Outcome Comparison of TEVAR with and without Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization from Analysis of Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database

Predicting the need for subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the effectiveness of left subclavian artery revascularization compared with non-revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and to summarize the current evidence on its indications.

METHODS

A computerized search was conducted across multiple databases, including MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, for studies published up to November 2023. Study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment (using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) were independently conducted by two reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots.

RESULTS

In the 76 included studies, left subclavian artery revascularization was associated with reduced risks of stroke (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.98; n = 15,331), spinal cord ischemia (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56-0.99; n = 11,995), and arm ischemia (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.59; n = 8438). No significant reduction in paraplegia (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.21-1.47; n = 1802) or mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.53-1.12; n = 11,831) was observed. Moreover, the risk of endoleak was comparable in both groups (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.55-2.84; P = .60; n = 793), whereas the risk of reintervention was significantly higher in the revascularization group (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.03-3.83; P = .04; n = 272). Both groups had similar risks of major (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.19-1.09; P = .08; n = 1113), minor (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.01-3.45; P = .27; n = 183), renal (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.12-3.06; P = .55; n = 310), and pulmonary (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.16-2.15; P = .42; n = 8083) complications. The most frequent indications for left subclavian artery revascularization were primary prevention of spinal cord ischemia, augmentation of the landing zone, and primary stroke prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

Left subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair was associated with reduced neurological complications but was not found to impact mortality. The study highlights important indications for revascularization as well as significant predictors of complications, providing a basis for clinical decision-making and future research.

Physician-Modified Endovascular Graft for Left Subclavian Artery Fenestration during Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of physician-modified endovascular graft for preservation of left subclavian artery during thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

From June 2019 to October 2022, 66 patients with a variety of thoracic aortic pathologies were treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair using physician-modified endovascular graft left subclavian artery fenestration to achieve adequate proximal landing zone. The details of surgical techniques were described. The perioperative morbidity, mortality, and the outcomes of mid-term follow-up were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 66 patients (men: women, 53:13; age, 55.18 [55.18 ± 10.62] years), 53 (80.30%) presented with type B aortic dissection, 10 (15.15%) with thoracic penetrating aortic ulcer, 2 (3.03%) with thoracic aortic aneurysm, and 1 (1.52%) with left subclavian artery aneurysm. All of them underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair using physician-modified endovascular graft left subclavian artery fenestration on the sterile back table. The technique success rate was 96.97% (n = 64). Total operation time was 92 min (interquartile range, 86-118), graft modification time was 19 min (interquartile range, 17-21), fluoroscopy time was 49 min (interquartile range, 41-62), and contrast agent dosage was 165 mL (interquartile range, 155-185). 30-day perioperative morbidities were 3 (4.55%) strokes, 1 (1.52%) retrograde type A aortic dissection, 1 (1.52%) aortic intimal intussusception, 1 (1.52%) left arm ischemia, and 3 (4.55%) type Ia endoleaks. Postoperative 30-day mortality and reintervention rates were 1.52% and 4.55%, respectively. Among the 63 patients included in the follow-up of 17 months (interquartile range, 7.75-18.25), the primary patency of left subclavian artery fenestration stents was 100%. Late complications were 1 (1.59%) distal stent graft-induced new entry and 1 (1.59%) death due to retrograde type A aortic dissection during the follow-up. The stent graft-induced new entry patient was observed with stable false lumen.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair with physician-modified endovascular graft for left subclavian artery revascularization is a safe, feasible, and efficacious technique associated with high success rate. Further study is needed for long-term outcome investigation.

Carbon dioxide flushing versus saline flushing of thoracic aortic stents (INTERCEPTevar): protocol for a multicentre pilot randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) carries a 3%-6.1% stroke risk, including risk of 'silent' cerebral infarction (SCI). Stent-grafts are manufactured in room air and retain air. Instructions for use recommend saline flushing to 'de-air' the system prior to insertion, but substantial amounts of air are released when deploying them, potentially leading to downstream neuronal injury and SCI. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is more dense and more soluble in blood than air, without risk of bubble formation, so could be used in addition to saline to de-air stents. This pilot trial aims to assess the feasibility of a full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) investigating the neuroprotective benefit against SCI with the use of CO2-flushed aortic stent-grafts.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre pilot RCT, which is taking place in vascular centres in the UK, USA and New Zealand. Patients identified for TEVAR will be enrolled after informed written consent. 120 participants will be randomised (1:1) to TEVAR-CO2 or TEVAR-saline, stratified according to TEVAR landing zone. Participants will undergo preoperative neurocognitive tests and quality of life assessments, which will be repeated at 6 weeks, or first outpatient appointment, and 6 months. Inpatient neurological testing will be performed within 48 hours of return to level 1 care for clinical stroke or delirium. Diffusion-weighted MRI will be undertaken within 72 hours postoperatively (1-7 days) and at 6 months to look for evidence and persistence of SCI. Feasibility will be assessed via measures of recruitment and retention, informing the design of a full-scale trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study coordination centre has obtained approval from the London Fulham Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/0836) and Southern Health and Disability Ethics Committee (NZ) and UK's Health Regulator Authority (HRA). The study has received ethical approval for recruitment in the UK (Fulham REC, 19/LO/0836), New Zealand (21/STH/192) and the USA (IRB 019-264, Ref 378630). Consent for entering into the study will be taken using standardised consent forms by the local study team, led by a local PI. The results of the trial will be submitted for publication in an open access journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03886675.

Comparison of techniques for left subclavian artery preservation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of both endovascular and surgical revascularization

Background

Currently, the optimal technique to revascularize the left subclavian artery (LSA) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) remains controversial. Our study seeks to characterize early and late clinical results and to assess the advantages and disadvantages of endovascular vs. surgical strategies for the preservation of LSA.

Methods

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library searches were conducted under the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analyses) standards. Only literature published after January 1994 was included. Studies reporting on endovascular revascularization (ER), surgical revascularization (SR) for LSA preservation were included. 30-day mortality and morbidity rates, restenosis rates, and rates of early and late reintervention are measured as outcomes.

Results

A total of 28 studies involving 2,759 patients were reviewed. All articles were retrospective in design. Single-arm analysis found no significant statistical differences in ER vs. SR in terms of 30-day mortality and perioperative complication rates. The mean follow-up time for the ER cohort was 12.9 months and for the SR cohort was 26.6 months, respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed a higher risk of perioperative stroke (4.2%) and endoleaks (14.2%) with the chimney technique compared to the fenestrated and single-branched stent approaches. Analysis of the double-arm studies did not yield statistically significant results.

Conclusion

Both ER and SR are safe and feasible in the preservation of LSA while achieving an adequate proximal landing zone. Among ER strategies, the chimney technique may presents a greater risk of neurological complications and endoleaks, while the single-branched stent grafts demonstrate the lowest complication rate, and the fenestration method for revascularization lies in an intermediate position. Given that the data quality of the included studies were relatively not satisfactory, more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to provide convincing evidence for optimal approaches to LSA revascularization in the future.

Left subclavian artery coverage during endovascular repair of thoracic aorta injury in trauma and non-trauma patients

PURPOSE

In thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), the left subclavian artery (LSA) is often occluded. Although most patients tolerate this, some develop ischemic symptoms to the brain or left upper extremity (LUE). A revascularization procedure may be associated with significant complications. The purpose of this review was to assess the incidence of LSA occlusion, resulting ischemic symptoms, and complications related to revascularization operations in trauma patients compared to non-trauma patients.

METHODS

Studies from 2010 to 2020 were fully reviewed if they discussed incidence of LSA coverage, LUE ischemia, carotid-subclavian bypass, or complications associated with carotid-subclavian bypass.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles were included in this analysis. A total of 167 patients were identified as trauma cases. Incidence of LSA occlusion in trauma was 91/167 (54%) compared to 281/1446 (19%) in the population exclusive of trauma (p < 0.001). Following LSA occlusion, the rate of LUE claudication/ischemia was 21/56 (38%) for trauma, compared to 12/193 (6%) in non-trauma cases (p < 0.001). The overall complication rate after carotid-subclavian rescue bypass was 29.2% (33/112), with phrenic nerve palsy (24%), recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (5%), and pseudoaneurysm (1.7%) being the most common.

CONCLUSION

LSA coverage following TEVAR is common and associated with significant complications, often requiring operative management. The incidence of ischemic complications after occlusion of the LSA is significantly higher in the trauma population. Revascularization procedures to correct the occlusion have a high rate of complications.

Transposition of left subclavian artery with reimplantation of isolated left vertebral artery before thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair for type B aortic dissection

Understanding and recognizing anatomic anomalies of the aortic arch is important when planning extra-anatomic debranching before thoracic endovascular aortic repair. A rare anomaly is the left vertebral artery aberrantly arising from the aortic arch; found in ∼5% of adults. When present, the artery courses through the carotid sheath at a variable length before entering the third or fourth cervical transverse foramen. In the present report, we have described the case of a 49-year-old man with a symptomatic, enlarging type B aortic dissection with an aberrant left vertebral artery and the novel methods used to surgically correct his pathology.

Physician-Modified Endovascular Grafts for Zone-2 Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE

 This study aims to describe our technique and early experience with physician-modified endovascular grafts (PMEGs) for aortic arch diseases in zone 2. We used a total endovascular technique based on a single fenestrated endograft to preserve left subclavian artery (LSA) patency.

METHODS

 From December 2019 to August 2020, six consecutive patients with a variety of thoracic aortic diseases were treated with handmade fenestrated thoracic aortic grafts: four aortic dissections, one penetrating aortic ulcer, and one intramural hematoma. The planning, endograft modification, surgical technique, and follow-up of the patients were described. We evaluated immediate technical success and after 30 days, the LSA patency, Type-1 endoleak, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

 Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) was performed for zone 2 in all cases. Immediate technical success, defined as successful alignment of the LSA with a covered stent and no Type-1 endoleak, was achieved in all cases. Patients had a 30-day follow-up computed tomography, which demonstrated LSA patency and no Type-I endoleaks. To date, no strokes, left arm ischemia, paraplegia, or conversions to open surgery have been reported; one patient operated for acute Type B dissection died during the early follow-up.

CONCLUSION

 TEVAR for zone 2 with a PMEG to maintain LSA patency achieved technical success and early durability. It is expected that with longer follow-up and a larger number of cases, these results will be confirmed.

Safety of Left Subclavian Artery Selective Coverage without Revascularization in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Type B Aortic Dissections

PURPOSE

Whether to proceed left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization in patients with LSA coverage due to insufficient proximal landing zone (PLZ) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) remains controversial.

METHODS

A total of 903 patients who received TEVAR were retrospectively analyzed. LSA could be covered if the PLZ was less than 15 mm accompanied with 1) a dominant or balanced right vertebral artery, 2) a complete circle of Willis, and 3) a left vertebral artery with a diameter ≥3 mm and without severe stenosis.

RESULTS

LSA selective coverage was necessary for 35.0% (316/903) of the patients to extend the PLZ. Patients presented with weakness, pain, cooling and discoloration of the left upper extremity (LUE), and pulselessness of the left brachial artery were more in the LSA-covered group. The ischemia of LUE occurred more often in patients with LSA covered completely than in those with LSA covered partially. Functional arm status showed no significant difference in the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire scores at 12 months postoperative between the LSA-covered group and LSA-uncovered group, or between the LSA-covered completely group and LSA-covered partially group.

CONCLUSION

It was safe to cover the LSA origin without revascularization if the PLZ was less than 15 mm accompanied with careful evaluation (description in method).

Stroke, spinal cord ischemia and upper limb ischemia in patients undergoing TEVAR with coverage of the left subclavian artery: a case series study

Background

We performed routine spinal fluid drainage for patients who underwent TEVAR for thoracic aortic pathology together with left subclavian artery coverage, which was needed for achievement of a safe proximal sealing zone. We assessed the occurrence of spinal cord ischemia as well the rate of occurrence of other complications such as stroke, and upper limb ischemia.

Results

This was a case series study done between July 2014 and April 2020, in them all the left subclavian artery was covered to ensure a proximal safe seal zone. Routine spinal fluid drainage was done, keeping the spinal fluid pressure < 10–15 mmHg with catheter in place for 48 h. Data was obtained from twenty-three patients who underwent TEVAR for thoracic aortic dissection (73.91%), thoracic aortic aneurysm (21.74%), or ulcer (4.35%). Planning was based upon multi-slice computed tomographic angiography and covering the left subclavian was mandatory to achieve a proximal sealing zone. Technical success was achieved in 100% of cases. 4.35% of patients had three endograft, 56.52% had two endografts, 39.13% had one endograft. All patients lost their radial pulsations immediately after implantation, 8.70% developed post implantation syndrome(fever) that was managed conservatively, 4.35% developed stroke related to the anterior circulation, 4.35% developed signs of spinal cord ischemia. During the follow up, one patient died within 6 h after the procedure due to extensive myocardial infarction (patient was scheduled for CABG after our procedure). 17.40% developed upper limb symptoms that were tolerable and were managed conservatively.

Conclusion

By adopting routine spinal cord drainage and pressure monitoring, we can consider not to revascularize the left subclavian artery prior to TEVAR if it will be covered.

Thoracic Endovascular Repair for Aortic Arch Pathologies with Surgeon Modified Fenestrated Stent Grafts: A Multicentre Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcome of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) for aortic arch pathologies with surgeon modified fenestrated stent grafts.

METHODS

A multicentre, retrospective study consisting of consecutive patients from seven centres treated with surgeon modified fenestrated stent grafts for aortic arch pathologies was conducted. A technique to align fenestrations and supra-aortic vessels was applied. Rates of technical success, mortality, complications, and re-interventions were evaluated.

RESULTS

Between February 2016 and January 2020, 513 consecutive patients with aortic arch pathologies received TEVAR with surgeon modified fenestrated stent grafts. The technical success rate was 98.6% (n = 506). In total, 626 fenestrations were created to revascularise 684 branch arteries of the aortic arch. There were 13 deaths and 15 re-interventions within 30 days of the operation. The estimated clinical success rate at 30 days was 94.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 92.4 - 96.4), the estimated survival at 30 days was 97.5% (95% CI 96.1 - 98.9), and the estimated freedom from re-intervention at 30 days was 97.1% (95% CI 95.7 - 98.5). The median follow up was 27 (interquartile range 13 - 31) months. During follow up, there were five aortic related deaths, three non-aortic related deaths, and four deaths of unknown cause. Eighteen patients underwent re-intervention. The estimated clinical success rate at 24 months was 88.2% (95% CI 85.5 - 91.0), the estimated survival at 24 months was 94.9% (95% CI 92.7 - 97.1), and the estimated freedom from re-intervention at 24 months was 93.1% (95% CI 91.0 - 95.3). In total, 18 cases of stroke were recorded, including 12 within 30 days and six during follow up; six cases of retrograde type A aortic dissection were recorded, including five within 30 days and one during the follow up.

CONCLUSION

TEVAR with surgeon modified fenestrated stent grafts for the treatment of aortic arch pathologies provides acceptable outcomes. Further follow up is required to confirm the benefits of this approach.

Outcomes of Total Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair with Surgeon-Modified Fenestrated Stent-Grafts on Zone 0 Landing for Aortic Arch Pathologies

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of total endovascular aortic arch repair with surgeon-modified fenestrated stent-graft on zone 0 landing for aortic arch pathologies.

METHODS

Between June 2016 and October 2019, 37 consecutive patients underwent total endovascular arch repair with surgeon-modified fenestrated stent-grafts on zone 0 landing. Outcomes included technical success, perioperative and follow-up morbidity and mortality, and branch artery patency.

RESULTS

During the study period, 37 patients were treated with total endovascular aortic arch repair with surgeon-modified fenestrated stent-graft. Twenty-one (56.8%) patients were diagnosed with aortic dissections, 15 (40.5%) patients with aneurysms, and 1 (2.7%) patient required reintervention due to endoleak and sac expansion from previous thoracic endovascular aortic repair for thoracoabdominal aneurysm. The proximal landing zone for all patients were in zone 0, and all branch arteries of aortic arch were reconstructed. Technical success was achieved in 34 cases (91.9%). Three (8.1%) patients had fenestrations misaligned with target arteries, and the chimney technique was applied as a complementary measure. Thirty-day mortality rate was 5.4% (n=2). Thirty-day stroke rate was 5.4% (n=2). Thirty-day reintervention rate was 2.7% (n=1). At a median follow-up of 20 months (range, 3-49 months), 5 (13.5%) patients died, including 2 aortic-related deaths, 1 nonaortic-related death, and 2 deaths of unknown reason. One (2.7%) patient had stroke. Four patients (10.8%) had reintervention during the follow-up, including 2 cases of left subclavian artery occlusion and 2 cases of type II endoleak. The estimated survival (±SE) at 2 years was 72.4%±9.7% (95% CI 53.4%-91.4%). The estimated freedom from reintervention (±SE) at 2 years was 87.4%±5.9% (95% CI 75.84%-98.96%).

CONCLUSIONS

Total endovascular aortic arch repair with surgeon-modified fenestrated stent-grafts on zone 0 landing is an alternate option for the treatment of aortic arch pathologies in experienced centers.

Complex endovascular repair of type B aortic dissection and predicting left arm ischemia: a case report

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the gold standard for surgical management of descending thoracic aortic pathology. Depending on the anatomy, TEVAR often requires deployment across the origin of the left subclavian artery (LSA) to obtain a proximal seal, thus potentially compromising perfusion to the left upper extremity (LUE). However, in most patients this is generally well tolerated without revascularization due to collateralization from the left vertebral artery (LVA).

CASE PRESENTATION

We present a complex 59-year-old Caucasian patient case of TEVAR with a history of prior arch debranching and intraoperative LSA coverage requiring subsequent LSA embolization and emergency take-back for left carotid-subclavian bypass.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this case report is to highlight an often overlooked anatomic LVA variant and an atypical, delayed presentation of acute LUE limb ischemia.

In Situ Laser Fenestration for Delayed Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization Following Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair of Type B Aortic Dissection

In situ laser fenestration (ISLF) is currently used to reconstruct the aortic major branches during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). To our knowledge, there have been no reports on the application of ISLF for delayed revascularization of the LSA previously sealed in TEVAR. This report describes 5 patients who underwent ISLF for delayed LSA revascularization, with a technical success rate of 80%. No endoleakage occurred, and stents remained patent during more than 6-month follow-up. ISLF is an effective, safe and minimally invasive method for delayed revascularization of the LSA following TEVAR for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) when patients are selected appropriately.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for traumatic aortic injuries: insight from literature and practical recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAIs) is nowadays the gold standard technique in adult patients, replacing gradually the use of open repair (OR). Although randomized controlled trials will never be performed comparing TEVAR to OR for BTAIs management, trauma and vascular societies guidelines today primarily recommend the former for BTAI patients with a suitable anatomy. The aim of this review was to describe past and recent data published in literature regarding pros and cons of TEVAR treatment in BTAI, and to analyze some debated issues and future perspectives.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) were used to obtain and describe selected articles on TEVAR in BTAI.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Young (<50 years) men were the most operated population. The use of TEVAR increased over the years, with a progressive reduction in mortality and overall postoperative complication rates when compared with OR. Lack of information remains about the percentage of urgent cases.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR is considered nowadays the treatment of choice in BTAI patients. In case of aortic rupture (grade IV) the treatment is mandatory, while intimal tear (grade I) and intramural hematoma (grade II) can be safely managed with no operative management (NOM). Debate is still ongoing on grade III (pseudoaneurysms). Unfortunately, several aspects remain not yet clarified, including disease classification, type and grade to treat, timing (urgent versus elective), priority of vascular injuries in polytrauma patients, and TEVAR use in pediatrics and young patients.

Chimney Endografting for Zone 2 Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Using The Reorientation Technique

The purpose of this report was to describe the reorientation of the chimney graft technique to downsize brachial artery access during thoracic endovascular aortic repair and thus preserve left subclavian artery flow. In the case described herein, the chimney graft was advanced not from the brachial or axillary artery, but from the common femoral artery, over a brachiofemoral pull-through wire. The chimney graft was then turned out into the ascending aorta by balloon dilatation via percutaneous brachial access (“reorientation”). Despite the use of a large-diameter chimney graft, the chimney technique with percutaneous brachial access was successfully performed using the reorientation technique.