10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Risk factors and early outcomes of acute renal injury after thoracic aortic endograft repair for type B aortic dissection

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become an emerging treatment modality for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) patients in recent years. The risk factors and impacts of acute kidney injury (AKI) after percutaneous TEVAR, however, have not been widely established.

          Methods

          We retrospectively studied the clinical records of 305 consecutive patients who admitted to our institution and had TEVAR for TBAD between December 2009 and June 2013. The patients were routinely monitored for their renal functions preoperatively until 7 days after TEVAR. The Kidney Disease Improving Global Guidelines (KDIGO) criteria were used for AKI.

          Results

          Of the total 305 consecutive patients, 84 (27.5%) developed AKI after TEVAR, comprising 66 (21.6%) patients in KDIGO stage 1, 6 (2.0%) patients in stage 2 and 12 (3.9%) patients in stage 3. From the logistic regression analysis, systolic blood pressure (SBP) on admission >140 mmHg (odds ratio [OR], 2.288; 95% CI, 1.319–3.969) and supra-aortic branches graft bypass hybrid surgery (OR, 3.228; 95% CI, 1.526–6.831) were independent risk factors for AKI after TEVAR. Local anesthesia tended to be a protective factor (OR, 0.563; 95% CI, 0.316–1.001). The preoperative renal function, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker or statin administration, volume of contrast agent, range of TBAD and false lumen involving renal artery were not associated with post-operation AKI. The in-hospital mortality and major adverse events were markedly increased with the occurrence of AKI (7.1% vs 0.9%, P=0.006; 14.3% vs 3.2%, P<0.001, respectively).

          Conclusions

          TEVAR for TBAD has a high incidence of AKI, which is associated with worse in-hospital outcomes. SBP on admission and supra-aortic branches graft bypass hybrid surgery were the most significant risk factors. Renopreventive measures should be considered in high-risk patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease. A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American College of Radiology,American Stroke Association, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of Thoracic Surgeons,and Society for Vascular Medicine.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Endovascular repair of type B aortic dissection: long-term results of the randomized investigation of stent grafts in aortic dissection trial.

            Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) represents a therapeutic concept for type B aortic dissection. Long-term outcomes and morphology after TEVAR for uncomplicated dissection are unknown. A total of 140 patients with stable type B aortic dissection previously randomized to optimal medical treatment and TEVAR (n=72) versus optimal medical treatment alone (n=68) were analyzed retrospectively for aorta-specific, all-cause outcomes, and disease progression using landmark statistical analysis of years 2 to 5 after index procedure. Cox regression was used to compare outcomes between groups; all analyses are based on intention to treat. The risk of all-cause mortality (11.1% versus 19.3%; P=0.13), aorta-specific mortality (6.9% versus 19.3%; P=0.04), and progression (27.0% versus 46.1%; P=0.04) after 5 years was lower with TEVAR than with optimal medical treatment alone. Landmark analysis suggested a benefit of TEVAR for all end points between 2 and 5 years; for example, for all-cause mortality (0% versus 16.9%; P=0.0003), aorta-specific mortality (0% versus 16.9%; P=0.0005), and for progression (4.1% versus 28.1%; P=0.004); Landmarking at 1 year and 1 month revealed consistent findings. Both improved survival and less progression of disease at 5 years after elective TEVAR were associated with stent graft induced false lumen thrombosis in 90.6% of cases (P<0.0001). In this study of survivors of type B aortic dissection, TEVAR in addition to optimal medical treatment is associated with improved 5-year aorta-specific survival and delayed disease progression. In stable type B dissection with suitable anatomy, preemptive TEVAR should be considered to improve late outcome. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01415804.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Randomized comparison of strategies for type B aortic dissection: the INvestigation of STEnt Grafts in Aortic Dissection (INSTEAD) trial.

              Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) represents a novel concept for type B aortic dissection. Although life-saving in acute emergencies, outcomes and survival of TEVAR in stable dissection are unknown. One hundred forty patients in stable clinical condition at least 2 weeks after index dissection were randomly subjected to elective stent-graft placement in addition to optimal medical therapy (n=72) or to optimal medical therapy alone (n=68) with surveillance (arterial pressure according to World Health Organization guidelines < or =120/80 mm Hg). The primary end point was all-cause death at 2 years, whereas aorta-related death, progression (with need for conversion or additional endovascular or open surgery), and aortic remodeling were secondary end points. There was no difference in all-cause deaths, with a 2-year cumulative survival rate of 95.6+/-2.5% with optimal medical therapy versus 88.9+/-3.7% with TEVAR (P=0.15); the trial, however, turned out to be underpowered. Moreover, the aorta-related death rate was not different (P=0.44), and the risk for the combined end point of aorta-related death (rupture) and progression (including conversion or additional endovascular or open surgery) was similar (P=0.65). Three neurological adverse events occurred in the TEVAR group (1 paraplegia, 1 stroke, and 1 transient paraparesis), versus 1 case of paraparesis with medical treatment. Finally, aortic remodeling (with true-lumen recovery and thoracic false-lumen thrombosis) occurred in 91.3% of patients with TEVAR versus 19.4% of those who received medical treatment (P<0.001), which suggests ongoing aortic remodeling. In the first randomized study on elective stent-graft placement in survivors of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection, TEVAR failed to improve 2-year survival and adverse event rates despite favorable aortic remodeling.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Dove Medical Press
                1176-6336
                1178-203X
                2017
                17 August 2017
                : 13
                : 1023-1029
                Affiliations
                Cardiology Department, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Guangdong General Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Jianfang Luo; Ling Xue, Cardiology Department, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Guangdong General Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, No 96, Dongchuan Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510100, China, Tel +86 136 0283 3227; +86 137 1112 8345, Email henryjfl@ 123456tom.com ; drxue@ 123456hotmail.com
                [*]

                These authors contributed equally to this work

                Article
                tcrm-13-1023
                10.2147/TCRM.S131456
                5566893
                © 2017 Luo et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Categories
                Original Research

                Medicine

                risk factor, acute renal injury, endovascular repair, aortic dissection

                Comments

                Comment on this article