Objectives: In recent years, non-invasive methods have replaced angiography in the diagnosis of aortic dissection. Angiography maybe used to evaluate coexisting coronary artery disease (CAD), which can delay surgery and increase the risk of rupture. We set out to examine the role of angiography in acute aortic dissection.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent repair of acute aortic dissection between January 1992 and June 2002 was conducted. The effect of angiography on the need for concomitant coronary artery surgery (CABG), delay to surgery and outcome were analysed.
Results: Seventy-four patients were identified. Initial diagnosis was established by non-invasive techniques. Twenty-three patients (31%) underwent angiography (Group I) in three this was unsuccessful. Three in Group I and four in the non-angiography group (Group II, n=51) had history of angina. One patient in Group I underwent concomitant CABG compared to seven in Group II. The patient who underwent CABG in Group I; and four out of seven in Group II died (NS). Patients who underwent concomitant CABG had a significantly higher mortality rate (P=0.04). Mortality in Group I was 35% (n=8) and in Group II was 29% (n=15) (NS). Mortality rate was also significantly higher in patients who presented with syncope (P=0.01) or hypotension (P=0.04). Median transfer time from arrival at our centre to the operating room was 5 h in Group I and 1.5 h in Group II (P<0.001). Mortality rate was higher in patients who took longer to transfer to the operating room, but this did not reach statistical significance.
Conclusions: We have shown that coronary angiography did not affect the occurrence of CABG and was not associated with improved hospital survival. Furthermore, there is a considerable delay to surgery caused by angiography. Therefore in this setting coronary angiography is not recommended.