Eduardo Bossone

Early and late complications associated with transcatheter occlusion of secundum atrial septal defect

OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to report the early and late complications experienced in atrial septal defect (ASD) transcatheter closure. BACKGROUND Atrial septal defect transcatheter occlusion techniques have become an alternative to surgical procedures. A number of different devices are available for transcatheter ASD closure. The type and rate of complications are different for different devices. METHODS Between December 1996 and January 2001, 417 patients (mean age: 26.6 +/- 19 years) underwent transcatheter occlusion of secundum type ASD. Complications were categorized into major and minor. Two different devices were used: the CardioSEAL/STARFlex in 159 patients and the Amplatzer septal occluder in 258 patients. RESULTS Thirty-four patients experienced 36 complications during the hospitalization (8.6%, 95% confidence interval: 6.1% to 11.1%). Ten patients underwent elective surgical repair because of device malposition (three patients) or device embolization (seven patients). Twenty-four patients experienced 25 minor complications: unsatisfactory device position or embolization. Devices were retrieved using a gooseneck snare and/or a basket; 11 patients experienced arrhythmic problems. Other complications were: pericardial effusion, thrombus formation on the left atrial disc, right iliac vein dissection, groin hematoma, hemorrhage in the retropharynx and sizing balloon rupture. Two patients had late complications: peripheral embolization in the left leg one year after implantation of an Amplatzer device and sudden death 1.5 year later. CONCLUSIONS Our series of patients with ASD by transcatheter occlusion shows that the procedure is safe and effective in the vast majority of cases. To further reduce the complications rate, the criteria of device selection according to ASD morphology and some technical tips during implantation are discussed.

Clinical Profiles and Outcomes of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection in the Current Era: Lessons From the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD)

Background—Clinical profiles and outcomes of patients with acute type B aortic dissection have not been evaluated in the current era. Methods and Results—Accordingly, we analyzed 384 patients (65±13 years, males 71%) with acute type B aortic dissection enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). A majority of patients had hypertension and presented with acute chest/back pain. Only one-half showed abnormal findings on chest radiograph, and almost all patients had computerized tomography (CT), transesophageal echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and/or aortogram to confirm the diagnosis. In-hospital mortality was 13% with most deaths occurring within the first week. Factors associated with increased in-hospital mortality on univariate analysis were hypotension/shock, widened mediastinum, periaortic hematoma, excessively dilated aorta (≥6 cm), in-hospital complications of coma/altered consciousness, mesenteric/limb ischemia, acute renal failure, and surgical management (all P <0.05). A risk prediction model with control for age and gender showed hypotension/shock (odds ratio [OR] 23.8, P <0.0001), absence of chest/back pain on presentation (OR 3.5, P =0.01), and branch vessel involvement (OR 2.9, P =0.02), collectively named ‘the deadly triad’ to be independent predictors of in-hospital death. Conclusions—Our study provides insight into current-day profiles and outcomes of acute type B aortic dissection. Factors associated with increased in-hospital mortality (“the deadly triad”) should be identified and taken into consideration for risk stratification and decision-making.

Aortic Diameter ≥5.5 cm Is Not a Good Predictor of Type A Aortic Dissection Observations From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD)

Background— Studies of aortic aneurysm patients have shown that the risk of rupture increases with aortic size. However, few studies of acute aortic dissection patients and aortic size exist. We used data from our registry of acute aortic dissection patients to better understand the relationship between aortic diameter and type A dissection. Methods and Results— We examined 591 type A dissection patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection between 1996 and 2005 (mean age, 60.8 years). Maximum aortic diameters averaged 5.3 cm; 349 (59%) patients had aortic diameters <5.5 cm and 229 (40%) patients had aortic diameters <5.0 cm. Independent predictors of dissection at smaller diameters (<5.5 cm) included a history of hypertension (odds ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 4.57; P=0.04), radiating pain (odds ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 4.0; P=0.03), and increasing age (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.05; P=0.03). Marfan syndrome patients were more likely to dissect at larger diameters (odds ratio, 14.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.7 to 100; P=0.002). Mortality (27% of patients) was not related to aortic size. Conclusions— The majority of patients with acute type A acute aortic dissection present with aortic diameters <5.5 cm and thus do not fall within current guidelines for elective aneurysm surgery. Methods other than size measurement of the ascending aorta are needed to identify patients at risk for dissection.

Role and Results of Surgery in Acute Type B Aortic Dissection Insights From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD)

Background— The clinical profiles and outcomes of patients treated surgically for acute type B aortic dissection (ABAD) are often reported for those in small series or for those cared for at a single institution over a long time period, during which a continuous evolution in techniques has occurred. Accordingly, we sought to evaluate the clinical features and surgical results of patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection by identifying primary factors that influenced surgical outcome and estimating average surgical mortality for ABAD in the current era. Methods and Results— A comprehensive analysis of 290 clinical variables and their relation to surgical outcomes for 82 patients who required surgery for ABAD (from a population of 1256 patients; mean±SD age, 60.6±15.0 years; 82.9% male) and who were enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection was performed. The overall in-hospital mortality was 29.3%. Factors associated with increased surgical mortality based on univariate analysis were preoperative coma or altered consciousness, partial thrombosis of the false lumen, evidence of periaortic hematoma on diagnostic imaging, descending aortic diameter >6 cm, right ventricle dysfunction at surgery, and shorter time from the onset of symptoms to surgery. Factors associated with favorable outcomes included radiating pain, normotension at surgery (systolic blood pressure 100 to 149 mm Hg), and reduced hypothermic circulatory arrest time. The 2 independent predictors of surgical mortality were age >70 years (odds ratio, 4.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.30 to 14.34) and preoperative shock/hypotension (odds ratio, 6.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 32.49). Conclusions— The present study provides insights into current-day clinical profiles and surgical outcomes of ABAD. Knowledge about different preoperative clinical conditions may help surgeons in making treatment decisions among these high-risk patients.

Gender-Related Differences in Acute Aortic Dissection

Background—Few data exist on gender-related differences in clinical presentation, diagnostic findings, management, and outcomes in acute aortic dissection (AAD). Methods and Results—Accordingly, we evaluated 1078 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) to assess differences in clinical features, management, and in-hospital outcomes between men and women. Of the patients enrolled in IRAD (32.1%) with AAD, 346 were women. Although less frequently affected by AAD (32.1% of AAD), women were significantly older and had more often presented later than men (P =0.008); symptoms of coma/altered mental status were more common, whereas pulse deficit was less common. Diagnostic imaging suggestive of rupture, ie, periaortic hematoma, and pleural or pericardial effusion were more commonly observed in women. In-hospital complications of hypotension and tamponade occurred with greater frequency in women, resulting in higher in-hospital mortality compared with men. After adjustment for age and hypertension, women with aortic dissection die more frequently than men (OR, 1.4, P =0.04), predominantly in the 66- to 75-year age group. Moreover, surgical outcome was worse in women than men (P =0.013); type A dissection in women was associated with a higher surgical mortality of 32% versus 22% in men despite similar delay, surgical technique, and hemodynamics. Conclusions—Our analysis provides insights into gender-related differences in AAD with regard to clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes; important diagnostic and therapeutic implications may help shed light on aortic dissection in women to improve their outcomes.

Chronobiological Patterns of Acute Aortic Dissection

Background—Chronobiological rhythms have been shown to influence the occurrence of a variety of cardiovascular disorders. However, the effects of the time of the day, the day of the week, or monthly/seasonal changes on acute aortic dissection (AAD) have not been well studied. Methods and Results—Accordingly, we evaluated 957 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and 2000 (mean age 62±14 years, type A 61%). A &khgr;2 test for goodness of fit and partial Fourier analysis were used to evaluate nonuniformity and rhythmicity of AAD during circadian, weekly, and monthly periods. A significantly higher frequency of AAD occurred from 6:00 am to 12:00 noon compared with other time periods (12:00 noon to 6:00 pm, 6:00 pm to 12:00 midnight, and 12:00 midnight to 6:00 am;P <0.001 by &khgr;2 test). Fourier analysis showed a highly significant circadian variation (P <0.001) with a peak between 8:00 am and 9:00 am. Although no significant variation was found for the day of the week, the frequency of AAD was significantly higher during winter (P =0.008 versus other seasons by &khgr;2 test). Fourier analysis confirmed this monthly variation with a peak in January (P <0.001). Subgroup analysis identified a significant association for all subgroups with circadian rhythmicity. However, seasonal/monthly variations were observed only among patients aged <70 years, those with type B AAD, and those without hypertension or diabetes. Conclusions—Similar to other cardiovascular conditions, AAD exhibits significant circadian and seasonal/monthly variations. Our findings may have important implications for the prevention of AAD by tailoring treatment strategies to ensure maximal benefits during the vulnerable periods.

Acute type A aortic dissection in the elderly: clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes in the current era

OBJECTIVES We sought to evaluate the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of elderly patients with acute type A aortic dissection. BACKGROUND Few data exist on the clinical manifestations and outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection in an elderly patient cohort. METHODS We categorized 550 patients with type A aortic dissection enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection into two age strata (<70 and >or=70 years) and compared their clinical features, management, and in-hospital events. RESULTS Thirty-two percent of patients with type A dissection were aged >or=70 years. Marfan syndrome was exclusively associated with dissection in the young, whereas hypertension, atherosclerosis and iatrogenic dissection predominated in older patients. Typical symptoms (abrupt onset of chest or back pain) and signs (aortic regurgitation murmur or pulse deficits) of dissection were less common among the elderly. Fewer elderly patients were managed surgically than younger patients (64% vs. 86%, p < 0.0001). Hypotension occurred more frequently (46% vs. 32%, p = 0.002) and focal neurologic deficits less frequently (18% vs. 26%, p = 0.04) among the elderly. In-hospital mortality was higher among older patients (43% vs. 28%, p = 0.0006). Logistic regression analysis identified age >or=70 years as an independent predictor of hospital death for acute type A aortic dissection (odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval 1.1-2.8; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Our study shows significant differences between older (age >or=70 years) and younger (age <70 years) patients with acute type A aortic dissection in their clinical characteristics, management, and hospital outcomes. Future research should evaluate strategies to improve outcomes in this high-risk elderly cohort.

Diagnosis of Acute Aortic Dissection by D-Dimer. The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Substudy on Biomarkers (IRAD-Bio) Experience

Background— D-dimer has been reported to be elevated in acute aortic dissection. Potential use as a “rule-out” marker has been suggested, but concerns remain given that it is elevated in other acute chest diseases, including pulmonary embolism and ischemic heart disease. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of D-dimer testing in a study population of patients with suspected aortic dissection. Methods and Results— In this prospective multicenter study, 220 patients with initial suspicion of having acute aortic dissection were enrolled, of whom 87 were diagnosed with acute aortic dissection and 133 with other final diagnoses, including myocardial infarction, angina, pulmonary embolism, and other uncertain diagnoses. D-dimer was markedly elevated in patients with acute aortic dissection. Analysis according to control disease, type of dissection, and time course showed that the widely used cutoff level of 500 ng/mL for ruling out pulmonary embolism also can reliably rule out aortic dissection, with a negative likelihood ratio of 0.07 throughout the first 24 hours. Conclusion— D-dimer levels may be useful in risk stratifying patients with suspected aortic dissection to rule out aortic dissection if used within the first 24 hours after symptom onset.

Presentation, diagnosis, and outcomes of acute aortic dissection: 17-year trends from the international registry of acute aortic dissection

BACKGROUND Diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of acute aortic dissection (AAS) are changing. OBJECTIVES This study examined 17-year trends in the presentation, diagnosis, and hospital outcomes of AAD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). METHODS Data from 4,428 patients enrolled at 28 IRAD centers between December 26, 1995, and February 6, 2013, were analyzed. Patients were divided according to enrollment date into 6 equal groups and by AAD type: A (n = 2,952) or B (n = 1,476). RESULTS There was no change in the presenting complaints of severe or worst-ever pain for type A and type B AAD (93% and 94%, respectively), nor in the incidence of chest pain (83% and 71%, respectively). Use of computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of type A increased from 46% to 73% (p < 0.001). Surgical management for type A increased from 79% to 90% (p < 0.001). Endovascular management of type B increased from 7% to 31% (p < 0.001). Type A in-hospital mortality decreased significantly (31% to 22%; p < 0.001), as surgical mortality (25% to 18%; p = 0.003). There was no significant trend in in-hospital mortality in type B (from 12% to 14%). CONCLUSIONS Presenting symptoms and physical findings of AAD have not changed significantly. Use of chest CT increased for type A. More patients in both groups were managed with interventional procedures: surgery in type A and endovascular therapy in type B. A significant decrease in overall in-hospital mortality was seen for type A but not for type B.

Bicuspid Aortic Valve Identifying Knowledge Gaps and Rising to the Challenge From the International Bicuspid Aortic Valve Consortium (BAVCon)

> Everything should be kept as simple as possible, but no simpler. > > —Albert Einstein1 Since its estimated first description >500 years ago by Leonardo da Vinci,2 the bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) has progressively built a reputation; initially, as a curious valvular phenotype with a tendency to develop obstruction and insufficiency. In more contemporary times, however, the BAV is recognized as underlying almost 50% of isolated severe aortic stenosis cases requiring surgery,3 and has been extensively associated with ominous outcomes such as bacterial endocarditis and aortic dissection.4 These associations, coupled with the high prevalence of BAV in humans,5 have prompted investigative efforts into the condition, which although insightful, have generated more questions than answers. This review describes our current knowledge of BAV, but, more importantly, it highlights knowledge gaps and areas where basic and clinical research is warranted. Our review has 2 sections. The first section outlines the multifaceted challenge of BAV, our current understanding of the condition, and barriers that may hamper the advancement of the science. The second section proposes a roadmap to discovery based on current imaging, molecular biology, and genetic tools, recognizing their advantages and limitations. ### A Condition Characterized by Variable Clinical Presentation The clinical presentation and consequences of BAV in humans are exceedingly heterogeneous, with few clinical or molecular markers to predict associated complications.4,6 BAV can be diagnosed at any stage during a lifetime, from newborns7 to the elderly,8 and in the setting of variable clinical circumstances. Some are benign circumstances such as auscultatory abnormalities or incidental echocardiographic findings in otherwise healthy patients8; other circumstances are morbid, such as early severe aortic valve dysfunction, premature congestive heart failure, and thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs).8,9 Life-threatening circumstances include bacterial endocarditis and acute aortic dissection.8–11 These complications may present …