Report on the results of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute, complicated, type B aortic dissection at 30 days and 1 year from a multidisciplinary subcommittee of the Society for Vascular Surgery Outcomes Committee

Malperfusion syndromes in aortic dissections

Aortic dissection remains a challenging clinical scenario, especially when complicated by peripheral malperfusion. Improvements in medical imaging have furthered understanding of the pathophysiology of malperfusion events in association with aortic dissection, including the elucidation of different mechanisms of branch vessel obstruction. Despite these advances, malperfusion syndrome remains a deadly entity with significant mortality. This review presents the latest knowledge regarding the pathogenesis of aortic dissection complicated by malperfusion syndrome, and discusses the diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines for management of this vicious entity.

Surgical Fenestration for Lower Limb Ischemia Developing from Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection: A Report of 2 Cases

Lower limb ischemia caused by type B aortic dissection typically presents with a leg-threatening condition in the acute phase. However, in some cases, lower limb ischemia symptom develops as intermittent claudication in the chronic phase. Although surgical fenestration has been used for treating ischemic complications of aortic dissection, it has recently become an alternative option for such cases because of the significant advance of endovascular treatments. We report 2 cases of chronic type B aortic dissection complicated by lower limb ischemia. Two male patients aged 57 and 43 years presented with intermittent claudication more than 2 weeks after the onset of the disease. On the basis of anatomic condition of the dissected aorta, we successfully performed surgical fenestration through a median laparotomy. In the current endovascular era, surgical fenestration remains an effective and durable option for treating lower limb ischemia caused by chronic type B aortic dissection.

Complicated Acute Aortic Syndromes Affecting the Descending Thoracic Aorta: Endovascular Treatment Compared With Open Repair

BACKGROUND

For patients with complicated acute thoracic aortic syndromes, endovascular treatment, when feasible, is preferred over open surgery. However, there are limited data on the long-term benefits of endovascular treatment in complicated acute aortic syndromes affecting the descending thoracic aorta.

HYPOTHESIS

The endovascular treatment is expected to have more favorable long-term mortality and fewer late reintervention in complicated acute thoracic aortic syndromes.

METHODS

Of 155 consecutive patients with acute aortic syndromes, 94 met the inclusion criteria of the study; 63 underwent endovascular repair (group 1) and 31 underwent open repair (group 2). Patients with a diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome localized in the descending thoracic aorta distal to the emergence of the left subclavian artery, complicated by rupture, malperfusion syndrome, and/or acute aortic expansion, were included. Indications for repair of the descending thoracic aorta included impending rupture in 70.2%, malperfusion syndrome in 29.8%, and persistence of pain with aortic expansion (aortic diameter >40 mm) in 2 patients.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period (63.0 ± 24.6 months), the cumulative survival free from cardiovascular death rates at 5 years was 92.0% and 51.4% in group 1 and 2, respectively (log rank P = 0.0001). Late mortality related to the aorta was 1.6% with thoracic endovascular aortic repair and 0% with surgical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular treatment in patients with complicated acute thoracic aortic syndromes localized at the descending thoracic aorta is feasible and safe, with a lower rate of early complications and similar long-term benefits when compared with surgical treatment.

Usefulness of contrast-enhanced transoesophageal echocardiography to guide thoracic endovascular aortic repair procedure

AIMS

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is commonly considered as a valid alternative to surgery. Endoleaks occurrence is one of the principal limitations of TEVAR. Transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is often adopted in adjunct to fluoroscopy and angiography (ANGIO) during stent-graft implantation. In the present study, we compare intraprocedural ANGIO, TEE, and contrast-enhanced TEE (cTEE), and we also evaluate their accuracy in early endoleaks detection and characterization.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifty-four patients with thoracic aortic disease suitable for TEVAR were prospectively enrolled in the study. After stent placement, the result of the procedure was assessed by ANGIO, TEE, and cTEE. The use of contrast (Sonovue, Bracco) significantly improved TEE quality (P = 0.0001). cTEE was superior in entry tears, false and true lumen and aneurysm thrombosis identification, and microtears and ulcer-like projections detection before stent deployment. After stent deployment, cTEE was more accurate than TEE and ANGIO in the detection of slow flow in the false lumen and in the aneurismal sac (P = 0.0001), and in the remaining flow identification (P = 0.0001). Notably, cTEE is more accurate in the endoleaks detection (P = 0.0001) and in the incomplete stent expansion diagnosis and need for a further balloon inflation (P 0.002), or a further stent implantation (P 0.006), compared with TEE and ANGIO.

CONCLUSION

TEVAR procedures are improved by the complimentary use of contrast fluoroscopy, multiplane TEE with Doppler flow interrogation, and cTEE. This triple imaging approach provides additional information in all phases of the procedure improving safety of stent-grafting and the procedural outcomes.

Management of acute aortic dissection

A new appraisal of the management of acute aortic dissection is timely because of recent developments in diagnostic strategies (including biomarkers and imaging), endograft design, and surgical treatment, which have led to a better understanding of the epidemiology, risk factors, and molecular nature of aortic dissection. Although open surgery is the main treatment for proximal aortic repair, use of endovascular management is now established for complicated distal dissection and distal arch repair, and has recently been discussed as a pre-emptive measure to avoid late complications by inducing aortic remodelling.

Thoracic aortic aneurysm and dissection

Aortic dissection is the most devastating complication of thoracic aortic disease. In the more than 250 years since thoracic aortic dissection was first described, much has been learned about diseases of the thoracic aorta. In this review, we describe normal thoracic aortic size; risk factors for dissection, including genetic and inflammatory conditions; the underpinnings of genetic diseases associated with aneurysm and dissection, including Marfan syndrome and the role of transforming growth factor beta signaling; data on the role for medical therapies in aneurysmal disease, including beta-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; prophylactic surgery for aneurysm; surgical techniques for the aortic root; and surgical and endovascular management of aneurysm and dissection for different aortic segments.

Trends in aortic dissection hospitalizations, interventions, and outcomes among medicare beneficiaries in the United States, 2000-2011

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology of aortic dissection (AD) has not been well described among older persons in the United States. It is not known whether advancements in AD care over the last decade have been accompanied by changes in outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Inpatient Medicare data from 2000 to 2011 were used to determine trends in hospitalization rates for AD. Mortality rates were ascertained through corresponding vital status files. A total of 32 057 initial AD hospitalizations were identified. The overall hospitalization rate for AD remained unchanged at 10 per 100 000 person-years. For 30-day and 1-year mortality associated with AD, the observed rate decreased from 31.8% to 25.4% (difference, 6.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.2-6.5; adjusted, 6.4%; 95% CI, 5.7-6.9) and from 42.6% to 37.4% (difference, 5.2%; 95% CI, 5.1-5.2; adjusted, 6.2%; 95% CI, 5.3-6.7), respectively. For patients undergoing surgical repair for type A dissections, the observed 30-day mortality decreased from 30.7% to 21.4% (difference, 9.3%; 95% CI, 8.3-10.2; adjusted, 7.3%; 95% CI, 5.8-7.8) and the observed 1-year mortality decreased from 39.9% to 31.6% (difference, 8.3%; 95% CI, 7.5-9.1%; adjusted, 8.2%; 95% CI, 6.7-9.1). The 30-day mortality decreased from 24.9% to 21% (difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, 3.5-4.2; adjusted, 2.9%; 95% CI, 0.7-4.4) and 1-year decreased from 36.4% to 32.5% (difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, 3.3-4.3; adjusted, 3.9%; 95% CI, 2.5-6.3) for surgical repair of type B dissection.

CONCLUSIONS

Although AD hospitalization rates remained stable, improvement in mortality was noted, particularly in patients undergoing surgical repair.

Midterm survival after thoracic endovascular aortic repair in more than 10,000 Medicare patients

OBJECTIVE

Aneurysms and dissections of the descending thoracic aorta represent a complex substrate with a variety of therapeutic options. The introduction of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has revolutionized the treatment of thoracic aortic disease. However, longitudinal analyses of post-TEVAR outcomes appropriately stratified by aortic disease remain limited.

METHODS

A total of 11,996 patients undergoing TEVAR from 2005-2010 were identified from the Medicare/Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services database. Patients were stratified by underlying aortic disease and the presence of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Cox proportional hazards analysis determined predictors of survival from TEVAR.

RESULTS

After TEVAR, patients had a median survival of 57.6 months (95% confidence interval, 54.9-61.3 months). Although patients without CPT codes had significantly fewer recorded comorbidities, TEVAR survival was comparable between patients with and without CPT codes (56.3 vs 59.5 months, P = .54). The early and late incidence of death varied significantly by aortic disease. Patients with aortic rupture, acute aortic dissection, and aortic trauma had the highest early incidence of death, whereas late survival was highest in patients with acute aortic dissection, aortic trauma, and isolated thoracic aortic aneurysm. Although hospital TEVAR volume was not associated with survival, an independent hospital effect (determined by using a mixed-effect Cox model) associated certain hospitals with a hazard for death 50% of what it was at other hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR has been applied to a multitude of aortic diseases in the Medicare population; early and late post-TEVAR survival varies by aortic disease. The late incidence of death remains high in TEVAR recipients, although certain aortic diagnoses such as acute aortic dissection, aortic trauma, and isolated thoracic aortic aneurysm were associated with improved late survival. An independent hospital effect, but not hospital volume, is correlated with post-TEVAR survival. Future analyses of TEVAR outcomes using the Medicare database should adjust for underlying aortic diagnoses and the presence of CPT codes.

Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Acute Type B Aortic Dissection

Background—

The outcome of patients with acute type B aortic dissection (ABAD) is strongly related to their clinical presentation. The purpose of this study was to investigate predictors for mortality among patients presenting with ABAD and to create a predictive model to estimate individual risk of in-hospital mortality using the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

Methods and Results—

All patients with ABAD enrolled in IRAD between 1996 and 2013 were included for analysis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to investigate predictors of in-hospital mortality. Significant risk factors for in-hospital death were used to develop a prediction model. A total of 1034 patients with ABAD were included for analysis (673 men; mean age, 63.5±14.0 years), with an overall in-hospital mortality of 10.6%. In multivariable analysis, the following variables at admission were independently associated with increased in-hospital mortality: increasing age (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–1.06; P =0.044), hypotension/shock (OR, 6.43; 95% CI, 2.88–18.98; P =0.001), periaortic hematoma (OR, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.38–6.78; P =0.006), descending diameter ≥5.5 cm (OR, 6.04; 95% CI, 2.87–12.73; P <0.001), mesenteric ischemia (OR, 9.03; 95% CI, 3.49–23.38; P <0.001), acute renal failure (OR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.68–7.75; P =0.001), and limb ischemia (OR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.05–8.68; P =0.040). Based on these multivariable results, a reliable and simple bedside risk prediction tool was developed.

Conclusions—

We present a simple prediction model using variables that are independently associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with ABAD. Although it needs to be validated in an independent population, this model could be used to assist physicians in their choice of management and for informing patients and their families.

Lower limb malperfusion in type B aortic dissection: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lower limb malperfusion (LLM) syndrome occurs in up to 40% of complicated type B aortic dissections (TBAD) and in up to 71% of TBAD with malperfusion syndrome. This syndrome is associated with higher 30-day mortality. The aim of this systematic review was to provide clinical and procedural data of patients with LLM syndrome secondary to TBAD.

METHODS

The PubMed database was systematically searched from January 2000 to June 2014 for English-language publications reporting on demographic data of patients with LLM secondary to TBAD.

RESULTS

A total of 29 papers were included (10 original articles and 19 case reports), reporting on a total of 138 patients (mean age =58±12 years; male =87%). Lower limb complications developed in acute and chronic TBAD in 134 (97%) and 4 (3%) cases, respectively. LLM presented with acute limb ischemia in 120 (87%) patients. Bilateral clinical presentation occurred in 56% (40/72) of cases. LLM was the only clinically detected malperfusion in 52% of cases (44/84). In 40% (35/84) and 25% (21/84) of cases, LLM was clinically associated with renal and visceral malperfusion, respectively. Radiological imaging showed renal, celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery involvement in 53% (47/88), 31% (27/88) and 34% (30/88) of cases, respectively. Medical, surgical and endovascular treatments were performed in 22 (16%), 51 (37%) and 65 (47%) patients, respectively. Thirty-day morbidity was 31% (13/42) and 46% (6/13) following surgical and endovascular treatment, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 14% (5/36) and 8% (2/26) following surgical and endovascular treatment, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

LLM syndrome secondary to TBAD usually developed during the acute phase and, in most cases, presented with acute limb ischemia. Bilateral clinical presentation occurred in more than half of cases. Renal and visceral malperfusion were frequently associated with lower limb flow reduction but LLM was the only clinically detected malperfusion in more than half of patients. Surgical fenestration was burdened with significant complication rates and 30-day mortality. Endovascular procedures showed lower mortality but complication rates remained high.

Early and late management of type B aortic dissection

The management of type B aortic dissection is undergoing profound changes with timely TEVAR accepted as first-line strategy in the setting of complicated dissection; with recent technological advances and in experienced hands this intervention is considered safe and life-saving. With the ability to remodel the dissected aorta as a result of scaffolding even pre-emptive endovascular treatment is being considered and supported by long-term stability and often prevention of aneurysmal expansion. This insight and a growing number of silent risk conditions (resistant hypertension, partial false lumen thrombosis) may lower the threshold for TEVAR in asymptomatic patients in the subacute phase. In the chronic phase of a type B dissection patients are usually free of symptoms, however, with the expanding false lumen at risk of rupture. Advanced TEVAR options (including branches and fenestrations) are likely to be used more often than open surgical replacement of such aneurysmatic segment of the dissected aorta in that chronic phase. All dissection patients should be offered lifelong surveillance.

Emergency endovascular stent grafting in acute complicated type B dissection

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess midterm results of emergency endovascular stent grafting for patients with life-threatening complications of acute type B aortic dissection.

METHODS

Between March 1999 and November 2011, 110 patients (86 men, 24 women) with complications of acute type B aortic dissection (mean age, 61 years; range, 19-87 years) were treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair for malperfusion (55.5%) or aortic rupture (53.6%) in five major European referral centers and one U.S. referral center. Additional comorbidities included hypertension in 90 patients (82%), diabetes in 14 patients (13%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in six patients (6%). Eleven patients (10%) had undergone previous aortic surgery.

RESULTS

Overall hospital mortality was 12% (n = 13), with 14 late deaths after hospital discharge. In-hospital complications occurred in 32 patients (36%); 10 patients developed postoperative renal failure, five patients experienced new permanent neurologic symptoms, and six patients (5.4%) experienced retrograde type A aortic dissection. Furthermore, nine patients (8%) developed an early type I endoleak. Actuarial survival at 1 and 5 years was 85% and 73%, respectively. Postprocedural computed tomography angiography showed complete or partial thrombosis of the false lumen at the stent graft level in 61% and 23% of all patients, respectively. Freedom from treatment failure according to the Stanford classification was 82%, 75%, and 59% at 1, 3, and 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair of complicated acute type B aortic dissection is proven to be a technically feasible and effective treatment modality in this relatively difficult patient cohort. Short-term and midterm results are persuasive; however, the long-term efficacy needs to be further evaluated.

Systematic review of outcomes of combined proximal stent-grafting with distal bare stenting for management of aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

Available data on outcomes of combined proximal stent-grafting with distal bare stenting for management of aortic dissection are limited. The objective of this study was to provide a systematic review of outcomes of this approach.

METHODS

Studies involving combined proximal stent-grafting with distal bare stenting for management of aortic dissection were systematically searched and reviewed through MEDLINE databases.

RESULTS

A TOTAL OF FOUR STUDIES WERE INCLUDED: 108 patients treated for management of acute (n=54) and chronic (n=54) aortic dissection. The technical success rate was 95.3% (range, 84-100%). The 30-day mortality rate was 2.7% (range from 0% to 5%). The morbidity rate occurring within 30 days was 51.8% (range from 0% to 65%) and included stroke (2.7%), paraplegia (2.7%), retrograde dissection (1.8%), renal failure (14.8%), severe cardiopulmonary complications (5.5%) and bowel ischemia (0.9%). The incidence of type I endoleak was 9.2% (10/108). During follow-up, 5 (4.6%) deaths were related to aortic rupture or aortic repair. Mean re-intervention rate was 12.9%. Two cases (1.9%) of delayed retrograde type A dissection and one case of aortobronchial fistula (0.9%) were reported. The most common delayed complication was thoracic stent-graft migration (4.7%). The rate of device failure was 9.2%. Favorable aortic remodeling was observed: studies reporting midterm follow-up of the true lumen demonstrated a high rate of both false lumen regression and true lumen expansion. At 12 months, complete false lumen thrombosis was observed at the thoracic level in 70.4% and at the abdominal level in 13.5% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined proximal stent-grafting with distal bare stenting appears to be a feasible approach for the management of Type B aortic dissection. Although this approach clearly improved true lumen perfusion and diameter, it failed to completely suppress false lumen patency. However, it should be acknowledged that contemporary data on this approach is limited to small studies with variable results.

Best surgical option for arch extension of type B dissection: the endovascular approach

Despite advances in surgical techniques and postoperative management, the in-hospital mortality rate for patients undergoing conventional open surgical repair for type B dissections is still significant. In light of this, the less invasive surgical procedure for acute type B aortic dissections, defined as thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), was developed. Despite some controversy, the use of TEVAR for the management of type B aortic dissections has become commonplace. Generally, the main entry tear in type B aortic dissection is located in the vicinity of the orifice of the left subclavian artery (LSA). The proximal landing zone in the aortic arch must be secured as long as the aim of TEVAR for type B dissection is primary entry closure. This requires hybrid surgery that includes the use of open surgical procedures, such as debranching for revascularization of cervical branches. Despite the presence of challenging anatomic conditions in the aortic arch, hybrid repair has evolved as an increasingly viable alternative, and promising early and long-term results have been reported. As the next step, fenestrated and branched TEVAR techniques have recently been reported with satisfactory early results. In the coming years, there will be intense competition to develop the devices themselves, improve delivery systems, and supplement devices with auxiliary functions. Thus there is high expectations for the next generation and how they will improve and advance treatment methods of TEVAR for type B aortic dissections.

Endovascular repair as a bridge to surgical repair of an aortobronchial fistula complicating chronic residual aortic dissection

Endovascular and open surgical repair have been used in patients with descending thoracic aortic dissection; however, the appropriate treatment is debated. We describe the case of a 60-year-old woman who had a symptomatic, chronic, residual, descending thoracic aortic dissection that was complicated by an aortobronchial fistula. She underwent emergent thoracic endovascular stent-grafting but remained symptomatic. Computed tomographic angiograms showed a contained rupture into the lower lobe of the left lung. The patient underwent definitive surgery to remove the stents, reconstruct the aorta, and resect the nonviable lung tissue. The remainder of her postoperative course was uneventful, and she was discharged from the hospital 13 days after the 2nd operation. Results of genetic testing confirmed an earlier presumptive diagnosis of Marfan syndrome. In an emergency, the best initial option for patients with a complicated descending thoracic aortic dissection might be thoracic endovascular aortic repair, which could serve as a bridge to definitive open repair.

Perioperative transesophageal echocardiography for aortic dissection

PURPOSE

Aortic dissection is an infrequent but serious condition that often requires immediate operative intervention. We explore recent developments in the classification of aortic dissection and perioperative transesophageal echocardiography that assist with quantifying the severity of disease and facilitate its management.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We describe the pivotal role of echocardiography in relation to key surgical considerations such as cannulation, aortic root surgery, perfusion in the aortic arch vessels, stenting in hybrid arch repair, and timing of preventative surgery.

CONCLUSION

Developments in the classification of aortic dissection have improved our perspective and understanding of the key presenting features that affect mortality. Improvements in patient outcome may be achieved in part by appropriately timed echocardiography-guided surgery.

Application of protective stents in endovascular repair of acute complicated Stanford type B aortic dissections

PURPOSE

To describe the use of protective stents in the endovascular repair of acute complicated Stanford type B aortic dissections.

METHODS

From 2009 to 2011, 33 patients (27 men; mean age 47 years, range 31-73) with acute complicated Stanford type B aortic dissection underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) assisted by protective stents. In all cases, the proximal and distal landing zones differed in size by >5 mm, and the primary entry tear was in the proximal descending aorta. A bare self-expanding stent (protective stent) was deployed initially at the intended distal landing site of the primary stent-graft in the true lumen. The intention was that the bare stent would prevent excessive dilation of the distal end of the stent-graft in the vicinity of the entry tear, thus avoiding intimal rupture.

RESULTS

Successful stent deployment and sealing of the entry tear was achieved in all patients. The median diameter and length of the protective bare stents was 20.3 mm (range 18-24) and 72.7 mm (range 60-80), respectively, while the corresponding dimensions of the covered stent-grafts were 32.8 mm (range 26-40) and 157.4 mm (range 120-200 mm), respectively. There was no stent twisting, migration, of rupture of the false or true lumen. Computed tomography 1 week postoperatively demonstrated closure of the primary entry tear with thrombosis of the false lumen in all cases. No patients were lost to follow-up, which has ranged from 3 months to 3 years. No late endoleaks or stent complications, such as angulation, dislodgment, persistent leaks, branch obstruction, or stent-graft migration, have been observed, and there has been no chronic progressive true or false lumen dilatation, recurrences, or deaths.

CONCLUSION

Adjunctive use of a protective stent when treating acute Stanford type B aortic dissections in which the diameters of the proximal and distal landing zones differ by >5 mm is feasible and safe and provides good short-term outcomes.

Five-year results for endovascular repair of acute complicated type B aortic dissection

INTRODUCTION

Despite a current lack of U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval for the indication, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has replaced open surgical management for acute complicated type B aortic dissection due to promising short- and midterm data. However, long-term results, with a view toward durability and need for secondary procedures, are limited. As such, the objective of the present study is to report long-term outcomes of TEVAR for acute (≤ 2 weeks from symptom onset) complicated type B dissection.

METHODS

Between July 2005 and September 2012, 50 consecutive patients underwent TEVAR for management of acute complicated type B dissection at a single referral institution. Patient records were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained clinical database.

RESULTS

Indications for intervention included rupture in 10 (20%), malperfusion in 24 (48%), and/or refractory pain/impending rupture in 17 (34%). One patient (2%) had both rupture and malperfusion indications. Ten (20%) patients required one or more adjunctive procedures, in addition to TEVAR, to treat malperfusion syndromes. In-hospital and 30-day rates of death were both 0%; 30-day/in-hospital rates of stroke, permanent paraplegia/paraparesis, and new-onset dialysis were 2% (n = 1), 2% (n = 1), and 4% (n = 2), respectively. Median follow-up was 33.8 months [interquartile range, 12.3-56.6 months]. Overall survival at 5 and 7 years was 84%, with no deaths attributable to aortic pathology. Thirteen (26%) patients required a total of 17 reinterventions over the study period for type I endoleak (n = 5), metachronous aortic pathology (n = 5), persistent false lumen pressurization via distal fenestrations (n = 4), type II endoleak (n = 2), or retrograde acute type A aortic dissection (n = 1). Median time to first reintervention was 4.5 months (range, 0 days-40.3 months). Of the 17 total reinterventions, six (35%) were performed using open techniques and 11 (65%) with endovascular or hybrid methods; there was no difference in survival between patients who did or did not require reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the excellent short-term outcomes of TEVAR for acute complicated type B dissection and demonstrates the results to be durable and sustained over long-term follow-up. Although aortic reinterventions were required in one-quarter of patients, no aortic-related deaths were observed. These data support the use of TEVAR for acute complicated type B aortic dissection but also highlight the importance of life-long aortic surveillance by an experienced aortic referral center in order to identify and treat complications of the underlying disease process and treatment, as well as new aortic pathologies, as they arise.

Renal autotransplant for subsequent endovascular exclusion of the thoracoabdominal aorta

In the last 20 years, endovascular procedures have radically altered the treatment of diseases of the aorta. The objective of endovascular treatment of dissections is to close the entry point to redirect blood flow toward the true lumen, thereby achieving thrombosis of the false lumen. In extensive chronic dissections that have evolved with the formation of a large aneurysm, the dissection is maintained from the end of the endoprosthesis due to multiple orifices, or reentries, that communicate with the lumens. In addition, one of the primary limitations of this technique is when the visceral arteries have disease involvement. In this report we present a case where, despite having treated the entire length of the descending thoracic aorta, the dissection was maintained distally, leading to progression of the diameter of the aneurysm. After reviewing the literature, and to the best of our knowledge, we describe the first case in which renal autotransplant was performed to allow for subsequent exclusion of the aorta at the thoracoabdominal level using a fenestrated endoprosthesis for the celiac trunk and the superior mesenteric artery.

Progress in management of malperfusion syndrome from type B dissections

OBJECTIVE

Malperfusion syndrome is a known predictor of poor outcomes in acute type B dissection. We describe our experience with revascularization in the acute setting.

METHODS

Patients undergoing intervention for ischemia complicated acute type B dissection between November 1999 and March 2011 were reviewed. Details of presenting condition, surgical intervention, and postoperative course were collected. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses included survival and freedom from reintervention using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 61 patients were identified with malperfusion in at least one territory, including spinal cord 7/61 (12%), mesenteric 37/61 (61%), renal 45/61 (73%), and lower extremity 38/61 (62%). Thoracic stent grafts were placed in all patients, and 41% of patients required adjunctive branch vessel stenting. After intervention, resolution of the ischemia was reported in 57/61 (93%) of patients. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality was 21.3%. The 6-month, 1-year, and 5-year survival was 75% (95% CI, 65%-87%), 71% (95% CI, 61%-84%), and 56% (95% CI, 43%-74%), respectively. The 6-month, 1-year, and 5-year freedom from reintervention was 84% (95% CI, 75%-95%), 76% (95% CI, 65%-90%), and 42% (95% CI, 24%-76%), respectively. Territory of ischemia was not independently associated with mortality, but placement of a stent graft proximal to the subclavian artery was associated with poor outcome hazard ratio 2.91 (95% CI, 1.09-8.11; P = .034).

CONCLUSIONS

Malperfusion in any territory at the time of presentation in patients with type B dissections can be treated with endovascular intervention with acceptable outcomes. Opposed to branch vessel intervention alone, increased aortic intervention with regard to proximal coverage may signify more serious disease is associated with worse outcome.