Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Purpose: To compare uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection (UATBAD) patients with intractable pain/refractory hypertension treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) to UATBAD subjects without these features receiving best medical therapy (BMT). Methods: Interrogation of the hospital database identified 101 consecutive UATBAD patients admitted between January 2011 and December 2014. Of these, 74 patients (mean age 62±13 years; 44 men) were treated with BMT; the other 27 UATBAD patients (mean age 63±13 years; 17 men) were subsequently treated with TEVAR for intractable pain (24, 89%) and/or refractory hypertension (3, 11%) at a mean 2.4±3.3 days (median 1, range 0–12) after admission. Mixed models were employed to determine differences in centerline measured aortic remodeling. Propensity analysis was employed to mitigate selection bias. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate reintervention and survival. Results: The groups were well matched; there was no difference in demographics, comorbidities, or proportion with visceral involvement (70% for TEVAR vs 86% for BMT, p=0.08). There was no significant difference in length of stay (9.6±6.3 for TEVAR vs 10.3±7.8 for BMT, p=0.3), complications (19% for TEVAR vs 24% for BMT, p=0.6), or 30-day mortality (0 for TEVAR vs 7% for BMT, p=0.1). One (4%) TEVAR patient experienced retrograde dissection. BMT resulted in greater mean increase in discharge antihypertensive medications (1.7±1.9 vs 0.7±1.7 for TEVAR, p=0.03), but there was no difference in narcotic utilization. Mean follow-up was greater in the TEVAR group (17.9±16.0 months) compared with BMT patients (11.5±10.8 months, p=0.05). TEVAR significantly improved rates of aortic diameter change (1.5% vs 12.9% for BMT, p=0.007), complete false lumen thrombosis (41% vs 11% for BMT, p=0.004), and true lumen expansion (85% vs 7% for BMT, p<0.01). However, there was no difference in reintervention (25.9% for TEVAR vs 23% for BMT, p=0.2) or survival (log-rank p=0.8). Conclusion: TEVAR for UATBAD with intractable pain/refractory hypertension is safe but offers no short-term outcome advantage when compared to UATBAD patients without these features receiving BMT. A significant improvement in aortic remodeling was identified after TEVAR. The potential long-term reintervention and aorta-related mortality benefits of this favorable remodeling have yet to be defined and randomized trials are warranted.

Keywords

acute dissection aortic dissection hypertension pain morbidity mortality reintervention remodeling thoracic endovascular aortic repair type B dissection uncomplicated acute dissection

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Nienaber

Divchev

Palisch

et al . Early and late management of type B aortic dissection. Heart. 2014;100:1491–1497.

Daily

Trueblood

Stinson

et al . Management of acute aortic dissections. Ann Thorac Surg. 1970;10:237–247.

DeBakey

Henly

Cooley

et al . Surgical management of dissecting aneurysms of the aorta. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1965;49:130–149.

Hughes

Andersen

McCann

RL.

Management of acute type B aortic dissection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;145(3 suppl):S202–S207.

Karthikesalingam

Holt

Hinchliffe

et al . The diagnosis and management of aortic dissection. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2010;44:165–169.

Fattori

Cao

De Rango

et al . Interdisciplinary expert consensus document on management of type B aortic dissection. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1661–1678.

Feezor

Martin

Hess

Jr et al . Early outcomes after endovascular management of acute, complicated type B aortic dissection. J Vasc Surg. 2009;49:561–566.

Khoynezhad

Donayre

Omari

et al . Midterm results of endovascular treatment of complicated acute type B aortic dissection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;138:625–631.

Schoder

Czerny

Cejna

et al . Endovascular repair of acute type B aortic dissection: Long-term follow-up of true and false lumen diameter changes. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;83:1059–1066.

10.

Elefteriades

Lovoulos

Coady

et al . Management of descending aortic dissection. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999;67:2002–2005.

11.

Trimarchi

Nienaber

Rampoldi

et al . Role and results of surgery in acute type B aortic dissection: insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). Circulation. 2006;114:I357–I364.

12.

Trimarchi

Eagle

Nienaber

et al . Importance of refractory pain and hypertension in acute type B aortic dissection: insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). Circulation. 2010;122:1283–1289.

13.

Moulakakis

Mylonas

Dalainas

et al . Management of complicated and uncomplicated acute type B dissection. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2014;3:234–246.

14.

Elefteriades

Hartleroad

Gusberg

et al . Long-term experience with descending aortic dissection: the complication-specific approach. Ann Thorac Surg. 1992;53:11–20.

15.

Juvonen

Ergin

Galla

et al . Risk factors for rupture of chronic type B dissections. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999;117:776–786.

16.

Lansman

Hagl

Fink

et al . Acute type B aortic dissection: surgical therapy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;74:S1833–S1835.

17.

Hata

Sezai

Niino

et al . Prognosis for patients with type B acute aortic dissection: risk analysis of early death and requirement for elective surgery. Circ J. 2007;71:1279–1282.

18.

Januzzi

Movsowitz

Choi

et al . Significance of recurrent pain in acute type B aortic dissection. Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:930–933.

19.

Januzzi

Sabatine

Choi

et al . Refractory systemic hypertension following type B aortic dissection. Am J Cardiol. 2001;88:686–688.

20.

Hiratzka

Bakris

Beckman

et al . 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines; American Association for Thoracic Surgery; American College of Radiology; American Stroke Association; Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions; Society of Interventional Radiology; Society of Thoracic Surgeons; Society for Vascular Medicine. Circulation. 2010;121:e266–e369.

21.

Matsumura

Lee

Mitchell

et al . The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines: management of the left subclavian artery with thoracic endovascular aortic repair. J Vasc Surg. 2009;50:1155–1158.

22.

Melissano

Bertoglio

Rinaldi

et al . Volume changes in aortic true and false lumen after the “petticoat” procedure for type B aortic dissection. J Vasc Surg. 2012;55:641–651.

23.

Fillinger

Greenberg

McKinsey

et al . Reporting standards for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). J Vasc Surg. 2010;52:1022–1033, 1033.e15.

24.

Austin

PC.

An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res. 2011;46:399–424.

25.

Harrell

Jr.

Regression Modeling Strategies (Springer Series in Statistics). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International; 2015.

26.

Glower

Speier

White

et al . Management and long-term outcome of aortic dissection. Ann Surg. 1991;214:31–41.

27.

Winnerkvist

Lockowandt

Rasmussen

et al . A prospective study of medically treated acute type B aortic dissection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006;32:349–355.

28.

Marui

Mochizuki

Mitsui

et al . Toward the best treatment for uncomplicated patients with type B acute aortic dissection: a consideration for sound surgical indication. Circulation. 1999;100:II275–II280.

29.

Tang

Dake

MD.

TEVAR for acute uncomplicated aortic dissection: immediate repair versus medical therapy. Semin Vasc Surg. 2009;22:145–151.

30.

Trimarchi

Tolenaar

Tsai

et al . Influence of clinical presentation on the outcome of acute B aortic dissection: evidences from IRAD. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2012;53:161–168.

31.

Tolenaar

Froehlich

Jonker

et al . Predicting in-hospital mortality in acute type B aortic dissection: evidence from International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection. Circulation. 2014;130(11 suppl 1):S45–S50.

32.

Brunkwall

Kasprzak

Verhoeven

et al . Endovascular repair of acute uncomplicated aortic type B dissection promotes aortic remodelling: 1 year results of the ADSORB trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2014;48:285–291.

33.

Nienaber

Rousseau

Eggebrecht

et al . Randomized comparison of strategies for type B aortic dissection: the investigation of stent grafts in aortic dissection (INSTEAD) trial. Circulation. 2009;120:2519–2528.

34.

Nienaber

Kische

Rousseau

et al . Endovascular repair of type B aortic dissection: Long-term results of the randomized investigation of stent grafts in aortic dissection trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:407–416.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.50 MB

0.08 MB

Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Acute Type B Dissection in Patients With Intractable Pain or Refractory Hypertension

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material