Twenty-five years of observations from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) and its impact on the cardiovascular scientific community.

OBJECTIVE: The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) celebrated its 25th anniversary in January 2021. This study evaluated IRAD's role in promoting the understanding and management of acute aortic dissection (AD) over these years. METHODS: IRAD studies were identified, analyzed, and ranked according to their citations per year (c/y) to determine the most-cited IRAD studies and topics. A systematic search of the literature identified cardiovascular guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute AD. Consequently, IRAD's presence and impact were quantified using these documents. RESULTS: Ninety-seven IRAD studies were identified, of which 82 obtained more than 10 cumulative citations. The median c/y index was 7.33 (25th-75th percentile, 4.01-16.65). Forty-two studies had a greater than median c/y index and were considered most impactful. Of these studies, most investigated both type A and type B AD (n = 17, 40.5%) and short-term outcomes (n = 26, 61.9%). Nineteen guideline documents were identified from 26 cardiovascular societies located in Northern America, Europe, and Japan. Sixty-nine IRAD studies were cited by these guidelines, including 38 of the 42 most-impactful IRAD studies. Among them, partial thrombosis of the false lumen as a predictor of postdischarge mortality and aortic diameters as a predictor of type A occurrence were determined as most-impactful specific IRAD topics by their c/y index. CONCLUSIONS: IRAD has had and continues to have an important role in providing observations, credible knowledge, and research questions to improve the outcomes of patients with acute AD.

Serial echocardiography for valve dysfunction and aortic dilation in bicuspid aortic valves.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Complications of bicuspid aortic valve commonly include aortic stenosis, aortic regurgitation, and ascending aortic dilation. The progression of these lesions is not well described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 249 bicuspid aortic valve patients with at least two echocardiograms from 2006 to 2016. Valve morphology (right-left or right-noncoronary cusp fusion) was confirmed by visual inspection, and aortic stenosis and regurgitation were quantified according to current guidelines; the ascending aorta was measured at end-systole 2-3 cm above the sinotubular junction. Annualized progression of stenosis, regurgitation, and aortic dilation from first to most recent echocardiogram were compared between right-left and right-nonfused valves using multivariable logistic regression to adjust for baseline differences in groups. RESULTS: Among 249 bicuspid aortic valve patients (mean age 47.6 ± 13.5 years, 66.3% male), 75.9% had right-left cusp fusion. At baseline, aortic stenosis was absent or mild in 80.3%; aortic regurgitation was absent or mild in 80.7%; and aortic diameters were 35.0 ± 5.7 mm (sinuses of Valsalva) and 37.4 ± 6.2 mm (ascending). Mean annualized decrease in aortic valve area was 0.07 cm2 /year, with 30% of bicuspid aortic valve patients progressing ≥0.1 cm2 /year. Aortic regurgitation progressed ≥1 grade in 37 patients. Mean annualized increase in ascending aorta diameter was 0.36 mm/year in right-left and 0.65 mm/year in right-nonbicuspid valves. CONCLUSIONS: In this serial echocardiographic study of bicuspid aortic valve patients, cusp orientation was not associated with progression of valve dysfunction. Right-noncoronary cusp fusion was associated with ascending aortic diameter progression.

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: Evidence from a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in comparison to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in intermediate-risk patients. BACKGROUND: TAVR is an established treatment option in high-risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AS). There are fewer data regarding efficacy of TAVR in intermediate-risk patients. METHODS: Databases were searched through April 30, 2016 for studies that compared TAVR with SAVR for the treatment of intermediate-risk patients with severe AS. We calculated summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with the random-effects model. RESULTS: The analysis included 4,601 patients from 7 studies (2 randomized and 5 observational). There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the two groups after mean follow-up of 1.15 years [14.7% with TAVR vs 15.4% with SAVR; RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.77-1.12]. TAVR resulted in lower rates of acute kidney injury [number needed to treat (NNT) = 26], major bleeding (NNT = 4), and atrial-fibrillation (NNT = 6), but higher rates of major vascular complications [number needed to harm (NNH)= 18], and moderate/severe aortic regurgitation (NNH = 13). The rate of permanent-pacemaker implantation was significantly higher with TAVR in observational studies (RR 2.31; 95% CI 1.22-2.81), but not in RCTs (RR 1.21; 95% CI 0.93-1.56). No significant difference in the rate of stroke or myocardial infarction was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of mid-term results showed that TAVR has similar clinical efficacy to SAVR in intermediate-risk patients with severe AS, and can be a suitable alternative to surgical valve replacement. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Presentation, Diagnosis, and Outcomes of Acute Aortic Dissection: 17-Year Trends From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of acute aortic dissection (AAS) are changing. OBJECTIVES: This study examined 17-year trends in the presentation, diagnosis, and hospital outcomes of AAD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). METHODS: Data from 4,428 patients enrolled at 28 IRAD centers between December 26, 1995, and February 6, 2013, were analyzed. Patients were divided according to enrollment date into 6 equal groups and by AAD type: A (n = 2,952) or B (n = 1,476). RESULTS: There was no change in the presenting complaints of severe or worst-ever pain for type A and type B AAD (93% and 94%, respectively), nor in the incidence of chest pain (83% and 71%, respectively). Use of computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of type A increased from 46% to 73% (p < 0.001). Surgical management for type A increased from 79% to 90% (p < 0.001). Endovascular management of type B increased from 7% to 31% (p < 0.001). Type A in-hospital mortality decreased significantly (31% to 22%; p < 0.001), as surgical mortality (25% to 18%; p = 0.003). There was no significant trend in in-hospital mortality in type B (from 12% to 14%). CONCLUSIONS: Presenting symptoms and physical findings of AAD have not changed significantly. Use of chest CT increased for type A. More patients in both groups were managed with interventional procedures: surgery in type A and endovascular therapy in type B. A significant decrease in overall in-hospital mortality was seen for type A but not for type B.

Predictors of ascending aortic dilation in bicuspid aortic valve disease: a five-year prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Bicuspid aortic valves are associated with aortic dilation and dissection. There is a paucity of prospective studies evaluating changes in aortic size over time in adult subjects with bicuspid aortic valves. METHODS: A total of 115 subjects with asymptomatic bicuspid aortic valves were enrolled from 2003 to 2008 and followed prospectively over 5 years. Clinical and family histories, as well as transthoracic echocardiograms, were obtained at baseline, and echocardiograms were performed annually thereafter. RESULTS: The mean age of subjects was 41.8 ± 12.8 years, and 61% were male. Ascending aortic size at baseline averaged 35.5 ± 5.6 mm and increased in 71.1% of subjects (mean, 0.66 ± 0.05 mm/y; range, 0.2-2.3 mm/y) over an average of 4.8 years. In 15.6% of subjects, the rate of change exceeded 1 mm/y. The average rate of ascending aortic dilation for all subjects was 0.47 ± 0.05 mm/y (P < .001). A family history of aortic valve disease was associated with progression in both unadjusted (P = .029) and logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, gender, and body surface area (odds ratio, 13.7; P = .021). Multivariate analysis did not find leaflet orientation or moderate to severe aortic valve dysfunction as independent predictors of aortic dilation. CONCLUSIONS: We found that in subjects with bicuspid aortic valve, studied prospectively, there was an annual rate of ascending aortic dilation of 0.47 mm/y. In contrast to previous reports, leaflet orientation and aortic valve dysfunction were not independent predictors of aortic dilation. A family history of aortic valve disease was associated with a significantly increased risk of increasing ascending aortic size.

Predicting in-hospital mortality in acute type B aortic dissection: evidence from International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of patients with acute type B aortic dissection (ABAD) is strongly related to their clinical presentation. The purpose of this study was to investigate predictors for mortality among patients presenting with ABAD and to create a predictive model to estimate individual risk of in-hospital mortality using the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients with ABAD enrolled in IRAD between 1996 and 2013 were included for analysis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to investigate predictors of in-hospital mortality. Significant risk factors for in-hospital death were used to develop a prediction model. A total of 1034 patients with ABAD were included for analysis (673 men; mean age, 63.5±14.0 years), with an overall in-hospital mortality of 10.6%. In multivariable analysis, the following variables at admission were independently associated with increased in-hospital mortality: increasing age (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.06; P=0.044), hypotension/shock (OR, 6.43; 95% CI, 2.88-18.98; P=0.001), periaortic hematoma (OR, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.38-6.78; P=0.006), descending diameter ≥5.5 cm (OR, 6.04; 95% CI, 2.87-12.73; P<0.001), mesenteric ischemia (OR, 9.03; 95% CI, 3.49-23.38; P<0.001), acute renal failure (OR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.68-7.75; P=0.001), and limb ischemia (OR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.05-8.68; P=0.040). Based on these multivariable results, a reliable and simple bedside risk prediction tool was developed. CONCLUSIONS: We present a simple prediction model using variables that are independently associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with ABAD. Although it needs to be validated in an independent population, this model could be used to assist physicians in their choice of management and for informing patients and their families.

Acute aortic dissection in blacks: insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Few data exist on race-related differences in acute aortic dissection patients. METHODS: We evaluated black (n = 189, 14%) or white (n = 1165, 86%) patients (mean age 62.8 ± 15.3 years; 36.4% women) enrolled in 13 US centers participating in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection. We excluded patients of other racial descent. RESULTS: Type B acute aortic dissection was more frequent in the black cohort (52.4% vs 39.3%, P = .001). Black patients were younger (mean age 54.6 ± 12.8 years vs 64.2 ± 15.2 years, P <.001) and more likely to have a history of cocaine abuse (12% vs 1.6%, P <.001), hypertension (89.7% vs 73.9%, P <.001), and diabetes (13.2% vs 6.4%, P = .001). Conversely, they were less likely to have bicuspid aortic valve (1.8% vs 5.8%, P = .029), iatrogenic dissection (0.5% vs 4.5%, P = .010), and prior aortic dissection repair (7.7% vs 12.8%, P = .047). Presenting features were similar except for more abdominal pain (44.6% vs 30.6%, P <.001) and left ventricular hypertrophy on echocardiogram (44.2% vs 20.1%, P <.001) in blacks. Management was similar. Hypotension/shock/tamponade was less common (7.6% vs 20.1%, P <.001), whereas acute kidney failure was more common (41.0% vs 21.7%, P <.001) in blacks. Mortality was similar in-hospital (14.3% vs 19.1%, P = .110, odds ratio 0.704, 95% confidence interval 0.457-1.085) and at 3 years postdischarge, as evaluated by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (22.0% vs 14.3%, P = .224, SE = 0.062 and 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows differences in type, etiology, and presentation of blacks and whites with acute aortic dissection, yet similar mortality for these cohorts.

Painless Type B Aortic Dissection: Insights From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

INTRODUCTION: The classical presentation of a patient with Type B acute aortic dissection (TBAAD) is characterized by severe chest, back, or abdominal pain, ripping or tearing in nature. However, some patients present with painless acute aortic dissection, which can lead to a delay in diagnosis and treatment. We utilized the International Registry on Acute Aortic Dissections (IRAD) database to study these patients. METHODS: We analyzed 43 painless TBAAD patients enrolled in the database between January 1996 and July 2012. The differences in presentation, diagnostics, management, and outcome were compared with patients presenting with painful TBAAD. RESULTS: Among the 1162 TBAAD patients enrolled in IRAD, 43 patients presented with painless TBAAD (3.7%). The mean age of patients with painless TBAAD was significantly higher than normal TBAAD patients (69.2 versus 63.3 years, P = 0.020). The presence of atherosclerosis (46.4% versus 30.1%, P = 0.022), diabetes (17.9% versus 7.5%; P = 0.018), and other aortic diseases (8.6% versus 2.3%, P= 0.051), such as prior aortic aneurysm (31% versus 18.8% P = 0.049) was more common in these patients. Median delay time between presentation and diagnosis was longer in painless patients (median 34.0 versus 19.0 hours; P = 0.006). Dissection of iatrogenic origin (19.5% versus 1.3%; P < 0.001) was significantly more frequent in the painless group. The in-hospital mortality was 18.6% in the painless group, compared with an in-hospital mortality of 9.9% in the control group (P = 0.063). CONCLUSION: Painless TBAAD is a relatively rare presentation (3.7%) of aortic dissection, and is often associated with a history of atherosclerosis, diabetes, prior aortic disease including aortic aneurysm, and an iatrogenic origin. We observed a trend for increased in-hospital mortality in painless TBAAD patients, which may be the result of a delay in diagnosis and management. Therefore, physicians should be aware of this relative rare presentation of TBAAD.

Type-selective benefits of medications in treatment of acute aortic dissection (from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection [IRAD]).

The effects of medications on the outcome of aortic dissection remain poorly understood. We sought to address this by analyzing the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) global registry database. A total of 1,301 patients with acute aortic dissection (722 with type A and 579 with type B) with information on their medications at discharge and followed for ≤5 years were analyzed for the effects of the medications on mortality. The initial univariate analysis showed that use of ß blockers was associated with improved survival in all patients (p = 0.03), in patients with type A overall (p = 0.02), and in patients with type A who received surgery (p = 0.006). The analysis also showed that use of calcium channel blockers was associated with improved survival in patients with type B overall (p = 0.02) and in patients with type B receiving medical management (p = 0.03). Multivariate models also showed that the use of ß blockers was associated with improved survival in those with type A undergoing surgery (odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.25 to 0.90, p = 0.02) and the use of calcium channel blockers was associated with improved survival in patients with type B medically treated patients (odds ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 0.88, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the present study showed that use of ß blockers was associated with improved outcome in all patients and in type A patients (overall as well as in those managed surgically). In contrast, use of calcium channel blockers was associated with improved survival selectively in those with type B (overall and in those treated medically). The use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors did not show association with mortality.

Descending aortic diameter of 5.5 cm or greater is not an accurate predictor of acute type B aortic dissection.

OBJECTIVE: The risk of acute type B aortic dissection is thought to increase with descending thoracic aortic diameter. Currently, elective repair of the descending thoracic aorta is indicated for an aortic diameter of 5.5 cm or greater. We sought to investigate the relationship between aortic diameter and acute type B aortic dissection, and the utility of aortic diameter as a predictor of acute type B aortic dissection. METHODS: We examined the descending aortic diameter at presentation of 613 patients with acute type B aortic dissection who were enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection between 1996 and 2009, and analyzed the subset of patients with acute type B aortic dissection with an aortic diameter less than 5.5 cm. RESULTS: The median aortic diameter at the level of acute type B aortic dissection was 4.1 cm (range 2.1-13.0 cm). Only 18.4% of patients with acute type B aortic dissection in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection had an aortic diameter of 5.5 cm or greater. Patients with Marfan syndrome represented 4.3% and had a slightly larger aortic diameter than patients without Marfan syndrome (4.68 vs 4.32 cm, P = .121). Complicated acute type B aortic dissection was more common among patients with an aortic diameter of 5.5 cm or greater (52.2% vs 35.6%, P < .001), and the in-hospital mortality for patients with an aortic diameter less than 5.5 cm and 5.5 cm or greater was 6.6% and 23.0% (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with acute type B aortic dissection present with a descending aortic diameter less than 5.5 cm before dissection and are not within the guidelines for elective descending thoracic aortic repair. Aortic diameter measurements do not seem to be a useful parameter to prevent aortic dissection, and other methods are needed to identify patients at risk for acute type B aortic dissection.

The role of preoperative coronary angiography in the setting of type A acute aortic dissection: insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Performing preoperative coronary angiography (CA) before surgical repair of a type A acute aortic dissection (TA-AAD) remains controversial. Although the information provided by CA may be useful in planning the surgical approach, the potential delay to surgery and complications of CA may confer added risk of death before definitive repair of the aorta. METHODS: We analyzed 1,343 patients from January 27, 1996, to May 3, 2010, with TA-AAD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection who underwent surgical or endovascular repair during the index hospitalization, with (n = 156) or without (n = 1,187) preoperative CA. The main outcomes measured were in-hospital complications and in-hospital and long-term mortality. RESULTS: Patients who underwent preoperative CA were more likely to have a history of atherosclerosis and present with electrocardiographic signs of myocardial ischemia/infarction. In the preoperative CA group, significant delays from the onset of symptoms to the time of surgery occurred. In-hospital postoperative complications and mortality rates were largely similar between the 2 groups. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, preoperative CA had no significant effect on in-hospital risk-adjusted mortality when compared to the validated International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection risk score. Long-term mortality was similar between patients receiving preoperative CA and those who did not; long-term rehospitalization rates were higher, although largely insignificantly, among preoperative CA recipients through 5 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative CA is infrequently performed on patients with TA-AAD, except, occasionally, on patients at high risk for myocardial ischemia. When performed, preoperative CA was not associated with any significant changes in in-hospital and long-term mortality.

Standardizing the method of measuring by echocardiogram the diameter of the ascending aorta in patients with a bicuspid aortic valve.

Serial echocardiographic follow-up of patients with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), in addition to providing assessment of valve dysfunction, can help identify those at risk of aortic complications. However, currently there is no standardized echocardiographic method for measuring the ascending aorta. We examined the echocardiograms of 45 patients with a BAV and 45 matched controls to understand the effects of the measurement location (1, 2, and 3 cm above the sinotubular junction) and the point in the cardiac cycle (end-diastole, mid-systole, and end-systole) at which the ascending aortic measurements are made. A greater length of aorta could be measured in end-systole than in end-diastole, presumably because of aortic recoil. Using the control data for comparison, we found that more dilated ascending aortas were detected by measuring 3 cm above the sinotubular junction in the patients with a BAV (56%) than at 1 cm (42%). The increases in size between 1 and 2 cm were greater than those between 2 and 3 cm. In conclusion, we propose that all transthoracic echocardiograms should include the proximal aorta at least 2 cm and preferably 3 cm above the sinotubular junction and suggest that for standardization and optimal visualization the measurements be done at end-systole in all patients.

Comparison of anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory responses using enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin for transesophageal echocardiography-guided cardioversion of atrial fibrillation.

The Assessment of Cardioversion Using Transesophageal Echocardiography (ACUTE) II study compared enoxaparin with unfractionated heparin (UFH) as bridging therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation >2 days in duration who underwent transesophageal echocardiography-guided cardioversion. In the present study, the anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory effects of enoxaparin and UFH were compared at prespecified time points. In a randomized substudy of 155 patients from 17 clinical sites, the anticoagulant activity of enoxaparin (n = 76) was compared with that of UFH (n = 79). Blood samples were drawn at enrollment, on day 2, and on day 4 in the 2 groups. Blood samples were evaluated for anticoagulant activity by measuring the activated partial thromboplastin time, anti-Xa, anti-IIa, and tissue factor pathway inhibitor levels. In addition, levels of coagulation activation (by thrombin antithrombin complex) and inflammation (by highly sensitive C-reactive protein) were measured. The results of this substudy showed that the anti-Xa levels in the 2 groups increased on day 2. Similar increases in anti-Xa were observed on day 4. The anti-Xa levels and tissue factor pathway inhibitor levels were higher in the enoxaparin group compared with the UFH group on days 2 and 4. However, as expected, the anti-IIa levels in the UFH group were higher. In addition, markers of coagulation activation and inflammation were increased in patients with atrial fibrillation. Treatment with enoxaparin significantly decreased thrombin antithrombin complex levels compared with treatment with UFH. Highly sensitive C-reactive protein levels were also decreased after treatment in the 2 groups. In conclusion, the ACUTE II study showed that the use of enoxaparin for bridging therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent transesophageal echocardiography-guided cardioversion resulted in a more predictable and stronger anticoagulant response than that observed with UFH. Markers of inflammation were also decreased in the 2 groups.

Acute type B aortic dissection: does aortic arch involvement affect management and outcomes? Insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

BACKGROUND: Stanford Type B acute aortic dissection (TB-AAD) spares the ascending aorta and is optimally managed with medical therapy in the absence of complications. However, the treatment of TB-AAD with aortic arch involvement (AAI) remains an unresolved issue. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined 498 patients with TB-AAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and 2003. Kaplan-Meier mortality curves were constructed and multivariate regression models were performed to identify independent predictors of AAI and to evaluate whether AAI was an independent predictor of follow-up mortality. We found that 371 (74.5%) patients with TB-AAD did not have AAI versus 127 (25.5%) with AAI. Independent predictors of AAI were a history of previous aortic surgery (OR 3.4; 95% CI, 1.6 to 7.6; P=0.002), absence of back pain (OR 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.5; P=0.05), and any pulse deficit (1.9; 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.3, P=0.03). Mortality for patients without AAI was 9.4%+/-4.3% and 21.0%+/-6.9% at 1 and 3 years versus 9.2%+/-7.7% and 19.9%+/-11.1% with AAI, respectively (mean follow-up overall, 2.3 years, log rank P=0.82). AAI was not an independent predictor of long-term mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with TB-AAD and aortic arch involvement do not differ with regards to mortality at 3 years. Whether or not AAI involvement impacts other measures of morbidity such as freedom from operation or endovascular intervention deserves further study.

Aortic diameter >or = 5.5 cm is not a good predictor of type A aortic dissection: observations from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

BACKGROUND: Studies of aortic aneurysm patients have shown that the risk of rupture increases with aortic size. However, few studies of acute aortic dissection patients and aortic size exist. We used data from our registry of acute aortic dissection patients to better understand the relationship between aortic diameter and type A dissection. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined 591 type A dissection patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection between 1996 and 2005 (mean age, 60.8 years). Maximum aortic diameters averaged 5.3 cm; 349 (59%) patients had aortic diameters <5.5 cm and 229 (40%) patients had aortic diameters <5.0 cm. Independent predictors of dissection at smaller diameters (<5.5 cm) included a history of hypertension (odds ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 4.57; P=0.04), radiating pain (odds ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 4.0; P=0.03), and increasing age (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.05; P=0.03). Marfan syndrome patients were more likely to dissect at larger diameters (odds ratio, 14.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.7 to 100; P=0.002). Mortality (27% of patients) was not related to aortic size. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with acute type A acute aortic dissection present with aortic diameters <5.5 cm and thus do not fall within current guidelines for elective aneurysm surgery. Methods other than size measurement of the ascending aorta are needed to identify patients at risk for dissection.

Long-term survival in patients presenting with type B acute aortic dissection: insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up survival studies in patients with acute type B aortic dissection have been restricted to a small number of patients in single centers. We used data from a contemporary registry of acute type B aortic dissection to better understand factors associated with adverse long-term survival. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined 242 consecutive patients discharged alive with acute type B aortic dissection enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and 2003. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed, and Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of follow-up mortality. Three-year survival for patients treated medically, surgically, or with endovascular therapy was 77.6+/-6.6%, 82.8+/-18.9%, and 76.2+/-25.2%, respectively (median follow-up 2.3 years, log-rank P=0.61). Independent predictors of follow-up mortality included female gender (hazard ratio [HR],1.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 3.71; P=0.03), a history of prior aortic aneurysm (HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.03 to 4.59; P=0.04), a history of atherosclerosis (HR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.32 to 4.66; P<0.01), in-hospital renal failure (HR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.15 to 5.63; P=0.02), pleural effusion on chest radiograph (HR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.18 to 5.58; P=0.02), and in-hospital hypotension/shock (HR, 12.5; 95% CI, 3.24 to 48.21; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary follow-up mortality in patients who survive to hospital discharge with acute type B aortic dissection is high, approaching 1 in every 4 patients at 3 years. Current treatment and follow-up surveillance require further study to better understand and optimize care for patients with this complex disease.

The use of enoxaparin compared with unfractionated heparin for short-term antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing transoesophageal echocardiography-guided cardioversion: assessment of Cardioversion Using Transoesophageal Echocardiography (ACUTE) II randomized multicentre study.

AIMS: To compare the feasibility and safety of transoesophageal echocardiograpy-guided cardioversion (CV) with enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: The Assessment of Cardioversion Using Transoesophageal Echocardiography (ACUTE) II pilot trial compared the safety and efficacy of enoxaparin with UFH in 155 patients with AF who were scheduled for transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE)-guided CV. Safety outcomes over a 5-week period were ischaemic stroke, major or minor bleeding, and death. Efficacy outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and return to normal sinus rhythm (NSR). Of the 76 patients assigned to the enoxaparin group, 72 (94.7%) had a transoesophageal echocardiogram and 63 (82.9%) had early CV, of which 59 (93.7%) were successful. Of the 79 UFH patients, 66 (83.5%) had a transoesophageal echocardiogram and 58 (73.4%) had early CV, of which 54 (98.2%) were successful. There were no significant differences in embolic events, bleeding, or deaths between groups. The enoxaparin group had shorter median LOS compared with the UFH group [3(2-4) vs. 4(3-5)] days; P<0.0001). There was also more NSR at 5 weeks in the enoxaparin group (76 vs. 57%; P=0.013). CONCLUSION: In the ACUTE II trial, there were no differences in safety outcomes between the two strategies. However, the enoxaparin group had a shorter LOS. Thus, the TEE-guided enoxaparin strategy may be considered a safe and effective alternative strategy for AF. The shorter LOS may translate to lower costs using the enoxaparin TEE-guided approach.

Long-term survival in patients presenting with type A acute aortic dissection: insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

BACKGROUND: Earlier studies evaluating long-term survival in type A acute aortic dissection (TA-AAD) have been restricted to a small number of patients in single center experiences. We used data from a contemporary, multi-center international registry of TA-AAD patients to better understand factors associated with long-term survival. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined 303 consecutive patients with TA-AAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and 2003. We included patients who were discharged alive and had documented clinical follow-up data. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed to depict cumulative survival in patients from date of hospital discharge. Stepwise Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of follow-up mortality. We found that 273 (90.1%) patients had been managed surgically and 30 (9.9%) were managed medically. Patients who were dead at follow-up were more likely to be older (63.9 versus 58.4 years, P=0.007) and to have had previous cardiac surgery (23.9% versus 10.6%, P=0.01). Survival for patients treated with surgery was 96.1%+/-2.4% and 90.5%+/-3.9% at 1 and 3 years versus 88.6%+/-12.2% and 68.7%+/-19.8% without surgery (mean follow-up overall, 2.8 years, log rank P=0.009). Multivariate analysis identified a history of atherosclerosis (relative risk (RR), 2.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08 to 4.37; P=0.03) and previous cardiac surgery (RR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.16 to 5.57; P=0.02) as significant, independent predictors of follow-up mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary 1- and 3-year survival in patients with TA-AAD treated surgically are excellent. Independent predictors of survival during the follow-up period do not appear to be influenced by in-hospital risks but rather preexisting comorbidities.