Thoracic endovascular aortic repair compared with medical treatment in patients with type B intramural hematoma.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Shuang Wu, Yan-Min Yang, Juan Wang, Yi-Jing Xin, Jing-Yang Wang, Han-Yang Liang, Li-Hui Zheng, Si-Qi Lyu
{"title":"Thoracic endovascular aortic repair compared with medical treatment in patients with type B intramural hematoma.","authors":"Shuang Wu, Yan-Min Yang, Juan Wang, Yi-Jing Xin, Jing-Yang Wang, Han-Yang Liang, Li-Hui Zheng, Si-Qi Lyu","doi":"10.1024/0301-1526/a001215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b></b> <i>Background</i>: The benefit-risk profile of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with type B aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) has not been well established yet. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of TEVAR compared with medical management (MM) in this population. <i>Patients and methods:</i> PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched to identify studies comparing TEVAR with MM in patients with type B IMH. <i>Results:</i> Sixteen studies involving 1528 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the MM group, the TEVAR group displayed similar incidences of in-hospital death [RR (95%CI): 0.73 (0.32-1.66), p=.45] and aortic-related death [RR (95%CI): 0.70 (0.31-1.58]), p=.39]. The risk of all-cause death was comparable between the two groups [RR (95%CI): 0.62 (0.36-1.07), p=.08]. Meanwhile, TEVAR was superior to MM in promoting IMH regression [RR (95%CI): 1.51(1.26-1.81), p<.001] and reducing IMH progression [RR (95%CI): 0.15 (0.08-0.29), p<.001], dissection [RR (95%CI): 0.26 (0.12-0.60), p=.002], and secondary intervention [RR (95%CI): 0.22 (0.08-0.60), p=.003]. <i>Conclusions:</i> In patients with type B IMH, the incidences of in-hospital death, aortic-related death and all-cause death during follow-up were comparable between the TEVAR group and the MM group. However, TEVAR was superior to MM in promoting IMH regression and reducing IMH progression, dissection, and secondary intervention. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify the role of TEVAR in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":23528,"journal":{"name":"Vasa-european Journal of Vascular Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vasa-european Journal of Vascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1024/0301-1526/a001215","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The benefit-risk profile of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with type B aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) has not been well established yet. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of TEVAR compared with medical management (MM) in this population. Patients and methods: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched to identify studies comparing TEVAR with MM in patients with type B IMH. Results: Sixteen studies involving 1528 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the MM group, the TEVAR group displayed similar incidences of in-hospital death [RR (95%CI): 0.73 (0.32-1.66), p=.45] and aortic-related death [RR (95%CI): 0.70 (0.31-1.58]), p=.39]. The risk of all-cause death was comparable between the two groups [RR (95%CI): 0.62 (0.36-1.07), p=.08]. Meanwhile, TEVAR was superior to MM in promoting IMH regression [RR (95%CI): 1.51(1.26-1.81), p<.001] and reducing IMH progression [RR (95%CI): 0.15 (0.08-0.29), p<.001], dissection [RR (95%CI): 0.26 (0.12-0.60), p=.002], and secondary intervention [RR (95%CI): 0.22 (0.08-0.60), p=.003]. Conclusions: In patients with type B IMH, the incidences of in-hospital death, aortic-related death and all-cause death during follow-up were comparable between the TEVAR group and the MM group. However, TEVAR was superior to MM in promoting IMH regression and reducing IMH progression, dissection, and secondary intervention. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify the role of TEVAR in this population.

胸椎血管内主动脉修复与内科治疗对B型壁内血肿的影响。
背景:B型主动脉壁内血肿(IMH)患者的胸血管内主动脉修复(TEVAR)的获益-风险分析尚未得到很好的确定。本研究旨在评估TEVAR与医疗管理(MM)在该人群中的效果。患者和方法:检索PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆和clinicaltrials.gov,以确定比较TEVAR和MM在B型IMH患者中的研究。结果:16项研究共纳入1528例患者。与MM组相比,TEVAR组院内死亡发生率相似[RR (95%CI): 0.73 (0.32-1.66), p=。[45]和主动脉相关死亡[RR (95%CI): 0.70 (0.31-1.58)], p= 0.39]。两组间全因死亡风险具有可比性[RR (95%CI): 0.62 (0.36-1.07), p=.08]。同时,TEVAR在促进IMH回归方面优于MM [RR (95%CI): 1.51(1.26-1.81)]。结论:B型IMH患者随访期间院内死亡、主动脉相关死亡和全因死亡发生率在TEVAR组与MM组之间具有可同性。然而,TEVAR在促进IMH消退、减少IMH进展、剥离和二次干预方面优于MM。需要进一步的随机对照试验来阐明TEVAR在这一人群中的作用。
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
3.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
61
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Vasa is the European journal of vascular medicine. It is the official organ of the German, Swiss, and Slovenian Societies of Angiology. The journal publishes original research articles, case reports and reviews on vascular biology, epidemiology, prevention, diagnosis, medical treatment and interventions for diseases of the arterial circulation, in the field of phlebology and lymphology including the microcirculation, except the cardiac circulation. Vasa combines basic science with clinical medicine making it relevant to all physicians interested in the whole vascular field.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信