal aortic segment (AR or AA). Patients with known genetically triggered aortopathy were excluded. MADs at time of dissection were compared between AR and AA groups. Secondary outcomes included operation, postoperative outcomes, and long-term survival., Results: Of patients with ATAD at an MAD <5.5 cm, 79.5% (n = 530) were in the AA group and 20.5% (n = 137) in the AR group. Modestly dilated ARs (median MAD 4.6 cm [IQR: 4.1-5.0 cm]) dissected at a significantly smaller diameter than modestly dilated AAs (median MAD 4.8 cm [IQR: 4.4-5.1 cm]) (P < 0.01). AR patients were significantly younger than AA patients (58.5 ± 13.0 years vs 63.2 ± 13.3 years; P < 0.01) and more commonly male (78% vs 65%; P < 0.01). Postoperative and long-term outcomes did not differ between groups., Conclusions: ATAD appears to occur at smaller diameters in patients with modest dilation in the AR vs the AA (4.6 vs 4.8 cm). These findings may have implications for future consensus guidelines regarding the management of patients with aortic disease., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: We sought to examine management and outcomes of (Stanford) type A aortic dissection (TAAAD) in patients aged >70 years., Methods: All patients with TAAAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection database (1996-2018) were studied (n = 5553). Patients were stratified by age and therapeutic strategy. Outcomes for octogenarians were compared with those for septuagenarians. Variables associated with in-hospital mortality were identified by multivariable logistic regression., Results: In-hospital mortality for all patients (all ages) was 19.7% (1167 deaths), 16.1% after surgical intervention vs 52.1% for medical management (P < 0.001). Of the study population, 1281 patients (21.6%) were aged 71-80 years and 475 (8.0%) were >80 years. Fewer octogenarians underwent surgery versus septuagenarians (68.1% vs 85.9%, P < 0.001). Overall mortality was higher for octogenarians versus septuagenarians (32.0% vs 25.6%, P = 0.008); however, surgical mortality was similar (25.1% vs 21.7%, P = 0.205). Postoperative complications were comparable between surgically managed cohorts, although reoperation for bleeding was more common in septuagenarians (8.1% vs 3.2%, P = 0.033). Kaplan-Meier 5-year survival was significantly superior after surgical repair in all age groups, including septuagenarians (57.0% vs 13.7%, P < 0.001) and octogenarians (35.5% vs 22.6%, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: When compared with septuagenarians, a smaller percentage of octogenarians undergo surgical repair for TAAAD, even though postoperative outcomes are similar. Age alone should not preclude consideration for surgery in appropriately selected patients with TAAAD., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Worse outcomes have been reported for women with type A acute aortic dissection (TAAD). We sought to determine sex-specific operative approaches and outcomes for TAAD in the current era., Methods: The Interventional Cohort (IVC) of the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) database was queried to explore sex differences in presentation, operative approach, and outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify adjusted outcomes in relation to sex., Results: Women constituted approximately one-third (34.3%) of the 2823 patients and were significantly older than men (65.4 vs 58.6 years, P < .001). Women were more likely to present with intramural hematoma, periaortic hematoma, or complete or partial false lumen thrombosis (all P < .05) and more commonly had hypotension or coma (P = .001). Men underwent a greater proportion of Bentall, complete arch, and elephant trunk procedures (all P < .01). In-hospital mortality during the study period was higher in women (16.7% vs 13.8%, P = .039). After adjustment, female sex trended towards higher in-hospital mortality overall (odds ratio, 1.40; P = .053) but not in the last decade of enrollment (odds ratio, 0.93; P = .807). Five-year mortality and reintervention rates were not significantly different between the sexes., Conclusions: In-hospital mortality remains higher among women with TAAD but demonstrates improvement in the last decade. Significant differences in presentation were noted in women, including older age, distinct imaging findings, and greater evidence of malperfusion. Although no distinctions in 5-year mortality or reintervention were observed, a tailored surgical approach should be considered to reduce sex disparities in early mortality rates for TAAD., (Copyright © 2022 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal strategy for cerebral protection during repair of type A acute aortic dissection has yet to be determined. We sought to determine the impact of differing degrees of hypothermia in patients undergoing acute dissection repair., Methods: All patients in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Interventional Cohort database who underwent type A acute aortic dissection repair between 2010 and 2018 were identified. Data for operative temperature were available for 1962 patients subsequently divided into 2 groups according to lowest temperature: moderate hypothermic circulatory arrest (MHCA) (20-28°C) versus deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA) (<20°C). We then propensity matched 362 pairs of patients and analyzed operative data and short-term outcomes., Results: The median lowest temperature was 25.0°C in the matched MHCA group as compared with 18.0°C in the DHCA group. For the entire cohort of 1962 patients, in-hospital mortality was 14.2% (278 deaths) but was not significantly different between DHCA and MHCA. The perioperative stroke rate was comparable between groups, before and after propensity matching. Circulatory arrest times were significantly longer in the MHCA cohort, regardless of matching. Use of antegrade or retrograde cerebral perfusion was similar in matched groups. There were no differences in 30-day survival or in other major postoperative morbidity between the 2 matched cohorts., Conclusions: A surgical strategy of MHCA + antegrade cerebral perfusion is at least as safe as DHCA during repair of acute type A aortic dissection., (Copyright © 2021 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The strategy for intervention remains controversial for patients presenting with type A aortic dissection (TAAAD) and cerebral malperfusion with neurologic deficit., Methods: Surgically managed patients with TAAAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection were evaluated to determine the incidence and prognosis of patients with cerebral malperfusion., Results: A total of 2402 patients underwent surgical repair of TAAAD. Of these, 362 (15.1%) presented with cerebral malperfusion (CM) and neurologic deficits, and 2040 (84.9%) patients had no neurologic deficits at presentation. Patients with CM were more less likely to present with chest pain (66% vs 86.5%; P < .001) and back pain (35.9% vs 44.4%; P = .008). Patients with CM were more likely to present with syncope (48.4% vs 10.1%; P < .001), peripheral malperfusion (52.7% vs 38.0%; P < .001), and shock (16.2% vs 4.1%; P < .001). There was no difference in the incidence of Marfan syndrome (2.8% vs 3.0%; P = .870) or history of known aortic aneurysm (11.7% vs 13.9%; P = .296). Patients with CM were more likely to have a DeBakey I (63.8% vs 47.1%; P < .001) and a pericardial effusion (53.8% vs 40.6; P < .001) on presentation. There was no difference in total arch replacement (21.3% for CM vs 19.5% for no CM; P = .473). Patients with CM had an increased incidence of postoperative cerebrovascular accident (17.5% vs 7.2%; P < .001) and acute kidney injury (28.3% vs 18.1%; P < .001). In-hospital mortality was greater in patients with CM (25.7% vs 12.0%; P < .001)., Conclusions: Fifteen percent of patients with TAAAD presented with CM and neurologic deficits. Despite the fact that this subset of the population was older and more likely to present with peripheral malperfusion, cardiac tamponade, and in shock, in-hospital survival was noted in nearly 75% of the patients. Surgeons may continue to offer lifesaving surgery for TAAAD to this critically ill cohort of patients with acceptable morbidity and mortality., (Copyright © 2019 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD) represents a surgical emergency requiring intervention regardless of time of day. Whether such a "evening effect" exists regarding outcomes for TAAAD has not been previously studied using a large registry data., Methods: Patients with TAAAD were identified from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissections (1996-2019). Outcomes were compared between patients undergoing operative repair during the daytime (D), defined as 8 am-5 pm, versus the evening (N), defined as 5 pm-8 am., Results: Four thousand one-hundrd and ninety-seven surgically treated patients with TAAAD were identified, with 1824 patients undergoing daytime surgery (43.5%) and 2373 patients undergoing evening surgery (56.5%). Daytime patients were more likely to have undergone prior cardiac surgery (13.2% vs. 9.5%; p < .001) and have had a prior aortic dissection (4.8% vs. 3.4%; p = .04). Evening patients were more likely to have been transferred from a referring hospital (70.8% vs. 75.0%; p = .003). Daytime patients were more likely to undergo aortic valve sparing root procedures (23.3% vs. 19.2%; p = .035); however, total arch replacement was performed with equal frequency (19.4% vs. 18.8%; p = .751). In-hospital mortality (D: 17.3% vs. N. 16.2%; p = .325) was similar between both groups. Subgroup analysis examining the effect of weekend presentation revealed no significant mortality difference., Conclusions: A majority of TAAAD patients underwent surgical repair at night. There were higher rates of postoperative tamponade in evening patients; however, mortality was similar. The expertise of cardiac-dedicated operative and critical care teams regardless of time of day as well as training paradigms may explain similar mortality outcomes in this high risk population., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objective: To analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of acute aortic dissections with proximal entry tear in the arch., Methods: Patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection and entry tear in the arch were classified into 2 groups: arch A (retrograde extension into the ascending aorta with or without antegrade extension) and arch B (only antegrade extension into the descending aorta or further distally). Presentation, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the 2 groups were compared., Results: The arch A (n = 228) and arch B (n = 140) groups were similar concerning the presence of any preoperative complication (68.4% vs 60.0%; P = .115), but the types of complication were different. Arch A presented more commonly with shock, neurologic complications, cardiac tamponade, and grade 3 or 4 aortic valve insufficiency and less frequently with refractory hypertension, visceral ischemia, extension of dissection, and aortic rupture. Management for both groups were open surgery (77.6% vs 18.6%; P < .001), endovascular treatment (3.5% vs 25.0%; P < .001), and medical management (16.2% vs 51.4%; P < .001). Overall in-hospital mortality was similar (16.7% vs 19.3%; P = .574), but mortality tended to be lower in the arch A group after open surgery (15.3% vs 30.8%; P = .090), and higher after endovascular (25.0% vs 14.3%; P = .597) or medical treatment (24.3% vs 13.9%; P = .191), although the differences were not significant., Conclusions: Acute aortic dissection patients with primary entry tear in the arch are currently managed by a patient-specific approach. In choosing the management type of these patients, it may be advisable to stratify them based on retrograde or only antegrade extension of the dissection., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The DeBakey classification divides type A acute aortic dissection (AAD) into type I and type II; the latter limited to the ascending aorta. We endeavored to examine differences in DeBakey groups in a contemporary registry. We divided 1,872 patients with noniatrogenic AAD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection into type I (n = 1691, 90.3%) and type II (n = 181, 9.7%). Patients with type II AAD were older. On presentation, patients with type I AAD reported more back and abdominal pain and were more likely to have pulse deficit. Intramural hematoma was more frequent in type II AAD. Most patients with both types were treated surgically. Lower rates of renal failure, coma, mesenteric and limb ischemia were noted in those with type II AAD. In-hospital death was less frequent (16.6% vs 22.5%) after type II AAD, a trend that did not reach significance. There was no difference in the incidence of new dissection, rapid aortic growth, late aortic intervention or survival at 5 years. In conclusion, AAD limited to the ascending aorta (DeBakey type II) appears to be associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with dissection that extend to the aortic arch or beyond. Although fewer dissection-related complications were noted in patients presenting with type II AAD, as was a trend toward reduced in-hospital mortality, 5-year survival and descending aortic sequelae are not reduced in this contemporary report from International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Presenting systolic blood pressure (SBP) is a powerful predictor of mortality in many cardiovascular settings, including acute coronary syndromes, cardiogenic shock, and acute heart failure., Objectives: This study evaluated the association of presenting SBP with in-hospital outcomes, specifically all-cause mortality, in acute aortic dissection (AAD)., Methods: The study included 6,238 consecutive patients (4,167 with type A and 2,071 with type B AAD) enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection. Patients were stratified in 4 groups according to presenting SBP: SBP >150, SBP 101 to 150, SBP 81 to 100, or SBP ≤80 mm Hg., Results: The relationship between presenting SBP and in-hospital mortality displayed a J-curve association, with significantly higher mortality rates in patients with very high SBP (26.3% for SBP >180 mm Hg in type A AAD, 13.3% for SBP >200 mm Hg in type B AAD; p = 0.005 and p = 0.018, respectively) as well as in those with SBP ≤100 mm Hg (29.9% in type A, 22.4% in type B; p = 0.033 and p = 0.015, respectively). This relationship was mainly from increased rates of in-hospital complications (acute renal failure, coma, and mesenteric ischemia/infarction in patients with SBP >150 mm Hg; stroke, coma, cardiac tamponade, myocardial ischemia/infarction, and acute renal failure in patients with SBP ≤80 mm Hg). Notably, presenting SBP ≤80 mm Hg was independently associated with in-hospital mortality in both type A (p = 0.001) and type B AAD (p = 0.003)., Conclusions: Presenting SBP showed a clear J-curve relationship with in-hospital mortality in patients with AAD. Although this association was related to increased rates of comorbid conditions at the edges of the curve, SBP ≤80 mm Hg was an independent correlate of in-hospital mortality., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The purpose of this research is to analyze factors associated with delays to surgical management of Type A acute aortic dissection patients., Methods: Time from diagnosis to surgery and associated factors were evaluated in 1880 surgically managed Type A dissection patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection., Results: The majority of patients were transferred (75.7% vs 24.3%). Patients who were transferred had a median delay from diagnosis to surgery of 4.0 hours (interquartile range 2.5-7.2 hours), compared with 2.3 hours (interquartile range 1.1-4.2 hours; P < .001) in nontransferred patients. Among patients who were transferred, those with worst-ever, posterior, or tearing chest pain those with severe complications, and those receiving transthoracic echocardiogram prior to a transesophageal echocardiogram or as the only echocardiogram were treated more quickly. Those undergoing magnetic resonance imaging, or who had prior cardiac surgery, had longer delays to surgery. Among nontransferred patients, those with coma were treated more quickly. In both groups, patients presenting with emergent conditions such as cardiac tamponade, hypotension, or shock had more rapid treatment. Among transferred patients, surviving patients had longer delays (4.1 [2.6-7.8] hours vs 3.3 [2.0-6.0] hours, P = .001). Overall mortality did not differ between patients who were transferred vs not (19.3% vs 21.1%, P = .416)., Conclusion: Simply being transferred added significantly to the delay to surgery for Type A acute aortic dissection patients, but a number of factors affected its extent. Overall, signs and symptoms leading to a definitive diagnosis or indicating immediate life threat reduced time to surgery, while factors suggesting other diagnoses correlated with delays., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The recommended extent of surgical resection and reconstruction of the arch in acute DeBakey Type I aortic dissection is an ongoing controversy. However, several recent reports indicate a trend towards a more extensive arch operation in several institutions. We have analysed the recent data from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection to assess the choice of procedure over time and to evaluate the surgical outcome in a 'real-world' database. Our aim was to compare short- and mid-term outcomes of limited repairs versus complete arch surgery., Methods: Of the 1241 patients included in the 'Interventional Cohort' of the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from March 1996 to March 2015, 907 underwent ascending aortic or hemiarch replacement (Group A) and 334 had extended arch replacement (Group B). An extended resection was a surgeon's 'judgement call'. Logistic regression analysis, propensity-adjusted multivariable comparisons and Kaplan-Meier curves were used for analyses., Results: Overall in-hospital mortality was 14.2% with no difference between groups (Group A 13.1%, Group B 17.1%). Coma/altered consciousness (odds ratio 3.16, 95% confidence interval 1.60-6.25, P = 0.001), hypotension, tamponade or shock (2.03, 1.11-3.73, P = 0.022) and any pulse deficit (1.92, 1.04-3.54, P = 0.038) were predictors of in-hospital mortality in a propensity score-adjusted multivariable analysis. Overall 5-year survival was 69.4% in the ascending group and 73.1% in the total arch group (P = 0.83 by Kaplan-Meier analysis). For survivors of the index hospitalization, the 5-year freedom from death, aortic rupture and reintervention were 71.1% in Group A and 76.4% in Group B (P = 0.54 by Kaplan-Meier analysis)., Conclusions: Selective, or 'surgeon's choice', extended arch replacement had no discernible acute downside compared with less extensive surgery. Whether extended arch replacement improves the prognosis beyond 5 years remains to be settled., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: We aimed to identify predictors of stable aortic dimensions in medically managed type B aortic dissections (TBAD)., Methods: Medically managed TBAD patients from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection with available aortic measurements at up to 24 months were included. Growth rate was calculated by dividing the largest descending diameter at the latest end point not influenced by intervention minus initial descending diameter, by the recorded time interval. Patients were split into 2 groups: without aortic growth (<0.0 mm/year, group I) and with aortic growth (>0.0 mm/year, group II)., Results: 219 patients had available data for our inclusion criteria and comprised group I (n = 89, 40.6%) and group II (n = 130, 59.4%). Mean expansion rate of the total cohort was 0.19 ± 0.81 cm, mean expansion rate in group I was -0.47 ± 0.54 cm, and in group II, it was +0.63 ± 0.64 cm. Patients in group I were more frequently of Asian descent (15.9% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.001), showed more often intramural hematoma on imaging (57.3% vs. 30.0%, P < 0.001) and demonstrated complete false lumen thrombosis more frequently (25.0% vs. 9.9%, P = 0.009). Group II patients were more Caucasian (77.3% vs. 92.2%, P = 0.002), presented more with posterior chest pain (57.8% vs. 74.7%, P = 0.025), back pain (68.2% vs. 80.2%, P = 0.046), a visible double lumen (50.6% vs. 63.8%, P = 0.050), dissection originating from the left subclavian artery (51.2% vs. 68.5%, P = 0.011), and a completely patent false lumen (37.5% vs. 62.4%, P = 0.002). Mortality rates between groups were similar (2.2% vs. 1.5%, P = 0.708). Complete false lumen thrombosis was an independent predictor of no growth (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.640, P = 0.011), while a larger sinotubular junction (STJ) (HR: 0.304, P = 0.004) and female gender (HR: 0.325, P = 0.030) were negative predictors of no growth., Conclusions: Complete false lumen thrombosis was a predictor of no growth, while a large STJ and female gender were predictors of aortic growth. This study might help predict which medically treated TBAD patients might show a stable clinical course during follow-up., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

To provide data on the management and outcomes of patients with acute retrograde aortic dissection (AD) originating from a tear in the descending aorta with extension into the aortic arch or ascending aorta. All patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996-2015 were reviewed. Retrograde AD was defined by primary tear in the descending aorta with proximal extension into the arch or ascending aorta. Primary end points were in-hospital management strategy and mortality. We identified 101 patients with retrograde AD (67 men; 63.2 ± 14.0 years). During index hospitalization, medical (MED), open surgical (SURG), and endovascular (ENDO) therapies were undertaken in 44, 33, and 22 patients, respectively. The SURG group presented with larger ascending aorta (P = 0.04) and more frequent ascending aortic involvement (81.8% [27/33] vs 22.7% [15/66], P < 0.001) compared with the MED and ENDO groups. Early mortality rate was 9.1% (4/44), 18.2% (6/33), and 13.6% (3/22), for the MED, SURG, and ENDO groups (P = 0.51), respectively. A favorable early mortality rate was observed in patients with retrograde extension limited to the arch (8.6% [5/58]) vs into the ascending aorta (18.6% [8/43], P = 0.14). Early mortality rate of patients with retrograde AD with primary tear in the descending aorta (12.9% [13/101]) was significantly lower than those with classic type A AD presenting with primary tear in the ascending aorta (20.0% [195/977], P = 0.001). A subset of patients with acute retrograde AD originating from primary tear in the descending aorta might be managed less invasively with acceptable early results, particularly among those with proximal extension limited to the arch., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Advancements in cardiothoracic surgery prompted investigation into changes in operative management for acute type A aortic dissections over time., Methods: One thousand seven hundred thirty-two patients undergoing surgery for type A aortic dissection were identified from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Interventional Cohort Database. Patients were divided into time tertiles (T) (T1: 1996-2003, T2: 2004-2010, and T3: 2011-2016)., Results: Frequency of valve sparing procures increased (T1: 3.9%, T2: 18.6%, and T3: 26.7%; trend P < .001). Biologic valves were increasingly utilized (T1: 35.6%, T2; 40.6%, and T3: 52.0%; trend P = .009), whereas mechanical valve use decreased (T1: 57.6%, T2: 58.0%, and T3: 45.4%; trend P = .027) for aortic valve replacement. Adjunctive cerebral perfusion use increased (T1: 67.1%, T2: 89.5%, and T3: 84.8%; trend P < .001), with increase in antegrade cerebral techniques (T1: 55.9%, T2: 58.8%, and T3: 66.1%; trend P = .005) and hypothermic circulatory arrest (T1: 80.1%, T2: 85.9%, and T3: 86.8%; trend P = .030). Arterial perfusion through axillary cannulation increased (T1: 18.0%, T2: 33.2%, and T3: 55.7%), whereas perfusion via a femoral approach diminished (T1: 76.0%, T2: 53.3%, and T3: 30.1%) (both P values < .001). Hemiarch replacement was utilized more frequently (T1: 27.0%, T2: 63.3%, and T3: 51.7%; trend P = .001) and partial arch was utilized less frequently (T1: 20.7%, T2: 12.0%, and T3: 8.4%; trend P < .001), whereas complete arch replacement was used similarly (P = .131). In-hospital mortality significantly decreased (T1: 17.5%, T2: 15.8%, and T3: 12.2%; trend P = .017)., Conclusions: There have been significant changes in operative strategy over time in the management of type A aortic dissection, with more frequent use of valve-sparing procedures, bioprosthetic aortic valve substitutes, antegrade cerebral perfusion strategies, and hypothermic circulatory arrest. Most importantly, a significant decrease of in-hospital mortality was observed during the 20-year timespan., (Copyright © 2017 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Postoperative myocardial infarction remains a serious complication in cardiac surgery. The incidence and impact of this condition in acute type A aortic dissection are poorly understood., Methods: A total of 1445 patients with acute type A aortic dissection who underwent surgery were enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2013. Individuals with preoperative myocardial infarction at hospital presentation and a history of myocardial infarction were excluded. Patients with postoperative myocardial infarction (n = 38, 2.6%) were compared with those without postoperative myocardial infarction (n = 1407, 97.4%)., Results: The postoperative myocardial infarction group was more often of white race (100% vs 90%, P = .043) with bicuspid aortic valve (15.6% vs 4.5%, P = .015). Imaging demonstrated more aortic root involvement (75.8% vs 49.5%, P = .003), pericardial effusion (65.5% vs 44.1%, P = .022), and coronary artery compromise (27.3% vs 10.2%, P = .022). Patients with postoperative myocardial infarction were more frequently hypotensive or in shock during surgery (42.9% vs 25.5%, P = .021). Patients with postoperative myocardial infarction were more likely to have undergone root replacement (54.5% vs 33.3%, P = .011), coronary artery bypass grafting (28.6% vs 7.4%, P < .001), or aortic valve replacement (40.0% vs 23.8%, P = .027), and less likely to have had complete arch replacement (2.8% vs 14.0%, P = .050). Median circulatory arrest time was higher in postoperative myocardial infarction (60 vs 38 minutes, P = .024). In-hospital mortality (57.9% vs 16.3%, P < .001) and Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year mortality (P = .007) were distinctly higher in postoperative myocardial infarction., Conclusions: Postoperative myocardial infarction is a devastating complication of type A aortic dissection repair. It is associated with bicuspid aortic valve, root involvement, pericardial effusion, and extent of surgical repair. Patients with postoperative myocardial infarction have higher serious postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality, and 5-year mortality rates than those without postoperative myocardial infarction., (Copyright © 2016 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Optimal management of acute type B aortic dissection with retrograde arch extension is controversial. The effect of retrograde arch extension on operative and long-term mortality has not been studied and is not incorporated into clinical treatment pathways., Methods: The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection was queried for all patients presenting with acute type B dissection and an identifiable primary intimal tear. Outcomes were stratified according to management for patients with and without retrograde arch extension. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed., Results: Between 1996 and 2014, 404 patients (mean age, 63.3 ± 13.9 years) were identified. Retrograde arch extension existed in 67 patients (16.5%). No difference in complicated presentation was noted (36.8% vs 31.7%, p = 0.46), as defined by limb or organ malperfusion, coma, rupture, and shock. Patients with or without retrograde arch extension received similar treatment, with medical management in 53.7% vs 56.5% (p = 0.68), endovascular treatment in 32.8% vs 31.1% (p = 0.78), open operation in 11.9% vs 9.5% (p = 0.54), or hybrid approach in 1.5% vs 3.0% (p = 0.70), respectively. The in-hospital mortality rate was similar for patients with (10.7%) and without (10.4%) retrograde arch extension (p = 0.96), and 5-year survival was also similar at 78.3% and 77.8%, respectively (p = 0.27)., Conclusions: The incidence of retrograde arch dissection involves approximately 16% of patients with acute type B dissection. In the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection, this entity seems not to affect management strategy or early and late death., (Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Shock is among the most dreaded and common complications of type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD). However, clinical correlates, management, and short- and long-term outcomes of TAAAD patients presenting with shock in real-world clinical practice are not known., Methods and Results: We evaluated 2,704 patients with TAAAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection between January 1, 1996, and August 18, 2012. On admission, 407 (15.1%) TAAAD patients presented with shock. Most in-hospital complications (coma, myocardial or mesenteric ischemia or infarction, and cardiac tamponade) were more frequent in shock patients. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in TAAAD patients with than without shock (30.2% vs 23.9%, P=.007), regardless of surgical or medical treatment. Most shock patients underwent surgical repair, with medically managed patients demonstrating older age and more complications at presentation. Estimates using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated that most (89%) TAAAD patients with shock discharged alive from the hospital survived 5years, a rate similar to that of TAAAD patients without shock (82%, P=.609)., Conclusions: Shock occurred in 1 of 7 TAAAD patients and was associated with higher rates of in-hospital adverse events and mortality. However, TAAAD survivors with or without shock showed similar long-term mortality. Successful early and aggressive management of shock in TAAAD patients has the potential for improving long-term survival in this patient population., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Currently no research exists assessing lifestyle modifications and emotional state of acute aortic dissection (AAD) survivors. We sought to assess activity, mental health, and sexual function in AAD survivors., Hypothesis: Physical and sexual activity will decrease in AAD survivors compared to pre-dissection. Incidence of anxiety and depression will be significant after AAD., Methods: A cross sectional survey was mailed to 197 subjects from a single academic medical center (part of larger IRAD database). Subjects were ≥18 years of age surviving a type A or B AAD between 1996 and 2011. 82 surveys were returned (overall response rate 42%)., Results: Mean age ± SD was 59.5 ± 13.7 years, with 54.9% type A and 43.9% type B patients. Walking remained the most prevalent form of physical activity (49 (60%) pre-dissection and 47 (57%) post-dissection). Physical inactivity increased from 14 (17%) before AAD to 20 (24%) after AAD; sexual activity decreased from 31 (38%) to 9 (11%) mostly due to fear. Most patients (66.7%) were not exerting themselves physically or emotionally at AAD onset. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 36 months post-discharge for patients engaging in ≥2 sessions of aerobic activity/week was 126.67 ± 10.30 vs. 141.10 ± 11.87 (p-value 0.012) in those who did not. Self-reported new-onset depression after AAD was 32% and also 32% for new-onset anxiety., Conclusions: Alterations in lifestyle and emotional state are frequent in AAD survivors. Clinicians should screen for unfounded fears or beliefs after dissection that may reduce function and/or quality of life for AAD survivors., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of acute aortic dissection (AAS) are changing., Objectives: This study examined 17-year trends in the presentation, diagnosis, and hospital outcomes of AAD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD)., Methods: Data from 4,428 patients enrolled at 28 IRAD centers between December 26, 1995, and February 6, 2013, were analyzed. Patients were divided according to enrollment date into 6 equal groups and by AAD type: A (n = 2,952) or B (n = 1,476)., Results: There was no change in the presenting complaints of severe or worst-ever pain for type A and type B AAD (93% and 94%, respectively), nor in the incidence of chest pain (83% and 71%, respectively). Use of computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of type A increased from 46% to 73% (p < 0.001). Surgical management for type A increased from 79% to 90% (p < 0.001). Endovascular management of type B increased from 7% to 31% (p < 0.001). Type A in-hospital mortality decreased significantly (31% to 22%; p < 0.001), as surgical mortality (25% to 18%; p = 0.003). There was no significant trend in in-hospital mortality in type B (from 12% to 14%)., Conclusions: Presenting symptoms and physical findings of AAD have not changed significantly. Use of chest CT increased for type A. More patients in both groups were managed with interventional procedures: surgery in type A and endovascular therapy in type B. A significant decrease in overall in-hospital mortality was seen for type A but not for type B., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Acute type B aortic dissection (ABAD) can lead to visceral malperfusion, a potentially life-threatening complication. The purpose of this study was to investigate the presentation, management, and outcomes of ABAD patients with visceral ischemia who are enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection., Methods: Patients with ABAD enrolled in the registry between 1996 and 2013 were identified and stratified based on presence of visceral ischemia at admission. Demographics, medical history, imaging results, management, and outcomes were compared for patients with versus without visceral ischemia., Results: A total of 1456 ABAD patients were identified, of which 104 (7.1%) presented with visceral ischemia. Preoperative limb ischemia (28% vs 7%, P < .001) and acute renal failure (41% vs 14%, P < .001) were more common among patients with visceral ischemia. Endovascular treatment and surgery were offered to 49% and 30% of the visceral ischemia cohort, respectively; remaining patients were managed conservatively. The in-hospital mortality was 30.8% for patients with visceral ischemia and 9.1% for those without visceral ischemia (odds ratio [OR] 4.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-7.0, P < .0001). Mortality rates were similar after surgical and endovascular management of visceral ischemia (25.8% and 25.5%, respectively, P = not significant). Among the visceral ischemia group, medical management was a predictor of mortality in multivariate analysis (OR, 5.91; 95% CI, 1.2-31.0; P = .036)., Conclusions: Patients with ABAD complicated by visceral ischemia have a high risk of mortality. We observed similar outcomes for patients treated by endovascular management versus surgery, whereas medical management was an independent predictor of mortality. Early diagnosis and intervention for visceral ischemia seems to be crucial., (Copyright © 2015 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Aortic root management in type A acute aortic dissection is controversial. This study compared outcomes of root replacement (RR) interventions versus more conservative root (CR) management., Methods: Of 1,995 type A acute aortic dissection patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection, 699 (35%) underwent RR interventions and 1,296 (65%) underwent CR management. Independent predictors of hospital and 3-year survival were identified using multivariable logistic and Cox regression models., Results: Compared with CR patients, RR patients were younger (56.9 versus 62.3 years; p = 0.023) and more likely to present with larger root diameter (4.7 cm versus 4.0 cm; p < 0.001), Marfan syndrome (8.7% versus 2.5%; p < 0.001), aortic insufficiency (64.0% versus 50.3%; p < 0.001), and hypotension, shock, or tamponade (33.0% versus 26.5%; p = 0.003). Root replacement management did not increase hospital mortality (propensity score-adjusted odds ratio, 1.14; p = 0.674). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 3-year survival (RR, 92.5% ± 1.7% versus CR, 91.6% ± 1.3%; log-rank p = 0.623) and freedom from aortic root reintervention (RR, 99.2% ± 0.1% versus CR, 99.3% ± 0.1%; log-rank p = 0.770) were similar. Only 2 patients (1 per group) underwent follow-up root reintervention. Propensity score-adjusted Cox regression excluded a relationship between root treatment and follow-up survival (hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.502 to 5.010; p = 0.432)., Conclusions: In type A acute aortic dissection patients more-extensive RR interventions are not associated with increased hospital mortality. This supports such an approach in young patients and patients with connective tissue diseases and bicuspid aortic valves. Excellent midterm survival and freedom from root reintervention in both groups suggest stable behavior of the nonreplaced aortic sinuses at 3 years. Thus, pending studies with longer follow-up, the use of aggressive RR techniques can be determined by patient-specific and dissection-related factors., (Copyright © 2014 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Acute aortic dissection associated with cocaine use is rare and has been reported predominantly as single cases or in small patient cohorts., Methods: Our study analyzed 3584 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2012. We divided the population on the basis of documented cocaine use (C+) versus non cocaine use (C-) and further stratified the cohorts into type A (33 C+/2332, 1.4%) and type B (30 C+/1252, 2.4%) dissection., Results: C+ patients presented at a younger age and were more likely to be male and black. Type B dissections were more common among C+ patients than in C- patients. Cocaine-related acute aortic dissection was reported more often at US sites than at European sites (86.4%, 51/63 vs 13.6%, 8/63; P < .001). Tobacco use was more prevalent in the C+ cohort. No differences were seen in history of hypertension, known atherosclerosis, or time from symptom onset to presentation. Type B C+ patients were more likely to be hypertensive at presentation. C+ patients had significantly smaller ascending aortic diameters at presentation. Acute renal failure was more common in type A C+ patients; however, mortality was significantly lower in type A C+ patients., Conclusions: Cocaine use is implicated in 1.8% of patients with acute aortic dissection. The typical patient is relatively young and has the additional risk factors of hypertension and tobacco use. In-hospital mortality for those with cocaine-related type A dissection is lower than for those with non cocaine-related dissection, likely due to the younger age at presentation., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Little is known about the relation between type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD) and pulse pressure (PP), defined as the difference between systolic and diastolic blood pressure. In this study, we explored the association between PP and presentation, complications, and outcomes of patients with TAAAD. PP at hospital presentation was used to divide 1,960 patients with noniatrogenic TAAAD into quartiles: narrowed (≤39 mm Hg, n=430), normal (40 to 56 mm Hg, n=554), mildly elevated (57 to 75 mm Hg, n=490), and markedly elevated (≥76 mm Hg, n=486). Variables relating to index presentation and in-hospital outcomes were analyzed. Patients with TAAAD in the narrowed PP quartiles were frequently older and Caucasian, whereas patients with markedly elevated PPs tended to be male and have a history of hypertension. Patients who demonstrated abdominal vessel involvement more commonly demonstrated elevated PPs, whereas patients with narrowed PPs were more likely to have periaortic hematoma and/or pericardial effusion. Narrowed PPs were also correlated with greater incidences of hypotension, cardiac tamponade, and mortality. Patients with TAAAD who were managed with endovascular and hybrid procedures and those with renal failure tended to have markedly elevated PPs. No difference in aortic regurgitation at presentation was noted among groups. In conclusion, patients with TAAAD in the third PP quartile had better in-hospital outcomes than patients in the lowest quartile. Patients with narrowed PPs experienced more cardiac complications, particularly cardiac tamponade, whereas those with markedly elevated PPs were more likely to have abdominal aortic involvement. Presenting PP offers a clue to different manifestations of acute aortic dissection that may facilitate initial triage and care., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Complicated acute type B aortic dissection (cABAD) generally requires urgent intervention. Advanced age is a risk factor for mortality after thoracic aortic intervention, including surgery for aortic dissection. The purpose of this study was to investigate the exact impact of increasing age on the management and outcomes of cABAD., Methods: We analyzed the outcomes of 583 patients with cABAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and 2012. All patients with cABAD were categorized according to age by decade and management type (medical, surgical, or endovascular treatment), and outcomes were subsequently investigated in the different age groups., Results: The mean age of the cohort was 63.4 ± 14.2 years, 36% of patients (n = 209) were greater than 70 years of age and 64% (n = 374) were less than 70 years. The utilization of surgery and endovascular techniques progressively decreased with patient age, while the rate of medical management significantly increased with age (p < 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rates for complicated patients younger than 70 years versus 70 years or more were 10.1% versus 30.0% for endovascular treatment (p = 0.001), 17.2% versus 34.2% for surgical treatment (p = 0.027), and 14.2% versus 32.2% for medical treatment (p = 0.001). Age 70 years or greater was a predictor of in-hospital mortality in multivariate analysis (odds ratio 2.37, 95% confidence interval: 1.23 to 4.54, p = 0.010)., Conclusions: Advanced age has a dramatic impact on the management and outcomes of patients with cABAD. A nonsignificant trend toward lower mortality after endovascular management was observed, both for younger patients and for elderly patients., (Copyright © 2013 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Few data exist on race-related differences in acute aortic dissection patients., Methods: We evaluated black (n = 189, 14%) or white (n = 1165, 86%) patients (mean age 62.8 ± 15.3 years; 36.4% women) enrolled in 13 US centers participating in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection. We excluded patients of other racial descent., Results: Type B acute aortic dissection was more frequent in the black cohort (52.4% vs 39.3%, P = .001). Black patients were younger (mean age 54.6 ± 12.8 years vs 64.2 ± 15.2 years, P <.001) and more likely to have a history of cocaine abuse (12% vs 1.6%, P <.001), hypertension (89.7% vs 73.9%, P <.001), and diabetes (13.2% vs 6.4%, P = .001). Conversely, they were less likely to have bicuspid aortic valve (1.8% vs 5.8%, P = .029), iatrogenic dissection (0.5% vs 4.5%, P = .010), and prior aortic dissection repair (7.7% vs 12.8%, P = .047). Presenting features were similar except for more abdominal pain (44.6% vs 30.6%, P <.001) and left ventricular hypertrophy on echocardiogram (44.2% vs 20.1%, P <.001) in blacks. Management was similar. Hypotension/shock/tamponade was less common (7.6% vs 20.1%, P <.001), whereas acute kidney failure was more common (41.0% vs 21.7%, P <.001) in blacks. Mortality was similar in-hospital (14.3% vs 19.1%, P = .110, odds ratio 0.704, 95% confidence interval 0.457-1.085) and at 3 years postdischarge, as evaluated by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (22.0% vs 14.3%, P = .224, SE = 0.062 and 0.018)., Conclusions: Our study shows differences in type, etiology, and presentation of blacks and whites with acute aortic dissection, yet similar mortality for these cohorts., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Stroke is a highly dreaded complication of type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD). However, little data exist on its incidence and association with prognosis., Methods and Results: We evaluated 2202 patients with TAAAD (mean age 62 ± 14 years, 1487 [67.5%] men) from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection to determine the incidence and prognostic impact of stroke in TAAAD. Stroke was present at arrival in 132 (6.0%) patients with TAAAD. These patients were older (65 ± 12 versus 62 ± 15 years; P=0.002) and more likely to have hypertension (86% versus 71%; P=0.001) or atherosclerosis (29% versus 22%; P=0.04) than patients without stroke. Chest pain at arrival was less common in patients with stroke (70% versus 82%; P<0.001), and patients with stroke presented more often with syncope (44% versus 15%; P<0.001), shock (14% versus 7%; P=0.005), or pulse deficit (51% versus 29%; P ≤ 0.001). Arch vessel involvement was more frequent among patients with stroke (68% versus 37%; P<0.001). They had less surgical management (74% versus 85%; P<0.001). Hospital stay was significantly longer in patients with stroke (median 17.9 versus 13.3 days; P<0.001). In-hospital complications, such as hypotension, coma, and malperfusion syndromes, and in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-2.65) were higher among patients with stroke. Among hospital survivors, follow-up mortality was similar between groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-2.89)., Conclusions: Stroke occurred in >1 of 20 patients with TAAAD and was associated with increased in-hospital morbidity but not long-term mortality. Whether aggressive early invasive interventions will reduce negative outcomes remains to be evaluated in future studies.

Background: Prior cardiac surgery (PCS) can complicate the presentation and management of patients with type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD). This report from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection examines this hypothesis., Methods and Results: A total of 352 of 2196 patients with TAAAD (16%) enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection had cardiac surgery before dissection, including coronary artery bypass grafting (34%), aortic or mitral valve surgery (36%), aortic surgery (42%), and other cardiac surgery (16%). Those with PCS were older, had a higher frequency of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and atherosclerosis, and presented later from symptom onset to hospital presentation and diagnosis (all P<0.05). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher for PCS patients (34% versus 23%; P<0.001). Five-year mortality was independently predicted by PCS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-3.95), age >70 years (HR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.40-5.05), medical management (HR, 5.10; 95% CI, 2.43-10.71), distal communication (HR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.35-5.14), and coma (HR, 9.50; 95% CI, 2.05-44.05). Among patients with PCS, in-hospital (43% medical versus 30% surgical; P=0.033) and intermediate-term mortality was higher in patients with medical versus surgical management. Propensity-matched analysis revealed significant increase in mortality with medical management, but not with PCS., Conclusions: PCS delays presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of TAAAD and is an important adverse risk factor for early and intermediate-term mortality. This effect may be because of increased medical management in this patient population.

Background: The classification of aortic dissection into acute (<14 days from symptom onset) versus chronic (≥14 days) is based on survival estimates of patients treated decades before modern diagnostic and treatment modalities were available. A new classification of aortic dissection in the current era may provide clinicians with a more precise method of characterizing the interaction of time, dissection location, and treatment type with survival., Methods: We developed separate Kaplan-Meier survival curves for Type A and Type B aortic dissection using data from the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD). Daily survival was stratified based on type of therapy provided: medical therapy alone (medical), nonsurgical intervention plus medical therapy (endovascular), and open surgery plus medical therapy (surgical). The log-rank statistic was used to compare the survival curves of each management type within Type A and Type B aortic dissection., Results: There were 1815 patients included, 67.3% male with mean age 62.0 ± 14.2 years. When survival curves were constructed, 4 distinct time periods were noted: hyperacute (symptom onset to 24 hours), acute (2-7 days), subacute (8-30 days), and chronic (>30 days). Overall survival was progressively lower through the 4 time periods., Conclusions: This IRAD classification system can provide clinicians with a more robust method of characterizing survival after aortic dissection over time than previous methods. This system will be useful for treating patients, counseling patients and families, and studying new diagnostic and treatment methods., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Partial thrombosis of the false lumen has been related to aortic growth, reoperations, and death in the chronic phase of type B and repaired type A aortic dissections. The impact of preoperative false lumen thrombosis has not been studied previously. We used data from a contemporary, multinational database on aortic dissections to evaluate whether different degrees of preoperative false lumen thrombosis influenced long-term prognosis., Methods and Results: We examined the records of 522 patients with surgically treated acute type A aortic dissections who survived to discharge between 1996 and 2011. At the preoperative imaging, 414 (79.3%) patients had patent false lumens, 84 (16.1%) had partial thrombosis of the false lumen, and 24 (4.6%) had complete thrombosis of the false lumen. The annual median (interquartile range) aortic growth rates were 0.5 (-0.3 to 2.0) mm in the aortic arch, 2.0 (0.2 to 4.0) mm in the descending thoracic aorta, and similar regardless of the degree of false lumen thrombosis. The overall 5-year survival rate was 84.7%, and it was not influenced by false lumen thrombosis (P=0.86 by the log-rank test). Independent predictors of long-term mortality were age >70 years (hazard ratio [HR], 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 4.56, P=0.012) and postoperative cerebrovascular accident, coma, and/or renal failure (HR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.40 to 4.92, P=0.003)., Conclusions: Patients with acute type A aortic dissection who survive to discharge have a favorable prognosis. Preoperative false lumen thrombosis does not influence long-term mortality, reintervention rates, or aortic growth.

Background: Few data exist on clinical/imaging characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with type A acute dissection and mesenteric malperfusion., Methods: Patients with type A acute dissection enrolled in the International Registry for Acute Dissection (IRAD) were evaluated to assess differences in clinical features, management, and in-hospital outcomes according to the presence/absence of mesenteric malperfusion. A mortality model was used to identify predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients with mesenteric malperfusion., Results: Mesenteric malperfusion was detected in 68 (3.7%) of 1809 patients with type A acute dissection. Patients with mesenteric malperfusion were more likely to be older and to have coma, cerebrovascular accident, spinal cord ischemia, acute renal failure, limb ischemia, and any pulse deficit. They were less likely to undergo surgical/hybrid treatment (52.9% vs 87.9%) and more likely to receive only medical (30.9% vs 11.6%) or endovascular (16.2% vs 0.5%) management (P < .001). Overall in-hospital mortality was 63.2% and 23.8% in patients with and without mesenteric malperfusion, respectively (P < .001). In-hospital mortality of patients with mesenteric malperfusion receiving medical, endovascular, and surgical/hybrid therapy was 95.2%, 72.7%, and 41.7%, respectively (P < .001). At multivariate analysis, male gender (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; P = .002), age (OR, 1.1/y; P = .002), and renal failure (OR, 5.9; P = .020) were predictors of mortality whereas surgical/hybrid management (OR, 0.1; P = .005) was associated with better outcome., Conclusions: Type A acute aortic dissection complicated by mesenteric malperfusion is a rare but ominous complication carrying a high risk of hospital mortality. Surgical/hybrid therapy, although associated with 2-fold hospital mortality, appears to be associated with better long-term outcomes in the management of type A acute aortic dissection in this setting., (Copyright © 2013 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Acute aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) is an important subgroup of aortic dissection, and controversy surrounds appropriate management., Methods and Results: Patients with acute aortic syndromes in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (1996-2011) were evaluated to examine differences between patients (based on the initial imaging test) with IMH or classic dissection (AD). Of 2830 patients, 178 had IMH (64 type A [42%], 90 type B [58%], and 24 arch). Patients with IMH were older and presented with similar symptoms, such as severe pain. Patients with type A IMH were less likely to present with aortic regurgitation or pulse deficits and were more likely to have periaortic hematoma and pericardial effusion. Although type A IMH and AD were managed medically infrequently, type B IMH were more frequently treated medically. Overall in-hospital mortality was not statistically different for type A IMH compared to AD (26.6% versus 26.5%; P=0.998); type A IMH managed medically had significant mortality (40.0%), although less than classic AD (61.8%; P=0.195). Patients with type B IMH had a hospital mortality that was less but did not differ significantly (4.4% versus 11.1%; P=0.062) from classic AD. One-year mortality was not significantly different between AD and IMH., Conclusions: Acute IMH has similar presentation to classic AD but is more frequently complicated with pericardial effusions and periaortic hematoma. Patients with IMH have a mortality that does not differ statistically from those with classic AD. A small subgroup of type A IMH patients are managed medically and have a significant in-hospital mortality.

The effects of medications on the outcome of aortic dissection remain poorly understood. We sought to address this by analyzing the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) global registry database. A total of 1,301 patients with acute aortic dissection (722 with type A and 579 with type B) with information on their medications at discharge and followed for ≤5 years were analyzed for the effects of the medications on mortality. The initial univariate analysis showed that use of β blockers was associated with improved survival in all patients (p = 0.03), in patients with type A overall (p = 0.02), and in patients with type A who received surgery (p = 0.006). The analysis also showed that use of calcium channel blockers was associated with improved survival in patients with type B overall (p = 0.02) and in patients with type B receiving medical management (p = 0.03). Multivariate models also showed that the use of β blockers was associated with improved survival in those with type A undergoing surgery (odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.25 to 0.90, p = 0.02) and the use of calcium channel blockers was associated with improved survival in patients with type B medically treated patients (odds ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 0.88, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the present study showed that use of β blockers was associated with improved outcome in all patients and in type A patients (overall as well as in those managed surgically). In contrast, use of calcium channel blockers was associated with improved survival selectively in those with type B (overall and in those treated medically). The use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors did not show association with mortality., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In acute aortic dissection, delays exist between presentation and diagnosis and, once diagnosed, definitive treatment. This study aimed to define the variables associated with these delays., Methods and Results: Acute aortic dissection patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and January 2007 were evaluated for factors contributing to delays in presentation to diagnosis and in diagnosis to surgery. Multiple linear regression was performed to determine relative delay time ratios (DTRs) for individual correlates. The median time from arrival at the emergency department to diagnosis was 4.3 hours (quartile 1-3, 1.5-24 hours; n=894 patients) and from diagnosis to surgery was 4.3 hours (quartile 1-3, 2.4-24 hours; n=751). Delays in acute aortic dissection diagnosis occurred in female patients; those with atypical symptoms that were not abrupt or did not include chest, back, or any pain; patients with an absence of pulse deficit or hypotension; or those who initially presented to a nontertiary care hospital (all P<0.05). The largest relative DTRs were for fever (DTR=5.11; P<0.001) and transfer from nontertiary hospital (DTR=3.34; P<0.001). Delay in time from diagnosis to surgery was associated with a history of previous cardiac surgery, presentation without abrupt or any pain, and initial presentation to a nontertiary care hospital (all P<0.001). The strongest factors associated with operative delay were prolonged time from presentation to diagnosis (DTR=1.35; P<0.001), race other than white (DTR=2.25; P<0.001), and history of coronary artery bypass surgery (DTR=2.81; P<0.001)., Conclusions: Improved physician awareness of atypical presentations and prompt transport of acute aortic dissection patients could reduce crucial time variables.

Background: In 2010, the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology released guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease, which identified high-risk clinical features to assist in the early detection of acute aortic dissection. The sensitivity of these risk markers has not been validated., Methods and Results: We examined patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2009. The number of patients with confirmed acute aortic dissection who presented with 1 or more of 12 proposed clinical risk markers was determined. An aortic dissection detection (ADD) risk score of 0 to 3 was calculated on the basis of the number of risk categories (high-risk predisposing conditions, high-risk pain features, high-risk examination features) in which patients met criteria. The ADD risk score was tested for sensitivity. Of 2538 patients with acute aortic dissection, 2430 (95.7%) were identified by 1 or more of 12 proposed clinical risk markers. With the use of the ADD risk score, 108 patients (4.3%) were identified as low risk (ADD score 0), 927 patients (36.5%) were intermediate risk (ADD score 1), and 1503 patients (59.2%) were high risk (ADD score 2 or 3). Among 108 patients with no clinical risk markers present (ADD score 0), 72 had chest x-rays recorded, of which 35 (48.6%) demonstrated a widened mediastinum., Conclusions: The clinical risk markers proposed in the 2010 thoracic aortic disease guidelines and their application as part of the ADD risk score comprise a highly sensitive clinical tool for the detection of acute aortic dissection.

Background: Performing preoperative coronary angiography (CA) before surgical repair of a type A acute aortic dissection (TA-AAD) remains controversial. Although the information provided by CA may be useful in planning the surgical approach, the potential delay to surgery and complications of CA may confer added risk of death before definitive repair of the aorta., Methods: We analyzed 1,343 patients from January 27, 1996, to May 3, 2010, with TA-AAD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection who underwent surgical or endovascular repair during the index hospitalization, with (n = 156) or without (n = 1,187) preoperative CA. The main outcomes measured were in-hospital complications and in-hospital and long-term mortality., Results: Patients who underwent preoperative CA were more likely to have a history of atherosclerosis and present with electrocardiographic signs of myocardial ischemia/infarction. In the preoperative CA group, significant delays from the onset of symptoms to the time of surgery occurred. In-hospital postoperative complications and mortality rates were largely similar between the 2 groups. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, preoperative CA had no significant effect on in-hospital risk-adjusted mortality when compared to the validated International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection risk score. Long-term mortality was similar between patients receiving preoperative CA and those who did not; long-term rehospitalization rates were higher, although largely insignificantly, among preoperative CA recipients through 5 years of follow-up., Conclusions: Preoperative CA is infrequently performed on patients with TA-AAD, except, occasionally, on patients at high risk for myocardial ischemia. When performed, preoperative CA was not associated with any significant changes in in-hospital and long-term mortality., (Copyright © 2011 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

To describe the trends in management and outcomes of patients with acute type B aortic dissection in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection. From 1996 – 2022, 3 908 patients were divided into similar sized quartiles (T1, T2, T3, and T4). In hospital outcomes were analysed for each quartile. Survival rates following admission were compared using Kaplan–Meier analyses with Mantel–Cox Log rank tests. Endovascular treatment increased from 19.1% in T1 to 37.2% in T4 (p trend <.001). Correspondingly, medical therapy decreased from 65.7% in T1 to 54.0% in T4 (p trend <.001), and open surgery from 14.8% in T1 to 7.0% in T4 (p trend <.001). In hospital mortality decreased in the overall cohort from 10.7% in T1 to 6.1% in T4 (p trend <.001), as well as in medically, endovascularly and surgically treated patients (p trend =.017,.033, and.011, respectively). Overall post-admission survival at three years increased (T1: 74.8% vs. T4: 77.3%; p =.006). Considerable changes in the management of acute type B aortic dissection were observed over time, with a significant increase in the use of endovascular treatment and a corresponding reduction in open surgery and medical management. These changes were associated with a decreased overall in hospital and three year post-admission mortality rate among quartiles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Optimal management of acute aortic dissections (AD) with entry tear in the arch without ascending involvement (arch B AD) is not discussed in clinical guidelines. This study aims to better define this type of AD. Methods: Presentation, management, and in-hospital mortality of patients with arch B AD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection were analyzed and compared to a control group of Stanford type B AD (TBAD) with entry tear in the descending aorta. Results: Patients with arch B AD (n=156) and TBAD (n=222) were not significantly different concerning demographics, except age, which was higher in TBAD patients (60±14 vs 64±14 years; p=0.024). Medical history, including hypertension, diabetes, bicuspid aortic valve, Marfan disease, renal insufficiency and COPD, was similar for both groups. On preoperative imaging, arch B AD patients had a larger median arch diameter (3.7 vs 3.5 cm; p=0.007) and smaller descending diameter (3.6 vs. 4.4 cm; p<0.001). The two groups were not different concerning preoperative complications such as shock, aortic rupture or neurological complications, except descending diameter >5.5 cm, which was less frequently seen for arch B AD (2.6% vs 13.5%; p<0.001). Arch B AD was more frequently treated with open surgery (19.9% vs. 10.8%; p=0.013) and less frequently managed medically (47.4% vs. 61.4%; p=0.007), while the frequency of endovascular treatment was similar (26.3% vs. 26.0%; P=0.953). The overall in-hospital mortality was higher for arch B AD (17.3% vs. 12.6%; p=0.196). This difference was driven primarily by those receiving open surgery (32.3% mortality for arch B AD vs. 16.7%; p=0.226), while mortality was similar after endovascular treatment (9.8% vs. 8.6%; p=1.0), and medical management (13.5% vs. 14.1%; p=1.0). Conclusions: Arch B AD is more frequently treated aggressively with open surgery, but associated mortality rates are high. A more conservative approach with either endovascular treatment or medical management may be preferable. In this respect, arch B AD may be comparable to TBAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]