Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 590

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Clinical Profiles and Outcomes of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection in the Current Era: Lessons From the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD)

Open access
Suzuki, Toru, Mehta, Rajendra H., Ince, Hüseyin, Nagai, Ryozo, Sakomura, Yasunari, Weber, Frank, Sumiyoshi, Tetsuya, Bossone, Eduardo, Trimarchi, Santi, Cooper, Jeanna V., Smith, Dean E., Isselbacher, Eric M., Eagle, Kim A., Nienaber, Christoph A.·2003·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Clinical profiles and outcomes of patients with acute type B aortic dissection have not been evaluated in the current era. Methods and Results— Accordingly, we analyzed 384 patients (65±13 years, males 71%) with acute type B aortic dissection enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). A majority of patients had hypertension and presented with acute chest/back pain. Only one-half showed abnormal findings on chest radiograph, and almost all patients had computerized tomography (CT), transesophageal echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and/or aortogram to confirm the diagnosis. In-hospital mortality was 13% with most deaths occurring within the first week. Factors associated with increased in-hospital mortality on univariate analysis were hypotension/shock, widened mediastinum, periaortic hematoma, excessively dilated aorta (≥6 cm), in-hospital complications of coma/altered consciousness, mesenteric/limb ischemia, acute renal failure, and surgical management (all P <0.05). A risk prediction model with control for age and gender showed hypotension/shock (odds ratio [OR] 23.8, P <0.0001), absence of chest/back pain on presentation (OR 3.5, P =0.01), and branch vessel involvement (OR 2.9, P =0.02), collectively named ‘the deadly triad’ to be independent predictors of in-hospital death. Conclusions— Our study provides insight into current-day profiles and outcomes of acute type B aortic dissection. Factors associated with increased in-hospital mortality (“the deadly triad”) should be identified and taken into consideration for risk stratification and decision-making.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.0000087386.07204.09

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 590

Metadata

Authors
Suzuki, T., Mehta, R. H., Ince, H., Nagai, R., Sakomura, Y., Weber, F., Sumiyoshi, T., Bossone, E., Trimarchi, S., Cooper, J. V., Smith, D. E., Isselbacher, E. M., Eagle, K. A., & Nienaber, C. A.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2003-09-09
Volume
108
Issue
10_suppl_1
Pages
II312-7
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2153593336
Cited by
590
References
0
FWCI
11.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical Profiles and Outcomes of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection in the Current Era: Lessons From the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.0000087386.07204.09
The paper
Suzuki, T., Mehta, R. H., Ince, H., Nagai, R., Sakomura, Y., Weber, F., Sumiyoshi, T., Bossone, E., Trimarchi, S., Cooper, J. V., Smith, D. E., Isselbacher, E. M., Eagle, K. A., & Nienaber, C. A. (2003). Clinical Profiles and Outcomes of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection in the Current Era: Lessons From the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD). Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000087386.07204.09

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.