Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Eric M Isselbacher

Publications and source records attributed to Eric M Isselbacher.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Simple risk models to predict surgical mortality in acute type A aortic dissection: the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection score.

BACKGROUND: Surgical mortality for acute type A aortic dissection is frequently related to preoperative clinical conditions. We report a predictive score to identify risk of death that may be helpful to assist surgeons who are considering whether to proceed with surgical correction in the case of patients in extreme clinical risk. METHODS: Surgical outcome of 682 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2003 was analyzed. Two different models were used. The initial model included only preoperative variables such as demographics, history, symptoms, signs, and diagnostic methods (model 1). The second model also tested intraoperative hemodynamic and surgical variables (model 2). A bedside risk prediction tool to predict operative mortality in individual patients was developed. RESULTS: The overall in-hospital surgical mortality was 23.9%. Independent preoperative predictors of mortality in model 1 were age greater than 70 years, prior cardiac surgery, hypotension (systolic blood pressure less than 100 mm Hg) or shock at presentation, migrating pain, cardiac tamponade, any pulse deficit, and electrocardiogram with findings of myocardial ischemia or infarction. In model 2, other predictors of surgical death were intraoperative hypotension, a right ventricle dysfunction at surgery, and a necessity to perform coronary revascularization. An independent predictor for favorable surgical outcome was right hemiarch replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery in unstable patients with acute type A aortic dissection can be highly unsuccessful. The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection risk models predict in-hospital mortality using a multivariable risk prediction tool, useful for surgeons and patients as they consider their surgical risk and the pros and cons of embarking on high-risk surgery.

Acute Disease↗

Acute limb ischemia associated with type B aortic dissection: clinical relevance and therapy.

BACKGROUND: The goal of the current study is to characterize the presentation, therapy, and outcomes of acute limb ischemia (ALI) associated with type B aortic dissection (AoD). METHODS: The prospective/retrospective International Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) database and a single institutional database were queried for all patients with type B AoD from 1996 to 2002. Univariate and multivariate statistics were used to delineate factors associated with morbidity and mortality outcomes. RESULTS: According to the IRAD data (n = 458), the mean age of patients was 64 years, and 70% were men. The overall mortality was 12%; of these, 6% had ALI. Pulse (3-fold) and neurologic deficits (5-fold) were more common in those with ALI (P < .001). Endovascular, but not surgical therapy, was more commonly performed in patients with ALI compared with those without ALI (31% vs 10%, P = .004). No difference in age, race, gender, or origin of dissection was observed. ALI was associated with acute renal failure (odds ratio [OR] = 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-7.1; P = .048) and acute mesenteric ischemia/infarction (OR = 6.9; 95% CI 2.5-20; P < .001). Adjusting for patient characteristics, ALI was associated with death (3.5; 95% CI 1.1-10; P = .02). The single institution analysis revealed similar patient demographics and mortality in 93 AoD patients, of whom 28 had ALI. Aortic fenestration or aorto-iliac stenting was the primary therapy in 93%; surgical bypass was used in 7%. Limb salvage was 93% in those with ALI at a mean of 18 months follow-up. The number of organ systems with malperfusion was 2-fold higher at aortography than suspected preprocedure (P = .002). By stepwise regression modeling, mortality was greater in those not taking a beta-blocker (OR = 19; 95% CI 3.1-111; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: ALI secondary to AoD is predictive of death and visceral ischemia. Endovascular therapy confers excellent limb salvage and allows diagnosis of unsuspected visceral ischemia.

Acute Disease↗

Role and results of surgery in acute type B aortic dissection: insights from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

BACKGROUND: The clinical profiles and outcomes of patients treated surgically for acute type B aortic dissection (ABAD) are often reported for those in small series or for those cared for at a single institution over a long time period, during which a continuous evolution in techniques has occurred. Accordingly, we sought to evaluate the clinical features and surgical results of patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection by identifying primary factors that influenced surgical outcome and estimating average surgical mortality for ABAD in the current era. METHODS AND RESULTS: A comprehensive analysis of 290 clinical variables and their relation to surgical outcomes for 82 patients who required surgery for ABAD (from a population of 1256 patients; mean+/-SD age, 60.6+/-15.0 years; 82.9% male) and who were enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection was performed. The overall in-hospital mortality was 29.3%. Factors associated with increased surgical mortality based on univariate analysis were preoperative coma or altered consciousness, partial thrombosis of the false lumen, evidence of periaortic hematoma on diagnostic imaging, descending aortic diameter >6 cm, right ventricle dysfunction at surgery, and shorter time from the onset of symptoms to surgery. Factors associated with favorable outcomes included radiating pain, normotension at surgery (systolic blood pressure 100 to 149 mm Hg), and reduced hypothermic circulatory arrest time. The 2 independent predictors of surgical mortality were age >70 years (odds ratio, 4.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.30 to 14.34) and preoperative shock/hypotension (odds ratio, 6.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 32.49). CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides insights into current-day clinical profiles and surgical outcomes of ABAD. Knowledge about different preoperative clinical conditions may help surgeons in making treatment decisions among these high-risk patients.

Acute Disease↗

Implications of periaortic hematoma in patients with acute aortic dissection (from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection).

The clinical profiles, presentation, and outcomes of patients with acute aortic dissections and associated periaortic hematomas on aortic imaging have not been described in a large cohort. This study sought to assess the prognostic implications of periaortic hematomas in patients with aortic dissections and to identify factors associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with periaortic hematomas. The study population was 971 patients with acute aortic dissections enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection with available imaging data on presentation with the presence or absence of periaortic hematomas. Patients with periaortic hematomas (n = 227, 23.4%) were more likely to be women, to have a history of hypertension and atherosclerosis, and to present early to the hospital. At presentation, they had greater frequencies of shock, cardiac tamponade, coma, and/or altered consciousness. Clinical outcomes were significantly worse in patients with periaortic hematomas, including significantly greater mortality (33% vs 20.3%, p <0.001). A multivariate model demonstrated periaortic hematomas to be an independent predictor of mortality in patients with aortic dissections (odds ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 2.54, p = 0.007). In conclusion, this study provides insight into the profiles, presentation, and outcomes of patients with periaortic hematomas and acute aortic dissections. The early identification and aggressive management of patients with periaortic hematomas may potentially improve clinical outcomes.

Acute Disease↗

Comparing on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: numerous studies but few conclusions: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association council on cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia in collaboration with the interdisciplinary working group on quality of care and outcomes research.

One of the most hotly debated and polarizing issues in cardiac surgery has been whether coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass or cardioplegia (off-pump CABG, or OPCAB) is superior to that performed with the heart-lung machine and the heart's being chemically arrested (standard CABG). Various clinical trials are reviewed comparing the 2 surgical strategies, including several large retrospective analyses, meta-analyses, and the randomized trials that address different aspects of standard CABG and OPCAB. Although definitive conclusions about the relative merits of standard CABG and OPCAB are difficult to reach from these varied randomized and nonrandomized studies, several generalizations may be possible. Patients may achieve an excellent outcome with either type of procedure, and individuals' outcomes likely depend more on factors other than whether they underwent standard CABG or OPCAB. Nevertheless, there appear to be trends in most studies. These trends include less blood loss and need for transfusion after OPCAB, less myocardial enzyme release after OPCAB up to 24 hours, less early neurocognitive dysfunction after OPCAB, and less renal insufficiency after OPCAB. Fewer grafts tend to be performed with OPCAB than with standard CABG. Length of hospital stay, mortality rate, and long-term neurological function and cardiac outcome appear to be similar in the 2 groups. To definitively answer the remaining questions of whether either strategy is superior and in which patients, a large-scale prospective randomized trial is required.

American Heart Association↗

Acute intramural hematoma of the aorta: a mystery in evolution.

BACKGROUND: The definition, prevalence, outcomes, and appropriate treatment strategies for acute intramural hematoma (IMH) continue to be debated. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 1010 patients with acute aortic syndromes who were enrolled in the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD) to delineate the prevalence, presentation, management, and outcomes of acute IMH by comparing these patients with those with classic aortic dissection (AD). Fifty-eight (5.7%) patients had IMH, and this cohort tended to be older (68.7 versus 61.7 years; P<0.001) and more likely to have distal aortic involvement (60.3% versus 35.3%; P<0.001) compared with 952 patients with AD. Patients with IMH described more severe initial pain than did those with AD but were less likely to have ischemic leg pain, pulse deficits, or aortic valve insufficiency; moreover, they required a longer time to diagnosis and more diagnostic tests. Overall mortality of IMH was similar to that of classic AD (20.7% versus 23.9%; P=0.57), as was mortality in patients with IMH of the descending aorta (8.3% versus 13.1%; P=0.60) and the ascending aorta (39.1% versus 29.9%; P=0.34) compared with AD. IMH limited to the aortic arch was seen in 7 patients, with no deaths, despite medical therapy in only 6 of the 7 individuals. Among the 51 patients whose initial diagnostic study showed IMH only, 8 (16%) progressed to AD on a serial imaging study. CONCLUSIONS: The IRAD data demonstrate a 5.7% prevalence of IMH in patients with acute aortic syndromes. Like classic AD, IMH is a highly lethal condition when it involves the ascending aorta and surgical therapy should be considered, but this condition is less critical when limited to the arch or descending aorta. Fully 16% of patients have evidence of evolution to dissection on serial imaging.

Acute Disease↗

Clinical characteristics of hypotension in patients with acute aortic dissection.

To evaluate the clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of hypotension in unselected patients who had acute aortic dissection (AAD), we studied 1,073 such patients who were enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection between 1996 and 2001. Hypotension was noted in 313 patients (29.2%) who had AAD (46.0% on admission). Multivariate logistic regression identified age >or=70 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4 to 2.9), type A dissection (referent type B AAD; OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4 to 3.2), neurologic deficit (OR 3.8, 95% CI 2.2 to 6.6), syncope (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.8 to 4.7), aortic regurgitation requiring valve surgery (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.3), cardiac tamponade (OR 5.1, 95% CI 3.0 to 8.8), and new Q-wave or ST-segment deviation on an electrocardiogram (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.4) as independent associations of hypotension (c statistic 0.78). Hospital complications (neurologic deficits 22.7% vs 12.0%, altered mental status 26.1% vs 4.4%, myocardial ischemia 14.6% vs 6.9%, mesenteric ischemia 6.9% vs 2.6%, or limb ischemia 14.6% vs 6.9%, and death 55.0% vs 10.3%) occurred more frequently in patients who had hypotension than in those who did not (p <0.001 for all comparisons). We concluded that hypotension that occurred in >25% of patients who had AAD was associated with a much higher rate of in-hospital adverse events. Our study also identified factors associated with hypotension in patients who had AAD.

Acute Disease↗

Contemporary results of surgery in acute type A aortic dissection: The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection experience.

BACKGROUND: Surgical mortality for acute type A aortic dissection reported in different experiences from single centers or surgeons varies from 7% to 30%. The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection, collecting patients from 18 referral centers worldwide, identifies a preoperative risk stratification scheme and a real average surgical mortality for acute type A aortic dissection in the current era. METHODS: A comprehensive analysis was completed of 290 clinical variables and their relationship to surgical outcomes in 526 of 1032 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996 through 2001. Extracted cases, categorized according to risk profile, were defined as unstable (group I) in the presence of cardiac tamponade; shock; congestive heart failure; cerebrovascular accident; stroke; coma; myocardial ischemia, infarction, or both; electrocardiograms with new Q waves or ST elevation; acute renal failure; or mesenteric ischemia-infarction at the time of the operation. Outside of an unstable condition, patients were categorized as stable (group II). RESULTS: The overall in-hospital mortality was 25.1%. Mortality in group I was 31.4% compared with 16.7% in group II ( P < .001). Independent preoperative predictors of operative mortality were history of aortic valve replacement (odds ratio = 3.12), migrating chest pain (odds ratio = 2.77), hypotension as sign of acute type A aortic dissection (odds ratio = 1.95), shock or tamponade (odds ratio = 2.69), preoperative cardiac tamponade (odds ratio = 2.22), and preoperative limb ischemia (odds ratio = 2.10). CONCLUSIONS: The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection experience confirms that patient selection plays an important role in determining surgical outcomes in patients with acute type A aortic dissection. Knowledge of significant risk factors for operative mortality can contribute to better management and a more defined risk assessment in patients affected by acute type A aortic dissection.

Acute Disease↗

The winter peak in the occurrence of acute aortic dissection is independent of climate.

We recently reported the existence of a higher risk of acute aortic dissection (AAD) during the winter months. However, it is not known whether this winter peak is affected by climate. To address this issue, we evaluated data from 969 AAD patients who were enrolled at various sites around the globe and who were participating in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). We found a significant (p = 0.001; chi2 test) difference in the number of AAD events occurring during the different seasons of the year, with highest incidence in winter (28.4%) and lowest incidence in summer (19.9%). Furthermore, the winter peak was evident in both cold and temperate climate settings, suggesting that the relative change in temperature, rather than absolute temperature, and/or endogenous annual rhythms are critical mechanistic factors.

Acute Disease↗

Does circadian and seasonal variation in occurrence of acute aortic dissection influence in-hospital outcomes?

The risk of acute aortic dissection (AAD) exhibits chronobiological variations with peak onset in the morning and in winter. However, it is not known whether the time of day or season of the year of the AAD affects clinical outcomes. We studied 1,032 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from January 1997 to December 2001. For circadian and seasonal analysis, the time and date of symptom onset were available for 741 and 1,007 patients, respectively, and were grouped into four 6h periods (morning, afternoon, evening, and night) and four seasons (winter, spring, summer, and autumn). The chi2 test for goodness of fit was used to evaluate non-uniformity of the time of day and time of year for critical in-hospital clinical events, including death. While highest incidence of AAD occurred in the morning and winter, clinical events (including mortality) were similar during the four different periods of the 24 h (chi2 = 1.9, p = 0.60) and seasonal (chi2 = 1.2, p = 0.75) periods.

Aged↗

Differences in clinical presentation, management, and outcomes of acute type a aortic dissection in patients with and without previous cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: There are less data on the clinical and diagnostic imaging characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with previous cardiac surgery (PCS) presenting with acute type A aortic dissection (AAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: In 617 patients with AAD, we evaluated the differences in the clinical characteristics, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the cohorts with and without PCS. A history of PCS was present in 100 of 617 patients. Patients with PCS were more likely to be males (P=0.02), older (P=0.014), and to have a history of previous aortic dissection (P<0.001) or aneurysms (P<0.001). In contrast, PCS patients were less likely to have presenting chest pain (P<0.001). Cardiac tamponade was less common in PCS patients (P=0.007). Fewer AAD patients with PCS underwent surgical repair (P=0.001). Hospital mortality was not adversely influenced by PCS (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 2.63), but a trend for increased death was seen in patients with previous aortic valve replacement (AVR) (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 0.98 to 5.43). Age 70 years or older, previous AVR, shock, and renal failure identified PCS patients at risk for death. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights differences in clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of AAD patients with PCS. Importantly, PCS, with the exception of previous AVR, does not adversely influence early outcomes of AAD patients, including those undergoing surgical repair. However, because of otherwise dismal outcomes with medical management of AAD, our data indicate that a history of PCS (even that of previous AVR) should not preclude physicians from recommending surgical correction of type A aortic dissection in appropriate patients.

Acute Kidney Injury↗

Comparison of aortic dissection in patients with and without Marfan's syndrome (results from the International Registry of Aortic Dissection).

Among 1,049 patients diagnosed with aortic dissection in a multinational registry, patients with Marfan's syndrome were typically younger and had unique presentations. Despite their younger age at presentation, patients with Marfan's syndrome and aortic dissection had a high mortality rate, similar to patients without Marfan's syndrome, an older patient cohort. Our data support the importance of aneurysm surveillance and prophylactic surgical intervention for patients with Marfan's syndrome to potentially reduce the risk of mortality.

Adult↗

Gender-related differences in acute aortic dissection.

BACKGROUND: Few data exist on gender-related differences in clinical presentation, diagnostic findings, management, and outcomes in acute aortic dissection (AAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Accordingly, we evaluated 1078 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) to assess differences in clinical features, management, and in-hospital outcomes between men and women. Of the patients enrolled in IRAD (32.1%) with AAD, 346 were women. Although less frequently affected by AAD (32.1% of AAD), women were significantly older and had more often presented later than men (P=0.008); symptoms of coma/altered mental status were more common, whereas pulse deficit was less common. Diagnostic imaging suggestive of rupture, ie, periaortic hematoma, and pleural or pericardial effusion were more commonly observed in women. In-hospital complications of hypotension and tamponade occurred with greater frequency in women, resulting in higher in-hospital mortality compared with men. After adjustment for age and hypertension, women with aortic dissection die more frequently than men (OR, 1.4, P=0.04), predominantly in the 66- to 75-year age group. Moreover, surgical outcome was worse in women than men (P=0.013); type A dissection in women was associated with a higher surgical mortality of 32% versus 22% in men despite similar delay, surgical technique, and hemodynamics. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis provides insights into gender-related differences in AAD with regard to clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes; important diagnostic and therapeutic implications may help shed light on aortic dissection in women to improve their outcomes.

Acute Disease↗