Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Jul 28;66(4):350-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.029.

Presentation, Diagnosis, and Outcomes of Acute Aortic Dissection: 17-Year Trends From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

Author information

1
Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Hospital, Worcester, Massachusetts. Electronic address: linda.pape@umassmed.edu.
2
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Internal Medicine, Botsford Hospital, Farmington Hills, Michigan.
3
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
4
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
5
Research Center for Thoracic Aortic Diseases, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato, Italy.
6
Servei de Cardiologia, Hospital General Universitari Vall D'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.
7
Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Tromso University Hospital, Tromso, Norway.
8
Cardiovascular Division, Minneapolis Heart Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
9
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
10
Cardiac Surgery Department, University Hospital S. Orsola, Bologna, Italy.
11
Cardiology Division, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
12
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
13
Thoracic Aortic Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
14
Department of Cardiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of acute aortic dissection (AAS) are changing.

OBJECTIVES:

This study examined 17-year trends in the presentation, diagnosis, and hospital outcomes of AAD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

METHODS:

Data from 4,428 patients enrolled at 28 IRAD centers between December 26, 1995, and February 6, 2013, were analyzed. Patients were divided according to enrollment date into 6 equal groups and by AAD type: A (n = 2,952) or B (n = 1,476).

RESULTS:

There was no change in the presenting complaints of severe or worst-ever pain for type A and type B AAD (93% and 94%, respectively), nor in the incidence of chest pain (83% and 71%, respectively). Use of computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of type A increased from 46% to 73% (p < 0.001). Surgical management for type A increased from 79% to 90% (p < 0.001). Endovascular management of type B increased from 7% to 31% (p < 0.001). Type A in-hospital mortality decreased significantly (31% to 22%; p < 0.001), as surgical mortality (25% to 18%; p = 0.003). There was no significant trend in in-hospital mortality in type B (from 12% to 14%).

CONCLUSIONS:

Presenting symptoms and physical findings of AAD have not changed significantly. Use of chest CT increased for type A. More patients in both groups were managed with interventional procedures: surgery in type A and endovascular therapy in type B. A significant decrease in overall in-hospital mortality was seen for type A but not for type B.

KEYWORDS:

acute aortic dissection; management; outcomes

PMID:
26205591
DOI:
10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.029
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center