Annals of vascular surgery · 2025
Long-Term Outcomes of Type B Aortic Dissections in Younger (<55 years) Patients.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jaggers Bliss, Shirley Charles, Gudz Oleksiy, Moursi Mohammed
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to review all type B aortic dissection (TBAD) cases treated at a single institution to identify any significant differences in clinical outcomes during long-term follow-up between younger (<55) and older (≥55) patients.
METHODS: Data were collected from patients admitted to a single center with a diagnosis of TBAD over a 10-year period 2012 to 2022. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities (e.g. genetic conditions, smoking, drug abuse, diabetes, renal disease, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension), level of entry tear, treatment type, and patient outcomes. Major end points included survival, progression of dissection or aneurysmal degeneration, and need for follow-up intervention.
RESULTS: One hundred seventy-five TBAD patients were identified (<55, n = 71; ≥55, n = 104). Patients aged ≥55 years had a significantly higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (30.6% vs. 16.9%, P = 0.0394), while younger (<55) patients more frequently reported drug abuse (22.1% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.0131). No significant difference in overall survival was noted between age groups. The survival curves are similar for the first three to 4 years following dissection, with the younger cohort having improved survival rates over the next several years, until the curves meet again at 10 years following dissection. However, among patients <55 years, those treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) had significantly higher survival compared with those treated conservatively (P = 0.0365).
CONCLUSION: In this retrospective cohort, TEVAR-used selectively for symptomatic or high-risk TBAD-was associated with better long-term survival in younger (<55-year) patients compared with medical therapy alone. These hypothesis-generating data suggest that early endovascular repair may be beneficial in carefully selected young patients but do not justify broad prophylactic expansion of TEVAR indications; prospective studies are required.
METHODS: Data were collected from patients admitted to a single center with a diagnosis of TBAD over a 10-year period 2012 to 2022. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities (e.g. genetic conditions, smoking, drug abuse, diabetes, renal disease, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension), level of entry tear, treatment type, and patient outcomes. Major end points included survival, progression of dissection or aneurysmal degeneration, and need for follow-up intervention.
RESULTS: One hundred seventy-five TBAD patients were identified (<55, n = 71; ≥55, n = 104). Patients aged ≥55 years had a significantly higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (30.6% vs. 16.9%, P = 0.0394), while younger (<55) patients more frequently reported drug abuse (22.1% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.0131). No significant difference in overall survival was noted between age groups. The survival curves are similar for the first three to 4 years following dissection, with the younger cohort having improved survival rates over the next several years, until the curves meet again at 10 years following dissection. However, among patients <55 years, those treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) had significantly higher survival compared with those treated conservatively (P = 0.0365).
CONCLUSION: In this retrospective cohort, TEVAR-used selectively for symptomatic or high-risk TBAD-was associated with better long-term survival in younger (<55-year) patients compared with medical therapy alone. These hypothesis-generating data suggest that early endovascular repair may be beneficial in carefully selected young patients but do not justify broad prophylactic expansion of TEVAR indications; prospective studies are required.