The Experts below are selected from a list of 18 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Arturo Evangelista - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
acute aortic dissections with entry tear in the arch a report from the international registry of acute aortic dissection
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2019Co-Authors: Santi Trimarchi, Hector W L De Beaufort, Jip L Tolenaar, Joseph E Bavaria, Nimesh D Desai, Marco Di Eusanio, Roberto Di Bartolomeo, Mark D Peterson, Marek Ehrlich, Arturo EvangelistaAbstract:Abstract Objective To analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of acute aortic dissections with proximal entry tear in the arch. Methods Patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection and entry tear in the arch were classified into 2 groups: arch A (retrograde extension into the ascending aorta with or without antegrade extension) and arch B (only antegrade extension into the descending aorta or further distally). Presentation, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the 2 groups were compared. Results The arch A (n = 228) and arch B (n = 140) groups were similar concerning the presence of any Preoperative Complication (68.4% vs 60.0%; P = .115), but the types of Complication were different. Arch A presented more commonly with shock, neurologic Complications, cardiac tamponade, and grade 3 or 4 aortic valve insufficiency and less frequently with refractory hypertension, visceral ischemia, extension of dissection, and aortic rupture. Management for both groups were open surgery (77.6% vs 18.6%; P Conclusions Acute aortic dissection patients with primary entry tear in the arch are currently managed by a patient-specific approach. In choosing the management type of these patients, it may be advisable to stratify them based on retrograde or only antegrade extension of the dissection.
Santi Trimarchi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
acute aortic dissections with entry tear in the arch a report from the international registry of acute aortic dissection
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2019Co-Authors: Santi Trimarchi, Hector W L De Beaufort, Jip L Tolenaar, Joseph E Bavaria, Nimesh D Desai, Marco Di Eusanio, Roberto Di Bartolomeo, Mark D Peterson, Marek Ehrlich, Arturo EvangelistaAbstract:Abstract Objective To analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of acute aortic dissections with proximal entry tear in the arch. Methods Patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection and entry tear in the arch were classified into 2 groups: arch A (retrograde extension into the ascending aorta with or without antegrade extension) and arch B (only antegrade extension into the descending aorta or further distally). Presentation, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the 2 groups were compared. Results The arch A (n = 228) and arch B (n = 140) groups were similar concerning the presence of any Preoperative Complication (68.4% vs 60.0%; P = .115), but the types of Complication were different. Arch A presented more commonly with shock, neurologic Complications, cardiac tamponade, and grade 3 or 4 aortic valve insufficiency and less frequently with refractory hypertension, visceral ischemia, extension of dissection, and aortic rupture. Management for both groups were open surgery (77.6% vs 18.6%; P Conclusions Acute aortic dissection patients with primary entry tear in the arch are currently managed by a patient-specific approach. In choosing the management type of these patients, it may be advisable to stratify them based on retrograde or only antegrade extension of the dissection.
Roberto Di Bartolomeo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
acute aortic dissections with entry tear in the arch a report from the international registry of acute aortic dissection
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2019Co-Authors: Santi Trimarchi, Hector W L De Beaufort, Jip L Tolenaar, Joseph E Bavaria, Nimesh D Desai, Marco Di Eusanio, Roberto Di Bartolomeo, Mark D Peterson, Marek Ehrlich, Arturo EvangelistaAbstract:Abstract Objective To analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of acute aortic dissections with proximal entry tear in the arch. Methods Patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection and entry tear in the arch were classified into 2 groups: arch A (retrograde extension into the ascending aorta with or without antegrade extension) and arch B (only antegrade extension into the descending aorta or further distally). Presentation, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the 2 groups were compared. Results The arch A (n = 228) and arch B (n = 140) groups were similar concerning the presence of any Preoperative Complication (68.4% vs 60.0%; P = .115), but the types of Complication were different. Arch A presented more commonly with shock, neurologic Complications, cardiac tamponade, and grade 3 or 4 aortic valve insufficiency and less frequently with refractory hypertension, visceral ischemia, extension of dissection, and aortic rupture. Management for both groups were open surgery (77.6% vs 18.6%; P Conclusions Acute aortic dissection patients with primary entry tear in the arch are currently managed by a patient-specific approach. In choosing the management type of these patients, it may be advisable to stratify them based on retrograde or only antegrade extension of the dissection.
Mark D Peterson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
acute aortic dissections with entry tear in the arch a report from the international registry of acute aortic dissection
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2019Co-Authors: Santi Trimarchi, Hector W L De Beaufort, Jip L Tolenaar, Joseph E Bavaria, Nimesh D Desai, Marco Di Eusanio, Roberto Di Bartolomeo, Mark D Peterson, Marek Ehrlich, Arturo EvangelistaAbstract:Abstract Objective To analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of acute aortic dissections with proximal entry tear in the arch. Methods Patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection and entry tear in the arch were classified into 2 groups: arch A (retrograde extension into the ascending aorta with or without antegrade extension) and arch B (only antegrade extension into the descending aorta or further distally). Presentation, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the 2 groups were compared. Results The arch A (n = 228) and arch B (n = 140) groups were similar concerning the presence of any Preoperative Complication (68.4% vs 60.0%; P = .115), but the types of Complication were different. Arch A presented more commonly with shock, neurologic Complications, cardiac tamponade, and grade 3 or 4 aortic valve insufficiency and less frequently with refractory hypertension, visceral ischemia, extension of dissection, and aortic rupture. Management for both groups were open surgery (77.6% vs 18.6%; P Conclusions Acute aortic dissection patients with primary entry tear in the arch are currently managed by a patient-specific approach. In choosing the management type of these patients, it may be advisable to stratify them based on retrograde or only antegrade extension of the dissection.
Nimesh D Desai - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
acute aortic dissections with entry tear in the arch a report from the international registry of acute aortic dissection
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2019Co-Authors: Santi Trimarchi, Hector W L De Beaufort, Jip L Tolenaar, Joseph E Bavaria, Nimesh D Desai, Marco Di Eusanio, Roberto Di Bartolomeo, Mark D Peterson, Marek Ehrlich, Arturo EvangelistaAbstract:Abstract Objective To analyze presentation, management, and outcomes of acute aortic dissections with proximal entry tear in the arch. Methods Patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection and entry tear in the arch were classified into 2 groups: arch A (retrograde extension into the ascending aorta with or without antegrade extension) and arch B (only antegrade extension into the descending aorta or further distally). Presentation, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the 2 groups were compared. Results The arch A (n = 228) and arch B (n = 140) groups were similar concerning the presence of any Preoperative Complication (68.4% vs 60.0%; P = .115), but the types of Complication were different. Arch A presented more commonly with shock, neurologic Complications, cardiac tamponade, and grade 3 or 4 aortic valve insufficiency and less frequently with refractory hypertension, visceral ischemia, extension of dissection, and aortic rupture. Management for both groups were open surgery (77.6% vs 18.6%; P Conclusions Acute aortic dissection patients with primary entry tear in the arch are currently managed by a patient-specific approach. In choosing the management type of these patients, it may be advisable to stratify them based on retrograde or only antegrade extension of the dissection.