论文部分内容阅读
Objective To evaluate the early and mid-term results of endovascular repair for acute and chronic type B aortic dissection, and to compare the clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. Methods From May 2002 to December 2006, 50 patients with type B aortic dissection were treated by endovascular stent-graft. There were 23 patients in the acute aortic dissection (AAD) group and 27 patients in the chronic aortic dissection (CAD) group. All patients were followed up from 1 to 54 months (average, 17±16 months).The immediate and follow-up clinical outcomes were documented and compared between the 2 groups. Results Placement of endovascular stent-grafts across the primary entry tears was technically successful in all 50 patients. Compared to the CAD group, the AAD group had a higher percentage of pleural effusion (17.4% vs. 0%, P=0.04) and visceral /leg ischemia (26.1% vs 3.7%, P=0.04). Procedure related complications, including endoleak and post-implantation syndrome, occurred more frequently in the AAD group than in the CAD group (21.7% vs 3.7% and 30.4% vs 11.1%, respectively; P=0.08 and P=0.04). Kaplan–Meier analysis showed no difference in the survival rate at 4 years between the 2 groups (86.4% vs 92.3%, P=0.42 by log-rank test). However, the event-free survival rate was higher in patients with chronic dissection than in patients with acute aortic dissection(96.2% vs 73.9%; P=0.02 by log-rank test). Conclu- sions Endovascular repair with stent-graft was safe and effective for the treatment of both acute and chronic type B aortic dissection. However, both immediate and long term major complications occurred more frequently in patients with acute dissection than in those with chronic dissection.
Objective To evaluate the early and mid-term results of endovascular repair for acute and chronic type B aortic dissection, and to compare the clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. Methods From May 2002 to December 2006, 50 patients with type B aortic dissection were treated There were 23 patients in the acute aortic dissection (AAD) group and 27 patients in the chronic aortic dissection (CAD) group. All patients were followed up from 1 to 54 months (average, 17 ± 16 months) The immediate and follow-up clinical outcomes were documented and compared between the 2 groups. Results Placement of endovascular stent-grafts across the primary entry tears was technically successful in all 50 patients. Compared to the CAD group, the AAD group had a higher percentage of pleural effusion (17.4% vs. 0%, P = 0.04) and visceral / leg ischemia (26.1% vs 3.7%, P = 0.04). Procedure related complications, including endoleak and post-implantation syndrome, in the AAD group than in the CAD group (21.7% vs 3.7% and 30.4% vs 11.1%, respectively; P = 0.08 and P = 0.04). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference in the survival rate at 4 years between the 2 groups (86.4% vs 92.3%, P = 0.42 by log-rank test). However, the event-free survival rate was higher in patients with chronic dissection than in patients with acute aortic dissection (96.2% vs 73.9%; P = 0.02 by log-rank test. Conclu- sions Endovascular repair with stent-graft was safe and effective for the treatment of both acute and chronic type B aortic dissection. However, both immediate and long term major causes occurred more frequently in patients with acute dissection than in those with chronic dissection.