Cargando…
Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and meta-analysis
This study aimed to evaluate the long-term survival and risk factors of traditional open surgical repair (OSR) vs thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for complicated type-B aortic dissection (TBAD). A total of 118 inpatients (45 OSR vs 73 TEVAR) with TBAD were enrolled from January 2004 to...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4932819/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27254661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1414-431X20165194 |
_version_ | 1782441135327674368 |
---|---|
author | Zhu, Y. Wang, B. Meng, Q. Liu, J. Zhai, S. He, J. |
author_facet | Zhu, Y. Wang, B. Meng, Q. Liu, J. Zhai, S. He, J. |
author_sort | Zhu, Y. |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study aimed to evaluate the long-term survival and risk factors of traditional open surgical repair (OSR) vs thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for complicated type-B aortic dissection (TBAD). A total of 118 inpatients (45 OSR vs 73 TEVAR) with TBAD were enrolled from January 2004 to January 2015. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards analysis were performed to identify the long-term survival rate and independent predictors of survival, respectively. Meta-analysis was used to further explore the long-term efficacy of OSR and TEVAR in the eight included studies using Review Manager 5.2 software. An overall 10-year survival rate of 41.9% was found, and it was similar in the two groups (56.7% OSR vs 26.1% TEVAR; log-rank P=0.953). The risk factors of long-term survival were refractory hypertension (OR=11.1; 95%CI=1.428-86.372; P=0.021] and preoperative aortic diameter >55 mm (OR=4.5; 95%CI=1.842-11.346; P=0.001). Long-term survival rate did not differ significantly between OSR and TEVAR (hazard ratio=0.87; 95%CI=0.52-1.47; P=0.61). Compared with OSR, TEVAR did not show long-term advantages for patients with TBAD. Refractory hypertension and total aortic diameter >55 mm can be used to predict the long-term survival of TBAD in the Chinese Han population. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4932819 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49328192016-07-15 Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and meta-analysis Zhu, Y. Wang, B. Meng, Q. Liu, J. Zhai, S. He, J. Braz J Med Biol Res Clinical Investigation This study aimed to evaluate the long-term survival and risk factors of traditional open surgical repair (OSR) vs thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for complicated type-B aortic dissection (TBAD). A total of 118 inpatients (45 OSR vs 73 TEVAR) with TBAD were enrolled from January 2004 to January 2015. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards analysis were performed to identify the long-term survival rate and independent predictors of survival, respectively. Meta-analysis was used to further explore the long-term efficacy of OSR and TEVAR in the eight included studies using Review Manager 5.2 software. An overall 10-year survival rate of 41.9% was found, and it was similar in the two groups (56.7% OSR vs 26.1% TEVAR; log-rank P=0.953). The risk factors of long-term survival were refractory hypertension (OR=11.1; 95%CI=1.428-86.372; P=0.021] and preoperative aortic diameter >55 mm (OR=4.5; 95%CI=1.842-11.346; P=0.001). Long-term survival rate did not differ significantly between OSR and TEVAR (hazard ratio=0.87; 95%CI=0.52-1.47; P=0.61). Compared with OSR, TEVAR did not show long-term advantages for patients with TBAD. Refractory hypertension and total aortic diameter >55 mm can be used to predict the long-term survival of TBAD in the Chinese Han population. Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica 2016-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC4932819/ /pubmed/27254661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1414-431X20165194 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Investigation Zhu, Y. Wang, B. Meng, Q. Liu, J. Zhai, S. He, J. Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and meta-analysis |
title | Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for
complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and
meta-analysis |
title_full | Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for
complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and
meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for
complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and
meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for
complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and
meta-analysis |
title_short | Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for
complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and
meta-analysis |
title_sort | long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for
complicated type-b aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and
meta-analysis |
topic | Clinical Investigation |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4932819/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27254661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1414-431X20165194 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhuy longtermefficacyofendovascularvsopensurgicalrepairforcomplicatedtypebaorticdissectionasinglecenterretrospectivestudyandmetaanalysis AT wangb longtermefficacyofendovascularvsopensurgicalrepairforcomplicatedtypebaorticdissectionasinglecenterretrospectivestudyandmetaanalysis AT mengq longtermefficacyofendovascularvsopensurgicalrepairforcomplicatedtypebaorticdissectionasinglecenterretrospectivestudyandmetaanalysis AT liuj longtermefficacyofendovascularvsopensurgicalrepairforcomplicatedtypebaorticdissectionasinglecenterretrospectivestudyandmetaanalysis AT zhais longtermefficacyofendovascularvsopensurgicalrepairforcomplicatedtypebaorticdissectionasinglecenterretrospectivestudyandmetaanalysis AT hej longtermefficacyofendovascularvsopensurgicalrepairforcomplicatedtypebaorticdissectionasinglecenterretrospectivestudyandmetaanalysis |