The heart surgery forum · 2021
Application of the Type, Entry Site, and Malperfusion Classification in Treatment of Aortic Dissection.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Wang Xuening, Wang Chunyan, Cheng Xinmeng, Hu Yuyuan, Yang Lingbo, Wang William
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Our goal is to investigate a new practical dissection classification system, including type of dissection, location of the tear of the primary entry, and malperfusion.
METHODS: The outcome of 151 patients with aortic dissection between January 2019 and May 2020 retrospectively were analyzed. All cases were classified with the Stanford dissection classification (A and B) by adding type non-A non-B. They were then further classified by the new classification system, including location of the primary Entry (E) and Malperfusion (M). All cases were followed up for six months.
RESULTS: The distribution of 151 patients was 53.0%, 27.8%, and 19.2%, respectively, in type A, B, and non-A non-B. The in-hospital mortality rate was 8.8%, 2.4%, and 3.4% in type A, B, and non-A non-B (P < 0.05) and postoperative neurological complications occurred in 33.8%, 7.1%, and 13.8% in type A, B, and non-A non-B (P < 0.05). Total arch replacement was performed in 53.8%, 4.8%, and 13.8% in type A, B, and non-A non-B. The in-hospital mortality rate was 12.0%, 10.4%, and 8.5% in type E1, E2 and E3, while it was 20.0%, 10.4%, and 8.5% in type M1, M2 and M3 (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The new practical dissection classification system is useful as a supplement to the Stanford dissection classification by regarding the extent of the disease process, aiding in decision-making about the operative indication and plan, and helping in anticipating prognosis.
METHODS: The outcome of 151 patients with aortic dissection between January 2019 and May 2020 retrospectively were analyzed. All cases were classified with the Stanford dissection classification (A and B) by adding type non-A non-B. They were then further classified by the new classification system, including location of the primary Entry (E) and Malperfusion (M). All cases were followed up for six months.
RESULTS: The distribution of 151 patients was 53.0%, 27.8%, and 19.2%, respectively, in type A, B, and non-A non-B. The in-hospital mortality rate was 8.8%, 2.4%, and 3.4% in type A, B, and non-A non-B (P < 0.05) and postoperative neurological complications occurred in 33.8%, 7.1%, and 13.8% in type A, B, and non-A non-B (P < 0.05). Total arch replacement was performed in 53.8%, 4.8%, and 13.8% in type A, B, and non-A non-B. The in-hospital mortality rate was 12.0%, 10.4%, and 8.5% in type E1, E2 and E3, while it was 20.0%, 10.4%, and 8.5% in type M1, M2 and M3 (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The new practical dissection classification system is useful as a supplement to the Stanford dissection classification by regarding the extent of the disease process, aiding in decision-making about the operative indication and plan, and helping in anticipating prognosis.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Aortic DissectionAorta, ThoracicAortic AneurysmAortic RuptureBlood Vessel Prosthesis ImplantationCardiac TamponadeCause of DeathClinical Decision-MakingComputed Tomography AngiographyEndovascular ProceduresFollow-Up StudiesHemorrhageHospital MortalityHumansPostoperative ComplicationsPrognosisRegional Blood FlowRetrospective StudiesVascular Surgical Procedures