Home > Riviste > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery > Fascicoli precedenti > Articles online first > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2015 Feb 06

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti
Per citare questo articolo

THE JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY

Rivista di Chirurgia Cardiaca, Vascolare e Toracica


Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,179


eTOC

 

The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2015 Feb 06

Copyright © 2015 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair or best medical therapy for uncomplicated Type B aortic dissection? A meta-analysis

Yang J., Shi Y., Jiang J.

Department of Vascular Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China


PDF  


AIM: To conduct a meta-­analysis of all studies comparing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and best medical therapy (BMT) for treating uncomplicated Type B aortic dissection (TBAD).
METHODS: PubMed/Medline and Web of Knowledge were searched till September 2014 for relevant studies published in English. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and its corresponding 95% CI were analyzed with Cochrane Review Manager (Revman 5.3).
RESULTS: Our analysis showed that compared with BMT, TEVAR did not significantly affect 30-­day (hospital) mortality. A significantly lower 1-­year and 2-­ or 3 year survival rates was observed with TEVAR vs BMT. Interestingly, a trend just short of statistical significance towards higher 4-­ or 5-­year survival was found with TEVAR treatment ( P = 0.08). No significant differences were found in false lumen (FL) thrombosis formation with TEVAR vs BMT treatment. However, a trend toward less incomplete or no FL thrombosis was noted with TEVAR. No significantly impact on the risk of later re-­intervention was found with TEVAR vs BMT.
CONCLUSIONS: TEVAR did not provide obvious early survival advantage for uncomplicated TBAD over BMT, especially in the patients using TEVAR alone. It may remain a treatment option in uncomplicated TBAD patients with high risks for later complications. More randomized, prospective, long-­term studies are needed to further clarify whether TEVAR could be a better first-­line treatment strategy vs BMT for uncomplicated TBAD.

inizio pagina

Publication History

Per citare questo articolo

Yang J, Shi Y, Jiang J. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair or best medical therapy for uncomplicated Type B aortic dissection? A meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Surg 2015 Feb 06. 

Corresponding author e-mail

jiangjhzhongshan@163.com