Hybrid endovascular repair for aortic arch pathology: Intermediate outcomes and complications

Outcomes of Secondary Endovascular Aortic Repair After Frozen Elephant Trunk

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the midterm outcomes of secondary extension of frozen elephant trunk (FET) by means of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

This single-center prospective study was conducted in a tertiary aortic center on consecutive patients having undergone TEVAR with an endograft covering most of the 10 cm FET module with 2 to 4 mm oversizing. All patients were monitored by computerized tomography angiography (CTA) at sixth month and yearly thereafter.

RESULTS

From January 2015 to July 2022, among 159 patients who received FET, 30 patients (18.8%) underwent a TEVAR procedure (13 for a thoracoabdominal aneurysm, 11 for a chronic aortic dissection and 6 for an emergency procedure). All connections were successfully achieved with 2 postoperative deaths (6.6%) and 1 paraplegia (3.3%). At a median follow-up of 21 months (interquartile range [IQR], 4.2-34.7), 5 patients (25%) required a fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) extension followed by 4 patients with 5 reinterventions, 3 for a Type 3 endoleak due to disconnection between FET and TEVAR endograft, and 2 unrelated to the FET for a secondary Type 1C endoleak. All reinterventions were successful, without mortality or morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

In this series, FET connection with a TEVAR endograft was effective with low postoperative morbidity but with a risk of aortic reintervention related to disconnection between the FET and TEVAR endograft. These results suggest the need for annual CTA monitoring with no time limit in patients following connection of the FET with a TEVAR endograft.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In this series of 30 patients, midterm outcomes of secondary extension of frozen elephant trunk (FET) by thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) showed 3 disconnections (10%) with a Type 3 endoleak between FET and TEVAR. These findings suggest the need for annual CTA monitoring with no time limit. But so far, only a few studies provide some information after one year while the risk of disconnection increases over time and becomes a concern after 3 years. This is the new message brought by our study.

Hybrid repair of aortic arch with zone zero endografting-Case series with review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

We present single-institution results of types I and II hybrid procedures for aortic arch disease with 30-day and long-term results and review of the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study of all patients that underwent zone 0 endografting and open bypass from ascending aorta to the arch vessels at our institution between January 2013 and 2020. The following data for the systematic review were extracted from eligible studies: 30-day/in-hospital mortality, stroke rate, spinal cord ischemia (SCI) rate, renal failure requiring dialysis, development of retrograde dissection, early (<30 days) types I and III endoleak, follow-up length, late (>30 days) endoleak, and late (>30 days) mortality.

RESULTS

Twelve patients underwent hybrid aortic arch treatment in our institution. The most common aortic arch pathology was degenerative aortic aneurysm. The rate of retrograde dissection and SCI was 8.33%. Regarding the literature data, a total of 768 patients undergoing types I and II hybrid aortic arch debranching procedure. The pooled rate of 30-day/in-hospital mortality was 10.96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.21-14.06), SCI pooled rate was 2.91% (95% CI, 1.76%-4.33%), and retrograde dissection pooled rate was 3.22% (95% CI, 1.99-4.72).

CONCLUSION

Hybrid arch techniques provide safe alternative to open repair with acceptable short- and midterm results.

Novel hybrid treatment for extensive aortic arch aneurysms, a case report

BACKGROUND

The treatment for extensive aortic arch aneurysms involving the aortic arch and descending aorta is challenging for most cardiovascular surgeons. The surgical treatment is associated with a very high mortality rate. The optimal treatment has not been defined.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 49-year-old male was hospitalized due to chest and upper back pain. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) demonstrated there was an extensive aortic arch aneurysm extending to the left common carotid artery and descending aorta. A novel single- stage hybrid surgery was performed on the patient through two steps: treatment of the aortic arch through median sternotomy and thoracic endovascular artery repair. The patient recovered uneventfully.

CONCLUSIONS

Our single-stage hybrid repair approach is safe, simple and effective. It provides an alternative treatment for extensive aortic arch aneurysms.

Endovascular repair of a leaking aortic-arch pseudoaneurysm using graft stent combined with chimney protection to left common carotid artery: Case report and review of literature

Aortic pseudoaneurysm (PsA) is a rare but serious condition that has high mortality and morbidity rates if untreated. We report a rare case of leaking aortic-arch PsA repaired by thoracic endovascular aortic repair using graft stent with the chimney technique to protect the left common carotid artery. Unlike other cases in the literature, our case was unique, having leaking PsA not related to previous cardiac surgery or aortic dissection. The successful management of this patient using thoracic endovascular aortic repair combined with the chimney technique suggests that this approach may be an attractive therapeutic alternative to treat aortic-arch PsA.

Comparison of Total Arch and Partial Arch Transposition During Hybrid Endovascular Repair for Aortic Arch Disease

OBJECTIVE

Total arch transposition (TAT) during hybrid endovascular repair for aortic arch disease is believed to allow a better landing zone, but also to be associated with higher peri-operative mortality than partial arch transposition (PAT). Information on this issue is limited.

METHOD

This study was a retrospective analysis. All 53 consecutive patients with aortic arch disease (41 males, mean age 65.0 years) who underwent hybrid endovascular repair with TAT (zone 0, n=20) or PAT (zone 1 or 2, n=33) from 2008 to 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. The peri-operative and late outcomes of these two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics, including EuroSCORE II results, were similar in the two groups. After procedures, peri-operative mortalities and stroke rates were similar in the two groups (5.0% vs. 9.1%, p=1.000, and 10.0% vs. 6.1%, p=.627). Interestingly, all four strokes occurred in patients with a type III aortic arch irrespective of transposition type. Primary success rates (80.0% vs. 69.7%, p=.527) and type I endoleak incidences (20.0% vs. 27.3%, p=.744) were not significantly different. During follow up (mean duration 36.9 months), overall survival (89.7% vs. 87.4% at 1 year and 89.7% vs. 79.3% at 3 years; p=.375) and re-intervention free survival rates (78.6% vs. 92.0% at 1 year; 72.0% vs. 62.2% at 3 years, p=.872) were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Morbidity and mortality were high within the first year of hybrid endovascular therapy for aortic arch disease, implying that candidates for hybrid procedures need to be selected carefully. Hybrid endovascular repair with TAT was found to have peri-operative mortality, stroke, and long-term survival rates comparable with PAT, so hybrid endovascular repair may be considered, irrespective of type of arch reconstruction, when clinically indicated.

Midterm results of endovascular stent grafts in the proximal aortic arch (zone 0): an imaging perspective

BACKGROUND

Endovascular options to repair the arch and ascending aorta are rapidly evolving. Little is known about the durability of endovascular devices deployed at this location. This report describes a single-centre experience with the novel application of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) by examining clinical and radiological outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed for a cohort of patients undergoing TEVAR of the arch or ascending aorta, or both, at a single centre from November 2008-July 2012.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients were included in the study, with mean imaging follow-up of 38 months (range, 15-72 months). Two complications at the proximal landing zone in the ascending aorta were identified: 1 endoleak and 1 infolding identified at 3 and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. Clinically, both these complications were attributed to the bird-beak configuration at the proximal landing zone site. At up to 72 months of follow-up, there were no cases of retrograde dissection of the native sinus of Valsalva. There were no cases of stent graft migration, graft fracture, open surgical reintervention for aortic pathologic conditions, or late mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Early outcomes suggest that the current generation of thoracic aortic endografts can be placed in the complex anatomy of the ascending aorta and aortic arch without a high incidence of early graft fracture or migration. Future endeavors will need to focus on techniques to achieve optimal apposition with the curves of the ascending aorta. These findings are important as indications for endovascular aortic therapies expand to address proximal aortic pathologic conditions.