Thoracic endovascular aortic repair or best medical therapy for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection? A meta-analysis.

Autor:	Yang J; Department of Vascular Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China., Shi Y; Department of Vascular Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China., Jiang J; Department of Vascular Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China - jiangjhzhongshan@163.com.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	The Journal of cardiovascular surgery [J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino)] 2022 Jun; Vol. 63 (3), pp. 288-298. Date of Electronic Publication: 2015 Feb 06.
DOI:	10.23736/S0021-9509.16.08594-3
Abstrakt:	Introduction: The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate all studies comparing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and best medical therapy (BMT) for the treatment of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD). Evidence Acquisition: PubMed/Medline and Web of Knowledge were searched until September 2014 for relevant studies published in English. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and its corresponding 95% CI were analyzed with Cochrane Review Manager (RevMan v.5.3). Evidence Synthesis: Our analysis showed that compared with BMT, TEVAR did not significantly affect 30-day (hospital) mortality. A significantly lower 1-year and 2- or 3-year survival rates was observed with TEVAR vs. BMT. Interestingly, a trend just short of statistical significance towards higher 4- or 5-year survival was found with TEVAR treatment (P=0.08). No significant differences were found in false lumen (FL) thrombosis formation with TEVAR vs. BMT treatment. However, a trend toward less incomplete or no FL thrombosis was noted with TEVAR. No significantly impact on the risk of later re-intervention was found with TEVAR vs. BMT. Conclusions: TEVAR did not provide obvious early survival advantage for uncomplicated TBAD over BMT, especially in the patients using TEVAR alone. It may remain a treatment option in uncomplicated TBAD patients with high risks for later complications. More randomized, prospective, long-term studies are needed to further clarify whether TEVAR could be a better first-line treatment strategy vs. BMT for uncomplicated TBAD.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu