Search

Although several studies have provided robust evidence about global differences for several cardiovascular emergencies, such as myocardial infarction and stroke, data were limited for aortic disease. The aim was to explore geographic variation in type A acute aortic dissection (TA-AAD) in a large group of consecutive patients. Patients (n = 615) from the IRAD with TA-AAD were studied with respect to presenting symptoms and signs, diagnosis, management, and outcomes in Europe versus North America. Compared with Europeans, North Americans were more likely to be older and present with atypical features and without many of the classic chest X-ray findings of AAD. In the North American cohort, electrocardiographic findings showed higher rates of nonspecific ST changes and a trend toward ST-elevation or new myocardial infarction (North Americans vs Europeans 7.9% vs 4.4%; p = 0.09). Use of imaging studies to confirm the diagnosis of AAD varied between North American and European centers. North American centers performed an average of 1.6 imaging studies compared with 1.8 in the European group (p = 0.002). Furthermore, they were significantly less likely to use computed tomography and significantly more likely to use transesophageal examination as part of the overall diagnostic algorithm. Compared with Europeans, TA-AAD occurred at smaller aortic diameters and there was a substantial delay to presentation and diagnosis in North Americans. No significant differences for early mortality rates were observed between the 2 groups. In conclusion, geographic differences in presentation and initial management were highlighted, but this did not translate into a difference in early mortality. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

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.)

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate long-term survival in type B aortic dissection patients treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) therapy., Background: Historical data have supported medical therapy in type B acute aortic dissection (TBAAD) patients. Recent advances in TEVAR appear to improve in-hospital mortality., Methods: We examined 1,129 consecutive patients with TBAAD enrolled in IRAD (International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection) between 1995 and 2012 who received medical (n = 853, 75.6%) or TEVAR (n = 276, 24.4%) therapy., Results: Clinical history was similar between groups. TEVAR patients were more likely to present with a pulse deficit (28.3% vs. 13.4%, p < 0.001) and lower extremity ischemia (16.8% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001), and to characterize their pain as the "worst pain ever" (27.5% vs. 15.7%, p < 0.001). TEVAR patients were also most likely to present with complicated acute aortic dissection, defined as shock, periaortic hematoma, signs of malperfusion, stroke, spinal cord ischemia, mesenteric ischemia, and/or renal failure (61.7% vs. 37.2%). In-hospital mortality was similar in patients managed with endovascular repair (10.9% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.273) compared with medically managed patients. One-year mortality was also similar in both groups (8.1% endovascular vs. 9.8% medical, p = 0.604). Among adverse events during follow-up, aortic growth/new aneurysm was most common, occurring in 73.3% of patients with medical therapy and in 62.7% of patients after TEVAR, based on 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates showed that patients undergoing TEVAR had a lower death rate (15.5% vs. 29.0%, p = 0.018) at 5 years., Conclusions: Results from IRAD show that TEVAR is associated with lower mortality over a 5-year period than medical therapy for TBAAD. Further randomized trials with long-term follow-up are needed., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The management strategy remains controversial for patients presenting with type A acute aortic dissection with cerebrovascular accident or coma. The present study aimed to help guide surgeons treating these high-risk patients., Methods: Of 1873 patients with type A acute aortic dissection enrolled in the International Registry for Acute Dissection, 87 (4.7%) presented with cerebrovascular accident and 54 (2.9%) with coma. The hospital and 5-year results were stratified by the presence and type of brain injury (no injury vs stroke vs coma) and management type (medical vs surgical). Independent predictors of short- and mid-term survival were identified., Results: Presentation with shock, hypotension, or tamponade (46.8% vs 25.2%; P < .001) and arch vessel involvement (55.0% vs 36.1%; P < .001) was more likely in patients with brain injury. Surgical management was avoided more often in patients with coma (33.3%) or cerebrovascular accident (24.1%) than in those without brain injury (11.1%; P < .001). The overall hospital mortality was 22.7% without brain injury, 40.2% with cerebrovascular accident, and 63.0% with coma (P < .001). Mortality varied among the management types for both cerebrovascular accident (76.2% medical vs 27.0% surgical; P < .001) and coma (100% medical vs 44.4% surgical; P < .001). Postoperatively, cerebrovascular accident and coma resolved in 84.3% and 78.8% of cases, respectively. On logistic regression analysis, surgery was protective against mortality in patients presenting with brain injury (odds ratio 0.058; P < .001). The 5-year survival of patients presenting with cerebrovascular accident and coma was 23.8% and 0% after medical management versus 67.1% and 57.1% after surgery (log rank, P < .001), respectively., Conclusions: Brain injury at presentation adversely affects hospital survival of patients with type A acute aortic dissection. In the present observational study, the patients selected to undergo surgery demonstrated improved late survival and frequent reversal of neurologic deficits., (Copyright © 2013 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.)

Purpose: To evaluate procedural and 30-day outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) employing the Valiant Thoracic Stent Graft with the Captivia Delivery System., Methods: Enrollment in the study ( www.ClinicalTrials.com identifier NCT01181947) included all eligible patients implanted with the Valiant Captivia System retrospectively and prospectively at 15 sites in Europe and Turkey between October 2009 and June 2010. In the 100 treated patients (81 men; mean age 64.6 ± 12.0 years, range 25-87), indications included descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA, 49.0%) and aortic dissection (42.0%)., Results: Technical success was 100.0%, with no misaligned deployments or aortic perforations. Mean follow-up was 68.9 ± 34.9 days (range 20-147, median 61). The 30-day rate of all-cause mortality was 4.0% (all 4 cases procedure-related, 3 device-related). Retrograde type A dissection occurred in 2 patients. The only conversion to open surgery was successful in a patient experiencing intraoperative aneurysm rupture. Stroke occurred in 4 (4.0%) patients and paraplegia in 1 (1.0%). Among 66 patients with 30-day imaging studies evaluable for endoleak, 4 (6.1%) had type I and 7 (10.6%) had type II endoleak; there were no types III or IV. Within 30 days, no secondary endovascular procedures were required due to endoleak. One patient with type II endoleak died 3 weeks postimplantation before scheduled embolization., Conclusion: In this analysis of procedural and 30-day results, the high technical success and clinical outcome rates showed that the Valiant Thoracic Stent Graft with the new Captivia Delivery System has promising capacity to treat a variety of thoracic aortic conditions in a range of anatomies.

Objective: Endovascular stent grafting represents a novel concept for type B aortic dissection both in the acute and subacute/chronic setting, with an unknown effect on outcomes., Methods: In a prospective trial 140 patients with stable type B dissection were randomly subjected to elective stent-graft placement in addition to optimal medical therapy (n = 72) or to optimal medical therapy (n = 68) with surveillance (arterial pressure according to World Health Organization guidelines ≤ 120/80 mm Hg). The primary end point was 1-year all-cause mortality, whereas aorta-related mortality, progression (with need for conversion or additional endovascular or open surgical intervention), and aortic remodeling were secondary end points., Results: There was no difference in all-cause mortality: cumulative survival was 97.0% ± 3.4% with optimal medical therapy versus 91.3% ± 2.1% with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (P = .16). Moreover, aorta-related mortality was not different (P = .42), and the risk for the combined end point of aorta-related death (rupture) and progression (including conversion or additional endovascular or open surgical intervention) was similar (P = .86). Three neurologic adverse events occurred in the thoracic endovascular aortic repair group (1 paraplegia, 1 stroke, and 1 transient paraparesis) versus 1 episode of paraparesis with medical treatment. Finally, aortic remodeling (with true-lumen recovery and thoracic false-lumen thrombosis) occurred in 91.3% with thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus 19.4% with medical treatment (P < .001), which is suggestive of continued remodeling., Conclusions: In survivors of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection, elective stent-graft placement does not improve 1-year survival and adverse events, despite favorable aortic remodeling., (Copyright © 2010 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Earlier studies evaluating long-term survival in type A acute aortic dissection (TA-AAD) have been restricted to a small number of patients in single center experiences. We used data from a contemporary, multi-center international registry of TA-AAD patients to better understand factors associated with long-term survival., Methods and Results: We examined 303 consecutive patients with TA-AAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and 2003. We included patients who were discharged alive and had documented clinical follow-up data. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed to depict cumulative survival in patients from date of hospital discharge. Stepwise Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of follow-up mortality. We found that 273 (90.1%) patients had been managed surgically and 30 (9.9%) were managed medically. Patients who were dead at follow-up were more likely to be older (63.9 versus 58.4 years, P=0.007) and to have had previous cardiac surgery (23.9% versus 10.6%, P=0.01). Survival for patients treated with surgery was 96.1%+/-2.4% and 90.5%+/-3.9% at 1 and 3 years versus 88.6%+/-12.2% and 68.7%+/-19.8% without surgery (mean follow-up overall, 2.8 years, log rank P=0.009). Multivariate analysis identified a history of atherosclerosis (relative risk (RR), 2.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08 to 4.37; P=0.03) and previous cardiac surgery (RR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.16 to 5.57; P=0.02) as significant, independent predictors of follow-up mortality., Conclusions: Contemporary 1- and 3-year survival in patients with TA-AAD treated surgically are excellent. Independent predictors of survival during the follow-up period do not appear to be influenced by in-hospital risks but rather preexisting comorbidities.

Background: Few data exist on gender-related differences in clinical presentation, diagnostic findings, management, and outcomes in acute aortic dissection (AAD)., Methods and Results: Accordingly, we evaluated 1078 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) to assess differences in clinical features, management, and in-hospital outcomes between men and women. Of the patients enrolled in IRAD (32.1%) with AAD, 346 were women. Although less frequently affected by AAD (32.1% of AAD), women were significantly older and had more often presented later than men (P=0.008); symptoms of coma/altered mental status were more common, whereas pulse deficit was less common. Diagnostic imaging suggestive of rupture, ie, periaortic hematoma, and pleural or pericardial effusion were more commonly observed in women. In-hospital complications of hypotension and tamponade occurred with greater frequency in women, resulting in higher in-hospital mortality compared with men. After adjustment for age and hypertension, women with aortic dissection die more frequently than men (OR, 1.4, P=0.04), predominantly in the 66- to 75-year age group. Moreover, surgical outcome was worse in women than men (P=0.013); type A dissection in women was associated with a higher surgical mortality of 32% versus 22% in men despite similar delay, surgical technique, and hemodynamics., Conclusions: Our analysis provides insights into gender-related differences in AAD with regard to clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes; important diagnostic and therapeutic implications may help shed light on aortic dissection in women to improve their outcomes.