Comparison of Outcomes and Complications Among Patients with Different Indications of Acute/Subacute Complicated Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection Treated by TEVAR: Data from the JaPanese REtrospective multicenter stuDy of ThoracIc Endovascular Aortic Repair for Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection (J-Predictive Study)

Shinichi Iwakoshi, Yoshihito Irie, Yoshiaki Katada, Shoji Sakaguchi, Norio Hongo, Katsuki Oji, Tetsuya Fukuda, Hitoshi Matsuda, Ryota Kawasaki, Takanori Taniguchi, Manabu Motoki, Makiyo Hagihara, Yoshihiko Kurimoto, Noriyasu Morikage, Hiroshi Nishimaki, Yukihisa Ogawa, Eijun Sueyoshi, Kyozo Inoue, Hideyuki Shimizu, Ichiro IdetaTakatoshi Higashigawa, Osamu Ikeda, Naokazu Miyamoto, Motoki Nakai, Takahiro Nakai, Takashi Inoue, Takeshi Inoue, Shigeo Ichihashi, Kimihiko Kichikawa

研究成果: Article査読

1 被引用数 (Scopus)

抄録

Purpose: To investigate the relationships between indications for thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute/subacute complicated Stanford type B aortic dissection and clinical outcomes, and complications specific to thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Material and methods: The J-predictive study retrospectively collected data of patients treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair for complicated Stanford type B aortic dissection at 20 institutions from January 2012 to March 2017. From the database, those treated for acute/subacute complicated Stanford type B aortic dissection were extracted (n = 118; 96 men; average age, 66.1 years; standard deviation, ± 13) and classified into groups 1, 2, and 3 according to thoracic endovascular aortic repair indications (rupture, superior mesenteric artery malperfusion, and renal or lower extremity malperfusion, respectively). Primary and secondary measures were mortality (overall and aortic-related) and complications related to thoracic endovascular aortic repair, respectively. For each outcome, the risks of being in groups 1 and 2 were statistically compared with that of being in group 3 as a control using Fisher’s exact test. Results: Mortality rate (odds ratio, 5.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33–20.53) and prevalence of paraparesis/paraplegia (odds ratio, 30.46; confidence interval, 1.71–541.77) were higher in group 1 than in group 3. Compared to group 3, group 2 showed no statistically significant differences in mortality or complications related to thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Conclusions: Rupture as an indication for thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection was more likely to result in worse mortality and high prevalence of spinal cord ischemia. Level of Evidence: Level 4, Case series.

本文言語English
ページ(範囲)290-297
ページ数8
ジャーナルCardiovascular and Interventional Radiology
45
3
DOI
出版ステータスPublished - 2022 3月

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • 放射線学、核医学およびイメージング
  • 循環器および心血管医学

フィンガープリント

「Comparison of Outcomes and Complications Among Patients with Different Indications of Acute/Subacute Complicated Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection Treated by TEVAR: Data from the JaPanese REtrospective multicenter stuDy of ThoracIc Endovascular Aortic Repair for Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection (J-Predictive Study)」の研究トピックを掘り下げます。これらがまとまってユニークなフィンガープリントを構成します。

引用スタイル