الفهرس 
Endovascular versus conventional medical treatment for acute type B aortic dissection
ContentsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 113 |  |  |
| | | from | 113 | | |
Abstract
Uncomplicated type-B acute aortic dissection (uATBAD) is generally treated with medical management; complicated dissections require surgery or Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR). Studies have demonstrated that long-term outcomes with medical management are suboptimal. Therefore, we sought to determine the long-term effect of TEVAR compared with best medical treatment (BMT) alone on uATBAD. We reviewed 182 patients presented with acute aortic dissection in the period between 2003-2015, only 103 met the inclusion criteria of the study and were included and analysed and retrospectively placed into 1 of 2 groups: 1) the TEVAR+ BMT group: patients with uATBAD treated with TEVAR and antihypertensive medications (n = 61); and 2) BMT only group: uATBAD patients treated medically alone (n = 42). There were no significant differences in demographics or comorbidity profiles between groups.There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding mortality. TEVAR was associated with relatively high early complications that was related to the procedural hazards.TEVAR showed significant positive effect on aortic remodeling during follow up and low rate of late complications and need for secondary interventions when compared to medical treatment alone and surveillance. Preemptive TEVAR with best medical treatment can be safe and effective strategy for treatment of uncomplicated type-B acute aortic dissection that prevent late complications