Abstract 18683: Outcomes of Patients Presenting with Acute Type A Aortic Dissection in the Setting of Prior Cardiac Surgery: An Analysis from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection
Introduction: Prior cardiac surgery can complicate the clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of patients with type A aortic dissection (TAAAD). This report from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) examines this hypothesis. Methods: 352 of 2289 TAAAD patients (15.4%) enrolled in IRAD had cardiac surgery prior to dissection, including coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG, 34.6%), aortic or mitral valve surgery (38.4%), aortic surgery (44.7%), and other cardiac surgery (18.1%). Results: Comparative differences in baseline demographics, clinical presentation, and management time are shown in Table 1. Patients with prior cardiac surgery were more likely to undergo CABG (p=0.006) or mitral valve replacement (p=0.001) at the time of dissection repair. Total cardiopulmonary bypass time was higher in patients with prior cardiac surgery (p<0.001); no difference was seen in cardiac arrest time (p=0.113) or cerebral ischemia time (p=0.286). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher for patients with prior cardiac surgery (33.5% vs. 24.0%, p70 (RR1.58, 95% CI 1.25-1.99), and medical management of acute dissection (RR 4.79, 95% CI 3.62-6.34). Kaplan-Meier analysis is shown in Figure 1. Conclusion: Prior cardiac surgery not only delays presentation and diagnosis of acute type A dissections, but is also an important adverse risk factor for early and late mortality.
Objective: The Lung Injury Prediction Score identifies patients at risk for acute respiratory distress syndrome in the emergency department, but it has not been validated in non-emergency department hospitalized patients. We aimed to evaluate whether Lung Injury Prediction Score identifies non-emergency department hospitalized patients at risk of developing acute respiratory distress syndrome at the time of critical care contact. Design: Retrospective study. Setting: Five academic medical centers. Patients: Nine hundred consecutive patients (≥ 18 yr old) with at least one acute respiratory distress syndrome risk factor at the time of critical care contact. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Lung Injury Prediction Score was calculated using the worst values within the 12 hours before initial critical care contact. Patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome at the time of initial contact were excluded. Acute respiratory distress syndrome developed in 124 patients (13.7%) a median of 2 days (interquartile range, 2–3) after critical care contact. Hospital mortality was 22% and was significantly higher in acute respiratory distress syndrome than non-acute respiratory distress syndrome patients (48% vs 18%; p < 0.001). Increasing Lung Injury Prediction Score was significantly associated with development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.21–1.42) and the composite outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome or death (odds ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.18–1.34). A Lung Injury Prediction Score greater than or equal to 4 was associated with the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (odds ratio, 4.17; 95% CI, 2.26–7.72), composite outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome or death (odds ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.68–3.49), and acute respiratory distress syndrome after accounting for the competing risk of death (hazard ratio, 3.71; 95% CI, 2.05–6.72). For acute respiratory distress syndrome development, the Lung Injury Prediction Score has an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.70 and a Lung Injury Prediction Score greater than or equal to 4 has 90% sensitivity (misses only 10% of acute respiratory distress syndrome cases), 31% specificity, 17% positive predictive value, and 95% negative predictive value. Conclusions: In a cohort of non-emergency department hospitalized patients, the Lung Injury Prediction Score and Lung Injury Prediction Score greater than or equal to 4 can identify patients at increased risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome and/or death at the time of critical care contact but it does not perform as well as in the original emergency department cohort.