ADSORB: A Study on the Efficacy of Endovascular Grafting in Uncomplicated Acute Dissection of the Descending Aorta

Navigating clinical appropriateness: A review of management strategies for type B aortic dissection

Aortic dissection is a catastrophic, life-threatening event. Its management depends on the anatomic location of the intimal tear (type A v B) and the clinical presentation in type B aortic dissection. In this article, the current evidence supporting clinical practice, gaps in knowledge, and the need for more rigorous research and higher-quality studies are reviewed.

Five-year outcomes of endovascular treatment for aortic dissection from the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment

OBJECTIVE

The Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) is an International prospective multicenter registry collecting real-world data on performance of Gore aortic endografts. The purpose was to analyze the long-term outcomes and patient survival rates, as well as device performance in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute and chronic and complicated or uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

From August 2010 to October 2016, 5014 patients were enrolled in the GREAT registry. The study population were patients treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair for TBAD through 5-year follow-up (days 0-2006). The primary outcomes for this analysis were all-cause and aortic-related mortality, stroke, aortic rupture, endoleaks, migration, fracture, compression, and any reintervention through 5 years.

RESULTS

We identified 265 patients. The mean age was 60.9 ± 11.9 years (range, 19-84 years; 211 males [79.6%]). Devices used were the Gore TAG and Conformable Gore TAG Thoracic Endoprosthesis. There were 228 patients (86.0%) who underwent primary endovascular treatment (144 off-label [54.3%]); 22 (8.3%) underwent reintervention after prior endovascular procedure and 15 (5.7%) underwent reintervention after prior open procedure. Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from all-cause mortality at 5 years was 71.1%. Freedom from aortic-related mortality through 5 years was 95.8%. There was no significant difference in freedom from all-cause mortality during the follow-up period in complicated or uncomplicated disease. At 30 days and through 5 years, respectively, for all the following outcomes, the aortic rupture rate was 1.1% (n = 3) and 1.9% (n = 5). The stroke rate was 1.1% (n = 3) and 4.2% (n = 11). The spinal cord ischemic event rate was 1.5% (n = 4) and 2.6% (n = 7). Reinterventions were required in 6.4% (n = 17) and 21.1% (n = 56) of patients. The need for conversion to open repair was 0.4% (n = 1) and 2.6% (n = 7). Additional graft placement was required in 3 patients (1.1%) and 16 patients (6.0%). The endoleak rate at 30 days was 3.4% (n = 9); type IA (n = 1 [0.4%]), type IB (n = 4 [1.5%]), type II (n = 1 [0.4%]), type III (n = 1 [0.4%]), and unspecified (n = 4 [1.6%]). Through 5 years, the endoleak rate was 12.1% (n = 32); type IA (n = 7 [2.6%]), type IB (n = 10 [3.8%]), type II (n = 9 [3.4%]), type III (n = 2 [0.8%]), and unspecified (n = 12 [4.5%]). There were no cases of stent migration, compression or fracture through 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Results at the 5-year follow-up demonstrate that the use of the Gore TAG and Conformable Gore TAG Thoracic Endoprosthesis can be supported in treatment of TBAD (acute, chronic, complicated, and uncomplicated). These data demonstrate strong device durability, beneficial patient outcomes, and support for the treatment of thoracic aortic dissection with an endovascular approach. Complete 10-year follow-up in GREAT as planned will be advantageous.

Traumatic Aortic Dissection as a Unique Clinical Entity: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the clinical characteristics, treatment approaches, and outcomes of the Stanford Type B traumatic aortic dissection (TAD) with non-traumatic aortic dissection (NTAD), and assess better management for TAD.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for Stanford type B aortic dissection at The First Hospital of China Medical University between 2014 and 2022. The patients were divided into TAD and NTAD groups based on whether they had a history of acute trauma. This study ultimately included 65 patients with TAD and 288 with NTAD. We assessed and compared the baseline characteristics, laboratory indicators, imaging features, surgical procedures, and follow-up results between the groups.

RESULTS

The TAD group was younger compared to the NTAD group (50.00 [IQR40.00-59.00] vs. 55.00 [IQR 47.00-61.00] years, p = 0.020). A lower percentage of the TAD group had a history of hypertension (20% vs. 71.18%, p < 0.001). The length of aortic dissection was shorter in the TAD group compared to the NTAD group (30.00 [IQR 22.00-40.00] vs. 344.00 [IQR 237.25-400.00] mm, p < 0.001). All patients with TAD underwent TEVAR following the same strategy as NTAD. The mean preoperative duration was 7.00 (IQR 2.00-14.00) days in the TAD group and 11.00 (IQR 8.00-15.00) days in the NTAD group (p < 0.001). TAD showed fewer complications after TEVAR in mid-to-long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

TAD is distinct from NTAD. TAD typically presents with more localized lesions than NTAD, and the patients experience a shorter preoperative duration and a better mid-to-long-term outcome.

Population risk profile analysis of acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (unTBAD) comprises the estimated majority of type B aortic dissection (TBAD), presenting without any of the complications associated with complicated TBAD (coTBAD). Although first-line treatment for coTBAD is thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), and despite the fact that TEVAR has proven its safety and effectiveness in the treatment of unTBAD, unTBAD is still being predominantly managed conservatively with medical therapy, with a small proportion of patients being offered TEVAR.

AIMS

The main scope of this review is to highlight the evidence in the literature of the demographic characteristics and associated co-morbidities of unTBAD patients undergoing TEVAR in order to produce a risk stratification system to achieve favourable outcomes.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using multiple electronic databases including PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and EMBASE.

RESULTS

Multiple demographic characteristics and associated co-morbidities of unTBAD patients affecting TEVAR outcomes were identified, assessed, and investigated, including age, gender, race, genetics, medical conditions, such as hypertension and diabetes, and lifestyle factors such as smoking. Most factors were associated with increased risks of mortality and morbidity, while others, such as race, were identified as being protective against those when it comes to TEVAR.

CONCLUSION

Despite the favourable results yielded by TEVAR in unTBAD, there remains a grey area concerning its management. Thus, it is important to incorporate the demographics and co-morbidities of unTBAD patients' when into clinical judgement when assessing indications for TEVAR intervention to ensure optimum results can be achieved.

Endovascular repair of acute vs. subacute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis evaluating the optimal timing for endovascular repair of acute versus subacute uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection.

Method

PubMed, EMBASE, web of science and Cochrane Library was interrogated to identify Electronic bibliographic studies updated to January 2023 to collect studies compared the clinical outcomes of endovascular repair for Acute Versus Subacute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection. Data were aggregated as pooled odds ratios (OR) using the fixed or random effects models according to the significance of heterogeneity, Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated by RevMan 5.3 and applied with fixed or random-effect models.

Result

A comprehensive literature search found 322 citations published and finally among them 6 studies containing 3,769 patients (acute group 2,642, subacute group 1,127) were included in review. There is an increased risk of 30-day complications (OR = 1.51,95%CI,1.26-1.81) 30-day mortality (OR = 2.39,95%CI, 1.55-3.67) and 1-year mortality (OR = 1.71,95%CI,1.27-2.30) for an acute uTBAD group compared to subacute ones. Similarly, reintervention was more likely in the acute group than in the subacute group (OR = 1.42,95%CI,1.05-1.91). However, no significant differences were found in long-term mortality.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis confirmed that there was no significant difference in the long-term prognosis between the acute and subacute phases in the timing of surgery. However, considering the high incidence of complications, high re-intervention rate and one-year mortality probably caused by high intima fragility in the acute phase, endovascular repair at subacute phase appears to favorably compare with acute strategy. But future studies with adequate patient numbers and longer-term follow-up are necessary to further verify the study conclusion.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021247609, identifier PROSPERO CRD42021247609.

Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: Challenges in Diagnosis and Categorisation

BACKGROUND

Acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a rare disease that is likely under-diagnosed in the UK. As a progressive, dynamic clinical entity, many patients initially diagnosed with uncomplicated TBAD deteriorate, developing end-organ malperfusion and aortic rupture (complicated TBAD). An evaluation of the binary approach to the diagnosis and categorisation of TBAD is needed.

METHODS

A narrative review of the risk factors predisposing patients to progression from unTBAD to coTBAD was undertaken.

RESULTS

Key high-risk features predispose the development of complicated TBAD, such as maximal aortic diameter > 40 mm and partial false lumen thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

An appreciation of the factors that predispose to complicated TBAD would aid clinical decision-making surrounding TBAD.

Prognostic Value of the Systemic Immune Inflammation Index after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Patients with Type B Aortic Dissection

The study aimed at investigating the association between postoperative inflammatory scores and aorta-related adverse events (AAEs) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD). This single-centre, retrospective cohort included all patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD between November 2016 and November 2020 at a university hospital. The risk factors for AAEs were analyzed by Cox proportional hazards model regression. Prediction accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. This study included 186 patients with a mean age of 58.5 years and a median follow-up period of 26 months. A total of 68 patients developed AAEs. Age and postoperative systemic immune inflammation index (SII) (>2893) were associated with post-TEVAR AAEs (hazard ratio (HR) 1.03, p = 0.003; HR 1.88, p = 0.043, respectively). Increased postoperative SII and age are independent risk factors for AAE post-TEVAR in patients with TBAD.

Aortic arch surgery for type B aortic dissection: How far should we go? The value of a hybrid approach

Traditionally, the management of type B aortic dissection has been the domain of the vascular surgeons. Timing and type of intervention still generate debate. We sought to review our early experience with the treatment of this condition based on a hybrid approach following an aortic multi-disciplinary team meeting involving close cooperation between cardiac surgeons, vascular surgeons, interventional radiologists, vascular anesthetists, and cardiac anesthetists. Four patients (age 41-56 years; 3 males; 1 female) with type B aortic dissection underwent aortic arch surgery through a hybrid approach: one elective procedure consisting of ascending aorta and hemi-arch replacement with debranching followed by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR); one redo procedure requiring aortic arch replacement with hybrid frozen elephant trunk; two acute presentations (aortic arch replacement and debranching followed by TEVAR; AVR with ascending aorta, arch, and proximal descending thoracic aorta replacement with conventional elephant trunk and debranching). Deep hypothermic circulatory arrest was required in three patients. Despite respiratory complications and slightly prolonged postoperative course, all patients survived without onset of stroke, paraplegia, malperfusion, endoleak, or need for re-exploration. Follow-up remains satisfactory. Different factors may affect outcome following complex aortic procedures. Nevertheless, close cooperation between cardiac surgeons, vascular surgeons, and interventional radiologists may reduce potential for complications and address aspects that may not be completely within the domain of individual specialists.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair and optimal medical treatment for acute type B penetrating aortic ulcer associated with intramural hematoma

To compare the safety and efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and optimal medical treatment (OMT) for type B penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) associated with intramural hematoma (IMH). From January 2015 to December 2018, 68 consecutive patients with acute type B PAU associated with IMH were enrolled in the study. TEVAR was performed following initially OMT in 30 patients (group A), and OMT was performed in 38 patients (group B). Primary outcome was aortic-related mortality. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, aortic-related adverse events, and complete aortic remodeling. There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics of patients among the 2 groups except for the depth of PAU and the thickness of IMH. Patients in group B had a significant higher risk of aortic-related mortality (13.3% vs 0%, P = .045), as the same to aortic-related adverse events during follow-up. Compared to OMT, TEVAR contributed to the favorable aortic remodeling more significantly during the mid-term follow-up (85.7% vs 18.2%, P < .001). Comparing with optimal medical repair, TEVAR for patients with PAU associated with IMH could promote the favorable aortic remolding more significantly and result in lower aortic-related mortality during mid-term follow-up. It should be considered as the first-line therapeutic option when intervention is required.

Comparison of Early Efficacy of the Percutaneous Presuture Technique with the Femoral Artery Incision Technique in Endovascular Aortic Repair under Local Anesthesia for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Objective

To compare the efficacy of the percutaneous presuture technique (PPST) and the femoral artery incision technique (FAIT) under local anesthesia in the treatment of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for patients with uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD).

Method

Two hundred and ninety-five patients diagnosed with uTBAD who underwent EVAR under local anesthesia from June 2017 to December 2021 were consecutively and randomly selected for retrospective analysis. The PPST was performed in 178 cases and the FAIT was performed in 117 cases. The clinical characteristics and surgical and postoperative data from the two groups were analyzed.

Results

There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups (p > 0.05). The operative time of the PPST group was significantly shorter than that of the FAIT group (46 (33, 58) versus 72 (67.5, 78.0) minutes, p < 0.001), as was the operative approach procedure time (6 (4.5, 9.0) versus 38 (36.5, 43.5) minutes, p < 0.001), and length of postoperative hospital stay (5.19 ± 2.26 versus 8.33 ± 3.76 days, p < 0.001). There were fewer postoperative approach-related procedural complications in the PPST group than in the FAIT group (2 versus 12, p < 0.001); similarly, the average frequency of postoperative wound disinfection was significantly lower in the PPST group (1.08 ± 0.39 versus 3.31 ± 0.91 times, p < 0.05). Obesity was identified as an independent risk factor for postoperative approach-related procedural complications (OR, 22.26; 95% CI, 4.74–104.49; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The PPST has comparable safety and efficacy to the FAIT in EVAR under local anesthesia. It can shorten the length of hospital stay, reduce operation time, lower the risk of wound-related complications, reduce the frequency of postoperative wound disinfection, and hasten postoperative recovery. It can therefore be used as a first-line surgical technique in EVAR of uTBAD under local anesthesia, especially in obese patients.

The misnomer of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a rare condition that can be divided into complicated (CoTBAD) and uncomplicated (UnCoTBAD) based on certain presenting clinical and radiological features, with UnCoTBAD constituting the majority of TBAD cases. The classification of TBAD directly affects the treatment pathway taken, however, there remains confusion as to exactly what differentiates complicated from uncomplicated TBAD.

AIMS

The scope of this review is to delineate the literature defining the intervention parameters for UnCoTBAD.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using multiple electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE to collate and summarize all research evidence on intervention parameters and protocols for UnCoTBAD.

RESULTS

A TBAD without evidence of malperfusion or rupture might be classified as uncomplicated but there remains a subgroup who might exhibit high-risk features. Two clinical features representative of "high risk" are refractory pain and persistent hypertension. First-line treatment for CoTBAD is TEVAR, and whilst this has also proven its safety and effectiveness in UnCoTBAD, it is still being managed conservatively. However, TBAD is a dynamic pathology and a significant proportion of UnCoTBADs can progress to become complicated, thus necessitating more complex intervention. While the "high-risk" UnCoTBAD do benefit the most from TEVAR, yet, the defining parameters are still debatable as this benefit can be extended to a wider UnCoTBAD population.

CONCLUSION

Uncomplicated TBAD remains a misnomer as it is frequently representative of a complex ongoing disease process requiring very close monitoring in a critical care setting. A clear diagnostic pathway may improve decision making following a diagnosis of UnCoTBAD. Choice of treatment still predominantly depends on when an equilibrium might be reached where the risks of TEVAR outweigh the natural history of the dissection in both the short- and long-term.

Risk profile analysis of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair: Laboratory and radiographic predictors

BACKGROUND

There is emerging evidence to support pre-emptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) intervention for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (unTBAD). Pre-emptive intervention would be particularly beneficial in patients that have a higher baseline risk of progressing to complicated TBAD (coTBAD). There remain debate on the optimal clinical, laboratory, morphological, and radiological parameters, which would identify the highest-risk patients that would benefit most from pre-emptive TEVAR.

AIM

This review summarizes evidence on the clinical, laboratory, and morphological parameters that increase the risk profiles of unTBAD patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was carried out on multiple electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and Scopus to collate all research evidence on the clinical, laboratory, and morphological parameters that increase the risk profiles of unTBAD patients RESULTS: At present, there are no clear clinical guidelines using risk-stratification to inform the selection of unTBAD patients for TEVAR. However, there are noticeable literature trends that can assist with the identification of the most at-risk unTBAD patients. Patients are at particular risk when they have refractory pain and/or hypertension, elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), larger aortic diameter, and larger entry tears. These risks should be considered alongside factors that increase the procedural risk of TEVAR to create a well-balanced approach. Advances in biomarkers and imaging are likely to identify more pertinent parameters in the future to optimize the development of balanced, risk-stratified treatment protocols.

CONCLUSION

There are a variety of risk profiling parameters that can be used to identify the high-risk unTBAD patient, with novel biomarkers and imaging parameters emerging. Longer-term evidence verifying these parameters would be ideal. Further randomized controlled trials and multicentre registry analyses are also warranted to guide risk-stratified selection protocols.

Red Blood Cell Distribution Width: A Prognostic Marker in Patients With Type B Aortic Dissection Undergoing Endovascular Aortic Repair

Background

Red blood cell distribution width (RDW) is associated with cardiovascular mortality. However, the relationship between preoperative RDW and outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in type B aortic dissection (TBAD) remains to be determined.

Methods

We review the records of 678 patients with TBAD and treated with TEVAR in three centers. Patients were divided into two groups according to the admission RDW cut-off by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis [≤13.5% (n = 278) and >13.5% (n = 400)]. The association between RDW and long-term mortality was evaluated using Cox survival analysis. Additionally, we used general additive models (GAM) with restricted cubic splines (RCS) to explore non-linear relationships between RDW and outcomes.

Results

Subjects with a high RDW had significantly higher in-hospital mortality rates (1.4 vs. 4.3%, P = 0.038). A total of 70 subjects died after a median follow-up period of 3.3 years. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed that subjects with an RDW >13.5% had worse survival rates than those with lower RDW values (P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox proportional hazard modeling revealed that an RDW >13.5% was an independent predictor of long-term mortality (adjusted HR = 2.27, P = 0.006). Also, we found that there was a non-linear relationship between RDW and mortality from RCS, and RDW of 13.5% might be an inflection point to distinguish the long-term mortality risk of TBAD patients.

Conclusion

As an inexpensive and routinely measured parameter, RDW holds promise as a novel prognostic marker in patients with TBAD receiving TEVAR. We found that an RDW >13.5% on admission was independently associated with increased long-term mortality.

TEVAR for complicated and uncomplicated type B aortic dissection-Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Type B aortic dissection (TBAD), is defined as a dissection involving the aorta distal to left subclavian artery with the ascending aorta and the aortic arch not affected. TBAD is classified due to the time frame and presence of complications. Complicated TBAD (co-TBAD) patients have a greater mortality rate than uncomplicated TBAD (un-TBAD) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is considered the gold-standard intervention for these clinical challenges.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic review of the literature regarding TEVAR intervention in co-TBAD and un-TBAD. A comprehensive search was undertaken across four major databases and was evaluated and assessed until June 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 16,104 patients were included in the study (7772 patients co-TBAD and 8352 un-TBAD). A significantly higher proportion of comorbidities were seen in co-TBAD patients compared with un-TBAD. Acute dissection was more frequent in the co-TBAD group (73.55% vs. 66.91%), while chronic dissection was more common in un-TBAD patients (33.8% vs. 70.73%). Postprocedure stroke was higher in co-TBAD (5.85% vs. 3.92%; p < .01), while postprocedural renal failure was higher in un-TBAD patients (7.23 vs. 11.38%; p < .01). No difference was observed in in-hospital mortality however the 30 days mortality was higher in the co-TBAD group. One-year survival was higher in the uncomplicated group but this difference was not observed in the 5-year survival.

CONCLUSION

In our analysis we can appreciate that despite significantly higher comorbidities in the co-TBAD cohort, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality between the two groups and the 5-year survival did not have any difference.

Ten-Year Clinical Characteristics and Early Outcomes of Type B Aortic Dissection Patients With Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND

This study examined the 10-year hospitalization characteristics, economic patterns and early clinical outcomes of type B aortic dissection (TBAD) patients that underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in one high-volume hospital in China.

METHODS

We performed a population-based retrospective analysis based on electronic medical record system data provided by Zhongshan Hospital Fudan University from 2009 to 2018.

RESULTS

We identified 1,367 cases of TBAD patients with TEVAR over the past decade. The total incidence of in-hospital complications was 7.6% (104 of 1,367), among which acute kidney injury (AKI) had the highest incidence (3.1%, 42 of 1,367). Aortic-related reintervention was performed in 7 patients (0.5%). The overall aortic-related in-hospital mortality rate was 2.7% (37 of 1,367) and had no significant time-varying trend (P = 0.2). Among these, 27% of in-hospital deaths were caused by retrograde type A dissection (RTAD). Chronic TBAD had a higher risk of in-hospital death versus acute TBAD, with a risk ratio of 2.69 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-6.09). Patients with hypertension (risk ratio 4.63, 95% CI: 1.38, 15.54) also had a higher in-hospital death risk. These 2 factors were also the predictive factors for the composite endpoint of in-hospital adverse events (risk ratio 2.17, 95% CI: 1.43, 3.29 and risk ratio 4.83, 95% CI: 1.90, 12.28, respectively), in addition to Marfan syndrome (risk ratio 4.05, 95% CI: 1.61, 10.19). The average length of hospitalization significantly declined during the past decade (annual percentage change -6.3%, 95% CI -8.2 to -4.3), and the stent-grafts (SGs) cost was the main expenditure of the total hospitalization costs.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed a favorable early outcome of TEVAR over the past decade. Greater attention should be paid to certain risk factors in order to reduce the in-hospital adverse events. SG expenditure is still the primary economic burden on Chinese TBAD patients.

Role of Endoluminal Techniques in the Management of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection and Intramural Haematoma

Twenty-five years ago, optimal medical management was the mainstay of treatment in acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) and intramural haematoma (IMH), with surgery being reserved for cases with rupture or critical branch vessel ischaemia. Less invasive endoluminal management of TBAD and IMH has developed rapidly over the past two and a half decades, thus changing the treatment algorithm in these patients. Today the focus has shifted to primary management with a combination of endoluminal intervention and optimal medical treatment. The purpose of this article is to describe the various interventional techniques, discuss the indications for intervention, and present the results in the current literature regarding clinical (rupture, branch vessel ischaemia) as well as morphological response (aortic remodelling), complications, and morbidity/mortality associated with endoluminal intervention.

Effect of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair on Aortic Remodeling in Patients with Type B Aortic Dissection in an Asian Population

BACKGROUND

Management of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) has traditionally been aggressive medical therapy. Recent studies brought about a paradigm shift with evidence to suggest benefits from early endovascular intervention to a high risk subgroup of acute uncomplicated TBAD patients.

AIMS

We aim to review the effects of aortic remodeling in Asian patients with TBAD with and without endovascular intervention, including maximal aortic diameter, true lumen diameter, and false lumen thrombosis.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study of a prospective database. Patients who presented to our institution with acute TBAD from January 2008 to December 2015 (n = 44) were evaluated. Eighteen percent (8 patients) presented with complicated TBAD and underwent emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) while the remaining 82% (36 patients) were treated with optimal medical therapy (OMT).

RESULTS

Six patients under the conservative arm crossed over to elective TEVAR after 6 weeks because of interval radiological progression of disease. There was no significant difference in the baseline demographics of the TEVAR group and the OMT group. At 24 months, mean maximal aortic diameter difference was -7.7 mm and +1.9 mm (P = 0.077), mean true lumen diameter difference was +10.0 mm and +2.6 mm (P = 0.049), and false lumen thrombosis was 100% and 20% (P = 0.012) for TEVAR and OMT, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in mortality between the 2 groups at 30 days and 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Within an Asian population with TBAD, TEVAR with OMT has a significant positive effect on aortic remodeling, compared with OMT-only management.

Utility of age, creatinine, and ejection fraction score in patients with type B aortic dissection undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Older age, renal and cardiac dysfunction are predictors of poor outcome in aortic dissection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of the age, creatinine and ejection fraction (ACEF) score with adverse events in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

The study enrolled 605 patients from January 2010 to July 2015, who were classified into three groups according to the tertiles of ACEF score: Tertile 1 (≤0.77, n = 204), Tertile 2 (0.77-0.96, n = 205) and Tertile 3 (>0.96, n = 196). The association between ACEF, AGEF (age, glomerular filtration rate and ejection fraction) and the updated version of the ACEF (ACEF II) score with adverse events was analyzed.

RESULTS

After a median 3.4 years follow-up, 63 (10.4%) patients died. Multivariable analysis revealed that ACEF score was independently associated with long-term mortality (adjusted hazard ratio = 3.54; 95% confidence interval, 2.09-6.01; p < 0.001). ACEF, AGEF and ACEF II score had similar predictive ability for both in-hospital and long-term death. The in-hospital mortality (1.5% vs. 1.0% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.001) were significantly higher in Tertile 3. In addition, cumulative long-term mortality in Tertile 3 was significantly higher than that in Tertile 1 and 2 (Log-Rank = 23.74; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ACEF score could be served as an useful and relatively simple tool for pre-TEVAR risk stratification in TBAD patients.

Predicting in-hospital death in patients with type B acute aortic dissection

The outcome of patients with acute type B aortic dissection (BAAD) is largely dictated by whether or not the case is "complicated." The purpose of this study was to investigate the risk factors leading to in-hospital death among patients with BAAD and then to develop a predictive model to estimate individual risk of in-hospital death.A total of 188 patients with BAAD were enrolled. Risk factors for in-hospital death were investigated with univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Significant risk factors were used to develop a predictive model.The in-hospital mortality rate was 9% (17 of 188 patients). Univariate analysis revealed 7 risk factors to be statistically significant predictors of in-hospital death (P < .1). In multivariable analysis, the following variables at admission were independently associated with increased in-hospital mortality: hypotension (odds ratio [OR], 4.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-18.90; P = .04), ischemic complications (OR, 8.24; 95% CI, 1.25-33.85; P < .001), renal dysfunction (OR, 12.32; 95% CI, 10.63-76.66; P < .001), and neutrophil percentage ≥80% (OR, 5.76; 95% CI, 2.58-12.56; P = .03). Based on these multivariable results, a reliable and simple prediction model was developed, a total score of 4 offered the best point value.Independent risk factors associated with in-hospital death can be predicted in BAAD patients. The prediction model could be used to identify the prognosis for BAAD patients and assist physicians in their choice of management.

Optimal blood pressure control for patients after thoracic endovascular aortic repair of type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend tight systolic blood pressure (SBP) control for favorable outcomes of type B aortic dissection (BAD) but are still limited by the optimal cut-off value of SBP. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the optimal cut-off value of SBP in BAD patients after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

From January 2011 to April 2017, 269 consecutive patients with BAD after TEVAR were included in the study. All patients were followed up according to a strict follow-up protocol. Cox regression analysis was used to examine the association between SBP at discharge and 90-day aortic related adverse events (ARAE).

RESULTS

All 269 patients completed 90 days of follow-up, and the unadjusted ARAE-free rates at 90-day was 95.1 ± 1.3%. The cut-off value of SBP at discharge identified by receiver operator curve was 130 mmHg for 90-day ARAE. In multivariable models, binary SBP at discharge was significant associated with 90-day ARAE (HR 3.780; 95% CI 1.236-11.556; p = 0.020). Hybrid operation (OR 2.046; 95%CI 1.015-4.122; p = 0.045) and insertion of ≥2 stents (OR 2.950; 95%CI 1.172-7.426; p = 0.022) were demonstrated to be independently associated with poor SBP control (SBP > 130 mmHg) using Logistic analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal cut-off value of SBP at discharge was 130 mmHg which can be used to predict short-term ARAE. Blood pressure in patients with hybrid operation and ≥ 2 stents should be given more focus.

Thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) versus open surgery for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury

BACKGROUND

Blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is a life-threatening surgical emergency associated with mortality up to 8000 per year, most commonly caused by rapid acceleration/deceleration injury sustained through motor vehicle accident and/or blunt thoracic trauma. BTAI has high pre-hospital mortality following the primary injury, with only 10% to 15% of patients surviving long enough to reach the hospital. Open surgical repair had remained the standard treatment option for BTAI since successfully introduced in 1959. However, with technological advances, thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) offers an alternative treatment option for BTAI. TEVAR is a less invasive surgical approach for management of these already critical patients; many reports have described favourable early outcomes.Thoracic endovascular repair may appear to be superior to open repair for treatment of BTAI. However, its long-term results and efficacy remain unknown. No randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have provided evidence to support the superiority of the endovascular approach versus open repair in the treatment of BTAI. This review aims to address this matter. This is an update of a review first published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether use of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) for treatment of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is associated with reduced mortality and morbidity when compared with conventional open surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and AMED databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 20 August 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TEVAR and open surgery for BTAI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed all RCTs identified by the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no RCTs that met the inclusion criteria for this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no RCTs conducted to determine whether use of TEVAR for the treatment of BTAI is associated with reduced mortality and morbidity when compared to conventional open repair. Hence, we are unable to provide any evidence to guide the treatment option for this life-threatening condition. To perform a randomised controlled trial to clarify the optimal management of BTAI would be highly challenging due to the natural history of the condition. Despite the lack of RCT evidence, clinicians are moving forward with endovascular treatment of BTAI on the basis of meta-analyses of cohort studies and large clinical series.

The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on follow-up after vascular surgery arterial procedures

Although follow-up after open surgical and endovascular procedures is generally regarded as an important part of the care provided by vascular surgeons, there are no detailed or comprehensive guidelines that specify the optimal approaches with regard to testing methods, indications for reintervention, and follow-up intervals. To provide guidance to the vascular surgeon, the Clinical Practice Council of the Society for Vascular Surgery appointed an expert panel and a methodologist to review the current clinical evidence and to develop recommendations for follow-up after vascular surgery procedures. For those procedures for which high-quality evidence was not available, recommendations were based on observational studies, committee consensus, and indirect evidence. Recognizing that there are numerous published reports on the role of duplex ultrasound for surveillance of infrainguinal vein bypass grafts, the Society commissioned a systematic review and meta-analysis on this topic. The panel classified the strength of each recommendation and the corresponding quality of evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system: recommendations were graded either strong or weak, and the quality of evidence was graded high, moderate, or low. The resulting recommendations represent a wide variety of open surgical and endovascular procedures involving the extracranial carotid artery, thoracic and abdominal aorta, mesenteric and renal arteries, and lower extremity arterial revascularization. The panel also identified many areas in which there was a lack of high-quality evidence to support their recommendations. This suggests that there are opportunities for further clinical research on testing methods, threshold criteria, and the role of surveillance as well as on the modes of failure and indications for reintervention after vascular surgery procedures.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair to treat uncomplicated Stanford type B aortic dissection: The surgeon's dilemma to preventing future complications

Uncomplicated type B aortic dissections have traditionally been managed non-operatively with aggressive blood pressure control. However, the best medical treatment is associated with a considerable risk of disease progression to complicated dissection or aneurysmal degeneration of the affected aortic segment. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair could prevent long-term complications but, because the dissected aorta is vulnerable, it is a high-risk procedure performed in asymptomatic patient. Therefore, endovascular treatment is not a solution for all patients and it should be performed only in the subgroup prone to developing progression of the disease and future complications. A number of studies have suggested several prognostic factors of early or late adverse events such as the patency of the false lumen in the follow-up, an initial aortic diameter ≥4 cm with a patent false lumen, an initial false lumen diameter ≥22 mm in the proximal descending aorta, visceral involvement and recurrent or refractory pain or hypertension. Partial false lumen thrombosis and a proximal entry tear size >10 mm have also been suggested to be associated with an increased rate of aortic growth. We need randomised trials focused on these prognostic factors to reach level 1, class A recommendation for the optimal timing of intervention. Meanwhile, we have to discuss with the patient the pro and cons of this prophylactic, low-invasive but high-risk treatment to personalise medical care and provide the optimal risk-to-benefit ratio.

Suppressive effect of pitavastatin on aortic arch dilatation in acute stanford type B aortic dissection: analysis of STANP trial

OBJECTIVES

Medical therapy for patients with uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection (ABAD) is essentially accepted for its excellent early outcome; however, long-term outcomes have not been satisfactory due to aorta-related complications. This trial was performed to investigate the efficacy of a statin as an additive that may enhance the effectiveness of conventional medical treatment in patients with ABAD.

METHODS

This was a multi-center, prospective, and randomized comparative investigation of patients with uncomplicated ABAD. Fifty patients with ABAD compatible with inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to two groups and then received administration of pitavastatin (group P) or not (group C). We followed up the patients for 1 year from study onset.

RESULTS

Two patients demised during the follow-up period (both were in group C). In addition, aorta-related interventions were performed in two patients (entry closure for aortic dissection by endovascular repair in one patient in each group). Aortic arch diameters at 1 year in group P tended to be smaller than in group C (P = 0.17), and the rate of change of the aortic arch diameters from onset to 1 year was significantly lower in group P (P = 0.046). Multivariate analysis identified patency of the false lumen was detected as a risk factor for aortic arch dilatation (P = 0.02), and pitavastatin intake was a negative risk factor (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Pitavastatin treatment, in addition to the standard antihypertensive therapy, may have a suppressive effect on aortic arch dilatation in patients with ABAD.

Type B Aortic Dissections: Current Guidelines for Treatment

Stanford type B aortic dissections (TBADs) involve the descending aorta and can present with complications, including malperfusion syndrome or aortic rupture, which are associated with significant morbidity and mortality if left untreated. Clinical diagnosis is straightforward, typically confirmed using CT angiography. Treatment begins with immediate anti-impulse medical therapy. Acute TBAD with complications should be repaired with emergent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Uncomplicated TBAD with high-risk features should undergo TEVAR in the subacute phase. Open surgical repair is seldom required and reserved only for select cases. It is critical to follow these patients clinically and radiographically in the outpatient setting.

Limited Distal Arch Open Stenting for Type B Aortic Dissection with an Enlarged Ulcer-Like Projection, Complicated by Abdominal Aortic Occlusion

A 79-year-old man underwent bifurcated graft replacement for abdominal aortic aneurysm, but the graft was totally occluded owing to an acute type B aortic dissection. We could not have access to the root for performing endovascular stenting for dissecting aneurysm. Furthermore, it was difficult to remove the aneurysm via a left thoracotomy because it was impossible to perfuse the lower body with blood from the femoral artery and also a left axillary arterial cannulation was unusable. Herein, we report a patient who was successfully treated with open surgical aortic stenting for an enlarged ulcer-like projection complicated by a type B aortic dissection.

Promoting False-Lumen Thrombosis after Thoracic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Type B Aortic Dissection by Selectively Excluding False-Lumen Distal Entry Tears

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and clinical outcomes of ancillary endovascular procedures in promoting false-lumen (FL) thrombosis (FLT) and preventing aortic expansion in patients after thoracic endografting for type B dissections.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective review included 15 patients (12 men and 3 women; mean age, 59.6 y). Mean aortic diameter at the time of ancillary treatment was 47.4 mm. Different techniques were used as single procedures or sequentially: covered stent occlusion of detached visceral artery entry tears, occlusion of single entry tears with vascular plugs, or aortic endograft occlusion of multiple FL entry tears. FL embolization with ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer was performed when selective occlusion was considered insufficient to close distal entry tears. Apart from endovascular aneurysm repair, all procedures were performed percutaneously under local anesthesia. If FL diameter increase persisted after 6-month follow-up computed tomographic (CT) angiography, another intervention was planned; otherwise, yearly follow-up was performed.

RESULTS

Mean clinical follow-up duration was 43.8 months (range, 8 d to 86.8 mo), with no in-hospital mortality. Estimated overall survival rates were 93.3%, 86.6%, and 77% at 12, 24, and 48 months, respectively. Three late deaths occurred, one of which was dissection-related at 40 months. Eight surviving patients (53%) had total FLT and 3 had partial FLT with stable aortic diameter on follow-up CT angiography. FL diameter increased in one patient, requiring further intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective exclusion of new distal entry tears remaining after thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair can stabilize abdominal aortic expansion and promote FLT.

Endovascular Stent-Graft Placement in Patients with Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection in China: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Improvements in stent-graft devices and increasing clinical experience with the technique have improved outcomes and expanded clinical indications in patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection (AD) in China. However, the evolution of and modifications to stent grafts have not been reviewed. The aim of this study was to summarize all available published data on technical success, potential benefits, complications, stent evolution, and survival rates associated with endovascular stent-graft placements in patients with Stanford type B AD in China.

METHODS

We performed comprehensive searches of the Chinese-language medical literature in Chinese Biomedical Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data and of the English-language medical literature in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. This systematic review was based on all retrospective studies assessing outcomes of Stanford type B AD treated with endovascular stent-graft placement in China.

RESULTS

A total of 153 retrospective studies that included 8,694 cases were analyzed in this study. Procedure success was reported in 99.7 ± 0.1% of patients. Overall complications were reported in 19.1 ± 0.6% of patients. Postoperative endoleaks occurred in 7.2 ± 0.3% of patients. Major complications were reported in 3.2 ± 0.2% of patients, with a neurological complication rate of 1.3 ± 0.1%. Periprocedural stroke occurred more frequently than did paraplegia (0.8 ± 0.1% vs. 0.1 ± 0.04%). Overall complications were significantly greater in patients treated with first-generation stents than in those treated with second-generation stents (25.1 ± 1.2% vs. 9.5 ± 0.9%, P < 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate was 1.6 ± 0.1%. In addition, 1.8 ± 0.2% of patients died during a mean follow-up period of 29.4 ± 13.5 months. The Kaplan-Meier estimates of the overall survival rate were 99.0 ± 0.1% at 30 days, 98.5 ± 0.2% at 6 months, 98.4 ± 0.2% at 1 year, 98.1 ± 0.2% at 2 years, and 97.9 ± 0.2% at 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular stent-graft placement is feasible and has a high technique success rate as well as favorable neurological complication and survival rates when used to treat Stanford type B AD. The new generation of stent grafts appears to have favorable in-hospital and follow-up outcomes.

Diagnosis and treatment of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection

A type B dissection involves the aorta distal to the subclavian artery, and accounts for 25–40% of aortic dissections. Approximately 75% of these are uncomplicated with no malperfusion or ischemia. Multiple consensus statements recommend thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) as the treatment of choice for acute complicated type B aortic dissections, while uncomplicated type B dissections are traditionally treated with medical management alone, including strict blood pressure control, as open repairs have a prohibitively high morbidity of up to 31%. However, with medical treatment alone, the morbidity, including aneurysm degeneration of the affected segment, is 30%, and mortality is 10% over 5 years. For both chronic and acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections, emerging evidence supports the use of both best medical therapy and TEVAR. This paper reviews the current diagnosis and treatment of uncomplicated type B aortic dissections.

[Pre- and postoperative imaging of type B aortic dissection]

Type B aortic dissections are serious diseases with a 60 to 80 % 5-year survival rate. Although typically managed with a medical treatment, surgery may be necessary in the acute/subacute or the chronic phase if significant complications are encountered. For these patients, CT angiography is the first-line imaging modality, used for indicating and preparing the surgical procedure as well as for follow-up. Physicians in charge of these patients should be familiar with the key reading points. Visceral malperfusion is the most common acute complication, while aneurysmal dilatation of the false lumen is the most common chronic complication, with surgical management generally indicated when the axial diameter of the aorta exceeds 55mm. Endovascular treatment tends to replace open surgery: it requires precise measurements and identification of the entry tear (contribution of 4D-MRA).