Back to Search Start Over

Acute aortic dissections with entry tear in the arch: A report from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection

Authors :
Jip L. Tolenaar
Jehangir J. Appoo
Thomas G. Gleason
Santi Trimarchi
Arturo Evangelista
Nimesh D. Desai
Kim A. Eagle
Marek Ehrlich
Tristan D. Yan
Truls Myrmel
Mark D. Peterson
Joseph E. Bavaria
Himanshu J. Patel
Marco Di Eusanio
Roberto Di Bartolomeo
G. Chad Hughes
Thoralf M. Sundt
Daniel G. Montgomery
Christoph A. Nienaber
G. Michael Deeb
Hector W.L. de Beaufort
Eric M. Isselbacher
Carlo De Vincentiis
Source :
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 157:66-73
Publication Year :
2019
Publisher :
Elsevier BV, 2019.

Abstract

To analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of acute aortic dissections with proximal entry tear in the arch.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.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.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.

Details

ISSN :
00225223
Volume :
157
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....021732401ce43c33d5a317b9da86898a
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.07.101