scholarly journals Prognosis and Risk Factors of Stroke After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection

2022 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhengbiao Zha ◽  
Youmin Pan ◽  
Zhi Zheng ◽  
Xiang Wei
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Subclavian Artery ◽  
Left Subclavian Artery ◽  
Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽  
Neurological Dysfunction ◽  
Type B ◽  
Type B Aortic Dissection

Background: Stroke is a severe complication of patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Our aim is to identify predictors of stroke after TEVAR.Methods: From February 2016 to February 2019, 445 patients with TBAD who underwent TEVAR were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of stroke after TEVAR.Results: The total incidence of stroke was 11.5%, with transient neurological dysfunction (TND) of 10.6% and permanent neurological dysfunction (PND) of 0.9%. The average age of the patients was 53.0 ± 3.2 years, and the male/female ratio was 1.17. Univariate analysis suggested that age, body mass index (BMI), diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the urgency of repair, type of anesthesia, and left subclavian artery (LSCA) processing were potential risks factors of stroke after TEVAR. Multiple logistic regression identified that LSCA coverage (OR = 5.920, 95% CI: 2.077–16.878), diabetes mellitus (OR = 3.036, 95% CI: 1.025–8.995), and general anesthesia (OR = 2.498, 95% CI: 1.002–6.229) were independent predictors of stroke after TEVAR.Conclusions: Left subclavian artery (LSCA) coverage, diabetes mellitus, and general anesthesia were independent risk factors of stroke after TEVAR for TBAD.

Complications after Endovascular Repair of Type B Aortic Dissection

2002 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 822-828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reinhard S. Pamler ◽  
Thomas Kotsis ◽  
Johannes Görich ◽  
Xaver Kapfer ◽  
Karl-Heinz Orend ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Stent Graft ◽  
Subclavian Artery ◽  
Left Subclavian Artery ◽  
Type B ◽  
Type B Aortic Dissection ◽  
Stent Grafting ◽  
Stent Graft Implantation ◽  
Graft Implantation

Purpose: To outline the complications encountered after endoluminal treatment in patients with type B aortic dissection. Methods: Between 1999 and 2001, 14 patients (12 men; mean age 60.3 years, range 39–79) with isolated type B aortic dissection (13 chronic, 1 acute) underwent aortic stent-grafting. Three patients with chronic dissection presented an acute clinical picture and were managed emergently. The left subclavian artery was intentionally covered by the prosthesis in 9 patients. Follow-up studies were performed at 6-month intervals. Results: Stent-graft implantation was technically successful in all patients, but incomplete sealing (endoleak) of the entry site required additional proximal stent-graft implantation in 4. The left subclavian artery remained patent in 5 patients. Secondary conversion was required in 3 patients: 2 for acute type A dissection resulting from injury to the aortic arch by Talent endografts and a sustained hemorrhage (left hemothorax). In another patient, a secondary intramural hematoma subsided spontaneously. Anterior spinal artery syndrome in 1 patient persisted at 1 month. No bypass was necessary for the 9 patients with the covered left subclavian arteries. Mean follow-up was 14 months (range 1–23). Conclusions: Stent-grafting is feasible in patients with type B aortic dissection, although it is associated with a considerable rate of complications. Frank reporting of these sequelae for a variety of stent-grafts is of paramount importance to clarifying the limitations of the method.

Long-term Results of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Type B Aortic Dissection and Risk Factors for Survival

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong-lin Li ◽  
Yun-jun He ◽  
Xiao-hui Wang ◽  
Yang-yan He ◽  
Zi-heng Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Type B ◽  
Type B Aortic Dissection ◽  
Chronic Patients ◽  
Aneurysmal Dilatation ◽  
Factors Influencing

Purpose: To compare characteristics of acute, subacute, and chronic type B aortic dissection and their influence on long-term results of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Materials and Methods: In a single-center, retrospective cohort study, 314 patients (median age 52 years; 244 men) with acute (n=165), subacute (n=115), or chronic (n=34) type B aortic dissection underwent TEVAR between January 2009 and December 2013. Patient demographics, risk factors, and imaging characteristics were compared among the groups. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to identify any factors influencing survival. Results: The acute and subacute patients exhibited more complications at presentation than chronic patients. However, the chronic patients exhibited more aneurysmal dilatation (p<0.001) and true lumen collapse (p<0.001). Over a mean follow-up of 68.1±22.9 months (range 2–108), subacute patients showed a lower reintervention rate (3.6% vs 12.1% vs 12.1%, p=0.045), a lower major complication rate (14.4% vs 33.1% vs 27.3%, p=0.002), and better cumulative overall survival (p=0.03) than the acute and chronic groups, respectively. Furthermore, acute patients developed more stent-graft–induced distal erosion (p=0.017) and retrograde type A dissection (RTAD) (p=0.036), whereas chronic patients had less aortic remodeling in the stented segment (p<0.001), distal thoracic aorta (p<0.001), and abdominal aorta (p=0.047). Finally, multivariable analysis demonstrated age >52 years, visceral malperfusion, and RTAD as independent factors influencing overall survival; aneurysmal dilatation, rupture/impending rupture, and RTAD were independent factors influencing aorta-specific survival. Conclusion: Acute and subacute patients had increased risks of rupture and complications at presentation, whereas chronic patients had increased risks for aneurysmal dilatation. From a long-term perspective, the subacute phase might be an optimal time for TEVAR in cases of type B aortic dissection that do not need emergent interventions. The risk factors influencing survival should be identified, carefully managed, and possibly prevented.

Unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection: A 16-year single-center report

Vascular ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 400-409
Author(s):  
Junjun Liu ◽  
Rongjie Zhang ◽  
Rui Feng ◽  
Jiaxuan Feng ◽  
Zhiqing Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽  
Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Type B ◽  
Type B Aortic Dissection ◽  
Aortic Repair ◽  
Type Ia

Background Unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair mean additional stents implantation beyond the preoperative planning to achieve operation success. This study aimed to reveal the prevalence and consequences of unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection and explore the reasons, risk factors and solutions for unplanned stents. Methods Retrospectively analysis consecutive patients diagnosed as type B aortic dissection with initial tear originating distal from the left subclavian artery and underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair from September 1998 to June 2014 in our center. Results Under the criteria, this study enrolled 322 patients, with 83 (25.8%) patients in unplanned group. The incidence rate of unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection in each year demonstrates as a bimodal curve. The curve showed that, 2003 and, 2004 was the first and highest peak and 2007 was the second peak. There was no difference in five-year survival rate between planned and unplanned patients (log-rank test, p = 0.994). The unplanned group had higher hospitalization expenses (142,699.08 ± 78,446.75 yuan vs. 175,238.58 ± 34,838.01 yuan; p = 0.019), longer operation time (104.50 ± 93.24 min vs. 179.08 ± 142.47 min; p < 0.001) and hospitalization time (17.07 ± 16.62 d vs. 24.00 ± 15.34 d; p = 0.001). The reasons for unplanned stents were type Ia endoleak (46 patients, 55.4%), bird beak (25 patients, 30.1%), and inappropriate shaping of stent (9 patients, 10.8%). Asymptomatic aortic dissection patients had higher incidence of unplanned stents. Short proximal neck length (2.66 ± 0.59 mm vs. 2.50 ± 0.51 mm; p = 0.016), short stent coverage length (154.62 ± 41.12 mm vs. 133.60 ± 44.33 mm; p = 0.002), and large distal stent oversize (75.44±10.77% vs. 82.68±15.80%; p <0.001) were risk factors for unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Conclusion There are some special risk factors and reasons for unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection. Knowing these can we reduce the utilization of unplanned stents with appropriate methods.

Using Machine Learning to Predict Five-Year Reintervention Risk in Type B Aortic Dissection Patients After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1560-1567
Author(s):  
Weiyuan Lin ◽  
Lifeng Que ◽  
Guisen Lin ◽  
Rui Chen ◽  
Qiyang Lu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽  
Type B ◽  
Imaging Data ◽  
Type B Aortic Dissection ◽  
Medical Guidelines

Purpose: Type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a high-risk disease, commonly treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). However, for the long-term follow-up, it is associated with a high 5-year reintervention rate for patients after TEVAR. There is no accurate definition of prognostic risk factors for TBAD in medical guidelines, and there is no scientific judgment standard for patients’ quality of life or survival outcome in the next five years in clinical practice. A large amount of medical data features makes prognostic analysis difficult. However, machine learning (ML) permits lots of objective data features to be considered for clinical risk stratification and patient management. We aimed to predict the 5-year prognosis in TBAD after TEVAR by Ml, based on baseline, stent characteristics and computed tomography angiography (CTA) imaging data, and provided a certain degree of scientific basis for prognostic risk score and stratification in medical guidelines. Materials and Methods: Dataset we recorded was obtained from 172 TBAD patients undergoing TEVAR. Totally 40 features were recorded, including 14 baseline, 5 stent characteristics and 21 CTA imaging data. Information gain (IG) was used to select features highly associated with adverse outcome. Then, the Gradient Boost classifier was trained using grid search and stratified 5-fold cross-validation, and Its predictive performance was evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) in the receiver operating characteristic (ROC). Results: Totally 60 patients underwent reintervention during follow-up. Combing 24 features selected by IG, ML model predicted prognosis well in TBAD after TEVAR, with an AUC of 0.816 and a 95% confidence interval of 0.797 to 0.837. Reintervention rate of prediction was slightly higher than the actual (48.2% vs. 34.8%). Conclusion: Machine learning, which combined with baseline, stent characteristics and CTA imaging data for personalized risk computations, effectively predicted reintervention risk in TBAD patients after TEVAR in 5-year follow-up. The model could be used to efficiently assist the clinical management of TBAD patients and prompt high-risk factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document