Systematic review and meta-analysis of acute type B thoracic aortic dissection, open, or endovascular repair

The purpose of this study was to compare perioperative and mortality outcomes of endovascular aortic repair against open repair in acute type B thoracic aortic dissection.A comprehensive search was undertaken among the four major databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Ovid) to identify all published data comparing open vs endovascular repair in management of acute type B aortic dissection. Databases where evaluated and assessed to July 2017. The 95% confidence intervals were analyzed from the extracted data using relevant statistical methods.Overall, 18,193 patients were found in a combination of nine studies. Patients undergoing open repair were younger (mean, 61.3 ± 9.3 years vs 66.6 ± 12.5 years; P < .00001). Postoperative stroke and paraplegia were similar in both groups (P = .71 and P = .81 respectively); however, the rate of all neurologic complications were more common in the traditional open repair group (6.9% vs 4.8%; P = .006). The all-cause operative and 1-year death was reported as higher in the open repair group (18.6% vs 7.4% [P < .0001] and 24.3% vs 14.3% [P < .0001], respectively); however, at 5 years this rate is almost similar between both groups (46.7% vs 49.7%; P = .21). At 1 year, the rate of reintervention was reported to be higher in endovascular repair group of patients (15.4% vs 5.5%; P = .004).This study concludes that endovascular repair, in the setting of acute type B thoracic aortic dissection, provides an early surgical benefit; however, this finding has not yet been supported by long-term data. There seems to be a benefit with respect to all-neurologic events in favor of endovascular repair. Long-term comparative data and studies are required to give a better understanding of these two approaches.