One-year results of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury (RESCUE trial)

Current expert-based opinions on endovascular treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury: A state-of-the-art narrative review on indications, techniques, results, and challenges

INTRODUCTION

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) represents one of the most devastating scenarios of vascular trauma which warrants prompt recognition with expedited management. Clinical manifestations of BTAI may not be straightforward to detect and may be misdiagnosed. Therefore, diagnosis of BTAI requires a high index of suspicion based on the mechanism of injury along with urgent transfer to centers with appropriate expertise and facilities.

METHODS

We provide an expert-based narrative review on endovascular treatment of BTAI highlighting indications, techniques, results, and challenges.

RESULTS

Multiple imaging modalities can be used including computed tomography angiography, transesophageal echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and intravascular ultrasound. Whilst conservative pharmacological management can be a safe option in low-grade BTAI, thoracic endovascular aortic repair has become the gold-standard strategy in most cases, replacing open surgical repair. Nevertheless, it is important to account for patient demographics particularly age, severity of injury, choice of endograft including its type and size, and endovascular technique including landing zone and left subclavian artery revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, TEVAR in BTAI has been shown to be an efficacious strategy with favorable early outcomes. In contrast, less is known on the long-term clinical outcomes of TEVAR in BTAI. Hence, despite the optimal early technical and clinical success rates, concerns remain about the need for long-term surveillance. The exact timing of follow-up and the integration of different modalities that can also investigate potential downstream cardiovascular effects remain hot topics for future research. Finally, industry should focus on developing more compliant endografts to improve the stiffness mismatch between the endograft and the aorta to optimize results.

Thoracic endovascular repair for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury: Long-term results

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the endoprosthesis complications in patients undergoing TEVAR for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury, through long-term clinical and diagnostic follow-up.

METHODS

During the study interval (November 2000-October 2020), a total of 38 patients (63% male; average age 37.5 years) with thoracic aortic injury underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Patients underwent routine follow-up with clinical examination and radiological evaluation (CT-angiography or MRI-angiography plus chest radiograph), scheduled at 1 month, at 6 months (only in the cases of thoracic aortic dissection), at 1 year after the procedure and every 1 year thereafter.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 38 procedures (100%). The TEVAR-related mortality rate was 0%. No immediate major complications related to the endovascular procedure were observed. The median duration of diagnostic follow-up was 80 months. A total of four procedure-related complications (10.5%) were identified at the follow-up. Three (7.9%) distal infoldings and collapses of the thoracic endoprosthesis and one (2.6%) type Ia endoleak were observed. No thrombosis of the prosthesis, nor signs of aortic pseudocoarctation were identified. No further complications related to endograft (endoleaks, infections, rupture, partial or complete thrombosis) occurred. No changes in the native aorta, stenosis, or increases in the endograft's diameters were observed. A total of 20 patients (52.6%) underwent MRI-angiography examinations, while a total of 34 patients (89.5%) underwent chest radiographs at the follow-up. In all cases, CT-angiography examinations were performed at the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Procedure-related complications were observed within one year of TEVAR, limiting concerns related to the durability of the prosthesis. No morphological changes in the aorta were observed despite long-term follow-up. The consequences of lifelong surveillance in terms of radiation exposure deserve special consideration, especially in younger patients treated for TAI.

Late Stent Thrombosis in a Patient with Endovascular Aortic Repair for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is associated with high mortality and morbidity. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair has become the recommended treatment modality given improved short-term results compared to open repair. We present a case of a 19-year-old male who presented with acute paralysis and multiorgan dysfunction from acute TEVAR thrombosis. Systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed thrombolysis followed by aspiration thrombectomy, and angioplasty were initially successful in restoring perfusion. However, he developed progressive multiorgan failure related to prompt reocclusion within 48 hours. This case is the first to describe thrombolysis and angioplasty as a management strategy for acute TEVAR thrombosis. We also review the literature surrounding this uncommon complication.

Female gender is associated with increased late luminal narrowing within the stent graft after thoracic endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Luminal narrowing, suspected secondary to thrombus, occurs within stent grafts at an unclear incidence after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The significance of this phenomenon has not been determined, nor have the risk factors for development of intragraft luminal narrowing. Small graft diameter is hypothesized to be a risk factor for the development of ingraft stenosis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of a multicenter healthcare system including all patients who underwent TEVAR between July 2011 and July 2019 with at least 1 year of subsequently available surveillance contrast-enhanced computed tomography imaging. Standard demographic, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were collected. Measurements were obtained via direct off-line images from computed tomography scans. Patent intragraft diameters were compared with baseline and interval change values were normalized to time to follow-up. The primary outcome measure was annual rate of intragraft luminal narrowing.

RESULTS

There were 208 patients who met the inclusion criteria (94 women, 114 men) with a median follow-up of 822 days. The mean annual rate of percent intragraft diameter reduction was 10.5 ± 7.7% for women and 7.6 ± 5.6% for men (P = .0026). Multivariate analysis demonstrated female gender (P = .0283), preoperative diagnosis of hypertension (P = .0449), and need for coverage of the left subclavian artery (P = .0328) were all significant predictors of intragraft luminal narrowing. Small aortic diameters were not found to be associated independently with ingraft luminal narrowing nor was the concomitant use of antiplatelet or anticoagulation medications. Significant amounts of ingraft luminal narrowing, defined as a greater than 20% intragraft diameter decrease, were associated with an increased need for any reintervention, including for malperfusion, endoleak, and symptomatic aneurysm (P = .0249). Kaplan-Meier estimates demonstrated a significant gender-associated difference in high rates of intragraft luminal narrowing (P = .00189).

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis, female gender is shown to be a significant nonmodifiable risk factor for intragraft luminal narrowing after TEVAR. The development of this phenomenon is not benign; as such, these findings were associated with an increased need for reintervention. This finding may be attributable to differences in aortic compliance or gender-associated differences in coagulation pathways and merits further investigation. Surveillance after thoracic stent grafting must account for patient-specific variations in complication risk.

[Diagnostics and treatment of traumatic aortic injuries]

Hintergrund

Traumatische Aortenverletzungen (TAV) sind seltene Folgen von stumpfen Traumata, die eine hohe Mortalität und Morbidität aufweisen. Die schnelle und akkurate Diagnostik sowie die Wahl der korrekten Therapie sind für das Patientenüberleben elementar.

Fragestellung

Bestimmung des aktuellen Standards der Abklärung von TAV im akuten Trauma-Setting und Evaluation der aktuellen Leitlinien zur Therapie.

Material und Methode

Eine Literaturrecherche wurde durchgeführt, mit der Suche nach Publikationen, die die Abklärung und Diagnostik der TAV beschreiben. Außerdem wurden Leitlinien für die Behandlung und Nachsorge von TAV zusammengefasst.

Ergebnisse

In der Literatur wird trotz geringer Spezifität eine konventionelle Thoraxröntgenaufnahme als Initialdiagnostik genannt. Es sollte primär, als Modalität der Wahl, zur Diagnostik und zur Therapiestratifizierung eine Computertomographie (CT) aufgrund der hohen Sensitivität und Spezifität nachfolgen. In allen Leitlinien ist die thorakale endovaskuläre Aortenrekonstruktion („thoracic endovascular aortic repair“, TEVAR) die Therapie der Wahl bei höhergradigen TAV (Grade II–IV) und hat die offene Chirurgie in dem meisten Fällen abgelöst.

Schlussfolgerung

Nach einer kurzfristig erfolgten CT-Diagnostik und Einteilung wird die TEVAR der offenen Chirurgie bei therapiebedürftigen TAV vorgezogen.

Clinical outcomes of endovascular treatment for ruptured thoracic aortic disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Untreated rupture of the thoracic aorta is associated with a high mortality rate. We aimed to review the clinical results of endovascular treatment for ruptured thoracic aortic disease.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data on 37 patients (mean age, 67.0 ± 15.18 years) treated for ruptured thoracic aortic disease from January 2005 to May 2016. The median follow-up duration was 308 days (interquartile range, 61 to 1,036.5). The primary end-point of the study was the composite of death, secondary intervention, endoleak, and major stroke/paraplegia after endovascular treatment.

RESULTS

The etiologies of ruptured thoracic aortic disease were aortic dissection (n = 11, 29.7%), intramural hematoma (n = 7, 18.9%), thoracic aortic aneurysm (n = 14, 37.8%), and traumatic aortic transection (n = 5, 13.5%). Three patients died within 24 hours of thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and one showed type I endoleak. The technical success rate was 89.2% (33/37). The in-hospital mortality rate was 13.5% (5/37); no deaths occurred during follow-up. The composite outcome rate during follow-up was 37.8% (14/37), comprising death (n = 5, 13.5%), secondary intervention (n = 5, 13.5%), endoleak (n = 5, 13.5%), and major stroke/paraplegia (n = 3, 8.1%). Left subclavian artery revascularization and proximal landing zone were not associated with the composite outcome. Low mean arterial pressure (MAP; ≤ 60 mmHg, [hazard ratio, 13.018; 95% confidence interval, 2.435 to 69.583, p = 0.003]) was the most significant predictor and high transfusion requirement in the first 24 hours was associated with event-free survival (log rank p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Endovascular treatment achieves high technical success rates and acceptable clinical outcome. High transfusion volume and low MAP were associated with poor clinical outcomes.

Endovascular treatment of traumatic dissection of the thoracic aorta - series of 16 cases

Background

Aortic injuries caused by blunt chest traumas have high pre-hospital and emergency mortality. The endovascular approach is one option for treatment of these injuries, but many outcomes related to this approach remain unknown.

Objectives

The aim of this study is to describe a specialist trauma center’s experience with endovascular treatment of cases like these.

Methods

This is a descriptive study based on review of the electronic medical records of patients who had suffered from blunt thoracic aorta trauma and were seen at a hospital specializing in trauma cases in the city of Curitiba (Paraná, Brazil).

Results

Sixteen patients were included in the study. All patients were traffic accident victims and 75% of the accidents were the result of vehicle collisions. Aortic lesions ranged from grade I to IV and the majority had grade II lesions (50%). All patients underwent endovascular treatment with endografts, an average of 71 hours after the trauma. Two patients died, both from causes unrelated to their aortic injuries. During follow-up, only two patients presented complications (endoleak and progression of the dissection).

Conclusions

The endovascular method is a viable alternative for treatment of blunt trauma thoracic aortic injuries. Randomized and controlled studies are needed to provide evidence to support indication of this method to treat this type of injury.

Emergent open conversion for stent-graft deployment failure in a ruptured thoracic aneurysm

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the standard of care for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms. A 92-year-old man had presented in stable condition but with acute severe back pain. Computed tomography revealed a ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm. TEVAR (Valiant; Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, Calif) into zone 2 with intentional coverage of the left subclavian artery was planned. After release of the stent-graft body, proximal release of the bare springs was impossible. Troubleshooting techniques were applied; but tip capture could not be released. Emergent conversion to open repair was performed. Intraoperative device deployment failure in TEVAR is rare. The findings from the present report have demonstrated the advantages of having in-house cardiac surgery backup available.

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.

Blunt thoracic aortic injury - concepts and management

BACKGROUND

Blunt thoracic aortic injury, a life-threatening concern, remains the second most common cause of mortality among all non-penetrating traumatic injuries, second only to intracranial hemorrhage. Kinetic forces from the rapid deceleration are the impetus for the injury mechanism and are graded accordingly. Given the prevalence of trauma as a public health problem, contemporary management considerations are important.

MAIN BODY

Blunt thoracic aortic injury may be fatal if not diagnosed and treated expeditiously. Endovascular options allow safe and effective management of these dangerous injuries. This paper describes the overview of blunt thoracic aortic trauma, the epidemiology, presentation, diagnosis, and treatment options with a focus on endovascular management.

CONCLUSION

Blunt thoracic aortic injury requires a high index of suspicion based on mechanism of injury in the trauma population. Endovascular options have become the mainstay of blunt thoracic aortic injury treatment whenever feasible with satisfactory results and long-term outcomes.

Open Conversion for Recurrent Endograft Occlusion after Endovascular Treatment of Blunt Traumatic Aortic Injury: A Peculiar Case Report

BACKGROUND

We report a rare case of delayed, symptomatic thoracic endograft thrombosis after the initial thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury which was successfully retreated with a redo TEVAR, followed by open conversion due to recurrent partial occlusion of the distal edge of the endografts.

METHODS

Two years ago, a 22-year-old man had undergone an emergency TEVAR for blunt thoracic aortic injury. A Zenith Cook 22 × 100 mm (Cook Incorporated, Bloomington, IN) endograft was used. Six months later, he underwent an emergency endovascular relining of the endograft using the same type of device. The multiorgan perfusion was completely restored except for the spinal cord injury. After 8 months, a recurrent partial occlusion of the distal edge of the second graft was documented. The thoracic aorta was replaced with a 22-mm silver-coated graft (Maquet Spain, SLU).

RESULTS

Histology examination showed a neointimal formation and thickening and fibrosis of the inner 1/3 of the media with loss of smooth muscle cells and increase of the elastic fibers.

CONCLUSIONS

The need for secondary interventions or open conversion because of potential complications after TEVAR for traumatic aortic injury is an additional consideration when weighing the risks and benefits of endovascular repair and subsequent surveillance strategies.

Blunt Aortic / Inferior Vena Cava Injury: Are We Consistently Providing the Same Level of Care?

Major vascular traumatic injuries have a higher pre-hospital and in-hospital mortality rate. The different mechanisms of injury and anatomy of the aorta and inferior vena cava (IVC) make the management a constant challenge to surgeons and clinicians. Blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI) can occur at the thoracic or abdominal level, each of which possesses different considerations. Blunt traumatic inferior vena cava injury (BTIVCI) also has important diagnostic challenges since the lesion may not be as evident in the IVC as compared to the aorta, possibly due to lower caval pressures or the ability to self-tamponade from adjacent structures. Endovascular management has significantly increased in the past years, and despite an improvement in mortality, the approach to aortic and IVC injuries is not well standardized. Diagnostic imaging helps to classify the extent of the lesions and guide towards the best therapeutic options for each case. Conservative management, in some cases, has shown to reduce mortality, and close follow-up has proven good outcomes. Future research will provide more evidence to determine the best approach to BTAI and BTIVCI for better long-term outcomes. This article aims to provide an updated review of the current literature regarding diagnosis, classification, and management of BTAI and BTIVCI.

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Adverse Events Reported In The Food And Drug Administration Manufacturer And User Facility Device Experience Database

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to identify adverse events (device- and patient-related) associated with thoracic aortic stent graft systems and their timing post-procedure.

Materials and methods

The Food and Drug Administration’s Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (FDA-MAUDE) voluntary database was searched for Thoracic Aortic Endovascular Repair (TEVAR) devices reported over the course of 1 year (January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014). The data abstracted included the indication for treatment, device used, and adverse events.

Results

During 2014, there were 334 original submissions to the FDA-MAUDE database describing 371 adverse events regarding TEVAR devices that met inclusion criteria for this study. All submissions were from manufacturers, and none were from physicians. The most common pathologies treated were thoracic aortic aneurysm (67.6%) and type B aortic dissection (25.1%). The most frequently reported intraoperative, early postoperative (<30 days), and late postoperative (>30 days) events overall were technical device failure, neurologic complications (stroke, paraplegia), and endoleak, respectively. Of note, there were descriptions of retained deployment materials, late graft infections, and aorto-visceral fistula formation up to 3 years postoperatively.

Conclusion

The MAUDE database is a valuable repository for complications and device failures that are not otherwise in the published literature and submitted by manufacturers relating to this relatively new technology.

Clinical Outcomes of the Seal® Thoracic Stent Graft for Traumatic Aortic Injury in a Korean Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) has been used as a primary treatment for blunt traumatic aortic injury (TAI). However, the outcomes of midterm surveillance of Seal® stent-graft durability for TAI have not been extensively studied. Thus, we aimed to report the midterm outcomes of TEVAR using the Seal® stent graft for blunt TAI.

METHODS

Patients with blunt TAI treated with TEVAR using the Seal® thoracic stent graft between 2007 and 2013 in Korea were included. Midterm outcomes included technical/clinical success, in-hospital death, aorta/procedure/device-related adverse events, secondary procedures, and 30-day and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 99 patients (54% men; mean age, 48 years) were included. Grade III or higher injuries were present in 95% of patients, including 15 free ruptures of the thoracic aorta, and 64% of injuries were located in zone III. The median procedure and hospitalization duration were 90 min and 11 days, respectively. The technical success rate was 98%. The number of in-hospital mortalities (n = 8) and stroke (n = 2) were observed at 30 days. Late stroke and paraplegia (>30 days) were not observed during the mean 49 ± 26 months of follow-up (median, 48 months; range, 0-117 months). There were no aorta-related mortalities or conversions to open repair. Secondary procedures were performed in 8 patients, all of which were carotid-subclavian bypasses for delayed left subclavian occlusion. The all-cause mortality rate was 5% at 30 days and 8% at 1 year. The survival rate was 95% at 30 days, 92% at 1 year, 92% at 3 years, and 89% at 5 years. One type Ia endoleak occurred at 18 months after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR with the Seal® stent graft for TAI showed favorable midterm outcomes. The incidence of major adverse events after the procedure was low.

Blunt traumatic injury to the thoracic aorta treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a single-centre 20-year experience

OBJECTIVES

Blunt thoracic aortic injury can be treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with excellent short and mid-term outcomes. However, few data are available about the long-term results. Our goal was to report our single-centre, 20-year experience using TEVAR to treat blunt thoracic aortic injury.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our institutional database to identify all patients treated with TEVAR for traumatic lesions of the aortic isthmus. We identified 35 patients since 1998. Patients' charts were analysed for preoperative characteristics, intraoperative variables and short-term outcomes. Information about the long-term follow-up was collected by analysing cross-sectional images and via phone calls. Follow-up was 100% complete. Rates of survival and of freedom from aortic redo were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were men (82%). The median age was 42 years (range 22-79 years) and the mean injury severity score was 38 (±13). The endovascular procedure was successfully carried out in all patients. The left subclavian artery was intentionally overstented in 11 patients (31%). Two patients died perioperatively (5.7%). The estimated survival was 92% and 87% at 5 and 10 years, respectively, with no aorta-related deaths. The estimated freedom from aortic redo was 96% and 91% at 5 and 10 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data corroborate the excellent results of the endovascular treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury when follow-up is extended to 20 years. New-generation devices, which are more comfortable and have smaller diameters, may further improve the results of TEVAR in treating traumatic aortic injury. Surveillance with cross-sectional imaging remains mandatory.

Endovascular Therapy of Vascular Trauma—Current Options and Review of the Literature

Objective:

To review the current use of endovascular techniques in trauma.

Summary Background Data:

Multiple studies have demonstrated that, despite current guidelines, endovascular therapies are used in instances of arterial trauma.

Methods:

The existing literature concerning arterial trauma was reviewed. Studies reviewed included case reports, single-center case series, large database studies, official industry publications and instructions for use, and society guidelines.

Results:

Endovascular therapies are used in arterial trauma in all systems. The use of thoracic endografts in blunt thoracic aortic trauma is accepted and endorsed by society guidelines. The use of endovascular therapies in other anatomic locations is largely limited to single-center studies. Advantages potentially include less morbidity due to smaller incisions as well as shorter operating room times. Many report using endovascular therapies even with hard signs of injury. Long-term results are limited by a lack of long-term follow-up but, in general, suggest that these techniques produce acceptable outcomes. The adoption of these techniques may be limited by resource and surgeon availability.

Conclusions:

The use of endovascular therapies in trauma has gained acceptance despite not yet having a place in official guidelines.

The endovascular repair of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury in Asia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury, the second leading cause of death from trauma, poses unique challenges in its management. However, there has not yet been a corresponding consolidated series of outcomes reported in Asia, which this systematic review aims to address.

METHOD

This review was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Searches were performed on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Database for studies performed in Asia reporting the endovascular management of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analyses of pooled proportions were performed using the metaprop command in STATA. This review has been prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018083773).

RESULTS

Sixteen retrospective cohort studies were included, reporting a total of 238 patients. The pooled Injury Severity Score was 32.5 (95%CI 27.8-37.1). The pooled mean time to operation from diagnosis was 39.2 hours (95%CI 24.6-53.8 hours), and operation time was 100 min (95%CI 63.5-136.5 min). The pooled rate of procedural conversion from endovascular repair to open surgery was 0.17% (95%CI 0-3.7%), and the proportion of left subclavian artery coverage was 55% (95%CI 37-72%). The pooled prevalence of intra-operative all-cause and aortic-related mortality was 0.72% (95%CI 0-4.9%) and 0.27% (95%CI 0-3.8%), respectively. The pooled prevalence of 30-day all-cause and aortic-related mortality was 2.2% (95%CI 0.16-5.6%) and 2.1% (95%CI 0-3.7%), respectively. In terms of 30-day complication, the pooled prevalence rates of type 1 endoleak, endograft complications, vascular access injury, strokes, and aortic re-rupture were 1.2%, 0.34%, 0.14%, 0.02%, and 0.01%, respectively. There were no cases of types II and III endoleak, and renal failure.

CONCLUSION

Short- to mid-term results for thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury in Asia are encouraging. However, there is a distinct disparity in reporting across Asia. We propose a prospective database for outcome reporting post thoracic endovascular aortic repair in this patient population, and ongoing follow up to assess long-term efficacy of this treatment strategy.

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.

National Trends of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Versus Open Repair in Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury

BACKGROUND

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) occurs in <1% of all trauma admissions. Considering the advent of multiple thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) devices over the past decade, improved outcomes of TEVAR supported in the literature, rapid diagnosis, and improved preoperative planning of BTAI using computed tomography imaging, we hypothesized that the national incidence of TEVAR in BTAI has increased while open repair has decreased. In addition, we hypothesized that the mortality risk in BTAI patients undergoing TEVAR would be lower than open repair.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2015. The primary end points of interest included the incidence of TEVAR and open repair, as well as mortality in BTAI patients undergoing intervention. Covariates were included in a multivariable analysis to determine risk for mortality in BTAI patients undergoing open repair versus TEVAR.

RESULTS

We identified 3,628 BTAI patients undergoing intervention. Of these, 3,226 underwent TEVAR (87.9%), and 445 (12.1%) underwent open repair. Compared with open repair, TEVAR had a shorter mean length of stay (LOS) (19.8 vs. 21.3 days, P < 0.05) and lower rates of acute kidney injury (AKI) (5.6% vs. 9.0%, P < 0.05) and mortality (8.8% vs. 12.8%, P < 0.05). Open repair had greater risk for mortality than TEVAR (odds ratio = 1.63, confidence intervals = 1.19-2.23, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of open repair decreased from 7.4% in 2007 to 1.9% in 2015, whereas TEVAR increased from 12.1 to 25.7% during the same time period. We confirmed previous findings that endovascular repair is associated with decreased mortality, LOS, and major complications, including AKI. Future investigations should focus on identifying the ideal patient candidate for TEVAR and elucidate precise indications for TEVAR in BTAI.

Limited influence of blunt aortic injuries on the outcome of polytraumatized patients: a matched pair analysis

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic lesions of great vessels such as the aorta are life-threatening injuries. There is limited evidence about the influence of traumatic aortic injuries in multiple trauma patients in particular with regard to posttraumatic complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of blunt thoracic aortic injuries in multiple trauma patients compared to a multiple trauma cohort without this specific injury. In addition, the safety of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) in multiple trauma patients was analyzed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed. We included all multiple trauma patients (ISS ≥ 16, age > 14 years) between 2005 and 2014 with (group BTAI) and without (group nBTAI) blunt traumatic aortic injuries who were treated at our level-1 trauma center. Demographic as well as clinical parameters were analyzed including injury pattern, mechanism of injury, posttraumatic complications such as ARDS, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and others. A matched pair analysis was performed by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

In total, 721 patients were enrolled (group BTAI: n = 45; nBTAI: n = 676). In the initial study population, surgical intervention was done in n = 32 (71.1%) patients (TEVAR: n = 25; 78.1%), there was an increased AIS_Chest and overall injury severity in group BTAI with associated significantly more posttraumatic complications in group BTAI. The matched pair analysis consisted of 42 patients per group. Beside an increased ventilation time, no significant differences were evident after the matching process. There was a trend to increased risk for SIRS using binary logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple trauma patients with blunt thoracic aortic injuries who are treated at a level-1 trauma center show a comparable outcome matched to their counterparts without aortic injuries. Our study confirms that using TEVAR in polytraumatized patients is a safe procedure. In all patients treated with TEVAR, there were no procedure-related complications, especially no neurological deficit.

Experts' Results in Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury are Reproducible in Lower Volume Tertiary Institutions. Early and Mid-term Results of an Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the early and mid-term clinical results, the device performance, and the mid-term re-intervention rates of patients suffering blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) managed by a multidisciplinary team in a low-volume BTAI centre.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study in a tertiary hospital setting. From December 2005 to March 2016, all patients over 18 years old admitted with BTAI were included in the study. No exclusion criteria were applied. The study data were collected and analysed retrospectively. Follow-up of survivors included computed tomography imaging 3 and 9 months post-procedure, then annually.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were included in the study. Their mean age was 42 ± 16 years and 89% were male. A contained aortic rupture was diagnosed in 20 patients, a Stanford type B dissection in six, and intramural haematoma in two patients. Multidisciplinary evaluations were performed and an intervention was indicated in 25 patients (89%), four of whom died before the intervention. Nineteen patients underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair of the descending thoracic aorta and two patients underwent a frozen elephant trunk procedure. The procedures were performed 0.7 ± 1.2 days after injury. All procedures were successful. There were no device related complications. The post-operative 30 day mortality was 5%, with one patient dying on the day of operation from other vascular injuries. The 30 day mortality of all patients was 18%. The median mid-term follow-up period was 786 days. All 30 day survivors survived the follow-up period. The mid-term imaging showed stable results in 19 patients. Two patients required frozen elephant trunk procedures after 240 and 681 days and both procedures were successful.

CONCLUSIONS

In a low volume centre, a multidisciplinary team using a standardised protocol with the endovascular first approach demonstrated excellent outcomes, similar to those of large centres. If the aortic trauma is adequately managed, the patient's outcome is closely related to the additional trauma.

Endovascular Repair in Acute Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection: 3-Year Results from the Valiant US Investigational Device Exemption Study

Acute complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a potentially catastrophic, life-threatening condition. If left untreated, there is a high risk of aortic rupture, irreversible organ or limb damage, or death. Several risk factors have been associated with acute complicated TBAD, including age and refractory hypertension. In the acute phase, even uncomplicated patients are more prone to develop complications if hypertension and pain are left medically untreated. Innovations in stent graft technologies have incrementally improved outcomes since their first use for this condition in 1999, though improvement is needed in mitigating periprocedural complications, adverse events, and mortality. In the past decade, endovascular repair has become the preferred treatment because of its superior outcomes to open repair and medical therapy. The Valiant Captivia Thoracic Stent Graft System is a third-generation endovascular stent graft with advancements in minimally invasive delivery, conformability to the anatomy, and the minimization of adverse sequelae. Herein, this stent graft is briefly reviewed and its 3-year outcomes are presented. Freedom from all-cause and dissection-related mortality was 79.1% and 90.0%, respectively. The Valiant Captivia Stent Graft represents a safe, effective intervention for acute complicated TBAD. Continued surveillance is needed to verify its longer-term durability.

Indications for Aortic Arch Intervention

Surgery of the aortic arch is arguably one of the most complex areas of cardiac surgery. Despite that, studies and guidelines have not sufficiently addressed the aortic arch specifically. In general, indications for aortic arch intervention parallel those of the ascending aorta. Herein we review indications for aortic arch intervention in various aortic pathologies based on the scant evidence available combined with surgical expertise and expert opinion.

Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury in Case of a 15-Year-Old Boy: Difficulties and Possibilities of the Endovascular Approach

BACKGROUND

Blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAIs) are rare but life threatening. Most BTAI are caused by high-energy trauma. Among children with blunt trauma, the incidence of BTAI is below 1 percent. The present case deals with covered thoracic aortic rupture of a 15-year-old boy. Emphasizing the value and the difficulties of endovascular surgery in children is the motivation for this case report.

CASE REPORT

We are presenting the case of a 15-year-old boy, who suffered multiple traumata after accident. Beneath multiple fractures and a liver laceration, a thoracic aortic rupture with pseudoaneurysm of the aortic wall was diagnosed. Owing to the comorbidities, an endovascular therapy in combination with a transposition of the left subclavian artery to the common carotid artery was performed. The chronological line-up of the events and the endovascular treatment as well as the in-hospital follow-up are described.

DISCUSSION

Injury-induced BTAI in pubescent children rarely occurs. Only few cases can be found in literature, none of which were associated with the presented pattern of injury.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal treatment for childhood BTAI is a case-by-case decision. We critically discuss the value of endovascular therapy in the present case.