Midterm outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus optimal medical therapy for uncomplicated acute type B dissection

Kevin G. Hu BS , Wei-Guo Ma MD , Stevan Pupovac MD , Irbaz Hameed MD , Soraya Fereydooni MD , Eric S. Li MD , Haleigh Larson MD , Mohammad Zafar MBBS , Britt Tonnessen MD , Jonathan Cardella MD , Eduard Aboian MD , Raul Guzman MD , Cassius Ochoa Chaar MD , David Strosberg MD , Matthew Williams MD , Naiem Nassiri MD , Roland Assi MD , Prashanth Vallabhajosyula MD, MS
{"title":"Midterm outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus optimal medical therapy for uncomplicated acute type B dissection","authors":"Kevin G. Hu BS ,&nbsp;Wei-Guo Ma MD ,&nbsp;Stevan Pupovac MD ,&nbsp;Irbaz Hameed MD ,&nbsp;Soraya Fereydooni MD ,&nbsp;Eric S. Li MD ,&nbsp;Haleigh Larson MD ,&nbsp;Mohammad Zafar MBBS ,&nbsp;Britt Tonnessen MD ,&nbsp;Jonathan Cardella MD ,&nbsp;Eduard Aboian MD ,&nbsp;Raul Guzman MD ,&nbsp;Cassius Ochoa Chaar MD ,&nbsp;David Strosberg MD ,&nbsp;Matthew Williams MD ,&nbsp;Naiem Nassiri MD ,&nbsp;Roland Assi MD ,&nbsp;Prashanth Vallabhajosyula MD, MS","doi":"10.1016/j.xjon.2024.12.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>We sought to compare the early and midterm outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) versus optimal medical therapy (OMT) for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Data were analyzed for 200 consecutive patients with uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection from February 1992 to July 2022, including 147 with initial OMT and 53 undergoing TEVAR at index hospitalization. Baseline, intraoperative, and postoperative data, survival, and (re)intervention were compared between the two strategies.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In-hospital/30-day mortality was 7.5% (15/200) for the entire series, which was significantly lower in the TEVAR group compared with the OMT group (0 vs 10.2% [15/147]; <em>P</em> = .013). Thirty-day rates were 5.7% (3/53) for reintervention after TEVAR and 15.6% (23/147) for intervention after OMT (<em>P</em> = .064). Death within 30 days of (re)intervention was 0 (n = 0) in the TEVAR group and 18.4% (n = 14) in the OMT group (<em>P</em> = .063). There were no significant differences in the incidences of stroke, paraplegia, acute kidney injury, sepsis, or malperfusion syndrome after initial treatment. Kaplan–Meier survival in the TEVAR group was 92.3% (95% CI, 80.7-97.0) at 1 year and 3 years, significantly higher than in the OMT group (80.3% [95% CI, 72.8-85.8] and 71.4% [95% CI, 63.4-78.0]; <em>P</em> = .012). In patients aged 65 years or more, TEVAR also achieved a significantly higher survival, which was 93.7% (95% CI, 77.5-98.3 vs 69.7% [95% CI, 58.0-78.7]) at 1 year and 93.7% (95% CI, 77.3-98.3] vs 60.5% [95% CI, 48.7-70.5]) at 3 years (<em>P</em> &lt; .001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In this single-institution experience, upfront TEVAR performed at index hospitalization for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection was associated with improved survival at early and midterm follow-up.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74032,"journal":{"name":"JTCVS open","volume":"24 ","pages":"Pages 67-76"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JTCVS open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666273625000324","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

We sought to compare the early and midterm outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) versus optimal medical therapy (OMT) for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection.

Methods

Data were analyzed for 200 consecutive patients with uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection from February 1992 to July 2022, including 147 with initial OMT and 53 undergoing TEVAR at index hospitalization. Baseline, intraoperative, and postoperative data, survival, and (re)intervention were compared between the two strategies.

Results

In-hospital/30-day mortality was 7.5% (15/200) for the entire series, which was significantly lower in the TEVAR group compared with the OMT group (0 vs 10.2% [15/147]; P = .013). Thirty-day rates were 5.7% (3/53) for reintervention after TEVAR and 15.6% (23/147) for intervention after OMT (P = .064). Death within 30 days of (re)intervention was 0 (n = 0) in the TEVAR group and 18.4% (n = 14) in the OMT group (P = .063). There were no significant differences in the incidences of stroke, paraplegia, acute kidney injury, sepsis, or malperfusion syndrome after initial treatment. Kaplan–Meier survival in the TEVAR group was 92.3% (95% CI, 80.7-97.0) at 1 year and 3 years, significantly higher than in the OMT group (80.3% [95% CI, 72.8-85.8] and 71.4% [95% CI, 63.4-78.0]; P = .012). In patients aged 65 years or more, TEVAR also achieved a significantly higher survival, which was 93.7% (95% CI, 77.5-98.3 vs 69.7% [95% CI, 58.0-78.7]) at 1 year and 93.7% (95% CI, 77.3-98.3] vs 60.5% [95% CI, 48.7-70.5]) at 3 years (P < .001).

Conclusions

In this single-institution experience, upfront TEVAR performed at index hospitalization for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection was associated with improved survival at early and midterm follow-up.
无并发症急性B型夹层胸腔血管内主动脉修复与最佳药物治疗的中期结果
目的:比较胸椎血管内主动脉修复术(TEVAR)与最佳药物治疗(OMT)治疗无并发症急性B型主动脉夹层的早期和中期预后。方法对1992年2月至2022年7月连续200例无并发症急性B型主动脉夹层患者的资料进行分析,其中147例首次行OMT, 53例在指数住院时行TEVAR。比较两种策略的基线、术中和术后数据、生存率和(再)干预。结果整个系列的院内/30天死亡率为7.5% (15/200),TEVAR组显著低于OMT组(0 vs 10.2% [15/147];p = .013)。TEVAR术后30天再干预率为5.7% (3/53),OMT术后30天再干预率为15.6% (23/147)(P = 0.064)。TEVAR组(再)干预后30天内的死亡率为0 (n = 0), OMT组为18.4% (n = 14) (P = 0.063)。初始治疗后卒中、截瘫、急性肾损伤、败血症或灌注不良综合征的发生率无显著差异。TEVAR组1年和3年的Kaplan-Meier生存率为92.3% (95% CI, 80.7-97.0),显著高于OMT组(80.3% [95% CI, 72.8-85.8]和71.4% [95% CI, 63.4-78.0]);p = .012)。在65岁及以上的患者中,TEVAR也获得了显著更高的生存率,1年生存率为93.7% (95% CI, 77.5-98.3 vs 69.7% [95% CI, 58.0-78.7]), 3年生存率为93.7% (95% CI, 77.3-98.3] vs 60.5% [95% CI, 48.7-70.5]) (P <;措施)。结论:在这项单机构研究中,在无并发症的急性B型主动脉夹层指数住院期间进行的前期TEVAR与早期和中期随访时生存率的提高相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信