暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

Even though cervical artery dissection is one of the main reasons for ischemic stroke in young patients, acute management and post-acute primary or secondary prevention of cerebral ischemia differ significantly in different centers and countries. These discrepancies are reflected by the differences in guideline recommendations of major stroke societies. Our narrative review aims to shed light on the different recommendations in guideline-statements of stroke societies and to give an overview of the current literature concerning acute management and post-acute treatment of cervical artery dissection patients. In general, intravenous thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy are recommended, irrespective of stroke etiology, if administered within the label. Secondary prevention of cerebral ischemia can be achieved by antiplatelet intake or anticoagulation, with, to date, neither treatment establishing superiority over the other. Duration of antithrombotic treatment, statin use as well as optimal endovascular approach are still up for debate and need further evaluation. Additionally, it is still unknown, whether the recommendations given in any of the guideline statements are similarly relevant in spontaneous and traumatic cervical artery dissection, as none of the stroke societies differentiates between the two.

急性主动脉夹层（AAD）合并冠心病患者的诊断与治疗仍面临诸多挑战，需要在较短时间内对患者进行风险评估并制定正确的急救策略。急诊室首诊医师需要根据患者病史特征，选择具有快速诊断与鉴别价值的辅助检查（心电图、计算机CT血管成像、肌钙蛋白、可溶性ST2以及D-二聚体）评估患者病情。Stanford A型主动脉夹层患者合并冠心病特别是合并急性冠状动脉综合征时可能需要采取外科方式同时处理升主动脉夹层以及冠状动脉病变，Stanford B型主动脉夹层合并冠心病时可能需要采取腔内治疗技术同时或分次处理主动脉夹层与冠状动脉。由于患者同时存在可能需要处理的冠状动脉系统病变，因此AAD合并冠心病患者在麻醉、围手术期管理、术后抗血小板治疗以及院外随访等多个方面存在一定特殊性，需要综合分析相关因素，对患者进行个体化管理。本共识联合多个相关学科的临床专家，结合相关文献以及临床经验，对AAD合并冠心病患者的诊断、治疗以及随访等多个方面进行总结，目的在于提高临床医生对这种临床情况的认识，避免因漏诊、误诊带来的严重不良后果。.

暂无摘要。

Cardiovascular societies have developed recommendations regarding the management of thoracic aortic diseases. While improvements in treatment have been observed during the past decade in regard to patient selection, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and associated techniques, and high-volume centralization, the broad expansion of TEVAR has raised considerations about its indications, appropriateness, limitations, and application. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the similarities and differences among current cardiovascular societies\' guidelines for the management of thoracic aortic diseases. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 2009 to May 2020. The initial search identified 990 articles. After exclusion of duplicate or inappropriate articles, the final analysis included 5 articles from cardiovascular societies published between 2010 and 2020. Selected controversial topics were analyzed, including diagnosis, imaging, spinal cord ischemia prevention, and management of the most important thoracic aortic pathologies. The analysis included data concerning the therapeutic approach in acute and chronic type B aortic dissection, penetrating aortic ulcer, intramural hematoma, thoracic aortic aneurysm, and traumatic aortic injury, as well a discussion of inflammatory aneurysms, aortitis, and genetic syndromes. The review presents consistent and controversial recommendations, as well as \"gray zone\" issues that need further investigation. There was significant overlap and agreement among the 5 societies regarding the management of thoracic aortic diseases. Especially in dissection and aneurysm management, TEVAR has established its role as the treatment of choice. However, robust evidence is still needed in many aspects of the management of thoracic aortic pathologies.

暂无摘要。

Current guidelines recommend prophylactic replacement of the ascending aorta at an aneurysmal diameter of >55 mm to prevent acute Type A aortic dissection (TAAD) in non-Marfan patients. Several publications have challenged this threshold, suggesting that surgery should be performed in smaller aneurysms to prevent this devastating disease. We reviewed our experience with measuring aortic size at the time of TAAD to validate the existing recommendation for prophylactic ascending aorta replacement.
All patients who had been admitted for TAAD to our emergency department from 2014 to 2019 and underwent ascending aorta replacement were included. Marfan patients were excluded. The maximum diameter of the dissected aorta was measured preoperatively using CT scan. We estimated the aortic diameter at the time of dissection to be 7 mm smaller than the measured maximum diameter of the dissected aorta (modelled pre-dissection diameter).
Overall, 102 patients were included. Of these, 67 were male (65.6%) and 35 were female (34.4%), and the cohort\'s mean age was 65 ± 12.1 years. In addition, 66% were treated for arterial hypertension. The mean maximum modelled pre-dissection diameter was 39.6 ± 4.8 mm: 39.1 ± 5.1 mm in men and 40.7 ± 2.8 mm in women (P = 0.1). The cumulative 30-day mortality rate was 19.6% (20/102).
TAAD occurred at a modelled aortic diameter below 45 mm in 87.7% of our patients. Therefore, the current aortic diameter threshold of 55 mm excludes ∼99% of patients with TAAD from prophylactic replacement of the ascending aorta. The maximum diameter of the ascending aorta warrants reappraisal and this parameter should be a distinct part of a personalized decision-making process that also takes into account age, gender and body surface area to establish the surgical indication for preventive aorta replacement aimed to improve the survival benefit of this procedure.

暂无摘要。

Acute aortic syndrome and in particular aortic dissection (AAD) persists as a cause of significant morbidity and mortality despite improvements in surgical management. This clinical review aims to explore the risks of misdiagnosis, outcomes associated with misdiagnosis and evaluate current diagnostic methods for reducing its incidence.Due to the nature of the pathology, misdiagnosing the condition and delaying management can dramatically worsen patient outcomes. Several diagnostic challenges exist, including low prevalence, rapidly propagating pathology, non-discrete symptomatology, non-specific signs, analogy with other acute conditions and lack of management infrastructure. A similarity to acute coronary syndromes is a specific concern and risks patient maltreatment. AAD with malperfusion syndromes are both a cause of misdiagnosis and marker of disease complication, requiring specifically tailored management plans from the emergency setting.Despite improvements in diagnostic measures, including imaging modalities and biomarkers, misdiagnosis of AAD remains commonplace and current guidelines are relatively limited in preventing its occurrence. This paper recommends the early use of AAD risk scoring, focused echocardiography and most importantly, fast-tracking patients to cross-sectional imaging where the suspicion of AAD is high. This has the potential to improve the diagnostic process for AAD and limit the risk of misdiagnosis. However, our understanding remains limited by the lack of large patient datasets and an adequately audited processes of emergency department practice.