Single-stage hybrid total arch replacement for extended arch aneurysms

One-stage total arch and proximal descending aorta replacement via a single median sternotomy

For extended arch pathologies involving the proximal descending aorta, the exposure afforded by the median sternotomy is less than ideal, and radical replacement of the distal arch by conventional total arch replacement is difficult. We developed a surgical manoeuvre to replace the total arch and proximal descending aorta in one-stage through a single median sternotomy.

Hybrid Technique on the Total Arch Replacement for Type A Aortic Dissection: 12-year Clinical and Radiographical Outcomes From a Single Center

Objective

Hybrid total arch replacement (HTAR) was an alternative for type A aortic dissection (TAAD). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiographical outcomes of HTAR for TAAD and to evaluate the clinical outcomes of performing this procedure under mild hypothermia.

Methods

A total of 209 patients who underwent HTAR for TAAD were retrospectively analyzed and stratified into mild (n = 48) and moderate (n = 161) hypothermia groups to evaluate the effects of mild hypothermia on the clinical outcomes. Long-term clinical outcomes were evaluated by the overall survival and adverse aortic events (AAEs). A total of 176 patients with preoperative and at least one-time postoperative aortic computed tomography angiography in our institute were included for evaluating the late aortic remodeling (aortic diameter and false lumen thrombosis).

Results

The median follow-up period was 48.3 (interquartile range [IQR] = 28.4–73.7) months. The overall survival rate was 88.0, 83.2, and 77.1% at the 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively, and in the presence of death as a competing risk, the cumulative incidence of AAEs was 4.8, 9.9, and 12.1% at the 1, 5, and 10 years. The aortic diameters were stable in the descending thoracic and abdominal aorta (P > 0.05 in all the measured aortic segments). A total of 100% complete false lumen thrombosis rate in the stent covered and distal thoracic aorta were achieved at 1 year (64/64) and 4 years (18/18), respectively after HTAR. The overall composite adverse events morbidity and mortality were 18.7 and 10.0%. Mild hypothermia (31.2, IQR = 30.2–32.0) achieved similar composite adverse events morbidity (mild: 14.6 vs. moderate: 19.9%, P = 0.41) and early mortality (mild: 10.4 vs. moderate: 9.9%, P = 1.00) compared with moderate hypothermia (median 27.7, IQR = 27–28.1) group, but mild hypothermia group needed shorter cardiopulmonary bypass (mild: 111, IQR = 93–145 min vs. moderate: 136, IQR = 114–173 min, P < 0.001) and aortic cross-clamping (mild: 45, IQR = 37–56 min vs. moderate: 78, IQR = 54–107 min, P < 0.001) time.

Conclusion

Hybrid total arch replacement achieved desirable early and long-term clinical outcomes for TAAD. Performing HTAR under mild hypothermia was as safe as under moderate hypothermia. After HTAR for TAAD, dissected aorta achieved desirable aortic remodeling, presenting as stable aortic diameters and false lumen complete thrombosis. In all, HTAR is a practical treatment for TAAD.

Comparison of Open Repair vs. the One-Stage Hybrid Extra-Anatomic Technique for Distal Aortic Arch Disease Treatment: Mid-term Outcomes With a Risk-Adjusted Analysis

Objective: This study aims to compare the short- and mid-term outcomes of the stented elephant trunk (SET) procedure combined with supra-arch branch reconstruction and one-stage hybrid arch repair combined thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with extra-anatomic bypass in the management of distal arch disease.

Methods: From January 2009 to January 2019, 97 patients underwent one-stage hybrid arch repair combined with TEVAR with extra-anatomic bypass (HAR group), and 206 patients underwent the SET procedure with supra-arch branch reconstruction (SET group). We used inverse-probability-of treatment weighting (IPTW) to adjust baseline differences.

Results: Before IPTW adjustment, there was no significant difference in operative mortality between the two groups (5.2 vs. 1.0%, P = 0.064). The incidences of stroke, spinal cord injury (SCI), acute kidney injury (AKI), and endoleak also showed no significant differences (4.1 vs. 0.5%, P = 0.066; 2.1 vs. 1.5%, P = 1.000; 0 vs. 1.0%, P = 0.831; 6.2 vs. 1.9%, P = 0.113, respectively). After IPTW adjustment, the incidences of stroke, SCI, and AKI showed no significant differences between the two groups (1.8 vs. 1.1%, P = 0.138; 0.8 vs. 1.6%, P = 0.448; and 0 vs. 0.7%, P = 0.148, respectively). However, the HAR group tended to have higher operative mortality and incidence of endoleak than the SET group (12.4 vs. 1.3%, P = 0.01; 9.9 vs. 1.8%, P = 0.031, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, open repair decreased the risks of endoleak (odds ratio [OR], 0.171, 95% CI, 0.060–0.401; P < 0.001) and operative mortality (OR, 0.093, 95% CI, 0.027–0.238; P < 0.001). The overall survival and event-free survival of the HAR group were significantly lower than those of the SET group (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: One-stage hybrid arch repair combined TEVAR with extra-anatomic bypass and the SET procedure with supra-arch branch reconstruction both provided good postoperative treatment outcomes for distal arch disease. However, hybrid arch repair increased the risks of endoleak and operative mortality. The SET procedure provided better mid-term survival than hybrid arch repair without increasing operative mortality. Carefully selecting the indications for the procedure, while receiving close long-term follow-up, may improve the survival rate of patients undergoing hybrid arch repair.

Hybrid repair of aortic arch with zone zero endografting-Case series with review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

We present single-institution results of types I and II hybrid procedures for aortic arch disease with 30-day and long-term results and review of the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study of all patients that underwent zone 0 endografting and open bypass from ascending aorta to the arch vessels at our institution between January 2013 and 2020. The following data for the systematic review were extracted from eligible studies: 30-day/in-hospital mortality, stroke rate, spinal cord ischemia (SCI) rate, renal failure requiring dialysis, development of retrograde dissection, early (<30 days) types I and III endoleak, follow-up length, late (>30 days) endoleak, and late (>30 days) mortality.

RESULTS

Twelve patients underwent hybrid aortic arch treatment in our institution. The most common aortic arch pathology was degenerative aortic aneurysm. The rate of retrograde dissection and SCI was 8.33%. Regarding the literature data, a total of 768 patients undergoing types I and II hybrid aortic arch debranching procedure. The pooled rate of 30-day/in-hospital mortality was 10.96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.21-14.06), SCI pooled rate was 2.91% (95% CI, 1.76%-4.33%), and retrograde dissection pooled rate was 3.22% (95% CI, 1.99-4.72).

CONCLUSION

Hybrid arch techniques provide safe alternative to open repair with acceptable short- and midterm results.

One-stage hybrid procedure for distal aortic arch disease: mid-term experience at a single center

Background

This study analyzes the outcomes of a one-stage hybrid procedure combining thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with extra-anatomic bypass in patients with distal aortic arch disease.

Methods

This retrospective study collected 103 hybrid procedures combining TEVAR with extra-anatomic bypass (mean age, 62.2±9.3 years; 90 males) performed from January 2009 to January 2019 at Beijing Anzhen Hospital. We analyzed 30-day and mid-term outcomes including survival rate and the incidence of stroke, spinal cord injury (SCI), and endoleak.

Results

Five deaths (4.6%) occurred within 30 days, including type I endoleak in Zone 1 (n=1), hemorrhagic shock (n=1), stroke (n=2), and stent migration (n=1). Two patients developed SCI. The median follow-up time was 39.5 (interquartile range, 13.6-69.0) months. In all, 14 late deaths occurred; these were due to stroke (n=2), severe pneumonia (n=1), aortic rupture caused by type I endoleak (n=3), and sudden death (n=8). Six late endoleaks occurred including three type I and one type II in Zone 1 and two type I in Zone 2. In a competing risks analysis, the incidences of reintervention at 7 years, late death, and survival without reintervention were 8%, 22%, and 70%, respectively. In a Cox risk model, stroke (HR, 21.602; 95% CI: 2.798–166.796; P=0.003) was the only risk factor for 30-day mortality. Stroke (HR, 19.484; 95% CI: 5.245–72.380; P<0.001), SCI (HR, 15.548; 95% CI: 2.754–87.786; P=0.002), and endoleak (HR, 4.626; 95% CI: 1.068–20.040; P=0.041) were independent risk factors for long-term mortality.

Conclusions

The one-stage hybrid procedure provides acceptable mid-term results with good mid-term patency of extra-anatomic bypass. Strict selection of patients suitable for hybrid repair can effectively improve the survival rate and reduce the incidence of complications. At the same time, close follow-up patients should receive close long-term follow-up after hybrid procedure.

Chronologic Changes in Residual False Lumen Under Continuous-Flow Circulation

We experienced a rare case of intraoperative type A aortic dissection during HeartMate II (Abbott, Chicago, IL) implantation and subsequently performed emergent total aortic arch replacement. Periodic follow-up computed tomography confirmed that the residual false lumen after the aortic repair had gradually thrombosed over time regardless of sufficient antithrombotic therapy. We analyzed the chronologic changes in the false lumen morphology, showing transient enlargement of the aortic diameter 1 year postoperatively and then a reduction at 3 years postoperatively. We report on the fate of residual false lumen after aortic repair under continuous-flow left ventricular assist device circulation.

Determinants of Changes in Arterial Stiffness after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

Aortic stent grafting can cause aortic stiffening and increase pulse wave velocity (PWV), which can potentially affect long-term cardiovascular outcomes. The aim of this study was to clarify the factors contributing to increases in PWV after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

We included 64 patients with thoracic aortic pathology (51 men; mean age, 73 years) who underwent elective TEVAR, in this study. TEVAR was performed for degenerative aortic aneurysm (n = 43) or aortic dissection (n = 21), and the treatment length was 175 ± 52 mm. Brachial-ankle PWV (baPWV) was obtained before and 1 week after TEVAR. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to determine the predictors of increases in baPWV of ≥100 cm/sec after TEVAR.

RESULTS

baPWV increased from 1,851 ± 392 cm/sec to 2,047 ± 479 cm/sec, and the change in baPWV (ΔbaPWV) was 195 ± 339 cm/sec (95% confidence interval, 111-280). Thirty-seven patients (58%) had ΔbaPWV ≥100 cm/sec after TEVAR. In the multivariable analysis, in addition to Δheart rate and Δsystolic blood pressure, age (odds ratio, 1.21/year; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.40) and coronary artery disease (odds ratio, 12.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-121) were independent determinants of ΔbaPWV ≥100 cm/sec after TEVAR, whereas ΔbaPWV ≥100 cm/sec was not associated with treatment length or device type.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR was associated with PWV progression, especially in older patients with coronary artery disease, whereas treatment length or device type was not a predictor of PWV progression after TEVAR.

Preoperative distal aortic diameter is a significant predictor of late aorta-related events after endovascular repair for chronic type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVES

Long-term therapeutic effects of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for chronic type B aortic dissection remain controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the possible predictors of late aortic rupture and re-interventions after TEVAR.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the operative outcomes of 40 patients who underwent TEVAR for chronic type B aortic dissection at Kyushu University Hospital. During a mean follow-up period of 39.2 months, we assessed aortic morphology via computed tomography and then employed a multivariable Cox regression analysis in an attempt to identify the predictors of late aorta-related events.

RESULTS

The early success rate of TEVAR was 100%. During the follow-up, however, three patients died from aortic rupture. Eight patients required aortic re-intervention, including thoraco-abdominal aortic graft replacement, repeated TEVAR, total arch replacement and EVAR. Multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that the preoperative maximum distal aortic diameter was a significant predictor of late aorta-related events. The cutoff value of the distal aortic diameter was 40 mm. Freedom from aorta-related events was 94.6% at 1 year and 78.3% at 3 years. The survival rate was not significantly different despite the re-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR is an effective treatment for chronic type B dissection, with acceptable mid-term results. The preoperative distal aortic diameter is a significant risk factor for late aorta-related events. When the maximum distal aortic diameter is ≥ 40 mm, a therapeutic strategy should be developed taking into consideration the possible need for aortic re-intervention.