MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.ejvs.2022.05.037

Медицинская библиотека · European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery · 2022

Management and Outcomes of Non-A Non-B Aortic Dissection.

Liu Jitao, Yang Fan, Chen Lyufan, Xie Enmin, Su Sheng, Liu Yuan, Geng Qingshan, Fan Ruixin, Li Jie, Luo Jianfang

СтатьяКомментарийПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

The results of best medical treatment (BMT), endovascular based treatment (EBT), and total arch replacement (TAR) with frozen elephant trunk (FET) treatment in a single centre experience were reported in non-A non-B aortic dissection patients.

METHODS

From January 2016 to May 2020, 215 consecutive patients with acute or subacute non-A non-B aortic dissection were enrolled. The primary endpoints were all cause death. Secondary endpoints included follow up adverse aortic event (AE), a composite of the outcomes of dissection related death, rupture, retrograde type A aortic dissection, stent graft induced new entry tear, secondary endoleak, and follow up re-intervention. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to evaluate associations between different treatments and outcomes.

RESULTS

Among the 215 dissection patients, 127 (59.1%) received EBT, 42 (19.5%) received TAR + FET, and the remaining 46 (21.4%) received BMT. Thirty day mortality was higher in patients receiving TAR + FET (7.1%) than in those treated with EBT (1.6%) or BMT (2.2%) (p = .12). However, after a median follow up of 39.1 (27.0 - 50.7) months, no additional death was recorded in the TAR + FET group, while nine (7.3%) patients died in the EBT group and 14 (31.8%) died in the BMT group (p < .001). Specifically, EBT and TAR + FET showed no significant difference in midterm mortality rate, follow up AE, and re-intervention for complicated or uncomplicated dissection patients involving zone 2. For patients with uncomplicated non-A non-B aortic dissection involving zone 2, EBT could profoundly decrease the mortality rate, follow up AE and re-intervention when compared with BMT (p < .010 for all), although this difference was not statistically significant between TAR + FET and BMT. No statistical comparison was performed in patients with zone 1 involvement because of the limited number of patients.

CONCLUSION

It was demonstrated that EBT or TAR + FET might be a viable strategy for non-A non-B aortic dissection patients.

Для цитирования: Liu Jitao, Yang Fan, Chen Lyufan, Xie Enmin, Su Sheng, Liu Yuan, Geng Qingshan, Fan Ruixin, Li Jie, Luo Jianfang. Management and Outcomes of Non-A Non-B Aortic Dissection.. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2022.05.037.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.