These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair versus Best Medical Treatment for High-Risk Type B Intramural Hematoma: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies.
    Author: Li L, Jiao Y, Zou J, Zhang X, Yang H, Ma H.
    Journal: Ann Vasc Surg; 2018 Oct; 52():273-279. PubMed ID: 29793011.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: To date, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection is favorable, but TEVAR for type B intramural hematoma (IMH) remains uncertain. There are numerous clinical (e.g., refractory pain) and radiologic (e.g., IMH thickness) factors that are reported to be associated with IMH progression, challenging the treatment for high-risk type B IMH with high risk factors in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to perform a systematic review of clinical studies to investigate outcomes of TEVAR + best medical treatment (BMT) and BMT in the treatment of high-risk type B IMH. METHODS: The online databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CNKI, Google Scholar, and Cochrane as well as some journals majoring in endovascular surgery and interventional therapy were searched on September 1, 2017. Observational studies that reported the effect of TEVAR and BMT on type B IMH were included. Two independent reviewers performed methodological assessment and data extraction. Random and fixed effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates. A sensitivity analysis was also carried out. RESULTS: In all 6 included studies, the total number of patients with type B IMH was 237 and 123 patients received TEVAR + BMT. There was a significantly higher IMH regression rate among patients undergoing TEVAR + BMT compared with BMT (odds ratios [OR] 10.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.43-29.4). There were a significantly lower IMH progress rate and aortic-related death rate among patients undergoing TEVAR + BMT compared with BMT (OR 0.239, 95% CI 0.075-0.758; OR 0.248, 95% CI 0.085-0.725). When the study of Ye K et al. was excluded, the results showed no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Combined data from the present study demonstrate that TEVAR + BMT results in significantly higher IMH regression rate, lower IMH progression, and lower aortic-related death rate compared with BMT in high-risk type B IMH patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]