Journals / Osmangazi Tıp Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 43 - Sayı: 5

Evaluation of Acute Aortic Dissections in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study

Acil Serviste Akut Aort Diseksiyonlarının Değerlendirilmesi: Geriye Dönük Çalışma

Pages
490–498
Publication Date
2021-09-13
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

When there is a clinical suspicion the scan of the aorta with computerized tomography must be ordered rapidly.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening emergency that has a mortality rate of around 27% even when optimal conditions are met.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Patients with ICD-10 codes for AD in their digital files were analyzed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When there is a clinical suspicion the scan of the aorta with computerized tomography must be ordered rapidly.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Aort diseksiyonu · Acil servis · Stanford sınıflaması

Abstract

Aortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening emergency that has a mortality rate of around 27% even when optimal conditions are met. Atypical process of the disease which can mimic other critical conditions makes it harder to diagnose. The study aimed to determine Emergency department presentations and factors that influence the diagnostic process, emergency department, and in-hospital mortalities of acute AD patients. This study is a single-centered retrospective observational study. Patients with ICD-10 codes for AD in their digital files were analyzed. Patients were categorized into Stanford Type A or B dissections according to their computerized tomography scans. Also, the patients were compared in terms of survival. Eighty-eight patients had an acute AD and the mean age was 61,90±12,67 years. According to Stanford Classification, 68 patients had Type A dissection. Altered mental status and syncope were detected more in Type A (p=0.003 and p=0.001). Bilateral arm blood pressure readings differential was more in Type A (p=0.007). Blood products were used and endotracheal intubation was performed more in Type A (p=0.002 and p=0.005). Patients who had bilateral arm blood pressure differential had 3.5-fold, who had developed cardiac arrest in ED had 5.07-fold, who got blood product transfusions had 5.41-fold more risk of death. [OR:3.50; (CI 95% 1.36-8.94) p=0.009, OR: 5.07; (CI 95% 1.18-21.39) p=0.027 and OR: 5.41; (CI 95% 1.97-14.78) p=0.001 respectively]. The mortality rates in ED and in-hospital were 12.5% and 61.4% respectively. Aortic dissections will stay as important clinical conditions which management in ED is crucial. Atypical presentation of AD and the nature of the disease cause delays in diagnoses. AD should be considered in the foreground in patients presenting with syncope and altered mental status. When there is a clinical suspicion the scan of the aorta with computerized tomography must be ordered rapidly.

Özet

Aortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening emergency that has a mortality rate of around 27% even when optimal conditions are met. Atypical process of the disease which can mimic other critical conditions makes it harder to diagnose. The study aimed to determine Emergency department presentations and factors that influence the diagnostic process, emergency department, and in-hospital mortalities of acute AD patients. This study is a single-centered retrospective observational study. Patients with ICD-10 codes for AD in their digital files were analyzed. Patients were categorized into Stanford Type A or B dissections according to their computerized tomography scans. Also, the patients were compared in terms of survival. Eighty-eight patients had an acute AD and the mean age was 61,90±12,67 years. According to Stanford Classification, 68 patients had Type A dissection. Altered mental status and syncope were detected more in Type A (p=0.003 and p=0.001). Bilateral arm blood pressure readings differential was more in Type A (p=0.007). Blood products were used and endotracheal intubation was performed more in Type A (p=0.002 and p=0.005). Patients who had bilateral arm blood pressure differential had 3.5-fold, who had developed cardiac arrest in ED had 5.07-fold, who got blood product transfusions had 5.41-fold more risk of death. [OR:3.50; (CI 95% 1.36-8.94) p=0.009, OR: 5.07; (CI 95% 1.18-21.39) p=0.027 and OR: 5.41; (CI 95% 1.97-14.78) p=0.001 respectively]. The mortality rates in ED and in-hospital were 12.5% and 61.4% respectively. Aortic dissections will stay as important clinical conditions which management in ED is crucial. Atypical presentation of AD and the nature of the disease cause delays in diagnoses. AD should be considered in the foreground in patients presenting with syncope and altered mental status. When there is a clinical suspicion the scan of the aorta with computerized tomography must be ordered rapidly.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇANAKÇI, M. E., ŞEVİK, Ö. E., AY, Y., ÖZAKIN, E., ŞAHİN, A., ACAR, N. (2021). Evaluation of Acute Aortic Dissections in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study. Osmangazi Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 43 - Sayı: 5, 490–498. https://ajindex.com/articles/694903

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Ankel F. Aortic dissection. In: Marx JA, Hockberger RS, Walls RM, et al, editor. Rosen’s Emergency Medicine: Concepts and Clinical Practice. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby Elsevier Publishing; 2010. p. 1088–92
  2. Clouse WD, Hallett JW, Schaff HV, Spittell PC, Rowland CM, Ilstrup DM, et al. Acute aortic dissection: population-based incidence compared with degenerative aortic aneurysm rupture. Mayo Clin Proc. 2004 Feb;79(2):176–80
  3. Cantrill SV, Brown MD, Burton JH, Diercks DB, Gemme SR, Gerardo CJ, et al. Clinical Policy: Critical Issues in the Evaluation and Management of Adult Patients With Suspected Acute Nontraumatic Thoracic Aortic Dissection. Annals of Emergency Medicine. 2015 Jan 1;65(1):32-42.e12
  4. Ohle R, Kareemi HK, Wells G, Perry JJ. Clinical Examination for Acute Aortic Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Acad Emerg Med. 2018 Apr;25(4):397–412
  5. Nazerian P, Ascione G, Castelli M, Capretti E, Ranaldi F, Bonaccorsi L, et al. Additional risk factors for evaluation of suspected acute aortic syndromes in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2021 Feb 22
  6. Nazerian P, Mueller C, Soeiro A de M, Leidel BA, Salvadeo SAT, Giachino F, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of the Aortic Dissection Detection Risk Score Plus D-Dimer for Acute Aortic Syndromes: The ADvISED Prospective Multicenter Study. Circulation. 2018 Jan 16;137(3):250–8
  7. Hagan PG, Nienaber CA, Isselbacher EM, Bruckman D, Karavite DJ, Russman PL, et al. The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD): new insights into an old disease. JAMA. 2000 Feb 16;283(7):897–903
  8. Lombardi JV, Hughes GC, Appoo JJ, Bavaria JE, Beck AW, Cambria RP, et al. Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Reporting Standards for Type B Aortic Dissections. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020 Mar;109(3):959–81
  9. JCS Joint Working Group. Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection (JCS 2011): digest version. Circ J. 2013;77(3):789–828
  10. Erbel R, Aboyans V, Boileau C, Bossone E, Bartolomeo RD, Eggebrecht H, et al. 2014 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases: Document covering acute and chronic aortic diseases of the thoracic and abdominal aorta of the adult. The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Aortic Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2014 Nov 1;35(41):2873–926
  11. Sobczyk D, Nycz K. Feasibility and accuracy of bedside transthoracic echocardiography