Endovascular Versus Open Repair for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury: Short-Term Results

Patterns, management options and outcome of blunt thoracic aortic injuries: a 20-year experience from a Tertiary Care Hospital

BACKGROUND

Blunt Thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is the second leading cause of mortality after head injuries in blunt trauma patients. There is a paucity of information on the presentation, management and outcome of BTAIs from the Middle Eastern region. We explored the patterns, management options and outcomes of BTAIs in a level I trauma center.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study on all adult patients who were admitted with BTAIs between 2000 and 2020. Patients were compared for the management option (conservative vs endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) vs open surgery) and outcomes. Comparison between the respective groups was performed using one-way analysis of variance for continuous variables, and Pearson chi-square test for categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier curve and Cox regression analysis were performed for the outcome.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients had BTAI (82% male) with mean age 37.3 ± 14.5 years. The mean injury severity score was 30 ± 10 and the aortic injury grade was III (I-IV). Grade III (41.4%) and Grade IV (33.3%) injuries were more common followed by Grade II (13.8%) and Grade I (11.5%). Forty percent of cases were treated conservatively whereas aortic interventions were performed in 60% of cases (n = 52). The TEVAR was performed in 33 patients (63.5%), and 19 (36.5%) were treated with open surgery (14 with graft interposition and 5 with clamp and direct repair). The aortic injury grade was significantly higher in the intervention groups as compared to the conservative group (p = 0.001). Patients with Grade IV injuries were more likely to be treated by open repair whereas a higher frequency of patients with grade III was managed by TEVAR (p = 0.001). All the patients with Grade I-II were treated conservatively. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 25.3% and it was significantly higher in the conservative group (40.0%) in comparison to the open repair (31.6%) and TEVAR (6.1%) group (P = 0.004). More of the non-survivors sustained head injuries (P = 0.004), had higher ISS (P = 0.001) and greater aortic injury grades (P = 0.002), and were treated non-operatively (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

BTAI seems not common in trauma, however, one quarter of cases died in a level 1 trauma center, prehospital deaths were not analyzed, and postmortem examination was lacking. The associated head injury and aortic injury grade have an impact on the management option and hospital outcome. The conservative and TEVAR options were performed almost equally in 78% of cases. TEVAR and open surgery were performed only for aortic injury grade III or IV whereas the conservative treatment was offered for selected cases among the 4 injury grades. However, the mortality was higher in the conservative followed by the open surgery group and mostly due to the associated severe head injury. TEVAR should be considered for patients requiring intervention unless contraindicated due to technical difficulties. Appropriately selected patients with low-grade injuries may be managed conservatively. Long-term follow-up is needed in young adults for concerns of aortic remodeling and complications.

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Endovascular Repair Versus Open Surgery for Ruptured Descending Thoracic Aorta

OBJECTIVE

The comparisons between thoracic endovascular aortic repair for ruptured thoracic aorta (TEVAR) and open surgery (OS) have not been well documented, although both procedures have been widely utilized. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness and safety between TEVAR and OS in the repair of ruptured descending thoracic aorta.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to find relevant studies to assess TEVAR and OS outcomes. The comparative parameters were perioperative mortality (30 day/in-hospital), 1 year mortality, paraplegia or paraparesis, renal insufficiency, stroke, pulmonary embolism, re-intervention rate, pulmonary complications, and cardiac complications. A fixed-effects model was applied to calculate the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) on pooled outcomes from different studies.

RESULTS

Eighteen observational trials involving 2088 patients were evaluated (TEVAR=560; OS=1528). Meta-analysis showed that TEVAR in repairing the ruptured descending thoracic aorta was associated with lower perioperative mortality (OR=0.47; 95% CI: 0.34-0.66; p<0.01), 1 year mortality (OR=0.46; 95% CI: 0.29-0.75; p<0.01), renal insufficiency incidence (OR=0.56; 95% CI: 0.33-0.93; p=0.03), and pulmonary complications (OR=0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.92; p=0.01) when compared with OS. There was no significant difference between TEVAR and OS in terms of paraplegia, stroke, pulmonary embolism, cardiac complications, and early re-intervention rates. However, the late re-intervention rate was higher in the TEVAR group than that in the OS group.

CONCLUSIONS

When repairing the ruptured descending thoracic aorta, TEVAR may be performed rapidly and safely. TEVAR is associated with lower rates of perioperative morbidity and early postoperative complications than OS.

Blunt aortic injuries in the new era: radiologic findings and polytrauma risk assessment dictates management strategy

PURPOSE

Blunt aortic injuries (BAI) have historically been considered an indication for emergent surgical intervention. Nevertheless, the observation that the outcome of the concomitant traumatic injuries has a major impact on prognosis and the rise of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) as an effective therapy for BAI have significantly changed in recent years the treatment algorithm of this condition. Our objective was to identify findings associated with the aortic injury which would be the best predictor of prognosis, with the objective of guiding the decision-making process for selecting the optimal timing of aortic repair.

METHODS

We reviewed blunt aortic injuries from 3 Level I Trauma Centers from July 2008 to December 2016. We analyzed overall and BAI-related 30-day mortality in relation to: hemodynamics, timing of treatment, TEVAR vs open repair, and aortic injury grade as defined by the Society for Vascular Surgery. Based on computed tomographic angiography (CT scan) imaging, we selected the radiologic aortic findings most indicative of high mortality risk, which we defined as "Radiographic Severe Injury" (RSI): (1) total/partial aortic transection, (2) active contrast extravasation, or (3) the association of 2 of more of the following: contained contrast extravasation > 10 mm, periaortic hematoma, and/or mediastinal hematoma with thickness > 10 mm, or significant left pleural effusion.

RESULTS

Of a total of 76 consecutive patients, 50 (66%) underwent immediate repair, 24 (31%) delayed aortic repair, and 2 (3%) died prior to repair. 58 patients (76%) had TEVAR, while 16 (24%) had open repair. Overall mortality was 18% and BAI-related mortality was 13%. In BAI-related mortalities, 70% of patients had RSI. Patients with high risk of overall mortality had hypotension and tachycardia (SBP < 100, HR ≥ 100), high ISS, and required vasopressors. Factors only associated with BAI-related mortality included RSI.

CONCLUSION

CT scan findings suggestive of RSI are predictive of mortality associated with BAI. Radiologic assessment of the severity of the aortic injury with characterization for the presence of RSI may represent the key factors to determine the optimal timing of treatment of the aortic injury and guide the overall treatment strategy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

The endovascular repair of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury in Asia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury, the second leading cause of death from trauma, poses unique challenges in its management. However, there has not yet been a corresponding consolidated series of outcomes reported in Asia, which this systematic review aims to address.

METHOD

This review was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Searches were performed on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Database for studies performed in Asia reporting the endovascular management of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analyses of pooled proportions were performed using the metaprop command in STATA. This review has been prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018083773).

RESULTS

Sixteen retrospective cohort studies were included, reporting a total of 238 patients. The pooled Injury Severity Score was 32.5 (95%CI 27.8-37.1). The pooled mean time to operation from diagnosis was 39.2 hours (95%CI 24.6-53.8 hours), and operation time was 100 min (95%CI 63.5-136.5 min). The pooled rate of procedural conversion from endovascular repair to open surgery was 0.17% (95%CI 0-3.7%), and the proportion of left subclavian artery coverage was 55% (95%CI 37-72%). The pooled prevalence of intra-operative all-cause and aortic-related mortality was 0.72% (95%CI 0-4.9%) and 0.27% (95%CI 0-3.8%), respectively. The pooled prevalence of 30-day all-cause and aortic-related mortality was 2.2% (95%CI 0.16-5.6%) and 2.1% (95%CI 0-3.7%), respectively. In terms of 30-day complication, the pooled prevalence rates of type 1 endoleak, endograft complications, vascular access injury, strokes, and aortic re-rupture were 1.2%, 0.34%, 0.14%, 0.02%, and 0.01%, respectively. There were no cases of types II and III endoleak, and renal failure.

CONCLUSION

Short- to mid-term results for thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury in Asia are encouraging. However, there is a distinct disparity in reporting across Asia. We propose a prospective database for outcome reporting post thoracic endovascular aortic repair in this patient population, and ongoing follow up to assess long-term efficacy of this treatment strategy.

Limited influence of blunt aortic injuries on the outcome of polytraumatized patients: a matched pair analysis

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic lesions of great vessels such as the aorta are life-threatening injuries. There is limited evidence about the influence of traumatic aortic injuries in multiple trauma patients in particular with regard to posttraumatic complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of blunt thoracic aortic injuries in multiple trauma patients compared to a multiple trauma cohort without this specific injury. In addition, the safety of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) in multiple trauma patients was analyzed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed. We included all multiple trauma patients (ISS ≥ 16, age > 14 years) between 2005 and 2014 with (group BTAI) and without (group nBTAI) blunt traumatic aortic injuries who were treated at our level-1 trauma center. Demographic as well as clinical parameters were analyzed including injury pattern, mechanism of injury, posttraumatic complications such as ARDS, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and others. A matched pair analysis was performed by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

In total, 721 patients were enrolled (group BTAI: n = 45; nBTAI: n = 676). In the initial study population, surgical intervention was done in n = 32 (71.1%) patients (TEVAR: n = 25; 78.1%), there was an increased AIS_Chest and overall injury severity in group BTAI with associated significantly more posttraumatic complications in group BTAI. The matched pair analysis consisted of 42 patients per group. Beside an increased ventilation time, no significant differences were evident after the matching process. There was a trend to increased risk for SIRS using binary logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple trauma patients with blunt thoracic aortic injuries who are treated at a level-1 trauma center show a comparable outcome matched to their counterparts without aortic injuries. Our study confirms that using TEVAR in polytraumatized patients is a safe procedure. In all patients treated with TEVAR, there were no procedure-related complications, especially no neurological deficit.

Endovascular Repair in Acute Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection: 3-Year Results from the Valiant US Investigational Device Exemption Study

Acute complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a potentially catastrophic, life-threatening condition. If left untreated, there is a high risk of aortic rupture, irreversible organ or limb damage, or death. Several risk factors have been associated with acute complicated TBAD, including age and refractory hypertension. In the acute phase, even uncomplicated patients are more prone to develop complications if hypertension and pain are left medically untreated. Innovations in stent graft technologies have incrementally improved outcomes since their first use for this condition in 1999, though improvement is needed in mitigating periprocedural complications, adverse events, and mortality. In the past decade, endovascular repair has become the preferred treatment because of its superior outcomes to open repair and medical therapy. The Valiant Captivia Thoracic Stent Graft System is a third-generation endovascular stent graft with advancements in minimally invasive delivery, conformability to the anatomy, and the minimization of adverse sequelae. Herein, this stent graft is briefly reviewed and its 3-year outcomes are presented. Freedom from all-cause and dissection-related mortality was 79.1% and 90.0%, respectively. The Valiant Captivia Stent Graft represents a safe, effective intervention for acute complicated TBAD. Continued surveillance is needed to verify its longer-term durability.

Endovascular treatment of traumatic thoracic aortic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

To provide an overview of the experience of endovascular treatment for traumatic thoracic aortic lesions (TTAL). Thoracic aortic injury secondary to high-energy chest trauma constitutes an emergency situation with potentially devastating outcome. In the present time, the majority of patients are treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair. The aim of this study was to provide a systematic overview of endovascular aortic repair in patients with TTAL with special attention to perioperative mortality, paraplegia, stroke, influence of left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage herein, and long-term stent-related complications.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed and Embase were searched for studies describing endovascular treatment of TTAL in the period between January 1st, 2000 and January 30th, 2016. The methodological quality of articles was assessed using the MINORS score and PRISMA guidelines. Data on early mortality, perioperative complications, and long-term stent-related complications were extracted.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 2005 reports were screened, and 74 publications were finally included in the analysis describing treatment of 1882 patients. Early mortality rate, paraplegia rate, and stroke rate were 7.5%, 0.4%, and 1.5%, respectively. LSA coverage did not increase the risk of stroke. The severity of injuries had a positive association on early mortality. Late stent related mortality and morbidity were uncommon.

CONCLUSIONS

TTAL can be treated endovascularly with low mortality and (neurological) morbidity. LSA coverage does not increase the risk of neurological complications but is associated with a moderate risk of left arm ischemia. Long-term stent-related complications are rare, but the available data is limited.

Evaluation and management of blunt traumatic aortic injury: a practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

BACKGROUND

Blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI) is the second most common cause of death in trauma patients. Eighty percent of patients with BTAI will die before reaching a trauma center. The issues of how to diagnose, treat, and manage BTAI were &filig;rst addressed by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) in the practice management guidelines on this topic published in 2000. Since that time, there have been advances in the management of BTAI. As a result, the EAST guidelines committee decided to develop updated guidelines for this topic using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework recently adopted by EAST.

METHODS

A systematic review of the MEDLINE database using PubMed was performed. The search retrieved English language articles regarding BTAI from 1998 to 2013. Letters to the editor, case reports, book chapters, and review articles were excluded. Topics of investigation included imaging to diagnose BTAI, type of operative repair, and timing of operative repair.

RESULTS

Sixty articles were identi&filig;ed. Of these, 51 articles were selected to construct the guidelines.

CONCLUSION

There have been changes in practice since the publication of the previous guidelines in 2000. Computed tomography of the chest with intravenous contrast is strongly recommended to diagnose clinically signi&filig;cant BTAI. Endovascular repair is strongly recommended for patients without contraindications. Delayed repair of BTAI is suggested, with the stipulation that effective blood pressure control must be used in these patients.

Long-term efficacy of endovascular vs open surgical repair for complicated type-B aortic dissection: a single-center retrospective study and meta-analysis

This study aimed to evaluate the long-term survival and risk factors of traditional open surgical repair (OSR) vs thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for complicated type-B aortic dissection (TBAD). A total of 118 inpatients (45 OSR vs 73 TEVAR) with TBAD were enrolled from January 2004 to January 2015. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards analysis were performed to identify the long-term survival rate and independent predictors of survival, respectively. Meta-analysis was used to further explore the long-term efficacy of OSR and TEVAR in the eight included studies using Review Manager 5.2 software. An overall 10-year survival rate of 41.9% was found, and it was similar in the two groups (56.7% OSR vs 26.1% TEVAR; log-rank P=0.953). The risk factors of long-term survival were refractory hypertension (OR=11.1; 95%CI=1.428-86.372; P=0.021] and preoperative aortic diameter >55 mm (OR=4.5; 95%CI=1.842-11.346; P=0.001). Long-term survival rate did not differ significantly between OSR and TEVAR (hazard ratio=0.87; 95%CI=0.52-1.47; P=0.61). Compared with OSR, TEVAR did not show long-term advantages for patients with TBAD. Refractory hypertension and total aortic diameter >55 mm can be used to predict the long-term survival of TBAD in the Chinese Han population.

Late diagnosis of silent thoracic aortic rupture presented as a right pleural effusion

Patients with ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm rarely present in a stable clinical condition. A man was referred to our hospital with the diagnosis of ruptured saccular aneurysm of the descending thoracic aorta. He successfully underwent both endovascular graft repair and open thoracotomy.

Open repair of blunt thoracic aortic injury remains relevant in the endovascular era

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) has been a major advance in the treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI), although many patients still undergo open repair. This study was undertaken to evaluate outcomes with open repair and TEVAR for BTAI.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review of all patients with BTAI at a single Level I trauma center from 2001 through 2009 was performed. Patients were grouped according to treatment modality, ie, open repair, TEVAR, or medical management. Direct comparison using standard statistical methods was made between patients undergoing open repair and TEVAR since late 2006 when TEVAR began at our institution using standard statistical methods. Outcomes variables included mortality, paraplegia, length of stay, ICU stay, and ventilator requirements.

RESULTS

There were 69 patients in the study, with 36 (52.2%) undergoing open repair, 10 receiving TEVAR (14.5%), 10 patients managed medically (14.5%), and 13 (18.8%) who died during triage. Overall mortality in the pre-TEVAR era was 29.6%. Since the introduction of TEVAR, there have been 8 open repairs. Patients undergoing open repair were significantly younger (32 vs 58 years; p = 0.002) and had smaller aortic diameter (18 mm vs 24.5 mm; p < 0.001) than those undergoing TEVAR. Overall mortality since the introduction of TEVAR has dropped to 12.0% (p = 0.097).

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR and open repair should be viewed as complementary rather than competing modalities for the treatment of BTAI. Having both available allows selection of the most appropriate management technique for each patient, with subsequent improvement in outcomes.

Preprocedural planning for endovascular stent-graft placement

Endovascular stent grafts have become a viable treatment for aortic thoracic and abdominal aneurysms in both elective and emergent situations. Computed tomographic (CT) angiography is the primary tool for determining eligibility for this procedure. This article discuses the preprocedural evaluation of an endovascular stent candidate. Evaluation begins with identification of the aneurysm pathology and its relationship to treatment efficacy. The radiologist must evaluate the aneurysm geometry for compatibility with stent hardware. Aneurysm features that suggest a contraindication must be recognized. Procedures that involve a combination of endovascular stenting and surgical revascularization are discussed so that the reader understands the limits of stent eligibility. Vascular access for stent placement must also be evaluated for the ability to accommodate stent delivery. The radiologist also must be familiar with CT imaging protocols and alternative methods of imaging that can evaluate stent feasibility. The utility of three-dimensional processing is discussed.

Injuries of the thoracic aorta and its branches

nema

Endovascular aortic repair versus open surgical repair for descending thoracic aortic disease a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) reduces death and morbidity compared with open surgical repair for descending thoracic aortic disease.

BACKGROUND

The role of TEVAR versus open surgery remains unclear. Metaregression can be used to maximally inform adoption of new technologies by utilizing evidence from existing trials.

METHODS

Data from comparative studies of TEVAR versus open repair of the descending aorta were combined through meta-analysis. Metaregression was performed to account for baseline risk factor imbalances, study design, and thoracic pathology. Due to significant heterogeneity, registry data were analyzed separately from comparative studies.

RESULTS

Forty-two nonrandomized studies involving 5,888 patients were included (38 comparative studies, 4 registries). Patient characteristics were balanced except for age, as TEVAR patients were usually older than open surgery patients (p = 0.001). Registry data suggested overall perioperative complications were reduced. In comparative studies, all-cause mortality at 30 days (odds ratio [OR]: 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33 to 0.59) and paraplegia (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.63) were reduced for TEVAR versus open surgery. In addition, cardiac complications, transfusions, reoperation for bleeding, renal dysfunction, pneumonia, and length of stay were reduced. There was no significant difference in stroke, myocardial infarction, aortic reintervention, and mortality beyond 1 year. Metaregression to adjust for age imbalance, study design, and pathology did not materially change the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Current data from nonrandomized studies suggest that TEVAR may reduce early death, paraplegia, renal insufficiency, transfusions, reoperation for bleeding, cardiac complications, pneumonia, and length of stay compared with open surgery. Sustained benefits on survival have not been proven.

Endovascular grafts for treatment of traumatic injury to the aortic arch and great vessels

BACKGROUND

Treatment of traumatic vascular injury using endovascular techniques has evolved as endovascular capabilities have advanced over the past several decades. Several endovascular techniques have been employed to address the challenges of traumatic arterial injury, including coil embolization and the use of stents, which may be either bare metal or covered with graft material. Compared with traditional surgical repair, endovascular stent grafting for the repair of traumatic arterial injury offers the advantage of decreased morbidity because a remote access site may be used, avoiding surgical dissection and lengthy operating times.

METHODS

A Medline (1995-2007) search was performed to find all studies discussing the use of endovascular means to treat supradiaphragmatic arterial trauma.

RESULTS

In this review of 195 studies published between January 1995 and December 2007, the overall technical success rate of endovascular treatment of supradiaphragmatic arterial injury was 96.7%, and the complication rate was 6.4%.

CONCLUSION

The results of this review suggest a potential morbidity and mortality benefit over traditional open repair; however, long-term data are lacking. Long-term follow-up for stent durability is of particular concern in the trauma population, which tends to comprise younger patients with minimal atherosclerotic disease. The success of endovascular techniques is also limited by the availability of skilled interventionalists, properly outfitted angiography suites, and suitable stent graft devices. Despite these challenges, the potential advantages of endovascular stenting make it a welcome addition to the armamentarium of the vascular interventionalist who treats arterial traumatic injuries.

Current management of traumatic rupture of the descending thoracic aorta

Traumatic rupture of the descending thoracic aorta remains a leading cause of death following major blunt trauma. Management has evolved from uniformly performing emergent open repair with clamp and sew technique to include open repair with mechanical circulatory support, medical management and most recently, endovascular repair. This latter approach appears, in the short term, to be associated with perhaps better outcome, but long term data is still accruing. While an attractive option, there are specific anatomic and physiologic factors to be considered in each individual case.

Endovascular intervention in thoracic arterial trauma

The management of thoracic vascular injury has improved dramatically over the past two decades. The availability of multi-row detector CT has facilitated early diagnosis and incorporation of minimally invasive endograft repair for traumatic aortic injury has improved mortality and paraplegia rates. This review evaluates the available data on stent-graft repair of acute blunt traumatic aortic injury and traumatic great vessel injury with regard to safety and efficacy in comparison with conventional open surgical repair.

Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BAI) is a rare but often fatal injury that occurs with severe polytrauma. Immediate diagnosis and treatment of BAI are essential for a successful outcome. We reviewed our experience with 20 patients with BAI treated at a Level I trauma center between 1995 and 2006. The mean Injury Severity Score was 38 ± 14 and 14 patients had an abnormal Glasgow Coma Score; associated injuries included abdomen in 13 patients, extremity in 12, and head in six. Chest x-ray (CXR) findings were suggestive of aortic injury in 15 patients, equivocal in three, and showed no evidence of aortic injury in two. Diagnosis was made by CT angiography (CTA) in 17 patients, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in two, and formal angiography in one. Sixteen patients underwent operative repair of BAI. Of these, eight also underwent laparotomy, six had operative repair of extremity fractures, and three had pelvic embolization. Five patients died, three of whom were treated nonoperatively, and length of hospitalization in survivors was 32 ± 20 days. BAI is rare and often associated with multiple life-threatening injuries complicating diagnosis and treatment. Our data support the aggressive use of CTA even when classic CXR findings are not present. When CT must be delayed for abdominal exploration, intraoperative TEE is useful.