Aortic Expansion After Acute Type B Aortic Dissection

University of Rostock, Rostock, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany
The Annals of thoracic surgery (Impact Factor: 3.85). 07/2012; 94(4):1223-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.05.040
Source: PubMed


A considerable number of patients with acute type B aortic dissection (ABAD) treated with medical management alone will exhibit aortic enlargement during follow-up, which could lead to aortic aneurysm and rupture. The purpose of this study was to investigate predictors of aortic expansion among ABAD patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.
We analyzed 191 ABAD patients treated with medical therapy alone enrolled in the registry between 1996 and 2010, with available descending aortic diameter measurements at admission and during follow-up. The annual aortic expansion rate was calculated for all patients, and multivariate regression analysis was used to investigate factors affecting the expansion rate.
Aortic expansion was observed in 59% of ABAD patients; mean expansion rate was 1.7 ± 7 mm/y. In multivariate analysis, white race (regression coefficient [RC], 4.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4 to 7.7) and an initial aortic diameter less than 4.0 cm (RC, 6.3; 95% CI, 4.0 to 8.6) were associated with increased aortic expansion. Female sex (RC, -3.8; 95% CI, -6.1 to -1.4), intramural hematoma (RC, -3.8; 95% CI, -6.5 to -1.1), and use of calcium-channel blockers (RC, -3.8; 95% CI, -6.2 to -1.3) were associated with decreased aortic expansion.
White race and a small initial aortic diameter were associated with increased aortic expansion during follow-up, and decreased aortic expansion was observed among women, patients with intramural hematoma, and those on calcium-channel blockers. These data raise the possibility that the use of calcium-channel blockers after ABAD may reduce the rate of aortic expansion, and therefore further investigation is warranted.

14 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Opinion statement: Recent improvements in diagnosis, peri-operative management, surgical techniques and postoperative care have resulted in decreased mortality and morbidity in acute aortic dissections (AAD). The classic treatment algorithm indicates that type A patients require direct surgical intervention and type B patients should be treated medically, in absence of complications. Initial medical treatment is adopted in all AAD patients, as it reduces propagation of the dissection and aortic rupture. In type A aortic dissection (TAAD) several techniques have contributed to major changes in the surgical approach, such as cerebral protection using moderate circulatory arrest, selective cerebral perfusion, and aortic valve sparing with root replacement. In TAAD with involvement of the descending aorta, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can be performed as a part of a complex hybrid procedure, in which surgical ascending/arch repair is combined with the placement of a stent graft in the descending aorta. Future developments in stent graft technologies might broaden the usefulness of TEVAR for the total endovascular repair of TAAD. In complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD), the use of TEVAR has become the therapy of first choice. By covering the proximal entry tear, the stent graft reduces the pressurization of the false lumen, treating malperfusion and inducing favorable aortic remodeling. In uncomplicated TBAD, TEVAR has been used to prevent long term complications, such as aortic aneurysm, but this concept is not yet routinely recommended. Regardless of their initial treatment, all AAD patients should be administered with strict antihypertensive management combined with imaging surveillance and careful periodic clinical follow-up.
    Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine 01/2013; 15(2). DOI:10.1007/s11936-012-0226-1
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: Patients with chronic Stanford type B aortic dissections (TBAD) are traditionally treated medically, but some of the affected thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic segments progress to large aneurysms with a significant risk of rupture. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively evaluate, with an 'all-comers' approach, the survival and the outcome of patients following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or conventional open surgery for chronic TBAD as a first-line therapy or a secondary option after failed medical treatment. Methods: Between January 2000 and May 2010, 80 consecutive patients (59 males, median age 63, inter-quartile range (IQR) 55-69) suffering from chronic TBAD were treated at our institution. Thirty-three were treated medically (Group A, median age: 65, IQR: 58.5-71.5), 32 received TEVAR (Group B, median age: 62, IQR: 54-67.5) and 15 patients underwent conventional open surgery (Group C, median age: 61, IQR: 54-66). The median follow-up was 42 months (range: 0.1-124.7) and 100% complete. Results: There were no significant differences with regard to age, gender and associated comorbidities between the treatment groups. The overall hospital mortality for chronic TBAD was 6.3% (n = 5); in-hospital mortalities for Groups A, B and C were 3.0, 6.2 and 13.4%, respectively. The incidence of major complications, such as paraplegia, malperfusion, renal failure and cardiac arrhythmia, did not significantly differ between the three groups. Postoperative stroke occurred more often after conventional open surgery (Group C: 13.3%; P = 0.07). Reintervention for TBAD pathology was required in Groups A, B and C in 12.1, 28.1 and 0%, respectively (P = 0.03). Secondary open surgery post-TEVAR was required in 7 cases (21.8%) with no postoperative paraplegia. Conclusions: Open surgery for extensive thoracic and thoracoabdominal repair in chronic TBAD may be performed with acceptable early and mid-term outcomes. TEVAR for aortic complications in patients with chronic dissection may be successfully performed as a first-stage procedure in order to stabilize the patient and serve as a 'bridge' to secondary open surgery. However, close surveillance is mandatory for the timely detection of aneurysm enlargement, malperfusion or impending rupture after TEVAR.
    European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery 06/2013; 44(3). DOI:10.1093/ejcts/ezt291 · 3.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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. 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). 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.
    Journal of the American Heart Association 07/2013; 2(4):e000112. DOI:10.1161/JAHA.113.000112 · 4.31 Impact Factor
Show more