Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Penetrating Aortic Ulcer: Literature Review

Endovascular Repair of Penetrating Thoracic Aortic Ulcers Using Tubular Stent Grafts Versus Stent Grafts With a Proximal Scallop

PURPOSE

In penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs), limited data support tubular thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) as a viable treatment option. For treatment of more proximal PAUs, hybrid approaches and-more recently-scalloped TEVAR (scTEVAR) have been advocated. Outcomes of scTEVAR specifically for PAUs have not yet been reported. This study reports long-term outcomes for tubular and scTEVAR in PAUs and compares the safety profile in both cohorts regarding the significantly more proximal landing zone (LZ) for scTEVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study includes all nonacute patients treated for complicated PAU with scTEVAR and tubular TEVAR. Patient and PAU characteristics as well as procedural success, complication and reintervention rates, and all-cause and aortic mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 212 TEVAR procedures reviewed, 21 patients with tubular TEVAR and 19 patients with scTEVAR were included. Patient and PAU characteristics were similar, and LZ was significantly more proximal in the scTEVAR cohort (p=0.0001), with similar number and types of supra-aortic revascularization procedures. Clinical success was reached in all 40 patients (100%), and reintervention rate was 2/21 (9.5%) and 1/19 (5.3%), respectively. Over the mean follow-up of 63 (TEVAR) and 53 (scTEVAR) months, clinical success was stable in all patients with one (abdominal) aortic-related mortality in the scTEVAR cohort.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of complicated PAUs with TEVAR as well as scTEVAR provides excellent and similar clinical success, stability of clinical success, and aortic survival with acceptable complication and reintervention rates. Scalloped TEVAR safely lengthens the proximal sealing zone to address more proximal pathologies.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Treatment of asymptomatic complicated penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs) with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) provides excellent clinical success and acceptable complication and reintervention rates. More patients become amenable to endovascular treatment by including scalloped TEVAR (scTEVAR) as a means to safely lengthen the proximal sealing zone to address more proximal pathologies.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Anatomic Utility of Single Branched Thoracic Endograft During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

INTRODUCTION

Single branched thoracic endografts (SBTEs) have been designed for pathology requiring zone 2 seal during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Numerous criteria must be met to allow for their implantation. Our aim was to analyze anatomic suitability for a next generation SBTE.

METHODS

We reviewed 150 TEVAR procedures between 2015 and 2019. Proximal seal was: zone 0 in 21 (16%), zone 1 in 4 (3%), zone 2 in 52 (40%), zone 3 in 45 (35%), and zone 4 or distal in 7 (5%). We analyzed the Zone 2 patient's angiograms and CT angiograms using centerline software to measure arterial diameters and length in relation to the left common carotid artery (LCCA), left subclavian artery (LSA) and proximal extent of aortic disease to determine if patients met anatomic criteria of a novel SBTE.

RESULTS

Zone 2 average age was 64.4 ± 16.3 years; 34 patients were male (65%). Indications for repair were aneurysm (N = 9, 17%), acute dissection (N = 14, 27%), chronic dissection with aneurysmal degeneration (N = 7, 13%), intramural hematoma (N = 9, 17%), penetrating aortic ulcer (N = 5, 10%), and blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI, N = 8, 15%). LSA revascularization occurred in 27 patients (52%). Overall, 20 (38.5%) of the zone 2 patients met anatomic criteria. Patients with dissection met anatomic criteria less frequently than aneurysm (33% [10 of 30] vs 64% [9 of 14]). Patients treated for BTAI rarely met the anatomic criteria (1 of 8, 13%). The main anatomic constraints were an inadequate distance from the LCCA to the LSA takeoff and from the LCCA to the start of the aortic disease process.

CONCLUSION

Less than half of patients who require seal in zone 2 met criteria for this SBTE. Patients with aneurysms met anatomic criteria more often than those with dissection. The device would have little applicability in treating patients with BTAI.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Diagnosis and Management of Acute Aortic Syndromes: Dissection, Penetrating Aortic Ulcer, and Intramural Hematoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute aortic syndromes, including aortic dissection, intramural hematoma, and penetrating aortic ulcer, are a group of highly morbid, related pathologies that are defined by compromised aortic wall integrity. The purpose of this review is to summarize current management strategies for acute aortic syndromes.

RECENT FINDINGS

All acute aortic syndromes have potential for high morbidity and mortality and must be quickly identified and managed with the appropriate algorithm to prevent suboptimal outcomes. Recent trials suggest that TEVAR is increasingly useful in stabilizing pathology of the descending thoracic aorta but when possible should be applied in a delayed fashion and with limited coverage to minimize neurologic complications. Treatment for acute aortic syndrome is frequently dictated by the anatomic location and extent of the wall compromise as well as patient comorbidities. Therapy is often individualized and often includes some combination of medical, procedural, and surgical intervention.

Endovascular repair of penetrating aortic ulcers: Indications and single-center mid-term results

BACKGROUND

Although endovascular repair is used to treat penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs), the indications for endovascular repair in PAUs remain controversial. The current study evaluated the mid-term results of endovascular repair for PAUs and further explored the endovascular indications for PAUs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who were diagnosed with PAUs and underwent endovascular repair in our department from October 2018 to August 2020. Endovascular indication included persistent or recurring symptoms, a maximum diameter of the PAU of greater than 20 mm, a maximum depth of the PAU of greater than 10 mm, an increase in the diameter of the aorta at the ulcer of greater than 10 mm annually, and multiple ulcers at the same or adjacent level of the aorta. Patient characteristics, anatomical parameters of the PAU, characteristics of endovascular repair and follow-up data were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were included in the study. Three patients had PAUs in the aortic arch, 6 PAUs were in the descending thoracic aorta, 4 PAUs were in the abdominal aorta, and 2 PAUS were in the descending thoracic and abdominal aortas. The average age was 70.60±8.27 years. Eight patients were symptomatic. The average depth of the PAUs was 7.32±2.74 mm, and the average diameter was 15.03±6.10 mm. The average operation time was 95.60±33.11 min. Postoperative hospital stay was 3.33±0.61 days. A left subclavian artery chimney stent was implanted in 3 aortic arch cases and 1 occluded case without adverse symptoms during the follow-up period. A bifurcated stent graft was placed in 3 abdominal aorta cases and exhibited good patency during the follow-up period. The duration of follow-up ranged from 3 to 24 months. The follow-up results showed that all PAUs were treated satisfactorily by endovascular repair, and no endoleaks or stent graft-related complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair is a safe and effective treatment for PAUs, and it may be safely performed in elderly patients and patients with comorbidities. The endovascular indications for PAUs must be further studied and optimized.

Unibody design for aortic disease with a narrow aortic bifurcation: tips and tricks for success

Background

Surgical management of patients with abdominal aortic diseases associated with distal narrowing is a challenging situation.

Objectives

To evaluate outcomes of unibody bifurcated endovascular stent graft repair.

Methods

This is a retrospective, observational, multi-institutional database study of a cohort of consecutive cases, approved by the local Ethics Committee. Records were reviewed of patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2020 with “shaggy” aorta, saccular aneurysm, penetrating aortic ulcer, and isolated aortic dissection located in the infrarenal abdominal aorta. All patients were treated with a unibody bifurcated stent graft. Main outcomes were technical success, procedure complications, long-term patency, and mortality in the follow-up period up to 5 years. Data on demographics, comorbidities, surgical management, and outcomes were analyzed.

Results

Twenty-three patients were treated with unibody bifurcated stent graft repair, including 7 cases of “shaggy” aorta, 3 isolated dissections of the abdominal aorta, 4 penetrating aortic ulcers, and 9 saccular aneurysms. Immediate technical success was achieved in 100% of cases. At follow-up, all stent grafts remained patent and there were no limb occlusions. The patients were symptom-free and reported no complications related to the procedure. There were 5 deaths during the follow-up period (median= 4 years), but none were related to the procedure and there were no aorta-related deaths.

Conclusions

The present study shows that unibody bifurcated stent grafting is safe and effective in this group of patients with narrow distal abdominal aorta and complex aortic pathology. The results were similar for both infrarenal aortic aneurysms and aorto-iliac atherosclerotic disease.

Transthoracic minimally invasive closure for the treatment of arch penetrating aortic ulcer: a case report

Penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) is one of the three subtypes of acute aortic syndrome. PAUs occur at any point throughout the aorta, most commonly in the descending thoracic aorta and less frequently in the aortic arch. Open surgical repair and total/hybrid endovascular repair are currently available to treat aortic arch PAUs. Herein, we present a patient with aortic arch PAU who underwent transthoracic minimally invasive closure, which is a novel method for the treatment of PAU. We describe a 52-year old Asian man who presented with sudden chest and back pain for 8 h. Computed tomography angiography showed that the PAU occurred in the aortic arch and had a diameter of 16 mm and a depth of 6 mm. The opening was successfully closed via transthoracic minimally invasive closure with an atrial septal defect occluder.

Management of the penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer in the descending thoracic aorta

Penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers present with an insidious onset with a reported mortality of 9%, varying across populations. With vast arrays of risk factors and potentially ominous complications, it is vital to efficiently provide optimum strategies for management. There exists controversy in the literature regarding management, especially for Type B penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers; the decision-making framework encompasses numerous factors in considerations for medical management versus invasive intervention and choice of endovascular versus open repair in the latter. The concomitant presence of intramural haematoma adds further complexity to the already intricate decision-making for management. We performed searches through PubMed and SCOPUS analysing studies reporting outcomes for management strategies for penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers treatment, focusing on Type B, further seeking to analyse studies reporting their experiences of PAU patients with concomitant intramural haematoma. Our review highlights the ambiguity and controversy existing in the literature, comprising studies burdened by their inherent hindering limitations of their single-centre retrospective experiences. Endovascular therapy has come to the forefront of penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers management, often considered first line therapy. In the case of penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers alongside intramural haematoma, there have been reports of potential hybrid surgical approaches to management. Studies further show misdiagnosis of penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers in earlier data sets further complicates management. However, it is clear we must progress on the journey towards precision medicine, allowing delivery of optimum care to our patients.

Prognostication of Asymptomatic Penetrating Aortic Ulcers: A Modern Approach

Background: Literature detailing the natural history of asymptomatic penetrating aortic ulcers (PAU) is sparse and lacks long-term follow-up. This study sought to determine the rate of asymptomatic PAU growth over time and adverse events from asymptomatic PAU. Methods: A cohort of patients with asymptomatic PAU from 2005-2020 was followed. One ulcer was followed per patient. Primary endpoints were change in size over time and the composite of symptoms, radiographic progression, rupture, and intervention; cumulative incidence function estimated the incidence of the composite outcome. Ulcer size and rate of change were modeled using a linear mixed effects model. Patient and anatomic factors were evaluated as potential predictors of the outcomes. Results: There were 273 patients identified. Mean age was 75.5±9.6 years; 66.4% were male. The majority of ulcers were in the descending thoracic aorta (53.9%), followed by abdominal aorta (41.4%), and aortic arch (4.8%). Fusiform aneurysmal disease was present in 21.6% of patients at a separate location; 2.6% had an associated intramural hematoma; 23.6% had at least one other PAU. Symptoms developed in one patient who ruptured; 8 patients (2.9%) underwent an intervention for PAU (one for rupture, 2 for radiographic progression, 5 for size/growth) at a median of 3.1 years (IQR:1.0-6.5) after diagnosis. Five and 10-year cumulative incidence of the primary outcome, adjusted for competing risk of death, was 3.6% (95% CI: 1.6-6.9%) and 6.5% (95% CI: 3.1-11.4%), respectively. For 191 patients with multiple CT scans (760 total CT's) with median radiographic follow-up of 3.50 years (IQR:1.20-6.63 years), mean initial ulcer width, ulcer depth, and total diameter in millimeters (mm) was 13.6, 8.5, and 31.4, respectively. Small, but statistically significant change over time was observed for ulcer width (0.23 mm/year) and total diameter (0.24 mm/year); ulcer depth did not significantly change over time. Hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, initial ulcer width>20 mm, thrombosed PAU, and associated saccular aneurysm were associated with larger changes in ulcer size over time, however the magnitude of difference was small, ranging from 0.4-1.9 mm/year. Conclusions: Asymptomatic PAU displayed minimal growth and infrequent complications including rupture. Asymptomatic PAU may be conservatively managed with serial imaging and risk-factor modification.

The Aortic Pathologies: How Far We Understand It and Its Implications on Thoracic Aortic Surgery

Thoracic aortic diseases contribute to a major part of cardiac surgeries. The severity of pathologies varies significantly from emergency and life-threatening to conservatively managed conditions. Life-threatening conditions include type A aortic dissection and rupture. Aortic aneurysm is an example of a conservatively managed condition. Pathologies that affect the arterial wall can have a profound impact on the presentation of such cases. Several risk factors have been identified that increase the risk of emergency presentations such as connective tissue disease, hypertension, and vasculitis. The understanding of aortic pathologies is essential to improve management and clinical outcomes.

Multicentre experience with the frozen elephant trunk technique to treat penetrating aortic ulcers involving the aortic arch

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to evaluate the use of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique for the treatment of penetrating aortic ulcers involving the aortic arch.

METHODS

Between January 2008 and January 2020, a total of 34 patients had the FET technique at 3 aortic centres. The indication for the FET technique was unsuitability for thoracic endovascular aortic repair due to the lack of a sufficient proximal landing zone even after supra-aortic rerouting (subclavian transposition, double transposition), ectasia of the ascending aorta/aortic arch (>40 mm) and/or a shaggy proximal thoracic aorta.

RESULTS

Additional cardiac procedures were performed in 14 patients (41%), and the beating heart technique was used in 7 patients (21%). Perioperative mortality was 18% (n = 6); 3 of these patients had a major stroke (9%). No case of spinal cord ischaemia was observed, and 2 patients (6%) developed a non-disabling stroke. After a median follow-up of 7 (first quartile: 1; third quartile 29) months, 2 patients (6%) died (1 of malignant disease and 1 of an unclear cause); 10 additional aortic interventions in all aortic segments (29%; endovascular: n = 8 [24%] and conventional surgical: n = 2 [6%]) were performed in 8 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The FET technique is a good treatment option for patients with penetrating aortic ulcers involving the aortic arch unsuitable for thoracic endovascular aortic repair. However, the high obliterative atherosclerotic load in these patients is accompanied by an un-neglectable risk of perioperative neurological injury. Concomitant cardiac surgical procedures are frequently needed. Patients commonly require secondary aortic procedures in all aortic segments, emphasizing the need for thorough primary conceptual planning and stringent follow-up.

The Management of Patients With Penetrating Aortic Ulcers: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs) are an entity within acute aortic syndrome. They often remain undiagnosed and are found incidentally or when they become symptomatic. Management is currently guided by clinical judgment. This review aims to identify indications for treatment and inform management.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for studies on the management of PAUs. The outcome measures were mortality, progression and resolution of symptoms.

RESULTS

This review incorporates 27 studies involving 1356 patients with PAU. Data was available regarding symptoms for 1213 patients (494 symptomatic, 719 asymptomatic). Overall late mortality for PAUs was found to be higher than 30-day mortality. Early mortality was higher for symptomatic patients as compared to those with asymptomatic PAUs. Early mortality was lowest for PAUs treated with endovascular interventions (5%), followed by PAUs managed medically and highest following open surgical management. Indications for treatment included symptoms, progression/instability, aortic diameter >5 cm, concomitant aortic pathology or pleural effusion. 13% of patients managed conservatively at initial presentation demonstrated progression and were considered for intervention subsequently. 9% of patients required reintervention after initial endovascular surgery.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular treatment, if anatomically suitable, should be considered as first line treatment for symptomatic PAUs. Patients with asymptomatic PAUs, if associated with high-risk features such as PAU diameter >20 mm, PAU depth >10 mm, aortic diameter >42 mm, concomitant pathology, morphological change or an infective etiology, should also be considered for intervention. Small asymptomatic PAUs with no high-risk features may be managed conservatively but must undergo regular surveillance.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for symptomatic penetrating aortic ulcers and intramural hematomas is associated with poor outcomes

BACKGROUND

The natural history of penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs) and intramural hematomas (IMHs) of the aorta has not been well described. Although repair is warranted for rupture, unremitting chest pain, or growth, no threshold has been established for treating those found incidentally. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) offers an attractive approach for treating these pathologic entities. However, the periprocedural and postoperative outcomes have not been well defined.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 years identified in the Vascular Quality Initiative database who had undergone TEVAR for PAUs and/or IMHs from January 2011 to February 2020 were included. We identified 1042 patients, of whom 809 had follow-up data available. The patient demographics and comorbidities were analyzed to identify the risk factors for major adverse events (MAEs) and postoperative and late mortality.

RESULTS

The cohort was 54.8% female, and 69.9% were former smokers, with a mean age of 71.1 years. Comorbidities were prevalent, with 57.8% classified as having American Society of Anesthesiologists class 4. Of the 1042 patients, 89.8% had hypertension, 28.3% chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 17.9% coronary artery disease, and 12.2% congestive heart failure. Patients were predominately symptomatic (74%), and 44.5% had undergone nonelective repair. The MAE incidence was 17%. The independent predictors of MAEs were a history of coronary artery disease, nonwhite race, emergent procedural indication, ruptured presentation, and deployment of two or more endografts. In-hospital mortality was 4.3%. Of the index hospitalization mortalities, 73% were treatment related. For the 809 patients with follow-up (mean, 25.1 ± 19 months), the all-cause mortality was 10.6%. The predictors of late mortality during follow-up included age >70 years, ruptured presentation, and a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and end-stage renal disease. A subset analysis comparing symptomatic (74%) vs asymptomatic (26%) patients demonstrated that the former were frequently women (58.2% vs 45.3%; P < .001), with a greater incidence of MAEs (20.6% vs 6.9%; P < .001), including higher in-hospital reintervention rates (5.9% vs 1.5%; P = .002) and mortality (5.6% vs 0.7%; log-rank P = .015), and a prolonged length of stay (6.9 vs 3.7 days; P < .0001), despite similar procedural risks. During follow-up, late mortality was greater in the symptomatic cohort (12.2% vs 6.5%; log-rank P = .025), with all treatment-related mortalities limited to the symptomatic group.

CONCLUSIONS

We found significantly greater morbidity and mortality in symptomatic patients undergoing repair compared with asymptomatic patients, despite similar baseline characteristics. Asymptomatic patients treated with TEVAR had no treatment-related mortality during follow-up, with the overall prognosis largely dependent on preexisting comorbidities. These findings, in conjunction with increasing evidence highlighting the risk of disease progression and attendant morbidity associated with these aortic entities, suggest a need for natural history studies and definitive guidelines on the elective repair of IMHs and PAUs.

The Management of Penetrating Aortic Ulcer

Penetrating aortic ulceration (PAU) is part of the spectrum of acute aortic syndromes (AAS), and is defined as an ulcerated intimal disruption due to atherosclerotic disease. PAU may be simple, isolated and asymptomatic, or it may be symptomatic, aneurysmal and extensive; these may progress and lead to rupture. This review aims to evaluate the treatment options for PAU. Treatment options range from radiological surveillance, risk factor modification, best medical therapy and open or endovascular surgical repair. Patients with PAU are frequently older and comorbid with relatively damaged aortic tissue; this can make open surgical repair more challenging. Endovascular repairs for larger, symptomatic, aneurysmal PAU may be performed with acceptable outcomes. Complex endovascular repairs may be required depending on the pathology. Patients with small, asymptomatic, uncomplicated PAU may be safely followed up with surveillance. PAU with concomitant intramural haematoma (IMH) should be closely monitored to observe for resolution or progression following conservative and medical management strategies. PAU is a unique entity and its natural history should be studied independently to better understand appropriate management strategies. This research is currently lacking, and larger studies or registries may be helpful in optimising PAU management.

Natural History, Clinical Significance, and the Role of Vascular Referral in the Management of Penetrating Ulcers of the Abdominal Aorta

BACKGROUND

Penetrating ulcers of the abdominal aorta (PUAA) are an increasingly common finding on abdominal imaging studies; however, their significance and natural history are not well described. This study's objective was to analyze the demographics, presentation, and outcomes of patients with a radiographic diagnosis of PUAA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients at our tertiary referral center were identified for inclusion based on a search for the term "penetrating ulcer" in abdominal computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging reports between January 2014 and December 2017. Patients' electronic medical records were retrospectively reviewed to determine baseline medical characteristics, imaging indication, and subsequent clinical course, interventions, and outcomes. Aortic diameters and ulcer depths were measured by a single observer on initial and follow-up imaging to assess for association with concomitant aortic pathology, evolving aortic disease, and ulcer progression, defined as increase in depth of ≥ 1 mm. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 16 (College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC), and a threshold P-value of <0.05 was set for significance.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients with PUAA were identified; 57 (62%) were male. The mean age at diagnosis was 79.3 years, and comorbidities included hypertension (74%), hyperlipidemia (65%), and malignancy (34%). The most common indication for imaging was chest, back, or abdominal pain (19%). On initial imaging, the mean ulcer depth was 1 cm (range from 0.2 cm to 3.4 cm). Concomitant abdominal aortic dilation ≥ 3 cm was found in 34 (37%) patients. Thirty-six (39%) patients had a vascular surgery consultation immediately after radiographic diagnosis. Follow-up axial imaging was performed on 27 (29%) untreated patients. The overall sample's mean ulcer depth remained essentially unchanged from initial measurement (P = 0.99); however, 14 (52%) patients with follow-up imaging were found to have increased overall aortic diameter. Of the total 92 patients, 9 (10%) underwent an endovascular abdominal aortic intervention during the review period: 2 for symptomatic PUAA and the remainder for progression of concomitant aneurysmal disease. All-cause mortality was 5% during the mean follow-up period of 21.9 months (range 0 to 72.5 months). Of the patients lost to follow-up, 61% did not receive vascular referral after initial diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

PUAA are typically incidental findings identified in elderly, comorbid patients undergoing imaging for an unrelated indication. Although isolated findings of asymptomatic PUAA rarely require surgical intervention, these patients we argue would benefit from vascular surgery referral for long-term follow-up and interval imaging to assess for disease progression and concomitant aortic degeneration, which may necessitate repair. In addition, we observed that most of those patients lost to follow-up did not receive vascular consultation, suggesting that lack of involvement of vascular specialists at the time of diagnosis is a missed opportunity to secure appropriate follow-up and management.

Hoarseness Caused by a Penetrating Proximal Descending Thoracic Aortic Ulcer and Pseudoaneurysm

We present a case of an 87-year-old female with new-onset hoarseness of unclear etiology. Imaging demonstrated a penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) in the proximal descending thoracic aorta with an associated pseudoaneurysm that enlarged to a depth of 32 mm over 2 years. This patient was diagnosed with hoarseness being secondary to left recurrent laryngeal nerve (LRLN) palsy, a variant of Ortner syndrome. Patient was treated with endovascular stent-grafting successfully covering of the PAU and pseudoaneurysm with zone 3 proximal landing zone. The patient had moderate improvement in hoarseness after 1 year of follow-up. Endovascular repair is indicated for symptomatic patients with PAUs complicated by enlarging pseudoaneurysms or rupture. Endovascular treatment is effective with low procedural morbidity and mortality. In this case, the PAU and associated pseudoaneurysm at the level of the ligamentum arteriosum caused compression on the LRLN, resulting in a nerve palsy and hoarseness. This case highlights the importance of vascular imaging for patients presenting with unclear etiology of hoarseness or other signs of LRLN palsy. Therefore, aortic arch abnormalities, a variant of Ortner syndrome, even though rare, should be on the differential diagnosis of new onset hoarseness.

Early experience and technical aspects of physician-modified fenestration in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for aortic arch pathologies

Objective

This study was performed to describe the treatment of aortic arch pathologies with a physician-modified fenestration (PMF) technique in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Methods

From August 2015 to August 2017, 32 patients with aortic arch pathologies underwent TEVAR with the PMF technique. All patients’ clinical data were analyzed with GraphPad Prism 7.0.

Results

Thirty-four aortic stent-grafts were implanted in 32 patients. The mean proximal diameter of the stent-graft was 32.4 ± 3.4 cm, and the mean length was 170.0 ± 25.2 cm. Twenty-nine PMF procedures were performed to preserve the left subclavian artery (LSA) and three to preserve both the LSA and left common carotid artery. The mean distance between the pathology and LSA was 8.4 ± 4.0 mm. The mean procedure time (from first to last digital subtraction angiography) was 22.8 ± 20.8 min. The mean follow-up time was 8.3 ± 5.3 months. During follow-up, the all-cause survival rate was 83.3% and the patency rate of the branch artery after PMF was 96.0%.

Conclusion

The PMF technique is a relatively safe, feasible, and time-saving method to preserve the branch artery in TEVAR for aortic arch pathologies. The short- to middle-term result of this technique is satisfactory.

Reinterventions in the modern era of thoracic endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

Using a national data set, we sought to describe the population of patients and the nature and timing of reinterventions after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) by aortic disease as well as their impact on survival.

METHODS

We evaluated the national data set for TEVAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2010 to 2017. Student t-test and χ² analysis were used to compare continuous and categorical variables in the reintervention and no reintervention groups, respectively. Freedom from reintervention and survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

A total of 7006 patients were evaluated: 51.2% thoracic aortic aneurysm, 33.5% type B dissection (TBD), 7.0% penetrating aortic ulcer, 6.7% trauma, and 1.6% intramural hematoma. Overall, 553 patients (7.9%) underwent at least one reintervention, with an in-hospital reintervention rate of 3.5%. Reinterventions were most commonly performed for TBD (11.5%), with reinterventions for other diseases occurring at lower rates: thoracic aortic aneurysm, 6.7%; intramural hematoma, 5.4%; penetrating aortic ulcer, 4.8%; and trauma, 1.8%. The most common cause of reintervention across all aortic diseases was type I endoleak. The most common long-term reinterventions were placement of endovascular stent graft (65%), other surgical treatments (15.9%), other endovascular treatment (13%), endovascular branch treatment (12.4%), surgical treatment with no device removal (11.0%), and surgical branch treatment (10.4%). Freedom from reintervention was decreased for TBD compared with other diseases (P < .001). There was no difference in survival comparing patients undergoing reinterventions and those without (P = .87). However, patients undergoing in-hospital reintervention trended toward increased mortality (P = .075).

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas reinterventions were not rare after TEVAR, there was no difference in mortality between patients undergoing reintervention and those without. Patients undergoing TEVAR for TBD demonstrated the highest reintervention rate. This study highlights the importance of long-term follow-up to address disease-specific patterns of reintervention.

Arch and access vessel complications in penetrating aortic ulcer managed with thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Background

To analyze our experience and to describe access and arch-related challenges when performing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs).

Methods

This is a single-center, observational, cohort study. Between October 2003 and February 2019, 48 patients with PAU were identified; 37 (77.1%) treated with TEVAR were retrospectively analyzed. Primary major outcomes were early (<30 days) and late survival, freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), and a composite endpoint of arch/vascular access-related complications.

Results

On admission, 17 (45.9%) patients were symptomatic with 4 (10.8%) presenting with rupture. In-hospital mortality was 8.1% (n=3). We observed 10 (27.0%) arch/access-related complications. There were 4 (10.8%) arch issues: 2 transient ischemic attacks and 2 retrograde acute type A dissections which required emergent open conversion for definitive repair. Access issues occurred in 6 (16.2%) patients: 3 (8.1%) required common iliac artery conduit, and 1 (2.7%) patient required iliac artery angioplasty to deliver the stent-graft. In addition, 2 (5.4%) patients developed access complications which required operative repair [femoral patch angioplasty (n=2), and femoral pseudoaneurysmectomy (n=1)]. Arch/access-related mortality rate was 5.4% (n=2) and median follow-up was 24 (range, 1-156; IQR, 3-52) months. Estimated survival was 87.1% (standard error: 0.6; 95% CI: 71.2-84.9%) at 1 year, and 63.3% (SE: 0.9; 95% CI: 44.1-79%) at 4 years. Estimated freedom from reintervention was 88.9% (SE: 0.5; 95% CI: 74.8-95.6%) at 1 year, and 84.2% (SE: 0.7; 95% CI: 67.3-93.2%) at 4 years. No arch/access-related issues developed during the follow-up period.

Conclusions

Our experience confirms that vascular access and aortic arch issues are still a challenging aspect of performing TEVAR for PAUs. Our cumulative 27% rate of access/arch issues is lower than previously reported due to both technological advancements and meticulous management of both access routes and arch anatomy.

Unconventional Endovascular Access for Symptomatic Thoracic Aortic Ulcer with Infrarenal Aortic Occlusion-A Case Report

BACKGROUND

A man in very poor general condition was admitted for acute thrombosis of the infrarenal aorta associated to a penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) of the distal thoracic aorta.

METHODS

We planned a two-stage procedure: an axillobifemoral revascularization to be followed by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) after rehabilitation. Before the second stage, the patient presented with acute respiratory failure secondary to an abrupt PAU evolution.

RESULTS

A properly selected stent graft was successfully deployed in an antegrade manner through a left axillary artery access with the nose of the delivery system pushed over a guidewire deep into the aortic thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Inadequate access and paraplegia are the major challenges hampering clinical success of TEVAR. Off-the-shelf stent graft can be used outside its primary use in an unconventional setting. Careful planning, consideration of all comorbidities and vascular anatomy, as well as correct choice of the device are crucial for the successful treatment.

Endovascular Repair of a Penetrating Aortic Ulcer with a Custom-made Relay Stent Graft Featuring a Single Celiac Trunk Fenestration and a Superior Mesenteric Artery Scallop

We report the case of a 70-year-old man with an asymptomatic, fast-growing, paraceliac penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU). Guidelines recommend endovascular repair if an asymptomatic PAU shows a mean growth rate ≥5 mm per year: this patient's maximum aortic diameter was 47 mm but had increased 10 mm in the previous year. The very short sealing zones required a custom-made stent graft. A custom-made relay stent graft comprises a single celiac trunk fenestration, a superior mesenteric artery (SMA) scallop measured according to SMA ostium size, an uncovered distal stent, and 6-mm tapering was used with technical and clinical success.

Single-stage Endovascular Treatment of a Penetrating Aortic Ulcer with a Concomitant "Isolated" Iliac Aneurysm

Penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) is an acute aortic syndrome that can proceed to life-threatening aortic dissection or even aortic rupture. Isolated iliac aneurysms are relatively rare and often asymptomatic due to their deep pelvic location but are frequently associated with high mortality with rupture. We report a case of a 68-year-old man with a symptomatic penetrating ulcer in the descending aorta and an asymptomatic right iliac aneurysm involving the common and internal iliac arteries. The patient was successfully treated by endovascular repair in a single-stage manner using stent grafts in the descending aorta and right common iliac artery after coil embolization of the right internal iliac artery. Follow-up imaging showed complete resolution of the PAU and exclusion of the right iliac aneurysm without endoleak. Aggressive endovascular treatment for a symptomatic PAU with an asymptomatic isolated iliac aneurysm is feasible and allows complete treatment of vascular pathology at a single time.

A penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer rupture in the ascending aorta with hemopericardium: a case report

Background

Acute aortic syndrome, including classic aortic dissection, intramural aortic hematoma, and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (PAU), is a term used to describe a group of conditions with similar clinical symptoms, but with different pathophysiological mechanisms. PAU is a lesion that penetrates the internal elastic lamina through the media. It is usually located in the descending aorta and rarely observed in the ascending aorta.

Case presentation

A 76-year-old man with a history of essential hypertension was brought to the emergency department (ED) because of a sudden-onset chest pain at rest. He had not been taking his medication as ordered. His vital signs in the ED were a blood pressure of 82/60 mmHg, heart rate of 158 beats per min, respiratory rate of 22 breaths per min, and a body temperature of 37.2 °C. An electrocardiogram did not show an ST segment elevation, and cardiac enzymes were within normal limits. No widening mediastinum was found on chest radiography, but a large pericardial effusion with an impending cardiac tamponade was revealed on echocardiography. The diagnosis of PAU rupture in the ascending aorta with hemopericardium was made with chest computed tomography. An emergent sternotomy and ascending aorta reconstruction were performed. A ruptured ulcerative plaque through the intima to the adventitia without flap dissection in the ascending aorta was confirmed. The patient was discharged 18 days after the operation.

Conclusions

Although PAU in the ascending aorta is uncommon, it is commonly lethal when it ruptures. With the current advances in endovascular techniques and devices, endovascular repair of PAU in the ascending aorta is currently recommended only for high-risk patients unsuitable for open repair. However, we anticipate that endovascular repair may become feasible in patients with PAU in the ascending aorta in the future.