Can a trainee perform endovascular aortic repair as effectively and safely as an experienced specialist?

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is a technically demanding procedure usually carried out by highly experienced surgeons. However, in this era of modern endovascular surgery with growing numbers of patients qualifying for the procedure, the need to enhance surgical training has emerged. Our aim was to compare the technical results of EVAR in patients operated on by trainees to that of those operated on by an endovascular expert.

METHODS

Between 2016 and 2018, a total of 119 patients diagnosed with an abdominal aorta disease requiring EVAR were admitted to our clinic. Overall, we included 96 patients who underwent preoperative and postoperative computed tomography angiography and EVAR performed either by an endovascular expert (N = 51) or a trainee (N = 45).

RESULTS

We detected no difference in the baseline characteristics, indication for EVAR and preoperative anatomy between patients operated on by trainees and our endovascular expert. We noted the same incidence of endoleak type Ia occurrence (n = 2 vs n = 2, P = 1.00), reintervention rate (n = 0 vs n = 0, P = 1.00) and in-hospital mortality (n = 0 vs n = 1, P = 1.00) for operations done by trainees and the expert, respectively. There was no difference in X-ray doses or time between the 2 groups. Despite longer median operation times [112 (first quartile: 84; third quartile: 129) vs 89 (75-104) min; P = 0.03] and in-hospital stays [10 (8-13) vs 8 (7-10) days, P = 0.007] of the patients operated on by trainees, the overall clinical success of EVAR was satisfactory in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

An EVAR planned and performed by a trainee need not raise the cumulative risk of the procedure. Trainees who have undergone both mind and hand skills training can therefore carry out EVAR under the supervision of an experienced specialist as effectively and safely as experts do.

Common carotid artery true lumen flow impairment in patients with type A aortic dissection

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to evaluate clinical and neurological effects of common carotid artery (CCA) true lumen flow impairment or occlusion in patients with type A aortic dissection.

METHODS

Characteristics and imaging data of patients with dissected CCA secondary to acute type A aortic dissection from 3 institutions were analysed. We defined true lumen blood flow as unimpaired when the maximum true lumen diameter exceeded 50% of the complete CCA diameter, as impaired when the true lumen was compressed to ˃50% of the complete lumen, or as occluded.

RESULTS

Out of 440 patients, 207 presented unimpaired CCA flow, 172 impaired CCA flow and CCA occlusion was present in 61 patients. Preoperative shock (P = 0.045) or a neurological deficit (P < 0.001) were least common in patients with unimpaired CCA flow and most common in those with CCA occlusion. Non-cerebral, other-organ malperfusion was common in 37% of all patients, but the incidence was similar (P = 0.69). In patients with CCA occlusion, postoperative stroke (P < 0.001) and in-hospital mortality (0.011) were significantly higher, while the incidences were similar between patients with unimpaired and impaired CCA flow. Mixed-effects logistic regression models showed that CCA flow impairment (P = 0.23) or occlusion (P = 0.55) was not predictive for in-hospital mortality, but CCA occlusion was predictive for in-hospital stroke (odds ratio 2.166, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Shock and non-cerebral, other-organ malperfusion are common in patients with CCA dissection. While there is a high risk for stroke in patients with CCA occlusion, CCA flow impairment and occlusion were not predictive for in-hospital mortality. Surgery should not be denied to patients with CCA flow impairment or occlusion.

Management of acute and chronic aortic disease during the COVID-19 pandemic-Results from a web-based ad hoc platform

Background

To share the results of a web‐based expert panel discussion focusing on the management of acute and chronic aortic disease during the coronavirus (COVID‐19) pandemic.

Methods

A web‐based expert panel discussion on April 18, 2020, where eight experts were invited to share their experience with COVID‐19 disease touching several aspects of aortic medicine. After each talk, specific questions were asked by the online audience, and results were immediately evaluated and shared with faculty and participants.

Results

As of April 18, 73.3% answered that more than 200 patients have been treated at their respective settings. Sixty‐four percent were reported that their hospital was well prepared for the pandemic. In 57.7%, the percentage of infected healthcare professionals was below 5% whereas 19.2% reported the percentage to be between 10% and 20%. Sixty‐seven percent reported the application of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in less than 2% of COVID‐19 patients whereas 11.8% reported application in 5%–10% of COVID‐19 patients. Thirty percent of participants reported the occurrence of pulmonary embolism in COVID‐19 patients. Three percent reported to have seen aortic ruptures in primarily elective patients having been postponed because of the anticipated need to provide sufficient ICU capacity because of the pandemic. Nearly 70% reported a decrease in acute aortic syndrome referrals since the start of the pandemic.

Conclusion

The current COVID‐19 pandemic has—besides the stoppage of elective referrals—also led to a decrease of referrals of acute aortic syndromes in many settings. The reluctance of patients seeking medical help seems to be a major driver. The number of patients, who have been postponed due to the provisioning of ICU resources but having experienced aortic rupture in the waiting period, is still low. Further, studies are needed to learn more about the influence that the COVID‐19 pandemic has on the treatment of patients with acute and chronic aortic disease.

Aortic dissection reconsidered: type, entry site, malperfusion classification adding clarity and enabling outcome prediction

OBJECTIVES

Aortic dissection is complex. Imaging and treatment modalities are evolving, demanding a more differentiated but pragmatic dissection classification. Our goal was to provide a new practical classification system including Type of dissection, location of the tear of the primary Entry and Malperfusion (TEM).

METHODS

We extended the Stanford dissection classification (A and B) by adding non-A non-B aortic dissection, the location of the primary entry tear (E) and malperfusion (M). A 0 was added if the primary entry tear was not visible; 1, if it was in the ascending aorta; 2, if it was in the arch; and 3, if it was in the descending aorta (E0, E1, E2, E3). We added 0 if malperfusion was absent; 1, if coronary arteries; 2, if supra-aortic vessels; and 3, if visceral/renal and/or a lower extremity was affected (M0, M1, M2, M3). Plus (+) was added if malperfusion was clinically present and minus (-) if it was a radiological finding.

RESULTS

The new classification system was analysed in 357 patients retrospectively; distribution was 59%, 31% and 10% for A, B and non-A non-B dissections. The in-hospital mortality rate was 16%, 5% and 8% (P = 0.01). Postoperative stroke occurred in 14%, 1% and 3% (P < 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate was 22%, 14%, 40% and 0% in A E0, E1, E2 and E3 (P = 0.023), respectively. Two years after the onset of dissection, the lowest survival rate was observed in A, followed by non-A non-B and B (83 ± 3% vs 88 ± 6% vs 93 ± 3%; P = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

The new practical TEM aortic dissection classification system adds clarity regarding the extent of the disease process, enhances awareness of the disease mechanism, aids in decision-making regarding the extent of repair and helps in anticipating outcome.

Current options and recommendations for the use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in acute and chronic thoracic aortic disease: an expert consensus document of the European Society for Cardiology (ESC) Working Group of Cardiovascular Surgery, the ESC Working Group on Aorta and Peripheral Vascular Diseases, the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the ESC and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)

Since its clinical implementation in the late nineties, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the standard treatment of several acute and chronic diseases of the thoracic aorta. While TEVAR has been embraced by many, this disruptive technology has also stimulated the continuing evolution of open surgery, which became even more important as late TEVAR failures do need open surgical correction justifying the need to unite both treatment options under one umbrella. This fact shows the importance of—in analogy to the heart team—aortic centre formation and centralization of care, which stimulates continuing development and improves outcome . The next frontier to be explored is the most proximal component of the aorta—the aortic root, in particular in acute type A aortic dissection—which remains the main challenge for the years to come. The aim of this document is to provide the reader with a synopsis of current evidence regarding the use or non-use of TEVAR in acute and chronic thoracic aortic disease, to share latest recommendations for a modified terminology and for reporting standards and finally to provide a glimpse into future developments.

The Frozen Elephant Trunk Technique for the Treatment of Type B and Type Non-A Non-B Aortic Dissection

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes of patients with acute complicated or chronic Type B or non-A non-B aortic dissection who underwent the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique.

METHODS

Between April 2013 and July 2019, 41 patients presenting with acute complicated (n = 29) or chronic (n = 12) descending thoracic aortic dissection were treated by the FET technique, which was the treatment of choice when supra-aortic vessel transposition would not suffice to create a satisfactory proximal landing zone for endovascular aortic repair, when a concomitant ascending or arch aneurysm was present, or in patients with connective tissue diseases.

RESULTS

One patient (2%) died intra-operatively secondary to an aortic rupture in dwnstream aortic segments. No post-operative deaths occurred. Four patients (10%) suffered a non-disabling posto-operative stroke and were discharged with no clinical symptoms (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0, n = 1), no significant disability (mRS 1, n = 2), or with slight disability (mRS 2, n = 1). No spinal cord ischaemia was observed. The primary entry tear was either surgically resected or excluded from circulation in all patients. During follow up, one patient (2%) died after two years (not aorta related) and 16 patients (39%) underwent an aortic re-intervention after 7.7 [interquartile range 0.7, 15.8] months (endovascular aortic repair: n = 14; open thoraco-abdominal aortic replacement: n = 1, hybrid approach: n = 1).

CONCLUSION

The FET technique is an effective treatment option for acute complicated and chronic Type B or non-A non-B aortic dissection in patients in whom primary endovascular aortic repair is non-feasible. While the post-operative outcome is acceptable with a relatively low incidence of non-disabling strokes, this study also underlines the considerable need for aortic re-interventions. Continuous follow up of all patients undergoing the FET procedure is essential.

How to minimize air embolisms during thoracic endovascular aortic repair with Relay Pro?

The aim of this study was to evaluate the volume of air released from Relay Pro NBS thoracic stent grafts using different de-airing methods. The gas volume was measured in an in vitro experimental setting. Stent grafts were de-aired via (i) standard saline flushing (40 ml), (ii) increased volume saline flushing (120 ml), (iii) carbon dioxide followed by 40 ml saline flushing and (iv) de-airing with 40 ml of saline in an ultrasound bath. The volume of gas released was measured separately while introducing the folded stent graft in the delivery device into the simulated aorta (step 1) and while deploying it outside the delivery device (step 2). Median air volumes released during steps 1 and 2 after flushing with 40 ml of saline were 0.09 (1st-3rd quartile 0.06-0.21) and 0.14 (0.11-0.15) ml, respectively. The volume of air released during step 2 was significantly less [0.09 (0.08-0.10) ml] after de-airing with 120 ml saline (P = 0.049). Neither de-airing with carbon dioxide nor in an ultrasonic bath led to a reduction in the volume of gas released during step 2. Air remaining after de-airing with a standard 40 ml of saline was released partially during stent graft introduction into the aorta and partially during final deployment. The most effective method of reducing air volume was de-airing with increased saline volume.

Diameter Changes in Traumatic Aortic Injury: Implications for Stent-Graft Sizing

OBJECTIVES

 The aim of this study was to compare aortic diameters from admission computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans to postoperative aortic diameters in patients with traumatic aortic injury (TAI) and evaluate the influence of substantial blood loss on aortic diameter.

METHODS

 The aortic databases of two tertiary university centers were retrospectively screened for patients with TAI between February 2002 and February 2019. Concomitant organ injuries, bone fractures, blood loss, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Aortic diameters were measured in CTA upon admission and were compared with the CTA before discharge at three different aortic levels (mid-ascending, 5 cm distal to the end of the stent graft, and at the celiac trunk level).

RESULTS

 We identified 45 patients, aged 43 (first quartile; third quartile [26; 55]) years with a TAI treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair. The most frequent cause of TAI was a car accident (n = 24). Concomitant injuries were seen in all but one patient. Bone and pelvic fractures were seen in 40 (89%) and 15 (33%) patients, respectively. Type III aortic injury was present in 25 patients (56%). Increase of aortic diameter after stabilization was +1.7 mm (-0.6 mm; 2.5 mm; p = 0.004) at the mid-ascending aorta, +2.1 mm (0.2 mm; 3.8 mm; p < 0.001) 5 cm distal to the stent graft, and +1.5 mm (0.5 mm; 3.2 mm; p < 0.001) at the celiac trunk level.

CONCLUSION

 In patients with TAI, the aortic diameter is significantly reduced as compared with the aortic diameter at discharge. The reduction of aortic diameter might be caused by hemorrhagic shock and should be kept in mind for appropriate stent-graft sizing.

What Is the Best Method to Achieve Safe and Precise Stent-Graft Deployment in Patients Undergoing TEVAR?

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aortic pathologies requires sufficient landing zone of ideally more than 25 mm for safe anchoring of the stent-graft and prevention of endoleaks. In the aortic arch and at the thoracoabdominal transition, landing zone length is usually limited by the offspring of the major aortic side-branches. Exact deployment of the stent-graft to effectively use the whole length of the landing zone and to prevent occlusion of one of the side-branches is key to successful TEVAR. There are numerous techniques described to lower blood pressure and to reduce or eliminate aortic impulse to facilitate exact deployment of stent-grafts including pharmacologic blood pressure lowering, adenosine-induced asystole, inflow occlusion, and rapid pacing. Aim of this review was to assess the current literature to identify which of the techniques is best suited to prevent displacement and allow for precise placement of the stent-graft and safe balloon-molding.

Endo-Bentall for proximal aortic dissection: from conception to application

The endovascular treatment of pathologies of the ascending aorta has not been incorporated into routine clinical practice. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the endovascular treatment of pathologies of the ascending aorta, particularly type A aortic dissection. A thorough analysis and discussion of anatomical, physiological, clinical and technical challenges, and obstacles is performed. Conventional straight stent-grafts alone are not capable of fixing the entire complex underlying problem in the vast majority of patients with acute type A aortic dissection. An endovascular valve-carrying conduit consisting of a proximal transcatheter aortic valve connected to a covered stent-graft would be able to close a primary entry tear in the ascending aorta, ensure coronary perfusion, initiate true lumen expansion, treat malperfusion, treat aortic regurgitation, drain any pericardial effusion through a transapical approach, and possibly stabilize the distal aorta. Two thirds of all patients with acute aortic dissection are potential candidates for endovascular treatment, and the concept may help to significantly improve survival in patients with acute aortic dissection.

Distal Stent Graft-Induced New Entry After TEVAR or FET: Insights Into a New Disease From EuREC

BACKGROUND

The study sought to learn about incidence and reasons for distal stent graft-induced new entry (dSINE) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or after frozen elephant trunk (FET) implantation, and develop prevention algorithms.

METHODS

In an analysis of an international multicenter registry (EuREC [European Registry of Endovascular Aortic Repair Complications] registry), we found 69 dSINE patients of 1430 (4.8%) TEVAR patients with type B aortic dissection and 6 dSINE patients of 100 (6%) patients after the FET procedure for aortic dissection with secondary morphological comparison.

RESULTS

The underlying aortic pathology was acute type B aortic dissection in 33 (44%) patients, subacute or chronic type B aortic dissection in 34 (45%) patients, acute type A aortic dissection in 3 patients and remaining dissection after type A repair in 3 (8%) patients, and acute type B intramural hematoma in 2 (3%) patients. dSINE occurred in 4.4% of patients in the acute setting and in 4.9% of patients in the subacute or chronic setting after TEVAR. After the FET procedure, dSINE occurred in 5.3% of patients in the acute setting and in 6.5% of patients in the chronic setting. The interval between TEVAR or FET and the diagnosis of dSINE was 489 ± 681 days. Follow-up after dSINE was 1340 ± 1151 days, and 4 (5%) patients developed recurrence of dSINE. Morphological analysis between patients after TEVAR with and without dSINE showed a smaller true lumen diameter, a more accentuated oval true lumen morphology, and a higher degree of stent graft oversizing in patients who developed dSINE.

CONCLUSIONS

dSINE after TEVAR or FET is not rare and occurs with similar incidence after acute and chronic aortic dissection (early and late). Avoiding oversizing in the acute and chronic settings as well as carefully selecting patients for TEVAR in postdissection aneurysmal formation will aid in reducing the incidence of dSINE to a minimum.

Evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of maximal aortic diameter, length and volume for prediction of aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

Management of thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) comprises regular diameter follow-up until the indication criterion for prophylactic surgery is reached. However, this approach is unable to predict the majority of acute type A aortic dissections (ATAADs). The current study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ascending aortic diameter, length and volume for occurrence of ATAAD.

METHODS

This two-centre observational cohort study retrospectively screened 477 consecutive patients who presented with ATAAD between 2009 and 2018. Of those, 25 (5.2%) underwent CT angiography (CTA) within 2 years before dissection onset. Aortic diameter, length and volume of these patients ('pre-ATAAD') were compared with those of TAA controls (n=75). Receiver operating curve analysis was performed to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the three different measurements.

RESULTS

96% of patients with pre-ATAAD did not meet the surgical diameter threshold of 55 mm before dissection onset. Maximal aortic diameters (45 (40-49) mm vs 46 (44-49) mm, p=0.075) and volume (126 (95-157) cm³ vs 124 (102-136) cm³, p=0.909) were comparable between patients with pre-ATAAD and TAA controls. Conversely, ascending aortic length (84±9 mm vs 90±16 mm, p=0.031) was significantly larger in patients with pre-ATAAD. All three parameters had an area under the curve of >0.800. At the 55 mm cut-off point, the maximal diameter yielded a positive predictive value (PPV) of 20%. While maintaining same specificity levels, measurements of aortic volume and length showed superior diagnostic accuracy (PPV 55% and 70%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Measurements of aortic volume and length have superior diagnostic accuracy compared with the maximal diameter and could improve the timely identification of patients at risk for ATAAD.

Landing Zone Remodelling after Endovascular Repair of Dissected Descending Aorta

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine geometric changes in the proximal and distal aortic landing zones after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for acute descending aortic dissection.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of clinical and radiological data. Included are patients who underwent TEVAR for acute descending aortic dissection between 2004 and 2018. Analysed are the proximal and distal landing zones' initial geometries and their change at follow up. Median follow up time was 2.3 (first quartile 0.9, third quartile 4.5) years.

RESULTS

One hundred and one patients were included (93 type B and 8 non-A non-B dissections, aged 65 (57, 74) years old, and 29% female). Dissection extended down to the abdominal aorta in 69% patients. The proximal landing zone was non-dissected in 92 patients. The diameters of non-dissected proximal landing zones increased by 3 (-1, 5; p < .001) mm at follow up. The distal landing zone was dissected in 84% of patients. The diameters of dissected distal landing zones had increased at follow up by 7 (3, 12) mm and 4 (1, 10; both p < .001) mm measured in true lumen and total aorta, respectively, observed one year after TEVAR. Stent grafts reached their nominal diameter at follow up in 22% and 17% of proximal and distal landing zones, respectively. There were seven proximal and 10 distal stent graft induced new entries at follow up. Aortic re-intervention was necessary in 23 patients entailing 19 TEVAR extensions and four open aortic repairs.

CONCLUSION

The distal landing zone in patients undergoing TEVAR for descending aortic dissection is frequently dissected and is associated with the risk of d-SINE at follow up and the need for re-interventions after TEVAR - factors that emphasise the importance of long term follow up.

Preoperative neurological deficit in acute type A aortic dissection

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to evaluate postoperative outcomes in patients with type A aortic dissection with preoperative neurological deficits independent of shock.

METHODS

Between 2002 and 2017, 150 of 1600 patients, operated on for aortic dissection type A in 3 centres, presented with preoperative new onset neurological deficits. Postoperative outcomes were classified using a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) as ‘no to moderate disability’ (mRS 0–3) or as ‘poor clinical outcome’ (mRS 4–6). Clinical and radiographic data were analysed.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients (62%) had no to moderate disability and 57 (38%) had a poor clinical outcome. The in-hospital mortality rate was 18% (28 patients). Patients with poor clinical outcomes were significantly older (P = 0.01) and had a significantly higher incidence of hypertension (P = 0.04), history of stroke (P = 0.03) and common carotid artery occlusion (left common carotid artery: P = 0.01; right common carotid artery: P &lt; 0.01). One-third of all patients developed haemodynamic instability (P = 0.27). Cardiopulmonary bypass (P &lt; 0.01) and cross-clamp (P = 0.03) times were significantly longer in patients with poor clinical outcomes. Age (odds ratio 1.041; P = 0.02) and history of stroke (odds ratio 2.651; P = 0.03) were predictive of poor clinical outcome; coma was not. Haemorrhagic transformation occurred in 7 patients without any independent predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with preoperative neurological deficit have no to moderate disability postoperatively but commonly develop preoperative haemodynamic instability. This study suggests that an immediate surgical approach may be reasonable in patients with preoperative neurological deficit or coma.