Hospitalization Cost and In-hospital Outcomes Following Type B Thoracic Aortic Dissection Repair

Association of Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm Versus Aortic Dissection on Outcomes After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Background Because thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the standard of care for complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) and descending thoracic aortic (DTA) aneurysm, it is important to understand outcomes and use of TEVAR across thoracic aortic pathologies. Methods and Results This was an observational study of patients with TBAD or DTA undergoing TEVAR from 2010 to 2018, using the Nationwide Readmissions Database. In-hospital mortality, postoperative complications, admission costs, and 30- and 90-day readmissions were compared between the groups. Mixed model logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with mortality. An estimated total of 12 824 patients underwent TEVAR nationally, of which 6043 had an indication of TBAD and 6781 of DTA. Patients with aneurysms were more likely to be older, women, have cardiovascular disease, and have chronic pulmonary disease compared with patients with TBAD. Weighted in-hospital mortality was higher for TBAD (8% [1054/12 711] versus 3% [433/14 407], P<0.001), compared with DTA, as were all postoperative complications. Patients with TBAD had a higher cost of care during their index admission (57.3 versus 38.8 × $1000, P<0.001), compared with DTA. The 30-day and 90-day weighted readmissions were more frequent for the TBAD group compared with DTA (20% [1867/12 711] and 30% [2924/12 711] versus 15% [1603/14 407] and 25% [2695/14 407], respectively, P<0.001). On multivariable adjustment, TBAD was independently associated with mortality (odds ratio, 2.06 [95% CI, 1.68-2.52]; P<0.001). Conclusions After TEVAR, patients who presented with TBAD had higher rates of postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality, and cost compared with DTA. The incidence of early readmission was substantial for patients undergoing TEVAR, faring worse for those undergoing TEVAR for TBAD as compared with DTA.

Cost analysis of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in type B aortic dissection: How much does quality cost?

BACKGROUND

Aortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening medical emergency that affects an estimated 3-4 people per 100,000 annually, with 40% of cases classified as type B AD (TBAD). TBAD can be further classified as being complicated (co-TBAD) or uncomplicated (un-TBAD) based on the presence or absence of certain features such as malperfusion and rupture. TBAD can be managed conservatively with optimal medical therapy (OMT), or invasively with open surgical repair (OSR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), depending on several factors such as type of TBAD and its clinical acuity. The cost-effectiveness, or cost-benefit profile, of these strategies must be given equal consideration. However, TBAD studies featuring cost analyses are limited within the literature. This narrative review aims to address the gap in the literature on cost-effectiveness of TBAD treatments by providing an overview of cost analyses comparing OMT with TEVAR in un-TBAD and TEVAR with OSR in co-TBAD. Another aim is to provide a market analysis of the commercially available TEVAR devices.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed using several search engines including PubMed, Ovid, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase to identify and extract relevant studies.

RESULTS

Several TEVAR devices are available commercially on the global market costing $12,000-19,495. Nevertheless, the Terumo Aortic RELAY® stent graft seems to be the most cost-effective, yielding highly favourable clinical outcomes. Despite the higher initial cost of TEVAR, evidence in the literature strongly suggest that it is superior to OMT for un-TBAD on the long-term. In addition, TEVAR is well established in the literature as being gold-standard repair technique for co-TBAD, replacing OSR by offering a more optimal cost-benefit profile through lower costs and improved results.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of TEVAR has revolutionized the field of aortovascular surgery by offering a highly efficacious and long-term cost-effective treatment for TBAD.

Model-Based Fluid-Structure Interaction Approach for Evaluation of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Endograft Length in Type B Aortic Dissection

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a commonly performed operation for patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD). The goal of TEVAR is to cover the proximal entry tear between the true lumen (TL) and the false lumen (FL) with an endograft to induce FL thrombosis, allow for aortic healing, and decrease the risk of aortic aneurysm and rupture. While TEVAR has shown promising outcomes, it can also result in devastating complications including stroke, spinal cord ischemia resulting in paralysis, as well as long-term heart failure, so treatment remains controversial. Similarly, the biomechanical impact of aortic endograft implantation and the hemodynamic impact of endograft design parameters such as length are not well-understood. In this study, a fluid-structure interaction (FSI) computational fluid dynamics (CFD) approach was used based on the immersed boundary and Lattice–Boltzmann method to investigate the association between the endograft length and hemodynamic variables inside the TL and FL. The physiological accuracy of the model was evaluated by comparing simulation results with the true pressure waveform measurements taken during a live TEVAR operation for TBAD. The results demonstrate a non-linear trend towards increased FL flow reversal as the endograft length increases but also increased left ventricular pulsatile workload. These findings suggest a medium-length endograft may be optimal by achieving FL flow reversal and thus FL thrombosis, while minimizing the extra load on the left ventricle. These results also verify that a reduction in heart rate with medical therapy contributes favorably to FL flow reversal.