OBJECTIVE: To explore whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) plus distal bare metal stent (BMS) implantation leads to favorable clinical outcomes compared with standard TEVAR in treating acute complicated type B aortic dissection. METHODS: Relevant publications were found through a precise search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Count data were calculated as the odd ratio (OR)and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the Mantel-Haenszel statistical method, quantitative data were calculated as mean difference and 95% CI using Inverse Variance statistical method. When the data heterogeneity was large, with an I2 > 50%, a random-effects model and sensitivity analysis were performed. The analysis tool we used was the software Revman 5.3 and G*power 3.1. RESULTS: There were 7 publications involving 958 patients who were enrolled ultimately. The incidence of unplanned secondary intervention and postoperative adverse events in the TEVAR + BMS were lower than standard TEVAR (OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.75); OR, 0.57, (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.90)), and the pooled number needed to treat was 15 for unplanned secondary intervention and 15 for postoperative adverse events. There were no significant difference in the aortic-related or all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.25 to 2.61); OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.22)), aortic-related, all-cause mortality at least 6 months or incidence of the postoperative endoleak (OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.32); OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.06); OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.32 to 2.05)). CONCLUSION: There is no significant outcome difference except for reduced reintervention but this does not seem to adversely affect survival. It is unclear whether this justifies the additional cost of placing it in every complicated type B aortic dissection regardless of anatomy after standard TEVAR alone. Besides, more data are needed to verify the adjunctive distal bare metal stents' performance at different dissection stages.
OBJECTIVE: To explore whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) plus distal bare metal stent (BMS) implantation leads to favorable clinical outcomes compared with standard TEVAR in treating acute complicated type B aortic dissection. METHODS: Relevant publications were found through a precise search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Count data were calculated as the odd ratio (OR)and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the Mantel-Haenszel statistical method, quantitative data were calculated as mean difference and 95% CI using Inverse Variance statistical method. When the data heterogeneity was large, with an I2 > 50%, a random-effects model and sensitivity analysis were performed. The analysis tool we used was the software Revman 5.3 and G*power 3.1. RESULTS: There were 7 publications involving 958 patients who were enrolled ultimately. The incidence of unplanned secondary intervention and postoperative adverse events in the TEVAR + BMS were lower than standard TEVAR (OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.75); OR, 0.57, (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.90)), and the pooled number needed to treat was 15 for unplanned secondary intervention and 15 for postoperative adverse events. There were no significant difference in the aortic-related or all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.25 to 2.61); OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.22)), aortic-related, all-cause mortality at least 6 months or incidence of the postoperative endoleak (OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.32); OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.06); OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.32 to 2.05)). CONCLUSION: There is no significant outcome difference except for reduced reintervention but this does not seem to adversely affect survival. It is unclear whether this justifies the additional cost of placing it in every complicated type B aortic dissection regardless of anatomy after standard TEVAR alone. Besides, more data are needed to verify the adjunctive distal bare metal stents' performance at different dissection stages.
Entities:
Keywords:
Type B aortic dissection; bare metal stent; restrictive stent; thoracic endovascular aortic repair