Background Type B aortic dissection (TBAD), is defined as a dissection involving the aorta distal to left subclavian artery with the ascending aorta and the aortic arch not affected. TBAD is classified due to the time frame and presence of complications. Complicated TBAD (co-TBAD) patients have a greater mortality rate than uncomplicated TBAD (un-TBAD) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is considered the gold-standard intervention for these clinical challenges. Methods We undertook a systematic review of the literature regarding TEVAR intervention in co-TBAD and un-TBAD. A comprehensive search was undertaken across four major databases and was evaluated and assessed until June 2020. Results A total of 16,104 patients were included in the study (7772 patients co-TBAD and 8352 un-TBAD). A significantly higher proportion of comorbidities were seen in co-TBAD patients compared with un-TBAD. Acute dissection was more frequent in the co-TBAD group (73.55% vs. 66.91%), while chronic dissection was more common in un-TBAD patients (33.8% vs. 70.73%). Postprocedure stroke was higher in co-TBAD (5.85% vs. 3.92%; p < .01), while postprocedural renal failure was higher in un-TBAD patients (7.23 vs. 11.38%; p < .01). No difference was observed in in-hospital mortality however the 30 days mortality was higher in the co-TBAD group. One-year survival was higher in the uncomplicated group but this difference was not observed in the 5-year survival. Conclusion In our analysis we can appreciate that despite significantly higher comorbidities in the co-TBAD cohort, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality between the two groups and the 5-year survival did not have any difference.

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus is recognised as a significant risk factor for cardiovascular and peripheral vascular disease, as the abnormal metabolic state increases the risk for atherosclerosis, occlusive arterial disease and vascular dysfunction. There have been reports of potential association across the literature that illustrates a link between diabetes mellitus and aortic aneurysm, with the former having a protective role on the development of the latter.Methods: A thorough literature search was performed through electronic databases, to provide a comprehensive review of the study's reporting on the association of diabetes mellitus and aortic aneurysm, discussing the mechanisms that have been reported; furthemore, we reviewed the reports of the impact of oral hypoglycameic agents on aortic aneurysms.Results: Various proposed mechanisms are involved in this protective process including endothelial dysfunction, chronic hyperglycemia and insulin resistance. The evidence suggests a negative association between these disease process, with prevelance of diabetes mellitus resulting in lower rates of aortic aneurysm, via its protective mechanistic action. The increase in advanced glycation end products, increased arterial stiffness and vascular remodelling seen in diabetes, was found to have a profound impact on aneurysm development, its slow progression and lower rupture rate in these individuals. This review has also highlighted the role of oral hypoglycaemic agents having a protective effect against AA disease.Conclusion: A decrease in development, progression and mortality from aortic aneurysms as well as reduced rates of dissection, have been observed in those with diabetes. This review has provided a comprehensive insight on the effect of diabetes and its physiological processes, and elements of its con-committant treatment, having a protective role against these aortic diseases.

Over the decades, the Frozen Elephant Trunk (FET) technique has gained immense popularity allowing simplified treatment of complex aortic pathologies. FET is frequently used to treat aortic conditions involving the distal aortic arch and the proximal descending aorta in a single stage. Surgical preference has recently changed from FET procedures being performed at Zone 3 to Zone 2. There are several advantages of Zone 2 FET over Zone 3 FET including reduction in spinal cord injury, visceral ischemia, neurological and cardiovascular sequelae. In addition, Zone 2 FET is a technically less complicated procedure. Literature on the comparison between Zone 3 and Zone 2 FET is scarce and primarily observational and anecdotal. Therefore, further research is warranted in this paradigm to substantiate current surgical treatment options for complex aortic pathologies. In this review, we explore literature surrounding FET and the reasons for the shift in surgical preference from Zone 3 to Zone 2.