Background: There is emerging evidence to support pre-emptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) intervention for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (unTBAD). Pre-emptive intervention would be particularly beneficial in patients that have a higher baseline risk of progressing to complicated TBAD (coTBAD). There remains debate on the optimal clinical, laboratory, morphological and radiological parameters which would identify the highest-risk patients that would benefit most from pre-emptive TEVAR. Aim: This review summarises evidence on the clinical, laboratory, and morphological parameters that increase the risk profiles of unTBAD patients. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was carried out on multiple electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid and Scopus in order to collate all research evidence on the the clinical, laboratory, and morphological parameters that increase the risk profiles of unTBAD patients Results: At present, there are no clear clinical guidelines using risk-stratification to inform the selection of unTBAD patients for TEVAR. However, there are noticeable literature trends that can assist with the identification of the most at-risk unTBAD patients. Patients are at particular risk when they have refractory pain and/or hypertension, elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), larger aortic diameter and larger entry tears. These risks should be considered alongside factors that increase the procedural risk of TEVAR to create a well-balanced approach. Advances in biomarkers and imaging are likely to identify more pertinent parameters in future to optimise the development of balanced, risk-stratified treatment protocols. Conclusion: There are a variety of risk profiling parameters that can be used to identify the high-risk unTBAD patient, with novel biomarkers and imaging parameter emerging. Longer-term evidence verifying these parameters would be ideal. Further randomized controlled trials and multicentre registry analyses are also warranted to guide risk-stratified selection protocols.

Background Up to a quarter of inpatients in high-income countries self-report beta-lactam allergy (BLA), which if incorrect, can increase use of alternative antibiotics that impact on bacterial resistance.. The epidemiology of BLA in low- and middle-income African countries is unknown. Methods Point-prevalence surveys were conducted at seven hospitals (adult, pediatric, government and private-funded, district- and tertiary-level) in Cape Town, South Africa between April 2019 and June 2021. Ward prescription records and interviews were conducted to identify BLA patients. De-labeling was attempted at the tertiary allergy clinic at Groote Schuur hospital. Findings A total of 1486 hospital inpatients were surveyed (1166 adults; 308 children). Only 48 (3.2%) patients self-reported a BLA with a higher rate amongst private- versus government-funded hospitals [6.3% vs 2.8%, p=0.014]. Using the PEN-FAST tool, only 10.4% (5/48) of self reported BLA patients were classified as high risk for true penicillin hypersensitivity. Antibiotics were prescribed to 70.8% (34/48) of self reported BLA patients, with 64.7% (22/34) receiving a beta-lactam. Despite three attempts to contact patients for de-labelling at the allergy clinic, only 3/36 underwent in vivo testing, with no positive results and one patient proceeded toa negative oral challenge. Interpretation Unlike high-income countries, self-reported BLA is low amongst inpatients in South Africa. The majority of self-reported BLA were low risk for type 1 hypersensitivity, but out-patient de-labeling efforts were largely unsuccessful. Funding None