SAIMSARA Journal

Machine Generated Science • ISSN 3054-3991

Aortic Dissection Prognosis: Scoping Review with ☸️SAIMSARA.

Cardiac & Vascular Health icon

Cardiac & Vascular Health

Issue 1, Volume 1, 2026

DOI: 10.62487/saimsara4e2d4fd3

Editorial note
• Last update: 2026-04-28 12:59:46
What is this paper about
Aortic dissection prognosis is not determined by anatomy alone: early malperfusion, shock, inflammatory activation, renal injury, and false-lumen remodeling sharply define survival risk. This review maps 173 references to show which clinical, biomarker, genetic, and imaging signals can guide urgent triage, TEVAR/open-surgery strategy, and long-term surveillance intensity.
Human-verified editorial review Verified by World ID proof-of-human. This editorial layer was submitted from a SAIMSARA account verified as a unique human.


Abstract: This review aims to synthesize current evidence regarding the prognostic factors associated with aortic dissection, focusing on clinical, biochemical, genetic, and imaging-based predictors of short- and long-term outcomes. The review cites 173 references drawn from 540 included records, including 502 original studies with 782518 total participants (topic deduplicated ΣN). The mapped evidence indicates that prognosis in aortic dissection is dominated by early malperfusion burden, hemodynamic instability, and systemic inflammatory activation, with reported in-hospital mortality spanning roughly 3% in stable surgical cohorts to over 50% in non-surgically managed type A disease and reaching 85.7% when two or more organ systems are malperfused. Stanford classification and treatment pathway remained powerful prognostic anchors, with type A in-hospital mortality of 11.8% with surgery versus 49.7% without surgery, and type B disease showing aorta-specific mortality of 6.9% with thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus 19.3% with medical therapy alone. Recurrent signals across topics support a role for inflammatory indices such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio above 6.0, coagulation and nutritional markers, lactate dynamics, and false lumen geometry, including a residual descending false lumen diameter of at least 28 mm, as practical stratifiers of short- and long-term risk. Imaging-derived features such as periaortic fat attenuation index, deep-learning-derived false lumen volumes, and patient-specific wall stress modeling further refine remodeling prediction beyond conventional diameter thresholds. Clinically, this evidence map supports integrating rapid biomarker-based triage, structured risk scores, and volumetric imaging surveillance into routine dissection care, while acknowledging that the predominantly retrospective single-center character of the included literature limits the strength of these signals. Future research should prioritize prospective multicenter validation of multimodal prognostic models that combine genetic, inflammatory, nutritional, and geometric predictors to personalize surgical timing, endovascular strategy selection, and long-term surveillance intensity.

Keywords: Aortic dissection; Prognostic biomarkers; Thoracic endovascular aortic repair; In-hospital mortality; Stanford type A; Stanford type B; Neutrophil extracellular traps; Aortic diameter; Surgical outcomes; Survival analysis

Review Stats

Get access to the full paper

Unlock the full evidence map

The full evidence review, including the Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, figures, and complete reference index, opens after purchase or sign-in. The Evidence Object JSON is a separate machine-readable evidence product: a concentrated synthesis of results, topic-level evidence, and discussion across original and non-original studies. It can be directly input into your LLM, agent, or RAG workflow.

Reference Index (173)