Comparison of type B dissection by open, endovascular, and medical treatments

Objective: This study aimed to address the shortcomings of previous clinical trials that were inadequate to prove the superiority of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in managing type B aortic dissection (TBAD) over open surgery (OS) or best medical treatment (BMT). The comparative effectiveness of these three treatments was analyzed using data of the National Inpatient Sample, a large U.S. database including patients from 4378 hospitals. Methods: Adult patients diagnosed with a primary or secondary TBAD in the years 2005 to 2012 were included for analysis. Patients who had aortic aneurysm or received cardioplegia, valve repair, or operations on vessels of the heart were excluded. A three-category propensity score was created by using a multinomial logistic regression model, a three-way matching algorithm for 1:1:1 matching was applied, and a parallel outcome comparison between the three matched treatment groups was performed. Results: Of a total of 54,971 patients included in the study, we matched 17,211 into three equal-size treatment groups (OS, 5755; TEVAR, 5695; BMT, 5761). No significant difference in the 22 baseline covariates was found in the matched cohort. We found TEVAR to have a much lower mortality rate than OS (odds ratio [OR], 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.79) or BMT (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.47-0.83). Mortality rates between OS and BMT were similar (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.74-1.27). We also found TEVAR to have a lower complication rate, shorter hospitalization, and lower medical cost compared with OS. Conclusions: TEVAR is superior to BMT or OS for treatment of TBAD in terms of mortality, complications, and cost.