Total Endovascular Aortic Repair in a Patient with Marfan Syndrome

Open, endovascular or hybrid repair of aortic arch disease: narrative review of diverse strategies with diverse options

OBJECTIVES

The management of aortic arch disease is complex. Open surgical management continues to evolve, and the introduction of endovascular repair is revolutionizing aortic arch surgery. Although these innovative techniques have generated the opportunity for better outcomes in select patients, they have also introduced confusion and uncertainty regarding best practices.

METHODS

In New York, we developed a collaborative group, the New York Aortic Consortium, as a means of cross-linking knowledge and working together to better understand and treat aortic disease. In our meeting in May 2023, regional aortic experts and invited international experts discussed the contemporary management of aortic arch disease, differences in interpretation of the available literature and the integration of endovascular technology into disease management. We summarized the current state of aortic arch surgery in this review article.

RESULTS

Approaches to aortic arch repair have evolved substantially, whether it be methods to reduce cerebral ischaemia, improve haemostasis, simplify future operations or expand options for high-risk patients with endovascular approaches. However, the transverse aortic arch remains challenging to repair. Among our collaborative group of cardiac/aortic surgeons, we discovered a wide disparity in our practice patterns and our management strategies of patients with aortic arch disease.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important to build unique institutional expertise in the context of complex and evolving management of aortic arch disease with open surgery, endovascular repair and hybrid approaches, tailored to the risk profiles and anatomical specifics of individual patients.

Endovascular aortic repair in patients with Marfan and Loeys-Dietz syndrome is safe and durable when employed by a multi-disciplinary aortic team

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to report on mid-term outcomes after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in patients with Marfan (MFS) or Loeys-Dietz (LDS) syndrome.

METHODS

We analysed data from 2 European centres of patients with MFS and LDS undergoing EVAR. Patients were analysed based on (i) timing of the procedure (planned versus emergency procedure) and (ii) the nature of the landing zone (safe versus non-safe). The primary end-point was freedom from reintervention. Secondary end-points were freedom from stroke, bleeding and death.

RESULTS

A population of 419 patients with MFS (n = 352) or LDS (n = 67) was analysed for the purpose of this study. Thirty-nine patients (9%) underwent EVAR. Indications for thoracic endovascular aortic repair or EVAR were aortic dissection in 13 (33%) patients, aortic aneurysm in 22 (57%) patients and others (intercostal patch aneurysm, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, pseudoaneurysm, kinking of frozen elephant trunk (FET)) in 4 (10%) patients. Thoracic endovascular repair was performed in 34 patients, and abdominal endovascular aortic repair was performed in 5 patients. Mean age at 1st thoracic endovascular aortic repair/EVAR was 48.5 ± 15.4 years. Mean follow-up after 1st thoracic endovascular aortic repair/EVAR was 5.9 ± 4.4 years. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of reinterventions between patients with non-safe landing zone and the patients with safe proximal landing zone (P = 0.609). Furthermore, there was no increased probability for reintervention after planned endovascular intervention compared to emergency procedures (P = 0.916). Mean time to reintervention, either open surgical or endovascular, after planned endovascular intervention was in median 3.9 years (95% confidence interval 2.0-5.9 years) and 2.0 years (95% confidence interval -1.1 to 5.1 years) (P = 0.23) after emergency procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR in patients with MFS and LDS and a safe landing zone is feasible and safe. Endovascular treatment is a viable option when employed by a multi-disciplinary aortic team even if the landing zone is in native tissue.

Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm in connective tissue disorder patients

Connective tissue disorders (CTDs) are a group of genetically triggered diseases in which the primary defect involves collagen and elastin protein assembly with potential vascular degenerations such as thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) and dissection. These most commonly include Marfan syndrome, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and familial thoracic aortic aneurysm and dissection. Open surgical repair represents the standard approach in this specific group of patients. Extensive aortic replacements are generally performed in order to reduce long-term complications caused by the progressive dilatation of the remnant aortic segments. In the last decades, endovascular interventions have emerged as a valid alternative in patients affected by degenerative TAAA. However, in patients with CTD, this approach presents higher rates of reinterventions and postoperative complications with a disputable long-term durability, and it is nowadays performed for very selective indications such as severe comorbidities and urgent/emergent settings. Despite a deeper knowledge of the pathophysiological mechanisms involved in CTD, improvements in medical therapy, and a multidisciplinary approach fully involved in the management of these usually frailer patients, this specific group still represents a challenge. Further dedicated studies addressing mid-term and long-term outcomes in this selected population are needed.

Total Aortic and Branches Repair with Hybrid Therapy in the setting of Marfan Syndrome: A Case Report

OBJECTIVE

Currently, no standard treatment has been established for the total lesion in patient with Marfan Syndrome (MFS). This case report aims to present a total aortic and branches repair with hybrid therapy in a young patient with MFS.

METHODS

Clinical data including imaging manifestation, surgical document, and follow-up results were retrospectively collected and presented.

RESULTS

A young patient with MFS underwent multi-stage endovascular aortic management and open surgical repair. On-the-table fenestration technique was applied to reconstruct the branches of the abdominal aorta. A bypass from superior mesenteric artery to celiac trunk was performed. A Bentall operation was conducted to repair his ascending aorta and aortic valves. Finally, in situ fenestration technique was adopted to recanalize the branches of aortic arch. The 18 month follow-up computed tomography angiography demonstrated patency of all the aorta branches.

CONCLUSION

It may be feasible to perform the total aortic and branches repair with hybrid therapy in patients with MFS.

Multi-stage open surgical and endovascular treatment of progressive aortic degeneration in a patient with Marfan syndrome

Aortic interventions in patients with underlying connective tissues disorders present a unique challenge. The inevitable degeneration of the native aorta can lead to the need for multiple staged interventions with significant risk of complications associated with reoperative aortic procedures. We present a challenging case of progressive aortic degeneration in a patient with Marfan syndrome treated with multi-staged open surgical and endovascular procedures.

Endovascular repair of residual intimal tear or distal new entry after frozen elephant trunk for type A aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

In patients with type A dissection, residual dissection and new distal entry tears following the frozen elephant trunk (FET) procedure adversely affect long-term prognosis. Management include open and endovascular repair, while clinical experience is limited. We evaluate the efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in management of residual intimal tear or distal new entry tear following FET in patients with type A aortic dissection (TAAD).

METHODS

Between May 2003 and April 2013, we performed FET and total arch replacement for 1,003 patients with TAAD. Among these, 23 patients (2.3%) required TEVAR for distal new entry (n=2) or residual intimal tear (n=21) at a mean of 2.0±1.6 years after FET. Mean age was 50.1±11.5 years. Marfan syndrome was seen in 2 patients (8.7%).

RESULTS

Procedural success was 100%. The distal landing zone was above the 11th thoracic vertebra (T11) in 86.9% (20/23). Neither death nor any paraplegia or stroke occurred early after TEVAR. Follow-up was complete in 100% averaging 2.8±1.7 years (0.3-6.4). One non-Marfan patient died of distal aortic rupture at 4 months after TEVAR. No late stroke or paraplegia occurred. Survival was 95.7% (95% CI, 72.9-99.4%) at 3 and 5 years, respectively. CTA detected false lumen obliteration by thrombus around the endograft in the descending aorta in 91.3% (21/23) of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

These early and midterm outcomes show the efficacy of TEVAR in obliterating the residual intimal tear or distal new entry after FET in patients with TAAD. TEVAR may be an alternative approach to distal new entry or residual intimal tear following FET for patients with TAAD.