Validating a Curvature-Based Marker of Cervical Carotid Tortuosity for Risk Assessment in Heritable Aortopathies.

BACKGROUND: Cervical arterial tortuosity is associated with adverse outcomes in Loeys-Dietz syndrome and other heritable aortopathies. METHODS AND RESULTS: A method to assess tortuosity based on curvature of the vessel centerline in 3-dimensional space was developed. We measured cervical carotid tortuosity in 65 patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome from baseline computed tomography angiogram/magnetic resonance angiogram and all serial images during follow-up. Relations between baseline carotid tortuosity, age, aortic root diameter, and its change over time were compared. Patients with unoperated aortic roots were assessed for clinical end point (type A aortic dissection or aortic root surgery during 4 years of follow-up). Logistic regression was performed to assess the likelihood of clinical end point according to baseline carotid tortuosity. Total absolute curvature at baseline was 11.13±5.76 and was relatively unchanged at 8 to 10 years (fold change: 0.026±0.298, P=1.00), whereas tortuosity index at baseline was 0.262±0.131, with greater variability at 8 to 10 years (fold change: 0.302±0.656, P=0.818). Baseline total absolute curvature correlated with aortic root diameter (r=0.456, P=0.004) and was independently associated with aortic events during the 4-year follow-up (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.64 [95% CI, 1.02-6.85]). Baseline tortuosity index correlated with age (r=0.532, P<0.001) and was not associated with events (adjusted OR, 1.88 [95% CI, 0.79-4.51]). Finally, baseline total absolute curvature had good discrimination of 4-year outcomes (area under the curve=0.724, P=0.014), which may be prognostic or predictive. CONCLUSIONS: Here we introduce cervical carotid tortuosity as a promising quantitative biomarker with validated, standardized characteristics. Specifically, we recommend the adoption of a curvature-based measure, total absolute curvature, for early detection or monitoring of disease progression in Loeys-Dietz syndrome.

Disparities in Outcomes Between Sexes in Type B Aortic Dissection Patients Treated with TEVAR.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate differences in presentation and outcomes between sexes in patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection (TBAD). METHODS: Between January 1, 2012 and January 1, 2017 186 patients underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for TBAD at a single institution. Men (n = 112) and women (n = 74) were compared based on presenting demographics, comorbidities, and postoperative complications. Primary outcomes were survival and need for reintervention. RESULTS: Women were older (P = 0.04) and had a lower body mass index (P = 0.03). More women (F) presented with continued pain or refractory hypertension (51.0% F, 30.0% M), while more men (M) presented with acute complicated dissections (19.0% F, 39.0% M) (P = 0.008). At presentation, women had statistically higher relative rates of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = 0.05), hyperlipidemia (P = 0.03), and smoking (P = 0.03). Significantly more women were on Medicare without Medicaid (55.0% F, 34.0% M), while men had private insurance (35.0% F, 13.0% M) (P = 0.005). There was no significant difference in blood pressure control at presentation, discharge, or at 30 days. When normalized by body surface area, women had larger ascending aortic diameters (19.2(3.10)F, 17.5(2.40)M, P = 0.0002), as well as proportionally larger true lumens at the left subclavian artery (14.9(2.90)F, 13.4(2.50)M, P = 0.0002), carina (12.6(5.80)F, 9.90(4.80)M, P = 0.0009), and celiac (10.5(4.50)F, 8.50(4.10)M, P = 0.006) levels, and at the largest point of dissection (11.6(6.50)F, 9.60(4.80)M, P = 0.04), as well as proportionately smaller false lumens at the carina (5.90(5.60)F, 9.30(6.10)M, P = 0.003). Despite not being statistically significant, women had lower rates of stroke (6.80% F, 8.00% M, P = 0.7) and acute kidney injury (5.40% F, 11.6% M, P = 0.2), as well fewer days in the intensive care unit (ICU) (3.20(4.30)F, 4.60(6.60)M, P = 0.2) and an overall shorter length of stay (6.80(6.70)F, 8.00(8.20)M, P = 0.5). Kaplan-Meier estimates for survival for women versus men were 96.0% vs. 92.0%, 90.0% vs. 79.0%, and 70.0% vs. 69.0% at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years, respectively (P = 0.042). Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from reintervention for women versus men were 89.0% vs. 90.0%, 58.0% vs. 72.0%, and 48.0% vs. 58.0% at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years, respectively (P = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Women present with TBAD at an older age, have more comorbidities, lower socioeconomic status, and have larger ascending aortic diameters for their size. Despite having less severe dissections as evidenced by smaller false lumens and wider true lumens, it does not appear that this correlates with improved outcomes for women when compared to men. It appears that this is one of the few, if not only, aortic pathologies that result in comparable outcomes between sexes.

Cost Analysis of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Type B Aortic Dissection: How Much Does Quality Cost?

BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening medical emergency that affects an estimated 3-4 people per 100,000 annually, with 40% of cases classified as type B AD (TBAD). TBAD can be further classified as being complicated (co-TBAD) or uncomplicated (un-TBAD) based on the presence or absence of certain features such as malperfusion and rupture. TBAD can be managed conservatively with optimal medical therapy (OMT), or invasively with open surgical repair (OSR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), depending on several factors such as type of TBAD and its clinical acuity. The cost-effectiveness, or cost-benefit profile, of these strategies must be given equal consideration. However, TBAD studies featuring cost analyses are limited within the literature. This narrative review aims to address the gap in the literature on cost-effectiveness of TBAD treatments by providing an overview of cost analyses comparing OMT with TEVAR in un-TBAD and TEVAR with OSR in co-TBAD. Another aim is to provide a market analysis of the commercially available TEVAR devices. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using several search engines including PubMed, Ovid, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase to identify and extract relevant studies. RESULTS: Several TEVAR devices are available commercially on the global market costing $12,000-19,495. Nevertheless, the Terumo Aortic RELAY® stent graft seems to be the most cost-effective, yielding highly favourable clinical outcomes. Despite the higher initial cost of TEVAR, evidence in the literature strongly suggest that it is superior to OMT for un-TBAD on the long-term. In addition, TEVAR is well established in the literature as being gold-standard repair technique for co-TBAD, replacing OSR by offering a more optimal cost-benefit profile through lower costs and improved results. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of TEVAR has revolutionized the field of aortovascular surgery by offering a highly efficacious and long-term cost-effective treatment for TBAD.

Initial Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair vs Medical Therapy for Acute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection.

Importance: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has increasingly been used for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD) despite limited supporting data. Objective: To assess whether initial TEVAR following uTBAD is associated with reduced mortality or morbidity compared with medical therapy alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services inpatient claims data for adults aged 65 years or older with index admissions for acute uTBAD from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2018, with follow-up available through December 31, 2019. Exposures: Initial TEVAR was defined as TEVAR within 30 days of admission for acute uTBAD. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular hospitalizations, aorta-related and repeated aorta-related hospitalizations, and aortic interventions associated with initial TEVAR vs medical therapy. Propensity score inverse probability weighting was used. Results: Of 7105 patients with eligible index admissions for acute uTBAD, 1140 (16.0%) underwent initial TEVAR (623 [54.6%] female; median age, 74 years [IQR, 68-80 years]) and 5965 (84.0%) did not undergo TEVAR (3344 [56.1%] female; median age, 76 years [IQR, 69-83 years]). Receipt of TEVAR was associated with region (vs South; Midwest: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.81]; P < .001; Northeast: aOR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.50-0.79]; P < .001), Medicaid dual eligibility (aOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91; P = .003), hypertension (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.03-1.54; P = .03), peripheral vascular disease (aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.49; P = .03), and year of admission (2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 were associated with greater odds of TEVAR compared with 2011). After inverse probability weighting, mortality was similar for the 2 strategies up to 5 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85-1.06), as were aorta-related hospitalizations (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.99-1.27), aortic interventions (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.84-1.20), and cardiovascular hospitalizations (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.93-1.20). In a sensitivity analysis that included deaths within the first 30 days, initial TEVAR was associated with lower mortality over a period of 1 year (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99; P = .03), 2 years (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.96; P = .008), and 5 years (aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, 16.0% of patients underwent initial TEVAR within 30 days of uTBAD, and receipt of initial TEVAR was associated with hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, region, Medicaid dual eligibility, and year of admission. Initial TEVAR was not associated with improved mortality or reduced hospitalizations or aortic interventions over a period of 5 years, but in a sensitivity analysis that included deaths within the first 30 days, initial TEVAR was associated with lower mortality. These findings, along with cost-effectiveness and quality of life, should be assessed in a prospective trial in the US population.

Costs and Readmissions Associated with Type A Aortic Dissections at High- and Low-Volume Centers.

BACKGROUND: Costs and readmissions associated with type A aortic dissection repairs are not well understood. We investigated statewide readmissions, costs, and outcomes associated with the surgical management of type A aortic dissection repairs at low- and high-volume centers. METHODS: We identified all adult type A aortic dissection patients who underwent operative repair in the Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission's database (2012-2020). Hospitals were stratified into high- (top quartile of total repairs) or low-volume centers. RESULTS: Of the 249 patients included, 193 (77.5%) were treated at a high-volume center. Patients treated at high- and low-volume centers had no differences in age, sex, race, primary payer, or severity (all p > 0.5). High- compared to low-volume centers had a greater proportion of patients transferred in (71.5% vs. 17.9%, p < 0.001). High-volume centers also had longer lengths of stay (12 vs. 8 days, p < 0.001), similar inpatient mortality (13.0% vs. 16.1%, p = 0.6), and similar proportion of patients readmitted (54.9% vs. 51.8%, p = 0.7). High-volume centers had greater index admission costs ($114,859 vs. $72,090, p < 0.001) and similar readmission costs ($48,367 vs. $42,204, p = 0.5). At high-volume centers, transferred patients compared to direct admissions had greater severity of illness (p = 0.05), similar mortality (p = 0.53), and greater lengths of stay (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: High-volume centers had a greater number of patients transferred from other institutions compared to low-volume centers. High-volume centers were associated with increased index admission resource utilization, with transfer patients having higher illness severity and greater resource utilization, yet similar mortality, compared to direct admission patients.

Comparison of sequential organ failure assessment score and cardiac surgery score systems for mortality prediction after emergency acute aortic dissection surgery.

BACKGROUND: Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is one of the most mortal cardiovascular diseases and requires urgent diagnosis and surgery. The patient's clinical findings, complications, and patient's history are closely related to mortality rates. Cardiac surgery score (CASUS) is a scoring system which is calculated by considering the special pathophysiological conditions of patients undergoing cardiac surgery and predicts post-operative results with high accuracy. METHODS: Following the ethical approval from institutional ethics committee (ID: 2021/7/496), the data of consecutive 50 ATAAD patients who underwent emergent surgery in our hospital between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020, were evaluated. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and CASUS scores were calculated using the worst values of the daily laboratory and neurological status for both in admission to emergency department and during intensive care unit (ICU) follow-up period. The average and the total values of these scores were recorded for pre-operative, post-operative 1st day, and for the categorical data were defined as frequency and percentage. We used the Mann-Whitney U test for the independent continuous data comparisons and Pearson Chi-Square or Fisher exact test for categorical data comparison whole ICU period. Continuous data were presented as median and interquartile ranges (25-75th). RESULTS: The study comprised 50 patients, the rate of death was 34% (n=17). In total group, there were hypertension 72% (n=36), diabetes mellitus 24% (n=12), initial hemoglobin 12.5 g/dL (10.7-14.1, 25-75th), creatinine 1.09 mg/dL (0.85-1.33, 25-75th), and 72% (n=36) of these patients were male. The CASUSmean and SOFAmean scores were higher in the death-group when compared with the group who survived (12.9 [9.5-13.8, 25-75th], 3 [2-5, 25-75th]; 8 [6.1-9.2, 25-75th], 2.6 (2-4.5, 25-75th], p<0.001, respectively]. CASUSmean was independently associated with the 1-month mortality in model 1 (HR 1.25 [1.14-1.37] (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: According to our results increase in CASUS mean was the main predictor of 1 month mortality. When CASUS mean exceeds 8.3 the patient should be followed up more carefully for major adverse events including death.

False Lumen Flow Assessment by Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Long-Term Outcomes in Uncomplicated Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Despite the absence of clinical complications after an acute aortic dissection (AD) with persistent patent false lumen (FL), a high risk for clinical events may persist. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the natural evolution of noncomplicated AD and ascertain whether different FL flow patterns by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have independent prognostic value for AD-related events beyond established morphologic parameters. METHODS: One hundred thirty-one consecutive patients, 78 with surgically treated type A dissections and 53 with medically treated type B dissections, were followed up prospectively after acute AD with persistent patent FL in the descending aorta. Maximum aortic diameter, true lumen compression, entry tear, and partial FL thrombosis by computed tomography were assessed. Systolic antegrade true lumen and FL flow volumes and diastolic antegrade and retrograde flows were analyzed by MRI during the first year after AD. RESULTS: After a median follow-up period of 8.0 years (IQR: 4.6-10.9 years), 43 patients presented aorta-related events (25 died and 18 required endovascular treatment). FL systolic antegrade flow ≥30% with respect to total systolic antegrade flow and retrograde diastolic flow ≥80% with respect to total diastolic FL flow were predictors of aortic events. In multivariate analysis, aortic diameter >45 mm (HR: 2.91), type B dissection (HR: 2.44), and MRI flow pattern (HR: 16.87) were independent predictors of AD-related events. CONCLUSIONS: High systolic antegrade flow volume in the FL with significant diastolic retrograde flow assessed by MRI and aortic diameter >45 mm identify patients with higher risk for complications in whom more aggressive management would be indicated.

The impact of hospital size on national trends and outcomes in isolated open proximal aortic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of hospital size on national trend estimates of isolated open proximal aortic surgery for benchmarking hospital performance. METHODS: Patients age >18 years who underwent isolated open proximal aortic surgery for aneurysm and dissection from 2002 to 2014 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Concomitant valvular, vessel revascularization, re-do procedures, endovascular, and surgery for descending and thoracoabdominal aorta were excluded. Discharges were stratified by hospital size and analyzed using trend, multivariable regression, propensity-score matching analysis. RESULTS: Over a 13-year period, 53,657 isolated open proximal aortic operations were performed nationally. Although the total number of operations/year increased (∼2.9%/year increase) and overall in-hospital mortality decreased (∼4%/year; both P < .001 for trend), these did not differ by hospital size (P > .05). Large hospitals treated more sicker and older patients but had shorter length of stay and lower hospital costs (both P < .001). Even after propensity-score matching, large hospital continued to demonstrate superior in-hospital outcomes, although only statistically for major in-hospital cardiac complications compared with non-large hospitals. In our subgroup analysis of dissection versus non-dissection cohort, in-hospital mortality trends decreased only in the non-dissection cohort (P < .01) versus dissection cohort (P = .39), driven primarily by the impact of large hospitals (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates increasing volume and improving outcomes of isolated open proximal aortic surgeries nationally over the last decade regardless of hospital bed size. Moreover, the resource allocation of sicker patients to larger hospital resulted shorter length of stay and hospital costs, while maintaining similar operative mortality to small- and medium-sized hospitals.

Procedure-Associated Costs and Mid-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Zone 0 and Zone 1 Aortic Arch Repair.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of proximal aortic arch pathology provides a less-invasive treatment option for high-risk patients ineligible for open arch reconstruction. However, the fiscal impact of these techniques remains unclear. Therefore, our objective was to characterize the mid-term outcomes after Zone 0 and Zone 1 TEVAR and describe the associated technical costs, revenues, and net margins at a single tertiary medical center. METHODS: We examined all patients who underwent TEVAR between April 2011 and August 2019 via retrospective chart review. Patients were categorized by proximal endograft extent to identify Zone 0 or Zone 1 repairs. Procedural characteristics and outcomes were described. Technical costs, revenues, and margins were obtained from the hospital finance department. RESULTS: We identified 10 patients (6 Zone 0, 4 Zone 1) who were denied open arch reconstruction. Patients were predominantly female (n = 8; 80%) and the mean age was 72.8 ± 5.5 years. TEVAR was performed in 5 asymptomatic patients, urgently in 3 symptomatic patients, and emergently in 2 ruptured patients. TEVAR plus extra-anatomic bypass was performed in 4 patients. Another 4 patients also received parallel stent-grafting while 1 patient received a branched thoracic endograft and yet another an in-situ laser fenestration followed by branch stent grafting. Within the 30-day postoperative period, 1 patient experienced stroke and 1 patient died. Bypass and branch vessel patency were 100% through the duration of follow-up (mean 19.3 months). Mean total technical cost associated with all procedures or repair stages was $105,164 ± $59,338 while mean net technical margin was -$25,055 ± $18,746. The net technical margin was negative for 9 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair of the proximal aortic arch is associated with good mid-term outcomes in patients considered too high-risk for open repair. However, reimbursement does not adequately cover treatment cost, with net technical margins being negative in nearly all cases. To remain financially sustainable, efforts should be made to both optimize aortic arch TEVAR delivery as well as advocate for reimbursement commensurate with associated costs.

Hospitalization Cost and In-hospital Outcomes Following Type B Thoracic Aortic Dissection Repair.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported lower mortality and morbidity after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) when compared to open surgical repair (OSR) in the treatment of type B aortic dissection (TbAD). However, there are few studies in the literature on the cost of both treatment options. Thus, the aim of this study is to focus on in-hospital outcomes and cost associated with TbAD repair procedures in a national database in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Premier Healthcare Database (PHD) between June 2009 and March 2015 was performed. ICD-9-CM codes were used to identify patients who underwent OSR or TEVAR for TbAD. Endpoints included in-hospital adverse events, in-hospital mortality and hospitalization cost. Logistic regression models and generalized linear models were used to assess the impact of treatment type on the main outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 1752 patients with TbAD, 54.3% underwent OSR and 45.7% underwent TEVAR. Patients in the TEVAR group were older [median age, 64 (IQR 54-73) vs. 59 (IQR 49-70), P < 1] and more likely to have preexisting comorbidities. IAE rates were 78.6% for the OSR group compared to 43.1% for the TEVAR group, P < 0.001. Patients in the OSR group showed significantly higher in-hospital mortality (15.3% vs. 5.9%, P < 0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, OSR was associated with a 5-fold increase in IAE [aOR(95%CI): 4.8 (3.8-6.1), P < 0.001] and a 3-fold increase in in-hospital mortality [aOR(95%CI): 3.3 (2.1-5.1), P < 0.001]. In regards to charges related to the hospital stay, total cost was significantly higher among patients undergoing OSR $53,371 ($39,029-$80,471) vs. TEVAR $45,311 ($31,479-$67,960), P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: The present study shows that TEVAR presents an advantage in terms of morbidity, mortality and cost when compared to OSR in the treatment of TbAD. However, long-term cost-effectiveness of both procedures remains unknown. Further research is warranted to see whether the superiority of TEVAR is maintained over time.

Outcomes and risk management in type B aortic dissection patients with acute kidney injury: a concise review.

PURPOSE: Type B aortic dissection is a rare but life-threatening disease. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) was widely used for Type B aortic dissection patients in the last decade due to the lower mortality and morbidity compared with open chest surgical repair (OCSR). AKI in type B aortic dissection is a well-recognized complication and indicates poor short-term and long-term outcome. The objective of this concise review was to identify the risk factors and the impact of AKI on type B aortic dissection patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: A literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library with the search terms 'type B aortic dissection' and 'acute kidney injury' (AKI), and all English-language literatures published in print or available online from inception through August 2020 were thoroughly reviewed. Studies that reported relative AKI risks and outcomes in type B aortic dissection patient were included. Major mechanisms of AKI in type B aortic dissection included renal hypoperfusion, inflammation response, and the use of contrast medium. Type B aortic dissection patients with AKI significantly had increased hospital stay duration, need of renal replacement therapy, and 30-d and 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS: AKI in type B aortic dissection is a well-recognized complication and associated with poor short-term and long-term outcome. Early identification of high-risk patients, early diagnosis of AKI, stabilization of the hemodynamic parameters, avoidance of nephrotoxic drugs, and optimization of the use of contrast agents are the major strategies for the reduction of AKI in type B aortic dissection patients.

Influence of Sex on Outcomes After Thoracic Endovascular Repair for Type B Aortic Dissection.

We aimed to investigate whether sex differences influence the clinical outcomes of patients who undergo thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection (TBAD). We retrospectively analyzed a prospectively maintained single-center cohort of patients with TBAD who underwent TEVAR between January 2010 and June 2017. We evaluated the in-hospital and long-term mortality and composite end point. Of the 913 patients, 793 (86.8%) were male and 120 (13.1%) were female. Compared to male patients, the female patients were older, more likely to have diabetes mellitus, but less likely to smoke or have hypertension. The proximal landing zone in 0 and 1 was higher in male patients (P = .023), who were more likely to require an aortic arch bypass. Endoleak, delirium, and ICU stay after stent-graft implantation were also more frequent in men. Sex factor was not associated with in-hospital or long-term mortality or the composite end point in the multivariable regression analyses and Cox regression model. The mean estimated survival time was similar between males and females (2462.9 ± 141.2 vs 2804.1 ± 117.4 days, P = .167) in the propensity score-matched cohort. Despite distinct characteristics between sex, there was no sex-related difference in long-term clinical outcomes after TEVAR for TBAD.

Gender-related differences in patients with acute aortic dissection type A.

OBJECTIVE: Acute aortic dissection type A can occur in both genders at any age. Our aim was to report differences in presentation, treatment, and outcome in female and male patients with acute aortic dissection type A. METHODS: Between July 2006 and June 2015, 56 centers participating in the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A reported on a total of 3380 patients. As many as 1234 (37%) were women and 2146 (63%) were men. We compared their clinical features and events occurring within 30 days after surgery. RESULTS: Women were significantly older than male patients (65.5 ± 12.7 years vs 59.2 ± 13.3 years; P < .001). Aortic dissection extended down to the abdominal aorta in 43% men and 39% women (P = .01). Visceral (4.9% vs 7.3%; P = .006) and renal malperfusion (7.7% vs 10.6%; P = .006) were more frequently diagnosed in men. Aortic roots were replaced more frequently in men (22% vs 18%; P < .001). Different aortic arch repair strategies were distributed similarly in both genders. The incidence of new hemiplegia or hemiparesis was also similar in men and women (P = .24). Thirty-day mortality did not differ between women and men (16.3% vs 16.6%; P = .18). In a logistically mixed-effect model, gender revealed no influence on 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.44; P = .21). CONCLUSIONS: Aortic dissection type A occurs almost twice as frequently in men. Women develop aortic dissection later in life. Despite women and men presenting at different ages and exhibiting varying dissection and malperfusion patterns, and the fact that men undergo complex proximal aortic repair more frequently, outcomes are similar in both genders.

Mid-Term Survival after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair by Indication in the Medicare Population.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is indicated for treatment of aneurysms, dissections, and traumatic injury. We describe mid-term mortality and reintervention rates in Medicare beneficiaries undergoing TEVAR. STUDY DESIGN: Patients who underwent TEVAR between 2006 and 2014 were identified by CPT codes in a 20% Medicare sample. Indication for aortic repair (aneurysm, dissection, trauma) was ascertained via ICD-9 codes. Follow-up was evaluated until 2015. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression were used to compare mortality, with reintervention and mortality rates expressed as a composite outcome in a hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (hazard ratio [HR] 95% CI). RESULTS: There were 3,095 patients who underwent TEVAR during the study period: 1,465 (47%) for aneurysm, 1,448 (47%) for dissection, and 182 (5.9%) for trauma. Mean patient age was 74.4 years, and 44.5% were female. Median follow-up was 2.7 years. The overall 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year, and 8-year survival rates were 93%, 78%, 49%, and 33%, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was highest in traumatic indications, but overall mortality was highest in patients undergoing TEVAR for aneurysm. Freedom from combined reintervention and mortality at 30 days, 1 year, 5 years, and 8 years was 89%, 73%, 43%, and 29%, respectively. Reintervention was highest in patients undergoing TEVAR for dissection (12.8%), followed by aneurysm (10.0%) and trauma (5.5%). Advanced age (HR 1.03 per year, 95% CI 1.02-1.03), congestive heart failure (CHF) (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.33-1.65), dementia (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.14-1.28), and rupture (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.24-1.54) were associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Midterm survival is lower in patients who undergo TEVAR for dissection and aneurysm compared with trauma. Aneurysmal disease, advanced age, CHF, dementia, and aortic rupture are associated with mortality and reintervention in TEVAR.

Cause-specific mortality of type B aortic dissection and assessment of competing risks of mortality.

OBJECTIVE: Natural history studies of type B aortic dissection (TBAD) commonly report all-cause mortality. Our aim was to determine cause-specific mortality in TBAD and to evaluate the clinical characteristics associated with aorta-related and nonaorta-related mortality. METHODS: Clinical and administrative records were reviewed for patients with acute TBAD between 1995 and 2017. Demographics, comorbidities, presentation, and initial imaging findings were abstracted. Cause of death was ascertained through a multimodality approach using electronic health records, obituaries, social media, Social Security Death Index, and state mortality records. Causes of death were classified as aorta related, nonaorta related, or unknown. A Fine-Gray multivariate competing risk regression model for subdistribution hazard ratio was employed to analyze the association of clinical characteristics with aorta-related and nonaorta-related mortality. RESULTS: A total of 275 individuals met inclusion criteria (61.1 ± 13.7 years, 70.9% male, 68% white). Mean survival after discharge was 6.3 ± 4.7 years. Completeness of follow-up Clark C index was 0.87. All-cause mortality was 50.2% (n = 138; mean age, 70.1 ± 14.6 years) including an in-hospital mortality of 8.4%. Cause-specific mortality was aorta related, nonaorta related, and unknown in 51%, 43%, and 6%, respectively. Compared with patients with nonaorta-related mortality, patients with aorta-related mortality were younger at acute TBAD (69.5 ± 11.2 years vs 61.6 ± 15.5 years; P = .001), underwent more descending thoracic aortic repairs (19.4% vs 45.8%; P = .002), and had a shorter survival duration (5.7 ± 3.9 vs 3.4 ± 4.5 years; P = .002). There was clear variation in cause of death by each decade of life, with higher aorta-related mortality among those younger than 50 years and older than 70 years and a stepwise increase in nonaorta-related mortality with each increasing decade (P < .001). All-cause mortality at 1 year, 3 years, and 10 years was 15%, 24%, and 57%, respectively. After accounting for competing risks, the cumulative incidence of aorta-related mortality at 1 year, 3 years, and 10 years was 8.9%, 16.5%, and 27.2%, respectively, and that of nonaorta-related mortality was 2.7%, 7.2%, and 29%, respectively. A maximum descending thoracic aortic diameter >4 cm was associated with an increase in hazard of aorta-related mortality by 84% (subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-3.28) on multivariate competing risk regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: TBAD is associated with high 10-year mortality. Those at risk for aorta-related mortality have a clinical phenotype different from that of individuals at risk for nonaorta-related mortality. This information is important for building risk prediction models that account for competing mortality risks and to direct optimal and individualized surgical and medical management of TBAD.

Ten-Year Clinical Characteristics and Early Outcomes of Type B Aortic Dissection Patients With Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: This study examined the 10-year hospitalization characteristics, economic patterns and early clinical outcomes of type B aortic dissection (TBAD) patients that underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in one high-volume hospital in China. METHODS: We performed a population-based retrospective analysis based on electronic medical record system data provided by Zhongshan Hospital Fudan University from 2009 to 2018. RESULTS: We identified 1,367 cases of TBAD patients with TEVAR over the past decade. The total incidence of in-hospital complications was 7.6% (104 of 1,367), among which acute kidney injury (AKI) had the highest incidence (3.1%, 42 of 1,367). Aortic-related reintervention was performed in 7 patients (0.5%). The overall aortic-related in-hospital mortality rate was 2.7% (37 of 1,367) and had no significant time-varying trend (P = 0.2). Among these, 27% of in-hospital deaths were caused by retrograde type A dissection (RTAD). Chronic TBAD had a higher risk of in-hospital death versus acute TBAD, with a risk ratio of 2.69 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-6.09). Patients with hypertension (risk ratio 4.63, 95% CI: 1.38, 15.54) also had a higher in-hospital death risk. These 2 factors were also the predictive factors for the composite endpoint of in-hospital adverse events (risk ratio 2.17, 95% CI: 1.43, 3.29 and risk ratio 4.83, 95% CI: 1.90, 12.28, respectively), in addition to Marfan syndrome (risk ratio 4.05, 95% CI: 1.61, 10.19). The average length of hospitalization significantly declined during the past decade (annual percentage change -6.3%, 95% CI -8.2 to -4.3), and the stent-grafts (SGs) cost was the main expenditure of the total hospitalization costs. CONCLUSION: Our study showed a favorable early outcome of TEVAR over the past decade. Greater attention should be paid to certain risk factors in order to reduce the in-hospital adverse events. SG expenditure is still the primary economic burden on Chinese TBAD patients.

A preoperative mortality risk assessment model for Stanford type A acute aortic dissection.

BACKGROUND: Acute aortic dissection type A is a life-threatening disease required emergency surgery during acute phase. Different clinical manifestations, laboratory tests, and imaging features of patients with acute aortic dissection type A are the risk factors of preoperative mortality. This study aims to establish a simple and effective preoperative mortality risk assessment model for patients with acute aortic dissection type A. METHODS: A total of 673 Chinese patients with acute aortic dissection type A who were admitted to our hospital were retrospectively included. All patients were unable to receive surgically treatment within 3 days from the onset of disease. The patients included were divided into the survivor and deceased groups, and the endpoint event was preoperative death. Multivariable analysis was used to investigate predictors of preoperative mortality and to develop a prediction model. RESULTS: Among the 673 patients, 527 patients survived (78.31%) and 146 patients died (21.69%). The developmental dataset had 505 patients, calibration by Hosmer Lemeshow was significant (χ2 = 3.260, df = 8, P = 0.917) and discrimination by area under ROC curve was 0.8448 (95% CI 0.8007-0.8888). The validation dataset had 168 patients, calibration was significant (χ2 = 5.500, df = 8, P = 0.703) and the area under the ROC curve was 0.8086 (95% CI 0.7291-0.8881). The following independent variables increased preoperative mortality: age (OR = 1.008, P = 0.510), abrupt chest pain (OR = 3.534, P < 0.001), lactic in arterial blood gas ≥ 3 mmol/L (OR = 3.636, P < 0.001), inotropic support (OR = 8.615, P < 0.001), electrocardiographic myocardial ischemia (OR = 3.300, P = 0.001), innominate artery involvement (OR = 1.625, P = 0.104), right common carotid artery involvement (OR = 3.487, P = 0.001), superior mesenteric artery involvement (OR = 2.651, P = 0.001), false lumen / true lumen of ascending aorta ≥ 0.75 (OR = 2.221, P = 0.007). Our data suggest that a simple and effective preoperative death risk assessment model has been established. CONCLUSIONS: Using a simple and effective risk assessment model can help clinicians quickly identify high-risk patients and make appropriate medical decisions.