Key result
Among 381 patients with aortic dissection, exercise rehabilitation programs may increase physical status and quality of life, though study heterogeneity prevented formal data synthesis.
Why the study?
Concern regarding further aortic events has limited evidence for exercise among aortic dissection patients, despite established benefits of physical exercise for long-term cardiovascular health.
Does exercise testing and rehabilitation improve physical status and quality of life in patients with aortic dissection who have undergone surgical intervention?
Systematic Review (n=381)
Does exercise testing and rehabilitation improve physical status and quality of life in patients with aortic dissection who have undergone surgical intervention?
Exercise rehabilitation appears to improve physical capacity and quality of life in post-surgical aortic dissection patients, though robust comparative data on safety and long-term outcomes are lacking.
May warrant cautious consideration post-dissection; extends sparse evidence while leaving optimal protocols and safety unresolved.
OBJECTIVE: Although physical exercise has established benefits for long-term cardiovascular health, concern regarding further aortic events has limited the evidence for exercise among aortic dissection (AD) patients. The objective was to perform a scoping review of the current concepts and gaps in the literature regarding the benefit and safety of cardiovascular testing and rehabilitation among post-AD patients. REVIEW METHODS: A scoping review of the literature search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Eligibility criteria included any studies with AD in relation to exercise rehabilitation or testing and physical or mental health. Electronic databases were queried for relevant studies (last queried, November 1, 2021). RESULTS: Six observational studies were included with a total of 381 patients with AD, all of whom underwent surgical intervention. Study heterogeneity prevented data synthesis and a formal systematic review, although four dominant themes emerged: cardiovascular-related outcomes, aorta-related outcomes, quality of life (QoL), and serious adverse events. Patients with AD have reduced baseline physical capacity and QoL. Rehabilitation programs may increase both physical status and QoL. Rates of serious adverse rates are minimal yet poorly defined. CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of apparent benefits from cardiovascular testing and rehabilitation for patients with AD who have undergone intervention, this scoping review highlights the need for increased comparative research specific to exercise among patients with AD and outcomes such as mortality and reinterventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jepsen et al. (2022) conducted a systematic review in Aortic dissection (n=381). Exercise testing and rehabilitation was evaluated on Cardiovascular-related outcomes, aorta-related outcomes, quality of life, and serious adverse events. Among 381 patients with aortic dissection, exercise rehabilitation programs may increase physical status and quality of life, though study heterogeneity prevented formal data synthesis.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: