Outcomes in the emergency endovascular repair of blunt thoracic aortic injuries

A Novel Technique for Thoracic Endovascular Graft Explantation

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) explantation remains a challenge due to endovascular graft ingrowth into the aortic wall with time. Surgical access into the aortic arch can be difficult either via sternotomy or thoracotomy, and proximal barbs become engaged firmly into the aortic wall. Explantation often requires extensive thoracic aortic resection, sometimes from the distal aortic arch to the abdominal aorta, followed by reconstruction, risking injury to surrounding neurovascular structures and even death. In cases of blunt thoracic aortic injury, the original injury is often healed, and failed TEVAR could theoretically be removed when thrombotic complications occur. We present a novel technique to facilitate TEVAR recapture with limited distal thoracic aorta replacement.

Physician-Modified Stent Graft for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injuries: Do the Benefits Worth the Trouble?

BACKGROUND

Obtaining a suitable proximal landing zone in blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAI) often necessitates coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA). This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of physician-modified endovascular grafts (PMEGs) in this indication.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective registry including all patients who had undergone a thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for BTAI from October 2008 to October 2020. Starting in 2015, patients requiring coverage of the LSA were either treated using a physician-modified proximal scalloped or single-fenestrated stent graft. After an early postoperative computed tomography scan, follow-up was performed at 3 months, 6-months, and yearly.

RESULTS

Among 58 patients treated with TEVAR for BTAI, 23 (39.6%) patients required a zone 2 landing zone of which 10 (17.2%) patients were treated with PMEGs. The median age was 48 [31-64.5] years, and 78.2% (n = 18) patients were male. The median Injury Severity Score was 38 [27-55.5]. Coverage of the LSA was performed in 25.8% (n = 15) of the total population in which 5 patients had an LSA transposition. The median modification time was 18 [14-27] minutes. Technical success of PMEGs was 90.0% overall and 100% for fenestrated stent grafts. No stroke, paraplegia, or retrograde dissection was observed. The primary patency of the LSA in the PMEGs group was 90 % at 1 year and 28.8 % in the LSA coverage group (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of PMEGs is feasible and effective in the management of BTAI with a short proximal landing zone. Further evaluation of long-term outcomes and durability are awaited.

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.

Blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injuries: a retrospective cohort analysis of 2 decades of experience

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyse and report the changes in the management of blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAIs) in a single centre during the last 2 decades.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with BTAI from January 1999 to January 2020 was performed. Data were collected from electronic/digitalized medical history records.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients were included [median age 42.4 years (16-84 years), 71.7% males]. The predominant cause of BTAI was car accidents (54.5%, n = 24) and all patients presented with concomitant injuries (93% bone fractures, 77.8% abdominal and 62.2% pelvic injuries). Over 70% presented grade III or IV BTAI. Urgent repair was performed in 73.8% of patients (n = 31), with a median of 2.75 h between admission and repair. Thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) was performed in 87% (n = 49), open surgery (OS) in 10.9% (n = 5) and conservative management in 2.1% (n = 1). Technical success was 82.6% (92.1% TEVAR, 79% OS). In-hospital mortality was 19.5% (17.5% TEVAR, 40% OS). Of these, 3 died from aortic-related causes. Seven (15.2%) required an early vascular reintervention. The median follow-up was 34 months (1-220 months), with 19% of early survivors having a follow-up of >10 years. Only 1 vascular reintervention was necessary during follow-up: secondary TEVAR due to acute graft thrombosis. Of the patients who survived the initial event, 6.7% died during follow-up, none from aortic-related causes.

CONCLUSIONS

Even with all the described shortcomings, in our experience TEVAR for BTAI proved to be feasible and effective, with few complications and stable aortic reconstruction at mid-term follow-up. With the current technical expertise and wide availability of a variety of devices, it should be pursued as a first-line therapy in these challenging scenarios.

Use of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Patients with Concomitant Blunt Aortic and Traumatic Brain Injury

BACKGROUND

Blunt aortic injury (BAI) and traumatic brain injury (TBI) represent the 2 leading causes of death after blunt trauma. The goal of this study was to examine the impact of TBI and use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) on patients with BAI, using a large, national dataset.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients with BAI were identified from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) database over 10 years, ending in 2016. Patients with BAI were stratified by the presence of concomitant TBI and compared. Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of mortality in BAI patients with and without TBI. Youden's index was used to identify the optimal time to TEVAR in these patients.

RESULTS

17,040 patients with BAI were identified, with 4,748 (28%) having a TBI. Patients with BAI and TBI were predominantly male, with a higher injury burden and greater severity of shock at presentation, underwent fewer TEVAR procedures, and had increased mortality compared with BAI patients without TBI. The optimal time for TEVAR was 9 hours. Mortality was significantly increased in patients undergoing TEVAR before 9 hours (12.9% vs 6.5%, p = 0.003). For BAI patients with and without TBI, MLR identified use of TEVAR as the only modifiable risk factor significantly associated with reduced mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.41; 95%CI 0.32-0.54, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

TBI significantly increases mortality in BAI patients. TEVAR and delayed repair both significantly reduced mortality. So, for patients with both BAI and TBI, an endovascular repair performed in a delayed fashion should be the preferred approach.

Endovascular repair of traumatic aortic isthmic rupture: Early and mid-term results

INTRODUCTION

Conventional open repair of a traumatic aortic isthmic rupture is associated with a significantly high mortality and morbidity rates. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is currently often performed because it is a less invasive treatment than surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate short and mid-term results of TEVAR in traumatic aortic isthmic rupture.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study conducted between 2010 and 2018 including patients who underwent TEVAR for traumatic aortic isthmic rupture.

RESULTS

Thirty-six consecutive patients were included. All patients had sustained a violent blunt chest trauma after a sudden deceleration with associated injuries. The injury severity score (ISS) was 40 (14-66). All patients were hemodynamically stable at admission. We deployed thoracic aorta stent grafts with a mean diameter of 26mm (18-36). The procedural success rate was 100%. We reported one intra-operative complication which was a distal migration of the graft, managed by an implantation of an aortic extension graft. On the first postoperative day, one patient presented an acute lower limb ischemia, probably due to the surgical femoral access, treated with an embolectomy with a Fogarty catheter with satisfactory results. The mean follow-up was 40.41 months (6.5-96). The mortality and paraplegia rates were 0% at one month and during the follow-up period. We reported a case of kinking of the graft that occurred at 6 months. No cases of endoleak neither re-intervention were reported.

CONCLUSION

TEVAR is a safe and a reliable method for the treatment of sub-acute traumatic thoracic aortic injuries.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

A systematic review and meta-regression analysis of nonoperative management of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury in 2897 patients

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair has transformed the management of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injuries (BTTAI). Recent studies have suggested that the nonoperative management (NOM) of BTTAI may be a viable alternative. We investigated the NOM of BTTAI by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of the mortality proportions and incidence of complications.

METHODS

We searched PubMed through June 22, 2017, and referenced lists of included studies without language restriction, with the assistance of a trained librarian. We included studies that reported the NOM of BTTAI (≥5 participants). Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and performed data extraction. Pooled prevalence of mortality (aortic related, in hospital) were obtained based on binomial distribution with Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation and continuity correction. The random-effects model was used for all analyses to account for variation between studies. Meta-regression was performed to explore sources of heterogeneity, including Injury Severity Score, age, and gender.

RESULTS

We included 35 studies comprising 2897 participants. The pooled prevalence of all-cause in-patient mortality in the overall, grade I, grade II, grade III, and grade IV populations are as follows: 29.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.3%-39.6%; I² = 95%; P < .01), 6.8% (95% CI, 0.6%-19.3%; I² = 52%; P = .03), 0% (95% CI, 0%-2.0%; I² = 0%; P = .81), 29.2% (95% CI, 17%-42.5%; I² = 3%; P = .41), and 87.4% (95% CI, 16.4%-100%; I² = 48%; P = .14), respectively. The combined incidence of aortic-related in-patient mortality in the overall, grade I, grade II, and grade III populations are: 2.4% (95% CI, 0.4%-5.5%; I² = 60%; P < .01), 0.93% (95% CI, 0%-14.2%; I² = 65%; P < .01), 0% (95% CI, 0%-1.8%; I² = 0%; P = .99), and 0.13% (95% CI, 0%-6.4%; I² = 14%; P = .33), respectively. The total proportion of postdischarge aortic-related mortality is 0% (95% CI, 0%-0.5%; I² = 0%; P = .91). Meta-regression showed a decreased risk of in-hospital mortality as age increases (β = .99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00), an increased risk of in-hospital mortality with a higher Injury Severity Score (β = 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04), and a decreased risk of in-hospital mortality among male patients (β = .54; 95% CI, 0.3-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides, to our knowledge, the most up-to-date pooled estimate of mortality rates after the NOM of BTTAI. However, its interpretation is limited by the paucity of data and substantial quantitative heterogeneity. If patients are to be managed nonoperatively, we would recommend the judicious use of active surveillance in a select group of patients in the short, mid, and long term.

Urgent retrograde two-stage hybrid repair of a complicated blunt traumatic aortic injury

Blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI) is a rare but life-threatening emergency that is usually caused by sudden acceleration/deceleration injuries in vehicular accidents. We describe our initial experience of a retrograde two-stage hybrid treatment approach for the emergent management of a 63-year-old motorcyclist who presented with a complicated BTAI with malperfusion syndrome. To our best knowledge, this uncommon BTAI case with fatal distal malperfusion saved by an urgent retrograde two-stage hybrid procedure has been reported rarely. This early reperfusion strategy with two-stage retrograde endovascular technique could be an effective and life-saving treatment option for polytrauma patients with suitable aortic anatomy.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The effect of TEVAR for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury on maximal aortic diameter: Mid- and long-term outcome

Objective

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the standard of care for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI). Long-term effects of TEVAR on the aortic diameter are not well studied. This study evaluates the effect of TEVAR for BTAI on the aortic diameter in mid- and long-term follow-up.

Methods

All patients treated with TEVAR for BTAI between August 2000 and May 2016 were included. Maximum aortic diameter was measured at four predetermined thoracic aortic levels in the preoperative and first postoperative CT angiography (CTa) and in the last control CTa or MR angiography: 1 cm proximal (D1) and 1 cm distal to the left subclavian artery (D2), 3 cm distal to the left subclavian artery (D3) and 3 cm proximal to the celiac trunk (D4).

Results

A total of 27 patients (20 men, mean age 40 years (±17.55) were included. Mean follow-up time was 90 months (±48.36)). No re-interventions were needed. Mean growth of aortic diameter at level D1, D2, D3 and D4 was 0.22 mm ± 3.66, 1.79 mm ± 3.82, 0.73 mm ± 4.18 and –1.06 mm ± 2.82, respectively, when comparing last follow-up to the preoperative imaging without any statistical significant differences. When comparing the preoperative diameter with the first postoperative CT, only a statistical significant growth of 2.81 mm ± 2.69 was seen at level of D2 ( p < 0.05)

Conclusion

During mid- to long-term follow-up, a temporary significant increase of the maximum aortic diameter was seen at level D2 in the direct postoperative phase This increase was not associated with clinical events and suggests long-term efficacy of TEVAR after BTAI.

Is endovascular repair the first choice for all blunt aortic injury? A real-world assessment

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) represents an infrequently encountered but lethal traumatic injury. Minimal aortic injuries are appropriately treated by medical management, while more severe injuries require endovascular or open repair. Rapidly evolving endovascular technology has largely supplanted open repair as first line operative intervention, however, the complexity of the severely injured blunt trauma patient can complicate management decisions. The development and implementation of an optimal consensus grading system and treatment algorithm for the management of BTAI is necessary and will require multi-institutional study.

Chimney parallel grafts and thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injuries: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Whilst the management of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury has seen a paradigm shift to an 'endovascular first' approach, the limitations of thoracic endovascular aortic repair remain. An inadequate proximal landing zone limits the use of thoracic aortic stent grafts and in an emergent polytrauma setting, aortic arch debranching via open surgery may not be practical or feasible. A wholly endovascular approach to debranching utilising 'off-the-shelf' stents and parallel graft techniques may represent a possible solution. Hence, we sought to perform a systematic review investigating the use of chimney graft techniques alongside thoracic aortic stenting in blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury.

METHODS

We performed the systematic review in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Searches were performed on Medline (PubMed), Web of Science and Scopus to identify articles describing the use of chimney grafts in traumatic aortic transection (PROSPERO: CRD42017082549).

RESULTS

The systematic search revealed 172 papers, of which 88 duplicates were removed resulting in 84 papers to screen. Based on title, abstract and full text review, six articles were included for final analysis. There were nine patients in total with an average age of 41 (three females, five males, one unspecified), all with significant polytrauma, secondary to the mechanism of injury. A variety of stents were used between centres, with techniques showing a predominance to stenting of the left subclavian artery (77%, n = 7). The technical success rate was 82%, with two (18%) cases of type 1 endoleaks, of which one resolved spontaneously.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the encouraging results, this by no means provides for a firm conclusion given the small sample size. Patients should still be judiciously selected on a case-by-case basis when employing the chimney graft technique. Larger cohort studies are needed to establish these findings.

Endovascular Repair of Traumatic Isthmic Ruptures: Special Concerns

Injury of the aortic isthmus is the second most frequent cause of death in cases of blunt traumatic injury. Conventional open repair is related to significant morbidity and mortality. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has increasing role in traumatic isthmic rupture, as it avoids the thoracotomy-related morbidity, aortic cross clamping, and cardiopulmonary bypass. Additionally to the technical difficulties of open repair, multi-trauma patients may not tolerate the manipulations necessary to undergo open surgery, due to concomitant injuries. TEVAR is a procedure easier to perform compared to open surgery, despite that a considerable degree of expertise is necessary. Direct comparison of the two methods is difficult, but TEVAR appears to offer better results than open repair in terms of mortality, incidence of spinal cord ischemia, renal insufficiency, and graft infection. TEVAR is related to a-statistically not significant-trend for higher re-intervention rates during the follow-up period. Current guidelines support TEVAR as a first-line repair method for traumatic isthmic rupture. Certain specific considerations related to TEVAR, such as the timing of the procedure, the type and oversizing of the endograft, heparinization during the procedure, the necessity of cerebrospinal fluid drainage, type of anesthesia, and the necessary follow-up strategy remain to be clarified. TEVAR should be considered advantageous compared to open surgery, but future developments in endovascular materials, along with accumulating long-term clinical data, will eventually improve TEVAR results in traumatic aortic isthmic rupture (TAIR) cases. This publication reviews the role, outcomes, and relevant issues linked to TEVAR in the repair of TAIR.

Endovascular treatment of traumatic thoracic aortic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

To provide an overview of the experience of endovascular treatment for traumatic thoracic aortic lesions (TTAL). Thoracic aortic injury secondary to high-energy chest trauma constitutes an emergency situation with potentially devastating outcome. In the present time, the majority of patients are treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair. The aim of this study was to provide a systematic overview of endovascular aortic repair in patients with TTAL with special attention to perioperative mortality, paraplegia, stroke, influence of left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage herein, and long-term stent-related complications.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed and Embase were searched for studies describing endovascular treatment of TTAL in the period between January 1st, 2000 and January 30th, 2016. The methodological quality of articles was assessed using the MINORS score and PRISMA guidelines. Data on early mortality, perioperative complications, and long-term stent-related complications were extracted.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 2005 reports were screened, and 74 publications were finally included in the analysis describing treatment of 1882 patients. Early mortality rate, paraplegia rate, and stroke rate were 7.5%, 0.4%, and 1.5%, respectively. LSA coverage did not increase the risk of stroke. The severity of injuries had a positive association on early mortality. Late stent related mortality and morbidity were uncommon.

CONCLUSIONS

TTAL can be treated endovascularly with low mortality and (neurological) morbidity. LSA coverage does not increase the risk of neurological complications but is associated with a moderate risk of left arm ischemia. Long-term stent-related complications are rare, but the available data is limited.

National trends in utilization and outcome of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for traumatic thoracic aortic injuries

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of traumatic thoracic aortic injuries (TTAI) is an alternative to conventional open surgical repair. Single-institution studies have shown a survival benefit with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), but whether this is being realized nationally is not clear. The purpose of our study was to document trends in the increase in use of TEVAR and its effect on outcomes of TTAI nationally.

METHODS

Patients admitted with a TTAI between 2005 and 2011 were identified in the National Inpatient Sample. Patients were grouped by treatment into TEVAR, open repair, or nonoperative management. Primary outcomes were relative use over time and in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality.

RESULTS

Included were 8384 patients, with 2492 (29.7%) undergoing TEVAR, 848 (10.1%) open repair, and 5044 (60.2%) managed nonoperatively. TEVAR became the dominant treatment option for TTAI during the study period, starting at 6.5% of interventions in 2005 and accounting for 86.5% of interventions in 2011 (P < .001). Nonoperative management declined concurrently with the widespread of adoption TEVAR (79.8% to 53.7%; P < .001). In-hospital mortality after TEVAR decreased during the study period from 33.3% in 2005 to 4.9% in 2011 (P < .001), and an increase in mortality was observed for open repair from 13.9% to 19.2% (P < .001). Procedural mortality (TEVAR or open repair) decreased from 14.9% to 6.7% (P < .001), and mortality after any TTAI admission declined from 24.5% to 13.3% during the study period (P < .001). In addition to lower mortality, TEVAR was followed by fewer cardiac complications (4.1% vs 8.5%; P < .001), respiratory complications (47.5% vs 54.8%; P < .001), and shorter length of stay (18.4 vs 20.2 days; P = .012) compared with open repair. In adjusted mortality analyses, open repair proved to be associated with twice the mortality risk compared with TEVAR (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-2.7), and nonoperative management was associated with more than a fourfold increase in mortality (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 3.8-5.3).

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR is now the dominant surgical approach in TTAI, with substantial perioperative morbidity and mortality benefits over open aortic repair. Overall mortality after admission for TTAI has declined, which is most likely the result of the replacement of open repair by TEVAR as well as the broadened eligibility for operative repair.

Blunt aortic injury: risk factors and impact of surgical approaches

PURPOSE

This study reviews our 17-year experience of managing blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI).

METHODS

We analyzed information collected retrospectively from a tertiary trauma center.

RESULTS

Between October 1995 and June 2012, 88 patients (74 male and 14 female) with a mean age of 39.9 ± 17.9 years (range 15-79 years) with proven BTAI were enrolled in this study. Their GCS, ISS, and RTS scores were 12.9 ± 3.7, 29.2 ± 9.8, and 6.9 ± 1.4, respectively. Twenty-one (23.8 %) patients were managed non-operatively, 49 (55.7 %) with open surgical repair, and 18 (20.5 %) with endovascular repair. The in-hospital mortality rate was 17.1 % (15/81) and there were no deaths in the endovascular repair group. The mean follow-up period was 39.9 ± 44.2 months. The survivors of blunt aortic injury had lower ISS, RTS, TRISS, and serum creatinine level and lower rate of massive blood transfusion, shock, and intubation than the patients who died, despite higher rates of endovascular repair, hemoglobin, and GCS on presentation. The degree of aortic injury, different therapeutic options, GCS, shock presentation, and intubation on arrival all had significant impacts on outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Shock, aortic injury severity, coexisting trauma severity, and different surgical approaches impact survival. Endovascular repair achieves a superior mid-term result and is a reasonable option for treating BTAI.

Case report of an endovascular repair of a residual type A dissection using a not CE not FDA-approved Najuta thoracic stent graft system

This report describes an endovascular repair of a residual type A dissection using a medical device that is not marked by european conformity (CE) or Food and Drug Administration (FDA).The patient underwent ascending aortic surgery for acute type A dissection. The 2-year angio-computed tomography demonstrated patency of the residual false lumen with evolution into a 6 cm aneurysm, the extension of the dissection from the aortic arch to the aortic bifurcation with thrombosis of the right common iliac artery. There was no CE- or FDA-marked medical device indicated for this case or any other acceptable therapeutic alternative.We used the Najuta thoracic stent graft and successfully handled the pathology in a multiple-phase treatment.Technology is evolving with specific grafts for the ascending and fenestrated grafts for the aortic arch. In this single case the Najuta endograft, in spite of the periprocedural problems, was a valid therapeutic option.