CLINICAL RESEARCH: AORTIC DISEASES
The Role of False Lumen Size in Prediction of In-Hospital Complications After Acute Type B Aortic Dissection
Chih-Ping Chang, MD*,
Juhn-Cherng Liu, MD , ,
Ying-Ming Liou, PhD ,
Shih-Sheng Chang, MD* and
Jan-Yow Chen, MD*,,*
* Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan
Department of Radiology, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan
Department of Life Science, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan
Department of Medical Radiological Technology, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
Manuscript received May 12, 2008;
revised manuscript received June 23, 2008,
accepted June 24, 2008.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Jan-Yow Chen, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, China Medical University Hospital, 2 Yuh-Der Road, Taichung 404, Taiwan (Email: janyow{at}ms77.hinet.net).
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine whether false lumen size predicts in-hospital complications for acute type B aortic dissection.
Background: The incidence of complications developing in patients with acute type B aortic dissection has been high. However, methods for recognizing high-risk patients have not been well-studied. We used quantitative analysis by computed tomography (CT) to predict the occurrence of in-hospital complications.
Methods: Fifty-five consecutive patients with acute type B aortic dissection documented by CT imaging were analyzed. They were divided into groups, with and without in-hospital complications, and compared regarding maximal aortic diameter (MAD), maximal false lumen area (MFLA), minimal true lumen area (MTLA), branch-vessel involvement (BVI), and longitudinal length (LL) of aortic dissection.
Results: There were 31 patients with a stable course (group 1) and 24 patients who developed complications (group 2). The MFLA of group 2 was significantly larger than that of group 1 (group 1 vs. group 2 = 577.7 ± 273.2 mm2 vs. 1,899.3 ± 1,642.4 mm2, p < 0.001). The BVI number was also higher in group 2 (group 1 vs. group 2 = 1.0 ± 1.1 vs. 3.3 ± 2.0, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, only MFLA and BVI number were independent predictors of in-hospital complications. Patients with initial MFLA  922 mm2 or BVI number 2 showed a significantly higher incidence of in-hospital complications than the other patients (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: A large MFLA and a higher BVI number are powerful predictors of in-hospital complications after acute type B aortic dissection.
Key Words: acute complications • predictors • type B aortic dissection
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | BVI = branch-vessel involvement | | CT = computed tomography | | LL = longitudinal length | | MAD = maximal aortic diameter | | MFLA = maximal false lumen area | | MTLA = minimal true lumen area |
|
Acute type B aortic dissection is an emergent cardiovascular disease with potentially serious complications (1,2). Despite significant advancement in the diagnosis and treatment of aortic dissection, mortality and morbidity rates remain high (3,4–7). The early mortality rate for type B aortic dissection ranges from 10% to 12% (1,8–10). The incidence of early complications is also significant and usually lethal (1,10). Yet, the optimal treatment for patients with acute type B aortic dissection remains unclear (11). Generally, the preferred treatment for patients without complications after Standford type B aortic dissection is medication therapy (1,12,13). Surgical intervention is reserved for cases that are complicated by progression of dissection, rupture or impending rupture, refractory chest pain, or end-organ ischemia caused by compromised aortic branches (11,14). These complications might occur early and frequently, and the outcome is usually fatal (15,16). However, prediction of patients who are at high risk of early lethal complications is still not well understood. The aortic diameter has been reported as a predictor of lethal complications of aortic dissection (17,18). In part, those results might be explained by La Place's law, which describes wall stress as being proportional to the pressure exerted by the fluid contents and its radius and being inversely proportional to wall thickness (17,19,20): therefore, the larger the diameter, the higher the resulting stress on the vessel wall and the greater the possibility of lethal complications.
Nevertheless, aortic dissection presents with a dual-lumen rather than a single-lumen. The anatomy of aortic dissection is usually complex, including irregular lumen shape and length. The impact of anatomic factors in aortic dissection is complicated and difficult to explain by total aortic diameter alone. Therefore, we propose that the occurrence of acute in-hospital complications of aortic dissection might be influenced by multiple anatomic factors, not only the total aortic diameter.
Computed tomography (CT) has been used to evaluate the aorta and to predict the outcome of aortic disorders (1–3,10,17,19). In the present study, we used CT imaging to identify the characteristics and abnormalities of aortic dissection. Thereafter, we tried to identify CT predictors of in-hospital complications of type B aortic dissection. Such predictors might be beneficial when determining strategies for managing type B aortic dissections.
|
Methods
|
|---|
Patient population.
The population studied consisted of 55 consecutive patients (51 male, 4 female) with a mean age of 58.3 ± 14.7 years. All patients underwent cross-sectional imaging by CT in our emergency department and met the criteria for having a Standford type B aortic dissection. Those patients with a stable hospital course were enrolled in group 1, and the patients with acute in-hospital complications comprised group 2. The criteria used to define a complicated type B aortic dissection are as follows: 1) in-hospital death due to aortic dissection; 2) expansion and progression of dissection in the acute phase; 3) impending rupture or actual rupture of the aorta; and 4) end-organ malperfusion. The clinical and radiological characteristics were compared between both groups.
CT imaging.
Both nonenhanced and enhanced images were acquired with a spiral CT scanner for all patients. The enhanced CT was performed with a bolus injection of 100 ml of ionic or nonionic contrast material. The CT was performed with a Light Speed 16 scanner (GE Medical System, Milwaukee, Wisconsin) or Twin Flash scanner (Elscint, Haifa, Israel) that generated axial images with contiguous 5-mm–thick sections from the top of the aortic arch to the abdominal aorta. In the spiral CT scanner, a power injector was used and scanning began at 30 s and 120 to 150 s, after starting to inject the contrast material.
Image analysis.
The CT images were evaluated by 1 radiologist (J.-C.L.) and by 1 cardiologist (C.-P.C.). All CT images taken during the hospital stay of each patient were analyzed prospectively and independently. The observers were blinded to the presence of complications. The aortic arch was defined as the segments between the brachiocephalic artery and the ligamentum arteriosus. The descending aorta was defined as the segment below the ligamentum arteriosus. Parameters of CT images, including the maximal aortic diameter (MAD), maximal false lumen area (MFLA), minimal true lumen area (MTLA), number of branch-vessel involvement (BVI), and total longitudinal length (LL) of the dissection, were measured off-line. The largest short-axial diameter of the outer contour of the affected aortic segment was measured and defined as the MAD, on the basis of the method that has been reported (Fig. 1A) (17). The MFLA was defined as the area over the segment with maximal false lumen in the descending aorta (Fig. 1B). The MTLA was defined as the area over the segment with minimal true lumen in the descending aorta with dissection. The false lumen area, true lumen area, and the diameter of the aortic dissection were measured by the CT imaging system software and corrected to the appropriate scale. The total LL of the dissection was measured by the total thickness of all affected contiguous sections of aortic dissection. The number of BVI was defined as the number of branch vessels including the carotid artery, celiac trunk, superior mesentery artery, inferior mesentery artery, renal artery, and iliac artery with involvement of dissection and presence of a false lumen.
View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 1 Measurement of the Total Aortic Diameter and False Lumen Area
(A) The maximal short-axial diameter of the aorta was measured (black line). (B) The computed tomography imaging system software measured the maximal false lumen area. The false lumen area is delineated by the red line.
|
|
Statistical analysis.
Continuous data were expressed as mean ± SD. The Student t test was used when the data were normally distributed; otherwise, the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test was used. The decision of tests used for comparison of continuous data was based on the test for normality by the Shapiro-Wilk test. Categorical data were compared by the conventional chi-square test if the observation numbers in all categories were larger than 5; otherwise, the Fisher exact test was used. The 5 CT parameters between the groups with either a smooth course or with lethal complications were compared. The relative influence of these variables was tested by multivariable stepwise logistic regression analysis. A receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis and Youden index were used to determine the best cutoff value, which maximized the sum of sensitivity and specificity for predicting in-hospital complications. The sensitivity and specificity of a cutoff value for predicting the in-hospital complication were considered to be both important in our study. The criterion of Youden index represents a situation when the loss of false positive equals that of the false negative. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
|
Results
|
|---|
Patient characteristics.
Of the 55 patients, 31 had a stable course during the hospital stay (group 1) and 24 had complications (group 2). The clinical features of patients in groups 1 and 2 are summarized in Table 1. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups.
In-hospital complications of patients with acute type B aortic dissection.
Nine patients had renal artery involvement with deteriorated renal function. Eight had limb ischemia due to compromised femoral arteries caused by the aortic dissection, and emergency surgical intervention was required. Two patients suffered from mesenteric ischemia after aortic dissection. Seven patients had symptomatic chest pain and progression of aortic dissection, as documented by follow-up CT during admission. Seven patients suffered from rupture or impending rupture of their aortic dissection, with symptoms such as persistent chest pain and unstable vital signs (Table 2). Cardiovascular surgeons typically recommend surgical interventions for acute and potentially lethal complications. Four patients died during the early stages of hospital stay after receiving emergency surgery for rupture or impending rupture of an aortic dissection.
CT findings and predictors of in-hospital complications.
The average MAD was 46.1 ± 14.9 mm (range 26 to 102 mm), and the average total LL of aortic dissections was 29.0 ± 10.9 cm (range 3 to 50 cm). The MFLA was 1,154.4 ± 1,275.9 mm2 (range 86 to 6,740 mm2), and the MTLA was 208.1 ± 201.5 mm2 (range 0 to 901 mm2). The average number of BVI was 2.0 ± 1.9 (range 0 to 6).
Computed tomographic parameters, including MAD, MFLA, total LL, number of BVI, and MTLA, were selected for comparisons between patients of group 1 and group 2. In univariate analysis, there was a significantly higher MFLA, total LL, MAD, and number of BVI in group 2 (p < 0.001, p = 0.004, p = 0.025, and p < 0.001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, only MFLA and number of BVI were independent variables for prediction of complicated type B aortic dissection (p = 0.02 and p = 0.004, respectively) (Table 3).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3 Comparisons of Characteristics of CT Imaging Between Patients With a Smooth Course and Those With Acute Complications
|
|
On the basis of the receiver-operating characteristic curve, the best cutoff value for MFLA to predict in-hospital complications was 922 mm2 (sensitivity 79.2%; specificity 96.8%). The best cutoff value for number of BVI was 2 (sensitivity 83.3% and specificity 74.2%). In a total of 55 patients, 20 patients with an MFLA 922 mm2 showed significantly higher incidences total of in-hospital complications (95% vs. 14.3%, p < 0.001), rupture (30% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.007), progression (35% vs. 0%, p < 0.001), and clinically branch-vessel compromise (50% vs. 14.3%, p = 0.01) than the other 35 patients who had an MFLA <922 mm2 (Fig. 2). Of the total 55 patients, the 28 patients with a number of BVI 2 demonstrated a higher total of in-hospital complications (71.4% vs. 14.8%, p < 0.001), progression (25.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.01), and clinically branch-vessel compromise (53.6% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) than the 27 patients with a number of BVI <2 (Fig. 3). The incidence of rupture was not different between patients with a number of BVI 2 and those with BVI <2 (10.7% vs. 14.3%, p = 0.71).
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 2 Influence of MFLA on Incidence of In-Hospital Complications
Differences in incidence of total in-hospital complications, rupture, progression, and end-organ malperfusion between patients with maximal false lumen area (MFLA) 922 mm2
(green bars) and those with MFLA <922 mm2
(yellow bars). *p = 0.01, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001 compared with patients with MFLA <922 mm2.
|
|
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 3 Influence of BVI Number on Incidence of In-Hospital Complications
Differences in incidence of total in-hospital complications, progression, and end-organ malperfusion between patients with branch-vessel involvement (BVI) number 2 (green bars) and those with BVI number <2 (yellow bars). *p = 0.01 and **p < 0.001 between patients with BVI number 2 and <2.
|
|
The effect of MTLA was analyzed, because of its suspected influence in development of malperfusion syndrome. On univariate analysis, the 15 patients who experienced malperfusion syndrome during hospital stay showed a lower MTLA than the 40 patients without malperfusion syndrome (99.47 ± 64.1 mm2 vs. 248.9 ± 220.2 mm2, p = 0.003). However, on multivariate analysis with parameters including MAD, MFLA, total LL, number of BVI, and MTLA, only BVI was an independent predictor of malperfusion syndrome (p = 0.001). Also, the MTLA did not demonstrate a significant difference between patients with complication of rupture or progression in univariate analysis and those without (p = 0.63 and p = 0.19, respectively).
|
Discussion
|
|---|
Acute type B aortic dissection is a devastating disease with high morbidity and mortality (4–7). In general, initial treatment for acute type B aortic dissection is medical, whereas patients with complications from acute type B aortic dissection need a more aggressive intervention (13,14,21–24). Complications tend to occur early, and the outcome is often serious and fatal (3). However, the early mortality rate is still significant, despite aggressive medical management (8,9,25). Conventional surgical reconstruction carries a significant risk of morbidity and mortality in acute complicated type B aortic dissection (13,26–29). The recent development of endovascular stent-graft treatment provides an alternative choice for patients with lethal complications, even in the acute phase (30–37). Surgical intervention or endovascular treatment is recommended for acute aortic dissection patients with acute lethal complications. Those patients have better outcomes than patients with medical treatment alone (2,3,9,18,25,29,31–34,38,39). Therefore, identification of patients at high risk of developing early or in-hospital complications is important.
Predictors of in-hospital complications.
The MAD of a type B aortic dissection has been reported to be predictive of the need for elective surgery and of in-hospital mortality (10,18). It has also been reported that the initial descending thoracic aorta diameter is a risk factor for late descending aortic aneurysmal formation in patients with type A aortic dissection after ascending aorta surgery (40). However, the initial aortic diameter still does not explain well the outcome and subsequent complications (18,41–45). The acute complications of type B aortic dissections were always due to the progression of the dissection, a ruptured aneurysm, or compromised end-organ perfusion (2,18). These results were always associated with a large or progressively enlarged false lumen. A large aortic diameter might be a major contribution by an enlarged false lumen. Therefore, we propose that the characteristics of the false lumen play a more important role than a large aortic diameter in the development of complications in type B aortic dissection patients.
In our study, we used CT imaging to quantitatively measure the aortic diameter and true lumen and false lumen sizes, including the MAD, MTLA, MFLA, total LL, and the number of BVI. On univariate analysis, MAD, MFLA, LL of false lumen, and BVI number were all shown to be significantly different between patients with a stable course and patients with acute complications. However, on multivariate analysis, only MFLA and BVI number were independent predictors of in-hospital complications. A large area of the false lumen has been reported to favor secondary dilation of the aorta after acute type A aortic dissection (42). We demonstrated that, consistent with that report, in patients with acute type B aortic dissection, those with a large initial MFLA have a higher incidence of in-hospital complications. The aortic dissection exhibited dual-lumen morphology, and the vessel wall of the false lumen was considered to be weaker than that of the true lumen. In patients with a large false lumen area, blood pressure has been shown to be higher in the false lumen compared with the true lumen (42). Therefore, the effect of wall stress might more significantly affect the false lumen.
Also, the structure of an aortic dissection is usually complex. Therefore, the influence of a false lumen cannot always be predicted, on the basis of La Place's law, with total MAD alone (17,19,20,43). In our study, some patients with a large MAD exhibited a small false lumen and had benign outcomes. In contrast, some patients did not have a large aortic diameter but had a large false lumen, and their outcomes were usually problematic.
Song et al. (43) has reported that a larger false lumen diameter of the upper descending thoracic aorta on the initial CT portends a late aneurysm and an adverse outcome in patients with aortic dissection involving the descending aorta. They showed that the initial false lumen diameter was the most powerful predictor and was better than the initial aorta diameter in predicting late aneurysmal change. Their study also demonstrated that the initial false lumen diameter but not the aorta diameter correlated with the rate of aorta dilation after aortic dissection. Consistent with that report, our data showed that the role of false lumen size is greater than the role of true lumen size in predicting in-hospital complications in acute type B aortic dissection patients. However, we found that the false lumen diameter was sometimes difficult to define due to irregular border and irregular morphology of the false lumen. Patients with a similar false lumen diameter might have quite different false lumen areas, particularly in a patient with a large false lumen surrounding the true lumen. The false lumen size might be underestimated in some patients by a false lumen diameter method. Therefore, we selected the MFLA, not the false lumen diameter, for estimation of the false lumen size and then predicted subsequent complications.
The total LL in our study showed a significant difference between the patients with a stable hospital course and those with complicated hospital courses on univariate analysis. However, on multivariate analysis, the total LL has not been demonstrated as an independent predictor. The length of the false lumen might somewhat reflect the presence or absence of involvement of the mid and distal abdomen aorta, leading to branch vessel compromise. In our study, patients with a longer false lumen always exhibited a larger BVI number (r = 0.62, p < 0.001). We suggest that a higher BVI number might reflect a sign of a high false lumen tension and shearing forces in the initial stages of type B aortic dissection and result in subsequent branch vessel compromise. To our knowledge, the present report is the first study demonstrating a role for MFLA and BVI number in predicting in-hospital complications of acute type B aortic dissection.
In the present study, MTLA has not been demonstrated as a significant predictor of total in-hospital complications after acute type B aortic dissection. However, patients with malperfusion syndrome showed significant lower MTLA than patients without malperfusion syndrome on univariate analysis. However, on multivariate analysis, only BVI number was an independent predictor for malperfusion syndrome. There was a significant negative correlation between MTLA and BVI number (r = –0.50, p < 0.001). Patients with a higher BVI number always demonstrated a lower MTLA. Patients with a higher BVI number were suspected to have a higher false lumen pressure, which then limited the true lumen area.
Study limitations.
In patients with aortic dissection involving the aortic arch, measurement of the false lumen area is limited in the descending aorta because the transectional lumen area could not be well delineated in the aortic arch. Therefore, the identified false lumen areas might not have been maximal in those patients. Another limitation of the study is that the study population is small. Our results should be confirmed in a larger-scale study.
Clinical implications.
The present study demonstrated a crucial role for false lumen size factors in predicting acute in-hospital complications after acute type B aortic dissection. It suggests that the effect of anatomic factors on aortic dissection is complicated and difficult to explain by total aortic diameter alone. The occurrence of acute in-hospital complications might be predominantly influenced by false lumen size factors including MLFA and BVI number. These 2 anatomic factors were both independent predictors of in-hospital complications. Measurement and estimation of the initial MFLA and BVI number by CT imaging are beneficial for determining strategies for managing type B aortic dissection.
On the basis of our data, patients with a large false lumen area (MFLA 922 mm2) and higher BVI number (2) are at high risk for developing in-hospital complications including rupture, progression, and malperfusion syndrome. Early and aggressive intervention including surgery or stent-graft treatment might be considered for them.
|
Conclusions
|
|---|
Computed tomography imaging is a useful tool to identify the patient at high risk of developing in-hospital complications. A large MFLA and high BVI number might predict the development of acute in-hospital complications in patients with acute type B aortic dissection. More aggressive medical management and early intervention is suggested for those patients in the early phase of type B aortic dissection.
|
Acknowledgments
|
|---|
The authors are grateful to Dr. Hong-Dar Isaac Wu of China Medical University Biostatics Center for his contribution to the statistical analysis of our study.
|
References
|
|---|
1. Estrera AL, Miller III CC, Safi HJ, et al. Outcomes of medical management of acute type B aortic dissection Circulation 2006;114(Suppl):I384-I389.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]2. Trimarchi S, Nienaber CA, Rampoldi V, et al. IRAD Investigators Role and results of surgery in acute type B aortic dissection: insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) Circulation 2006;114(Suppl):I357-I364.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 3. Hagan PG, Nienaber CA, Isselbacher, et al. The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD): new insights into an old disease JAMA 2000;283:897-903.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 4. Anagnostopoulos CE, Prabhakar MJS, Kittle CF. Aortic dissections and dissecting aneurysms Am J Cardiol 1972;30:263-273.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 5. Wheat Jr MW. Acute dissecting aneurysms of the aorta: diagnosis and treatment: 1979 Am Heart J 1980;99:373-387.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 6. Roberts WC. Aortic dissection: anatomy, consequences, and causes Am Heart J 1981;101:195-214.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 7. Hirst A, Johns VJ, Krime SJ. Dissecting aneurysm of the aorta: a review of 505 cases Medicine 1958;37:217-279.[Medline] 8. Nienaber CA, Eagle KA. Aortic dissection: new frontiers in diagnosis and management: part I: from etiology to diagnosis strategies Circulation 2003;108:628-635.[Free Full Text] 9. Roseborough G, Burke J, Sperry J, Perler B, Parra J, Williams GM. Twenty-year experience with acute distal thoracic dissections J Vasc Surg 2004;402:235-246. 10. Suzuki T, Mehta RH, Ince H, et al. Clinical profiles and outcomes of acute type B aortic dissection in the current era: lessons from the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD) Circulation 2003;108(Suppl 1):II312-II317.[Medline] 11. Erbel R, Alfonso F, Boileau C, et al. Diagnosis and management of aortic dissection Eur Heart J 2001;22:1642-1681.[Free Full Text] 12. Miller DC, Mitchell RS, Oyer PE, Stinson EB, Jamieson SW, Shumway NE. Independent determinants of operative mortality for patients with aortic dissection Circulation 1984;70(Suppl I):I153-I164.[Medline] 13. Glower DD, Fann JI, Speier RH, et al. Comparison of medical and surgical therapy for uncomplicated descending aortic dissection Circulation 1990;82(Suppl IV):IV39-IV46.[Medline] 14. Fann JI, Miller DC. Aortic dissection Ann Vasc Surg 1995;9:311-323.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 15. Chirillo F, Marchiori MC, Andriolo L, et al. Outcome of 290 patients with aortic dissection. A 12-year multicentre experience. Eur Heart J 1990;11:311-319.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 16. Jamieson WR, Munro AI, Miyagishima RT, Allen P, Tyers GF, Gerein AN. Aortic dissection: early diagnosis and surgical management are the keys to survival Can J Surg 1982;25:145-149.[Web of Science][Medline] 17. Sueyoshi E, Sakamoto I, Hayashi K, Yamaguchi T, Imada T. Growth rate of aortic diameter in patients with type B aortic dissection during the chronic phase Circulation 2004;110(Suppl 1):II256-II261.[Web of Science][Medline] 18. Hata M, Sezai A, Niino T, et al. Prognosis for patients with type B acute aortic dissection. Risk analysis of early death and requirement for elective surgery. Circ J 2007;71:1279-1282.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 19. Hirose Y, Hamada S, Takamiya M, Imakita S, Naito H, Nishimura T. Aortic aneurysms: growth rates measured with CT Radiology 1992;185:249-252.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 20. Juvonen T, Ergin MA, Galla JD, et al. Prospective study of the natural history of thoracic aortic aneurysm Ann Thorac Surg 1997;63:1533-1545.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 21. DeSanctis RW, Doroghazi RM, Austen WG, Buckley MJ. Aortic dissection N Engl J Med 1987;317:1060-1067.[Web of Science][Medline] 22. Crawford ES. The diagnosis and management of aortic dissection JAMA 1990;264:2537-2541.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 23. Miller DC. The continuing dilemma concerning medical versus surgical management of patients with acute type B dissection Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;5:33-46.[Medline] 24. Masuda Y, Yamada Z, Morooka N, Watanabe S, Inagaki Y. Prognosis of patients medically treated aortic dissection Circulation 1991;84(Suppl III):III7-III13.[Medline] 25. Fann JI, Smith JA, Miller DC, et al. Surgical management of aortic dissection during a 30-year period Circulation 1995;92(Suppl):II113-II121.[Medline] 26. Crawford ES, Svensson LG, Coselli JS, Safi HJ, Hoss KR. Aortic dissection and dissecting aortic aneurysms Ann Surg 1988;208:254-273.[Web of Science][Medline] 27. Cambria RP, Brewster DC, Gertler J, et al. Vascular complications associated with spontaneous aortic dissection J Vasc Surg 1988;7:199-209.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 28. Fann JI, Sarris GE, Mitchell RS, et al. Treatment of patients with aortic dissection presenting with peripheral vascular complications Ann Surg 1990;212:705-713.[Web of Science][Medline] 29. Doroghazi RM, Slater EE, DeSanctis RW, Buckley MJ, Austen WG, Rosenthal S. Long-term survival of patients with treated aortic dissection J Am Coll Cardiol 1984;3:1026-1034.[Abstract] 30. Bortone AS, De Cillis E, D'Agostino D, de Luca Tupputi Schinosa L. Endovascular treatment of thoracic aortic disease: four years of experience Circulation 2004;110(Suppl 1):II262-II267.[Web of Science][Medline] 31. Eggebrecht H, Nienaber CA, Neuhauser M, et al. Endovascular stent-graft placement in aortic dissection: a meta-analysis Eur Heart J 2006;27:489-498.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 32. Nienaber CA, Fattori R, Lund G, et al. Nonsurgical reconstruction of thoracic aortic dissection by stent-graft placement N Engl J Med 1999;340:1539-1545.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 33. Dake MD, Kato N, Mitchell RS, et al. Endovascular stent-graft placement for the treatment of acute aortic dissection N Engl J Med 1999;340:1546-1552.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 34. Bortone AS, Schena S, Mannatrizio G, et al. Endovascular stent-graft treatment for diseases of the descending thoracic aorta Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;20:514-519.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 35. Bortone AS, Schena S, D'Agostino D, et al. Immediate versus delayed endovascular treatment of post-traumatic aortic pseudoaneurysms and type B dissections: retrospective analysis and premises to the upcoming European trial Circulation 2002;106(Suppl 1):I234-I140.[Web of Science][Medline] 36. Orend KH, Scharrer-Pamler R, Kapfer X, Kotsis T, Gorich J, Sunder-Plassmann L. Endovascular treatment in diseases of the descending thoracic aorta: 6-year results of a single center J Vasc Surg 2003;37:91-99.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 37. Lambrechts D, Casselman F, Schroeyers P, De Geest R, D'Haenens P, Degrieck I. Endovascular treatment of the descending thoracic aorta Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2003;26:437-444.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 38. Kozai Y, Watanabe S, Yonezawa M, et al. Long-term prognosis of acute aortic dissection with medical treatment: a survey of 263 unoperated patients Jpn Circ J 2001;65:359-363.[CrossRef][Medline] 39. Duebener LF, Lorenzen P, Richardt G, Misfeld M, Notzold A, Hartmann F, Sievers HH, Geist V. Emergency endovascular stent-grafting for life-threatening acute type B aortic dissections Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78:1261-1266.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 40. Yeh CH, Chen MC, Wu YC, Wang YC, Chu JJ, Lin PJ. Risk factors for descending aortic aneurysm formation in medium-term follow-up of patients with type A aortic dissection Chest 2003;124:989-995.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 41. Pape LA, Tai TT, Isselbacher EM, et al. International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) Investigators Aortic diameter > or = 5.5 cm is not a good predictor of type A aortic dissection: observations from the international registry of acute aortic dissection (IRAD) Circulation 2007;116:1120-1127.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 42. Immer FF, Kra enbul E, Hagen U, et al. Large area of the false lumen favors secondary dilatation of the aorta after acute type A aortic dissection Circulation 2005;112(Suppl I):I249-I252.[Web of Science][Medline] 43. Song JM, Kim SD, Kim JH, et al. Long-term predictors of descending aorta aneurismal change in patients with aortic dissection J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:799-804.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 44. Bernard Y, Zimmermann H, Chocron S, et al. False lumen patency as a predictor of late outcome in aortic dissection Am J Cardiol 2001;87:1378-1382.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 45. Akutsu K, Nejima J, Kiuchi K, et al. Effects of the patent false lumen on the long-term outcome of type B acute aortic dissection Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2004;26:359-366.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Related Article
-
Inside This Issue of JACC
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2008 52: A31-A32.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
Top
Abstract
Methods