Circulation Journal
Online ISSN : 1347-4820
Print ISSN : 1346-9843
ISSN-L : 1346-9843
Critical Care
Acute Type B Aortic Dissection With Communicating vs. Non-Communicating False Lumen
– Analysis of 502 Patients From the Tokyo CCU-Network Database –
Koichi AkutsuHideaki YoshinoTetsuya TobaruKenichi HagiyaYusuke WatanabeKeiji TanakaNobuya KoyamaTakeshi YamamotoKen NagaoMorimasa Takayama
Author information
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS FULL-TEXT HTML

2015 Volume 79 Issue 3 Pages 567-573

Details
Abstract

Background:In practice, patients with acute aortic dissection (AAD) are generally divided into 2 groups according to the status of the false lumen: non-communicating or communicating. The similarities and differences between the 2 groups, however, have not been fully determined in a large population.Methods and Results:We studied 502 patients with Stanford type B AAD. Clinical background at symptom onset was compared, and similarities and differences characterized, for patients with non-communicating (NC group, n=288) vs. communicating (C group, n=214) false lumens. Time of day (00.00–06.00 hours, 06.00–12.00 hours, 12.00–18.00 hours, and 18.00–24.00 hours) and extent of physical activity (extreme exertion, slight exertion, at rest, and sleeping) at symptom onset were similar between groups. Patients in the NC group were older (mean age, 71±11 years vs. 64±14 years, P<0.01) and had lower prevalence of distally extended aortic dissection (26% vs. 8%, P<0.01) and deaths in hospital (2% vs. 7%, P=0.011) than those in the C group.Conclusions:At symptom onset, clinical circumstances and physical activity were similar between the groups, and old age and a background of DeBakey IIIa aortic dissection may be associated with determination of false lumen status. The outcome in the NC group was better than in the C group. (Circ J 2015; 79: 567–573)

Content from these authors
© 2015 THE JAPANESE CIRCULATION SOCIETY
Previous article Next article
feedback
Top