Thoracic Aortic Research Center, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy; Department of Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Thoracic Aortic Research Center, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019 Jan;157(1):66-73. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.07.101. Epub 2018 Sep 21.
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.
分析近端破口位于主动脉弓的急性主动脉夹层的临床表现、治疗和结局。
纳入国际急性主动脉夹层注册研究且近端破口位于主动脉弓的患者被分为 2 组:弓 A 组(逆行撕裂累及升主动脉,或伴或不伴顺行撕裂累及升主动脉)和弓 B 组(仅顺行撕裂累及降主动脉或更远段)。比较 2 组患者的临床表现、治疗和住院结局。
弓 A 组(n=228)和弓 B 组(n=140)患者术前均存在并发症(68.4% vs 60.0%;P=.115),但并发症类型不同。弓 A 组患者更常见休克、神经系统并发症、心脏压塞和 3 或 4 级主动脉瓣关闭不全,而较少出现难治性高血压、内脏缺血、夹层延伸和主动脉破裂。2 组患者的治疗方法分别为开放手术(77.6% vs 18.6%;P<.001)、血管内治疗(3.5% vs 25.0%;P<.001)和药物治疗(16.2% vs 51.4%;P<.001)。总的院内死亡率相似(16.7% vs 19.3%;P=.574),但开放手术后弓 A 组死亡率较低(15.3% vs 30.8%;P=.090),血管内治疗后死亡率较高(25.0% vs 14.3%;P=.597),药物治疗后死亡率较高(24.3% vs 13.9%;P=.191),尽管差异无统计学意义。
目前对于近端破口位于主动脉弓的急性主动脉夹层患者,采用个体化治疗策略。在选择这些患者的治疗类型时,可能需要根据夹层的逆行或仅顺行撕裂来分层。