Evolution of lesion-specific management of blunt thoracic aortic injury

Using machine learning to predict outcomes of patients with blunt traumatic aortic injuries

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) remains controversial, with experienced centers offering therapy ranging from medical management to TEVAR. We investigated the utility of a machine learning (ML) algorithm to develop a prognostic model of risk factors on mortality in patients with BTAI.

METHODS

The Aortic Trauma Foundation registry was utilized to examine demographics, injury characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with BTAI. A STREAMLINE (A Simple, Transparent, End-To-End Automated Machine Learning Pipeline Facilitating Data Analysis and Algorithm Comparison) model as well as logistic regression (LR) analysis with imputation using chained equations was developed and compared.

RESULTS

From a total of 1018 patients in the registry, 702 patients were included in the final analysis. Of the 258 (37%) patients who were medically managed, 44 (17%) died during admission, 14 (5.4%) of which were aortic related deaths. Four hundred forty-four (63%) patients underwent TEVAR and 343 of which underwent TEVAR within 24 hours of admission. Among TEVAR patients, 39 (8.8%) patients died and 7 (1.6%) had aortic related deaths ( Table 1 ). Comparison of the STREAMLINE and LR model showed no significant difference in ROC curves and high AUCs of 0.869 (95% confidence interval, 0.813-0.925) and 0.840 (95% confidence interval, 0.779-0.900) respectively in predicting in-hospital mortality. Unexpectedly, however, the variables prioritized in each model differed between models. The top 3 variables identified from the LR model were similar to that from existing literature. The STREAMLINE model, however, prioritized location of the injury along the lesser curve, age and aortic injury grade.

CONCLUSION

Machine learning provides insight on prioritization of variables not typically identified in standard multivariable logistic regression. Further investigation and validation in other aortic injury cohorts are needed to delineate the utility of ML models.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

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.

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.

Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury and Contemporary Management Strategy

Thoracic aortic injury (TAI) is a leading cause of death in blunt chest trauma. Motor vehicle collisions are the commonest cause, and most patients die before receiving medical attention. Survivors who make it to the hospital also typically have other debilitating injuries with high morbidity. It is imperative to understand the nature of these injuries and implement current management strategies to improve patient outcomes. A literature review on contemporary management strategies on blunt thoracic aortic injuries was performed to evaluate the available evidence using online databases (PubMed and Google Scholar). We found that there has been an improved survival owing to the current advancement in diagnostic modalities, the use of contrast-enhanced computed tomography angiography, and contemporary management techniques with an endovascular approach. However, careful assessment of patients and a multidisciplinary effort are necessary to establish an accurate diagnosis. Minimal aortic injuries (intimal tear and aortic hematoma) can be managed medically with careful monitoring of disease progression with imaging. Endovascular approaches and delayed intervention are key strategies for optimal management of high-grade TAI.

Thoracic Trauma: Aortic Injuries

Thoracic aortic injuries caused by high impact trauma are life-threatening and require emergent diagnosis and management. With improvement in the acute care services, an increasing number of such injuries are being managed such that patients survive to undergo definitive therapies. A high index of clinical suspicion is required to order appropriate imaging. Computed tomography angiography is used to classify the injuries and guide treatment strategy. While low-grade injuries might be managed conservatively, high-grade injuries require urgent surgical or endovascular intervention. Over the past decade, endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta with or without a surgical bypass has become the preferred treatment with reduced mortality and morbidity. Rapid advancements in the stent graft technology have reduced the anatomic barriers to endovascular therapy and increased the confidence of the operators. Detailed planning prior to the procedure, understanding of the anatomy, correct choice of hardware, and adherence to technical protocol are essential for a successful endovascular procedure. These patients are often young and the limited data on the long-term outcome of aortic stent grafts make a case for a robust follow-up protocol.

Minimal Aortic Injury: Mechanisms, Imaging Manifestations, Natural History, and Management

Over the last 2 decades, increased depiction of minimal aortic injury (MAI) in the evaluation of patients who have sustained trauma has mirrored the increased utilization and improved resolution of multidetector CT. MAI represents a mild form of blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI) that usually resolves or stabilizes with pharmacologic management. The traditional imaging manifestation of MAI is a subcentimeter round, triangular, or linear aortic filling defect attached to an aortic wall, representing a small intimal flap or thrombus consistent with grade I injury according to the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS). Small intramural hematoma (SVS grade II injury) without external aortic contour deformity is included in the MAI spectrum in several BTAI classifications on the basis of its favorable outcome. Although higher SVS grades of injury generally call for endovascular repair, there is growing literature supporting conservative management for small pseudoaneurysms (SVS grade III) and large intimal flaps (>1 cm, unclassified by the SVS), hinting toward possible future inclusion of these entities in the MAI spectrum. Injury progression of MAI is rare, with endovascular aortic repair reserved for these patients as well as patients for whom medical treatment cannot be implemented. No consensus on the predetermined frequency and duration of multidetector CT follow-up exists, but it is common practice to perform a repeat CT examination shortly after the initial diagnosis. The authors review the evolving definition, pathophysiology, and natural history of MAI, present the primary and secondary imaging findings and diagnostic pitfalls, and discuss the current management options for MAI. Online DICOM image stacks are available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2020.

Transesophageal Echocardiography at the Golden Hour: Identification of Blunt Traumatic Aortic Injuries in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Although surface sonography has become an essential diagnostic tool in the evaluation of trauma patients, important limitations of this modality include the evaluation of retroperitoneal hemorrhage and mediastinal pathology, such as blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAI). As in other emergency applications where surface sonography can't provide the information needed, focused transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) may represent a valuable diagnostic tool in the evaluation of hemodynamically unstable trauma patients with suspected thoracic pathology such as BTAI.

CASE SERIES

We present a series of five cases that illustrate the diagnostic value of emergency physician-performed resuscitative TEE in the diagnosis of BTAI in patients presenting with blunt thoracic trauma. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: As the use of point-of-care TEE during resuscitation continues to expand in emergency medicine, the evaluation of patients with BTAI represents a novel application where this emerging modality can allow early diagnosis of these injuries in hemodynamically unstable patients.

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.

Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury: Endovascular Repair Is Now the Standard

BACKGROUND

Incidence and treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has evolved, likely from improved imaging and emergence of endovascular techniques; however, multicenter data demonstrating this are lacking. We examined trends in incidence, management, and outcomes in BTAI.

STUDY DESIGN

The American College of Surgeons National Trauma Databank (2003 to 2013) was used to identify adults with BTAI. Management was categorized as nonoperative repair, open aortic repair (OAR), or thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR). Outcomes included demographics, management, and outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 3,774 patients. Median age was 46.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 29.3, 62.0 years), with 70.8% males, and median Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 34.0 (IQR 26.0, 45.0). The number of BTAIs diagnosed over the decade increased 196.8% (p < 0.001), median ISS decreased from 38 to 33 (p < 0.001), and significantly more patients were treated at a level I trauma center (p < 0.001). After FDA approval of TEVAR devices, there was a significant increase in endovascular repair overall (1.0% to 30.6%, p < 0.001) and in those treated operatively (0.0% to 94.9%, p < 0.001), with a marked decrease in OAR. Use of TEVAR was associated with significantly reduced median ICU LOS (9.0 vs 12.0 days, p = 0.048) and mortality (9.3% vs 16.6%; p = 0.015) compared with OAR. In modern BTAI care, TEVAR has nearly completely replaced OAR.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of BTAI has increased, likely due to more sensitive imaging. Nearly 70% of patients get nonoperative care. Treatment with TEVAR improves outcomes relative to OAR. Part of the proportional increase in TEVAR use may represent overtreatment of lower grade BTAI amenable to medical management, and warrants further investigation.

Incidence and outcomes of thoracic aortic injuries with regionalized care in a mature trauma system

Introduction

Thoracic aortic injury is a leading cause of death after blunt trauma, but the effect of trauma system organization on outcomes is undefined. This was an analysis of thoracic aortic injury in a state with a comprehensive trauma system.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of thoracic aortic injury in Maryland between 2009 and 2014 using a statewide inpatient admission database. Presence of thoracic aortic injury and open or endovascular aortic interventions were identified by International Classification of Diseases version 9 codes. Patients were compared by admitting hospital status, categorized as Level I or non-Level I trauma centers. Outcomes were overall inpatient mortality and death after aortic repair.

Results

Of 774,211 injured patients, 168 (0.02%) had thoracic aortic injury. Patients with thoracic aortic injury were younger, more often male, and were more severely injured than patients without thoracic aortic injury. The majority of patients (136, 81%) were admitted to Level I trauma centers; Level I and non-Level I patients had similar characteristics. Most patients (110, 65%) were managed non-operatively, but patients admitted to Level I facilities were more likely to undergo aortic repair. Overall and post-operative mortality rates were lower at Level I hospitals (22% versus 31% and 6% versus 17%, respectively), but these differences did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusion

This novel analysis indicates thoracic aortic injury management in Maryland is highly concentrated at Level I trauma centers, which was associated with mortality below previously reported national rates. Although limited by small sample size, these findings suggest a benefit to regionalized care for patients with thoracic aortic injury and support transfer to high-volume facilities for definitive management.

Thoracic Trauma: Injuries, Evaluation, and Treatment

Thoracic injury is common in high-energy and low-energy trauma, and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Evaluation requires a systematic approach prioritizing airway, respiration, and circulation. Chest injuries have the potential to progress rapidly and require prompt procedural intervention. For the diagnosis of nonemergent injuries, a careful secondary survey is essential. Although medicine and trauma management have evolved throughout the decades, the basics of thoracic trauma care have remained the same.