Objective:To evaluate the outcomes of intensive conservative treatment compared to conventional conservative treatment in patients with acute aortic syndrome(AAS).Methods:The study prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with AAS who were admitted to Beijing Anzhen Hospital, affiliated with Capital Medical University, and Beijing Dawanglu Emergency Rescue Hospital from January 2024 to December 2024. These patients with surgical contraindications or refused surgery for various reasons opted for conservative treatment. A total of 282 patients were included, and 15 patients with missing data or those who died without any treatment were excluded. Finally, 267 patients were enrolled, of whom 94 received intensive conservative treatment, and 173 received conventional conservative treatment, the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to reduce the influence of confoundings. After adjusting of baseline datas via IPTW, the survival outcomes of the two groups were compared at 14 days, 30 days, and at the end of follow-up.Results:The results showed significant differences in acute phase survival rates between the enhanced conservative treatment group and the conventional conservative treatment group at 14 days(82.40%vs.53.20%, P<0.0001). Significant survival differences were also observed at 30 days and at 276-day mid-term follow-up (96.29% vs.51.60%, P<0.0001; 78.50% vs.48.50%, P<0.0001). In the subgroup analysis, for type A aortic dissection, the enhanced conservative treatment group had higher survival rates compared to the conventional conservative treatment group at 14, 30 and 276 days (63.46% vs.41.35%, P<0.05; 52.17% vs.37.90%, P<0.05; 50.00% vs. 31.97%, P<0.05). However, for type B aortic dissection, although the enhanced conservative treatment group had higher survival rates than the conventional conservative treatment group, no statistically significant differences were observed (96.29% vs. 80.00%, P=0.054; 95.65% vs.78.37%, P=0.067; 94.12% vs.74.20%, P=0.088). Conclusion:For patients diagnosed with AAS are forced to choose conservative treatment if emergency surgery is not possible in the first place, intensive conservative treatment strategies can significantly reduce the mortality in the acute phase compared with conventional conservative treatment. Mid-term follow-up, intensive conservative treatment still has a significant survival advantage.

Objective:To evaluate the outcomes of intensive conservative treatment compared to conventional conservative treatment in patients with acute aortic syndrome(AAS).Methods:The study prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with AAS who were admitted to Beijing Anzhen Hospital, affiliated with Capital Medical University, and Beijing Dawanglu Emergency Rescue Hospital from January 2024 to December 2024. These patients with surgical contraindications or refused surgery for various reasons opted for conservative treatment. A total of 282 patients were included, and 15 patients with missing data or those who died without any treatment were excluded. Finally, 267 patients were enrolled, of whom 94 received intensive conservative treatment, and 173 received conventional conservative treatment, the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to reduce the influence of confoundings. After adjusting of baseline datas via IPTW, the survival outcomes of the two groups were compared at 14 days, 30 days, and at the end of follow-up.Results:The results showed significant differences in acute phase survival rates between the enhanced conservative treatment group and the conventional conservative treatment group at 14 days(82.40%vs.53.20%, P<0.0001). Significant survival differences were also observed at 30 days and at 276-day mid-term follow-up (96.29% vs.51.60%, P<0.0001; 78.50% vs.48.50%, P<0.0001). In the subgroup analysis, for type A aortic dissection, the enhanced conservative treatment group had higher survival rates compared to the conventional conservative treatment group at 14, 30 and 276 days (63.46% vs.41.35%, P<0.05; 52.17% vs.37.90%, P<0.05; 50.00% vs. 31.97%, P<0.05). However, for type B aortic dissection, although the enhanced conservative treatment group had higher survival rates than the conventional conservative treatment group, no statistically significant differences were observed (96.29% vs. 80.00%, P=0.054; 95.65% vs.78.37%, P=0.067; 94.12% vs.74.20%, P=0.088). Conclusion:For patients diagnosed with AAS are forced to choose conservative treatment if emergency surgery is not possible in the first place, intensive conservative treatment strategies can significantly reduce the mortality in the acute phase compared with conventional conservative treatment. Mid-term follow-up, intensive conservative treatment still has a significant survival advantage.

Objective:To investigate the clinical features, treatment and prognosis of anti-γ-aminobutyric acid type B receptor (GABA B R) encephalitis. Methods:Retrospective analysis of five patients of anti-GABA BR encephalitis from the Department of Neurology, the University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital from September 2017 to June 2019 was carried out. Clinical manifestations, auxiliary examination, and treatment were analyzed. The patients were followed up for 3.5-23.0 months to assess their prognosis. Results:Five cases of anti-GABA BR encephalitis (19-81 years old) presented acute onset, with refractory epilepsy as the main clinical manifestation. There were hyperintensive signals on T 2/fluid attenuated inversion recovery in four patients′ temporal lobe and hippocampus. Electroencephalogram showed slow wave or epileptic discharge; Lung mass was found in four patients, and all were small cell lung cancer. Five cases had poor response to first-line immunotherapy (intravenous use of pulse methylprednisolone, high dose immunoglobulin or plasma exchange), then three patients received second-line immunotherapy (rituximab, cyclophosphamide), two of whom with tumor also received tumor chemotherapy. Patients who received second-line treatment and tumor chemotherapy showed better outcome than those who only received first-line treatment. Conclusions:Anti-GABA BR encephalitis present with limbic encephalitis syndromes characterized by refractory epilepsy. For patients with poor response to first-line immunotherapy, initiating second-line immunotherapy as soon as possible can improve the prognosis significantly.