ORIGINAL ARTICLES  VASCULAR SECTION RECENT ADVANCES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THORACIC DISSECTIONS 

The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2010 October;51(5):613-32

Copyright © 2010 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Outcome of patients with open and endovascular repair in acute complicated type B aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and comparative studies

Luebke T., Brunkwall J. ✉

Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Cologne, Germany

AIM: Acute complicated type B aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition. We summarized all published studies for TEVAR among patients with acute complicated typ B aortic dissection (TBAD) with respect to clinical success, complications, and outcomes. Furthermore, we determined whether TEVAR reduces death and morbidity compared with open repair for TBAD.
METHODS: Studies were identified from a literature search using various databases, and included studies when three or more patients were reported and at least in-hospital mortality was reported. Data from comparative studies of TEVAR versus open repair of the descending aorta in TBAD were combined through meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Seventy-six observational studies involving 1951 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. In-hospital mortality was 11.5% and other major complications (i.e., stroke (6.3%), paraplegia (4.9%), retrograde type A aortic dissection (7%), renal impairment including dialysis (6.9%), bowel infarction (4.1%), vascular problems including major amputation (2.5%)) occurred less frquently. Long-term follow-up was limited to a mean of 24 months. During this time, endovascular reintervention was required in 11.3%, surgical reintervention in 7.7%, and late aortic rupture was calculated for 3.2% of cases. A complete false lumen thrombosis was estimated to occur in 76.1% of cases. In comparative studies, 30-day/in-hospital mortality (OR=0.256, P=0.001) and paraplegia/paraparesis (OR=0.256, P=0.001) were significantly reduced for TEVAR versus open repair. In addition to that, the rate of vascular complications was reduced for TEVAR (OR=0.373, P=0.036). There was no significant difference between TEVAR and open repair in patients with acute complicated TBAD for the following outcomes: late mortality, reintervention rate, renal dysfunction (including dialysis), and stroke rate.
CONCLUSION: This summary analysis suggests that endovascular treatment of complicated acute type B aortic dissection produces favourable initial outcomes and would seem to be a great addition to the treatment options for this condition. Further study of long-term outcomes is required.