Aortic dissection & aortic aneurysm information support group
Aortic dissection, aortic aneurysm - The aorta - Life after an aortic dissection
Long term survival Of Aortic Dissection Patients: Mt Sinai Hospital in the US
This popped up today on the auto AD google search: Personally I have come to be quite removed from the statistics in this type of report, as it suggests a 60% and a bit survival after 10 years for an acute ascending Type A with aortic arch tear (mine).
I'm at my 7 years anniversary next month - and going like a train. Way too many variable factors in these reports: age, happiness, family, health, fitness, belief in oneself, diet, exercise and a lot more. Take from it what you will: I only post it in that it might be of interest to some.
Cheers
Graeme
Tags: a, aortic, b, dissection, mt, rates, sinai, survival, type
Views: 17
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Graeme on -
ps:
If you have a day or so to spare (!) you can watch the 2008 Aortic Symposium video presentations held in the US. It's interesting in some ways with the projections for what the specialists consider will be able to be done by 2010 for AD. Be warned - its bloody and quite medical/technical!
Here's the link: http://www.aats.org/CME/2008_Aortic_Symposium_Webcast.html
Graeme
-
Permalink Reply by Charles Jackson on -
I'm not sure that quoting survival rates is very useful without further details such as age, other medical problems (e.g. coronary heart disease) etc. It isn't necessarily the AD which is primarily responsible.
Charles
-
Permalink Reply by Graeme on
-
Charles, agree wholeheartedly as per my original post comment(s). Actually gives us an insight into the mindset in a way of the medical profession and their obsession with statistics. My dad used to say 'statistics are like a lampost - you can use them to lean against - or use them to throw light on a subject'...
cheers
Graeme
-
Permalink Reply by Charles Jackson on
-
Graeme
Absolutely. If they came up with survival rates for 45 year old men with type A dissections, hypertension and high cholestrorol controlled by drugs, no replacement aortic valve and a relatively stress-free job then I would probably take some notice. I don't think there would be enough people in that situation to constitute a reasonably-sized sample though. Without some better understanding of the dataset, statistics should be viewed with caution and a healthy amount of scepticism.
Regards
Charles
-
Permalink Reply by Richard Deal on -
i work a little with statistics (albeit in a sales/manufacturing capacity) and i like the lamp post analogy from graeme's dad - although it doesn't cover the "massaged" figures i am sometimes asked to "coax" out of a dataset...
not really wanting to be gloomy, but bear in mind the acta-2 theory here too and the predisposition to aneuryse (is that even a word?)...
r
-
Permalink Reply by Charles Jackson on
-
Richard
I think that in terms of trusting the reliabity of figures I would be happier knowing the experimenter. I like to drill down into the data.
Charles
Our AD Facebook Page!
OR - Use the QR Code above
Our Twitter Feed!
Events
© 2012 Created by Graeme.
