Home > Journals > International Angiology > Past Issues > International Angiology 2021 October;40(5) > International Angiology 2021 October;40(5):416-24



Publishing options
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian


Publication history
Cite this article as


REVIEW  AORTIC DISEASE Editor’s choice • Free accessfree

International Angiology 2021 October;40(5):416-24

DOI: 10.23736/S0392-9590.21.04687-3


language: English

Predictors of adverse events in uncomplicated type B aortic dissection: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Ana B. ROMEIRO 1 , Clara NOGUEIRA 1, 2, Andreia COELHO 1, 3, Armando MANSILHA 1, 4

1 Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 2 Department of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Vila Nova de Gaia/Espinho, Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal; 3 Department of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, Portugal; 4 Department of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de São João, Porto, Portugal

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been selectively used for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD); however, not all cases will benefit from TEVAR. A search for high risk clinical and radiographic predictors for complications is ongoing. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify predictors of major adverse events during follow-up of uncomplicated TBAD, in order to identify who might benefit from elective TEVAR.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) Statement.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: 16 studies were included in a qualitative synthesis and 10 in the meta-analysis. Several risk factors associated to major adverse events have been described, including: 1) aortic diameter ≥40 mm; 2) greater false lumen diameter (>22 mm); 3) patent false lumen; 4) primary entry tear >10 mm; and 5) greater number of false lumen vessels origin. Quantitative synthesis identified an aortic diameter ≥40 mm significantly associated with major adverse events (HR=3.56; P<0.00001). Reporting of false lumen status, aortic diameters and growth, and demographic data was not always congruent with the most recent recommendations by Society for Vascular Surgery and Society of Thoracic Surgeons, published in 2020.
CONCLUSIONS: Acute and subacute patients with uncomplicated TBAD presenting with an aortic diameter ≥40 mm and solely treated with BMT have an increased hazard of developing major adverse events (HR), making them potential candidates for TEVAR. Remaining risk factors analysed have weaker evidence.

KEY WORDS: Aneurysm, dissecting; Endovascular procedures; Prognosis; Prostheses and implants

top of page