Examination of factors in type I endoleak development after thoracic endovascular repair

A computational study of artery curvature and endograft oversize influence on seal zone behavior in endovascular aortic repair

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a minimally invasive procedure involving the placement of an endograft inside the dissection or an aneurysm to direct blood flow and prevent rupture. A significant challenge in endovascular surgery is the geometrical mismatch between the endograft and the artery, which can lead to endoleak formation, a condition where blood leaks between the endograft and the vessel wall. This study uses computational modeling to investigate the effects of artery curvature and endograft oversizing, the selection of an endograft with a larger diameter than the artery, on endoleak creation. Finite element analysis is employed to simulate the deployment of endografts in arteries with varying curvature and diameter. Numerical simulations are conducted to assess the seal zone and to quantify the potential endoleak volume as a function of curvature and oversizing. A theoretical framework is developed to explain the mechanisms of endoleak formation along with proof-of-concept experiments. Two main mechanisms of endoleak creation are identified: local buckling due to diameter mismatch and global buckling due to centerline curvature mismatch. Local buckling, characterized by excess graft material buckling and wrinkle formation, increases with higher levels of oversizing, leading to a larger potential endoleak volume. Global buckling, where the endograft bends or deforms to conform to the centerline curvature of the artery, is observed to require a certain degree of oversizing to bridge the curvature mismatch. This study highlights the importance of considering both curvature and diameter mismatch in the design and clinical use of endografts. Understanding the mechanisms of endoleak formation can provide valuable insights for optimizing endograft design and surgical planning, leading to improved clinical outcomes in endovascular aortic procedures.

Complications of thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR): A pictorial review

Thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) has replaced open surgical repair as the treatment of choice for several aortic conditions. Despite its lower morbidity and mortality, several TEVAR-related complications can occur and some of which may necessitate surgical or endovascular re-intervention. The current article reviews common and rare complications of TEVAR procedure with emphasis on complications identifiable on cross-sectional imaging and potential pitfalls of pre-procedural planning.

Analysis of Postoperative Remodeling Characteristics after Modular Inner Branched Stent-Graft Treatment of Aortic Arch Pathologies Using Computational Fluid Dynamics

The modular inner branched stent-graft (MIBSG), a novel interventional therapy, has demonstrated good effects in the endovascular treatment of aortic arch pathologies, especially those involving the supra-aortic branches. Nevertheless, the long-term efficacy of the MIBSG and in-depth quantitative evaluation of postoperative outcomes remain to be examined. Moreover, the regularity of postoperative vascular remodeling induced by MIBSG implantation has yet to be explored. To address these questions, we constructed four models (normal, preoperative, 1 week postoperative, and 6 months postoperative) based on a single patient case to perform computational fluid dynamics simulations. The morphological and hemodynamic characteristics, including the velocity profile, flow rate distribution, and hemodynamic parameter distribution (wall shear stress and its derivative parameters), were investigated. After MIBSG implantation, the morphology of the supra-aortic branches changed significantly, and the branch point moved forward to the proximal ascending aorta. Moreover, the curvature radius of the aortic arch axis continued to change. These changes in morphology altered the characteristics of the flow field and wall shear stress distribution. As a result, the local forces exerted on the vessel wall by the blood led to vessel remodeling. This study provides insight into the vascular remodeling process after MIBSG implantation, which occurs as a result of the interplay between vascular morphological characteristics and blood flow characteristics.

Hybrid type II and frozen elephant trunk in acute Stanford type A aortic dissections

Objectives. Composite frozen elephant trunk is an increasingly popular solution for complex aortic pathologies. This review aims to compare outcomes of zone 0 type II hybrid (hybrid II) with the composite frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique in managing acute Stanford type A aortic dissections. Methods. PubMed and Embase were systematically searched using PRISMA protocol. 11 relevant studies describing the outcomes of hybrid II arch repair and FET techniques in patients with type A aortic dissection were included in the meta-analysis. The study focused on early post-operative 30-day outcomes analysing mortality, stroke, spinal cord injury, renal impairment requiring dialysis, bleeding and lung infection. Results. 1305 patients were included in the analysis - 343 receiving hybrid II repair and 962 treated with the FET. Meta-analysis of proportions showed Hybrid II was associated with less early mortality [5.0 (CI 3.1-7.8) vs 8.1 (CI 6.5-10.0) %], stroke [2.3 (CI 1.1-4.6) vs 7.0 (CI 5.5-8.8) %], spinal cord injury [2.0 (CI 0.9-4.3) vs 3.8 (CI 2.8-5.3) %], renal impairment requiring dialysis [7.9 (CI 5.5-11.2) vs 11.8 (CI 9.8-14.0) %], reoperation for bleeding [3.9 (CI 1.8-8.4) vs 10.6 (CI 8.1-13.8) %] and lung infection [14.8 (CI 10.8-20.0) vs 20.7 (CI 16.9-25.1) %]. Conclusion. Hybrid II should be considered in favour of FET technique in acute Stanford type A dissection patients who are at higher risk due to age and comorbidities.

Determination of Optimal and Safest Proximal Sealing Length During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE

To determine the optimal and safest proximal sealing length (PSL) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), depending on anatomical aortic arch types and proximal landing zones (LZs).

METHODS

This was a single centre retrospective observational study of consecutive TEVAR patients (2008-2020). All aortic pathologies requiring Ishimaru landing zone (LZ) 0 - 3 were included; results were stratified by aortic arch type. The PSL was measured as the length of complete aortic wall to endograft apposition at the level of the proximal neck. The primary endpoint was proximal failure (type 1A endoleak, endograft migration, or re-intervention requiring proximal graft extension). Freedom from proximal failure was estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves. An "optimal" sealing length (PSL cutoff maximising sensitivity + specificity for proximal failure) and "safest length" (PSL cutoff determining ≥ 90% sensitivity) were identified using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty patients received TEVAR; mean ± standard deviation PSL was 29 ± 9 mm. Freedom from proximal endograft failure at five years (median 31 months) was 82.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 72 - 95); the shorter the PSL, the greater was the risk of failure (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 - 0.97; p = .004). Overall optimal and safest PSL were 25 mm (sensitivity 78%, specificity 66%) and 30 mm (sensitivity 92%, specificity 30%), respectively. In type I arch, the optimal PSL was 22 mm (sensitivity 50%, specificity 87%). In type II, the optimal PSL was 25 mm (sensitivity 89%, specificity 59%) overall and 27 mm for type II/LZ 2 - 3 (sensitivity 31%, specificity 68%). For type III, the optimal PSL was 27 mm (sensitivity 80%, specificity 87%); the safest was 30 mm (sensitivity 100%, specificity 61%) In type III/LZ 2 - 3, the optimal PSL was 27 mm (sensitivity 31%, specificity 68%) and safest was 30 mm (sensitivity 100%, specificity 55%).

CONCLUSION

A 20 mm PSL may be acceptable only for type I arches. For types II/III, that represent the majority of cases, a 25 - 30 mm PSL may be required for a safe and durable TEVAR.

A Novel Vascular-Friendly Thoracic Stent Graft for Endovascular Repair of Acute Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel vascular-friendly thoracic stent graft for patients with acute complicated type B aortic dissection (ac-TBAD).

Methods: A multicenter retrospective study was undertaken in which we prospectively collected data in consecutive ac-TBAD patients treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with the Ankura Thoracic Stent. Complications, true lumen rate (TLR), and mortality were recorded. Follow-up computed tomography angiography (CTA) was performed at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and yearly thereafter.

Results: Altogether, 63 patients with ac-TBAD in four medical centers were included. No deaths or serious complications occurred during the perioperative period. The mean follow-up time was 30.1 ± 18.9 months. All-cause mortality rate was 3.1% (n = 2). TEVAR-related mortality rate was 1.6% (n = 1) because of retrograde type A dissection (RTAD) at 6 months. The other death was caused by acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the third postoperative month. A distal endoleak detected at 3 months in one patient (1.6%) was treated by reintervention. The use of this novel vascular-friendly thoracic stent graft in ac-TBAD postoperative patients significantly improved their TLR.

Conclusion: The novel vascular-friendly thoracic stent graft showed satisfactory results, with favorable stability of the aortic diameter during follow-up.

Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in thoracic aortic aneurysm and penetrating aortic ulcer using the Conformable Gore TAG within and outside the instructions for use

OBJECTIVE

To describe the outcome of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in thoracic aortic aneurysm and penetrating aortic ulcer with respect to instructions for use status.

METHODS

Between October 2009 and September 2017, a total of 532 patients underwent TEVAR; of which 195 have been treated using the Conformable GORE® TAG® thoracic endoprosthesis (CTAG). Fifty-six patients of this cohort underwent TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysm/penetrating aortic ulcer using the CTAG. Depending on the preoperative computed tomography angiography findings, patients were classified as inside or outside the device's instructions for use. All inside instruction for use patients underwent postoperative reclassification regarding the instructions for use status. Study endpoints included TEVAR-related reintervention, exclusion of the pathology (endoleak type I/III), TEVAR-related mortality, and graft-related serious adverse events. The median duration of follow-up was 29.7 months (range: 0-109.4 months).

RESULTS

Of the 56 patients, 17 were primarily classified as outside instruction for use, and in additional 13 patients, TEVAR was performed outside instruction for use, leading to 30 outside instruction for use patients (53.6%). Twenty-six patients (46.4%) were treated inside instruction for use. Reintervention-free survival was lower in outside instruction for use patients (P = 0.016) with a hazard ratio of 9.74 (confidence interval 1.2-80.2; P = 0.034) for TEVAR-related reintervention. With respect to endoleak type I/III, relevant difference was detected between inside/outside instruction for use status (P = 0.012). The serious adverse event rate was 30.4%, mainly in outside instruction for use patients (P = 0.004). Logistic regression analysis indicated an association between graft-related serious adverse event/instructions for use status (odds ratio 6.11; confidence interval 1.6-30.06; P = 0.012). In-hospital death was seen more frequently in outside instruction for use patients (P = 0.12) as was procedure-related death (log-rank test: P = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysm/penetrating aortic ulcer is frequently performed outside instruction for use despite preoperative inside instruction for use eligibility, leading to important consequences for technical/clinical outcome. Instructions for use adherence in TEVAR should be of interest for further large-scale studies.

Surgical Outcomes And Postoperative Descending Aorta Morphologic Remodeling After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair For Acute And Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection

Background

This study aims to investigate the descending aortic morphological alterations caused by pathological changes in acute and chronic Type B aortic dissection (TBAD) and morphological remodeling after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Patients and methods

From February 2012 to January 2016, 86 TBAD patients undergoing TEVAR were divided into an acute group (n=63) and a chronic group (n=23). The areas of the true, false and maximal lumen and descending aorta morphological parameters, including the taper ratio (TR), oversizing ratio (OR), mismatch ratio (MR), radius of curvature (RoC) and tortuosity index (TI), were evaluated. Follow-ups were performed postoperatively before discharge, at 1 and 6 months, and yearly thereafter.

Results

Before TEVAR, the TR (0.57 (0.49) vs 0.74 (0.60); P < 0.05), OR (2.75 ± 1.89 vs 3.96 ± 2.27; P < 0.05) and TI (1.22 (1.19) vs 1.41 ± 0.17; P < 0.05) were significantly higher in the chronic group than in the acute group. The TEVAR technical success rate was 100%. No differences were found in 30-day and >30-day mortality between the two groups. Pathology-specific devices, such as tapered stent grafts and distal bare stents, were used more frequently in the chronic group than in the acute group (47.8% vs 23.8%, P = 0.03; 43.5% vs 12.7%, P = 0.002, respectively). The OR and TI changes that occurred after TEVAR were significantly higher in the chronic group than in the acute group (1.80 ± 0.86 vs 2.98 ± 1.85, P = 0.028; 0.00 ± 0.09 vs 0.09 ± 0.10, P < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

TEVAR is a safe and effective therapy for acute and chronic TBAD. Compared to acute TBAD, chronic TBAD resulted in an adverse preoperative descending aorta morphology. Pathology-specific devices may be a feasible treatment option for endovascular repair of chronic TBAD. A larger series of cases with longer follow-up are needed to draw definitive conclusions.

A New Methodology to Determine Apposition, Dilatation, and Position of Endografts in the Descending Thoracic Aorta After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Purpose: To validate computed tomography angiography (CTA)–applied software to assess apposition, dilatation, and position of endografts in the proximal and distal landing zones after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of thoracic aortic aneurysm. Materials and Methods: Twenty-two patients (median age 75.5 years; 11 men) with a degenerative descending thoracic aortic aneurysm treated with TEVAR with at least one postoperative CTA were selected from a single center’s database. New CTA-applied software was used to determine the available apposition surface in the proximal and distal landing zones, apposition of the endograft fabric with the aortic wall, shortest apposition length, endograft inflow and outflow diameters, shortest distance between the left subclavian artery and the proximal endograft fabric, and shortest distance between the celiac trunk and the distal endograft fabric on each CTA. Interobserver variability for these parameters was assessed with the repeatability coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: Excellent interobserver agreement was found for all measurements. Interobserver variability of surface and shortest apposition length calculations was larger for the distal site compared with the proximal site, with a mean difference of 10% vs 2% of the mean available apposition surface, 12% vs 5% of the endograft apposition surface, and 16% vs 8% of the shortest apposition length, respectively. Inflow and outflow diameters of the endograft showed low variability, with a mean difference of 0.1 mm with 95% of the interobserver difference within 1.8 mm. Mean interobserver differences of the proximal and distal shortest fabric distances were 1.0 and 0.9 mm (both 2% of the mean lengths). Conclusion: Assessment of apposition, dilatation, and position of the proximal and distal parts of an endograft in the descending thoracic aorta is feasible after TEVAR with the new software. Interobserver agreement for all measured parameters was excellent for the proximal and distal landing zones. The new method allows detection of subtle changes during follow-up. However, a larger study is needed to quantify how parameters change over time in complicated and uncomplicated TEVAR cases and to define the real added value of the new methodology.

Midterm prognosis of type B aortic dissection with and without dissecting aneurysm of descending thoracic aorta after endovascular repair

Few studies support guidelines for the use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) to address type B aortic dissection (TBAD) coexisting with descending thoracic aortic dissection and aneurysm (dTADA). This cohort study investigated midterm outcomes of TBAD with dTADA (dTADA group, n = 31) and without dTADA (non-dTADA group, n = 98) after TEVAR. Compared with the non-dTADA group, the dTADA group exhibited higher incidences of type Ia endoleak (29.0% vs. 3.1%, P < 0.001) and reintervention (16.1% vs. 5.1%, P = 0.045). The completely thrombosed rate of the thoracic false lumen was significantly lower in the dTADA group than in the non-dTADA group (45.2% vs. 80.6%, P < 0.001). Although the two groups exhibited similar mortality rates, TBAD coexisting with no regressive dTADA after TEVAR was an independent predictor of mortality (HR: 15.52, 95% CI: 1.614-149.233, P = 0.018). Moreover, the change percentages of false lumen retraction and true lumen re-expansion in the dTADA group were significantly inferior to those of the non-dTADA group at levels of 4th, 6th, 8th and 10th thoracic vertebra throughout follow-up. In conclusion, in the presence of preexisting dTADA, the failure of the dTADA to regress after TEVAR is associated with lower survival and a higher risk of reintervention.

Risk Factors Associated With Reintervention After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Descending Aortic Pathologies

BACKGROUND:

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is associated with several short-term benefits, including reduced morbidity and mortality; however, the long-term durability of TEVAR and the need for secondary aortic reintervention remain unclear. We aimed to determine the adverse outcomes, including aortic reintervention, after TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissection.

METHODS:

Between October 2009 and July 2016, 130 patients underwent TEVAR at Kyungpook National University Hospital. We excluded 35 patients with traumatic injury and included the remaining 95 patients in our study after TEVAR. The patients included in this study were categorized into 2 groups (reintervention [R] and nonintervention [N] groups) according to the need for reintervention. The mean follow-up period for all 95 patients was 22.4 (20.6) months.

RESULTS:

The overall actuarial survival rates were 83.7% (4.1%) and 63.6% (8.8%) at 1 and 5 years, respectively. The rates of freedom from aortic reintervention after TEVAR were 94.0% (3.5%), 72.8% (8.2%), and 48.9% (10.5%) at 2, 3, and 5 years, respectively. The independent risk factors for aortic reintervention were endoleaks after TEVAR (odds ratio [OR] 6.13, P = .017), increase in aortic size by over 5% per year (OR 20.40, P = .001), and peripheral vascular occlusive disease (PVOD; OR 13.62, P = .007). Patients with preoperative hemoptysis tended to show a greater need for aortic reintervention ( P = .059). Increase in aortic size by over 5% per year and PVOD were the primary risk factors for endoleaks (OR 3.82, P = .013 and OR 4.37, P = .021, respectively).

CONCLUSION:

Survival after TEVAR for thoracic aortic pathologies was satisfactory in most of the patients chosen as candidates for the procedure. However, the occurrence of endoleaks, increase in aortic size by over 5% per year, and PVOD were the primary causes of aortic reintervention.

Explantation of a failed endovascular stent graft in a patient with a type B dissection

We report a patient who underwent insertion of an endovascular stent graft in the descending aorta for an aneurysmal type B dissection. The patient developed a proximal type I endoleak which required explantation of the graft and replacement of the descending aorta. Carotid artery cannulation was utilized for antegrade perfusion during the period of circulatory arrest.

Unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection: A 16-year single-center report

Background

Unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair mean additional stents implantation beyond the preoperative planning to achieve operation success. This study aimed to reveal the prevalence and consequences of unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection and explore the reasons, risk factors and solutions for unplanned stents.

Methods

Retrospectively analysis consecutive patients diagnosed as type B aortic dissection with initial tear originating distal from the left subclavian artery and underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair from September 1998 to June 2014 in our center.

Results

Under the criteria, this study enrolled 322 patients, with 83 (25.8%) patients in unplanned group. The incidence rate of unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection in each year demonstrates as a bimodal curve. The curve showed that, 2003 and, 2004 was the first and highest peak and 2007 was the second peak. There was no difference in five-year survival rate between planned and unplanned patients (log-rank test, p = 0.994). The unplanned group had higher hospitalization expenses (142,699.08 ± 78,446.75 yuan vs. 175,238.58 ± 34,838.01 yuan; p = 0.019), longer operation time (104.50 ± 93.24 min vs. 179.08 ± 142.47 min; p < 0.001) and hospitalization time (17.07 ± 16.62 d vs. 24.00 ± 15.34 d; p = 0.001). The reasons for unplanned stents were type Ia endoleak (46 patients, 55.4%), bird beak (25 patients, 30.1%), and inappropriate shaping of stent (9 patients, 10.8%). Asymptomatic aortic dissection patients had higher incidence of unplanned stents. Short proximal neck length (2.66 ± 0.59 mm vs. 2.50 ± 0.51 mm; p = 0.016), short stent coverage length (154.62 ± 41.12 mm vs. 133.60 ± 44.33 mm; p = 0.002), and large distal stent oversize (75.44±10.77% vs. 82.68±15.80%; p <0.001) were risk factors for unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Conclusion

There are some special risk factors and reasons for unplanned stents in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection. Knowing these can we reduce the utilization of unplanned stents with appropriate methods.

Comparison of thoracic endovascular aortic repair, open surgery and best medical treatment for type B aortic dissection: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Treatments of type B aortic dissection (TBAD) include thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), best medical treatment (BMT) and open surgery (OS). This meta-analysis was to compare these three strategies to evaluate which provides best outcomes.

METHODS

We searched clinical trials that compared treatment strategies for TBAD. The outcomes measures were 30-day/in-hospital mortality, long-term survival rate, paraplegia or paraparesis, renal failure, rupture, stroke, late re-intervention, late rupture and aneurismal dilatation/expansion.

RESULTS

Sixteen control trials covering 10,307 patients were evaluated. Meta-analysis showed that TEVAR provides preferable long-term survival rate (HR=0.71; 95% CI: 0.52-0.95), lower rate of late re-intervention (OR=0.33; 95% CI: 0.13-0.85), late rupture (OR=0.21; 95% CI: 0.10-0.43) and late aneurismal dilatation/expansion (OR=0.15; 95% CI: 0.04-0.63) compared with BMT. However, TEVAR seemed to be associated with higher stroke rate than BMT (OR=1.65; 95% CI: 1.21-2.23). 30-day/in-hospital mortality appeared to be lower in TEVAR (OR=0.49; 95% CI: 0.29-0.81) when compared with OS. In addition, OS induced higher 30-day/in-hospital mortality compared with BMT (OR=3.95, 95% CI: 1.56-10.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that TEVAR may be favorable in long-term outcomes and effectively provide morphologic advantages compared to BMT. However, there is a need for prophylactic measures against stroke in TEVAR. OS seems to be inferior to TEVAR both in short-term and long-term outcomes. Further studies especially randomized clinical trials are needed to comprehensively compare the efficacy between TEVAR and BMT.

Complications and Perioperative Management of Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Endovascular treatments have become increasingly common for patients with a variety of thoracic aortic pathologies. Although considered less invasive than traditional open surgical approaches, they are nonetheless complex procedures. Patients undergo manipulation of an often calcified aorta near the origin of the carotid and subclavian vessels and have stents placed in a curved vessel adjacent to a perpetually beating heart. These stents can obstruct blood flow to the spinal cord, induce an inflammatory response, and in rare cases erode into the adjacent trachea or esophagus. Renal complications range from contrast-induced nephropathy to hypotension and ischemia to dissection. Emboli can lead to strokes and mesenteric ischemia. These patients have complex medical histories, and skilled perioperative management is critical to achieving the best clinical outcomes. Here, we review the medical management of the most common complications in these patients including stroke, spinal cord ischemia, renal injury, retrograde dissections, aortoesophageal and aortobronchial fistulas, postimplantation syndrome, mesenteric ischemia, and endograft failure.

Hybrid Arch Frozen Elephant Trunk for Persistent Endoleak After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Aneurysms of the distal aortic arch and proximal descending thoracic aorta remain challenging to treat. Whereas thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with arch debranching has provided a more minimally invasive option for patients with such aneurysms, recurrent type Ia endoleaks can be difficult or impossible to treat with further endovascular intervention. We report the successful use of a hybrid arch and frozen elephant trunk graft for the treatment of a patient with a recurrent type Ia endoleak after TEVAR and arch debranching.

Comparison of Total Arch and Partial Arch Transposition During Hybrid Endovascular Repair for Aortic Arch Disease

OBJECTIVE

Total arch transposition (TAT) during hybrid endovascular repair for aortic arch disease is believed to allow a better landing zone, but also to be associated with higher peri-operative mortality than partial arch transposition (PAT). Information on this issue is limited.

METHOD

This study was a retrospective analysis. All 53 consecutive patients with aortic arch disease (41 males, mean age 65.0 years) who underwent hybrid endovascular repair with TAT (zone 0, n=20) or PAT (zone 1 or 2, n=33) from 2008 to 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. The peri-operative and late outcomes of these two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics, including EuroSCORE II results, were similar in the two groups. After procedures, peri-operative mortalities and stroke rates were similar in the two groups (5.0% vs. 9.1%, p=1.000, and 10.0% vs. 6.1%, p=.627). Interestingly, all four strokes occurred in patients with a type III aortic arch irrespective of transposition type. Primary success rates (80.0% vs. 69.7%, p=.527) and type I endoleak incidences (20.0% vs. 27.3%, p=.744) were not significantly different. During follow up (mean duration 36.9 months), overall survival (89.7% vs. 87.4% at 1 year and 89.7% vs. 79.3% at 3 years; p=.375) and re-intervention free survival rates (78.6% vs. 92.0% at 1 year; 72.0% vs. 62.2% at 3 years, p=.872) were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Morbidity and mortality were high within the first year of hybrid endovascular therapy for aortic arch disease, implying that candidates for hybrid procedures need to be selected carefully. Hybrid endovascular repair with TAT was found to have peri-operative mortality, stroke, and long-term survival rates comparable with PAT, so hybrid endovascular repair may be considered, irrespective of type of arch reconstruction, when clinically indicated.

Long-Term Experience of Endovascular Repair for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms and Dissections

Purpose:

To report the long-term results of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in both elective and emergency cases of thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) and type B dissection.

Material and Methods:

A prospective single-center study of 78 TEVAR patients treated between February 1998 and February 2013. Stent-graft implantation was performed in 51 (65%) patients for TAA (43 elective and 8 emergency cases) and in 27 (35%) patients for type B dissection (11 elective and 16 emergency cases). Short- and long-term results were evaluated, and a subgroup of patients with left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage was also analyzed.

Results:

The patients were followed for a mean of 55 months (1-160 months). The technical success rate was 81% and 30-day mortality 6.4% (n = 5). The stroke rate was 7.7% (n = 6) and permanent paraparesis 2.6% ( n = 2). In follow-up, there were 28 (36%) primary (15 type I and 13 type II) and 10 secondary endoleaks (8 type I and 2 type II). Multivariate analysis showed no significant predictive factors for developing a type I endoleak. Secondary interventions were required in 24% of the patients. There was 1 late thoracic aortic rupture and 1 late conversion (1.3%). Patients with LSA coverage had a higher incidence of stroke (12.5% vs 4.3%, P = .18) and paraparesis (3.1% vs 2.2%, P = .79) compared to those without LSA coverage, although this difference was not statistically significant. Stroke rates were significantly higher in patients treated in an emergency setting ( P = .048).

Conclusion:

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair is a relatively safe and effective therapy for different aortic pathologies with good long-term success. The risk of stroke and paraparesis is notable whether the LSA is covered, and strokes clearly accumulate in the emergency setting. A type I endoleak is the most common complication, but there are no predictive factors for its development.

Biomechanical Changes After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Type B Dissection

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has evolved into an established treatment option for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) since it was first introduced 2 decades ago. Morbidity and mortality have decreased due to the minimally invasive character of TEVAR, with adequate stabilization of the dissection, restoration of true lumen perfusion, and subsequent positive aortic remodeling. However, several studies have reported severe setbacks of this technique. Indeed, little is known about the biomechanical behavior of implanted thoracic stent-grafts and the impact on the vascular system. This study sought to systematically review the performance and behavior of implanted thoracic stent-grafts and related biomechanical aortic changes in TBAD patients in order to update current knowledge and future perspectives.