Retrograde type A dissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection

Long-term results of etiology-based thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a single-center experience

The use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) and Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) has been increasing; however, in terms of etiology, the differences of long term after TEVAR outcomes remain unexplored. Thus, we investigated etiology-specific long-term results of TEVAR for TAA and TBAD. A total of 421 TEVAR procedures were performed at our institution from July 2007 to December 2021; 249 TAA cases and 172 TBAD cases were included. Traumatic aortic dissection and aortic injury cases were excluded. The mean observation duration was 5.7 years. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 1.4% (n = 6), with 1.2% (n = 3) in the TAA group and 1.7% (n = 3) in the TBAD group. The overall incidence of postoperative stroke was 0.9% (n = 4), with 1.2% (n = 3) and 0.6% (n = 1) in the TAA and TBAD groups, respectively (p = 0.90). Paraplegia developed in 1.7% (n = 7) of patients, with 2.4% (n = 6) in the TAA group and 0.6% (n = 1) in the TBAD group. Freedom from aortic-related death was not significantly different between the two etiologies; however, thoracic reintervention was more common in the TBAD group (p = 0.003), with endoleak being the most common indication for reintervention. Additionally, retrograde type A aortic dissection occurred in four TBAD cases, while migration occurred in three TAA cases. The perioperative results of TEVAR for TAA and TBAD were satisfactory. The long-term results were unfavorable owing to the occurrence of etiology-specific and common complications. In terms of the high frequency of reintervention, the long-term complications associated with TEVAR are etiology specific.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Reinterventions after TEVAR

Thoracic cardiovascular aortic repair is an alternative procedure to open surgery for degenerative thoracic aortic aneurysm and thoracic aortic dissection. The advancements in graft design and imaging techniques have expanded its utility. However, the long-term patency of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) graft is still a concern. This review delves into the literature on re-intervention following TEVAR, highlighting factors that influence the re-intervention rate.

Physician-Modified Endovascular Graft for Left Subclavian Artery Fenestration during Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of physician-modified endovascular graft for preservation of left subclavian artery during thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

From June 2019 to October 2022, 66 patients with a variety of thoracic aortic pathologies were treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair using physician-modified endovascular graft left subclavian artery fenestration to achieve adequate proximal landing zone. The details of surgical techniques were described. The perioperative morbidity, mortality, and the outcomes of mid-term follow-up were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 66 patients (men: women, 53:13; age, 55.18 [55.18 ± 10.62] years), 53 (80.30%) presented with type B aortic dissection, 10 (15.15%) with thoracic penetrating aortic ulcer, 2 (3.03%) with thoracic aortic aneurysm, and 1 (1.52%) with left subclavian artery aneurysm. All of them underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair using physician-modified endovascular graft left subclavian artery fenestration on the sterile back table. The technique success rate was 96.97% (n = 64). Total operation time was 92 min (interquartile range, 86-118), graft modification time was 19 min (interquartile range, 17-21), fluoroscopy time was 49 min (interquartile range, 41-62), and contrast agent dosage was 165 mL (interquartile range, 155-185). 30-day perioperative morbidities were 3 (4.55%) strokes, 1 (1.52%) retrograde type A aortic dissection, 1 (1.52%) aortic intimal intussusception, 1 (1.52%) left arm ischemia, and 3 (4.55%) type Ia endoleaks. Postoperative 30-day mortality and reintervention rates were 1.52% and 4.55%, respectively. Among the 63 patients included in the follow-up of 17 months (interquartile range, 7.75-18.25), the primary patency of left subclavian artery fenestration stents was 100%. Late complications were 1 (1.59%) distal stent graft-induced new entry and 1 (1.59%) death due to retrograde type A aortic dissection during the follow-up. The stent graft-induced new entry patient was observed with stable false lumen.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair with physician-modified endovascular graft for left subclavian artery revascularization is a safe, feasible, and efficacious technique associated with high success rate. Further study is needed for long-term outcome investigation.

Retrograde type A aortic dissection during or after thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a single center 16-year experience

Objective

This article aims to investigate the incidence rate of retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD) and the risk factors of RTAD in relation to thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Methods

Patients with thoracic aortic disease who underwent TEVAR at Henan Provincial People's Hospital from January 2004 to December 2019 were enrolled in the present research. The risk factors associated with RTAD following TEVAR using univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses.

Results

During the study period, A total of 1,688 TEVAR patients were included in this study, and of these, 1,592 cases were included in the type B aortic dissection (TBAD) group, and 96 cases were included in the non-TBAD group. There were 1,230 cases of aortic dissection and 362 cases of aortic intramural hematoma and/or penetrating ulcer in the TBAD group. The non-TBAD group included 68 cases of thoracic aortic aneurysm, 21 cases of thoracic aortic pseudoaneurysm, and seven cases of congenital aortic coarctation. The overall incidence rate of RTAD was 1.1% (18/1,688) in patients, all of which occurred in the TBAD group. The cohort comprised 18 RTAD patients with an average age of 56.78, consisting of 13 males and 5 females. Among them, 13 individuals exhibited hypertension. Ten instances happened within the TEVAR perioperative period, including two cases during the surgery, six cases occurred within three months, two cases occurred after one year, and the longest interval was 72 months following TEVAR. TEVAR was successfully implemented in 17 patients, while the operation technique was temporarily altered in one case. The new entry position for RTAD was identified as the proximal region of the stent graft (SG) in 13 patients, while in five cases, the entry site was more than 2 cm away from the proximal region of the SG. 17 cases were at the greater curvature of the aorta, and one case was at the lesser curvature. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the SG oversizing ratio is a relevant risk factor for RTAD. However, ascending aortic diameter, aortic arch type, SG type, and anchored region were not directly related to the occurrence of RTAD.

Conclusion

RTAD is a rare yet catastrophic complication. It could occur both during the procedure, early and late postoperative periods. Maintaining an appropriate SG oversizing ratio is crucial to minimize the risk of RTAD.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of retrograde type A aortic dissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Retrograde type A dissection (RTAD) is a devastating complication of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) with low incidence but high mortality. The objective of this study is to report the incidence, mortality, potential risk factors, clinical manifestation and diagnostic modalities, and medical and surgical treatments.

METHODS

A systematic review and single-arm and two-arm meta-analyses evaluated all published reports of RTAD post-TEVAR through January 2021. All study types were included, except study protocols and animal studies, without time restrictions. Outcomes of interest were procedural data (implanted stent-grafts type, and proximal stent-graft oversizing), the incidence of RTAD, associated mortality rate, clinical manifestations, diagnostic workouts and therapeutic management.

RESULTS

RTAD occurred in 285 out of 10,600 patients: an estimated RTAD incidence of 2.3% (95% CI: 1.9-2.8); incidence of early RTAD was approximately 1.8 times higher than late. Wilcoxon signed-rank testing showed that the proportion of RTAD patients with acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) was significantly higher than those with chronic TBAD (P = .008). Pooled meta-analysis showed that the incidence of RTAD with proximal bare stent TEVAR was 2.1-fold higher than with non-bare stents: risk ratio was 1.55 (95% CI: 0.87-2.75; P = .13). Single arm meta-analysis estimated a mortality rate of 42.2% (95% CI: 32.5-51.8), with an I2 heterogeneity of 70.11% (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

RTAD is rare after TEVAR but with high mortality, especially in the first month post-TEVAR with acute TBAD patients at greater risk as well as those treated with proximal bare stent endografts.

Efficacy of endovascular repair in the treatment of retrograde ascending aortic intramural haematoma

BACKGROUND

The current treatment for retrograde ascending aortic intramural hematoma (RAIMH) remains challenging. This study aims to summarize the short-term results of endovascular repair in the treatment of retrograde ascending aortic intramural hematoma.

METHODS

Between June 2019 and June 2021, 21 patients (16 males and 5 females) with a retrograde ascending aortic intramural hematoma, aged 53 ± 14years, received an endovascular repair in our hospital. All cases involved an ascending aortic or aortic arch intramural hematoma. 15 patients had an ulcer on the descending aorta combined with an intramural hematoma in the ascending aorta and 6 patients had typical dissection changes on the descending aorta combined with an intramural hematoma in the ascending aorta. All patients had a successful endovascular stent-graft repair, with 10 cases operated on in the acute phase (<14 days) and 11 cases in the chronic phase (14-35 days).

RESULTS

A single-branched aortic stent graft system was implanted in 10 cases, a straight stent in 2 cases, and a fenestrated stent in 9 cases. All surgeries were technically successful. One of the patients developed a new rupture 2 weeks after surgery and was converted to a total arch replacement. No perioperative stroke, paraplegia, stent fracture or displacement, limb or abdominal organ ischemia occurred. The intramural hematomas started being absorbed on CT angiography images before discharge. There was no incidence of postoperative 30-day mortality, and the intramural hematomas in the ascending aorta and aortic arch were fully or partly absorbed.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular repair of retrograde ascending aortic intramural hematoma was shown to be safe and effective, and correlated with favorable short-term results.

Efficacy of left subclavian artery revascularization strategies during thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with type B dissection: A single-center experience of 105 patients

Background

Left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is necessary to reduce postoperative complications in patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection and an insufficient proximal anchoring area. However, the efficacy and safety of different LSA revascularization strategies remain unclear. Here, we compared these strategies to provide a clinical basis for selecting an appropriate LSA revascularization method.

Methods

In this study, we included 105 patients with type B aortic dissection who were treated using TEVAR combined with LSA reconstruction in the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University from March 2013 to 2020. They were divided into four groups according to the method used for LSA reconstruction, namely, carotid subclavian bypass (CSB; n = 41), chimney graft (CG; n = 29), single-branched stent graft (SBSG; n = 21), and physician-made fenestration (PMF; n = 14) groups. Finally, we collected and analyzed the baseline, perioperative, operative, postoperative, and follow-up data of the patients.

Results

The treatment success rate was 100% in all the groups, and CSB + TEVAR was the most commonly used procedure in emergency settings compared with the other three procedures (P &lt; 0.05). The estimated blood loss, contrast agent volume, fluoroscopic time, operation time, and limb ischemia symptoms during the follow-up were significantly different in the four groups (P &lt; 0.05). Pairwise comparison among groups indicated that the estimated blood loss and operation time in the CSB group were the highest (adjusted P &lt; 0.0083; P &lt; 0.05). The contrast agent volume and fluoroscopy duration were the highest in the SBSG groups, followed by PMF, CG, and CSB groups. The incidence of limb ischemia symptoms was the highest in the PMF group (28.6%) during the follow-up. The incidence of complications (except limb ischemia symptoms) during the perioperative and follow-up periods was similar among the four groups (P &gt; 0.05) The median follow-up time of CSB, CG, SBSG, and PMF groups was significantly different (P &lt; 0.05), and the CSB group had the longest follow-up.

Conclusion

Our single-center experience suggested that the PMF technique increased the risk of limb ischemia symptoms. The other three strategies effectively and safely restored LSA perfusion in patients with type B aortic dissection and had comparable complications. Overall, different LSA revascularization techniques have their advantages and disadvantages.

Readmission after early thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus medical management of acute type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

The use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for the management of acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) has increased. Although the results from early studies were promising, larger randomized trials evaluating TEVAR are lacking. It is also unclear where sufficient equipoise exists for such trials. In the present study, we evaluated the number of readmissions and unplanned operations after TEVAR vs those after medical management as the initial treatment of acute uncomplicated TBAD and the frequency of each treatment in this population.

METHODS

We performed a multi-institutional retrospective review of patients with acute TBAD from 2015 to 2020 with the 1-year outcomes available, excluding patients with prior aortic intervention or chronic, iatrogenic or traumatic etiologies. The primary exposure was TEVAR vs medical management at the index admission. The patient demographics, clinical presentation, and imaging findings were analyzed using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression for the primary outcomes of unplanned readmission and/or operation after the initial admission. The secondary outcomes were mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure requiring dialysis, retrograde type A dissection, and length of stay. We hypothesized that the readmissions would be higher with medical management.

RESULTS

A total of 216 patients with TBAD (47 with complicated and 169 with uncomplicated) from two large academic centers were identified. Of the 169 patients with uncomplicated TBAD, 83 (49%) had been treated medically and 86 (51%) had undergone TEVAR at the initial admission. No differences were found in the demographics or high-risk imaging features at presentation. The medically managed patients had had higher rates of unplanned readmission (34% vs 9%; P = .0001) and operation (28% vs 8%; P = .0007) but shorter lengths of stay (6.3 vs 13.1 days; P < .0001). No differences were found in mortality, although the rate of myocardial infarction was higher in the medically managed group (10.8% vs 2.3%; P = .02). Although 28% of the medically managed patients had later required operation, they had had morbidity and mortality similar to those of patients who had undergone initial TEVAR. Initial medical management was associated with unplanned readmission (odds ratio, 8.3; P = .02) and the need for operation (odds ratio, 4.56; P = .006). No differences were found in the outcomes according to the involved aortic zones.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, medical management of acute uncomplicated TBAD was associated with higher rates of readmission and the need for unplanned operation compared with TEVAR. However, no differences were found in the 1-year mortality for the patients for whom medical management had failed. Because one half of the patients had undergone medical management and one half had undergone early TEVAR, this finding suggests clinical equipoise for the treatment of acute uncomplicated TBAD. Therefore, a larger randomized trial appears warranted to determine whether a clear benefit exists for early TEVAR.

Effectiveness and Minimal-Invasiveness of Zone 0 Landing Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Using Branched Endograft

Background: Zone 0 landing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for the treatment of aortic arch diseases has become a topic of interest. This study aimed to verify whether branced TEVAR (bTEVAR) is an effective and a more minimally invasive treatment by comparing the outcomes of bTEVAR and hybrid TEVAR (hTEVAR) in landing zone 0. Methods: This retrospective, single-center, observational cohort study included 54 patients (bTEVAR, n = 25; hTEVAR, n = 29; median age, 78 years; median follow-up period, 5.4 years) from October 2012 to June 2018. The logistic Euro-SCORE was significantly higher in the bTEVAR group than in the hTEVAR group (38% vs. 21%, p < 0.001). Results: There was no significant difference the in-hospital mortality between the bTEVAR and hTEVAR groups (0% vs. 3.4%, p = 1.00). The operative time (220 vs. 279 min, p < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (12 vs. 17 days, p = 0.013) were significantly shorter in the bTEVAR group than in the hTEVAR group. The 7-year free rates of aorta-related deaths (bTEVAR [95.5%] vs. hTEVAR [86.9%], Log-rankp = 0.390) and aortic reintervention (bTEVAR [86.3%] vs. hTEVAR [86.9%], Log-rankp = 0.638) were not significantly different. Conclusions: The early and mid-term outcomes in both groups were satisfactory. bTEVAR might be superior to hTEVAR in that it is less invasive. Therefore, bTEVAR may be considered an effective and a more minimally invasive treatment for high-risk patients.

[Chronic type B aortic dissection-what to do?]

BACKGROUND

Chronic type B aortic dissection requires optimal medical therapy. However, secondary complications like organ or extremity malperfusion or development of aneurysmal dilatation require interventional therapy.

OBJECTIVES

Presentation of different endovascular treatment options for complications of chronic type B aortic dissection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analysis of current literature with regard to indications, techniques, results, and differential indications of interventional techniques for the treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection complications.

RESULTS

Endovascular implantation of an aortic stent graft is interventional standard therapy for treatment of aneurysmal dilatation of the aorta following type B dissection. Technical problems are the proximal and distal landing zones and the treatment of persistent flow in the false lumen.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular treatment of chronic complicated type B aortic dissection is increasingly used compared to open surgical treatment because not only are more complex stent grafts (fenestrated and branched devices) available but also because of newly developed techniques for effective occlusion of flow in the false lumen (e.g., candy plug).

Surgical technique for acute retrograde type A aortic dissection after zone 2 TEVAR for complicated type B dissection in a 63-year-old patient

Patients suffering retrograde type A aortic dissection after TEVAR for type B dissection are at higher risk of mortality than their spontanous counterparts and the kind of optimal therapy remains obscure. We present a case of successful open surgical repair where distal open anastomosis was accomplished by cutting off the un-covered stent portion and suturing a vascular prosthesis to the dissected distal aortic arch including the covered stent part. The clinical course was regular. Immediate and radical repair in the aortic arch may be the adequate response in such instances.

Predictive factors of distal stent graft-induced new entry after frozen elephant trunk procedure for aortic dissection

OBJECTIVES

The incidence rate of distal stent graft-induced new entry after frozen elephant trunk technique for aortic dissection remains controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and seek the clinical and anatomical predictive factors.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective multicenter evaluation of complications including distal stent graft-induced new entry, aortic events, and re-intervention after the frozen elephant trunk procedure for aortic dissection.

RESULTS

Our cohort included total 177 consecutive patients who underwent the frozen elephant trunk procedure for acute and chronic aortic dissection at five centers in Japan from May 2014 to March 2021. The incidence rate of distal stent graft-induced new entry was 14.1% (25/177 patients). The cumulative incidence of d-SINE was 7.1%, 12.4%, 21.4% after 12, 36, and 60 months, respectively. Distal stent graft-induced new entry was not associated with mid-term survival rate. After competing risk regression analysis, onset time > 48 hours (subdistribution hazard ratio, 3.80; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-12.79; P=0.031) was detected as an independent predictor.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness that there is a relatively higher incidence of distal stent graft-induced new entry after frozen elephant trunk procedures is important. Non-hyperacute phase was detected as an independent risk factor. Preemptive endovascular repair may be appropriate to protect new entry in high-risk patients.

Retrograde ascending aortic dissection in the midterm period after thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a case report and literature review

Retrograde ascending aortic dissection (rAAD) is a catastrophic complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). A 56 year-old male patient who had undergone TEVAR for Stanford type B aortic dissection 6-month ago was admitted to our clinic with uncontrolled hypertension for the last twelve hours and history of a syncopal attack three days ago. Retrograde ascending aortic dissection was detected in computed tomography angiography. Ascending aorta and hemiarch replacement with a Dacron graft was safely performed via hypothermic circulatory arrest and antegrade cerebral perfusion for the treatment of rAAD after TEVAR.

Impact of high-risk features and timing of repair for acute type B aortic dissections

OBJECTIVE

The new Society for Vascular Surgery/Society for Thoracic Surgery reporting standards for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) categorize clinical presentations of aortic dissection into uncomplicated, high-risk features (HRF), and complicated groups. Although it is accepted that complicated dissections require immediate repair, the optimal timing of repair for HRF has yet to be established. This study aims to identify the ideal timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for HRF, as well as outcomes associated with specific HRF.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for TEVARs performed for acute and subacute TBAD with HRF from 2014 to 2020. Rupture, malperfusion, and uncomplicated patients were excluded. HRF were defined per the guidelines as refractory hypertension, pain, or rapid expansion/aneurysm of more than 40 mm. The primary outcomes were in-hospital/30-day mortality and 1-year survival with primary exposure variables being days from symptoms to repair and number of HRFs. Secondary outcomes were spinal cord ischemia, stroke, and retrograde type A dissection (RTAD).

RESULTS

Of the 1100 patients who met inclusion criteria, 811 had one HRF, 249 had two, and 40 had three. There were no significant differences in primary or secondary outcomes based on number of HRFs. There were 309 patients who underwent repair at 0 to 2 days, 262 at 3 to 6 days, 270 at 7 to 14 days, and 259 at 15 days or more. TEVAR performed at 15 days or more was independently associated with lower in-hospital/30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.38; P = .0388) and improved 1-year survival. Postoperative stroke was associated with earlier repair (0-2 days). There was no association of timing of repair with spinal cord ischemia, retrograde type A dissection or reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR for TBAD with HRF delayed at least 15 days from symptom onset is associated with improved survival, supporting the theory that it is best to delay TEVAR until the subacute phase. Additionally, TEVAR delayed at least 3 days is associated with a decrease in stroke. Having more than one HRF was not associated statistically with worse outcomes. Because the classification of HRF is relatively new and without guidelines for repair, this study highlights the risks of early intervention for HRF and suggests that these patients seem to benefit from at least a short stabilization period before TEVAR.

Mid- and long-term outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in acute and subacute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (un-TBAD) has been managed conservatively with medical therapy to control the heart rate and blood pressure to limit disease progression, in addition to radiological follow-up. However, several trials and observational studies have investigated the use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in un-TBAD and suggested that TEVAR provides a survival benefit over medical therapy. Outcomes of TEVAR have also been linked with the timing of intervention.

AIMS

The scope of this review is to collate and summarize all the evidence in the literature on the mid- and long-term outcomes of TEVAR in un-TBAD, confirming its superiority. We also aimed to investigate the relationship between the timing of TEVAR intervention and results.

METHODS

We carried out a comprehensive literature search on multiple electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE to collate and summarize all research evidence on the mid- and long-term outcomes of TEVAR in un-TBAD, as well as its relationship with intervention timing.

RESULTS

TEVAR has proven to be a safe and effective tool in un-TBAD, offering superior mid- and long-term outcomes including all-cause and aorta-related mortality, aortic-specific adverse events, aortic remodeling, and need for reintervention. Additionally, performing TEVAR during the subacute phase of dissection seems to yield optimal results.

CONCLUSION

The evidence demonstrating a survival advantage in favor TEVAR over medical therapy in un-TBAD means that with further research, particular trials and observational studies, TEVAR could become the gold-standard treatment option for un-TBAD patients.

Late Retrograde Aortic Dissection after Hybrid Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR): A Case Report

Open total arch replacement is allied to high rates of mortality and morbidity; surgeons, therefore, tend to choose hybrid aortic arch repair as a less invasive operative procedure for the treatment of aortic arch aneurysms, especially in high-risk patients. However, studies on the early and late outcomes of patients undergoing hybrid aortic arch repair have revealed high rates of reintervention and reoperation compared with open total arch replacement. Here, we describe a male patient with late retrograde aortic dissection after hybrid thoracic endovascular aortic repair for aortic arch aneurysms. The patient returned 3 years after the procedure with signs of dyspnea on exertion and chest pain. Transthoracic echocardiography and computed tomography showed dissection of the ascending aorta, for which he underwent a redo Bentall procedure. The patient was weaned from cardiopulmonary bypass without any problem and discharged after 7 days.

Effectiveness of Proximal Landing Zones 0, 1, and 2 Hybrid Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Single Centre 12 Year Experience

OBJECTIVE

Hybrid thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is being accepted increasingly as a first line treatment for arch repair at the present authors' institution. This study aimed to clarify the effectiveness of zones 0, 1, and 2 landing hybrid TEVAR.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single centre case series. From April 2008 to March 2020, 348 patients (median age 72 years; interquartile range [IQR] 65, 77 years) were enrolled, with a median follow up period of 5.6 years (IQR 2.6, 8.7 years). The procedures included zone 0 in 135 patients (38.8%), zone 1 in 82 patients (23.6%), and zone 2 proximal landing zone (LZ) hybrid TEVAR in 131 patients (37.6%). The pathologies consisted of dissecting aortic aneurysms in 123 (35.3%) patients. Emergency procedures were performed in 39 (11.2%) patients.

RESULTS

The 30 day mortality (n = 2, 0.6%) and hospital deaths (n = 6, 1.7%) were registered. The stroke rate was 1.1% (n = 4), while early and late endoleak rates were 4.8% (n = 17) and 1.7% (n = 6), respectively. Type 1a endoleak and retrograde type A dissection occurred in seven (2.0%) and three (0.9%) patients, respectively. The cumulative survival, freedom from aorta related deaths, and freedom from aortic events in 10 years were 75.0%, 97.2%, and 84.1%, respectively. The freedom from aortic events in each landing zone in 10 years was 82.3%, 81.4%, and 87.9% for zones 0, 1, and 2, respectively. The 10 year survival rates were 82.5% and 73.6%; the 10 year aorta related death free rates were 94.9% and 98.6%, and the 10 year aortic event free rates were 82.3% and 85.5% in the zone 0 and zone 1 and 2 TEVAR, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Satisfactory early and long term results of hybrid arch repair at zones 0, 1, and 2 were achieved. To avoid complications and aortic events, the treatment strategy of hybrid arch repair for aortic arch pathologies should be tailored using accurate pre-operative assessment of the ascending aorta and the aortic arch.

Early and Long-Term Follow-Up for Chronic Type B and Type Non-A Non-B Aortic Dissection Using the Frozen Elephant Trunk Technique

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the early and long-term outcomes of a single center using a frozen elephant trunk (FET) procedure for chronic type B or non-A non-B aortic dissection.

Methods: From February 2009 to December 2019, 79 patients diagnosed with chronic type B or non-A non-B aortic dissection who underwent the FET procedure were included in the present study. We analyzed operation mortality and early and long-term outcomes, including complications, survival and interventions.

Results: The operation mortality rate was 5.1% (4/79). Spinal cord injury occurred in 3.8% (3/79), stroke in 2.5% (2/79), and acute renal failure in 5.1% (4/79). The median follow-up time was 53 months. The overall survival rates were 96.2, 92.3, 88.0, 79.8, and 76.2% at 1/2, 1, 3, 5 and 7 years, respectively. Moreover, 79.3% of patients did not require distal aortic reintervention at 7 years. The overall survival in the subacute group was superior to that in the chronic group (P = 0.047).

Conclusion: The FET technique is a safe and feasible approach for treating chronic type B and non-A non-B aortic dissection in patients who have contraindications for primary endovascular aortic repair. The technique combines the advantages of both open surgical repair and endovascular intervention, providing comparable early and long-term follow-up outcomes and freedom from reintervention.

Long-term results of hybrid aortic arch repair using landing zone 0: a single-centre study

OBJECTIVES

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been gradually extended to the aortic arch region, with improved results. However, the rates of strokes and endoleaks in a hybrid TEVAR remain high. The goal of this study was to clarify the effectiveness of a hybrid TEVAR with a zone 0 landing using our treatment strategy.

METHODS

From April 2008 to March 2020, a total of 102 patients were enrolled in this study, with a median follow-up period of 3.2 years. The procedures included total debranching TEVAR with graft replacement of the ascending aorta in 62 patients, total debranching TEVAR with ascending aorta banding in 19 patients and total debranching TEVAR without ascending aorta banding in 21 patients.

RESULTS

Thirty-day mortality and hospital deaths were 1.0% (n = 1) and 3.9% (n = 4), respectively. The rates of aortic complications and endoleaks during the first 30 days postoperatively were 8.8% (n = 9) and 4.9% (n = 5), respectively. There was no type 1a endoleak, whereas retrograde type A dissection occurred in 2 (2.0%) patients. The rate of late aortic events was 3.9% (n = 4); there were no late endoleaks or aneurysm ruptures. The 10-year survival rate was 73.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 60.3-83.8%]. The 10-year rates of aorta-related deaths and aortic events when performing a competitive-risk analysis were 29.4% (95% CI 16.3-42.5%) and 7.2 (95% CI 23.0-51.4%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfactory early and long-term results of a hybrid TEVAR with a zone 0 landing were achieved using our treatment strategy. When performing hybrid TEVAR in zone 0, postoperative aortic events may be reduced by accurate preoperative assessment of the ascending aorta.

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.

Hybrid zone zero debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair of ascending aortic injury after surgery and radiotherapy for breast cancer

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair of the ascending aorta remains challenging. We have reported the case of an 81-year-old woman with ascending aortic injury who underwent a life-saving hybrid repair. The patient had previously undergone extended radical mastectomy and postoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer, which had resulted in a right thoracic wall defect and bone exposure and osteonecrosis of the sternum. Therefore, the ascending aorta was directly compressed by the sternum at the level of the brachiocephalic artery bifurcation, causing persistent bleeding from the thoracic wall. Hybrid zone 0 debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair with a left subclavian artery inflow was emergently performed and achieved hemostasis.

Role of Endoluminal Techniques in the Management of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection and Intramural Haematoma

Twenty-five years ago, optimal medical management was the mainstay of treatment in acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) and intramural haematoma (IMH), with surgery being reserved for cases with rupture or critical branch vessel ischaemia. Less invasive endoluminal management of TBAD and IMH has developed rapidly over the past two and a half decades, thus changing the treatment algorithm in these patients. Today the focus has shifted to primary management with a combination of endoluminal intervention and optimal medical treatment. The purpose of this article is to describe the various interventional techniques, discuss the indications for intervention, and present the results in the current literature regarding clinical (rupture, branch vessel ischaemia) as well as morphological response (aortic remodelling), complications, and morbidity/mortality associated with endoluminal intervention.

Important issues regarding planning and sizing for emergent TEVAR

In the past decades, treatment of acute thoracic aortic syndrome underwent drastic changes with a central role for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). One of the essential factors in the success of TEVAR is accurate sizing of the endograft, as both under- and oversizing can lead to suboptimal results and disastrous complications. The aim of this review was to give an overview of issues regarding endograft sizing in emergent TEVAR. Sizing of the endograft can be complicated by specific factors related to the underlying disease. For instance, different types of the acute thoracic aortic syndrome, i.e. blunt thoracic injury, thoracic aortic aneurysm or dissection with concomitant rupture are associated with hemorrhagic shock and the need for resuscitation, which leads to profound changes in diameter of the thoracic aorta. These diameter changes should be taken into account during endograft sizing. Measuring the thoracic aorta based on the admission CTA can lead to inaccurate sizing, even if proper centerline-based measurements are performed. The use of real-time imaging, in particular intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), has been shown to provide more accurate endograft sizing in acute thoracic aortic syndromes, especially if associated with hypovolemia. Future research should provide additional data on the exact role of different intra-operative imaging modalities (e.g. IVUS, transesophageal echocardiography [TEE], three dimensional CTA) on endograft sizing and long-term outcomes to ultimately improve patient outcome.

Generalized convulsive status epilepticus after retrograde type A aortic dissection surgery

INTRODUCTION

Generalized convulsive status epilepticus is defined as a generalized and convulsive seizure with 5 minutes or more of continuous clinical and/or electrographic seizure activity or recurrent seizure activity without recovery between seizures. For the first time, we present a case with retrograde type A aortic dissection after endovascular repairment and received thoracotomy intensely.

CASE REPORT

The patient experienced frequent generalized seizures in the immediate postoperative period, and status epilepticus was considered for his medical history, clinic symptoms and related examinations.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Generalized convulsive status epilepticus should be alert for avoiding delay in the rehabilitation particularly after aortic dissection surgery. Under the good condition of ventilation, combining morphine with midazolam or diazepam can more effectively relieve the symptoms.

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

Background

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Total Arch and Descending Aorta Replacement for Retrograde Type A Aortic Dissection After Endovascular Stent Graft Replacement for Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD) is a severe complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). In this regard, we present our unique surgical methods for total arch and descending aorta replacement for RTAD after TEVAR for complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD). A 52-year-old man with a history of distal arch large aneurysm was diagnosed with TBAD. Because he had sustained chest pain and his aneurysm diameter was 67 mm, TEVAR was urgently performed. After a right axillary-left axillary artery bypass, a stent graft was deployed in the descending aorta via the right femoral artery. Coil embolization was performed in the left subclavian artery. After the condition of the stent graft was checked by angiography, no Type 1 endoleak and backflow from the re-entry was observed. However, seven days after the operation, he experienced chest pain suddenly.

Computed tomography (CT) revealed forward blood flow in the descending aorta (type IA endoleak) and thrombosed aortic dissection in the ascending aorta. The distal arch diameter exceeded 70 mm. A decision was taken to immediately perform an operation. Total aortic arch and descending aorta replacement were performed through a median sternotomy with left 5th interspace thoracotomy. The operation was performed under deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, and selective antegrade cerebral perfusion was accomplished. As a result of the exploration of the aortic arch, it was found that the intimal injury by the bare stent caused RTAD. The patient was successfully extubated after the operation and was discharged without any complications. RTAD can present as an early complication after descending stent grafting because of aortic instability or due to the strength of bare stents. Aortic arch and descending aorta replacement after TEVAR via a clamshell incision can be safely performed if RTAD is diagnosed early.

New Type A Aortic Dissection after a Chronic Type B Dissection, Compressing the Pulmonary Artery: A Case Report

The authors report a case of a 69-year-old man with a 5-year history of medically treated type B aortic dissection, who presented a new retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD) of the aortic arch and the ascending aorta. Clinical presentation was suggestive of pulmonary embolism. Computed tomographic angiography revealed a contained rupture of the dissected aortic arch, confined to the connective tissue plane between the arch and the pulmonary arteries. Extrinsic compression of both pulmonary arteries caused right heart failure. The patient was successfully operated with replacement of the dissected aortic arch, decompressing the pulmonary arteries. The combination of a secondary new RTAD after a chronic type B aortic dissection and a compression of the pulmonary arteries by a contained rupture of the dissected aortic arch have not been reported previously in literature.