Open Surgical Repair of Descending Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms in the Endovascular Era: A 9-Year Single-Center Study

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.

Identifying Paraplegia Risk Associated with Thoracic Endografting

Endografting, like open surgical repair of the thoracic aorta, can be complicated by paraplegia. We reviewed our thoracic endografting experience regarding the incidence and treatment of spinal cord neurologic events. Between February 2000 and July 2008, 346 patients underwent endoluminal grafting of the descending thoracic aorta. Indications for intervention included atherosclerotic aneurysms (45.9%), acute and chronic dissections (31.5%), miscellaneous lesions (13.6%), and penetrating aortic ulcers (8.9%). Ten women and 4 men (4.0%), with a mean age of 71.3 years, developed either paraparesis (1.7%) or paraplegia (2.3%). Nine (64.3%) of these patients had an aneurysm, 4 (28.6%) had acute or chronic type B aortic dissection, and 1 (7.1%) had a penetrating aortic ulcer; 3 (21.4%) of them had previously undergone open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, and 13 (92.9%) required coverage of more than 20 cm of the aorta. Cerebrospinal fluid drainage was instituted in 7/8 paraplegic patients. Eight (57.1%) of the 14 patients recovered fully, 2 (14.3%) experienced partial recovery, and 4 (28.6%) had significant neurological deficits. Paraplegia following thoracic endografting appears to be associated with female sex, longsegment coverage of the thoracic aorta, and aneurysmal disease.