Open and endovascular repair of type B aortic dissection in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample

Mechanisms of aortic dissection: From pathological changes to experimental and in silico models

Aortic dissection continues to be responsible for significant morbidity and mortality, although recent advances in medical data assimilation and in experimental and in silico models have improved our understanding of the initiation and progression of the accumulation of blood within the aortic wall. Hence, there remains a pressing necessity for innovative and enhanced models to more accurately characterize the associated pathological changes. Early on, experimental models were employed to uncover mechanisms in aortic dissection, such as hemodynamic changes and alterations in wall microstructure, and to assess the efficacy of medical implants. While experimental models were once the only option available, more recently they are also being used to validate in silico models. Based on an improved understanding of the deteriorated microstructure of the aortic wall, numerous multiscale material models have been proposed in recent decades to study the state of stress in dissected aortas, including the changes associated with damage and failure. Furthermore, when integrated with accessible patient-derived medical data, in silico models prove to be an invaluable tool for identifying correlations between hemodynamics, wall stresses, or thrombus formation in the deteriorated aortic wall. They are also advantageous for model-guided design of medical implants with the aim of evaluating the deployment and migration of implants in patients. Nonetheless, the utility of in silico models depends largely on patient-derived medical data, such as chosen boundary conditions or tissue properties. In this review article, our objective is to provide a thorough summary of medical data elucidating the pathological alterations associated with this disease. Concurrently, we aim to assess experimental models, as well as multiscale material and patient data-informed in silico models, that investigate various aspects of aortic dissection. In conclusion, we present a discourse on future perspectives, encompassing aspects of disease modeling, numerical challenges, and clinical applications, with a particular focus on aortic dissection. The aspiration is to inspire future studies, deepen our comprehension of the disease, and ultimately shape clinical care and treatment decisions.

Thirty-Day Endovascular Repair Outcomes of Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: A Propensity-Score-Matched Study From the ACS-NSQIP Database

BACKGROUND

The surgical intervention for Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) has been revolutionized by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). While diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with increased risks of short-term mortality and infectious complications after major surgeries, previous studies present conflicting findings regarding the outcomes of TEVAR in DM patients. This study aimed to assess the 30-day postoperative outcomes for DM patients who have undergone TEVAR for TBAD using a dataset from a multi-institutional national registry.

METHODS

Patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD were selected from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from 2005 to 2022. A 1:4 propensity-score matching was used to balance demographics and preoperative characteristics between patients with and without DM. Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

There were 160 (8.89%) DM and 1640 (91.11%) non-DM patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD. After propensity-score matching, all DM patients were matched to 594 non-DM patients. DM patients had a higher rate of mortality that was trending toward significance (10.19% vs 5.89%, p = 0.07). All 30-day complications were comparable between DM and non-DM patients.

CONCLUSION

TEVAR can generally be safe for DM patients in terms of short-term outcomes, but the potential for higher perioperative mortality rates in these patients may warrant careful consideration. Further large-scale studies may be necessary to fully understand the impact of DM on both short-term and long-term outcomes following TEVAR for TBAD.Clinical ImpactThis study assessed the 30-day postoperative outcomes for diabetes mellitus (DM) patients who have undergone thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. After propensity-score matching, DM patients had a higher rate of mortality that was trending toward significance but all 30-day complications were comparable between DM and non-DM patients. Therefore, TEVAR can generally be safe for DM patients in terms of short-term outcomes, but the potential for higher perioperative mortality rates in these patients may warrant careful consideration. Further large-scale studies may be necessary to fully understand the impact of DM on both short-term and long-term outcomes following TEVAR for TBAD.

Type A Aortic Dissection Following Abdominal Solid Organ Transplantation: Population-Level Outcomes in the United States

BACKGROUND

This study aims to analyze the patient characteristics, clinical outcomes, and contemporary trends concerning type A aortic dissection (TAAD) in previous recipients of abdominal solid organ transplantation (ASOT) in the United States.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify all patients aged ≥18 with TAAD and a history of ASOT (TAAD-ASOT) between 2002 and 2015Q3 using ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes. Baseline characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were compared between TAAD-ASOT patients and TAAD patients without a history of ASOT (TAAD-non-ASOT).

RESULTS

We identified a weighted total of 71 061 TAAD patients. Among them, 346 (0.49%) were ASOT recipients; of these, 318 (91.9%) were kidney transplant recipients, and 28 (8.1%) were liver transplant recipients. There is an increasing trend in the incidence of TAAD among ASOT recipients over the study period (p-trend < 0.001). Compared to TAAD-non-ASOT patients, TAAD-ASOT patients were younger (54.7 vs. 60.7 years, p < 0.001), less likely to be White (53.8% vs. 69.1%, p = 0.008), and associated with a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (3.79 vs. 2.26, p < 0.001). TAAD-ASOT patients also exhibited significantly higher in-hospital mortality (27.4% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.03) and a greater risk of renal complications (53.5% vs. 29.7%, p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis indicated that a history of ASOT was independently associated with an increased in-hospital mortality rate in TAAD patients (adjusted odds ratio = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.01-3.31, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

TAAD-ASOT patients were younger but presented a higher comorbidity burden, an elevated in-hospital mortality rate, and an increased risk of postoperative complications compared to TAAD-non-ASOT patients. The rising incidence and unfavorable outcomes emphasize the need for future preventative measures and enhancements in surgical outcomes.

Comparisons of open surgical repair, thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and optimal medical therapy for acute and subacute type B aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Various treatments have been employed in managing type B aortic dissection (TBAD), encompassing open surgical repair (OSR), thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), and optimal medical therapy (OMT). Nonetheless, the determination of the most efficacious treatment protocol remains a subject of debate. We aim to compare the treatments in patients with acute and subacute TBAD using a meta-analytic approach.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across databases including PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies published from their inception up to September 2024. Studies comparing OSR, TEVAR, and OMT for TBAD through controlled or direct comparative designs were incorporated. Pairwise comparison meta-analyses were performed employing odds ratios (OR) alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to quantify intervention effects by using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies involving 34,681 patients with TBAD were included in the final meta-analysis. We noted OSR were associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (OR: 2.41; 95%CI: 1.67-3.49; P < 0.001), paraplegia (OR: 3.60; 95%CI: 2.20-5.89; P < 0.001), limb ischemia (OR: 7.80; 95%CI: 2.39-25.49; P = 0.001) and bleeding (OR: 9.54; 95%CI: 6.57-13.85; P < 0.001) as compared with OMT. Moreover, OSR versus TEVAR showed an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (OR: 2.67; 95%CI: 1.92-3.72; P < 0.001), acute renal failure (OR: 1.98; 95%CI: 1.61-2.42; P < 0.001), myocardial infaraction (OR: 2.76; 95%CI: 1.64-4.65; P < 0.001), respiratory failure (OR: 2.19; 95%CI: 1.73-2.76; P < 0.001), or bleeding (OR: 1.88; 95%CI: 1.33-2.67; P < 0.001), and lower risk of reintervention (OR: 0.30; 95%CI: 0.10-0.89; P = 0.030). Finally, TEVAR was associated with an increased risk of stroke (OR: 1.77; 95%CI: 1.41-2.21; P < 0.001), limb ischemia (OR: 13.00; 95%CI: 4.33-39.06; P < 0.001), and bleeding (OR: 3.65; 95%CI: 2.40-5.55; P < 0.001) as compared with OMT.

CONCLUSIONS

This study systematically compared various treatments and showed their safety and efficacy for acute and subacute TBAD. The results require further large-scale randomized controlled trials.

Hospital Teaching Status and Outcomes in Type B Aortic Dissection: Analysis of More Than 40,000 Patients

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of hospital teaching status with outcomes of patients presenting with type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study of the National Readmissions Database (NRD), from 2016 to 2020.

SETTING

Hospitals across the United States stratified by teaching status.

PARTICIPANTS

TBAD patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Surgical repair, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), and conservative medical management.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 44,981 TBAD patients were included, of whom 5421 (12%) were managed at a nonteaching (NT) hospital and 39,470 (88%) were treated at a teaching (T) hospital. Propensity score matching (1:1) yielded 4676 matched pairs. In-hospital mortality (12.9% for NT vs 12.5% for T; p = 0.58) and 30-day readmission (23.3% for NT vs 21.8% for T; p = 0.12) outcomes were not statistically significantly different between the groups. On multivariable regression, teaching status was not associated with higher odds of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.943; 95% confidence interval [CI, 0.841-1.057; p = 0.31) or 30-day readmission (OR, 0.965; 95% CI, 0.88-1.058; p = 0.44). At teaching hospitals, TEVAR was associated with higher odds of in-hospital mortality (OR, 1.898; 95% CI, 1.596-2.257; p < .01), while hospital volume was associated with higher odds of 30-day readmission (quartile 3: OR, 1.488; 95% CI, 1.106-2.002; quartile 4: OR, 1.684; 95% CI, 1.256-2.257; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital teaching status alone was not associated with in-hospital mortality or 30-day readmission in TBAD patients. At teaching hospitals, management by TEVAR and greater hospital volume were associated with in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmission outcome, respectively.

Thirty-day outcomes of endovascular repair of Stanford type B aortic dissection in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) has revolutionized the surgical treatment for Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD). While chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with worse outcomes in major surgeries, the specific outcomes of TEVAR in patients with COPD have not been extensively explored. This study aimed to evaluate the 30-day postoperative outcomes of COPD patients undergoing TEVAR for TBAD utilizing data from a multi-institutional national registry.

METHODS

Patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD were identified in the ACS-NSQIP database from 2005 to 2022. A 1:3 propensity-score matching was used to match demographics and preoperative characteristics between patients with and without COPD. Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

There were 172 (9.56%) and 1628 (90.44%) COPD and non-COPD patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD, respectively. Patients with COPD had a higher comorbidity burden. After the propensity-score matching, all 172 COPD patients were matched to 440 non-COPD patients. COPD and non-COPD patients had comparable mortality rates (10.12% vs 6.82%, p = .18). However, COPD patients had a higher risk of pulmonary complications (20.83% vs 13.18%, p = .02). All other 30-day outcomes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

COPD patients had 58.04% higher pulmonary complications while all other 30-day outcomes were comparable to their non-COPD counterparts. Therefore, close monitoring and timely intervention for pulmonary complications in COPD patients can be important after TEVAR for TBAD. Future studies should investigate long-term outcomes among these COPD patients.

National registry insights on genetic aortopathies and thoracic endovascular aortic interventions

OBJECTIVE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with genetic aortopathies (GA) is controversial, given concerns of durability. We describe characteristics and outcomes after TEVAR in patients with GA.

METHODS

All patients undergoing TEVAR between 2010 and 2023 in the Vascular Quality Iniatitive were identified and categorized as having a GA or not. Demographics, baseline, and procedural characteristics were compared among groups. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the independent association of GA with postoperative outcomes. Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate 5-year survival and 2-year reinterventions.

RESULTS

Of 19,340 patients, 304 (1.6%) had GA (87% Marfan syndrome, 9% Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 4% vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome). Compared with patients without GA, patients with GA were younger (50 years [interquartile range, 37-72 years] vs 70 years [interquartile range, 61-77 years]), more often presented with acute dissection (28% vs 18%), postdissection aneurysm (48% vs 17%), had a symptomatic presentation (50% vs 39%), and were less likely to have degenerative aneurysms (18% vs 47%) or penetrating aortic ulcer (and intramural hematoma) (3% vs 13%) (all P < .001). Patients with GA were more likely to have prior repair of the ascending aorta/arch (open, 56% vs 11% [P < .001]; endovascular, 5.6% vs 2.1% [P = .017]) or the descending thoracic aorta (open, 12% vs 2% [P = .007]; endovascular, 8.2% vs 3.6% [P = .011]). No significant differences were found in prior abdominal suprarenal repairs; however, patients with GA had more prior open infrarenal repairs (5.3% vs 3.2%), but fewer prior endovascular infrarenal repairs (3.3% vs 5.5%) (all P < .05). After adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and disease characteristics, patients with GA had similar odds of perioperative mortality (4.6% vs 7.0%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-1.9; P = .75), any in-hospital complication (26% vs 23%; aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.92-1.6; P = .14), or in-hospital reintervention (13% vs 8.3%; aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.84-1.80; P = .25) compared with patients without GA. However, patients with GA had a higher likelihood of postoperative vasopressors (33% vs 27%; aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9; P = .006) and transfusion (25% vs 23%; aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.03-1.9; P = .006). The 2-year reintervention rates were higher in patients with GA (25% vs 13%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.4-2.9; P < .001), but 5-year survival was similar (81% vs 74%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.70-1.50; P = .1).

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR for patients with GA seemed to be safe initially, with similar odds for in-hospital complications, in-hospital reinterventions, and perioperative mortality, as well as similar hazards for 5-year mortality compared with patients without GA. However, patients with GA had higher 2-year reintervention rates. Future studies should assess long-term durability after TEVAR compared with the recommended open repair to appropriately weigh the risks and benefits of endovascular treatment in patients with GA.

Trends in utilization, timing, and outcomes of thoracic endovascular repair for type B aortic dissection in the United States

Background

Aortic dissection is the most common acute aortic syndrome in the United States. Type B aortic dissection (TBAD) can be managed medically, through open surgical repair, or with thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR). The present study sought to assess contemporary trends in the use and timing of TEVAR.

Methods

Adult nonelective TBAD admissions were identified in the 2010 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients were categorized as medical management (Medical Management), TEVAR at initial hospitalization (Early), or TEVAR during readmission (Delayed). Multivariable models were developed to assess associations with clinical outcomes and resource utilization.

Results

Of 85,753 patients, 8.7% underwent TEVAR at index hospitalization (Early). From 2010 to 2020, the proportion undergoing TEVAR decreased significantly (from 11.3% to 9.6%; nptrend < .001), while the proportion of TEVAR at a subsequent hospitalization increased (from 13.0% to 21.6%; nptrend < .001). Compared to Medical Management, the Early group was younger (median. 63 [interquartile range (IQR), 52-74] years vs 69 [IQR, 57-81] years), and more frequently privately insured (27.7% vs 17.5%; P < .001). Following adjustment, the Early group had a reduced odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-0.66) and increased hospitalization costs (β = +$50,000; 95% CI, $48,000-$53,000). Among 4267 TEVAR patients with available procedure timing data, 15.7% were categorized as Delayed. The Early and Delayed groups did not differ in terms of demographics. The Delayed group had a decreased likelihood of major adverse events (aOR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.64); however, this did not affect 90-day cumulative hospitalization costs (β = +$2700; 95% CI, -$5000-$11,000, ref: Early).

Conclusions

This study suggests changes to TBAD management in both treatment modality and TEVAR timing. Focused analysis on the timing and long-term costs of TEVAR are needed to optimize care delivery.

Trends in the incidence, surgical management and outcomes of type B aortic dissections in Australia over the last decade

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate the incidence and in-hospital outcomes of surgical repair for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) in Australia.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Australasian Vascular Audit (AVA) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). The former is a total practice audit mandated for all members of the Australian and New Zealand Society for Vascular Surgery (ANZSVS) while the latter is an independent government agency which records all healthcare data in Australia. All cases of TBAD which underwent surgical intervention (endovascular or open repair) between 2010 and 2019 were identified using prospectively recorded data from the AVA (New Zealand data was excluded). The primary outcomes were temporal trends in procedures and hospital mortality; secondary outcomes were complications and risk factors for mortality. All admissions and procedures for, and hospital deaths from, TBAD in Australia were identified in AIHW datasets using the relevant diagnosis and procedure codes, with age-standardized rates calculated for the period 2000-01 to 2018-19.

RESULTS

A total of 567 cases of TBAD underwent vascular surgical intervention (AVA data, Australia). Of these, 96.3% were treated by endovascular repair. There was an increase in the annual procedure number from 45 in 2010 to 88 in 2019. In-hospital mortality was 4.8% for endovascular repair and 19% for open repair (p = 0.021). From 2000-01 to 2018-19, the age-standardized procedure rates for TBAD (Australia) doubled, the proportion of admitted patients undergoing a procedure rose from 28% to 43%, and in-hospital deaths fell by 25%.

CONCLUSION

There has been an increasing incidence of vascular surgical intervention for TBAD in Australia. The majority of patients received endovascular therapy while the mortality from surgically managed TBAD appears to be falling.

Efficacy and Safety of Endovascular Fenestrated and Branched Grafts Versus Open Surgery in Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: An Updated Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression

OBJECTIVE

To provide an updated systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression of efficacy and safety of fenestrated/branched endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) compared with open repair.

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of TAAAs may be a promising alternative to open surgery by reducing invasiveness and expanding the eligible population, but evidence remains limited.

METHODS

We applied "Prepared Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis" guidelines to retrieve, quantitatively pool, and critically evaluate the efficacy and safety (including 30-day mortality, reintervention, spinal cord injury [SCI], and renal injury) of both approaches. Original studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library until April 20, 2022, excluding papers reporting <10 patients. Pooled proportions and means were determined using a random-effect model. Heterogeneity between studies was evaluated with I2 statistics.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. Endovascular cohort patients were older and had higher rates of comorbidities. Endovascular repair was associated with similar proportions of mortality (0.07, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.06-0.08) compared with open repair (0.09, 95% CI: 0.08-0.12; P = 0.22), higher proportions of reintervention (0.19, 95% CI: 0.13-0.26 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.04-0.10; P < 0.01), similar proportions of transient SCI (0.07, 95% CI: 0.05-0.09 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.05-0.08; P = 0.28), lower proportions of permanent SCI (0.04, 95% CI: 0.03-0.05 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.05-0.07; P < 0.01), and renal injury (0.08, 95% CI: 0.06-0.10 vs 0.13, 95% CI: 0.09-0.17; P = 0.02). Results were affected by high heterogeneity and potential publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite these limitations and the lack of randomized trials, this meta-analysis suggests that endovascular TAAA repair could be a safer alternative to the open approach.

Neurological event rates and associated risk factors in acute type B aortic dissections treated by thoracic aortic endovascular repair

OBJECTIVES

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair is the method of choice in patients with complicated type B acute aortic dissection. However, thoracic endovascular aortic repair carries a risk of periprocedural neurological events including stroke and spinal cord ischemia. We aimed to look at procedure-related neurological complications within a large cohort of patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

Between 1996 and 2021, the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection collected data on 3783 patients with type B acute aortic dissection. For this analysis, 648 patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair were included (69.4% male, mean age 62.7 ± 13.4 years). Patients were excluded who presented with a preexisting neurologic deficit or received adjunctive procedures. Demographics, clinical symptoms, and outcomes were analyzed. The primary end point was the periprocedural incidence of neurological events (defined as stroke, spinal cord ischemia, transient neurological deficit, or coma). Predictors for perioperative neurological events and follow-up outcomes were considered as secondary end points.

RESULTS

Periprocedure neurological events were noted in 72 patients (11.1%) and included strokes (n = 29, 4.6%), spinal cord ischemias (n = 21, 3.3%), transient neurological deficits (n = 16, 2.6%), or coma (n = 6, 1.0%). The group with neurological events had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality (20.8% vs 4.3%, P < .001). Patients with neurological events were more likely to be female (40.3% vs 29.3%, P = .077), and aortic rupture was more often cited as an indication for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (38.8% vs 16.5%, P < .001). In patients with neurological events, more stent grafts were used (2 vs 1 stent graft, P = .002). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that aortic rupture (odds ratio, 3.12, 95% confidence interval, 1.44-6.78, P = .004) and female sex (odds ratio, 1.984, 95% confidence interval, 1.031-3.817, P = .040) were significantly associated with perioperative neurological events.

CONCLUSIONS

In this highly selected group from dedicated aortic centers, more than 1 in 10 patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair had neurological events, in particular women. Further research is needed to identify the causes and presentation of these events after thoracic endovascular aortic repair, especially among women.

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.

Anatomic Utility of Single Branched Thoracic Endograft During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

INTRODUCTION

Single branched thoracic endografts (SBTEs) have been designed for pathology requiring zone 2 seal during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Numerous criteria must be met to allow for their implantation. Our aim was to analyze anatomic suitability for a next generation SBTE.

METHODS

We reviewed 150 TEVAR procedures between 2015 and 2019. Proximal seal was: zone 0 in 21 (16%), zone 1 in 4 (3%), zone 2 in 52 (40%), zone 3 in 45 (35%), and zone 4 or distal in 7 (5%). We analyzed the Zone 2 patient's angiograms and CT angiograms using centerline software to measure arterial diameters and length in relation to the left common carotid artery (LCCA), left subclavian artery (LSA) and proximal extent of aortic disease to determine if patients met anatomic criteria of a novel SBTE.

RESULTS

Zone 2 average age was 64.4 ± 16.3 years; 34 patients were male (65%). Indications for repair were aneurysm (N = 9, 17%), acute dissection (N = 14, 27%), chronic dissection with aneurysmal degeneration (N = 7, 13%), intramural hematoma (N = 9, 17%), penetrating aortic ulcer (N = 5, 10%), and blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI, N = 8, 15%). LSA revascularization occurred in 27 patients (52%). Overall, 20 (38.5%) of the zone 2 patients met anatomic criteria. Patients with dissection met anatomic criteria less frequently than aneurysm (33% [10 of 30] vs 64% [9 of 14]). Patients treated for BTAI rarely met the anatomic criteria (1 of 8, 13%). The main anatomic constraints were an inadequate distance from the LCCA to the LSA takeoff and from the LCCA to the start of the aortic disease process.

CONCLUSION

Less than half of patients who require seal in zone 2 met criteria for this SBTE. Patients with aneurysms met anatomic criteria more often than those with dissection. The device would have little applicability in treating patients with BTAI.

National Trends and Clinical Outcomes of Type B Aortic Dissection Management at Safety-Net Hospitals

INTRODUCTION

Patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) are often underinsured and urgently admitted for open or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The present study evaluated the association of safety-net status with outcomes among patients with TBAD.

METHODS

The 2012-2019 National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify all adults admitted with type B aortic dissection. Safety-net hospitals (SNHs) were defined as institutions in the top 33% for the annual proportion of uninsured or Medicaid patients. Multivariable regression models were utilized to assess the association of SNH with in-hospital mortality, perioperative complications, length of stay (LOS), hospitalization cost, and non-home discharge.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 172 595 patients, 61 000 (35.3%) were managed at SNH. Compared to others, patients admitted to SNH were younger, more commonly non-white, and more frequently non-electively admitted. From 2012 to 2019, the annual incidence of type B aortic dissection increased in the overall cohort. Additionally, utilization of TEVAR at non-SNH increased significantly (2012: 6.5% vs 2019: 9.8%), while that of SNH remained similar (2012: 7.4% vs 2019: 7.9%). Patients undergoing open repair had higher mortality at both SNH (12.4 vs 7.8%, P < .001) and non-SNH (13.1 vs 6.1%, P < .001) compared to those receiving TEVAR. After risk adjustment, compared to non-SNH, SNH status was associated with greater odds of mortality, perioperative complications and non-home discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Our finding suggests that SNH have inferior clinical outcomes for TBAD as well as reduced adoption of endovascular management strategies. Future studies to identify barriers to optimal aortic repair and ameliorate disparities at SNH are warranted.

Mid-term Outcomes of Endovascular and Hybrid Procedures to Treat Complex Aortic Arch Pathologies

PURPOSE

To compare the mid-term outcomes of endovascular and hybrid procedures in treating aortic arch pathologies with an unfavorable proximal landing zone, and analyze the different indications of the 2 methods.

METHODS

We collected the clinical data from 59 patients with complex aortic arch pathologies who underwent endovascular or hybrid surgery from March 2018 to April 2020 at a single center. Among the patients, 45 were treated by branched or fenestrated surgery and 14 by hybrid surgery. The clinical data of preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative results were retrospectively analyzed and compared. The main study indexes were the branch patency rate and endoleakage rate during the follow-up period. The secondary study indexes included the operation success rate, operative time, hospital expenses, complication incidence, freedom from reintervention rate, mortality, etc.

RESULTS

The operation success rate of all the groups was 100%. The hospital expenses of the hybrid group were lower than those of the endovascular group (p<0.05). The operative time of the hybrid group was longer than that of the endovascular group (p<0.05). The incidence of anatomic variants in the hybrid group was 28.6%, which was significantly higher than that in the endovascular group (2.2%, p=0.011). However, there were no significant differences in operative bleeding, ventilator use duration, and treatment time in intensive care units between the 2 groups (p>0.05). Follow-up was conducted for a period of 12 to 34 months. Four patients of the hybrid group experienced numbness of the upper limb (28.57%); the proportion was higher than the endovascular group (0%, p=0.002). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of endoleaks, retrograde aortic dissection, target lesion, secondary operation, branch patency rate, paraplegia, cerebral apoplexy, renal failure, or other complications in either group (p>0.05). The mortality of the endovascular group was 6.67% (3/45). Overall cumulative survival at 1 year was 100% in the hybrid group and 93.3% in the endovascular group. There was no statistical difference in the increase of the true lumen between the 2 groups for vascular remodeling (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The hybrid surgery costs less and proves more suitable for treating variants of the aortic arch. The endovascular treatment still has limitations due to anatomical conditions.

Safety and efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute Stanford type B aortic dissection with retrograde type A intramural hematoma

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for acute Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) with retrograde type A intramural hematoma (TAIMH).

METHODS

Patients with acute TBAD with retrograde TAIMH treated with TEVAR between January 1, 2014, to March 31, 2022, were retrospectively reviewed. Aortic diameter and distance were measured using the 3D Slicer image computing platform. Patients' characteristics, procedural, in-hospital and follow-up data, and aortic remodeling were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients (average age, 52.6 years; 42 males [80.8%]) were included. The median interval from symptom onset to TEVAR was 11 days (interquartile range, 7.0-16.8 days). The maximal diameter of the ascending aorta (AA) was <50 mm, and the hematoma thickness in the AA was ≤10 mm in all patients. Both the in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were 0%. The 30-day complication rate was 11.5%. The overall cumulative survival rates were 100% at 1 year, 97.1% at 3 years, and 92.6% at 5 years. Four of 52 patients (7.7%) developed retrograde type A aortic dissection at 10 days to 4 months postoperatively, and one of 52 patients (1.9%) developed an isolated AA dissection 4 months postoperatively; these five patients were treated and alive at late follow-up in March 2022. The rates of cumulative freedom from thoracic aortic re-intervention were 93.7% at 1 year and 90.7% at 5 years. Positive AA remodeling was observed in 92.3% (48/52) of patients during follow-up. The maximal diameter of AA (mean ± standard error of mean) at admission was 42.7 ± 0.8 mm, which decreased to 39.5 ± 0.9 mm at last follow-up. The maximal AA hematoma thickness at admission was 7.6 ± 0.3 mm, which reduced to 2.2 ± 0.9 mm at last follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

For selected patients of acute Stanford TBAD with retrograde TAIMH, endovascular repair may be a safe, effective, and durable alternative treatment, if the maximum diameter of the AA is <50 mm and the intramural hematoma thickness in the AA is ≤10 mm.

Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm life-altering events following endovascular aortic repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair has lower rates of postoperative mortality and morbidity when compared with open repair. However, endovascular repair still carries the risk of postoperative dialysis, paralysis, and stroke. This study examined the rates of postoperative mortality and morbidity stratified by type of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

METHODS

All patients who underwent endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry from January 2011 - May 2022 were identified. Patients were stratified by repair type: infrarenal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), complex EVAR, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), extent I-III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair, or aortic arch repair. The primary outcome was postoperative thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm life-altering events (TALE) across the different treatment groups. TALE was defined as a composite outcome of postoperative mortality, dialysis, paralysis, and/or stroke. Mixed effect logistic regression modeling was used to identify procedural and anatomic factors that were independently associated with TALE.

RESULTS

A total of 52,592 EVARs, 3,768 complex EVARs, 3,899 TEVARs, 1,139 extent I-III TAAA repairs, and 479 arch repairs were identified. TALE was observed in 1.2% of EVARs, 4.8% of complex EVARs, 6.0% of TEVARs, 10% of extent I-III TAAA repairs, and 14% of arch repairs. More proximal landing zone was associated with higher odds of TALE after complex EVAR (OR 1.9 [1.2-3.1]; p=.008), TEVAR (OR 2.2 [1.4-3.5]; p=.001), and extent I-III TAAA repair (OR 2.7 [1.5-4.9]; p=.001). Aortic diameter >65mm was associated with higher odds of TALE after infrarenal EVAR (OR 1.8 [1.4-2.3]; p<.001), complex EVAR (OR 1.6 [1.1-2.3]; p=.010), TEVAR (OR 2.7 [2.0-3.8]; p<.001), and arch repair (OR 2.4; [1.3-4.4]; p=.007). The use of parallel grafting technique (chimney/snorkel/periscope) during extent I-III TAAA repair was also associated with higher odds of TALE (OR 1.8 [1.1-3.2]; p=.032). Preoperative chronic kidney disease was also associated with higher odd of TALE after infrarenal EVAR (OR 4.3 [3.0-5.7]; p<.001), complex EVAR (OR 5.2 [3.3-8.2]; p<.001), TEVAR (OR 4.5 [2.8-7.1]; p<.001), and extent I-III TAAA repair (OR 3.2 [1.6-6.7]; p=.001).

CONCLUSION

While TALE was originally described for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs, TALE may occur after complex EVAR, TEVAR, and arch repairs as well. Therefore, TALE and its component parts should be used to evaluate the efficacy of all aortic repairs and for preoperative counseling. Additionally, surgeons should be aware of anatomic and procedural characteristics that are associated with higher odds of TALE. The anticipated need for such interventions during aortic repair should be factored into preoperative risk assessment of patients.

Treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysmal degeneration following aortic dissections at a single surgical center using a physician-assembled branched endovascular stent graft

OBJECTIVE

Aneurysmal degeneration of aortic dissection portends significant morbidity and mortality consequences in the subacute and chronic phases of aortic dissection. This paper describes the use of a multi-branched stent graft system for the treatment of thoracoabdominal aneurysmal degeneration of dissections with visceral segment involvement and reports upon the 30-day and one-year outcomes for the first 18 patients treated with this design configuration.

METHODS

The in-hospital, 30-day and one-year morbidity and mortality outcomes of 18 consecutive patients treated with the physician-assembled visceral manifold or unitary manifold stent graft systems between 2013 and 2022 were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients were treated for aneurysmal changes after aortic dissection. A total of 71 visceral vessels were successfully stented. There were no acute procedural failures. There were no episodes of paraplegia, reinterventions for type I or III endoleaks, patency-related events or mortalities reported in the first 30 days following treatment. One-year, all-cause mortality demonstrated 2/11 (18.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Aneurysmal degeneration of aortic dissection poses significant risks to patients with medically managed aortic dissections and those under surveillance. When these aneurysms develop in the thoracoabdominal region, treatment becomes even more challenging given the problem of visceral vessel patency, as these vessels can originate off the true or false lumens. The physician-designed endovascular stent graft system reported upon here has been successfully deployed in 18 patients with no acute procedural failures and promising clinical results. This treatment modality may offer utility to vascular surgeons whose patients with thoracoabdominal aneurysmal degeneration following aortic dissection have historically had limited endovascular repair prospects.

Morbid obesity impacts mortality among inpatients with type a aortic dissection: an analysis of the national inpatient sample

BACKGROUND

Stanford type A aortic dissection (T(A)AD) is one of the most dangerous cardiovascular diseases and morbid obesity is associated with the prognosis of many cardiovascular diseases. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of morbid obesity on in-hospital mortality, total hospital costs and discover the prevalence of morbid obesity among inpatients with T(A)AD.

METHODS

Patients with a primary diagnosis of T(A)AD were identified from the National Inpatient Sample database (NIS) from 2008 to 2017. These patients were categorized into non-obesity, obesity and morbid obesity. Multivariable regression models were utilized to assess the association between obesity/morbid obesity and in-hospital mortality, total cost and other clinical factors. The temporal trend in prevalence of obesity/morbid obesity in T(A)ADs and the trend of in-hospital mortality among different weight categories were also explored.

RESULTS

From the NIS database 8489 T(A)AD inpatients were identified, of which 7230 (85.2%) patients were non-obese, 822 (9.7%) were obese and 437 (5.1%) were morbid obese. Morbid obesity was associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.86), 8% higher total cost compared with the non-obese patients. From 2008 to 2017, the rate of obesity and morbid obesity in patients with T(A)AD have significantly increased from 7.36 to 11.33% (P < 0.001) and from 1.95 to 7.37% (P < 0.001). Factors associated with morbid obesity in T(A)ADs included age, female, elective admission, hospital region, dyslipidemia, smoking, rheumatoid arthritis/collagen vascular diseases, chronic pulmonary disease, diabetes and hypertension.

CONCLUSIONS

Morbid obesity are connected with worse clinical outcomes and more health resource utilization in T(A)AD patients. Appropriate medical resource orientation and weight management education for T(A)AD patients may be necessary.

Initial Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair vs Medical Therapy for Acute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Importance

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has increasingly been used for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD) despite limited supporting data.

Objective

To assess whether initial TEVAR following uTBAD is associated with reduced mortality or morbidity compared with medical therapy alone.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services inpatient claims data for adults aged 65 years or older with index admissions for acute uTBAD from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2018, with follow-up available through December 31, 2019.

Exposures

Initial TEVAR was defined as TEVAR within 30 days of admission for acute uTBAD.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular hospitalizations, aorta-related and repeated aorta-related hospitalizations, and aortic interventions associated with initial TEVAR vs medical therapy. Propensity score inverse probability weighting was used.

Results

Of 7105 patients with eligible index admissions for acute uTBAD, 1140 (16.0%) underwent initial TEVAR (623 [54.6%] female; median age, 74 years [IQR, 68-80 years]) and 5965 (84.0%) did not undergo TEVAR (3344 [56.1%] female; median age, 76 years [IQR, 69-83 years]). Receipt of TEVAR was associated with region (vs South; Midwest: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.81]; P < .001; Northeast: aOR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.50-0.79]; P < .001), Medicaid dual eligibility (aOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91; P = .003), hypertension (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.03-1.54; P = .03), peripheral vascular disease (aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.49; P = .03), and year of admission (2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 were associated with greater odds of TEVAR compared with 2011). After inverse probability weighting, mortality was similar for the 2 strategies up to 5 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85-1.06), as were aorta-related hospitalizations (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.99-1.27), aortic interventions (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.84-1.20), and cardiovascular hospitalizations (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.93-1.20). In a sensitivity analysis that included deaths within the first 30 days, initial TEVAR was associated with lower mortality over a period of 1 year (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99; P = .03), 2 years (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.96; P = .008), and 5 years (aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96; P = .004).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, 16.0% of patients underwent initial TEVAR within 30 days of uTBAD, and receipt of initial TEVAR was associated with hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, region, Medicaid dual eligibility, and year of admission. Initial TEVAR was not associated with improved mortality or reduced hospitalizations or aortic interventions over a period of 5 years, but in a sensitivity analysis that included deaths within the first 30 days, initial TEVAR was associated with lower mortality. These findings, along with cost-effectiveness and quality of life, should be assessed in a prospective trial in the US population.

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.

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair with Supra-Aortic Trunk Revascularization is Associated with Increased Risk of Periprocedural Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND

Ischemic stroke is a devastating complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). This risk may be higher in more proximal aneurysms that require arch manipulation. The purpose of this study is to (1) describe 30-day stroke and death rates in patients undergoing TEVAR, (2) compare stroke rates in patients undergoing TEVAR for arch versus descending aneurysm pathology, and (3) identify predictive factors associated with stroke after TEVAR.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative registry was queried (2015-2021) for TEVAR procedures performed for degenerative aneurysms. Our primary outcomes were any stroke or death at 30 days. Patient-, procedure-, and hospital-level predictors of stroke were assessed using multivariable Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Among 3,072 patients with degenerative aneurysms (197 [6.4%] arch versus 2,875 [93.6%] descending) treated with elective TEVAR, the median age was 73 years (interquartile range 67-79) and 54.8% were male. Within the arch aneurysm group, there were 27.4% zone 0, 22.8% zone 1, and 49.8% zone 2 interventions. Overall 30-day stroke and death rates were 3.2% and 3.8%. The distribution of stroke events was bilateral (52.9%), left carotid (20.7%), left vertebrobasilar (11.5%), right carotid (9.2%), and right vertebrobasilar (5.7%). Although mortality was similar between groups, the rate of ischemic stroke was higher for patients undergoing TEVAR for arch aneurysm versus descending aneurysms (7.1% arch versus 2.9% descending, P = 0.001). Factors that were associated with ischemic stroke after TEVAR included age (>79 years, relative risk [RR] 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-2.98 vs. <79 years), dependent functional status (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.07-2.78), procedural time (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15-1.36), and endovascular intervention for supra-aortic trunk revascularization (RR 2.66, 95% CI 1.06-6.70 versus no intervention).

CONCLUSIONS

Ischemic stroke risk after TEVAR was increased for arch aneurysms compared to descending aneurysms. More proximal zone coverage and endovascular interventions on the supra-aortic trunks were associated with increasing risk for stroke. Adequate preparation for stroke prevention is necessary prior to TEVAR with supra-aortic trunk revascularization.

Nationwide database analysis of one-year readmission rates after open surgical or thoracic endovascular repair of Stanford Type B aortic dissection

Objective

We examined readmissions and resource use during the first postoperative year in patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair or open surgical repair of Stanford type B aortic dissection.

Methods

The Nationwide Readmissions Database (2016-2018) was queried for patients with type B aortic dissection who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair or open surgical repair. The primary outcome was readmission during the first postoperative year. Secondary outcomes included 30-day and 90-day readmission rates, in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and cost. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine risk factors for readmission.

Results

During the study period, type B aortic dissection repair was performed in 6456 patients, of whom 3517 (54.5%) underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair and 2939 (45.5%) underwent open surgical repair. Patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair were older (63 vs 59 years; P < .001) with fewer comorbidities (Elixhauser score of 11 vs 17; P < .001) than patients undergoing open surgical repair. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair was performed electively more often than open surgical repair (29% vs 20%; P < .001). In-hospital mortality was 9% overall and lower in the thoracic endovascular aortic repair cohort than in the open surgical repair cohort (5% vs 13%; P < .001). However, the 90-day readmission rate was comparable between the thoracic endovascular aortic repair and open surgical repair cohorts (28% vs 27%; P = .7). Freedom from readmission for up to 1 year was also similar between cohorts (P = .6). Independent predictors of 1-year readmission included length of stay more than 10 days (P = .005) and Elixhauser comorbidity risk index greater than 4 (P = .033).

Conclusions

Approximately one-third of all patients with type B aortic dissection were readmitted within 90 days after aortic intervention. Surprisingly, readmission during the first postoperative year was similar in the open surgical repair and thoracic endovascular aortic repair cohorts, despite marked differences in preoperative patient characteristics and interventions.

Effectiveness of endovascular repair versus open surgery for the treatment of thoracoabdominal aneurysm: A systematic review and meta analysis

Background

Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) are associated with significant comorbidities. The aim of our study is to compare the outcomes of open repair versus endovascular repair of TAAAs.

Methods

A thorough literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases. The analysis included observational studies comparing the outcomes of surgical vs endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of TAAA. Mortality, spinal cord ischemia (SCI), renal failure, stroke, paraplegia, and respiratory and cardiac problems were all included in the studies. The results were provided as relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). These were then aggregated using an inverse variance weighted random-effects model, and the pooled analysis was displayed using forest plots.

Results

This meta-analysis compromising of twelve studies revealed significant results, favoring endovascular repair versus open surgery for all-cause mortality (HR = 1.91; 95% CI: 1.68–2.18; P < 0.00001), SCI (HR = 1.62; 95% CI: 1.18–2.21; P = 0.003), respiratory complications (HR = 2.22; 95% CI: 1.78–2.77; P < 0.00001), and cardiac complications (HR = 1.66; 95% CI: 1.38–2.00; P < 0.00001). Upon subgroup analysis based on propensity matched, results were consistent and significant for the outcomes of all-cause mortality, cardiac complications, and respiratory complications. For the propensity unmatched subgroup, the incidence of all-cause mortality, SCI, respiratory complications, and cardiac complications were lower among endovascular repair cohort.

Conclusion

Current evidence supports the use of endovascular repair over open surgery. However, there is a need to conduct dedicated randomized controlled trials to effectively compare and determine the benefits and risk of both strategies.

•

Current findings support endovascular repair over open surgery for the treatment of thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAA).

•

Endovascular repair for TAAA can help reduce the risk of all-cause mortality, respiratory and cardiac complications.

•

Consistent results were noted upon subgroup analyses.

•

Dedicated randomized controlled trials are warranted to compare the benefits and risk of both strategies.

Postoperative Intensive Care Management of Aortic Repair

Vascular surgery patients have multiple comorbidities and are at high risk for perioperative complications. Aortic repair surgery has greatly evolved in recent years, with an increasing predominance of endovascular techniques (EVAR). The incidence of cardiac complications is significantly reduced with endovascular repair, but high-risk patients require postoperative ST-segment monitoring. Open aortic repair may portend a prohibitive risk of respiratory complications that could be a contraindication for surgery. This risk is greatly reduced in the case of an endovascular approach, and general anesthesia should be avoided whenever possible in the case of endovascular repair. Preoperative renal function and postoperative kidney injury are powerful determinants of short- and long-term outcome, so that preoperative risk stratification and secondary prevention are critical tasks. Intraoperative renal protection with selective renal and distal aortic perfusion is essential during open repair. EVAR has lower rates of postoperative renal failure compared to open repair, with approximately half the risk for acute kidney injury (AKI) and one-third of the risk of hemodialysis requirement. Spinal cord ischemia used to be the most distinctive and feared complication of aortic repair. The risk has significantly decreased since the beginning of aortic surgery, with advances in surgical technique and spinal protection protocols, and is lower with endovascular repair. Endovascular repair avoids extensive aortic dissection and aortic cross-clamping and is generally associated with reduced blood loss and less coagulopathy. The intensive care physician must be aware that aortic repair surgery has an impact on every organ system, and the importance of early recognition of organ failure cannot be overemphasized.

Diagnosis and Management of Acute Aortic Syndromes: Dissection, Penetrating Aortic Ulcer, and Intramural Hematoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute aortic syndromes, including aortic dissection, intramural hematoma, and penetrating aortic ulcer, are a group of highly morbid, related pathologies that are defined by compromised aortic wall integrity. The purpose of this review is to summarize current management strategies for acute aortic syndromes.

RECENT FINDINGS

All acute aortic syndromes have potential for high morbidity and mortality and must be quickly identified and managed with the appropriate algorithm to prevent suboptimal outcomes. Recent trials suggest that TEVAR is increasingly useful in stabilizing pathology of the descending thoracic aorta but when possible should be applied in a delayed fashion and with limited coverage to minimize neurologic complications. Treatment for acute aortic syndrome is frequently dictated by the anatomic location and extent of the wall compromise as well as patient comorbidities. Therapy is often individualized and often includes some combination of medical, procedural, and surgical intervention.

Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Octogenarians

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare outcomes between octogenarians and non-octogenarians undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

Using the National Inpatient Sample database, we identified octogenarians (≥80 years) and non-octogenarians (<80 years) who had undergone thoracic endovascular aortic repair between 2012 and 2017. We compared patients' demographic, socioeconomic, comorbidity data between the two groups as well as the procedure indications and perioperative outcomes. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of advanced age (≥80 years) on the in-hospital mortality rates in patients who underwent TEVAR. This analysis was also performed for a separate cohort which included only patients who underwent TEVAR for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm.

RESULTS

A total of 4108 patients were included in our study; 3432 (83.5%) patients were <80 years (37.9% female; median age, 64 years; 34.3% non-white) and 676 (16.5%) patients were ≥80 years (50.7% female; median age, 83 years; 20.4% non-white). Non-ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm was the most common indication for TEVAR in older patients (61.4%), whereas type B aortic dissection was the most common indication in younger patients (36.4%). In-hospital complications were comparable between the two groups except for respiratory complications that were higher in the younger patients (21.2% vs. 15.2%; P <.001). The multivariable analysis demonstrated that advanced age had no association with increased in-hospital mortality rates (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], .97-2.05), However, in ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm cohort, octogenarians had higher in-hospital mortality rates (aOR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.04-3.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Octogenarians have acceptable rates of perioperative morbidity and mortality compared to the younger group and should be considered for TEVAR. Octogenarians are at higher risk for in-hospital mortality in the setting of ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm, supporting the appropriateness of elective TEVAR in selected Octogenarians.

The Effect of Intravenous and Oral Beta-Blocker Use in Patients with Type B Thoracic Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers have become the cornerstone for medical management in patients with chronic type B aortic dissection (TBAD). However, the effect of being on and/or receiving intravenous beta-blockers during hospitalization on outcomes of surgical repair of TBAD is not fully described. We sought to investigate this association during open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular (Endo) intervention for nontraumatic TBAD.

METHODS

The Premier Healthcare Database was inquired (June/2009-March/2015). Patients with nontraumatic isolated TBAD were identified via ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedural codes. Patients with codes that indicated TAAD were excluded. In-hospital mortality, cardiac complications (CHF, MI, arrythmia) and stroke were evaluated. Log binomial regression analyses with bootstrapping were performed to assess the relative risk of adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1,752 were admitted for OSR (54.3%) and Endo (45.7%) TBAD repair. Use of oral beta blocker (BB) was 16.0% in OSR and 56.4% in Endo groups. In each arm, patients on BB were more likely to be diabetic, on aspirin or statin and more likely to receive additional IV BB than nonBB patients. There was no significant difference in age, sex, race, or prior history of CHF between BB and nonBB groups. Mortality was proportionally lower in patients on BB in OSR group (7.9% vs. 16.7%; P = 0.006) and Endo (3.3% vs. 9.2%; P < 0.001). The adjusted relative risk for mortality and stroke were significantly lower in oral BB recipients compared with none [aRR (95% CI): 0.53 (0.32-0.90) and 0.46 (0.25-0.87); both P ≤ 0.02]. IV metoprolol was the only IV BB that reduced mortality [aRR (95% CI): 0.62 (0.46-0.85); P = 0.003]. A dose of ≤10 mg was associated with significant mortality reduction: 6.3% (3.0-9.5%) compared with 8.1% (4.6-11.6%) in no IV BB group. Cardiac complications were not affected by BB use.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with nontraumatic TBAD, use of oral BB was associated with significant protection against in-hospital mortality and stroke following repair. Metoprolol was the only Intravenous BB type associated with improved survival. Further research is warranted to elucidate the effect of beta-blockers on the long-term surgical outcomes of TBAD.

Use of Vasoactive Medications after Cardiac Surgery in the United States

Rationale: Patients undergoing cardiac surgery often require vasopressor or inotropic ("vasoactive") medications, but patterns of postoperative use are not well described.Objectives: This study aimed to describe vasoactive medication administration throughout hospitalization for cardiac surgery, to identify patient- and hospital-level factors associated with postoperative use, and to quantify variation in treatment patterns among hospitals.Methods: Retrospective study using the Premier Healthcare Database. The cohort included adult patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting or open valve repair or replacement (or in combination) from January 1, 2016, to June 30, 2018. Primary outcome was receipt of vasoactive medication(s) on the first postoperative day (POD1). We identified patient- and hospital-level factors associated with receipt of vasoactive medications using multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression modeling. We calculated adjusted median odds ratios to determine the extent to which receipt of vasoactive medications on POD1 was determined by each hospital, then calculated quotients of Akaike Information Criteria to compare the relative contributions of patient and hospital characteristics and individual hospitals with observed variation.Results: Among 104,963 adults in 294 hospitals, 95,992 (92.2%) received vasoactive medication(s) during hospitalization; 30,851 (29.7%) received treatment on POD1, most commonly norepinephrine (n = 11,427, 37.0%). A median of 29.0% (range, 0.0-94.4%) of patients in each hospital received vasoactive drug(s) on POD1. After adjustment, hospital of admission was associated with twofold increased odds of receipt of any vasoactive medication on POD1 (adjusted median odds ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.93-2.21). Admitting hospital contributed more to observed variation in POD1 vasoactive medication use than patient or hospital characteristics (quotients of Akaike Information Criteria 0.58, 0.44, and <0.001, respectively).Conclusions: Nearly all cardiac surgical patients receive vasoactive medications during hospitalization; however, only one-third receive treatment on POD1, with significant variability by institution. Further research is needed to understand the causes of variability across hospitals and whether these differences are associated with outcomes.

National trends in repair for type B aortic dissection

Background

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) first gained in popularity for repair of type B aortic dissections (TBADs) in the early 2000's. We aimed to describe patients undergoing open repair, TEVAR, and no repair and analyze factors associated with repair within 14 days of presentation in the contemporary era.

Methods

We used the MarketScan database to find patients with TBAD between 2014 and 2017. To assess factors associated with early repair, univariable, and multivariable log‐binomial regression were used.

Results

There were 2613 patients admitted with TBAD between 2014 and 2017 across the United States, of whom 38.4% underwent repair within 14 days of admission (25.3% open repair and 13.1% TEVAR). The incidence of repair within 14 days decreased over the study period (43% of the study cohort in 2014 to 26.4% in 2017) primarily due to a decrease in open repairs from 30.8% of patients in 2014 to 12.5% in 2017. In multivariable analysis, older age, Middle Atlantic location, diabetes mellitus, insulin use, antiplatelet use, and more recent year were associated with lower likelihood of early repair; male sex, peripheral vascular disease, and the presence of extremity ischemia, rupture, shock, and acidosis were associated with higher likelihood of repair.

Conclusions

Overall, repair of TBAD within 14 days of presentation declined from 2014 to 2017, with a steady rate of TEVAR but declining rate of open repairs. Further investigation into provider‐ and hospital‐specific factors as they relate to likelihood of repair is needed.

Long-term survival after descending thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (dTAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) often have a variety of medical comorbidities. Those that are deemed acceptable for intervention undergo complicated repairs with good early outcomes. The purpose of this study was to identify variables that were associated with mortality over time.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database at our institution from 1983 to 2015. Patients were included if they underwent open or endovascular repair for dTAA or TAAA. Patients were excluded if they were intervened on for traumatic transections. The primary outcome for the study was long-term survival. Secondary outcomes included aortic-related mortality. We had mortality and survival data on all patients.

RESULTS

A total of 946 patients met our study criteria with a median follow-up of 102.8 months (interquartile range [IQR], 58.9-148.2 months). The median age of the cohort was 71 years (IQR, 63-77 years) with the majority of patients being male (58.1%). The extent of TAAA pathology was as follows: type I (14.2%), type II (21.2%), type III (17.1%), type IV (26.2%), and dTAA (21.2%). A total of 147 patients (15.5%) had a prior dissection. The median diameter of aneurysm was 6.4 cm (IQR, 6.0-7.0 cm). A total of 158 patients (16.7%) underwent endovascular repair over the study period. Variables associated with mortality over time were age, surgical era, acute pathology, dissection, preoperative creatinine, and type IV TAAAs. In addition, experiencing the following complications in the postoperative period was associated with mortality over time: neurological, cardiac, and pulmonary. Aortic-related mortality was 2.1% (n = 20) over the study period. Patients who underwent endovascular repair for acute conditions had better long-term survival when compared with open repair. However, there were no differences in long-term survival between open and endovascular repair for nonacute cases. In addition, repair in the more modern era was associated with improved survival.

CONCLUSIONS

TAAAs can be repaired with reasonable perioperative mortality rates. Once patients undergo repair of their aneurysm, aortic-related mortality remains low. The addition of endovascular options has dramatically changed management of patients with dTAA and TAAA. Further, endovascular repair was associated with decreased perioperative mortality and significantly increased long-term survival in acute patients. Patients undergoing TAAA repair are generally considered high risk and therefore require extensive long-term follow-up for management of their comorbidities and complications, because these are the main contributors to mortality over time.

Epidemiology of aortic dissection

Aortic dissection remains a highly morbid diagnosis. The treatment of aortic dissection has undergone several paradigm shifts since it was first understood. However, despite the robust research in treatment, the epidemiology of aortic dissection is limited. In this review, we discuss the historical perspectives of aortic dissection with a review of risk factors and presentation. We review the trends in incidence during the past 40 years, with consideration for sex, race, and ethnicity in admission. We further focus our discussion of the classically described Type B aortic dissection treatment. Lastly, we review the impact of long-term events, readmissions, cost assessments, and quality of life studies of patients with aortic dissection. Care for those with aortic dissection remains a long-term challenge for providers and a multispecialty approach is needed for complete patient management.

Conceptual Framework Development for a Double-Walled Aortic Stent-Graft to Manage Blood Pressure

A double-walled stent-graft (DWSG) design with a compressible gas layer was conceived with the goal of treating hypertension in patients receiving an aortic stent-graft. Early prototypes were developed to evaluate the design concept through static measurements from a finite element (FE) model and quasi-static inflation experiments, and through dynamic measurements from an in vitro flow loop and the three-element Windkessel model. The amount of gas in the gas layer and the properties of the flexible inner wall were the primary variables evaluated in this study. Properties of the inner wall had minimal effect on DWSG behavior, but increased gas charge led to increased fluid capacitance and larger reduction in peak and pulse pressures. In the flow loop, placement of the DWSG decreased pulse pressure by over 20% compared to a rigid stent-graft. Capacitance measurements were consistent across all methods, with the maximum capacitance estimated at 0.07 mL/mmHg for the largest gas charge in the 15 cm long prototype. Windkessel model predictions for in vivo performance of a DWSG placed in the aorta of a hypertensive patient showed pulse pressure reduction of 14% compared to a rigid stent-graft case, but pressures never returned to unstented values. These results indicate that the DWSG design has potential to be developed into a new treatment for hypertensive patients requiring an aortic intervention.

Incidence and characteristics of hospitalization for proximal aortic surgery for acute syndromes and for aneurysms in the USA from 2005 to 2014

OBJECTIVES

The effectiveness of proximal thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) surgery in preventing acute aortic syndromes, such as dissection and rupture, is unknown at the populational level. This study evaluated trends in acute aortic syndrome operation incidence relative to proximal aortic surgical volume in the USA.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the National Inpatient Sample in 2005-2014 was performed. Acute aortic syndrome and TAA were identified with International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition diagnosis codes. Proximal aortic surgery was defined as the diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome or TAA with an aortic procedure and either cardioplegia, cardiopulmonary bypass or other cardiac operation. Annual rates of acute aortic syndrome surgery and proximal thoracic aneurysm surgery were adjusted for US population. Trends were evaluated using linear regression.

RESULTS

We identified 38 442 operations for acute aortic diagnoses and 74 953 operations for TAAs. Case volume for acute aortic syndromes increased from 0.93 to 1.63 per 100 000 (P = 0.001), and aneurysm surgery increased from 1.75 to 3.19 per 100 000 (P < 0.001). Patient and hospital characteristics differed between acute aortic and aneurysm operations, with black patients being most notably underrepresented in the aneurysm population (4.9% vs 17.0%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Acute aortic syndrome operative volume increased from 2005 to 2014 despite increasing rates of proximal aortic aneurysm surgery. Patient characteristic discrepancies were observed between the 2 groups of hospitalizations, highlighting the need for continued efforts to minimize sociodemographic disparities.

Hospital Incidence and In-Hospital Mortality of Surgically and Interventionally Treated Aortic Dissections: Secondary Data Analysis of the Nationwide German Diagnosis-Related Group Statistics From 2006 to 2014

Background

Population‐based data about the incidence and mortality of patients with aortic dissections (ADs) are sparse. Therefore, the hospital incidence and in‐hospital mortality of patients undergoing open or endovascular surgery for type A ADs (TAADs) and type B ADs (TBADs) in Germany were analyzed on a nationwide basis between 2006 and 2014.

Methods and Results

A secondary data analysis of the nationwide diagnosis‐related group statistics, compiled by the German Federal Statistical Office, was performed for patients who were surgically/interventionally treated for AD (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, German Modification [ICD‐10‐GM] codes I71.00‐I71.07; n=20 533). By using specific procedure codes, a distinction between TAAD (n=14 911/72.6%) and TBAD (n=5622/27.4%) could be made. The standardized hospital incidence of surgically/interventionally treated AD was 2.7/100 000 per year, comprising 2.0/100 000 per year for TAAD and 0.7/100 000 per year for TBAD. The in‐hospital mortality of TAAD was 19.5%; and of TBAD, 9.3%. Both the incidence and in‐hospital mortality increased over the 9‐year period. The share of endovascularly treated TBAD increased steadily during the same time interval. A multilevel multivariable analysis revealed that, for TAAD, age and comorbidity were significantly associated with a higher mortality risk.

The latter was also true for TBAD. Sex was not significantly associated with mortality. A significant association between higher annual center volume and mortality was found for TAAD, but not for TBAD.

Conclusions

This is the first report on hospital incidence and mortality for surgically/interventionally treated AD on a nationwide basis. Overall, in Germany, hospital incidence and mortality of TAAD and TBAD increased over time. In addition, TAAD is performed more safely in high‐volume centers.

See Editorial Svensson

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair with true-false-true lumen deployment

Endovascular treatment of aortic dissection may be complicated by challenges to navigating the true lumen. In this report, we describe treatment of a type B dissection after open type A repair with aneurysmal degeneration, a short-segment occluded true lumen, and a distal re-entry tear near the celiac artery origin. Endovascular septal fenestration and subsequent thoracic endovascular aortic repair were used to bypass the short-segment midthoracic aortic occlusion, successfully excluding the thoracic aortic aneurysm. The patient was discharged without complications, and follow-up imaging demonstrated favorable aortic remodeling. The case demonstrates feasibility of an endovascular bypass of an intervening short-segment occluded true lumen using a thoracic endovascular aortic repair with true-false-true lumen deployment.

Impact of patient factors and procedure on readmission after aortic dissection admission in the states of Florida and New York

BACKGROUND

Readmissions after aortic dissection (AD) admission are not well described. Using state-based administrative claims data, we sought to define readmission rates after AD and to identify factors associated with them.

METHODS

State Inpatient Databases for Florida (2007-2012) and New York (2008-2012) were queried for AD index admissions. Admissions were stratified by initial treatment strategy: type A open surgery repair (TAOR), type B open surgery repair (TBOR), thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), or medical management (MM). All-cause readmission rates were calculated at 30 days, 90 days, and 2 years. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with readmission at each time point for all type A admissions (TAOR) or type B admissions (TBOR, TEVAR, MM).

RESULTS

We identified 4670 patients with an AD index admission. Treatment was with TAOR in 1031 (22%), TBOR in 761 (16%), TEVAR in 412 (9%), and MM in 2466 (53%). Patients were predominantly male (59.4%) and white (61.9%), with a median age of 66 years. Overall mortality during AD index admission was 14.8% (TAOR, 15.8%; TBOR, 17.1%; TEVAR, 9.0%; MM, 14.7%; P = .002 across all groups). All-cause readmission rates were similar across treatment groups at 30 days (9.6%-11%; P = .56), 90 days (15.2%-20%; P = .26), and 2 years (49.2%-54.4%; P = .15). Higher income quartile (vs lowest) was associated with lower odds of early readmission (at 30 days and 90 days) after type B admissions but not after type A admissions. At 2 years, self-pay (vs Medicare) was associated with lower odds of readmission in both type A and type B admissions, whereas higher comorbidity count and black race (vs white) were associated with higher odds of readmission. TEVAR (vs MM) was also associated with higher odds of readmission. Cardiovascular disease was the most common cause for readmission at all time points. Emergency department readmission counts were highest after MM admissions, and ambulatory surgical admissions were highest after TBOR. Both TEVAR and MM initial costs were lower than TAOR and TBOR costs, but at 2 years, costs remained significantly lower only for MM.

CONCLUSIONS

In-state 30-day, 90-day, and 2-year readmission rates after AD were not associated with initial treatment type. Two-year readmissions are common. Strategies to target socioeconomic, race, and geographic factors may reduce variations in readmission patterns after AD admission.

Readmissions after acute type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

Acute type B aortic dissection can be treated with medical management alone, open surgical repair, or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The nationwide burden of readmissions after acute type B aortic dissection has not been comprehensively assessed.

METHODS

We analyzed adults with a hospitalization due to acute type B aortic dissection between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2014, in the Nationwide Readmissions Database. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to identify hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis code for thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic dissection. The primary outcome was nonelective 90-day readmission. Predictors of readmission were determined using hierarchical logistic regression.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 6937 patients with unplanned admissions for type B aortic dissections from 2010 through 2014. Medical management alone was the treatment for 62.6% of patients, 21.0% had open surgical repair, and 16.4% underwent TEVAR. Nonelective 90-day readmission rate was 25.1% (23.6% with medical management alone, 26.9% with open repair, and 28.7% with TEVAR; P < .001). An additional 4.7% of patients were electively readmitted. The most common cause for nonelective readmission was new or recurrent arterial aneurysm or dissection (24.8%). Of those with unplanned readmissions, 5.2% underwent an aortic procedure. The mortality rate during nonelective readmission was 5.0%, and the mean cost of the rehospitalization was $22,572 ± $41,598.

CONCLUSIONS

More than one in four patients have a nonelective readmission 90 days after hospitalization for acute type B aortic dissection. Absolute rates of readmission varied by initial treatment received but were high irrespective of the initial treatment. The most common cause of readmission was aortic disease, particularly among those treated with medication alone. Further research is required to determine potential interventions to decrease these costly and morbid readmissions, including the role of multidisciplinary aortic teams.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus open chest surgical repair for patients with type B aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: This meta-analysis study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of TEVAR versus OCSR for TBAD patients.Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane library to identify studies compared the effectiveness of TEVAR and OCSR in TBAD patients from the inception up to July 2019. The summary results were calculated using a random-effects model.Results: The electronic search identified 1,894 studies, and 18 studies with 9,664 TBAD patients were included. We noted patients received TEVAR were associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital mortality, acute renal failure, respiratory failure, and bleeding as compared with OCSR, whereas no significant differences between groups for the risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, paraplegia, mesenteric ischaemia/infarction, reinterventions, sepsis, and spinal cord ischaemia.Conclusions: The findings of this meta-analysis study suggested that TEVAR resulted in more short-term survival benefits. Moreover, the reduced risk of acute renal failure, respiratory failure and bleeding was detected in TEVAR group. The treatment effects of TEVAR versus OCSR on specific complications should be further verified by a study with high-level of evidence.Key messageComprehensive collected studies investigated the treatment effectiveness between TEVAR and OCSR for TBAD patientsTEVAR resulted in more survival benefits, in addition to lower risk of acute renal failure, respiratory failure and bleedingThe results of stratified analyses according to patients' characteristics were conducted.

Volume-Outcome Relationships in Surgical and Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

As surgical mortality decreases and endovascular utilization increases, it is unknown whether volume-outcome relationships exist in thoracic aortic dissection repair. We characterized volume-outcome relationships for surgical and endovascular management of thoracic aortic dissection.

METHODS

Patients aged more than 18 years undergoing repair of thoracic aortic dissection in the United States between 2010 and 2014 were identified in seven all-payer state inpatient administrative databases. Patients were divided into groups based on type of repair: surgical repair of type A dissection (TAAD), surgical repair of type B dissection (TBAD), and endovascular repair (TEVAR). Hierarchical logistic regression models evaluated the association between hospital volume and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Overall in-hospital mortality rate was 13.4% (890 of 6650), highest after TAAD (463 of 2918, 15.9%), followed by TBAD (270 of 1934, 14.0%) and TEVAR (157 of 1798, 8.7%). Volume-outcome relationships for adjusted in-hospital mortality were demonstrated for TAAD and TBAD (P-trend < .001), but not TEVAR (P-trend = .11). Adjusted in-hospital mortality differed most for TAAD (fewer than 3 cases per year: 21%, 95% confidence interval, 18% to 24%; vs 11 or more cases per year: 12%, 95% confidence interval, 8% to 16%; P < .001) and TBAD (fewer than 2 cases per year: 18%, 95% confidence interval, 15% to 22%; vs 11 or more cases per year: 9%, 95% confidence interval, 5% to 12%; P < .001), whereas TEVAR did not differ between quartiles. Adjusted mortality was lower at centers with 26 or more overall annual thoracic dissection repairs, compared with any of the three lower-volume quartiles (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated lower mortality at high-volume hospitals for overall repair of aortic dissection, persisting separately for surgical repair of TAAD and TBAD, but not TEVAR. As endovascular technology advances and practice patterns consequently change, analyses should focus on understanding the balance between procedural volume, mortality, and access to care for thoracic aortic dissection.

Off pump hybrid extra-anatomic techniques for aortic arch repair-own experience

Background

Treatment of the aortic arch pathologies is technically challenging. In this study we assess early and late outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repairs that comprise extra-anatomic surgical procedures completed by thoracic endovascular interventions [thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR)].

Methods

Since 2007, 21 patients (8 women and 13 men) with a median age of 48 years have undergone hybrid procedures for aortic arch pathologies. All of them were treated without cardio-pulmonary bypass. All survivors were followed up regularly and imaging examination were performed. A technical success, procedural complications as well as the early and late mortality and morbidity rates were evaluated.

Results

All patients survived surgery and TEVAR was technically successful in all of them. However, 2 individuals died (in-hospital mortality rate 9.5%) during in-hospital stay, both due to multi-organ failure (MOF). Additionally, one patient developed symptoms of cerebral stroke, another one of spinal cord ischemia. During the follow-up that ranged from 6 to 118 months and was completed by 100% of the survivors, one patient died 3 years after procedure because of sepsis (aorto-oesophageal fistula prior to intervention) and late vascular graft occlusions were noted in three cases.

Conclusions

Hybrid procedures on the aortic arch that comprise surgical and endovascular interventions has become an attractive and safe therapeutic option with acceptable mortality and morbidity rate. They may be considered as a method of choice in treatment of the elderly and high-risk patients.

Reinterventions in the modern era of thoracic endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

Using a national data set, we sought to describe the population of patients and the nature and timing of reinterventions after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) by aortic disease as well as their impact on survival.

METHODS

We evaluated the national data set for TEVAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2010 to 2017. Student t-test and χ² analysis were used to compare continuous and categorical variables in the reintervention and no reintervention groups, respectively. Freedom from reintervention and survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

A total of 7006 patients were evaluated: 51.2% thoracic aortic aneurysm, 33.5% type B dissection (TBD), 7.0% penetrating aortic ulcer, 6.7% trauma, and 1.6% intramural hematoma. Overall, 553 patients (7.9%) underwent at least one reintervention, with an in-hospital reintervention rate of 3.5%. Reinterventions were most commonly performed for TBD (11.5%), with reinterventions for other diseases occurring at lower rates: thoracic aortic aneurysm, 6.7%; intramural hematoma, 5.4%; penetrating aortic ulcer, 4.8%; and trauma, 1.8%. The most common cause of reintervention across all aortic diseases was type I endoleak. The most common long-term reinterventions were placement of endovascular stent graft (65%), other surgical treatments (15.9%), other endovascular treatment (13%), endovascular branch treatment (12.4%), surgical treatment with no device removal (11.0%), and surgical branch treatment (10.4%). Freedom from reintervention was decreased for TBD compared with other diseases (P < .001). There was no difference in survival comparing patients undergoing reinterventions and those without (P = .87). However, patients undergoing in-hospital reintervention trended toward increased mortality (P = .075).

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas reinterventions were not rare after TEVAR, there was no difference in mortality between patients undergoing reintervention and those without. Patients undergoing TEVAR for TBD demonstrated the highest reintervention rate. This study highlights the importance of long-term follow-up to address disease-specific patterns of reintervention.