The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12471-016-0921-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Acute aortic dissection (AD) requires immediate treatment, but is a diagnostic challenge. We studied how often AD was missed initially, which patients were more likely to be missed and how this influenced patient management and outcomes.
A retrospective cohort study including 200 consecutive patients with AD as the final diagnosis, admitted to a tertiary hospital between 1998 and 2008. The first differential diagnosis was identified and patients with and without AD included were compared. Characteristics associated with a lower level of suspicion were identified using multivariable logistic regression, and Cox regression was used for survival analyses. Missing data were imputed.
Mean age was 63 years, 39% were female and 76% had Stanford type A dissection. In 69% of patients, AD was included in the first differential diagnosis; this was less likely in women (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.44–0.99), in the absence of back pain (aRR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.30–0.84), and in patients with extracardiac atherosclerosis (aRR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.43–0.96). Absence of AD in the differential diagnosis was associated with the use of more imaging tests (1.8 vs. 2.3, p = 0.01) and increased time from admission to surgery (1.8 vs. 10.1 h, p < 0.01), but not with a difference in the adjusted long-term all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.46–1.27).
Acute aortic dissection was initially not suspected in almost one-third of patients, this was more likely in women, in the absence of back pain and in patients with extracardiac atherosclerosis. Although the number of imaging tests was higher and time to surgery longer, patient outcomes were similar in both groups.
Newgard CD, Haukoos JS. Advanced statistics: missing data in clinical research-part 2: multiple imputation. Acad Emerg Med. 2007;14:669–78. PubMed
Rubin D. An overview of multiple imputation. In: Proceedings of the survey research methods section. Alexandria: American Statistical Association; 1988. pp. 79–84.
EUGenMed, Cardiovascular Clinical Study Group, Regitz-Zagrosek V, Oertelt-Prigione S, Prescott E, et al. Gender in cardiovascular diseases: impact on clinical manifestations, management, and outcomes. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:24–34. CrossRef
Erbel R, Aboyans V, Boileau C, 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. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2873–926. CrossRefPubMed
Hiratzka LF, Bakris GL, Beckman JA, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with Thoracic Aortic Disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2010;121:e266–e369. CrossRefPubMed
Nazerian P, Morello F, Vanni S, et al. Combined use of aortic dissection detection risk score and D‑dimer in the diagnostic workup of suspected acute aortic dissection. Int J Cardiol. 2015;175:78–82. CrossRef
Asha SE, Miers JW. A systematic review and meta-analysis of D‑dimer as a rule-out test for suspected acute aortic dissection. Ann Emerg Med. 2015;66:1–11. CrossRef
Tanoue S, Yanagawa Y. Ischemic stroke with left hemiparesis or shock should be evaluated by computed tomography for aortic dissection. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30(836):e3–e4.
Huang CH, Huang HC, Lin KH, Chen WK, Tsai CH. Identification of painless aortic dissection before thrombolytic treatment for acute ischemic stroke. Am J Emerg Med. 2013;31(762):e5–e6.
- Clinical recognition of acute aortic dissections: insights from a large single-centre cohort study
W. W. Jansen Klomp
G. J. Brandon Bravo Bruinsma
L. M. Peelen
A. P. Nierich
J. G. Grandjean
A.W.J. van ’t Hof
- Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
Neu im Fachgebiet Kardiologie
Mail Icon II