Thoracic endovascular aortic repair with stent grafts alone or with a composite device design in patients with acute type B aortic dissection in the setting of malperfusion

Risk Factors for Incomplete Aortic Remodeling With Stent-Assisted Balloon-Induced Intimal Disruption and Relamination in Aortic Dissection Repair for Complicated Aortic Dissection: Results of a Multicenter Study

PURPOSE

The STABILISE technique has extended the treatment of aortic dissection to the thoracoabdominal aorta to achieve complete aortic remodeling. The aim of this multicenter study was to analyze the short- and midterm anatomical results of the STABILISE technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients treated with the STABILISE technique for complicated aortic dissection at 3 French academic centers. The aortic diameter at different levels was measured preoperatively, postoperatively, and at 1 year.

RESULTS

Between 2018 and 2020, 58 patients, including 47 men (average patient age: 60±11 years), were treated for type B aortic dissection in 34 cases and residual aortic dissection after type A repair in 24 cases. Three (5.2%) patients died postoperatively. Complete aortic remodeling (false lumen thrombosis and complete reapposition of the intimal flap) was achieved in 45/55 patients (81.8%), and false lumen thrombosis in the thoracic aorta was achieved in 52/55 patients (94.5%). At 1 year, with a computed tomographic (CT) scan available for 98.2% (54/55) of patients, we observed a significant decrease in the maximal thoracic aortic diameter and a significant increase in the aortic diameter at the bare-stent level compared with the preoperative CT scan. Severe aortic angulation (p=0.024) was a risk factor for incomplete aortic remodeling and significantly increased the aortic diameter (p=0.032). Chronic aortic dissection was associated with an increased risk of incomplete aortic remodeling (p=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

STABILISE for complicated aortic dissection results in false lumen thrombosis, complete reapposition of the intimal flap, and a decrease in the maximum aortic diameter in most cases. Incomplete reapposition of the intimal flap, which is more frequent in cases of chronic aortic dissection and severe aortic angulation, is a risk factor for a significant increase in the aortic diameter at the bare-stent level, and this risk justifies close follow-up and better patient selection.

CLINICAL IMPACT

STABILISE technique for complicated aortic dissection results in false lumen thrombosis, complete aortic remodeling and a decrease in the maximum aortic diameter in most cases. At the bare-stent level, incomplete reapposition of the intimal flap, more frequent in chronic aortic dissection and severe aortic angulation, is a risk factor for an increased aortic diameter. This finding justifies close follow-up and better patient selection; thus, the STABILISE technique should be used with care in chronic aortic dissection and severe aortic angulation.

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.

Five-year results of the STABLE II study for the endovascular treatment of complicated, acute type B aortic dissection with a composite device design

OBJECTIVE

To provide the five-year outcomes of the use of a composite device (proximal covered stent-graft + distal bare stent) for endovascular repair of patients with acute, type B aortic dissection complicated by aortic rupture and/or malperfusion.

METHODS

STABLE II was a prospective, multicenter study of the Zenith Dissection Endovascular System (William Cook Europe, Denmark). Patients were enrolled between August 2012 and January 2015 at sites in the United States and Japan. Five-year follow-up was completed by January 2020.

RESULTS

In total, 73 patients (mean age 60.7±10.9 years; 65.8% male) with acute type B dissection complicated by malperfusion (72.6%), rupture (21.9%), or both (5.5%) were enrolled. Patients were treated with either a composite device (79.5%) or the proximal stent-graft alone (no distal bare stent, 20.5%). Dissections were more extensive in patients who received the composite device (408.9±121.3 mm) than in patients who did not receive a bare stent (315.9±100.1 mm). Mean follow-up was 1209.4±754.6 days. Freedom from all-cause mortality was 80.3%±4.7% at one year and 68.9%± 7.3% at five years. Freedom from dissection-related mortality remained at 97.1%±2.1% from one-year through five-year follow-up. Within the stent-graft region, the rate of either complete thrombosis or elimination of the false lumen increased over time (82.1% of all patients at five years vs. 55.7% at first post-procedure CT), with a higher rate at five years in patients who received the composite device (90.5%) compared with patients without the bare stent (57.1%). Throughout follow-up, overall true lumen diameter increased within the stent-graft region, and overall false lumen diameter decreased. At five years, 20.7% of patients experienced a decrease in maximum transaortic diameter within the stent-graft region, 17.2% experienced an increase, and 62.1% experienced no change. Distal to the treated segment (but within the dissected aorta), 23.1% of patients experience no change in transaortic diameter at five years; a bare stent was deployed in all these patients at the procedure. Five-year freedom from all secondary intervention was 70.7%±7.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

These five-year outcomes indicate a low rate of dissection-related mortality for the Zenith Dissection Endovascular System in the treatment of patients with acute, complicated type B aortic dissection. Further, these data suggest a positive influence of composite device use on false lumen thrombosis. Continuous monitoring for distal aortic growth is necessary in all patients.

Endovascular repair of acute complicated type B aortic dissection-systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term survival and reintervention

Background

Thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) is considered the first-line therapy in the repair of acute complicated type B aortic dissection (AC-BAD). Given the difficulty of designing randomized trials in this surgical cohort, long-term outcome data is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis provide a complete aggregation of reported long-term survival and freedom from reintervention of AC-BAD patients based on the existing literature.

Methods

Three databases were searched from date of database inception to January 2021. The relevant references were identified and baseline cohort characteristics, survival and freedom from reintervention were extracted. The primary endpoints were survival and freedom from reintervention, whilst secondary endpoints were post-operative outcomes such as cord ischemia and endoleak. Kaplan-Meier curves were digitized and aggregated as per established procedure.

Results

A total of 2,812 references were identified in the literature search for review, with 46 selected for inclusion. A total of 2,565 patients were identified, of which 1,920 (75%) were male. The mean age of the cohort was 59.8±5.8. Actuarial survival at 2, 4, 6 and 10 years was 87.5%, 83.2%, 78.5% and 69.7%, respectively. Freedom from all secondary reintervention at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 years was 74.7%, 69.1%, 65.7%, 63.9% and 60.9%, respectively. When accounting for study quality, actuarial survival at 2, 4, 6 and 8 years was 85.4%, 79.1%, 69.8% and 63.1%, respectively. Freedom from all secondary reintervention at 2, 4, 6 and 8 years was 73.2%, 67.6%, 63.7% (maintained), respectively.

Conclusions

TEVAR is associated with promising long-term survival extended to 10 years, though rates of freedom from reintervention remain an ongoing point for improvement. Randomized controlled trials comparing endovascular with open repair in the setting of acute, complicated type B aortic dissection are needed.

Unique characteristics of the type B aortic dissection patients with malperfusion in the Vascular Quality Initiative

OBJECTIVE

Type B aortic dissection (TBAD) complicated by malperfusion carries high morbidity and mortality. The present study was undertaken to compare the characteristics of malperfusion and uncomplicated cohorts and to evaluate the long-term differences in survival using a granular, national registry.

METHODS

Patients with TBAD entered into the thoracic endovascular aortic repair/complex endovascular aortic repair module of the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2010 to 2019 were included. The demographic, radiographic, operative, postoperative, in-hospital, and long-term reintervention data were compared between the malperfusion and uncomplicated TBAD groups using t tests and χ² analysis, as appropriate. Overall survival was compared using Cox regression to generate survival curves.

RESULTS

Of the 2820 included patients, 2267 had uncomplicated TBAD and 553 had malperfusion. The patients with malperfusion were younger (age, 55.8 vs 61.2 years; P < .001), were more often male (79.7% vs 68.1%; P < .001), had a higher preoperative creatinine (1.8 vs 1.1 mg/dL; P < .001), had more often presented with an American Society of Anesthesiologists class of 4 or 5 (81.9% vs 58.4%; P < .001), and had more often presented with urgent status (77.4% vs 32.8%; P < .001). In contrast, the uncomplicated TBAD group had had more medical comorbidities, including coronary artery disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and a larger aortic diameter (4.0 cm vs 4.9 cm; P < .001). The malperfusion group more frequently had proximal zones of disease in zones 0 to 2 (38.6% vs 31.5%; P = .002) and distal zones of disease in zones 9 and above (78.7% vs 46.2%; P < .001), with a greater number of aortic zones traversed (7.7 vs 5.1; P < .001) and a greater frequency of dissection extension into branch vessels (61.8% vs 23.1%; P < .001). Patients with malperfusion also exhibited greater case complexity, with a greater need for branch vessel stenting and longer procedure times. The overall incidence of postoperative complications was greater in the malperfusion group (39.4% vs 17.1%; P < .001) and included a greater rate of spinal cord ischemia (6.3% vs 2.2%; P < .001), acute kidney injury (10.4% vs 0.9%; P < .001), and in-hospital mortality (11.6% vs 5.6%; P < .001). In-hospital reintervention was also greater for the malperfusion patients (14.5% vs 7.4%; P < .001), although the incidence of long-term reinterventions was similar between the two groups (8.7% vs 9.7%; P = .548). A proximal zone of disease in zone 0 to 2 was associated with decreased survival. In contrast, a distal zone of disease in 9 and above, in-hospital reintervention, and long-term follow-up were associated with increased survival. Despite these differences, long-term survival did not differ between the malperfusion and uncomplicated groups (P = .320.) CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting with TBAD and malperfusion represent a unique cohort. Despite the greater need for branch vessel stenting and in-hospital reintervention, they had similar long-term reintervention rates and survival compared with those with uncomplicated TBAD. These data lend insight with regard to the observed differences between uncomplicated and malperfusion TBAD.

Prognostic dynamic nomogram integrated with metabolic acidosis for in-hospital mortality and organ malperfusion in acute type B aortic dissection patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Organ malperfusion is a lethal complication in acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD). The aim of present study is to develop a nomogram integrated with metabolic acidosis to predict in-hospital mortality and organ malperfusion in patients with ATBAD undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

The nomogram was derived from a retrospectively study of 286 ATBAD patients who underwent TEVAR from 2010 to 2017 at a single medical center. Model performance was evaluated from discrimination and calibration capacities, as well as clinical effectiveness. The results were validated using a prospective study on 77 patients from 2018 to 2019 at the same center.

RESULTS

In the multivariate analysis of the derivation cohort, the independent predictors of in-hospital mortality and organ malperfusion identified were base excess, maximum aortic diameter ≥ 5.5 cm, renal dysfunction, D-dimer level ≥ 5.44 μg/mL and albumin amount ≤ 30 g/L. The penalized model was internally validated by bootstrapping and showed excellent discriminatory (bias-corrected c-statistic, 0.85) and calibration capacities (Hosmer-Lemeshow P value, 0.471; Brier Score, 0.072; Calibration intercept, - 0.02; Slope, 0.98). After being applied to the external validation cohort, the model yielded a c-statistic of 0.86 and Brier Score of 0.097. The model had high negative predictive values (0.93-0.94) and moderate positive predictive values (0.60-0.71) for in-hospital mortality and organ malperfusion in both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

A predictive nomogram combined with base excess has been established that can be used to identify high risk ATBAD patients of developing in-hospital mortality or organ malperfusion when undergoing TEVAR.

Early outcomes associated with use of the Zenith TX2 Dissection Endovascular Graft for the treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate short term outcomes related to the use of the Zenith TX2 Dissection Endovascular Graft (ZDEG) and the Zenith Dissection Bare stent (ZDES) for the treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissections.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter case cohort study collated data from 10 European institutions for patients with both complicated and uncomplicated type B aortic dissection treated with ZDEG and ZDES between 2011 and 2018. The primary end point was mortality at 30 and 90 days. Secondary end points included complications related to TEVAR, such as, type Ia endoleak, stroke, paraparesis, paraplegia, and retrograde type A dissection (RTAD). Statistical analysis was carried out using the t test, or one-way analysis of variance and the χ² or Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

We treated 120 patients (87 male; mean age, 62.7 ± 12.2years) either in the acute 76 (63.3%), subacute 16 (13.3%), or chronic 28 (23.3%) phase. Seven patients (5.8%) died within 30 days after the index procedure and two (1.7%) between 30 and 90 days. There was one instance of postoperative RTAD in a patient treated for rupture. Stroke and paraplegia occurred in three (2.5%) and five (4.2%), patients, respectively. Eight patients (6.7%) had a type Ia endoleak in the perioperative period. There were no instances of paraplegia, no permanent dialysis, and no requirement for adjunctive superior mesenteric or celiac artery stenting in the 33 patients (27.5%) who were treated by concurrent placement of ZDES distal to the ZDEG. The length and distal oversizing of ZDEG components used was less in this group.

CONCLUSIONS

The present series demonstrates a low (<1%) RTAD rate and favorable morbidity and mortality. The lower rate of paraplegia, dialysis, and visceral artery stenting in the cohort that had adjunctive use of ZDES is compelling and merits further assessment.

Arc of Buhler: A lifesaving anatomic variation. A case report

The presence of malperfusion syndrome in cases of complicated acute type B aortic dissection is a negative predictive factor and urgent intervention is indicated. Anatomic variations, such as the Arc of Buhler, contribute anastomotic channels and can preserve the visceral blood supply. In this case report, we describe the overall management of a 54-year-old man who presented with a type B aortic dissection. Initially, conservative management was chosen, as indicated for an uncomplicated type B dissection, but the dissection deteriorated. Despite the fact that severe occlusion of the celiac artery was detected on Computed Tomography (CT) angiography, the Arc of Buhler anatomical variation was present, contributing adequate visceral blood supply. After considering this finding, the patient was treated effectively with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

A meta-analysis of combined proximal stent grafting with or without adjunctive distal bare stent for the management of aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of placement of a proximal covered stent graft combined with a distal bare stent are controversial because of the lack of evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the outcomes of combined proximal covered stent grafting with distal bare stenting (BS group) and proximal covered stent grafting without distal bare stenting (non-BS group).

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases and key references were searched up to January 26, 2019. Predefined outcomes of interest were mortality, morbidity, and postoperative assessment of aortic remodeling. We pooled risk ratios (RRs) of the outcomes of interest using fixed effects model or random effects model.

RESULTS

Overall, eight observational studies involving 914 patients were included. There were no significant differences in overall aorta-related mortality (RR, 0.54; confidence interval [CI], 0.24-1.24; P = .15), complete thoracic false lumen (FL) thrombosis rate (RR, 1.23; CI, 0.83-1.81; P = .30), or complete abdominal FL thrombosis rate (RR, 1.96; CI, 0.68-5.69; P = .21) between the BS group and the non-BS group. The BS group had a lower rate of partial thoracic FL thrombosis (RR, 0.40; CI, 0.25-0.65; P = .0002), a lower stent graft-induced new entry rate (RR, 0.08; CI, 0.02-0.41; P = .003), and a lower reintervention rate (RR, 0.42; CI, 0.26-0.69; P = .0005).

CONCLUSIONS

Combined proximal covered stent grafting with distal adjunctive bare stenting had the potential to reduce the partial thoracic FL thrombosis rate and the rates of stent graft-induced new entry and reintervention but was not associated with lower aorta-related mortality or the complete FL thrombosis rate. Further research with a stricter methodology is needed.