SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Aortic Dissection”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 451 records · Page 25Linked to original sources

PubMed1996

Novel biochemical diagnostic method for aortic dissection. Results of a prospective study using an immunoassay of smooth muscle myosin heavy chain.

BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection is one of the most common aortic catastrophes. Although newer diagnostic methods as exemplified by image diagnostic techniques have greatly improved the diagnosis of aortic dissection, the diagnosis is still frequently missed today because the signs and symptoms of the disease are at times obscure. A reliable biochemical diagnostic method for aortic dissection would be beneficial. METHODS AND RESULTS: A novel biochemical diagnostic method for diagnosis of aortic dissection was developed that uses an immunoassay of monoclonal antibodies to smooth muscle myosin heavy chain. A prospective study was conducted to ascertain the usefulness of the method in the diagnosis of aortic dissection. Twenty-seven patients with aortic dissection admitted within the first 24 hours after onset were enrolled. Serial assay of serum smooth muscle myosin heavy chain showed significant elevations within the first 24 hours after onset of aortic dissection, with levels exceeding 10 ng/mL, with subsequent rapid reductions. The sensitivity of the assay within the first 12 hours was 90% with a specificity of 97%. Analysis of 65 patients with acute myocardial infarction showed that the method could accurately differentiate myocardial infarction from aortic dissection. CONCLUSIONS: The immunoassay of serum smooth muscle myosin heavy chain is a rapid and reliable biochemical method in the diagnosis of aortic dissection. The potential use of the method in clinical medicine is promising.

Aged↗

PubMed1999

Nonsurgical reconstruction of thoracic aortic dissection by stent-graft placement.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of thoracic aortic dissection is guided by prognostic and anatomical information. Proximal dissection requires surgery, but the appropriate treatment of distal thoracic aortic dissection has not been determined, because surgery has failed to improve the prognosis. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of elective transluminal endovascular stent-graft insertion in 12 consecutive patients with descending (type B) aortic dissection and compared the results with surgery in 12 matched controls. In all 24 patients, aortic dissection was diagnosed by magnetic resonance angiography. In each group, the dissection involved the aortic arch in 3 patients and the descending thoracic aorta in all 12 patients. With the patient under general anesthesia, either surgical resection was undertaken or a custom-designed endovascular stent-graft was placed by unilateral arteriotomy. RESULTS: Stent-graft placement resulted in no morbidity or mortality, whereas surgery for type B dissection was associated with four deaths (33 percent, P=0.09) and five serious adverse events (42 percent, P=0.04) within 12 months. Transluminal placement of the stent-graft prosthesis was successful in all patients, with no leakage; full expansion of the stents was ensured by balloon inflation at 2 to 3 atm. Sealing of the entry tear was monitored during the procedure by transesophageal ultrasonography and angiography, and thrombosis of the false lumen was confirmed in all 12 patients after a mean of three months by magnetic resonance imaging. There were no deaths or instances of paraplegia, stroke, embolization, side-branch occlusion, or infection in the stent-graft group; nine patients had postimplantation syndrome, with transient elevation of C-reactive protein levels and body temperature plus mild leukocytosis. All the patients who received stent-grafts recovered, as did seven patients who underwent surgery for type B dissection (58 percent) (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary observations suggest that elective, nonsurgical insertion of an endovascular stent-graft is safe and efficacious in selected patients who have thoracic aortic dissection and for whom surgery is indicated. Endoluminal repair may be useful for interventional reconstruction of thoracic aortic dissection.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Lower leg ischemia associated with aortic dissection.

Lower leg ischemia associated with aortic dissection is a potentially life-threatening condition requiring immediate treatment. To better understand the diagnostic factors and improve the treatment strategy of this serious complication, we analyzed our experience regarding the radiographic findings, treatment, and outcome in eight patients (aged 28-72 years, six men and two women). CT revealed type A aortic dissection in seven patients and type B in one. The obstructed site was in the iliac artery in five patients and in the abdominal aorta below the renal arteries in three. Surgical procedures included five ascending aortic graft replacements, three femoro-femoral bypasses, and one each of surgical fenestration, aorto-iliac bypass, and axillo-femoral bypass with thrombectomy. Endovascular treatment was performed in two patients, iliac stent placement in one, and thrombolysis of the iliac artery in one. Five patients survived and three died due to myonephrotic metabolic syndrome in two and postoperative bleeding in one. Treatment strategy depends on several issues regarding aortic dissection including ascending aortic involvement, patent false lumen, entry site, renal artery involvement, and thrombosis in a true or false lumen. CT and angiography are the most important methods for deciding upon appropriate therapy in each individual.

Adult↗

PubMed1994

Aortic valve repair with fibrin glue for type A acute aortic dissection.

Repair of the acute aortic insufficiency associated with type A aortic dissection is now preferred to valve replacement. This is generally achieved by resuspending the aortic valve using different types of suturing techniques, with sutures usually passing through the aortic wall, which causes bleeding at the suture sites. We suggest, instead, simply injecting fibrin glue between the two dissected layers of the aortic annulus, which achieves resuspension of the aortic valve and reinforces the proximal stump without the need for any sutures. To evaluate the efficacy of this simple technique, the cases of 15 consecutive patients who underwent operative intervention for the treatment of the type A aortic dissection associated with acute aortic insufficiency between January 1989 and July 1993 were reviewed. The mean patient age was 63 +/- 11.2 years (range, 43 to 74 years). All had massive 3+ or 4+ aortic insufficiency, documented pre-operatively by transesophageal echocardiography. None had any history of aortic regurgitation. In all patients, the aortic repair was done in conjunction with a supracoronary replacement of the ascending aorta with a collagen-impregnated graft attached using a running suture, after reinforcement of the dissected tissues with glue. There was one non-valve-related early death (6.7%) and no late mortality. At a mean follow-up of 2.3 years, all patients were in New York Heart Association functional class I and had a mean aortic insufficiency grade of 0.3 (range, 0 to 1+). Follow-up computed tomography in all patients showed closure of the dissecting process on the proximal ascending aorta.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1992

Diagnosis of thoracic aortic dissection. Magnetic resonance imaging versus transesophageal echocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection requires prompt and reliable diagnosis to reduce the high mortality. The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability of both ECG-triggered magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transesophageal two-dimensional echocardiography combined with color-coded Doppler flow imaging (TEE) for the diagnosis of thoracic aortic dissection and associated epiphenomena. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifty-three consecutive patients with clinically suspected aortic dissection were subjected to a dual noninvasive imaging protocol in random order; imaging results were compared and validated against the independent morphological "gold standard" of intraoperative findings (n = 27), necropsy (n = 7), and/or contrast angiography (n = 53). No serious side effects were encountered with either imaging method. In contrast to a precursory screening transthoracic echogram, the sensitivities of both MRI and TEE were 100% for detecting a dissection of the thoracic aorta irrespective of its location. The specificity of TEE, however, was lower than the specificity of MRI for a dissection (TEE, 68.2% versus MRI, 100%; p less than 0.005), which resulted mainly from false-positive TEE findings confined to the ascending segment of the aorta (TEE, 78.8% versus MRI, 100%; p less than 0.01). In addition, MRI proved to be more sensitive than TEE in detecting the formation of thrombus in the false lumen of both the aortic arch (p less than 0.01) and the descending segment of the aorta (p less than 0.05). There were no discrepancies between the two imaging techniques in detecting the site of entry to a dissection, aortic regurgitation, or pericardial effusion. CONCLUSIONS: Both MRI and TEE are atraumatic, safe, and highly sensitive methods to identify and classify acute and subacute dissections of the entire thoracic aorta. TEE, however, is associated with lower specificity for lesions in the ascending aorta. These results may still favor TEE as a semi-invasive diagnostic procedure after a precursory screening transthoracic echogram in suspected aortic dissection, but they establish MRI as an excellent method to avoid false-positive findings. Anatomic mapping by MRI may emerge as the most comprehensive approach and morphological standard to guide surgical interventions.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Composite graft replacement in acute aortic dissection: technique for anastomosing the right coronary artery without an aortic button.

Acute aortic dissection that involves the ostium of the right coronary artery is a rare occurrence, but treatment by composite graft replacement of the aortic root is a technically difficult procedure, usually involving implantation of an aortic button. We describe 2 patients with ostium of the right coronary artery severely damaged by acute aortic dissection. In both cases we used a technique that mobilized the right coronary artery sufficiently so that it could be implanted without including an aortic button.

Anastomosis, Surgical↗

PubMed1995

Surgical management of aortic dissection during a 30-year period.

BACKGROUND: Certain recent studies have demonstrated improved surgical outcome in patients with aortic dissection. We analyzed the surgical survival rates of patients with acute aortic dissections and the late prognosis of those with aortic dissection during a 30-year period. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 1963 and 1992, 360 patients (256 men and 104 women; mean +/- 1 SD age, 57 +/- 14 years) underwent surgery for aortic dissection: 174 patients had an acute type A (AcA), 46 an acute type B (AcB), 106 a chronic type A (ChA), and 34 a chronic type B (ChB) aortic dissection. The overall operative mortality rate was 24 +/- 8% (26 +/- 3% for AcA, 39 +/- 8% for AcB, 17 +/- 4% for ChA, and 15 +/- 6% for ChB, [+/- 70% confidence limit]). The operative mortality rates for patients with acute aortic dissection (AcA or AcB) were assessed for five time "windows": 1963 to 1972 (42 +/- 8%), 1973 to 1977 (37 +/- 8%), 1978 to 1982 (15 +/- 6%), 1983 to 1987 (27 +/- 6%), and 1988 to 1992 (26 +/- 6%). Logistic regression analysis suggested that the low operative mortality rate during the 1978-to-1982 interval occurred by chance. Multivariate analysis showed earlier operative year, hypertension, cardiac tamponade, renal dysfunction, and older age were independent determinants of operative death. Actuarial survival rates (including early deaths) after 5, 10, and 15 years for AcA patients were 55%, 37%, and 24%; for AcB, 48%, 29%, and 11%; for ChA, 65%, 45%, and 27%; and for ChB, 59%, 45%, and 27%. Multivariate analysis revealed that older age and previous operation were significant predictors for late death. Freedom from reoperation for all patients was 84%, 67%, and 57% at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although the operative mortality rate decreased over time for patients with aortic dissection, the risk for those with acute aortic dissection during the last 10 years (1983 to 1992) is probably more realistic than that observed in the preceding 5-year interval (1978 to 1982). The operative mortality rates for patients with chronic aortic dissection have remained relatively static. Earlier diagnosis of acute aortic dissection before development of cardiac tamponade and renal impairment is critical to improve the operative salvage rate. Long-term outcome still is not optimal, which emphasizes the need for better serial postoperative aortic imaging surveillance and medical follow-up and blood pressure control.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Diagnostic accuracy of transesophageal echocardiography, helical computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging for suspected thoracic aortic dissection: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with suspected thoracic aortic dissection require early and accurate diagnosis. Aortography has been replaced by less invasive imaging techniques including transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), helical computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); however, accuracies have varied from trial to trial, and which imaging technique should be applied to which risk population remains unclear. We systematically reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of these imaging techniques in patients with suspected thoracic aortic dissection. METHODS: Published English-language reports on the diagnosis of thoracic aortic dissection by TEE, helical CT, or MRI were identified from electronic databases. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were pooled in a random-effects model. RESULTS: Sixteen studies involving a total of 1139 patients were selected. Pooled sensitivity (98%-100%) and specificity (95%-98%) were comparable between imaging techniques. The pooled positive likelihood ratio appeared to be higher for MRI (positive likelihood ratio, 25.3; 95% confidence interval, 11.1-57.1) than for TEE (14.1; 6.0-33.2) or helical CT (13.9; 4.2-46.0). If a patient had shown a 50% pretest probability of thoracic aortic dissection (high risk), he or she had a 93% to 96% posttest probability of thoracic aortic dissection following a positive result of each imaging test. If a patient had a 5% pretest probability of thoracic aortic dissection (low risk), he or she had a 0.1% to 0.3% posttest probability of thoracic aortic dissection following a negative result of each imaging test. CONCLUSION: All 3 imaging techniques, ie, TEE, helical CT, and MRI, yield clinically equally reliable diagnostic values for confirming or ruling out thoracic aortic dissection.

Aortic Dissection↗

PubMed2006

Outcomes of medical management of acute type B aortic dissection.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the optimal treatment of acute type B aortic dissection remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to report early clinical outcomes of medical management for acute type B aortic dissection. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between January 2001 and March 2005, 129 consecutive patients with the confirmed diagnosis of acute type B aortic dissection were studied. Mean age was 61 years (range, 29 to 94), with 33.3% (43/129) female. Acute type B aortic dissection protocol was instituted with the intent to manage all patients medically. Indications for surgical intervention included rupture, aortic expansion, malperfusion, and intractable pain. All patients were followed-up after discharge. Hospital mortality was 10.1% (13/129), 19% (4/21) when vascular intervention was required, and 8.3% (9/108) when medical management was maintained. Early intervention was required in 21 cases (16.2%), 19 (14.7%) open vascular/aortic cases and 2 cases (1.6%) of percutaneous aortic interventions. Morbidity included rupture (4.7%), stroke (4.7%), paraplegia (8.5%), bowel ischemia (7%), acute renal failure (21%), dialysis requirement (13%), and peripheral ischemia (4.7%). Late vascular-related procedures were performed in 5.2% (6/116) of cases. Univariate risk factors for early mortality were rupture (P<0.0001), need for laparotomy (P<0.008), acute renal failure (P<0.0001), need for dialysis (P<0.0001), and lower extremity ischemia (P<0.0004). The only independent risk factors for hospital mortality by multiple logistic regression was rupture (P<0.0009), and independent risk factors for midterm death were history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P<0.002) and low glomerular filtration rate (<57 mL/min; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Medical management for acute type B aortic dissection is associated acceptable outcomes. Outcomes of other management strategies, eg, endovascular stenting, for acute type B aortic dissection need to be compared with these results.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed2004

Endovascular stent-graft repair of aortic dissection.

Between October 2000 and January 2002, 9 consecutive male patients with subacute or chronic aortic dissection underwent stent-graft placement. The indication for surgery was continuous pain or aneurysm development. One patient had a type A dissecting aortic aneurysm with a primary tear in the ascending thoracic aorta; the other 8 had type B dissection. Placement of an endovascular stent-graft was technically successful in 8 patients, and one underwent an open procedure for abdominal aortic fenestration. The entry site was sealed and the false lumen disappeared in 8 cases, and thrombosis of the false lumen was obtained. Rupture of an iliac artery dissecting aneurysm occurred in one patient 2 days after stent-graft placement; abdominal aortic fenestration with prosthetic replacement of the distal abdominal aorta was performed. One patient died of myocardial infarction 3 days after the stent-graft procedure. During a mean follow-up period of 7 months (1-16 months), one patient died of acute myocardial infarction at 11 months. It was concluded on the basis of these short-term results that endovascular repair of aortic dissection is a promising treatment, and abdominal aortic fenestration is a useful adjuvant procedure.

Adult↗

PubMed1992

[Surgical aspects of acute aortic dissection].

This paper highlights some of the surgical aspects of acute aortic dissections such as: emergency diagnosis, indications for surgery, reconstructive operative techniques, malperfusion phenomena and necessity for follow-up. Aortic dissection is caused by an intimal tear, called the "entry", and subsequent splitting of the media by the stream of blood. Two lumina are thus created, which may communicate through "re-entries". As this creates severe weakness of the aortic wall, rupture and/or dilatation are the imminent dangers of acute aortic dissection. Acute aortic dissection type A, by definition involving the ascending aorta (Figures 1 and 2), is an absolute indication for emergency surgical treatment, because its natural history shows an extremely poor outcome (Figure 3). Due to impending (intrapericardial) aortic rupture, it may be necessary to limit diagnostic procedures to a minimum. Transesophageal echocardiography is the method of choice for establishing a quick, precise and reliable diagnosis (Figure 4). In stable patients, computed tomography gives additional information about aortic diameters or sites of extrapericardial perforation. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) shows perfusion of the lumina and dependent organs. The surgical strategy in acute aortic dissection type A aims at replacement of the ascending aorta. Reconstructive techniques have to be considered, especially in aortic valve regurgitation without annuloectasia (Figures 5 and 6). In recent times, the use of GRF tissue glue has reduced the need for teflon felt. Involvement of the aortic arch should be treated aggressively up to the point of total arch replacement in deep hypothermic circulatory arrest as part of the primary procedure (Figure 7). Malperfusion phenomena of aortic branches remain risk-factors.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Acute Disease↗

PubMed2005

Adventitial inversion technique without the aid of biologic glue or Teflon buttress for acute type A aortic dissection.

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of the adventitial inversion technique in acute type A aortic dissection, with special attention to the impact of this procedure on the postoperative status of false lumen evaluated by computed tomographic scan. METHODS: From March 2001 to November 2004, 18 consecutive patients underwent emergent surgery for acute type A aortic dissection. Supracoronary graft replacement was performed in all the patients (ascending aorta/hemiarch replacement: 13/18=72%, total arch replacement: 5/18=28%). The adventitial inversion technique was used for both the proximal and the distal stump constructions of the dissected aortic wall without the aid of Teflon felt or biologic glue. Aortic regurgitation was treated with resuspension of the aortic commissures. RESULTS: There were two hospital deaths and the overall hospital mortality rate was 11.1%. The mean postoperative blood loss was 635+/-214 ml and no reexploration was required in any of the patients. Postoperative computed tomography showed closure of the false lumen in aortic root, aortic arch, and proximal descending thoracic aorta in all of the surviving patients. Postoperative echocardiography demonstrated no aortic regurgitation in any of the patients. Two patients died late postoperatively from unrelated causes to aortic dissection. The remaining 14 patients are doing well without a second-stage operation for aortic root or distal aortic lesions during the follow-up period of 7-51 months (mean: 28+/-14 months). CONCLUSIONS: The adventitial inversion technique provides an excellent immediate hemostasis and facilitates thrombotic closure of the proximal and the distal false lumen in the treatment for acute type A aortic dissection.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed2002

Factors influencing intensive care unit length of stay after surgery for acute aortic dissection type A.

BACKGROUND: Operative mortality after acute aortic dissection type A is still high, and prolonged stay at the intensive care unit is common. Little has been documented about factors influencing the intensive care unit length of stay. The aim of this study was to determine such variables. METHODS: During a 10-year period, 67 patients (47 male, 20 female) were operated on for acute aortic dissection type A. In 42 patients (63%), an ascending aortic replacement was performed, 23 patients (34%) underwent a Bentall procedure, and 2 patients (3%) received a valve-sparing David type of operation. In 14 of these cases (20%), an additional partial or total arch replacement was performed. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 9 of 67 (14%). Median postoperative intensive care unit length of stay was 5 days (range, 1 to 72 days). Intensive care unit stay was in univariate analysis significantly influenced by the following factors: age (p = 0.008), body mass index (p = 0.039), cardiopulmonary bypass time (p = 0.018), aortic cross-clamp time (p = 0.031), postoperative low cardiac output syndrome (p < 0.001), and postoperative lactate levels (p = 0.01). By multivariate analysis, age (p = 0.012), cardiopulmonary bypass time (p = 0.037), and the presence of a postoperative low cardiac output syndrome (p < 0.001) significantly influenced intensive care unit stay. CONCLUSIONS: Stay in the intensive care unit after operation for acute aortic dissection type A seems to be determined by age, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and the postoperative presence of a low cardiac output syndrome.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1999

Pathologic variants of thoracic aortic dissections. Penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers and intramural hematomas.

This article confirms the existence of two variants of acute aortic pathology, the penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (PAU) and the intramural hematoma (IMH), which are radiologically distinct from classic aortic dissection. Table 4 reviews the characteristics distinguishing PAU from classic aortic dissection and IMH. We took as a matter of definition that classic aortic dissection involves a flap which traverses the aortic lumen. We defined PAU and IMH as nonflap lesions, with PAU demonstrating a crater extending from the aortic lumen into the space surrounding the aortic lumen. This categorization can be summarized with the expression, "no flap, no dissection." With these definitions made, re-review of the imaging studies for the present report identified 36 such lesions out of 214 cases originally read as aortic dissection. Therefore, these variant lesions accounted for over 1 out of 8 acute aortic pathologies. Besides confirming the existence of the conditions, PAU and IMH, as distinct radiographic lesions, this series strongly suggests that these two conditions constitute distinct clinical entities as well. Table 4 summarizes the clinical patterns of these two entities as apparent from the present study, and contrasts them with classic aortic dissections. In particular, the following observations, some of which are consonant findings in smaller series, can be made regarding the typical patient profiles of PAU and IMH from the present study: The patients with PAU and IMH are distinctly older than those with type A aortic dissection (74.0 and 73.9 versus 56.5 years, P = 0.0001). Although not statistically significant, PAU and IMH patients tend to be older than patients with type B aortic dissections as well. For PAU and IMH, unlike aortic dissection, the concentration in the elderly is manifested in a very small standard deviation of the mean age (see Fig. 13); these two entities, PAU and IMH, are essentially diseases of the seventh, eighth, and ninth decades of life. Patients with PAU and IMH are almost invariably hypertensive (about 94% of cases). The pain of PAU and IMH mimics that of classic aortic dissection, with anterior symptoms in the ascending aortic lesions and intrascapular or back pain with descending aortic lesions. Unlike classic dissection, PAU and IMH do not produce branch vessel compromise or occlusion and do not result in ischemic manifestations in the extremities or visceral organs. PAU and IMH are more focal lesions than classic aortic dissection, which frequently propagates for much or the entire extent of the thoracoabdominal aorta. PAU is uniformly associated with severe aortic arteriosclerosis and calcification, whereas classic dissection often occurs in aortas with minimal arteriosclerosis and calcification. PAU and IMH tend to occur in even larger aortas than classic aortic dissection (6.2 and 5.5 versus 5.2 cm, P = 0.01). PAU and IMH are strongly associated with AAA, which is seen concomitantly in 42.1% of PAU patients and 29.4% of IMH patients. PAU and IMH are largely diseases of the descending aorta (90% for PAU and 71% for IMH). Although our pathology data is limited, we do feel that an inherent difference in the histologic intramural level of the hematoma may underlie the pathophysiologic process that determines which patient develops a typical dissection and which develops an intramural hematoma. In particular, we feel that the level of blood collection is more superficial, closer to the adventitia, in IMH than in typical aortic dissection. This may explain why the inner layer does not prolapse into the aorta on imaging studies or when the aorta is opened in the operating room. This more superficial location would also explain the high rupture rates as compared to classic aortic dissection (Fig. 14, Table 3). We did find PAU and IMH to behave much more malignantly than typical descending aortic dissection. As seen in Figure 6, the rupture rate is much higher than for aortic dissection. Docume

Aged↗

PubMed2005

[Doppler sonography suggesting fulminant aortic dissection in initial middle cerebral artery infarction].

Acute aortic dissection is a cardiovascular emergency with a wide spectrum of clinical symptoms making the diagnosis difficult if the leading symptom of thoracic pain is not present. In up to 10% of cases an ischemic stroke may be the first clinical sign. We report a patient with a middle cerebral artery infarction in whom an abnormal signal in the extracranial Doppler sonography revealed the first hint of an aortic dissection. Before the diagnosis could be verified, the patient died due to electromechanical decoupling; autopsy showed an extensive aortic dissection with cardiac tamponade. Based on this case report, we review special problems of diagnosis and therapy in aortic dissection with primary cerebrovascular manifestation.

Aged↗

PubMed1994

[Closing aortic dissection--it's clinical manifestation and treatment].

15 cases (31.6%) with closing aortic dissection have been experienced among 46 cases in acute dissecting aneurysm of the aorta during past 8 years and 9 months. Ulcer like projection was recognized in 81.8% of closing aortic dissection. Serum FDP level measured within 48 hours after onset was significantly lower and serum fibrinogen level was significantly higher in closing aortic dissection than in patent false lumen type. Especially, the case with FDP < or = 10 micrograms/ml, fibrinogen > or = 300 mg/dl is strongly suspected as closing aortic dissection. There was no death among patients with closing aortic dissection except one who died after operation at chronic phase. These patients were well controlled by medical therapy except one who received emergent operation. We showed 3 interesting cases with Stanford A type closing aortic dissection. One patient was treated surgically because of cardiac tamponade and shock, but the other two patients were treated medically. From these results, we conclude that medical therapy should be a first choice for patients with closing aortic dissection regardless of Stanford classification.

Adult↗

PubMed1989

Familial aortic dissecting aneurysm.

A family is described in which nine members over two generations had an aortic dissecting aneurysm or aortic or arterial dilation at a young age. The family has been followed up since 1977 after the death of a second teenager from a kindred of 11. None of the patients had the Marfan syndrome or a history of systemic hypertension. Three members died of ruptured aortic dissecting aneurysm and acute hemopericardium at 14, 18 and 24 years of age, respectively; a fourth member died suddenly at age 48 years, a few years after aortic repair for aneurysmal dilation. One member underwent surgical repair of an ascending aortic dissecting aneurysm at age 18 years and is still alive. Four members are currently under close medical observation for aortic or arterial dilation. Histologic examination of the aortic wall at autopsy or surgery in three patients revealed a loss of elastic fibers, deposition of mucopolysaccharide-like material in the media and cystic medial changes. Types I and III collagen from cultured fibroblasts appeared normal on gel electrophoresis. Results of indirect immunofluorescent studies of the elastin-associated microfibrillar fiber array in skin and fibroblast culture from multiple family members were also normal. This dramatic familial cluster of aortic dissecting aneurysm and aortic or arterial dilation suggests a genetically determined disease of autosomal dominant inheritance although the basic defect remains unknown.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

D-dimer serum levels in a case of type B aortic dissection. A rapid test for the early diagnosis of acute aortic disease?

This article reports on a case of acute type B aortic dissection presenting with electrocardiographic abnormalities mimicking an acute coronary syndrome, associated with high D-dimer levels in the acute phase and normalization in the chronic phase of the disease process. This case report is consistent with recent data from the literature suggesting that D-dimer levels might be a useful biochemical tool in the diagnostic work-up of patients with suspected acute aortic dissection.

Acute Disease↗