Type B Aortic Dissection Management Strategies: National Survey, Systematic Review, and Pooled Clinician Perceptions

Background: Type B Aortic Dissection (TBAD) management relies on risk stratification, yet evidence-based tool adoption remains inconsistent in National Health Services (NHSs). Bridging the gap between Emergency Medicine (EM) and Vascular Surgery remains essential for timely diagnosis, optimal risk stratification, and appropriate intervention to improve outcomes and reduce mortality. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of EM consultants yielded n = 173 valid responses from n = 33 units across the UK. Subgroup analyses were conducted using a Chi-square test (p < 0.05) alongside descriptive analysis. A pooled prevalence analysis of the literature, utilizing a random-effects model at a 95% confidence interval (CI), served as a benchmark for perception analysis. Agreement was evaluated using Bland–Altman analysis, incorporating upper, lower, and overall bias of agreeability. Results: Access to a rapid Computed Tomography Angiogram (CTA) was 70% (95% CI: 63.3–76.8%, p < 0.001), while 32% had standard operating procedures (SOPs) for TBAD (95% CI: 25.3–39.1%), and 26% were aware of any decision tool (95% CI: 20.6–33.6%). Labetalol as a first-line antihypertensive was more common amongst least experience (p < 0.05). TBAD diagnosis increased 1.6-fold with every 4 years of additional experience (p < 0.05). Perception analysis showed strong agreement for pain (characteristics and location), hypertension, gender, and age with moderate-to-low agreement for other factors with a reported bias of 23.58% (−38.20% to 85.36%) (p = 0.02). Conclusions: The survey suggests a degree of misperception and inconsistency in recognition of most and least prevalence factors for TBAD suspicion and management. This outcome advocates targeted strategies to enhance diagnostic accuracy using tools aligned with NHS resources and QALY frameworks. Furthermore, upon recognition of the most prevalent factors, CTA and specialist referral is advocated.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Vascular Diseases
Published
2026-01-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jvd5010002
Primary Topic
Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Type B Aortic Dissection Management Strategies: National Survey, Systematic Review, and Pooled Clinician Perceptions

Karen May Rhodes, Ali Kordzadeh
Journal of Vascular Diseases
Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
article

Type B Aortic Dissection Management Strategies: National Survey, Systematic Review, and Pooled Clinician Perceptions

Karen May Rhodes, Ali Kordzadeh
article en

Abstract

Background: Type B Aortic Dissection (TBAD) management relies on risk stratification, yet evidence-based tool adoption remains inconsistent in National Health Services (NHSs). Bridging the gap between Emergency Medicine (EM) and Vascular Surgery remains essential for timely diagnosis, optimal risk stratification, and appropriate intervention to improve outcomes and reduce mortality. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of EM consultants yielded n = 173 valid responses from n = 33 units across the UK. Subgroup analyses were conducted using a Chi-square test (p < 0.05) alongside descriptive analysis. A pooled prevalence analysis of the literature, utilizing a random-effects model at a 95% confidence interval (CI), served as a benchmark for perception analysis. Agreement was evaluated using Bland–Altman analysis, incorporating upper, lower, and overall bias of agreeability. Results: Access to a rapid Computed Tomography Angiogram (CTA) was 70% (95% CI: 63.3–76.8%, p < 0.001), while 32% had standard operating procedures (SOPs) for TBAD (95% CI: 25.3–39.1%), and 26% were aware of any decision tool (95% CI: 20.6–33.6%). Labetalol as a first-line antihypertensive was more common amongst least experience (p < 0.05). TBAD diagnosis increased 1.6-fold with every 4 years of additional experience (p < 0.05). Perception analysis showed strong agreement for pain (characteristics and location), hypertension, gender, and age with moderate-to-low agreement for other factors with a reported bias of 23.58% (−38.20% to 85.36%) (p = 0.02). Conclusions: The survey suggests a degree of misperception and inconsistency in recognition of most and least prevalence factors for TBAD suspicion and management. This outcome advocates targeted strategies to enhance diagnostic accuracy using tools aligned with NHS resources and QALY frameworks. Furthermore, upon recognition of the most prevalent factors, CTA and specialist referral is advocated.

Journal of Vascular DiseasesVol. 5(1)
Broomfield Hospital (GB), Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust (GB), Basildon Hospital (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 85%
Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.