1. Acute aortic dissections with entry tear in the arch: A report from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection
- Author
-
Jip L. Tolenaar, Jehangir J. Appoo, Thomas G. Gleason, Santi Trimarchi, Arturo Evangelista, Nimesh D. Desai, Kim A. Eagle, Marek Ehrlich, Tristan D. Yan, Truls Myrmel, Mark D. Peterson, Joseph E. Bavaria, Himanshu J. Patel, Marco Di Eusanio, Roberto Di Bartolomeo, G. Chad Hughes, Thoralf M. Sundt, Daniel G. Montgomery, Christoph A. Nienaber, G. Michael Deeb, Hector W.L. de Beaufort, Eric M. Isselbacher, and Carlo De Vincentiis
- Subjects
Male ,Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Computed Tomography Angiography ,Aorta, Thoracic ,Dissection (medical) ,030204 cardiovascular system & hematology ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Cardiac tamponade ,medicine.artery ,Ascending aorta ,medicine ,Humans ,Registries ,Aortic rupture ,Aorta ,Aortic dissection ,Acute aortic syndrome ,business.industry ,Middle Aged ,medicine.disease ,Aortic Aneurysm ,Surgery ,Aortic Dissection ,Treatment Outcome ,030228 respiratory system ,Descending aorta ,Female ,Tomography, X-Ray Computed ,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ,business ,Retrograde extension - Abstract
To analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of acute aortic dissections with proximal entry tear in the arch.Patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection and entry tear in the arch were classified into 2 groups: arch A (retrograde extension into the ascending aorta with or without antegrade extension) and arch B (only antegrade extension into the descending aorta or further distally). Presentation, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the 2 groups were compared.The arch A (n = 228) and arch B (n = 140) groups were similar concerning the presence of any preoperative complication (68.4% vs 60.0%; P = .115), but the types of complication were different. Arch A presented more commonly with shock, neurologic complications, cardiac tamponade, and grade 3 or 4 aortic valve insufficiency and less frequently with refractory hypertension, visceral ischemia, extension of dissection, and aortic rupture. Management for both groups were open surgery (77.6% vs 18.6%; P .001), endovascular treatment (3.5% vs 25.0%; P .001), and medical management (16.2% vs 51.4%; P .001). Overall in-hospital mortality was similar (16.7% vs 19.3%; P = .574), but mortality tended to be lower in the arch A group after open surgery (15.3% vs 30.8%; P = .090), and higher after endovascular (25.0% vs 14.3%; P = .597) or medical treatment (24.3% vs 13.9%; P = .191), although the differences were not significant.Acute aortic dissection patients with primary entry tear in the arch are currently managed by a patient-specific approach. In choosing the management type of these patients, it may be advisable to stratify them based on retrograde or only antegrade extension of the dissection.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF