High intimal flap mobility assessed by intravascular ultrasound is associated with better short-term results after TEVAR in chronic aortic dissection.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 05 2019
13 05 2019
Historique:
received:
19
07
2018
accepted:
02
05
2019
entrez:
16
5
2019
pubmed:
16
5
2019
medline:
5
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in chronic aortic dissection remains controversial. We analysed whether a high intimal flap mobility (IFM) of the dissection membrane has an impact on aortic remodelling after TEVAR in chronic Type B aortic dissection. Patients undergoing TEVAR with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) were analysed and IFM was calculated. High IFM was defined as maximum flap amplitude >3 mm. For determining aortic remodelling, the degree of true lumen (TL) expansion was analysed in the last available follow-up CT. Fifty-two patients (63.6 ± 15.4 years) with a mean follow-up of 26.6 ± 20.7 months were analysed. The mobile flap group (n = 29) showed higher absolute TL expansion at the distal stent-graft (5.9 ± 3.1 vs. 3.3 ± 5.4 mm; p = 0.036) and a higher increase in TL diameter (18 ± 10 vs. 9 ± 15%; p = 0.017) compared to the non-mobile group (n = 23). Basic TEVAR-related outcome characteristics were comparable, but the mobile intimal flap group showed a lower re-intervention rate (3 vs. 8pts.; p = 0.032) in chronic dissections. High IFM in chronic Type B aortic dissection is linked to improved aortic remodelling and is associated with a lower re-intervention rate over time. IVUS assessment of IFM in chronic Type B aortic dissection might be helpful in identifying patients with better remodelling after TEVAR.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31086282
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-43856-6
pii: 10.1038/s41598-019-43856-6
pmc: PMC6513991
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
7267Références
J Vasc Surg. 2007 Nov;46(5):891-6; discussion 896-7
pubmed: 17980275
Semin Vasc Surg. 2009 Sep;22(3):145-51
pubmed: 19765524
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008 Nov;36(5):522-9
pubmed: 18692416
Eur J Radiol. 2009 Oct;72(1):146-53
pubmed: 18678452
Aorta (Stamford). 2017 Jun 01;5(3):80-90
pubmed: 29675440
J Endovasc Ther. 2004 Feb;11(1):1-12
pubmed: 14748634
Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019 Jan;67(1):154-160
pubmed: 28852959
Circulation. 2002 Sep 24;106(12 Suppl 1):I234-40
pubmed: 12354739
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Sep 6;68(10):1054-65
pubmed: 27585511
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Jul;6(7):830-2
pubmed: 23747066
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Feb 1;87(2):E54-61
pubmed: 26198289
PLoS One. 2014 Feb 04;9(2):e87664
pubmed: 24503676
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 19;13(4):e0196180
pubmed: 29672613
Expert Opin Med Diagn. 2012 Nov;6(6):529-40
pubmed: 23480835
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012 Apr;43(4):386-91
pubmed: 22326695
J Invasive Cardiol. 2018 Apr;30(4):145-146
pubmed: 29610445
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011 Nov;42(5):632-47
pubmed: 21880515
Am J Cardiol. 1995 Jan 15;75(2):161-5
pubmed: 7810493
J Vasc Surg. 2008 Jun;47(6):1333-6
pubmed: 18514848
Vasc Med. 2016 Dec;21(6):547-552
pubmed: 27126951
Ann Vasc Surg. 2018 May;49:310.e1-310.e3
pubmed: 29477683
Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017 Summer;29(2):131-136
pubmed: 28823318
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Aug;6(4):407-16
pubmed: 23922146
Am J Med. 2013 Aug;126(8):730.e19-24
pubmed: 23885677
JAMA. 1990 Nov 21;264(19):2537-41
pubmed: 2232021
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Apr 23;61(16):1661-78
pubmed: 23500232
Eur Heart J. 2014 Nov 1;35(41):2873-926
pubmed: 25173340
J Vasc Surg. 2012 May;55(5):1419-26
pubmed: 22342152
Vasc Med. 2016 Jun;21(3):239-50
pubmed: 26957573
J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2015 Apr;56(2):231-8
pubmed: 25604323