Early and Midterm Outcomes of Open Surgical Correction After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Incidence, Predictors, and Implications of Secondary Aortic Intervention Following Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Type B Dissection

BACKGROUND

Secondary aortic intervention (SAI) following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is not uncommon. However, a satisfactory management system has not been established for these patients. We aimed to report our single-center experience with SAI after prior TEVAR for type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

From January 2010 to May 2017, 860 eligible patients with TBAD underwent TEVAR. One hundred seven (12.4%) patients required SAI, either endovascularly (n=76) or surgically (n=31). The main indications for SAI were entry flow (n=58 [54.2%]), aneurysm expansion of the proximal or remote aorta (n=26 [24.3%]), retrograde type A aortic dissection (n=11 [10.3%]), distal stent-graft-induced new entry tear (n=6 [5.6%]), and stent migration (n=4 [3.7%]). The Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to determine the degree of freedom from SAI and the prognosis. Cox proportional hazards were used to screen for risk factors for SAI and poor prognosis.

RESULTS

The overall 30-day mortality rate after SAI was 4.7% (n=5): endovascular (n=2 [2.6%]) vs open surgery (n=3 [9.7%]; p=0.145). The cumulative survival rates with or without SAI were 86.3%±3.6% vs 95.7%±0.8% at 3 years and 82.0%±4.2% vs 92.2%±1.1% at 5 years, respectively (log-rank p<0.001). Although no significant difference in survival was observed, the incidence of SAI was significantly greater in patients who underwent TEVAR during the chronic phase (acute [11.6%] vs subacute [9.6%] vs chronic [27.8]; p<0.001). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that prior TEVAR in the chronic phase (hazard ratio [HR]=1.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.03-2.90; p=0.039), maximum aortic diameter (HR=1.05, 95% CI=1.04-1.07; p<0.001), and arch involvement (HR=1.48, 95% CI=1.01-2.18; p=0.048) were predictors of the incidence of SAI. In addition, the maximum aortic diameter was demonstrated to be the only risk factor for prognosis after adjusting for confounding factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for chronic TBAD patients should be reconsidered. Open surgery is preferable for those with proximal progression, whereas endovascular treatment is more suitable for distal lesions. Close surveillance and timely reintervention after TEVAR, whether via endovascular techniques or open surgery, are necessary to prevent devastating complications.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The management of patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is challenging. We summarized our single-center experience regarding secondary aortic intervention after TEVAR for TBAD. We found that TEVAR for chronic TBAD patients should be carefully evaulated, and open surgery is recommended for those with proximal progession, while endovascular treatment is more preferable for distal lesions.

Vascular covered stent and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for Aortoesophageal fistula caused by esophageal fishbone: a case report

BACKGROUND

Aortoesophageal fistula (AEF) is a rare condition characterized by communication between the aorta and esophagus. AEF caused by an esophageal foreign body is even rare, and there is currently no recommended standard treatment protocol. We report a case of delayed aortic rupture after the endoscopic removal of a fish bone, which was successfully treated with a combined approach of vascular stenting and thoracic surgery.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 33-year-old man presented to the hospital after experiencing chest discomfort for 3 days following the accidental ingestion of a fish bone. Under endoscopic guidance, the fish bone was successfully removed, and the patient was subsequently admitted for medical therapy. On the fourth postoperative day, the patient suddenly developed hematemesis, and chest computed tomography angiography revealed the presence of an AEF. This necessitated urgent intervention; hence, thoracic surgery was performed and a vascular-covered stent was placed. Following the surgical procedure, the patient received active medical treatment, recovered well, and was successfully discharged from the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with esophageal perforation caused by foreign bodies, hospitalization for observation, computed tomography angiography examination, early use of antibiotics, and careful assessment of aortic damage are advised. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair and esophageal rupture repair may have benefits for the treatment of AEF.

Surgical Repair of Two Kinds of Type A Aortic Dissection After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Background

Retrograde dissection is now recognized as an important complication following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The purpose of this study is to describe two different situations of TAAD after TEVAR. We will introduce the surgical methods used to repair TAAD following TEVAR at our center, and evaluate its long-term prognosis.

Methods

Between January 2010 and October 2019, 50 patients who had previously received TEVAR treatment for TBAD were admitted to our center for repair of a type A aortic dissection. According to the patients’ CT angiographies and intra-operative findings, we identified two distinct groups: a retrograde group (stent-induced new aortic injury, with retrograde extension involving the ascending aorta) and an antegrade group (entry tear located in the aortic root, ascending aorta or the aortic arch, away from the edges of the stent grafts). The options for treatment of the proximal aorta were Bentall procedure (12/50, 24.0%) and ascending aorta replacement (38/50, 76.0%). All patients underwent total arch replacement (TAR) and frozen elephant trunk (FET) implantation. Survival over the follow-up period was evaluated with the Kaplan–Meier survival curve and the log-rank test.

Results

The median interval time from prior TEVAR to reoperation was 187 days (IQR: 30.0, 1375.0 days). 18.0% of TAAD after TEVAR did not have any obvious symptoms at the time of diagnosis, most of which were found on routine follow-up imaging. The patients in the retrograde group were younger than those in the antegrade group (44.0 ± 9.4 vs. 51.4 ± 10.5 years, P = 0.012). No significant differences in the incidence of post-operative complications or mortality were noted between the two groups. The mean follow-up time was 3 years. No late death or complications occurred after one year following surgery upon follow-up. The asymptomatic survival rate one year after surgery was 90.0%.

Conclusion

The TAR and FET technique was feasible and effective for complicated TAAD after TEVAR. The surgical success rate and long-term prognosis of patients undergoing the timely operation are satisfactory.

An aorto-oesophageal fistula treated with total arch repair combined with oesophageal repair

Aorto-oesophageal fistula is a rare but fatal disease. Open surgical repair or endotube repair of aorta and oesophagus save patients from circulatory deterioration, major haematemesis and severe infection. Here we present a rare case of an aorto-oesophageal fistula in the right hemi-arch caused by a fish bone treated with an alternative surgical strategy. Total aortic arch repair using the frozen elephant trunk procedure combined with oesophageal repair were performed. No aortic fistula, oesophageal fistula or artificial graft infection occurred in the follow-up.

Survival and cause of death after aortic arch aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to identify differences in prognosis, causes of death, and outcomes between open and endovascular repair for aortic arch aneurysms.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the survival status and causes of death determined from the medical records of 124 consecutive elderly patients (age>70 years) with aortic arch aneurysms that were treated between 2010 and 2018 at our hospital. Forty patients (male, N.=30; mean age, 76 years) underwent open repair and 84 (male, N.=68; mean age, 78 years) underwent endovascular repair.

RESULTS

Early postoperative complications (10.0% vs. 6.3%; P=0.4) and rates of in-hospital death (2.5% vs. 6.3%; P=0.2) did not significantly differ between open and endovascular repair. Cumulative long-term and event free survival rates at eight years were similar in both groups (78.7% vs. 66.3%, P=0.1 and 66.6% vs. 58.4%; P=0.4, respectively). The causes of death at follow-up after endovascular repair comprised malignancies in 11 (52.4%) patients and cardiopulmonary and cerebral events unrelated to aortic aneurysms in 10 (47.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Early and late outcomes did not statistically differ after both procedures. However, the prevalence of cancer-related death occurring late after arch repair was significantly higher after endovascular repair. The most important observation from this series was that significantly more patients died of malignant disease during follow-up after endovascular repair than open repair.

Aortoesophageal fistula: review of trends in the last decade

We reviewed articles on aortoesophageal fistula (AEF) published between January, 2009 and December, 2018. Postoperative aortic disease was the most common cause of AEF, followed by primary aortic aneurysm, bone ingestion, and thoracic cancer. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) was the most common initial therapy for primary aortic disease, rather than graft replacement. Secondary AEF developed between 1 and 268 months, and between 1 and 11 months after the initial therapy for aortic disease and thoracic cancer, respectively. TEVAR trended to be preferred over surgery for aortic lesions because of its minimal invasiveness and certified hemostasis. In contrast, esophagectomy was preferred for esophageal lesions to remove the infectious source. A combination of surgery for the aorta (TEVAR, graft replacement or repair) and esophagus (esophagectomy, esophageal stent or repair) was usually adopted. Each graft replacement or esophagectomy was associated with a favorable prognosis for aortic or esophageal surgery, and the combination of graft replacement and esophagectomy generally improved the prognosis remarkably. Antibiotic therapy was given to 65 patients, with 20 receiving multiple antibiotics aimed at strong effects and the type of antibiotic described as broad-spectrum in 29 patients. Meropenem, vancomycin, and fluconazole were the most popular antibiotics used to prevent graft or stent infection. In conclusion, graft replacement and esophagectomy can achieve a favorable prognosis for patients with AEF, but strong, broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy might be required to prevent sepsis after surgery.

Explantation of a failed endovascular stent graft in a patient with a type B dissection

We report a patient who underwent insertion of an endovascular stent graft in the descending aorta for an aneurysmal type B dissection. The patient developed a proximal type I endoleak which required explantation of the graft and replacement of the descending aorta. Carotid artery cannulation was utilized for antegrade perfusion during the period of circulatory arrest.

Secondary Open Aortic Procedure Following Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: Meta-Analytic State of the Art

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair is characterized by a substantial need for reintervention. Secondary open aortic procedure becomes necessary when further endoluminal options are exhausted. This synopsis and quantitative analysis of available evidence aims to overcome the limitations of institutional cohort reports on secondary open aortic procedure.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Electronic databases were searched from 1994 to the present date with a prospectively registered protocol. Pooled quantification of pre/intraoperative variables, and proportional meta-analysis with random effect model of early and midterm outcomes were performed. Subgroup analysis was conducted for patients who had early mortality. Fifteen studies were elected for final analysis, encompassing 330 patients. The following values are expressed as "pooled mean, 95% confidence interval." Type B dissection was the most common pathology at index thoracic endovascular aortic repair (51.2%, 44.4-57.9). The most frequent indication for secondary open aortic procedure was endoleak (39.7%, 34.6-45.1). More than half of patients had surgery on the descending aorta (51.2%, 45.8-56.6), and one fourth on the arch (25.2%, 20.8-30.1). Operative mortality was 10.6% (7.4-14.9). Neurological morbidity was substantial between stroke (5.1%, 2.8-9.1) and paraplegia (8.3%, 5.2-13.1). At 2-year follow-up, mortality (20.4%, 11.5-33.5) and aortic adverse event (aortic death 7.7%, 4.3-13.3, tertiary aortic open procedure 7.4%, 4.0-13.2) were not negligible.

CONCLUSIONS

In the secondary open aortic procedure population, type B dissection was both the most common pathology and the one associated with the lowest early mortality, whereas aortic infection and extra-anatomical bypass were associated with the most ominous prognosis.

Surgical strategy of esophageal resection and reconstruction for aortoesophageal fistula

Aortoesophageal fistula is a critical and life-threatening disease. The cardiovascular strategy for graft replacement has been widely discussed. However, the surgical strategy of esophageal resection and reconstruction for aortoesophageal fistula has rarely been discussed. The objective of this study is to establish a surgical strategy and procedure of esophageal resection and reconstruction for aortoesophageal fistula. Eleven patients with aortoesophageal fistula who underwent aortic graft replacement and esophagectomy between 2008 and 2015 at Kobe University Hospital were enrolled in this study. Patient characteristics, operative methods, and clinical outcomes were obtained by retrospective chart review. All 11 patients underwent graft replacement, esophagectomy, and omental wrapping. Ten esophagectomies were simultaneously accomplished in the same operative field as aortic graft replacement. Seven patients underwent subtotal esophagectomy from a left thoracotomy, and three patients underwent upper hemiesophagectomy from a median sternotomy. The other patient underwent staged esophagectomy from a right thoracotomy. Seven of 11 patients (63.6%) successfully underwent staged esophageal reconstruction. Pedicled jejunal transfer with supercharge and superdrainage were performed in six patients, and ileocecal reconstruction was performed in one patient. Median survival time in the patients with esophageal reconstruction was 21 months while that in the patients without esophageal reconstruction was 10 months. Six of 7 patients (85.7%) who underwent esophageal reconstructions were alive. Our surgical strategy for aortoesophageal fistula, which includes simultaneous graft replacement and esophagectomy in the same operative field and staged reconstruction by pedicled jejunal transfer to ensure omental wrapping, is feasible and promising.