Management Of Acute Type Research Articles

Inflammatory signature-based theranostics for acute lung injury in acute type A aortic dissection.

Acute lung injury (ALI) is a serious adverse event in the management of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). Using a large-scale cohort, we applied artificial intelligence-driven approach to stratify patients with different outcomes and treatment responses. A total of 2,499 patients from China 5A study database (2016-2022) from 10 cardiovascular centers were divided into 70% for derivation cohort and 30% for validation cohort, in which extreme gradient boosting algorithm was used to develop ALI risk model. Logistic regression was used to assess the risk under anti-inflammatory strategies in different risk probability. Eight top features of importance (leukocyte, platelet, hemoglobin, base excess, age, creatinine, glucose, and left ventricular end-diastolic dimension) were used to develop and validate an ALI risk model, with adequate discrimination ability regarding area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.844 and 0.799 in the derivation and validation cohort, respectively. By the individualized treatment effect prediction, ulinastatin use was significantly associated with significantly lower risk of developing ALI (odds ratio [OR] 0.623 [95% CI 0.456, 0.851]; P = 0.003) in patients with a predicted ALI risk of 32.5-73.0%, rather than in pooled patients with a risk of <32.5 and >73.0% (OR 0.929 [0.682, 1.267], P = 0.642) (Pinteraction = 0.075). An artificial intelligence-driven risk stratification of ALI following ATAAD surgery were developed and validated, and subgroup analysis showed the heterogeneity of anti-inflammatory pharmacotherapy, which suggested individualized anti-inflammatory strategies in different risk probability of ALI.

Three-Dimensional-Evaluation of Aortic Changes after Frozen Elephant Trunk (FET) in Zone 0 vs. Zone 2 in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.

Introduction: The management of aortic dissection has evolved significantly over the decades, with the frozen elephant trunk (FET) procedure emerging as a key technique for treating complex aortic pathologies. Recent practices involve deploying the FET prosthesis more proximally in the aorta (Zone 0) to reduce complications, leading to questions about its impact on long-term aortic remodeling compared to traditional Zone 2 deployment. Methods: This retrospective analysis utilized 3D segmentation software to assess the volumetric changes in aortic remodeling after acute Type A aortic dissections, comparing FET stent graft deployment in Zone 0 and Zone 2. The study included 27 patients operated on between 2020 and 2022, with volumetric measurements taken from postoperative and 6-month follow-up CT scans. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate the differences in the aortic true lumen (TL) and the perfused false lumen (PFL) between the two groups. Results: Both Zone 0 and Zone 2 deployments resulted in significant true lumen (TL) increases (Z0 p = 0.001, Z2 p < 0.001) and perfused false lumen (PFL) decreases (Z0 p = 0.02, Z2 p = 0.04), with no significant differences in volumetric changes between the groups (p = 0.7 post op and p = 0.9 after 6 months). The distal anastomosis in Zone 0 did not compromise the aortic remodeling outcomes and was associated with reduced distal ischemia and cerebral perfusion times (p = 0.041). The angle measurements in Zone 0 did not show any significant changes after the 6-month control (p = 0.2). However, in Zone 2, a significant change was detected. (p = 0.022). The part comparison analyses did not indicate significant differences in aortic deviation between the groups (p = 0.62), suggesting comparable effectiveness in aortic remodeling. Conclusions: Performing the distal anastomosis more proximally in Zone 0 offers technical advantages without compromising the effectiveness of aortic remodeling compared to the traditional Zone 2 deployment. This finding supports the continued recommendation of Zone 0 deployment in the management of acute Type A aortic dissections, with ongoing studies being needed to confirm the long-term outcomes and survival benefits.

Individualized treatment of type A intramural hematoma-upfront surgery is not always necessary.

Management of acute type A intramural hematoma (IMH) is a controversial topic, and variable treatment strategies have been reported. Upfront aortic replacement may not be necessary in all cases. The goal of our study was to evaluate clinical outcomes of patients with acute type A IMH or thrombosed false lumen (FL) treated with upfront surgery or watchful waiting. Patients admitted to our hospital with type A IMH or aortic dissection with thrombosed ascending FL from December 2012 to February 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Among the 93 patients with type A IMH, 36 (38.7%) patients underwent upfront aortic surgery (Group S), and 57 (61.3%) patients were offered watchful waiting with medical surveillance (Group W). Of the 57 patients in Group W, 32 were treated conservatively with medical therapy alone (Group C). Patients in Group S had larger ascending aortic diameter (47.8±5.3 vs. 44.4±4.2 mm: P=0.001), higher frequency of pericardial effusion (38.9% vs. 10.5%; P=0.001) and cardiac tamponade (16.7% vs. 1.8%; P=0.008). The overall mortality rate was 4.3% in the whole cohort over a median follow up of 40.5 months. Overall survival for Group S was 100% at 30 days and 1 year, and 96.2% at 5 years. Overall survival for Group W was 98.2% at 30 days, 96.3% at 1 year and 95.2% at 5 years. The difference in overall survival was not statistically significant (P=0.64). Overall survival for Group C was 100% at 30 days and 1 year, and 90.9% at 5 years. Survival outcomes in selected patients with type A IMH were satisfactory. An individualized approach to patients with uncomplicated type A IMH was feasible. Upfront surgery was not necessary in all cases.

Current management of acute Stanford type A aortic dissection complicated with mesenteric malperfusion

The management of acute type A aortic dissection (aTAAD) with mesenteric malperfusion (MMP) is quite challenging as it is often associated with high mortality and poor outcomes, and an optimal treatment strategy is lack of consensus for this critically ill condition. Emergent open surgical repair of the ascending aorta is a life-saving operation and remains the standard of care for aTAAD with MMP, but is associated with a high rate of mortality. In recent years, reperfusion of superior mesenteric artery (SMA) by endovascular repair as the first treatment strategy in the treatment of aTAAD with MMP has been concerned and reported. Only endovascular repair and conservative medical treatment are also introduced in few cases with poor outcomes. There are many urgent issues that need to be addressed in current strategies. The optimal management strategies remain controversial, and further investigation and research are needed. These issues were addressed in this article.

Management of acute type B aortic dissection: treatment and follow-up

Aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition caused by a tear in the tunica intima which creates a false lumen into the aortic wall. Acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is defined by the presence of the entry tear in the aorta distal to the left subclavian artery, without ascending aorta and arch involvement, and accounts for 25-40% of all aortic dissections. Optimal medical therapy (OMT), focused on blood pressure and heart rate control, remains the gold standard treatment, especially for patients with uncomplicated TBAD, while complicated dissections require surgical therapy. Recent studies have shown that a considerable number of patients treated only with OMT develop late aorta-related complications that increase morbidity and mortality, as well as the need for surgical intervention. During the last decades, emerging evidence indicates that thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is safe and effective in the treatment of TBAD, both complicated and uncomplicated, with improved long-term survival outcomes and aortic remodeling in combination with OMT compared to OMT alone. However, in cases of acute uncomplicated TBAD the optimal timing for TEVAR is not entirely clarified and there is lack of long-term evidence. Therefore, the role of pre-emptive TEVAR for these patients is still uncertain and the management of acute uncomplicated TBAD remains challenging.

PCI in Management of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Involving the Left Main Coronary Artery

PCI in Management of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Involving the Left Main Coronary Artery

Editor's Choice – Trends in Management and Outcomes of Type B Aortic Dissection: A Report From the International Registry of Aortic Dissection

To describe the trends in management and outcomes of patients with acute type B aortic dissection in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection. From 1996 - 2022, 3 908 patients were divided into similar sized quartiles (T1, T2, T3, and T4). In hospital outcomes were analysed for each quartile. Survival rates following admission were compared using Kaplan-Meier analyses with Mantel-Cox Log rank tests. Endovascular treatment increased from 19.1% in T1 to 37.2% in T4 (ptrend < .001). Correspondingly, medical therapy decreased from 65.7% in T1 to 54.0% in T4 (ptrend < .001), and open surgery from 14.8% in T1 to 7.0% in T4 (ptrend < .001). In hospital mortality decreased in the overall cohort from 10.7% in T1 to 6.1% in T4 (ptrend < .001), as well as in medically, endovascularly and surgically treated patients (ptrend= .017, .033, and .011, respectively). Overall post-admission survival at three years increased (T1: 74.8% vs. T4: 77.3%; p= .006). Considerable changes in the management of acute type B aortic dissection were observed over time, with a significant increase in the use of endovascular treatment and a corresponding reduction in open surgery and medical management. These changes were associated with a decreased overall in hospital and three year post-admission mortality rate among quartiles.

Changing Management of Type B Aortic Dissections.

The purpose of this manuscript is to review recent trends in the management of acute type B aortic dissection. Due to its efficacy and low morbidity, thoracic endografting has rapidly been adopted as the treatment of choice for most patients with malperfusion or rupture as a consequence of acute aortic dissection. This technology is increasingly applied to patients without rupture or malperfusion, so-called "uncomplicated" dissections, to reduce the incidence of late aneurysmal degeneration in the ungrafted segments of the thoracoabdominal aorta. A variety of techniques have been proposed, including intentional rupture of the dissection membrane to obliterate the false lumen as well as the candy-plug technique to eliminate retrograde flow in the false lumen.

Management Strategies for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Complicated By Limb Malperfusion

Acute type A aortic dissection complicated by limb malperfusion presents a risk of mortality to the patients. Debates exist regarding management, whether focused on reperfusion first or immediate repair. Here, we aimed to describe our experience with the management of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) complicated by limb malperfusion. From January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021, 22 consecutive patients were admitted to Xiamen Cardiovascular Hospital, due to acute type A aortic dissection complicated by limb malperfusion. All perioperative variables were recorded and analyzed. Limb malperfusion was diagnosed, according to the clinical symptoms, computed tomography angiography, and laboratory test. We adopted the clinical categories of acute limb ischemia to stratify severity of limb ischemia. Surgery strategies are as follows: Reperfusion first followed by central repair, immediate central repair, and immediate central repair followed by stenting. There were 21 males and one female with an average of 53.3±11.7 years. Management strategies were as follows: immediate central repair using total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk in 15 patients, endovascular stenting followed by central repair in four patients, and endovascular stenting after central repair in two patients. The average extracorporeal circulation time was 258.8 ± 70.5 min; the average aortic cross-clamp time was 177.9 ± 54.2 min; and the average circulatory arrest time was 45.5 ± 13.1 min. The early mortality rate was 13.6% (3/22). Two patients left the hospital voluntarily, due to cerebral infarction and bleeding. One patient underwent fasciotomy for osteofascial compartment syndrome and uneventfully was discharged. Six patients underwent continuous renal replacement therapy and hemoperfusion. Central repair is safe and feasible for ATAAD complicated with limb malperfusion. For serious limb malperfusion, endovascular stenting followed by central repair is a good choice with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) and hemoperfusion. Hospital mortality rate is high in cases with multiple organ malperfusion.

Abstract 14546: Long-Term Outcome of Immediate Aortic Repair for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Complicated With Brain Malperfusion

Introduction: Management of acute type A aortic dissection complicated by brain malperfusion remains controversial. We previously reported an excellent recovery of consciousness for patients with coma if aortic repair performed within 5 hours from onset of symptoms. This study evaluates neurological outcomes after 19 years with this approach. Methods: Between 8/03 and 12/21, aortic repair was performed in 400 patients with acute type A aortic dissection, including 59 (12.7%) presented with brain malperfusion on arrival. Brain malperfusion was defined as distributed consciousness or paralysis in patients with dissection in carotid artery on hospital arrival. Forty patients (67.8 %) were repaired within 5 hours from onset of symptoms (immediate repair) while 19 (32.2 %) were repaired after 5 hours (later repair). We compared the immediate repair group with the later repair group. The mean age of the patients was 70.0±11.7 and 70.0±9.0 years, respectively, and prevalence of shock, cardiac tamponade, EuroSCORE were not significantly different between two groups. Preoperative coma (GCS&lt;10) coexisted in 60.0 and 47.4%, respectively. For brain protection, deep hypothermia with antegrade cerebral perfusion was utilized. Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) were used for neurological evaluation. Results: Time from onset of symptoms to operating room was 3.4 ± 0.9 in immediate group and 14.2 ± 13.3 hours in later group. Total arch replacement was performed in 35.0 and 36.8%, respectively. Changes of GCS was significantly better in immediate group (p=0.03), and cut off value of time from onset to operating room for predicting consciousness recovery was 249minutes (p=0.02). Postoperative ADL independence (mRS&lt;3) was achieved in 50.0% (20/40) and 36.4% (7/19), respectively. The follow-up periods were between 0.6 and 216 (mean 47.8) months. Cumulative survival rate in 10 years of immediate group was 63.4% and significantly better than that of later group (49.0%). Conclusions: Long-term outcomes following the strategy of immediate aortic repair for acute type A aortic dissection complicated by brain malperfusion were satisfactory.

Management of acute type A aortic dissection in the elderly: an analysis from IRAD.

We sought to examine management and outcomes of (Stanford) type A aortic dissection (TAAAD) in patients aged >70 years. All patients with TAAAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection database (1996-2018) were studied (n = 5553). Patients were stratified by age and therapeutic strategy. Outcomes for octogenarians were compared with those for septuagenarians. Variables associated with in-hospital mortality were identified by multivariable logistic regression. In-hospital mortality for all patients (all ages) was 19.7% (1167 deaths), 16.1% after surgical intervention vs 52.1% for medical management (P < 0.001). Of the study population, 1281 patients (21.6%) were aged 71-80 years and 475 (8.0%) were >80 years. Fewer octogenarians underwent surgery versus septuagenarians (68.1% vs 85.9%, P < 0.001). Overall mortality was higher for octogenarians versus septuagenarians (32.0% vs 25.6%, P = 0.008); however, surgical mortality was similar (25.1% vs 21.7%, P = 0.205). Postoperative complications were comparable between surgically managed cohorts, although reoperation for bleeding was more common in septuagenarians (8.1% vs 3.2%, P = 0.033). Kaplan-Meier 5-year survival was significantly superior after surgical repair in all age groups, including septuagenarians (57.0% vs 13.7%, P < 0.001) and octogenarians (35.5% vs 22.6%, P < 0.001). When compared with septuagenarians, a smaller percentage of octogenarians undergo surgical repair for TAAAD, even though postoperative outcomes are similar. Age alone should not preclude consideration for surgery in appropriately selected patients with TAAAD.

Outcomes of Medical Management of Acute Type B Aortic Dissections

Outcomes of Medical Management of Acute Type B Aortic Dissections

Role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in the management of acute type B aortic dissection

: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the optimal therapy for the treatment of complicated acute type B aortic dissection (aTBAD). Numerous studies have confirmed its efficacy in improving early survival and minimizing the risk of adverse events compared to alternative treatments. Moreover, growing evidence demonstrates its ability to remodel the aorta, improve aortic-specific survival, and decrease the need for aortic re-interventions at long-term follow-up. While uncomplicated aTBAD has traditionally been managed with optimal medical therapy (OMT), there is an increasing amount of data to suggest that OMT is a poor strategy for the treatment of TBAD in the chronic phase. Several recent studies have demonstrated that a significant number of patients with uncomplicated aTBAD treated with OMT require aortic intervention in the chronic phase due to aneurysmal degeneration of the false lumen (FL). Therefore, TEVAR has been increasingly proposed as an alternative therapy for patients with uncomplicated aTBAD, especially in patients with high-risk features. In this article, we summarize the most recent data regarding short- and long-term outcomes of TEVAR in complicated aTBAD that have established TEVAR as the standard of care for this presentation. Additionally, we address the unresolved issues in the management of uncomplicated aTBAD including the evolving use of TEVAR for this cohort of patients.

Impact of thoracic endovascular aortic repair timing on aortic remodeling in acute type B aortic intramural hematoma

ObjectiveThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is increasingly utilized in the management of acute type B aortic intramural hematoma (TBIMH). Optimal timing for intervention has not been described. The aim of this study was to evaluate TEVAR timing on postoperative aortic remodeling. MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed on patients who underwent TEVAR for TBIMH from January 2008 to September 2018. Imaging was reviewed pre- and postoperatively. Primary data points included true lumen diameter (TLD) and total aortic diameter (TAD) at the site of maximal pathology. Primary endpoint was aortic remodeling evidenced by a TAD/TLD ratio closest to 1.0. Secondary outcome was occurrence of aortic-related adverse events and mortality (AREM): aortic rupture, aortic-related death, progression to dissection, or need for aortic reintervention within 12 months. Patients undergoing emergent TEVAR (within 24 hours, ‘eTEVAR’) were compared with the remainder – delayed TEVAR (‘dTEVAR’). ResultsWe analyzed 71 patients that underwent TEVAR for TBIMH; 25 underwent emergent TEVAR and 46 patients underwent dTEVAR (median, 5.5 days; range, 2-120 days). There were no differences in demographics and comorbidities, and patients did not differ in presenting IMH thickness (12.6 ± 3.1 vs 11.3 ± 4.1 mm; P = .186) nor presenting TAD/TLD ratio (1.535 ± 0.471 vs 1.525 ± 0.397; P = .928) for eTEVAR and dTEVAR groups, respectively. eTEVAR patients had larger average presenting maximal descending aortic diameter (45.8 ± 14.3 vs 38.2 ± 7.5 mm; P = .018) and higher incidence of penetrating aortic ulcer on presenting computed tomography angiography (52.0% vs 21.7%; P = .033). Thirty-day mortality was 2 of 25 (8.0%) for eTEVAR and 2 of 45 (4.4%) for dTEVAR (P = .602). Postoperative aortic remodeling was more complete in the dTEVAR group (1.23 ± 0.12 vs 1.33 ± 0.15; P = .004). Case-control matching (controlling for presenting descending aortic diameter and penetrating aortic ulcer) on 30 patients still showed better aortic remodeling in the dTEVAR group (1.125 ± 0.100 vs 1.348 ± 0.42; P < .001). The incidence of AREM was higher in the eTEVAR (6/25; 24.0%) group compared with the dTEVAR group (2/46; 4.3%). At 12 months, freedom from AREM was higher in the dTEVAR group (95.7% vs 76.0%; P = .011). Postoperative TAD/TLD ratio was the best predictor for late aortic-related adverse events (area under the receiver operator characteristic = 0.825; P = .003). ConclusionsTEVAR for acute TBIMH within 24 hours of admission is associated with lower aortic remodeling and higher occurrence of late AREM. Delaying TEVAR when clinically possible could improve aortic remodeling and aortic-related outcomes.

Surgical management of acute type A aortic dissection in complicated cases: experience with branch-first aortic arch replacement technique.

Surgical management of acute type A aortic dissection in complicated cases: experience with branch-first aortic arch replacement technique.

Trends in management of the acute type A aortic dissection over 15 years: Insights from a large retrospective observational study

Acute type A aortic dissection is one of the most hazardous acute vascular pathology. To investigate trends in the management of acute type A aortic dissections on the last 15 years. All consecutive patients who were operated on for an acute type A aortic dissection at the CHU of Toulouse, France, between 2005 and 2019 were retrospectively included. We compared demographics, diagnostic methods and surgical techniques between 3 periods: 2005–2009, 2010–2014 and 2015–2019 ( Table 1 ). A total of 507 patients were included, mean age was 63 ± 12 years, 354 (70%) were male and 299 (59%) had hypertension. Demographics were similar across periods. About clinical presentation, the proportion of patients admitted to the operating room with cardiac arrest has increased between the 3 periods (12% vs 5% vs7%; P < 0.01). Regarding diagnostic, CT was the cornerstone (90%) and the use of TEE has increased (26% vs 10% vs 10%, P < 0.01). Regarding surgical management, we observed a decrease of the use of mechanical prosthesis (6% vs 17% vs 12%; P < 0.01), an increase of the use of hybrid prosthesis (10% vs 2% vs 0%; P < 0.01), of valve sparing (6% vs 0% vs 0%; P < 0.01) and of Bentall (29% vs 25% vs 13%; P < 0.01) ( Fig. 1 ). Over a 15-years period, the demographics of patients operated on for type A aortic dissection has not significantly changed. However, there is a trend towards the management of patients in a more life-threatening condition. Most of the shifts relate to surgical techniques, with a more proactive approach to the treatment of associated aortic regurgitation.

Management of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection after Thrombolytic Therapy for Cerebral Infarction

Management of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection after Thrombolytic Therapy for Cerebral Infarction

Management of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection at a Public Cardiac Center in the Northeast Region of Brazil.

IntroductionAortic diseases are among the most serious cardiovascular diseases; the overall mortality rate due to diseases such as aneurysms and aortic dissections has been estimated at 2.78 per 100,000 persons in 2010, with a higher mortality rate in men than women. Our objective was to evaluate the epidemiological profile of patients with acute type A aortic dissection at a cardiology referral center.MethodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was performed at a public cardiac center with 24 patients hospitalized from 1/1/2016 to 12/31/2017 with a confirmed diagnosis of acute type A aortic dissection.ResultsTwenty (83.3%) out of 24 patients underwent surgery and four (16.7%) did not undergo surgery. Among those who underwent surgery, 10 (50%) died and 10 (50%) were discharged, and all non-operated patients died (P=0.114) (Fisher's exact test). The male gender predominated (n=19, 79.2%), 86.7% (n=13) of the patients presented body mass index > 25 kg/m2, chest pain was found in 91.7% (n=22), and renal failure was present in 45.8% (n=11) of the cases. Hypertension predominated in 91.7% (n=22) and the main exam was aortic angiotomography in 79.2% (n=19) of the cases.ConclusionThe study presented a small sample size, making it impossible to associate the factors, although the service was considered a high-volume referral center. It is possible that the delay in arriving at the service and the accomplishment of invasive imaging with the use of contrast agents have aggravated the patients’ condition and have been decisive for the increase in lethality, which requires further studies.

Acute Type A Aortic Dissection With Cardiopulmonary Arrest at Presentation

Management of acute type A aortic dissection (AADA) presenting with cardiopulmonary arrest (CPA) may require aggressive cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), including extracorporeal CPR followed by aortic repair. This study evaluated the early and long-term outcomes of patients with preoperative CPA related to AADA. Between September 2003 and August 2019, 474 patients with AADA were brought to our hospital, 157 (33.1%) presenting with CPA. Their mean age was 74.3 ± 11.3 years and prevalence of out-of-hospital CPA 90%, and causes of CPA were cardiac tamponade in 75%, hemothorax in 10%, and coronary malperfusion in 10% of cases. In the same time periods 2974 patients with CPA were transported, and AADA was 4.8% of all cause of CPA. Return of spontaneous circulation was achieved in 26 patients (17%) and extracorporeal CPR was required in 31 (20%); 131 CPA patients (83%) died before surgery, 24 (15%) underwent aortic repair, and 2 (1%) received nonsurgical care. Hospital mortality was 90%, and none survived without aortic repair. Of patients achieving return of spontaneous circulation 17 underwent aortic repair, 13 survived, and 5 fully recovered. All patients with extracorporeal CPR died: 24 before surgery and 7 postoperatively. There were significant differences in hospital mortality between patients who did and did not undergo aortic repair (P < .01). Aortic repair was the only significant predictor of long-term survival (P < .01). AADA with CPA is associated with significantly high mortality; however aortic repair can be performed with a 30% likelihood of functional recovery, if return of spontaneous circulation is achieved. Preoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is not recommended in this patient cohort.

Review of Studies Reporting the Incidence of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection

Aortic dissection (AD) causes more deaths each year in the United Kingdom than road traffic collisions. Yet the incidence of AD is not known. The management of acute type B AD (TBAD) is changing, with the greater use of thoracic aortic stent grafts (TEVAR) in treatment and fewer open surgical procedures performed. The study’s aim is to review the worldwide, English language published, literature on acute TBAD incidence and treatment, to report on its strengths and limitations, and better understand changes in incidence over time and between countries. Thirty-one studies were identified that focus on the epidemiology and treatment of TBAD. Eight of these studies report the incidence of acute TBAD as between of 0.5–6.3 per 100,000 person years. Hospital admissions for aortic dissection are reported to be increasing in six studies and stable in one study. The proportion of patients with TBAD operated on varies between studies (range 13% to 76%). Studies identify patient age (median 51–77 years), gender (range 48%–81% male) and prevalence of cardio-vascular risk factors, specifically hypertension, in the populations studied as independent factors influencing aortic dissection incidence. Treatment of acute TBAD remains largely conservative with analgesia, hypertension control and serial cross-sectional imaging (range 24%–87% TBAD medically treated). The use of TEVAR to treat acute AD is increasing worldwide (range 13%–76% TBAD treated with TEVAR). The incidence of TBAD is under-reported due to out of hospital deaths, variable clinical presentation (miss-diagnosis) and coding errors. Importantly for research, the single International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code for aortic dissection, I17.0, does not distinguish between acute, chronic, type A or type B dissection types. Similarly, the OPCS Classification of Interventions and Procedures version 4 (OPCS-4) codes for TEVAR, L27.4 and L28.4, do not distinguish between acute and chronic AD presentation, unlike the codes for open thoracic aortic replacement. Standardised reporting of aortic dissection type, and the urgency of both the initial presentation (acute or chronic) and treatment (emergency, urgent or planned) in future studies would allow more meaningful comparisons between populations.