Acute Aortic Intramural Hematoma An Analysis From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection
Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, 920 E 28th St, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55407. . Circulation
(Impact Factor: 14.43).
09/2012; 126(11 Suppl 1):S91-6. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.084541
Acute aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) is an important subgroup of aortic dissection, and controversy surrounds appropriate management.
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.
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.
Available from: Jang-Won Son
- "Another recent study conducted for North American and European showed that the majority of type A IMH patients (84.4%) received surgical treatment. Even though there was no direct comparison between surgically treated and medically treated type A IMH, the mortality in medically treated group (40.0%) was much higher than that of surgically treated group (24.1%) . Although the exact cause is unknown, IMH is diagnosed much more frequently and has better outcomes in Japan/Korea than North America/Europe. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
Intramural hematoma of the aorta (IMH), a variant of classic aortic dissection, shows very dynamic process in the early phase. The aim of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes of patients with acute aortic IMH from real world registry data.
We analyzed 165 consecutive patients with acute IMH from five medical centers in Korea. All patients were divided into two groups; type A (n = 61, 37.0%) and type B (n = 104, 63.0%) according to the Stanford classification. Clinical outcomes and morphological evolution by CT were analyzed for 2 years.
Most of the patients (77.0% of type A and 99.0% of type B, P < 0.001) were treated medically during their initial hospitalization. There were no significant differences in in-hospital mortality (4.9% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.671) and 2-year mortality (13.1% vs. 11.5%, P = 0.765) between two groups. During the 2-year follow up period, progression to aortic dissection (18.0% vs. 6.7%, P = 0.037) and surgical treatment (29.5% vs. 2.9%, P < 0.001) were higher in type A. For the type A patients, there were no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (7.1% of surgery vs. 4.3% of medical, P = 0.428) and 2-year mortality (7.1% of surgery vs. 14.9% of medical, P = 0.450) in terms of initial treatment strategy.
For real world practice in Korea, most of IMH patients were treated medically at presentation and showed favorable outcomes. Thus, even in type A acute IMH, early medical treatment with alternative surgical conversion for selected, complicated cases would be a favorable treatment option.
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders 08/2014; 14(1):103. DOI:10.1186/1471-2261-14-103 · 1.88 Impact Factor
Heart, Lung and Circulation 12/2012; 22(1). DOI:10.1016/j.hlc.2012.11.004 · 1.44 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Aortic intramural hematoma type B (IMHB) is a variant of acute aortic syndrome, which presents with symptoms similar to classic type B aortic dissection (ABAD). However, the natural history of IMHB is not well understood. The purpose of this study was to better characterize IMHB, comparing its clinical characteristics, treatment, and in-hospital and long-term outcomes to those with classic ABAD.
A total of 107 IMHB and 790 ABAD patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between January 1996 and June 2012 were analyzed. Accordingly, differences in presentation, diagnostics, therapeutic management, and outcomes were assessed.
As compared with the ABAD, IMHB presented predominantly in males (62% vs 33%; P < .001) at older age (69 ± 12 vs 63 ± 14; P < .001). IMHB patients more often had chest pain (80% vs 69%; P = .020) and periaortic hematoma (22% vs 13%; P = .020) and were more often treated medically (88% vs 62%; P < .001), with surgical/endovascular interventions being reserved for more complicated patients. Overall in-hospital mortality was 10% (IMHB, 7% vs ABAD, 11%; P = NS). Six out of seven IMHB deaths occurred during medical treatment, two due to aortic rupture. During follow-up in IMHB, patient mortality was 7%, and no adverse events, including progression to an aortic dissection or aortic rupture, were observed. Imaging showed significantly more aortic enlargement at the level of the descending aorta in ABAD patients (39% vs 61%; P = .034).
Most IMHB patients can be treated medically, and aortic enlargement is less common during follow-up, which may suggest that IMHB may have a slightly more benign course compared with classic ABAD in the acute setting.
Journal of vascular surgery: official publication, the Society for Vascular Surgery [and] International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter 09/2013; 58(6). DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2013.05.099 · 3.02 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.