Endograft exclusion of acute and chronic descending thoracic aortic dissections

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Current Evidence Related to the Impact of Endovascular Repair Timing on Prognosis of Acute Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to determine whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) timing is more beneficial in the acute phase (first 14 days) than in the subacute phase (14-90 days) for the administration of acute Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in databases (EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Library) until December 2023 to identify studies reporting the results of TEVAR used for patients with acute TBAD. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated utilizing either the random-effects model or the fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies involving 4,827 individuals with TBAD (including 1,609 with subacute TBAD) met our selection criteria. Early results revealed a lower incidence of Ia endoleaks (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.03-2.33; P = 0.04) and aortic ruptures (OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 0.98-8.50; P = 0.05) in subacute TBAD. Apart from these findings, there was little difference in other incidents between the 2 groups. Regarding late outcomes, we observed significantly higher rates of retrograde dissection (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.04-4.34; P = 0.04), distal stent-induced new entry (OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.24-4.61; P = 0.009), and reintervention (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.05-1.99; P = 0.02) in acute TBAD than in subacute TBAD, whereas no significant differences were found for other outcomes between the 2 groups. Also, TEVAR appeared to yield comparable results for false lumen thrombosis and true lumen regression in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Subacute TBAD repair with TEVAR demonstrates a more effective reduction in adverse event rates compared to immediate treatment in the acute phase.

Thoracic endovascular repair of chronic type B aortic dissection: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

At present, the optimal management strategy for chronic type B aortic dissection (CTBAD) remains unknown, as equipoise remains regarding medical management versus endovascular treatment versus open surgery. However, the results over recent years of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in CTBAD appear promising. The aim of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive analysis of the available data reporting outcomes and survival rates for TEVAR in CTBAD.

METHODS

Electronic searches of six databases were performed from inception to April 2021. All studies reporting outcomes, specifically 30-day mortality rates, for endovascular repair of CTBAD were identified. Relevant data were extracted, and a random-effects meta-analysis of proportions or means was performed to aggregate the data. Survival data were pooled using data derived from original Kaplan-Meier curves, which allows reconstruction of individual patient data.

RESULTS

Forty-eight studies with 2,641 patients were identified. Early (<30 days) all-cause and aortic-related mortality rates were low at 1.6% and 0.5%, respectively. Incidence of retrograde type A dissection in the post-operative period was only 1.4%. There were also low rates of cerebrovascular accidents and spinal cord injury (1.1% and 0.9%, respectively). Late follow-up all-cause mortality was 8.0%, however, late aortic-related mortality was only 2.4%. Reintervention rates were 10.1% for endovascular and 6.7% for surgical reintervention. Pooled rates of overall survival at 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year were 91.5%, 84.7%, 77.7% and 56.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant heterogeneity in the available evidence and absence of consensus reporting standards are important considerations and concern when interpreting the data. Evaluation of the evidence suggests that TEVAR for CTBAD is a safe procedure with low rates of complications. However, the optimal treatment strategy for CTBAD remains debatable and requires further research. Evidence from high-quality registries and clinical trials are required to address these challenges.

Medical therapy versus TEVAR for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection

The standard of care in uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection (uTBAD) has been optimal medical management. Surgical repair and endovascular interventions are adjuncts in managing complicated type B dissection. Increasing safety and confidence in the thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and recent data indicating long-term complications in medical management of uTBAD has brought a shift in treatment approach. TEVAR at best remains controversial, yet there is a subset, which will definitely benefit from intervention.

Validated Computational Model to Compute Re-apposition Pressures for Treating Type-B Aortic Dissections

The use of endovascular treatment in the thoracic aorta has revolutionized the clinical approach for treating Stanford type B aortic dissection. The endograft procedure is a minimally invasive alternative to traditional surgery for the management of complicated type-B patients. The endograft is first deployed to exclude the proximal entry tear to redirect blood flow toward the true lumen and then a stent graft is used to push the intimal flap against the false lumen (FL) wall such that the aorta is reconstituted by sealing the FL. Although endovascular treatment has reduced the mortality rate in patients compared to those undergoing surgical repair, more than 30% of patients who were initially successfully treated require a new endovascular or surgical intervention in the aortic segments distal to the endograft. One reason for failure of the repair is persistent FL perfusion from distal entry tears. This creates a patent FL channel which can be associated with FL growth. Thus, it is necessary to develop stents that can promote full re-apposition of the flap leading to complete closure of the FL. In the current study, we determine the radial pressures required to re-appose the mid and distal ends of a dissected porcine thoracic aorta using a balloon catheter under static inflation pressure. The same analysis is simulated using finite element analysis (FEA) models by incorporating the hyperelastic properties of porcine aortic tissues. It is shown that the FEA models capture the change in the radial pressures required to re-appose the intimal flap as a function of pressure. The predictions from the simulation models match closely the results from the bench experiments. The use of validated computational models can support development of better stents by calculating the proper radial pressures required for complete re-apposition of the intimal flap.

Dissecção aórtica de tipo B de Stanford: relato de caso e revisão de literatura

O complexo tratamento de dissecção da aorta ainda apresenta controvérsias devido à gravidade do caso e à necessidade de individualização da terapêutica. A gravidade relaciona-se ao difícil diagnóstico pelas queixas inespecíficas e pelas graves complicações inerentes à evolução da doença (ruptura aórtica, síndrome de má perfusão, dissecção retrógrada, dor ou hipertensão refratária). Este relato apresenta um homem de 61 anos, tabagista e hipertenso mal controlado, que evoluiu para dissecção aórtica de tipo B de Stanford. Foi abordado através de técnica endovascular com uso de endoprótese com stent para tratamento do caso após falha do tratamento medicamentoso. O tratamento endovascular mostrou-se uma ferramenta eficaz para o tratamento definitivo, com boa taxa de sobrevida ao final do primeiro ano após o procedimento.

Risk factors and early outcomes of acute renal injury after thoracic aortic endograft repair for type B aortic dissection

Background

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become an emerging treatment modality for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) patients in recent years. The risk factors and impacts of acute kidney injury (AKI) after percutaneous TEVAR, however, have not been widely established.

Methods

We retrospectively studied the clinical records of 305 consecutive patients who admitted to our institution and had TEVAR for TBAD between December 2009 and June 2013. The patients were routinely monitored for their renal functions preoperatively until 7 days after TEVAR. The Kidney Disease Improving Global Guidelines (KDIGO) criteria were used for AKI.

Results

Of the total 305 consecutive patients, 84 (27.5%) developed AKI after TEVAR, comprising 66 (21.6%) patients in KDIGO stage 1, 6 (2.0%) patients in stage 2 and 12 (3.9%) patients in stage 3. From the logistic regression analysis, systolic blood pressure (SBP) on admission >140 mmHg (odds ratio [OR], 2.288; 95% CI, 1.319–3.969) and supra-aortic branches graft bypass hybrid surgery (OR, 3.228; 95% CI, 1.526–6.831) were independent risk factors for AKI after TEVAR. Local anesthesia tended to be a protective factor (OR, 0.563; 95% CI, 0.316–1.001). The preoperative renal function, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker or statin administration, volume of contrast agent, range of TBAD and false lumen involving renal artery were not associated with post-operation AKI. The in-hospital mortality and major adverse events were markedly increased with the occurrence of AKI (7.1% vs 0.9%, P=0.006; 14.3% vs 3.2%, P<0.001, respectively).

Conclusions

TEVAR for TBAD has a high incidence of AKI, which is associated with worse in-hospital outcomes. SBP on admission and supra-aortic branches graft bypass hybrid surgery were the most significant risk factors. Renopreventive measures should be considered in high-risk patients.

Contemporary Management Strategies for Chronic Type B Aortic Dissections: A Systematic Review

Background

Currently, the optimal management strategy for chronic type B aortic dissections (CBAD) is unknown. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature to compare results of open surgical repair (OSR), standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or branched and fenestrated TEVAR (BEVAR/FEVAR) for CBAD.

Methods

EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched for eligible studies between January 2000 and October 2015. Studies describing outcomes of OSR, TEVAR, B/FEVAR, or all, for CBAD patients initially treated with medical therapy, were included. Primary endpoints were early mortality, and one-year and five-year survival. Secondary endpoints included occurrence of complications. Furthermore, a Time until Treatment Equipoise (TUTE) graph was constructed.

Results

Thirty-five articles were selected for systematic review. A total of 1081 OSR patients, 1397 TEVAR patients and 61 B/FEVAR patients were identified. Early mortality ranged from 5.6% to 21.0% for OSR, 0.0% to 13.7% for TEVAR, and 0.0% to 9.7% for B/FEVAR. For OSR, one-year and five-year survival ranged 72.0%-92.0% and 53.0%-86.7%, respectively. For TEVAR, one-year survival was 82.9%-100.0% and five-year survival 70.0%-88.9%. For B/FEVAR only one-year survival was available, ranging between 76.4% and 100.0%. Most common postoperative complications included stroke (OSR 0.0%-13.3%, TEVAR 0.0%-11.8%), spinal cord ischemia (OSR 0.0%-16.4%, TEVAR 0.0%-12.5%, B/FEVAR 0.0%-12.9%) and acute renal failure (OSR 0.0%-33.3%, TEVAR 0.0%-34.4%, B/FEVAR 0.0%-3.2%). Most common long-term complications after OSR included aneurysm formation (5.8%-20.0%) and new type A dissection (1.7–2.2%). Early complications after TEVAR included retrograde dissection (0.0%-7.1%), malperfusion (1.3%–9.4%), cardiac complications (0.0%–5.9%) and rupture (0.5%–5.0%). Most common long-term complications after TEVAR were rupture (0.5%–7.1%), endoleaks (0.0%–15.8%) and cardiac complications (5.9%-7.1%). No short-term aortic rupture or malperfusion was observed after B/FEVAR. Long-term complications included malperfusion (6.5%) and endoleaks (0.0%-66.7%). Reintervention rates after OSR, TEVAR and B/FEVAR were 5.8%-29.0%, 4.3%-47.4% and 0.0%-53.3%, respectively. TUTE for OSR was 2.7 years, for TEVAR 9.9 months and for B/FEVAR 10.3 months.

Conclusion

We found a limited early survival benefit of standard TEVAR over OSR for CBAD. Complication rates after TEVAR are higher, but complications after OSR are usually more serious. Initial experiences with B/FEVAR show its feasibility, but long-term results are needed to compare it to OSR and standard TEVAR. We conclude that optimal treatment of CBAD remains debatable and merits a patient specific decision. TUTE seems a feasible and useful tool to better understand management outcomes of CBAD.

The Risk Factors and Outcomes of Acute Kidney Injury after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Background

We aimed to evaluate the incidence, predictive factors, and impact of acute kidney injury (AKI) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Methods

A total of 53 patients who underwent 57 TEVAR operations between 2008 and 2015 were reviewed for the incidence of AKI as defined by the RIFLE (risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage kidney disease risk) consensus criteria. The estimated glomerular filtration rate was determined in the perioperative period. Comorbidities and postoperative outcomes were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

Underlying aortic pathologies included 21 degenerative aortic aneurysms, 20 blunt traumatic aortic injuries, six type B aortic dissections, five type B intramural hematomas, three endoleaks and two miscellaneous diseases. The mean age of the patients was 61.2±17.5 years (range, 15 to 85 years). AKI was identified in 13 (22.8%) of 57 patients. There was an association of preoperative stroke and postoperative paraparesis and paraplegia with AKI. The average intensive care unit (ICU) stay in patients with AKI was significantly longer than in patients without AKI (5.3 vs. 12.7 days, p=0.017). The 30-day mortality rate in patients with AKI was significantly higher than patients without AKI (23.1% vs. 4.5%, p=0.038); however, AKI did not impact long-term survival.

Conclusion

Preoperative stroke and postoperative paraparesis and paraplegia were identified as predictors for AKI. Patients with AKI experienced longer average ICU stays and greater 30-day mortality than those without AKI. Perioperative identification of high-risk patients, as well as nephroprotective strategies to reduce the incidence of AKI, should be considered as important aspects of a successful TEVAR procedure.

Spinal cord injury following thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic repairs

Objective

To discuss the currently available approaches to prevent spinal cord injury during thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic repairs.

Methods

We carried out a PubMed search up to 2013 using the Medical Subject Headings: “aortic aneurysm/surgery” and “spinal cord ischemia”; “aortic aneurysm, thoracic/surgery” and “spinal cord ischemia”; “aneurysm/surgery” and “spinal cord ischemia/cerebrospinal fluid”; “aortic aneurysm/surgery” and “paraplegia”. All 190 original articles satisfying our inclusion criteria were analyzed for incidence, predictors, and other pertinent variables related to spinal cord injury, and we compared the results in recent publications with those in earlier reports.

Results

The mean age of the 38,491 patients was 65.3 ± 4.9 years. The overall incidence of paraplegia and/or paraparesis was 7.1% ± 6.1% (range 0%–32%). The incidence of spinal cord injury before 2000, from 2001 to 2007, and 2008–2013 was 9.0% ± 6.7%, 7.0% ± 6.1%, and 5.9% ± 5.2%, respectively ( p = 0.019). Various predictors of spinal cord injury were identified, extent of disease being the most common. Modification of surgical techniques, use of adjuncts, and better understanding of spinal cord perfusion physiology were attributed to the decrease in postoperative spinal cord injury in recent years.

Conclusions

Spinal cord injury after thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic repair poses a real challenge to cardiovascular surgeons. However, with evolving surgical strategies, identification of predictors, and use of various adjuncts over the years, the incidence of spinal cord injury after thoracic/thoracoabdominal aortic repair has declined. Embracing a multimodality approach offers a good insight into combating this grave complication.

Ischemia and functional status of the left arm and quality of life after left subclavian artery coverage during stent grafting of thoracic aortic diseases

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to report on the incidence of left arm ischemia, left arm function, and quality of life after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) by stent grafting with and without coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA).

METHODS

All patients who underwent TEVAR since 1996 in our institution were included. Basic demographic parameters, underlying disease, details of TEVAR, long-term left arm function (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand [DASH] questionnaire), and quality of life (12-Item Short Form Health Survey) were analyzed. End points were left arm ischemia, need for LSA revascularization (before or after TEVAR), long-term functional impairment, and quality of life.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients underwent TEVAR for degenerative aneurysm (n = 64), traumatic aortic injury (TAI; n = 38), or Stanford type B dissection (n = 36). Seventy-three patients (52.9%) had LSA coverage, which led to partial or complete LSA occlusion in 49 (35.5%). Selectively, nine patients (6.5%) had primary LSA revascularization. After TEVAR, left arm ischemia was observed in only one patient, who consecutively needed a left carotid to subclavian bypass. During a mean follow-up period of 4.1 ± 3.7 years, no additional patient needed secondary LSA revascularization. In comparing patients with occluded vs patent LSA, the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) health scores (12-Item Short Form Health Survey) as well as DASH scores were similar. However, subgroup analysis showed better PCS scores for TAI patients with patent LSA, whereas MCS and DASH scores were similar in TAI patients, and scores were indifferent within thoracic aortic aneurysm and Stanford type B dissection subgroups. In comparing different subgroups, TAI patients had significantly better PCS, MCS, and DASH scores.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR is associated with a low risk of peri-interventional left arm ischemia. During long-term follow-up, secondary LSA revascularization is uncommon. Coverage of the LSA has no impact on left arm function and quality of life, probably with the exception of physical health scores in patients with TAI.

Gore TAG®Thoracic Endoprosthesis: the first US FDA-approved thoracic endograft

Open surgical repair of thoracic aortic lesions carries a significant risk of complications, including death. Minimally invasive approaches, however, may improve outcomes. Clinical trials of the Gore TAG Thoracic Endoprosthesis device indicate that subjects receiving the graft are less likely to experience major adverse events, less intraprocedural blood loss, shorter intensive care unit and hospital stays, and reduced recovery times than surgical patients. The US FDA approved the device in March 2005. Since then, the device has been used widely, although a 0.30% rate of complications related to infolding or partial compression of the device prompted a 'Dear Doctor' letter in January 2006. This article profiles the TAG device and evaluates endografting technology in general.

Hybrid approach in an acute type B aortic dissection in a female patient after having a renal transplant

This study describes our experiences with a 44-year-old woman who developed acute type B aortic dissection and elected emergency surgery 3 years after a renal transplant. This led to acute ischemia in the right lower extremity. The first stage of surgery was to implant an extra-anatomic (pretracheal) bypass with a GORE-TEX prosthesis from the brachiocephalic trunk to the left common carotid artery. The second stage was implanting a stent graft into the aortic arch that covered the left common carotid artery and the left subclavian artery. The third stage was to insert a stent graft that involved the entire thoracic aorta and proximal segment of the abdominal aorta to the celiac trunk, with the right axillary and left femoral approach. The fourth stage was an extra-anatomic (suprapubic) bypass with the GORE-TEX prosthesis from the left femoral artery to the right femoral artery. Surgery resulted in normal blood supply to the organs and restored renal function.

The role of mandatory lifelong annual surveillance after thoracic endovascular repair

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become an attractive and well-accepted option for the management of the various thoracic aortic pathologies that vascular surgeons are confronted with. As in the abdominal aorta, current management trends include the treatment of younger patients with longer life expectancies, raising the issue of postoperative surveillance. There are several relevant differences between these anatomic areas when it comes to surveillance, including the relative inaccessibility of the thoracic aorta to ultrasound interrogation and the increased variability of thoracic aortic pathologies and post-TEVAR complications. In addition, concerns regarding radiation-induced carcinogenesis and contrast-induced nephropathy reduce the enthusiasm of many surgeons for regular computed tomography surveillance. Most agree that surveillance is important after TEVAR, but the method, duration, and frequency of that surveillance is much less clear and is the topic of this debate.

Endovascular management of acute aortic syndromes

The term "acute aortic syndrome" (AAS) refers to a spectrum of life-threatening thoracic aortic pathologies including intramural hematoma, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, and aortic dissection. Clinically, patients often present with characteristic aortic pain. AAS often leads to aortic rupture. Therefore, recognition of this condition, its prompt diagnosis, and timely treatment is crucial to obtain clinical success and improved overall survival. The management of AAS, however, remains a therapeutic challenge. Endovascular strategies have gained wide acceptance and now represent a minimally invasive alternative to traditional open surgery. Several studies have shown endovascular repair of varying thoracic aortic pathologies to be technically feasible with fewer complications than open surgery. In this review, the authors discuss AAS pathology and its management, with particular attention to the current role of endovascular aortic repair and its treatment.

Predictability of Cerebral Embolization from Aortic Arch Manipulations During Thoracic Endovascular Repair

There is no sensitive tool to monitor embolic events and predict patients at a risk for strokes during thoracic endovascular aortic repair. We examined the relationship between the number of high intensity transient signals (HITS) by transcranial doppler ultrasound and the extent of atherosclerotic plaques in aortic arch. Thirteen patients were treated as a part of a single center United States Food and Drug Administration-approved investigational device exemption for various thoracic aortic pathologies. Bilateral transcranial doppler ultrasound transducers recorded the number of HITS. CT angiography and intravascular ultrasound were used to measure the thickness of mural thrombi and determine their arch location. All 13 patients had detectable HITS, and one patient sustained a stroke. Eleven patients had quantifiable mural thrombi. The highest HITS were observed in patients with thrombi in zones 2 to 3. All three patients with bovine arch had more HITS in the right middle cerebral artery whereas the patients with normal arch anatomy had more HITS in the left middle cerebral artery. The presence of mural thrombi in zones 2 and 3, irrespective of their thickness, was associated with increased HITS during thoracic endovascular aortic repair. This is the first study to characterize the significance of mural thrombi in aortic arch and their relationship to embolic events during aortic arch manipulations.

A systematic review of mid-term outcomes of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) of chronic type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN

The role of Thoracic Endovascular Repair (TEVAR) in chronic type B aortic dissection remains controversial and its mid-term success as an alternative to open repair or best medical therapy remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to provide a systematic review of mid-term outcomes of TEVAR for chronic type B aortic dissection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medline, trial registries, conference proceedings and article reference lists from 1950 to January 2011 were searched to identify case series reporting mid-term outcomes of TEVAR in chronic type B dissection. Data were extracted for review.

RESULTS

17 studies of 567 patients were reviewed. The technical success rate was 89.9% (range 77.6-100). Mid-term mortality was 9.2% (46/499) and survival ranged from 59.1 to 100% in studies with a median follow-up of 24 months. 8.1% of patients (25/309) developed endoleak, predominantly type I. Re-intervention rates ranged from 0 to 60% in studies with a median follow-up of 31 months. 7.8% of patients (26/332) developed aneurysms of the distal aorta or continued false lumen perfusion with aneurysmal dilatation. Rare complications included delayed retrograde type A dissection (0.67%), aorto-oesophageal fistula (0.22%) and neurological complications (paraplegia 2/447, 0.45%; stroke 7/475, 1.5%).

CONCLUSION

The absolute benefit of TEVAR over alternative treatments for chronic B-AD remains uncertain. The lack of natural history data for medically treated cases, significant heterogeneity in case selection and absence of consensus reporting standards for intervention are significant obstructions to interpreting the mid-term data. High-quality data from registries and clinical trials are required to address these challenges.

Thoracic EndoVascular Stent Graft Repair for Aortic Aneurysm

BACKGROUND

The number of cases employing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been increasing due to lower morbidity and mortality compared to open repair technique. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcome of TEVAR for thoracic aortic diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen patients underwent TEVAR from October 2003 to April 2010. Mean age at operation was 59 years (20~78 years), and 11 were male. Indications for TEVAR were large aortic diameter (>5.5 cm) upon presentation in 6 patients, increasing aortic diameter during the follow-up period in 4, traumatic aortic rupture in 3, persistent chest pain in 2, and ruptured aortic aneurysm in one. The mean diameter, length and the number of the stents were 33 mm (26~40 mm), 12 cm (9.5~16.0 cm), and 1.25 (1~2), respectively. Aortography employing Multi-detector computerized tomography (MDCT) technique was performed at one week, and patients were followed up in the out-patient department at one month, 6 months, and one year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Primary technical success showing complete exclusion of the aneurysm was achieved in 15 patients. One patient showed a small endo-leak (type 1). Four patients developed perioperative stroke: Three recovered without sequelae, and one showed mild right-side weakness. There was no operative mortality. Diameter of the thoracic aorta covered by stent graft changed within 10% range in 12 patients, decreased by more than 10% in 3, and increased by more than 10% in one during mean follow-up duration of 18 months (1~73 months). There was no recurrence-related death during this period.

CONCLUSION

Intermediate-term outcome after TEVAR was encouraging. Indications for TEVAR could be extended for other thoracic aortic diseases.

The value of intravascular phased-array imaging in endovascular treatment of thoracic aortic pathology

BACKGROUND

Careful pre-, intra- and postoperative diagnostics in endovascular treatment of thoracic aortic pathology is crucial for a favourable outcome. Computer tomography (CT) and digitally subtracted angiography (DSA) do not always provide sufficient diagnostic information.

PURPOSE

To report our primary experiences of using intraluminal phased-array imaging (IPAI) as an additive tool for diagnostics and endovascular treatment of thoracic aortic pathology.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eleven patients, nine men and two women (mean age 60, range 45) were examined intraoperatively with IPAI in stentgraft procedures of thoracic aortic pathology.

RESULTS

IPAI could detect and visualize the entries and re-entries in the intima. Aortic branch vessels could be visualized for patency both during and immediately after stentgraft deployment. It was also possible to detect ceased blood flow in the false lumen or aneurysmal sac after stentgraft deployment.

CONCLUSION

IPAI is a helpful tool for diagnostics and for guiding stentgraft placing in the treatment of thoracic aortic pathology.

How to manage the left subclavian artery during endovascular stenting for thoracic aortic dissection? An assessment of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Despite the publication of recent guidelines for management of the left subclavian artery (LSA) during endovascular stenting procedures of the thoracic aorta, specific management for those presenting with dissection remains unclear. This systematic review attempts to address this issue.

METHODS

Systematic assessment of the published data on thoracic aorta dissection was performed identifying 46 studies, which incorporated 1,275 patients. Primary outcomes included the prevalence of left arm ischemia, stroke, spinal cord ischemia, endoleak, stent migration, and mortality. Outcomes were compared between patients with and without LSA coverage and revascularization incorporating factors such as the number of stents used, length of aorta covered, urgency of intervention, and type of dissection (acute or chronic). Statistical pooling techniques, χ(2) tests, and Fisher's exact testing were used for group comparisons.

RESULTS

As compared with other outcomes, LSA coverage without revascularization in the presence of aortic dissection is much more likely to be complicated by left arm ischemia (prevalence increased from 0.0% to 4.0% [p = 0.021]), stroke (prevalence increased from 1.4% to 9.0% [p = 0.009]), and endoleak (prevalence increased from 4.0% to 29.3% [p = 0.001]). However, revascularization was not shown to reverse these effects. Longer aortic coverage (≥ 150 mm) was associated with an increased prevalence of spinal cord ischemia (from 1.3% to 12.5% [p = 0.011]) and mortality (from 1.3% to 15.6% [p = 0.003]).

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing endovascular stenting for thoracic aortic dissection, in cases where LSA coverage is necessary, revascularization should be considered before the procedure to avoid complications such as left arm ischemia, stroke, and endoleak, and where feasible, an appropriate preoperative assessment should be carried out.

Intravascular ultrasound measurement of the aortic lumen

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been successfully used to guide the implantation of stents in the thoracic aorta. However, its accuracy in measuring the diameter of the aortic lumen has not been clearly established. Thirteen patients with thoracic aortic disease underwent IVUS, and lumen diameter measurements were compared with those obtained by CT or magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 31 comparable measurements were obtained. The correlation was good (r=0.98; P< .001), with IVUS tending to give a larger minimum diameter than CT (systematic error, 0.59+/-1.8 mm; P=.077). Given that the aorta is often not circular, the diameter obtained by IVUS was also compared to the mean diameter obtained by CT, and it was found that these two measurements were more closely related (P=.425), except in aortic segments with significant eccentricity (i.e., >10%). In conclusion, IVUS was a reliable tool for measuring the diameter of the aorta, particularly in concentric segments where stents are normally placed. Consequently, IVUS could supplement conventional imaging techniques.

Incidence of and outcomes after misaligned deployment of the talent thoracic stent graft system

OBJECTIVE

Various types of device-specific adverse events can occur during deployment of thoracic stent grafts due to the high flow rate and severe aortic angulation that is often encountered in the thoracic aorta. This study assessed the incidence, etiology, and overall effect of misaligned deployment of the Talent Thoracic Stent Graft (TSG) System. Techniques to predict and avoid this complication are discussed.

METHODS

Data collection included pivotal-trial follow-up, direct surveys of centers inside and outside the United States and principal investigators, a targeted literature search, and review of complaint files. Misaligned deployment was considered to occur when the proximal covered or uncovered stent apices of a thoracic stent graft folded back on itself and remained nonparallel to the wall of the aorta after deployment had been completed.

RESULTS

Of about 20,305 deployments to date of the Talent TSG, 24 misaligned deployments were identified for an incidence of 0.1%. Nineteen (79%) events occurred during treatment of degenerative aneurysms or penetrating ulcers, four (17%) during treatment of dissections, and the underlying pathology could not be determined for one patient. The misalignment was noted at the proximal end of the stent graft in 15 patients (63%), and the other 9 events (37%) occurred at the graft overlap junction. Two events were treated intraoperatively, with a second overlapping device placed in one patient and a snare used to reposition the proximal stent in another. Adverse clinical events occurred in three patients and included a persistent type I endoleak, continued false lumen perfusion in a patient with dissection, and delayed retrograde type A dissection in a patient undergoing total arch repair. No intraoperative contrast extravasation or computed tomography evidence of perforation was noted. There were no perioperative deaths or cerebrovascular events, with one report of paraplegia among the 24 patients in this series.

CONCLUSION

Misaligned deployment is an unusual phenomenon that tends to occur in the context of certain well-defined anatomic conditions in the thoracic aorta. To date, most of these events have not led to significant adverse sequelae. However, careful patient selection, periprocedural imaging, and case planning can help to identify anatomies in which misaligned opening is likely to occur, allowing physicians to avoid this complication.

Endografts for thoracic aortic pathologies--uncontested benefits in patient care

Medical and surgical treatment of thoracic aortic pathologies have been associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Conversely, thoracic aortic endografting is proving to be extremely useful for correcting a variety of lesions with few complications. Endovascular intervention avoids sternotomy or thoracotomy, chest tubes, respirators and general anesthesia, and blood loss is limited. Complications such as paraplegia, renal failure and cardiac and pulmonary difficulties are minimized; hospital and rehabilitation times are also reduced. Selection of patients on the basis of favorable anatomy and pathology for a specific device is critical to procedural success. In addition, hybrid procedures combining endovascular and surgical techniques may extend the uses of available devices. Branched and fenestrated grafts are now being developed and are more accessible in Europe and Australia for use in thorac-abdominal aneurysm exclusion; they may be used in the arch and proximal descending thoracic aorta. However, at present, grafting in these regions has been associated with a significant incidence of stroke.

TEVAR for acute uncomplicated aortic dissection: immediate repair versus medical therapy

Medical management remains the standard treatment modality for acute uncomplicated descending aortic dissections. Intervention (by either open surgery or an endovascular approach) is currently reserved for patients who present with or subsequently develop complications (ie, complicated dissections). Despite the success of medical therapy in the acute management of uncomplicated dissection, long-term morbidity and mortality are far from ideal. The introduction of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been associated with reductions in morbidity and mortality in the treatment of complicated dissections. There is limited data regarding TEVAR for acute uncomplicated dissections. Early results from the INSTEAD (Investigation of Stent Grafts in Patients with Type B Aortic Dissection) trial, a randomized trial for TEVAR in subacute/chronic uncomplicated dissections, were not favorable. The ADSORB (Acute Uncomplicated Aortic Dissection Type B: Evaluating Stent-Graft Placement or Best Medical Treatment Alone) trial, a randomized trial for TEVAR in acute dissections, is currently underway. Nonetheless, current data available, including multiple reports proposing a variety of predictive factors, suggest that there may be a subset of higher-risk patients with acute uncomplicated dissections who could benefit from TEVAR.

Current status of endovascular management of complicated acute type B aortic dissection

Acute type B dissection is a catastrophic condition. Up to 20% of these patients develop severe complications such as rupture or branch vessel malperfusion. These challenging patients are usually triaged to surgical or endovascular management. The surgical approach has been the gold standard for treatment of complicated type B dissection. However, the management has been challenging even in centers of excellence. For these reasons, thoracic endovascular aortic repair of acute aortic dissection has gained increased interest as an initial treatment option. The goal of this therapy is to exclude the primary entry site, obliterate the false lumen, prevent aortic rupture, and relieve visceral and lower body malperfusion. The aim of this study is to review the contemporary outcome of patients undergoing endovascular treatment for complicated acute type B aortic dissection.

Current status of thoracic endografting and its adjunctive pharmacology

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair is a promising treatment modality. The advantages in the short term include shorter hospital stay, avoidance of lengthy invasive procedures, and decreased anesthesia time. It has made possible the treatment of elderly patients with coexisting comorbidities who otherwise would be difficult candidates for open surgery.

OBJECTIVE

Although the technical aspects of thoracic endovascular procedures have been described in the literature, the adjunct pharmacology has not been discussed. The aim of this study is therefore to review the clinical pharmacology necessary for procedural details in repair of patients with aortic aneurysms and aortic dissection.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PUBMED by combining relevant Medical Subject Heading key words. The query was subsequently limited to English language, and involving "human". The articles were assessed for their validity, importance, and applicability. The publications were analyzed and clinically important data were collected and incorporated.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair is a complex procedure on a morbid cohort of patients with aortic pathologies. The pharmacotherapy is a crucial component of the procedure: It is aimed at facilitating the endovascular procedure and improving outcomes.

Endovascular repair or medical treatment of acute type B aortic dissection? A comparison

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the outcome of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) to that of medical therapy in patients with acute type B aortic dissection (TBD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From July 1996 to April 2008, 88 patients presenting with acute TBD underwent either TEVAR (group A, n=38) or medical therapy (group B, n=50). Indications for TEVAR were intractable pain, aortic branch compromise resulting in end-organ ischemia, rapid aortic dilatation and rupture. Follow-up was performed postinterventionally, at 3, 6 and 12 months and yearly thereafter and included clinical examinations and computed tomography (CT), as well as aortic diameter measurements and assessment of thrombosis.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 33 months in group A and 36 months in group B. The overall mortality rate was 23.7% in group A and 24% in group B, where 4 patients died of late aortic rupture. In group A, complications included 9 endoleaks and 4 retrograde type A dissections, 3 patients were converted to open surgery and 2 needed secondary intervention. None of the patients developed paraplegia. In group B, 4 patients were converted to open surgery and 2 to TEVAR. The maximal aortic diameter increased in both groups. Regarding the extent of thrombosis, our analyses showed slightly better overall results after TEVAR, but they also showed a tendency towards approximation between the two groups during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

TEVAR is a feasible treatment option in acute TBD. However, several serious complications may occur during and after TEVAR and it should therefore be reserved to patients with life-threatening symptoms.

High-dose adenosine-induced asystole assisting accurate deployment of thoracic stent grafts in conscious patients

Adenosine has been used to induce asystole and assist deployment of endoluminal grafts. However, application of high-dose adenosine in conscious patients has not been described. In this prospective study, we administered high-dose adenosine in patients undergoing thoracic stent grafting. Asystole duration in relationship to the dosage of adenosine, safety, and side effect profiles was investigated. All patients who underwent thoracic stent grafting between 1998 and 2006 were the potential study subjects. They received monitored anesthesia care and local anesthesia unless contraindicated. Adenosine was given via rapid intravenous bolus immediately prior to the deployment of the stent graft. Every patient received a dose of 36 mg. If needed, a second dose of 18 mg was given. Duration of asystole was recorded after each administration. Patients' vital signs before and after administration were also documented. Side effect profiles were collected intra- and postoperatively. A total of 46 patients received adenosine (34 men, 12 women). Mean age was 60.4 +/- 17.5 years. American Society of Anesthesiologists scores were II in one patient (2%), III in six patients (13%), and IV in 39 patients (85%). Eighteen patients received a single dose of 36 mg adenosine, 15 were given a second dose of 18 mg, and 13 received nonstandard dosages. Asystole durations were 18.8 +/- 8.8 and 11.6 +/- 5.5 sec for 36 and 18 mg, respectively. Technical success was achieved in all cases. The differences achieved statistical significance (p = 0.0009). There were no severe cardiac or pulmonary complications. High-dose adenosine can be given safely in conscious patients. The dose-response was predictable and reproducible. The dosages used in our study induce sufficient duration of asystole, which ensured accurate deployment of thoracic stent grafts.