Neurological complications after left subclavian artery coverage during thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Clinical outcomes and aortic remodeling after Castor single-branched stent-graft implantation for type B aortic dissections involving left subclavian artery

Background

The left subclavian artery (LSA) can be intentionally covered by a stent graft to acquire adequate landing zones for a proximal entry tear near the LSA during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The Castor single-branched stent graft is designed to treat type B aortic dissection (TBAD) to retain the LSA during TEVAR. This study investigates clinical outcomes, aortic remodeling, and abdominal aortic perfusion patterns after TEVAR with the novel Castor device.

Methods

From November 2020 to June 2023, 29 patients with TBAD involving the LSA were treated with the Castor single-branched stent graft. In-hospital clinical outcome and aortic computed tomography angiography (CTA) data were analyzed. CTA was performed preoperatively and at follow-up to observe stent morphology; branch patency; endoleak; change in true lumen (TL), false lumen (FL), and transaortic diameters; and abdominal aortic branch perfusion pattern.

Results

The technical success rate was 96.6%. One failure was that the branch section did not completely enter the LSA and the main body migrated distally. No in-hospital mortality, paraplegia, or stroke occurred. During follow-up, one type Ib endoleak, four distal new entry tears, and one recurrent type A dissection arose from a new entry tear at the ascending aorta, no stent migration was observed, and the branch patency rate was 100%. At the thoracic aorta, TL diameters significantly increased, FL diameters markedly decreased, and FL was partially or completely thrombosed in most patients at follow-up. At the abdominal aorta, we observed 33.3% of TL growth and 66.7% of TL stabilization or shrinkage. The initial TL ratio at iliac bifurcation negatively predicted abdominal TL growth after TEVAR with a cutoff of 21.0%. Of the 102 abdominal aortic branches, 94.1% of the branches showed no change in perfusion pattern, 3.9% of the branches had an increased TL perfusion, and 2.0% of the branches had an increased FL contribution.

Conclusion

The Castor unibody single-branched stent graft offers an efficient endovascular treatment for TBAD involving the LSA. TEVAR with the Castor device effectively induced thoracic FL thrombosis and thoracic TL enlargement and resulted in abdominal TL growth when the initial TL ratio at iliac bifurcation is less than 21.0%. Abdominal aortic branch perfusion patterns remain relatively stable after TEVAR with the Castor stent graft.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Right and Left Upper Extremity Access in Endovascular Aortic Repair for Patients with Thoracoabdominal and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Traditionally, left-sided upper extremity (LUE) access has been preferred in patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) to manage aortic aneurysms and decrease the risk of cerebrovascular adverse events. Recently, right-sided upper extremity access (RUE) has gained popularity owing to its greater maneuverability and ergonomics. However, synthesized data comparing the safety and efficacy of RUE and LUE accesses are limited. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on various databases from inception to September 2023 to retrieve all studies that compared RUE and LUE access in EVAR. Data on stroke, 30-day mortality, technical success, access-site complications, total time required for fluoroscopy, and contrast agent requirement were extracted, pooled, and analyzed. Forest plots were generated using a random-effects model on review manager by pooling the risk ratios (RRs) and standard mean differences (SMDs). Ten observational studies with a total of 3994 patients were included in our analysis with 1186 patients in the RUE and 2808 patients in the LUE access groups. EVAR using RUE access was associated with a significantly lower amount of contrast agent requirement than the LUE access group [SMD, -0.23; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.45 to -0.02; P = 0.03]. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of the risk of stroke (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.81-3.22; P = 0.17), 30-day mortality (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.50-4.06; P = 0.51), rate of technical success (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95-1.01; P = 0.18), risk of access-site complications (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.72-1.39; P = 0.99), and total time required for fluoroscopy (SMD, 0.07; 95% CI, -0.39 to 0.26; P = 0.69). The use of RUE access in EVAR appears to be comparable to LUE access in terms of the risk of stroke, access-related complications, all-cause mortality, technical success rate, and fluoroscopy duration. The RUE group required a lower volume of contrast agent.

Comparison of total percutaneous in situ microneedle puncture and chimney technique for left subclavian artery fenestration in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of totally percutaneous in situ microneedle puncture for left subclavian artery (LSA) fenestration (ISMF) and chimney technique in type B aortic dissection (TBAD) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on patients who underwent either chimney-TEVAR (n = 89) or ISMF-TEVAR (n = 113) from October 2018 to April 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcomes were mortality and major complications at 30 days and during follow-up.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 84.3% in the chimney group and 93.8% in the ISMF group (p = 0.027). The incidence of immediate endoleakage was significantly higher in the chimney than ISMF group (15.7% vs 6.2%, respectively; p = 0.027). The 1- and 3-year survival rates in the chimney and ISMF groups were 98.9% ± 1.1% vs 98.1% ± 0.9% and 86.5% ± 6.3% vs 92.6% ± 4.1%, respectively (log-rank p = 0.715). The 3-year rate of cumulative freedom from branch occlusion in the chimney and ISMF group was 95.4% ± 2.3% vs 100%, respectively (log-rank p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

Both ISMF-TEVAR and chimney-TEVAR achieved satisfactory short- and mid-term outcomes for the preservation of the LSA in patients with TBAD. ISMF-TEVAR appears to offer better clinical outcomes with higher patency and lower reintervention rates. However, ISMF-TEVAR had longer operation times with higher procedure expenses.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

When LSA revascularization is required during TEVAR, in situ, fenestration, and chimney techniques are all safe and effective methods; in situ, fenestration-TEVAR appears to offer better clinical outcomes, but takes longer and is more complicated.

KEY POINTS

LSA revascularization during TEVAR reduces post-operative complication rates. Both in situ ISMF-TEVAR and chimney-TEVAR are safe and effective techniques for the preservation of the LSA during TEVAR. The chimney technique is associated with a higher incidence of endoleakage and branch occlusion, but ISMF-TEVAR is a more complicated and expensive technique.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Vertebral artery course variation leading to an insufficient proximal anchoring area for thoracic endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUNDS

We aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection in patients with an insufficient proximal anchoring area due to the vertebral artery originating from the aortic arch.

METHODS

In this study, we report two patients with type B aortic dissection who were complicated with left vertebral artery course variation. Specifically, the left vertebral artery originated from the aortic arch. In these patients, the anchoring area (<15 mm) was not sufficient between the left vertebral artery and the ruptured aortic dissection.

RESULT

We reconstructed the left vertebral artery during horacic endovascular aortic repair. Both patients recovered well and were discharged without any adverse events.

CONCLUTION

Our experience shows that horacic endovascular aortic repair is feasible in patients with type B aortic dissection who have an insufficient proximal anchoring area due to the left vertebral artery originating from the aortic arch.

Subclavian artery revascularization with subclavian-carotid transposition for TEVAR and non-TEVAR patients

BACKGROUND

Subclavian artery revascularization (SAR) has become an increasingly performed technique in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR), in order to optimize the proximal landing zone, or in patients with significant atherosclerotic diseases. SAR was usually achieved through carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB) which is daunted by graft and patency-related issues, or through subclavian carotid transposition (SCT) which has recently been reconsidered as a potential solution. Nowadays, multiple endovascular strategies including parallel grafts, chimney graft and branch-fenestrated repair, are available in patients unfit for open SAR. However, there is no consensus on the preferable technique in both TEVAR- and non TEVAR-patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our experience with SCT in terms of overall postoperative adverse events and mid-term patency rate.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study, including all patients who underwent SCT between June 2014 and March 2020 at our Division. Preoperative risk factors, symptoms, intraoperative details, postoperative outcomes and follow-up data were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 27 patients were included in this study. Indications for SCT included aortic arch debranching for TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysm and type B dissection and symptomatic subclavian steal syndrome (SSS). There were no major perioperative adverse events or major neurological complications; five minor adverse events occurred (18.5%) (3 Horner' Syndrome, 1 hematoma requiring reoperation,1 pneumothorax). Peripheral nerve injuries and lymphatic lesions were not recorded. On a mean follow-up of 21±16 months, SCT patency was confirmed in all patients and no deaths occurred. Comparison of baseline and operative characteristics and intraoperative details between groups of patients with or without adverse events did not found differences.

CONCLUSIONS

SCT should be considered a feasible, effective and safe technique for SAR, with low perioperative complications and optimal mid-term patency. This surgical technique appears to provide a lower risk of neurological events and mortality, particularly in TEVAR patients, reducing the complications caused by the coverage of the left subclavian artery.

Thoracic aortic aneurysms, a single center's 10-years experience and analysis of outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) are an increasingly prevalent pathology with significant associated morbidity and mortality. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the primary line of treatment. The purpose of this study was to analyse a single center's experience in the treatment of TAAs and identify possible risk factors for worse outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review of our institutional database was done to identify all patients treated for TAAs in a 10-year period, from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2022. Data were extracted from patients' medical records. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality and secondary outcomes were procedure related morbidity (vascular access complications, medullary ischaemia, stroke, endoleaks, migration, aneurysm sac enlargement >5 mm) and need for reintervention at 1-, 6- and 12-month follow-up. A descriptive and inferential analysis of the data was performed. Statistical analyses were conducted using the IBM Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software.

RESULTS

We identified 34 patients treated for TAAs in this period. Mean age was 68 years [47-87] and 79.4% of patients were male. Mean aneurysm diameter was 63 mm [35-100], 55.9% fusiform and 44.1% saccular. The majority (91.2%) were located at the descending thoracic aorta and 3 (8.8%) of them extended to the aortic arch. The most common aetiology was degenerative in 22 patients (64.7%), followed by aortic dissection in 8 patients (23.5%). Elective surgery was performed in 19 (61.3%) patients and 12 (38.7%) had urgent repair. TEVAR was the treatment of choice in 24 (77.4%) patients, and the remaining 7 (22.6%) were treated with hybrid surgery. Mean length of hospital stay was 10 days [2-80] (6 days for elective repair versus 16 days for urgent repair, p = .016). Follow-up period ranged from 1 month to 10 years. At 1 year follow-up, all-cause mortality was 15%, morbidity was 30% (with 6 (22%) patients having a type Ia endoleak) and need for reintervention was 22%. Aneurysm diameter was a significant risk factor for procedure related morbidity (median diameter of 73.5 mm versus 56.0 mm in patients with no morbidity; p = .027). The presence of type Ia endoleak was significantly associated with higher reintervention rates (p = .001), but not with higher mortality rates (p = .515). Age, female sex, aetiology and urgent repair weren't associated with any significant differences in the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR proved to be effective in the treatment of TAAs, with good outcomes at short and mid-term follow-up. TAAs should be diagnosed earlier and be promptly treated when meeting criteria to prevent worse outcomes.

Aortic Arch Debranching and Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Since its introduction, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has revolutionized the treatment of type B aortic dissections (TBADs). However, the proximal aspect of the aortic pathology treated may infringe on the origin of the left subclavian artery or even more proximally. Hence, to ensure durable outcomes, the origin of these vessels needs to be covered, but an extra-anatomical bypass is required to perfuse vital branches, known as aortic arch debranching. This series aims to describe and delineate the disparities of aortic arch debranching during TEVAR for TBAD.

METHODS

A retrospective review and analysis of a multicenter international database was conducted to identify patients with TBAD treated with TEVAR between 2005 and 2021. Data analyzed included patient demographics, disease characteristics, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes with follow-up on mortality and reintervention. All statistical analyses were carried out using IBM SPSS 26. Patient survival was calculated using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and a P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients were included in the analysis, of which 27 (46.6%) presented with complicated disease and 31 were uncomplicated, of which 10 (17.2%) were classed as high risk and 21 (36.2%) low risk. Zone 2 was the most common proximal landing zone for the stent graft. Left subclavian artery bypass was performed selectively (26%), with 1 stroke occurring, likely due to embolic reasons. A further 6 underwent more proximal aortic debranching before TEVAR (10%) and was a significant risk factor for mortality and the number of stents deployed. The overall rates of reintervention and mortality were 17.2% (n = 10) and 29.3% (n = 17).

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic arch debranching and TEVAR for TBAD is associated with significant mortality. Future developments to treat aortic arch pathology could incorporate branched graft devices, eliminating the need for debranching, improving stroke rates, and reducing future reinterventions.

Short-term follow-up of proximal aorta remodeling after zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the early remodeling of the proximal aorta in patients with acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) after zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

From January 2016 to May 2022, 53 ATBAD patients underwent zone 2 TEVAR were divided into two groups, the Castor single-branched stent-graft (CSS) group (n = 26) and the common stent-graft group (n = 27). Three-dimensional imaging created by computed tomography angiography was used to measure different parameters of the aorta, such as angulation, cross-sectional area (CSA), length and tortuosity. Early remodeling of the proximal aorta was evaluated by comparing geometric parameters of the proximal aorta before and 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

In terms of angle, the postoperative angle of aortic arch to ascending aorta, descending aorta increased in all patients compared with that before surgery (all P < 0.05), while the angle of aortic arch to left subclavian artery increased after surgery only in the CSS group (P < 0.001); As for CSA, the CSA of distal aortic arch and true lumen increased (all P < 0.05), while the CSA of false lumen decreased in both groups after operation (all P < 0.05); Only in CSS group, the CSA of the ascending aorta, proximal aortic arch and total descending thoracic aorta decreased after surgery (all P < 0.05); In terms of length, the aortic arch prolonged after operation in both groups (P = 0.018 and P = 0.004, respectively). In addition, the ascending aorta tortuosity decreased in the CSS group after surgery (P = 0.011). There was no significant difference in the alterations of other aortic parameters after operation (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The CSS implantation provided a more relatively safe and effective treatment for acute type B aortic dissection patients with unfavorable proximal landing zone. It can promote the earlier remodeling of the proximal aorta compared with the common stent-graft implantation after zone 2 TEVAR.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection with aberrant right subclavian artery: a single-center retrospective study

Objective

To evaluate the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) with aberrant right subclavian artery (ARSA).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with TBAD and ARSA who underwent TEVAR between the period of January 2017 and December 2022. Patient demographics, computed tomography angiography (CTA) measurements, surgical procedures, and postoperative outcomes were reviewed.

Results

A total of 9 patients (6 males and 3 females) were included in the study. 4 ARSA were reconstructed, 3 by periscope technique and 1 by in vitro fenestration technique. 3 left subclavian arteries (LSA) were reconstructed, 1 by the chimney technique and 2 by the single-branched stent technique. 2 patients underwent reconstruction of both ARSA and LSA. The overall technical success rate was 100%, with no occurrences of stroke, paraplegia, or mortality within 30 days. 1 patient experienced immediate type Ia endoleak, which resolved after 3 months. 1 patient developed weakness in the right upper limb, while 1 patient presented mild subclavian steal syndrome (SSS); both cases showed recovery during follow-up. The average follow-up duration was 35.6 ± 11.1 months, during which no reinterventions, deaths, or strokes were observed.

Conclusion

Our limited experience involving 9 patients demonstrates that early and mid-term outcomes of TEVAR for the treatment of TBAD with ARSA are satisfactory.

Atypical presentation of subclavian steal syndrome with left sided sensorineural deafness

We present a rare manifestation of a common pathology: left sided sensorineural hearing loss secondary to subclavian steal syndrome after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for complicated acute aortic dissection. We describe the vascular physiology that can result in unilateral hearing loss and provide a brief review of subclavian steal syndrome. This case report highlights the importance of avid clinical recognition of an atypical presentation of a common vascular disease.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Highlights and Perioperative Implications from the 2022 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease

As the understanding of aortic diseases and their complications grow, increasing importance of uniformity in diagnosis and management is crucial for optimal care of this patient population. The 2022 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease discusses these considerations in detail. The purpose of this review is to highlight essential recommendations that are of relevance to the perioperative physician who manages these patients. A few notable points include, shared decision-making with patients, creation of multidisciplinary aortic teams, lower diameter thresholds for surgery in certain situations, and increased testing for patients with heritable aortic diseases. In addition to briefly reviewing basics of aortic diseases, the authors discuss changes to guidelines that are especially relevant to perioperative care.

Long-Term Outcomes in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection or Intramural Hematoma Depending on Proximal Landing Zone

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the preferred treatment for complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) or intramural hematoma (IMH). This study aimed to investigate the association of the proximal landing zone and its morphology with long-term outcomes in patients with TBAD or IMH. A total of 94 patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD or IMH between 10/2003 and 01/2020 were included. The cohort was divided according to the proximal landing in Ishimaru zone 2 or 3 and the presence of a healthy landing zone (HLZ; non-dissected or aneurysmatic, ≥2 cm length). Primary outcome was freedom from aortic reintervention. Secondary endpoints were freedom from aortic growth, stroke, spinal cord ischemia, retrograde dissection, proximal stent-graft induced new entry (pSINE), debranching failure, and mortality. Outcomes were assessed using Cox proportional hazard models with mortality as a competing risk. A proximal TEVAR landing in zone 2 was associated with higher rates of reinterventions compared to zone 3 (33% vs. 15%, p = 0.031), spinal cord ischemia (8% vs. 0%, p = 0.037), and pSINE (13% vs. 2%, p = 0.032). No difference was found for the other outcomes, including mortality. Landing in dissected segments was not associated with impaired results. Proximal TEVAR landing in zone 3 may be preferable with regard to long-term aortic reintervention in patients with TBAD or IMH.

Early and midterm outcomes of in situ fenestration via adjustable puncture needle for Ankura aortic stent graft: A single-center experience

OBJECTIVES

An analysis was conducted to demonstrate early and midterm outcomes of using adjustable puncture needle-based in situ fenestration (ISF) technique for Ankura aortic stent graft to reconstruct the supra-arch branch in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 68 cases of aortic lesions with insufficient proximal anchoring area admitted to our department from March 2017 to December 2021 was performed. In situ fenestration thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) was performed at the same time during the operation. Among them, there were fifty-eight cases of thoracic aortic dissection, seven cases of thoracic aortic aneurysm, and three cases of thoracic aortic ulcer. Intraoperative adjustable puncture with needle was used for the Ankura aorta stent graft to perform ISF and reconstruction of the supra-arch branch.

RESULTS

The success rate of ISF was 94.1% (64/68). Only in four cases, attempts were made to create ISF in the left subclavian artery (LSA), and all the four were unsuccessful because of sharp and tortuosity angle. Among them, forty-four cases were only LSA fenestration, and one case was left common carotid artery (LCCA) fenestration + LSA embolism. LSA + left vertebral artery (LVA) fenestration was performed in two cases, LSA fenestration +LCCA chimney was performed in fourteen cases, LCCA + LSA fenestration + innominate artery (INA) chimney was performed in one case, and LCCA fenestration + INA chimney + LSA embolism was performed in two cases. The overall neurologic event rate was 3.1% (spinal cord ischemia 0, with stroke observed in two cases). Postoperatively, one patient (1.6%) died on the third day after TEVAR due to the retrograde dissections. There were four cases of endoleak (6.3%; three type I and one type II). The average follow-up was 29.2 ± 14.4 months, and no patient died during the follow-up period. Three cases of endoleak disappeared, and one case did not increase further. In addition, other two cases of retrograde dissections were observed at 3 and 5 months after TEVAR. Fortunately, they were scheduled for emergency surgery with ascending aorta replacement and improved well. There was only one case of LSA occlusion after ISF which was reconstructed by endovascular treatment. Two patients were found with distal stent graft-induced new entries (dSINE), and TEVAR was performed again during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Early and midterm outcomes demonstrated that ISF via the adjustable puncture needle device for the Ankura aorta stent graft is a feasible and effective treatment method, which can achieve high technical success and satisfactory short-term results.

Mid-term outcomes of left subclavian artery revascularization with Castor stent graft in treatment of type B aortic dissection in left subclavian artery

Background

Here we analyzed mid-term data of thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) surgery with Castor single-branched stent graft placement for the management of Stanford type B aortic dissection (STBAD) involving the left subclavian artery (LSA).

Methods

Between April 2014 and February 2019, 32 patients with STBAD involving a Castor single-branched stent graft were included. We analyzed their outcomes, including technical success rate (TSR), surgical duration (SD), presence of ischemia, perioperative complications, LSA patency, and survival rate (SR), using computed tomography angiography and clinical evaluation during mid-term follow-up.

Results

The mean patient age was 54.63 ​± ​12.37 years (range, 36-83 years). The TSR was 96.88% (n ​= ​31/32). The mean SD was 87.44 ​± ​10.89 with a mean contrast volume of 125.31 ​± ​19.30 ​mL. No neurological complications or deaths occurred during the study period. The patients had a mean hospital stay of 7.84 ​± ​3.20 days. At a mean follow-up of 68.78 ​± ​11.26 months, four non-aortic deaths (12.5%) were observed. The LSA patency rate was 100% (n ​= ​28/28). There was only one case of type I endoleak immediately after surgery (3.12%) (type I from LSA). However, none of the patients experienced type II endoleaks, and there were no cases of retrograde type A aortic dissection or stent graft-driven new distal entry. Finally, all patients exhibited good LSA patency.

Conclusion

TEVAR using a Castor single-branched stent graft may be a highly feasible and efficient procedure for the management of STBAD involving the LSA.

Comparative Analysis of Endovascular Repair of Single-Branched Stent-Graft and Hybrid Procedure for Patients With Type B Acute Aortic Dissection Involving the Left Subclavian Artery

PURPOSE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization has been used in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD), with inadequate proximal landing zone (PLZ). The outcomes of comparisons between TEVAR and hybrid procedure on patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ, are rarely reported. This study sought to compare and clarify the early and midterm outcomes between TEVAR and hybrid procedure in patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2019 and December 2021, 93 patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ, who underwent TEVAR or hybrid procedure, were retrospectively evaluated in Beijing Anzhen hospital. Demographics, comorbidities, preoperative imaging features, periprocedural details, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. Survival was analyzed according to Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

TEVAR procedures were performed on 41 patients (TEVAR group) and hybrid procedures on 52 patients (hybrid group). Early events, 30 day mortality, and all-cause mortality, were not significantly different between the 2 groups. However, patients receiving TEVAR had significantly shorter procedure time (p<0.001), hospital stay (p<0.001), and intensive care unit (ICU) stay (p=0.001) compared with those in the hybrid group. Patients receiving TEVAR had significantly lower midterm events (p=0.014) and re-intervention (p=0.015) compared with those in the hybrid group.

CONCLUSION

The study indicated that TEVAR with LSA revascularization for TBAD with inadequate PLZ is associated with a trend toward lower rates of midterm events, while the early and midterm mortalities were comparable with those in hybrid procedure.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study is novel as it compared the outcomes between thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and hybrid procedure in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD), with inadequate proximal landing zone, which has been rarely reported previously. We believe that our study makes a significant contribution to the literature because it is clinically relevant as it demonstrated that TEVAR with left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization for TBAD with inadequate proximal landing zone is associated with a trend toward lower rates of mid-term events, while the early and mid-term mortalities were comparable with those in the hybrid procedure.

Cover with caution: Management of the Left Subclavian Artery in TEVAR for trauma

BACKGROUND

Elective Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery coverage (LSA-C) without revascularization is associated with increased rates of ischemic stroke. In patients with blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) requiring TEVAR, LSA-C is frequently required in over one-third of patients. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes of TEVAR in BTAI patients with and without LSA-C.

METHODS

The largest existing international multicenter prospective registry of BTAI, developed and implemented by the Aortic Trauma Foundation, was utilized to evaluate all BTAI patients undergoing TEVAR from March 2016 to January 2021. Patients with uncovered left subclavian artery (LSA-U) were compared with patients who had left subclavian artery coverage with (LSA-R) and without (LSA-NR) revascularization.

RESULTS

Of the 364 patients with BTAI who underwent TEVAR, 97 (26.6%) underwent LSA-C without revascularization, 10 (2.7%) underwent LSA-C with revascularization (LSA-R). Late and all ischemic strokes were more common in LSA-NR patients than LSA-U patients ( p = 0.006, p = 0.0007). There was no difference in rate of early, late, or overall incidence of paralysis/paraplegia between LSA-NR and LSA-U. When compiled as composite central nervous system ischemic sequelae, there was an increased rate in early, late, and overall events in LSA-NR compared with LSA-U ( p = 0.04, p = 0.01, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

While prior studies have suggested the relative safety of LSA-C in BTAI, preliminary multicenter prospective data suggests there is a significant increase in ischemic events when the left subclavian artery is covered and not revascularized. Additional prospective study and more highly powered analysis is necessary.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Chimney Stenting Versus Surgical Debranching for the Treatment of Aortic Arch Pathologies-A Propensity-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of aortic arch lesions requires revascularization of epiaortic vessels in case of coverage. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of surgical bypass versus endovascular reconstruction with a chimney graft.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a multicenter register between January 2005 and December 2019 was performed. A total of 127 patients were included and divided into 2 groups: thoracic endovascular aortic repair + surgical debranching (n = 72) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair + chimney stenting (n = 55). The main end points were major neurologic sequelae and type IA endoleak. Propensity score matching was performed to analyse baseline variables related to these outcomes.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 35.6 months for the debranching group and 34.1 for the chimney group (P = 0.65). The incidence of stroke was higher in the chimney group although not statistically significant (7.3% vs. 4.1%; P = 0.46); for both groups, a wide angle between the ostium of the target vessel and the aorta and landing in Ishimaru Zone 0 was found to be the main predictors for major neurologic sequelae (P = 0.002 and P = 0.003, respectively). During follow-up, 9 (12.5%) type IA endoleaks occurred in the debranching group and 12 (21.8%) in the chimney group (P = 0.14). Aortic diameter larger than 66 mm and arch angle >46° had a strong association with proximal endoleak incidence (P = 0.001 and P = 0.011, respectively) CONCLUSIONS: Surgical debranching showed better results than chimney stenting in terms of major neurologic events incidence and type IA endoleak, although the difference between the groups was not statistically significant. Further research with larger cohorts is needed to establish the indications for these procedures.

Technical tips and clinical experience with the Gore Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis®

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been widely accepted as a treatment option in patients with thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissections who have suitable anatomy. It is estimated that up to 60% of patients treated by TEVAR require extension of the repair into the distal aortic arch across Ishimaru zone 2. In these patients, coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA) without revascularization has been associated with increased risk of arm ischemia, stroke, and spinal cord injury. The Gore Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis (TBE, WL Gore, Flagstaff, AZ, USA) is the first off-the-shelf thoracic branch stent-graft approved by the Federal Drug Administration for treatment of distal aortic arch lesions requiring extension of the proximal seal into zone 2. This article summarizes the technical pitfalls and clinical outcomes of the TBE^® device in zone 2.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Favorable neurological outcomes in thoracic endovascular aortic repair with RELAY™ branched-An international perspective

BACKGROUND

While open surgical repair continues to be the mainstay option for aortic arch reconstruction, the associated mortality, morbidity, and high turn-down rates have led to a need for the development of minimally invasive options for aortic arch repair. Though RELAY™ Branched (Terumo Aortic, Inchinnan, UK) represents a promising option for complex endovascular aortic arch repair, neurological complications remain a pertinent risk. Herein we seek to present multicenter data from Europe documenting the neurological outcomes associated with RELAY™ Branched.

METHODS

Prospective data collected between January 2019 and January 2022 associated with patients treated with RELAY™ single-, double-, and triple-branched endoprostheses from centers across Europe was retrospectively analyzed with descriptive and distributive analysis. Follow-up data from 30 days and 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively were included. Patient follow-up was evaluated for the onset of disabling stroke (DS) and non-disabling stroke (NDS).

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 147 (99.3%) cases. Over 24 months period, in total, six (4.1%) patients suffered DS, and eight (5.4%) patients suffered NDS after undergoing aortic arch repair with RELAY™. All patients that developed postoperative DS had been treated with the double-branched RELAY™ endoprosthesis.

DISCUSSION

The data presented herein demonstrates that RELAY™ Branched is associated with favorable neurological outcomes and excellent technical success rates. Key design features of the endoprosthesis and good perioperative management can contribute greatly to mitigating neurological complications following endovascular aortic arch repair.

Outcomes of Endovascular Repair of Aortic Aneurysms with the GORE® Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for Left Subclavian Artery Preservation

OBJECTIVE OR BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair has emerged as the dominant paradigm for treatment of patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. For aneurysms involving the aortic arch in the region of the left subclavian artery (LSA), branch vessel preservation to maintain blood flow to the LSA is recommended. Branched aortic endografts are an alternative to surgical revascularization of the LSA.

METHODS

Across 34 investigative sites, 84 patients with Zone 2 aneurysm were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective study of a single branched aortic endograft. The thoracic branch endoprosthesis device allows for graft placement proximal to the LSA and incorporates a single side branch for left subclavian perfusion.

RESULTS

Over half of the patients were male (63%). Their average age was 70 (±11) years. The aneurysm morphology was fusiform in 43 and saccular in 41 patients. The mean aneurysm diameter at screening was 56.2 mm. The mean follow up was 30 months (range 2.6 to 50.7 months). Reported here are the patient outcomes at 1 and 12 months. Pre-defined technical success with implantation of the device in landing Zone 2 was achieved in 92% (n=77) of patients. There were no cases of aortic rupture, lesion-related mortality, or new onset renal failure. There was no peri-operative (30-day) mortality. A single case each of permanent paraplegia and paraparesis occurred. Three patients experienced a procedure-related stroke. Through 12 months, four patients died; none of the deaths were adjudicated as related to the device or procedure. One aortic reintervention was required. A single case of aortic enlargement (core laboratory) was reported at 6 months. Type 1 (n=3) and III (n=5) endoleaks occurred in 9.8% of patients of which one (Type III) required reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this device study in patients with Zone 2 aneurysm demonstrate that early safety and efficacy outcomes are maintained up to 12 months after the endovascular procedure with low mortality and reintervention rates and an acceptable frequency of procedural complications, including neurologic complications.

Left Subclavian Artery Coverage is Not Associated with Neurological Deficits in Trauma Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) outcomes have been studied with interest in complications related to left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage in patients with atherosclerotic pathologies; however, specific data on the management of the LSA in a trauma population is lacking. The objective of this study is to evaluate outcomes following TEVAR for traumatic aortic injury based on LSA coverage.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative thoracic endovascular aortic repair module (2010-2017) was analyzed. Patients were included if they had a traumatic aortic injury requiring TEVAR. Patients were placed in two groups based on coverage of the left subclavian artery. Patients were propensity score matched and the primary outcomes were cerebrovascular symptoms and spinal cord ischemia. Additional clinical and resource utilization outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

451 patients were included in the analysis. There were 268 patients in the LSA not covered group and 183 patients in the LSA covered group. The mean aortic injury grade was 2.88±0.056 vs 2.88±0.049 in the covered versus not-covered group (p=0.957). Glasgow coma scale and injury severity score were not different between the groups. There was no difference between groups for cerebrovascular symptoms or spinal cord ischemia, 1.4% vs 2.8% p=0.684 and 0% vs 2.1% p=0.247, after propensity score matching. Significant differences in access site complications and resource utilization were identified between groups.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest series to evaluate complications based on LSA coverage following TEVAR in trauma patients. Our data demonstrate that coverage of the LSA during TEVAR following blunt trauma is associated with no difference in CNS outcomes. As such, LSA revascularization strategies, while possible, are not directly supported by these data, and should be individualized based on each patient's specific clinical scenario.

Perioperative neurologic outcomes of right versus left upper extremity access for fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Upper extremity (UE) access is frequently used for fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR), particularly for complex repairs. Traditionally, left-side UE access has been used to avoid crossing the arch and the origin of the supra-aortic vessels, which could potentially result in cerebral embolization and an increased risk of perioperative cerebrovascular events. More recently, right UE has been more frequently used as it is more convenient and ergonomic. The purpose of this study was to assess the outcomes and cerebrovascular events after F-BEVAR with the use of right- vs left-side UE access.

METHODS

During an 8-year period, 453 patients (71% male) underwent F-BEVAR at a single institution. UE access was used in more complex repairs. Left UE access was favored in the past, whereas right UE access is currently the preferred UE access side. Brachial artery cutdown was used in all patients for the placement of a 12F sheath. Outcomes were compared between patients undergoing right vs left UE access. End points included cerebrovascular events, perioperative mortality, technical success, and local access-related complications.

RESULTS

UE access was used in 361 (80%) patients. The right side was used in 232 (64%) and the left side in 129 (36%) patients for the treatment of 88 (25%) juxtarenal, 135 (38%) suprarenal, and 137 (38%) thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Most procedures were elective (94%). Technical success was achieved in 354 patients (98%). In-patient or 30-day mortality was 3.3%. Five (1%) perioperative strokes occurred in patients undergoing right UE access, of which three were ischemic and two were hemorrhagic. No transient ischemic attacks occurred perioperatively. Two hemorrhagic strokes were associated with permissive hypertension to prevent spinal cord ischemia. No perioperative strokes occurred in patients undergoing left UE access (P = .16). Overall, perioperative strokes occurred with similar frequency in patients undergoing UE (5, 1%) and femoral access only (1, 1%) (P = .99). Arm access-related complications occurred in 15 (5%) patients, 11 (4.8%) on the right side and 4 (6%) on the left side (P = .74).

CONCLUSIONS

Right UE access can be used for F-BEVAR with low morbidity and minimal risk of perioperative ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attacks. In general, UE access is not associated with an increased risk of perioperative stroke compared with femoral access only. Tight blood pressure control is, however, critical to avoid intracranial bleeding related to uncontrolled hypertension.

Imaging and Surveillance of Chronic Aortic Dissection: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

All patients surviving an acute aortic dissection require continued lifelong surveillance of their diseased aorta. Late complications, driven predominantly by chronic false lumen degeneration and aneurysm formation, often require surgical, endovascular, or hybrid interventions to treat or prevent aortic rupture. Imaging plays a central role in the medical decision-making of patients with chronic aortic dissection. Accurate aortic diameter measurements and rigorous, systematic documentation of diameter changes over time with different imaging equipment and modalities pose a range of practical challenges in these complex patients. Currently, no guidelines or recommendations for imaging surveillance in patients with chronic aortic dissection exist. In this document, we present state-of-the-art imaging and measurement techniques for patients with chronic aortic dissection and clarify the need for standardized measurements and reporting for lifelong surveillance. We also examine the emerging role of imaging and computer simulations to predict aortic false lumen degeneration, remodeling, and biomechanical failure from morphological and hemodynamic features. These insights may improve risk stratification, individualize contemporary treatment options, and potentially aid in the conception of novel treatment strategies in the future.

Covering/Overstenting of the left subclavian artery (LSA) in thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) to treat various thoracic/thoracoabdominal aortic lesions: Is revascularization of the left arm a must? (A retrospective cohort study with 12 years of experience to describe the real-world situation of daily clinical practice and the literature review)

Background: Pathologies of the descending thoracic aorta inwardly extended towards the aortic arch actually shorten the proximal landing zone for aortic prosthesis. This, in turn, worsens the feasibility of the aorta for endovascular therapeutic options of those pathologies. Objective: This work considers the blockage of the left subclavian artery (LSA) through endovascular treatment of the pathologies of the descending aorta as a main work question, which is based on the hypothesis that there is no necessity for primary standard revascularization of the LSA in TEVAR with LSA covering. The researchers have 12 years of experience in treatment of different thoracic aortic lesions. Their experience will also be reviewed in this paper. Design: Retrospective unicenter cohort study in consecutive patients order to describe the real-world situation of daily clinical practice Material: All the patients who had undergone endovascular, hybrid, or open operative therapy of variant pathologies of descending aorta were included in this study. Methods: Various parameters were investigated, including therapeutic procedures such as i) pure endovascular vs. hybrid; ii) year of therapy; iii) symptomatic vs. asymptomatic status of the patients; iv) variant epidemiological factors (age, sex, risk factors, mortality, and follow up); v) overstenting/blocking of the LSA; vi) complications of applied therapies; vii) further operations/interventions to treat such complications; viii) radiologic aortic measurements (such as lumen extensions, false lumen measurements, distance to the supra-aortic and visceral vessels); and ix) multiple other pathological features. Different statistical parameters were also examined. Survival was analysed by the Kaplan–Meier assessment in the group of whole patients vs. the group of over-stented patients. Here the analysis of variance is performed for the independent parameters for the revascularized patients—not the revascularized patients—who had undergone LSA coverage. For statistical approval, U-test was used. The p-value < 0.05 was considered significantly different. The literature review was achieved by a search in PubMed, Google scholar, Research Gate, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane library by using the following terms endovascular, TEVAR, revascularization, stroke, and left-subclavian-artery ischemia. The literature is classified accordingly in relation to the main topic. In fact, the literature undergoes further analysis if it goes with or against our hypothesis. Results: Overall, 112 patients were enrolled in the study. There was no significant difference comparing the not-revascularized vs. the revascularized group of patients, considering the consequences on cerebrovascular blood circulation (in particular, n=1 case [4.8 %] vs. no case [0 %]; p=1) or the spinal cord ischemia (n=2 [9.5 %] vs. n=1 [7.1 %]; p=1). As the main result, there was no case of manifest left arm ischemia and deaths (mortality, 0). Survival was in both groups as follows: 22 [95% CI, 14.154–29.904] months vs. 43 [95% CI, 33.655–51.921] months with no significant statistical difference (p>0.05) . The only statistically significant risk factor found was renal insufficiency (p, 0.028), but this too is considered a trend by the urgency of revascularization. Postoperatively, pneumonia showed a trend of higher frequency (p=0.058) in the revascularized cases (n=0 in the not-revascularized vs. n=3 [21.4 %] in the revascularized cases). There was no significant difference in the occurance of postoperative neurovascular complications (such as cerebrovascular accidents, spinal cord ischemia, or left arm ischemia) by comparing the groups of not-revascularized and revascularized patients. Conclusion: The revascularization of the overstented LSA due to TEVAR should be limited to certain indications, including i) the inadequate intracerebral circle of Willis; ii) the predominantly perfused left vertebral artery with inadequate blood perfusion via the right vertebral artery (e.g., by stenosis), iii) anatomic variance such as the left vertebral artery originating directly from the aortic arch (and must be blocked by TEVAR); iv) the need of an adequate left internal thoracic artery for coronary-artery-bypass grafting (CABG); v) the need of patent LSA for the dialysis shunt of the left arm. However, there is no appropriate evidence as yet based on sufficient study results achieved in trials with an advanced design (such as [double-]blind, multicenter randomized study) that appears to be urgently required.

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

Background

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Systematic review and meta-analysis of association of prophylactic cerebrospinal fluid drainage in preventing spinal cord ischemia after thoracic endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis to compare the association between prophylactic cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) vs non-CSFD in preventing spinal cord ischemia (SCI) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aneurysm and dissection.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched to identify all relevant studies reported before April 1, 2020. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. We assessed the association between CSFD strategies, including routine CSFD vs selective CSFD or no CSFD, and the SCI rates after TEVAR for patients with aortic dissection (AD), solitary thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA), or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA). Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the association between different aortic pathologies, including AD and thoracic aneurysms, and SCI rates after TEVAR with and without prophylactic CSFD. The data are presented as the pooled event rates (ERs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies of 3561 patients (2671 with TAA or TAAA and 890 with type B AD) were included in the present analysis. The data are presented as the pooled ERs and 95% CIs. The overall SCI rate for patients who had undergone TEVAR with prophylactic CSFD for AD (ER, 1.80%; 95% CI, 0.88%-2.72%) was significantly lower than that for the aortic aneurysm group (ER, 5.73%; 95% CI, 4.20%-7.27%; P < .0001). The SCI rate after TEVAR with prophylactic CSFD was not significantly different from that without CSFD for AD (P = .51). No association was found between the rates of SCI after TEVAR with routine prophylactic CSFD vs selective prophylactic CSFD for aortic aneurysms (P = .76) and AD (P = .70). The SCI rate after TEVAR without CSFD for aortic aneurysms, including isolated TAA and TAAA (ER, 3.49%; 95% CI, 0.23%-6.76%) was not significantly different from that for AD (ER, 3.20%; 95% CI, 0.00%-7.20%; P = .91). For the patients with TAAAs, the rate of SCI after TEVAR with routine prophylactic CSFD was significantly lower than that with selective prophylactic CSFD (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review and meta-analysis has shown that SCI occurs more often after TEVAR for aortic aneurysms than for AD. Routine prophylactic CSFD, compared with selective CSFD, was associated with a lower rate of postoperative SCI after TEVAR for TAAAs. No significant association was found between the SCI rate and routine prophylactic CSFD for patients undergoing TEVAR for isolated TAA or AD.

Identifying risk factors for early neurological outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair using the SUMMIT database

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess risk factors for early neurological complications following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for multiple thoracic aortic diseases using an aggregated dataset.

METHODS

The Study to Assess Outcomes After Endovascular Repair for Multiple Throacic Aortic Disease dataset included data from 6 studies evaluating Zenith thoracic endografts. Post hoc analysis identified early (30-day) neurological complications by TEVAR indication and corresponding risk factors.

RESULTS

The study included 594 TEVAR patients (67% male; mean age 66 ± 15 years) with thoracic aortic aneurysm (n = 329), ulcer (n = 56), acute (n = 126) or non-acute (n = 33) type B aortic dissection (TBAD) or blunt injury (n = 50). Overall early stroke rate was 3.5% (n = 21). Overall early paraplegia and paraparesis rates were 1.3% (n = 8) and 2.5% (n = 15), respectively. Multivariable analysis identified acute TBAD [versus others, odds ratio (OR) = 3.47, 95% confidence internal (CI): 1.41-8.52) and longer procedural time (OR = 1.33, CI: 1.02-1.73) as early stroke risk factors. Risk factors for paraplegia or paraparesis included more endografts deployed (OR = 2.43, CI: 1.30-4.55), older age (OR = 1.05, CI: 1.01-1.10) and higher preoperative serum creatinine (OR = 1.31, CI: 1.05-1.64). Endografts landing proximal to the left subclavian artery (LSA) increased stroke rate (versus distal to the LSA; 6.8% vs 2.3%, P = 0.014). Intraoperative LSA revascularization was performed in 20.9% of patients with endografts proximal to the LSA; revascularization did not significantly alter stroke rate (8.1% with revascularization vs 6.4% without, P = 0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

Acute TBAD and prolonged procedure time increased early stroke risk, while more endografts placed, age and preoperative renal impairment increased early paraplegia or paraparesis risk. For acute TBAD, endograft placement proximal to the LSA, but not LSA patency, increased stroke risk.

Safety and durability of single-stage type I hybrid total aortic arch repair for extensive aortic arch disease: early- and long-term clinical outcomes from a single center and our 10-year of experience

Background

Single-stage type I hybrid total aortic arch repair is a surgical treatment for extensive aortic arch disease, but the clinical outcomes were distinguishing. The purposes of this study were to share our experience and evaluate the perioperative safety and long-term durability.

Methods

Thirty-six patients who underwent single-stage type I hybrid total aortic arch repair in Fuwai Hospital between January 2010 and June 2020 were respectively reviewed. Early primary endpoint was defined as early composite adverse events, including mortality, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), unplanned reoperation, stroke, paraplegia, acute renal failure (ARF) necessitating continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), respiratory failure and stents related complications. Long-term endpoints included late mortality, late aortic related reintervention and late adverse aortic events. When evaluating the early- and long-term outcomes, all patients were stratified into two subgroups by age (65 years).

Results

All patients acquired technical success. Early composite adverse events rate was 11.1% (4/36), in-hospital mortality was 8.3% (3/36). Average follow-up period was 48.0±35.3 months. Overall survival rate was 83.3% and 51.9% at 5 and 10 years respectively. Late aortic related reintervention occurred at one (3.0%, 1/33) patient and this patient died after reintervention. Overall freedom from adverse aortic events was 79.2% and 47.5% at 5 and 10 years respectively. Significant difference was not observed between the elderly and young subgroups, no matter in early- and long-term outcomes.

Conclusions

Single-stage type I hybrid total aortic arch repair has achieved desirable outcomes in our center, which does not increase perioperative risk in the elderly patients, meanwhile, also acquire acceptable durability in the young patients. In conclusion, this surgery is a practical mini-invasive treatment for extensive aortic arch disease with strict and limited indications.

Left subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair: single center's clinical experiences from 171 patients

Background

Left subclavian artery revascularization (LSA) is frequently performed in the setting of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR). The purpose of this study was to compare different techniques for LSA revascularization during TEVAR.

Methods

We performed a single center’s retrospective cohort study from 2016 to 2019. Patients were categorized by LSA revascularization methods, including direct coverage without revascularization (Unrevascularized), carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB), fenestrated TEVAR (F-TEVAR). Indications, demographics, operation details, and outcomes were analyzed using standard statistical analysis.

Results

171 patients underwent TEVAR with LSA coverage, 16.4% (n = 28) were unrevascularized and the remaining patients underwent CSB (n = 100 [58.5%]) or F-TEVAR (n = 43 [25.1%]). Demographics were similar between the unrevascularized and revascularized groups, except for procedure urgent status (p = 0.005). The incidence of postoperative spinal cord ischemia was significantly higher between unrevascularized and revascularized group (10.7% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.032). There was no difference in 30-day and mid-term rates of mortality, stroke, and left upper extremity ischemia. CSB was more likely time-consuming than F-TEVAR [3.25 (2.83–4) vs. 2 (1.67–2.67) hours, p = 0], but there were no statistically significant differences in 30-day or midterm outcomes for CSB versus F-TEVAR. During a mean follow-up time of 24.8 months, estimates survival rates had no difference.

Conclusions

LSA revascularization in zone 2 TEVAR is necessary which is associated with a low 30-day rate of spinal cord ischemia. When LSA revascularization is required during TEVAR, CSB and F-TEVAR are all safe and effective methods, and F-TEVAR appears to offer equivalent clinical outcomes as a less time-consuming and minimally invasive alternative.

[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.

Evaluation of the Gore TAG thoracic branch endoprosthesis in the treatment of proximal descending thoracic aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair has radically transformed the treatment of descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. However, when aneurysms involve the aortic arch in the region of the left subclavian artery, branch vessel preservation must be considered. Branched aortic endografts have provided a new option to maintain branch patency.

METHODS

Six investigative sites enrolled 31 patients in a nonrandomized, prospective investigational device exemption feasibility trial of a single branched aortic endograft for the management of aneurysms that include the distal aortic arch. The Gore TAG thoracic branch endoprosthesis (W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc, Flagstaff, Ariz), an investigational device, allows for graft placement proximal to the left subclavian artery and incorporates a single side branch for left subclavian perfusion.

RESULTS

All 31 patients (100%) had undergone successful implantation of the investigational device in landing zone 2. Men slightly outnumbered women (51.6%). Their average age was 74.1 ± 10.4 years. The aneurysm morphology was fusiform in 12 and saccular in 19 patients, with a mean maximum aortic diameter of 54.8 ± 10.9 mm. The mean follow-up period for the cohort was 25.2 ± 11.1 months. We have reported the patient outcomes at 1 month and 1 year. At 1 month, the side branch patency was 100% and the freedom from core laboratory-reported device-related endoleak (types I and III) was 96.7%, without 30-day death or permanent paraplegia. One patient experienced a procedure-related stroke. Through 1 year, five patients had died; none of the deaths were related to the device or procedure (clinical endpoint committee adjudicated). One thoracic reintervention was required. No conversions were required, and no aneurysm growth (core laboratory) was reported. One case of the loss of side branch patency was diagnosed in the left subclavian artery in an asymptomatic individual from computed tomography at 6 months, with no reported subsequent adverse events due to loss of patency. Endoleaks were reported by the core laboratory in five patients at 12 months (two, type II; and three, indeterminate).

CONCLUSIONS

The present investigational device exemption feasibility study has reported the preliminary results of the use of a single side branch endograft to treat patients with proximal descending thoracic aortic aneurysms.

Association of carotid ultrasonography with perioperative stroke after thoracic aortic aneurysm treatment: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to verify whether carotid ultrasonography (CUS) findings could be associated with the occurrence of perioperative stroke after thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) treatment.

METHODS

Patients with TAAs who were treated by either total arch replacement or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) were retrospectively enrolled. Left subclavian artery (LSA) embolization and bypass surgery of the left common carotid artery (CCA) to the LSA before TEVAR were additionally performed for some patients. CUS was performed before TAA treatment to evaluate carotid atherosclerosis and flow velocities of bilateral cervical arteries. After dividing patients into those with and without perioperative stroke, their background, atherosclerotic risk factors, history of stroke, TAA location and size, treatment procedures, and CUS parameters were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of the 60 patients (18 women, 42 men; mean age 73.5 ± 10.2 years) with TAA, four (7.5%) developed perioperative stroke. There were no significant differences in the patients' characteristics and their TAAs between those with and without perioperative stroke. For the CUS parameters, end-diastolic velocity (EDV) of bilateral CCAs was significantly decreased in perioperative stroke patients (with vs without stroke; right: 9.2 ± 1.8 vs. 14.5 ± 4.6 cm/s, P = 0.025, left: 9.1 ± 0.3 vs. 15.0 ± 4.5 cm/s, P = 0.012), whereas the resistance index (RI) of bilateral CCAs was significantly elevated (right: 0.76 vs. 0.87, P = 0.008, left: 0.76 vs. 0.87, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower EDV and higher RI of bilateral CCAs were significantly associated with perioperative stroke after TAA treatment. Thus, CUS findings may help predict the occurrence of perioperative stroke.

Partial subclavian artery coverage in TEVAR patients for acute type B aortic dissections: an alternative solution

BACKGROUND

Acute type B aortic dissection with origin of the left subclavian artery (LSA) is generally managed with endovascular therapy for acute coverage of the LSA with: 1) no revascularization; 2) revascularization with open methods; or 3) endovascular revascularization. To identify an alternative solution, we critically evaluated a small cohort of patients who had partial coverage of their LSA.

METHODS

Three thoracic endovascular repairs were performed from January-March 2015. Patients were deemed eligible for endovascular repair after they had failed conservative management. Indications included acute type B dissection with lower extremity ischemia, ruptured dissection, and persistent symptoms of dissection after medical therapy.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in all three patients, and all procedures were performed percutaneously. The mean distance between the ostium of the LSA and the entry point of dissection was 11.1±3.4 mm. Within the 30-day postoperative period, there were no deaths, aortic ruptures, myocardial infarctions, or conversions to open repair. Freedom from re-intervention was noted in all 3 patients. There was no spinal cord ischemia.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no strong evidence to support the current optimal approach for treatment of the thoracic aorta. Partial coverage of LSA in patients with <2 cm seal zones may be considered as an alternative. However, due to our small sample size, limited follow-up, and lack of comparison cohort, further investigation is necessary.

Reevaluating the Need for Routine Coverage of the Left Subclavian Artery in Thoracic Blunt Aortic Injury

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the treatment of choice for thoracic blunt aortic injury (TBAI). A 20 mm proximal seal zone is recommended based on aneurysmal disease literature which often results in coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA). The aim of this study was to analyze our experience with TEVAR for TBAI and evaluate whether 20 mm is required to achieve successful remodeling.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective study of all consecutive patients who received a TEVAR for treatment of moderate and severe TBAI between April 2014 and November 2018. Three-dimensional software reconstruction was used for computed tomography (CT) scan centerline measurements. Outcomes included technical success, need for reinterventions, and immediate and long-term aortic-related complications.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients underwent TEVAR for TBAI during the study period. Twenty-eight (46%) patients underwent LSA coverage with an average distance from the LSA to the injury of 6.4 mm (0-15.1 mm). Of the 33 (54%) patients who did not undergo coverage of the LSA, 22 patients (66%) had less than 20 mm of proximal seal zone. The mean distance from the LSA to injury in this group was 16.6 mm (7.9-29.5 mm). None of the patients with LSA coverage developed ischemic symptoms, and an average decrease in left arm systolic blood pressure of 24.8 mm Hg (0-62 mm Hg) was noted versus the right arm. There was no aortic-related mortality in either group. Follow-up CT scans revealed excellent remodeling.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate outcomes of TEVAR for TBAI with LSA coverage are well tolerated; however, the long-term sequela of LSA coverage is unknown. Exclusion of the injury and excellent remodeling appear to occur with less than 20 mm of proximal seal, and perhaps more attention should be made to preservation of the LSA.

Early Outcomes of Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization Using Castor Single-Branched Stent-Graft in the Treatment of Type B Aortic Dissection or Intramural Hematoma

Background: More evidence was required to guide the management of left subclavian artery (LSA) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The present study aimed to compare the outcomes of LSA coverage with LSA revascularization. Another purpose of this study was to share our experience of LSA revascularization with castor single-branched stent-graft.

Methods: From January 2016 to December 2019, 134 patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) or intramural hematoma (IMH) were enrolled and divided into two groups, the LSA-covered group (n = 61) and the LSA-revascularized group (with castor single-branched stent-graft, n = 73). The results, such as in-hospital and 30-day mortality, stroke, paraplegia, left arm ischemia, operation time, endoleak, were compared between the two groups.

Results: The incidence of 30-day stroke in the LSA-covered group (8.2%) was significantly higher compared with the LSA-revascularized group (0%, P = 0.018). 30-day ischemia of left arm occurred in more patients in the LSA-covered group (11.5%, P = 0.003). No statistical difference was found in the incidences of paraplegia, endoleak, in-hospital mortality, and 30-day mortality.

Conclusions: LSA should be revascularized during TEVAR to reduce the incidences of stroke and left arm ischemia. Castor single-branched stent-graft was feasible and safe for treating TBAD or IMH.

Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissection Involving the Left Subclavian Artery by Castor Stent Graft: A Multicentre Prospective Trial

OBJECTIVE

The left subclavian artery (LSA) origin can be intentionally covered by stent grafts, to provide adequate proximal landing zones during thoracic endovascular repair for Stanford type B aortic dissections (TBADs). To preserve the LSA, a novel single branched stent graft, named "Castor" was designed and a clinical trial conducted to investigate its suitability.

METHODS

From April 2013 to March 2015, 73 patients with TBAD were treated by Castor stent grafts at 11 Chinese tertiary hospitals as part of a single arm prospective clinical trial. There were 50 acute (<2 weeks [68.5%]) and 23 chronic aortic dissections (>2 weeks [31.5%]).

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 97% (n = 71/73). The two failures were caused by occlusion of the branch section of the stent graft. There were four intra-operative endoleaks (two type Ia, two type B from the LSA). The endoleak rate was 5% (n = 4/73). There was one in hospital death and no major complications. The median follow up time was 61 months (range 48-72 months). The mortality was 5% (n = 4/73) within one year and 7% within six years (n = 5/73). Two deaths were of unknown cause and three were not related to the aorta. Two new entry tears were found on the proximal or distal edge of the stent graft and were retreated endovascularly. Six occlusions of the branch section of the Castor stent graft were found, and the follow up patency rate of the branch section was 93% (n = 63/68). Two intra-operative endoleaks were left during follow up and eventually disappeared according to the latest computed tomography angiograms.

CONCLUSION

For patients with TBADs needing anchoring proximal to the origin of LSA, the Castor single branched stent graft may provide an easily manipulated, safe, and effective endovascular treatment.

Management of the Left Subclavian Artery in TEVAR for Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection

Objectives:

Left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) remains controversial. Left subclavian artery coverage without revascularization can cause stroke and death. TEVAR has gained popularity for the treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection (cTBD). Using the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database, we reviewed outcomes of LSA revascularization in TEVAR for cTBD.

Methods:

The VQI registry identified 5683 patients treated with TEVAR from July 2010 to July 2016, including 208 repairs for cTBD. We analyzed outcomes per the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards.

Results:

Of the 208 patients, 150 (72.1%) were male with a median age of 65.0 years (interquartile range [IQR], 55.0-72.0). Median aneurysm diameter was 5.7 cm (IQR, 5.0-6.5 cm). Data on the patency of the LSA was available in 131 (63.0%) patients. Twenty-five (19.1%) had occlusion of the LSA without revascularization, while 106 (80.9%) maintained patency or had revascularization. Successful device delivery occurred in all 131 (100%) patients. Maintaining LSA patency did not affect the rate of cerebrovascular accident ( P = .16), spinal cord ischemia ( P = 1.00), or death ( P = 1.00). This was also nonsignificant when analyzing the subgroup of 98 elective cases. There was no difference in the rates of endoleak. Any intervention for the LSA (revascularization or occlusion) led to a longer procedure time (203.6 minutes vs 163.7 minutes, P = .04).

Conclusions:

Maintaining LSA patency during TEVAR for cTBD offers no advantage in perioperative morbidity or endoleak. Occlusion of LSA may be performed safely in this cohort and revascularization reserved for those who have anatomy that compromises perfusion to critical organs.

Endovascular Aortic Arch Reconstruction with Parallel Grafts: A Dilemma of Excessive Endograft Oversizing

Background

Preservation of supra-aortic branches in thoracic endovascular aortic repair plays a role in associated neurological outcomes, and the strategy varies.

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a parallel graft technique to reconstruct the aortic arch.

Methods

From August 2014 to July 2018, a total of 25 patients with thoracic aortic pathologies requiring arch reconstruction were included. All patients underwent thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) with a zone 1 landing aortic stent graft, a chimney graft to preserve the left common carotid artery, and a periscope graft to preserve the left subclavian artery. The associated outcomes and complications were reported.

Results

Eighteen patients presented with aortic dissection, 4 with a thoracic aortic aneurysm, 1 with a penetrating aortic ulcer, 1 with a traumatic aortic injury, and 1 case of re-TEVAR. The technical success rate was 96% (24/25), but the case of immediate failure died of retrograde type A dissection. Over a mean follow-up of 32.33 months, another retrograde type A aortic dissection was detected in 1 month, and a case of early failure (< 1 year) and 3 cases of late failure (> 1 year) whose primary aortic problems recurred were detected.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates a total endovascular approach to preserve supra-aortic branches with a parallel graft technique. However, the dilemma of excessive graft oversizing was disclosed due to the risk of retrograde type A dissections and an unsatisfactory durability in this small series.

Periscope sandwich stenting as an alternative to open cervical revascularization of left subclavian artery during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

Revascularization of the left subclavian artery (LSA) during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) maintains collateral circulation to decrease ischemic complications, including stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and upper extremity ischemia. Both open surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization techniques have been described, each with unique risks and benefits. We describe our "periscope sandwich" technique for the LSA during zone 2 TEVAR, which maintains antegrade access to the distal abdominal aorta if subsequent interventions are necessary. Technical results and short-term outcomes are compared with LSA open surgical debranching.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review was performed for patients requiring zone 2 TEVAR with LSA revascularization by periscope sandwich technique or open surgical debranching with subclavian to carotid transposition (SCT) or carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB). The presenting aortic disease and perioperative details were recorded. Intraoperative angiography and postoperative computed tomography images were reviewed for occurrence of endoleak and branch patency.

RESULTS

Between January 2013 and December 2018, the LSA was revascularized by periscope sandwich in 18 patients, SCT in 22 patients, and CSB in 13 patients. Compared with open surgical debranching, periscope sandwich had a lower median estimated blood loss (100 mL vs 200 mL for pooled SCT and CSB; P = .03) and lower median case duration (133.5 minutes vs 226 minutes; P < .001). Contrast material volume (120 mL vs 120 mL; P = .98) and fluoroscopy time (13.1 minutes vs 13.3 minutes; P = .92) did not differ significantly between the groups. There was no difference in aorta-related mortality (P = .14), and LSA patency was 100%. Median follow-up for the periscope sandwich group was 11 months, with an overall estimated 91% freedom from gutter leak at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

LSA periscope sandwich technique provides safe and effective LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR. LSA periscope sandwich can be used emergently with off-the-shelf endovascular components and facilitates future branched-fenestrated endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic diseases.