Painless Type B Aortic Dissection: Insights From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The classical presentation of a patient with Type B acute aortic dissection (TBAAD) is characterized by severe chest, back, or abdominal pain, ripping or tearing in nature. However, some patients present with painless acute aortic dissection, which can lead to a delay in diagnosis and treatment. We utilized the International Registry on Acute Aortic Dissections (IRAD) database to study these patients. METHODS: We analyzed 43 painless TBAAD patients enrolled in the database between January 1996 and July 2012. The differences in presentation, diagnostics, management, and outcome were compared with patients presenting with painful TBAAD. RESULTS: Among the 1162 TBAAD patients enrolled in IRAD, 43 patients presented with painless TBAAD (3.7%). The mean age of patients with painless TBAAD was significantly higher than normal TBAAD patients (69.2 versus 63.3 years, P = 0.020). The presence of atherosclerosis (46.4% versus 30.1%, P = 0.022), diabetes (17.9% versus 7.5%; P = 0.018), and other aortic diseases (8.6% versus 2.3%, P= 0.051), such as prior aortic aneurysm (31% versus 18.8% P = 0.049) was more common in these patients. Median delay time between presentation and diagnosis was longer in painless patients (median 34.0 versus 19.0 hours; P = 0.006). Dissection of iatrogenic origin (19.5% versus 1.3%; P < 0.001) was significantly more frequent in the painless group. The in-hospital mortality was 18.6% in the painless group, compared with an in-hospital mortality of 9.9% in the control group (P = 0.063). CONCLUSION: Painless TBAAD is a relatively rare presentation (3.7%) of aortic dissection, and is often associated with a history of atherosclerosis, diabetes, prior aortic disease including aortic aneurysm, and an iatrogenic origin. We observed a trend for increased in-hospital mortality in painless TBAAD patients, which may be the result of a delay in diagnosis and management. Therefore, physicians should be aware of this relative rare presentation of TBAAD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".