Outcomes of emergency in situ laser fenestration-assisted thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with acute Stanford type A aortic dissection unfit for open surgery

Results of the in situ fenestration technique for preservation of the Left subclavian artery in the endovascular repair of acute aortic syndromes in a reference center

INTRODUCTION

The in situ fenestration (ISF) technique consists of maintaining the patency of the aortic branch after the endoprosthesis is already in place as a viable, effective, and fast-performing alternative to revascularize the aortic arch arteries.

OBJECTIVE

To report the experience with a series of cases of endovascular treatment of Acute Aortic Syndromes involving the aortic arch, using the ISF technique in a specialized center.

METHODS

We analyzed data collected from patients treated with ISF during TEVAR for Acute Aortic Syndromes involving the aortic arch from June 2020 to January 2022, assessing perioperative outcomes, including immediate and late success rates, complications, morbidity and mortality, and short and medium term aortic branch patency.

RESULTS

Of the 11 patients eligible for the ISF procedure, 9 were successful, with a technical success rate of 81%. No patient had a type 1A endoleak related to fenestration. There was complete thrombosis of the false lumen in the thoracic aorta in 77% cases. No death was related to the fenestration technique.

CONCLUSION

ISF as feasible and with a high rate of technical success and good results in the short and medium term. Prospective studies with long-term clinical follow-up are still needed to fully assess the durability of these unreinforced fenestrations.

Emergent In Situ Fenestration in the Ascending Aorta for the Endovascular Repair of a Large Pseudoaneurysm: A Technical Note

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to describe an emergent in situ fenestration (ISF) technique in the ascending aorta for the endovascular repair of a large pseudoaneurysm using a trans-septal needle device through direct right common carotid artery access, in a patient with left ventricular assist device (LVAD).

TECHNIQUE

We performed, in a multidisciplinary team-work approach, an emergent ISF to correct the displacement of a physician-modified thoracic endograft released in the ascending aorta to correct a large anastomotic pseudoaneurysm in a patient who underwent ascending aorta replacement and subsequent LVAD implantation. We used a trans-septal needle device inserted through a direct access to the right carotid artery and performed an ISF to restore the patency of the outflow ostium of the LVAD. Window was then completed and stabilized with a nitinol balloon expandable covered stent graft obtaining an effective exclusion of the anastomotic aortic aneurism and the regular patency of the LVAD outflow graft with no signs of leaks.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary teamwork approach can be crucial in challenging procedures where an alternative approach may lead to problem solving. The ISF technique may be a valid option to adopt in emergency cases in which no other technical solutions are suitable.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The endovascular approach has become more and more frequent for the treatment of vascular pathologies, getting increasingly refined and complex. Thereby the chance of incurring intraprocedural troubles has grown and bailout strategies should always be present. In situ fenestration is a technique to be aware of and that could help you recover from difficult situations. We report a possible rescue maneuver that can be applied also in arduous anatomies such as the ascending aorta. Moreover, we would like to highlight the importance of a multidisciplinary working environment that can enrich our everyday practice accomplishing effective and unexpected solutions.

Early and Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair Using In Situ Laser Fenestration

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to present single-center outcomes in patients treated with in situ laser fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair (LFTEVAR) for various aortic arch pathologies and assess the impact of increasing experience.

METHODS

The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was followed. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected single aortic center data was conducted, including baseline information and peri- and post-operative outcomes of consecutive patients managed with LFTEVAR for aortic arch pathologies. Patients were enrolled from April 1, 2017 to January 31, 2023. The cohort was dichotomized to compare early (2017-2019) and late experience (2020-2023). Primary outcomes were peri-operative mortality and cerebrovascular morbidity.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were included (63.3% males, mean age 69.8±9.6 years); 21.4% presented with aortic ruptures. Aortic aneurysm involving the aortic arch was the most frequent pathology (53.3%). Forty target vessels (TVs) were revascularized, including 19 left subclavian arteries (47.5%) and 17 left common carotid arteries (42.5%). Double fenestrations were performed in 10 patients. The proximal landing zone was Ishimaru zone 0 in 5 patients (16.7%) and zone 1 in 13 patients (43.3%). Technical success was 93%. No spinal cord ischemia was recorded, and 3 patients (10%) suffered a post-operative stroke, of which 1 was major (3.3%). The median follow-up was 12 months (range=1-48 months). Thirty-day and follow-up mortality rates were 13.5% and 15.3%, respectively. Target vessel instability was 10%, of which 3.8% required reintervention. There was no statistically significant difference in outcomes between the early and late experience groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair of the aortic arch performed in experienced aortic centers is associated with low early mortality and stroke rates. It is a safe and effective therapeutic option in patients considered unfit for open repair.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Custom-made devices for arch pathologies requiring urgent repair are not an option because of manufacturing delays. Off-the-shelf devices with single branch arch prostheses, and outside IFU techniques such as parallel-grafts and surgeon-modified endografts have been proposed in this setting. Another off-the-shelf alternative is in situ laser fenestration thoracic endovascular repair (LFTEVAR), which addresses many limitations of the other off-the-shelf options. Our study reports the outcomes of 30 patients treated with LFTEVAR, showing that it is a viable therapeutic option in patients considered unfit for open repair acknowledging that sufficient experience with complex endovascular aortic repair is mandatory to achieve acceptable outcomes in these high-risk patients with challenging aortic anatomies.

Anatomic feasibility of a modular Endo-Bentall stent graft system for type A aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

The implementation of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with type A aortic dissection has been strictly constrained due to the pulsatile movement and distensibility and the insufficient length of landing zones on ascending aorta. The most prevalent anatomical limitation is the insufficient length of proximal and distal landing zones. We propose a modularly designed Endo-Bentall stent graft system to broaden the scope of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in the ascending aorta by covering intimal tears in the aortic root and ascending aorta and reconstructing coronary arteries. This study was conducted to assess the anatomical feasibility of a novel stent graft design.

METHODS

In this study, we included 152 patients with type A aortic dissection for image measurement and analysis. All computed tomography angiography images were assessed on a 3mensio Workstation version 10.2 (3mensio Medical Imaging B.V.) utilizing the centerline method. We compared the diameters and lengths at various planes in relation to the proposed anatomical criteria for the modular Endo-Bentall stent graft system.

RESULTS

The patients were predominantly male (67.1%), with a median age of 56.5 years (interquartile range, 50.0-65.0 years). Among all aortic dissections, 91.5% extended proximally to the sinotubular junction, whereas only 8.6% were restricted to the tubular ascending aorta. The median perimeter-derived diameter of the aortic annulus was 24.1 mm. The median maximum aortic diameter at the sinotubular junction and brachiocephalic trunk were 44.6 mm and 43.5 mm, respectively. The median height of the left coronary artery, right coronary artery, and sinus of Valsalva were 12.7 mm, 16.7 mm, and 28.4 mm, respectively. After applying exclusion criteria, 66.4% of all patients were anatomically eligible for the modular Endo-Bentall stent graft system. A total of 85.1% of patients were suitable for stent grafts with lengths of 70 mm, 80 mm, or 90 mm. Both antegradely and retrogradely tapered stent grafts were required, according to the diameter differences between the STJ and brachiocephalic trunk.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilizing the modular Endo-Bentall stent-graft design, approximately two-thirds of patients with type A aortic dissection are anatomically eligible for endovascular repair. Further animal studies are required to optimize the device design.

Endovascular Treatment of Type A Aortic Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Using Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data

OBJECTIVE

The undisputed gold standard of treatment for type A aortic dissections (TAAD) is open surgery. Anecdotal reports have assessed thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) as a last resort for highly selected candidates. The present study aims to evaluate endovascular outcomes in TAAD patients who are unsuitable for open surgery whilst having TEVAR-compatible aortic anatomy.

METHODS

A PRISMA-compliant systematic search of the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases was performed up to 19 May 2022. Time-to-event data were reconstructed using Kaplan-Meier curves from the source literature.

RESULTS

In 20 eligible studies, 311 patients underwent TEVAR for acute, subacute, or chronic TAAD. Mean age at the time of the operation was 60.70 ± 8.00 years and 75.48% (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 60.33-88.46%) of the included patients were males. Mean operative time was 169.40 ± 30.70 min. Overall, 0.44% (95% CI, 0.00-4.83%) of the cases were converted to salvage open surgery. Technical failure, stroke, and endoleaks occurred in 0.22%, 0.1%, and 8.52% of the cohort, respectively. Thirty-day postoperative complication rate was 7.08% (95% CI, 1.52-14.97%), whereas late complications developed in 16.89% (95% CI, 7.75-27.88%) of the patients. One-, three-, and five-year survival rates were estimated at 87.15%, 82.52% and 82.31%, respectively. Reintervention was required in 8.38% of the cohort over a mean follow-up of 32.40 ± 24.40 months.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR seems to be feasible in highly selected patients with TAAD who cannot tolerate open surgery. Overcoming technical limitations and acquiring long-term data are warranted to safely define the place of endovascular treatment in the armamentarium of TAAD repair.

Comparison of Chimney and Fenestrated Techniques for Supra-Aortic Branch Revascularization During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the technical and clinical outcomes of fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (F-TEVAR) and chimney thoracic endovascular aortic repair (CH-EVAR) of aortic disease.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were systematically searched to identify studies on the management of thoracic aortic pathologies using chimney or fenestrated techniques published between 2000 and 2022. Individual studies provided at least one of the following essential outcomes: technical success, immediate and follow-up type I endoleak, 30-day and aorta-related mortality, cerebral events and supra-aortic branch patency.

RESULTS

24 chimney (1106 patients) and 21 fenestrated technique studies (1040 patients) were included. The scope of the study encompassed various thoracic aortic conditions, such as thoracic aortic dissection, thoracic aortic aneurysm, thoracic aortic ulcer, and other thoracic aortic diseases. Technical success was defined as the handling of the principal ailment affecting the aorta, devoid of any instances of complications. The technical success rates were higher in fenestrated group compared with chimney group (98.0% vs. 95.8% p < 0.001), and the rate of type I endoleak either immediately or during follow-up was higher in the chimney technique group (9.3% vs. 1.3% p < 0.001, 4.0% vs. 0.0% p < 0.001). The chimney technique group had higher 30-day mortality and aorta-related mortality than those in the fenestrated technique group (2.1% vs. 0.3% p < 0.001, 0.4% vs. 0.0% p < 0.001). Morbidity rates of cerebral events and supra-aortic branch patency were same in both groups (2.2% vs. 1.1% p = 0.116, 98.2% vs. 99.4% p = 0.094). The chimney technique group had longer operative time (110.0 min vs. 90.8 min p < 0.001). Two groups had same fluoroscopy time (34.0 min vs. 33.4 min p = 0.614).

CONCLUSIONS

The finding suggest that both the chimney and fenestrated techniques are efficacious in supra-aortic branch reconstruction. However, the fenestrated technique exhibits potential superiority as an interventional strategy, as it demonstrates a lower incidence of type 1 Endoleak, 30-day mortality, and aorta-related death following TEVAR.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of laser, needle, and "quick fenestrater" in in situ fenestration during thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Background

Special instruments are needed for the revascularization of aortic branches in in situ fenestration during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). This prospective study compared the effectiveness and safety of three currently used fenestraters: laser, needle, and Quick Fenestrater (QF).

Methods

In all, 101 patients who underwent TEVAR for aortic disease (dissection, n = 62; aneurysm, n = 16, or ulcer, n = 23) were enrolled. All patients were randomly assigned to three groups: 34 were assigned to laser fenestration, 36 to needle fenestration, and 31 to QF fenestration. The epidemiological data, treatment, imaging findings, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed using data from the medical records.

Results

The technical success rates of the laser, needle, and QF fenestration groups were 94.1%, 94.4%, and 100% (p > 0.05). After correction of mixed factors such as age and gender, it was showed the average operative time (Laser group: 130.01 ± 9.36 min/ Needle group: 149.80 ± 10.18 min vs. QF group: 101.10 ± 6.75 min, p < 0.001), fluoroscopy time (Laser group: 30.16 ± 9.81 min/ Needle group: 40.20 ± 9.91 min vs. QF group: 19.91 ± 5.42 min, p < 0.001), fenestration time (Laser group 5.50 ± 3.10 min / Needle group 3.50 ± 1.50 min vs. QF group 0.67 ± 0.06 min, p < 0.001), and guide wire passage time after fenestration (Laser group 5.10 ± 1.70 min / Needle group 4.28 ± 1.60 min vs. QF group 0.07 ± 0.01 min, p < 0.001) were all shorter with QF fenestration than with the other two tools. The overall perioperative complication rates of the laser, needle, and QF fenestration groups were 5.9%, 5.6%, and 0% (p > 0.05): One case of sheath thermal injury and one case of vertebral artery ischemia occurred in the laser fenestration group; one case each of access site hematoma and brachial artery thrombosis were reported in the needle fenestration group. 89 (88.1%, 89/101) patients were followed for a median of 12.6 ± 1.6 months. The overall postoperative complication rates of the laser, needle, and QF fenestration groups were 3.3%, 6.5%, and 0% (p > 0.05): In the laser fenestration group, there was one death due to postoperative ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; in the needle fenestration group, one patient developed occlusion of the bridge stent; no complications occurred in the QF group.

Conclusion

All three fenestration methods were effective in reconstructing supra-arch artery during TEVAR. QF fenestration required less contrast agent, with a shorter surgery duration and fewer complications than laser and needle fenestration.

Feasibility and safety of Stanford A aortic dissection complete endovascular repair system in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is a catastrophic disease with high morbidity and mortality. Although open surgery is still the gold standard for the treatment of ATAAD, some patients, with advanced age and multiple comorbidities, can only receive medical management alone. Nowadays, thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) provides a potential treatment option for the patient with ATAAD, but traditional stent grafts (SGs), which are not designed for the ATAAD, are inapplicable to the unique anatomy of the aortic arch. Therefore, we innovatively created the BRIDGE system (Chuangxin Medical, Shenzhen, China), a complete endovascular reconstruction system designed to treat ATAAD. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of the novel Stanford A aortic dissection complete endovascular reconstruction system in a porcine model.

METHOD

The BRIDGE system consists of the type A stent system and the type C stent system. Between November 2020 and March 2021, three white swine were utilized in the study. The BRIDGE system was deployed via the transcatheter approach under angiographic guidance. The swine(n = 3) treated with our system were evaluated using angiography before sacrifice 1-month after implantation, which was followed by gross specimen evaluation and histological examination of harvested tissues.

RESULT

The acute procedure success rate was 100% (3/3). The immediate post-procedural angiography showed that both type A SGs and type C SGs were deployed in satisfactory locations, with patency of the supra-aortic trunk and no endoleak. The cumulative mortality of 30-day was 0% without any adverse events. No device migration or leakage was observed angiographically, before sacrifice. The gross observation confirmed a type A SG covered part of the entry of anonyma. Favorable endothelialization, no thrombogenesis, and slight inflammatory infiltration of the tissues around the device were confirmed by microscopic examinations in all pigs.

CONCLUSION

It was feasible and secure to use Stanford A aortic dissection complete endovascular reconstruction system to implement a transcatheter endovascular repair in a porcine model. With this novel system, treating acute type A aortic dissection may be more efficient and secure in human.

A Systematic Review of Contemporary Outcomes from Aortic Arch In Situ Laser Fenestration During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

In situ laser fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (L-FEVAR) is a novel and creative solution for complex aortic pathologies in the urgent and emergency setting. Outcomes of this technique, however, are poorly reported. We sought to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and outcomes of L-FEVAR in aortic arch pathologies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review and analysis were conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses and Cochrane guidelines. A search was conducted using Google, PubMed, and Scopus to identify studies evaluating L-FEVAR. Two independent reviewers determined study inclusion. Case reports and series including < 10 patients were excluded. Reviewers also assessed the methodological quality and extracted data regarding outcomes. A meta-analysis of endoleak event rates was conducted using a fixed-effect model due to small sample size.

RESULTS

Eight studies met inclusion criteria between 2013 and 2021. Most studies were retrospective (87.5%) with median follow-up duration of 12.5 months (range 10-42). There were 440 patients included (range 15-148), mostly men (64%). Mean age was 61 years (range 53-68). Included patients were all symptomatic with L-FEVAR being technically successful in 93.3% of cases. The main indication for aortic arch intervention was aortic dissection. Single fenestrations occurred most frequently (68%), followed by triple (22%) then double fenestrations (9%). Meta-analysis of 8 studies (n = 440) demonstrated an endoleak event rate of 0.06 (95% confidence interval 0.04-0.09, P < 0.001) with no observed statistically significant heterogeneity of effects (Q = 7.91, P = 0.34). The median operative time was 162 min (range 53-252) with median length of stay of 10 days (range 7-17). Primary branch patency was 96.6%. Secondary patency rate was 97%. Pooled complication rates such as endoleak occurred in 4.8%, stroke in 2.0%, spinal cord ischemia in 0.2%, retrograde dissection in 0.9%, and 30-day death in 2.0%. Access complications occurred in 0.4%. Antiplatelet regimen was poorly reported in the study cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In situ laser fenestration is a feasible, safe, and effective approach to treat aortic arch disease in patients who are unsuitable for open or custom-made endovascular means. High technical success and excellent short-term branch patency can be achieved. These single-institution series exhibit promising short-term outcomes. In a similar paradigm to investigational device exemptions studies for custom-made and physician modified endografts, these preliminary data make a persuasive argument for larger long-term multi-institutional prospective study of this promising technique.

Systematic Review on In Situ Laser Fenestrated Repair for the Endovascular Management of Aortic Arch Pathologies

Background: In situ laser-fenestrated thoracic aortic endovascular repair (FTEVAR) has emerged as a valuable alternative for aortic arch management. This review assessed the early and follow-up outcomes of in situ laser-FTEVAR in aortic arch pathologies. Methods: The PRISMA statement was followed. The English literature was searched, via Ovid, until 15 October 2022. Observational studies, published after 2000, reporting on early and follow-up outcomes for the in situ laser-FTEVAR were eligible. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. Primary outcomes were the technical success, stroke, and mortality at 30-days, and the secondary were the mortality and reintervention during follow-up. Results: Six retrospective studies from 591 and 247 patients were included. Fifty-nine (23.9%) patients were managed for aortic arch aneurysms and 146 (59.1%) for dissections; 22.6% of them for type A. Technical success was at 98% (range 90–100%). Eight patients died (3.2%) and 11 cases presented any type of stroke (4.5%) during the 30-day follow-up. The mean follow-up was 15 months (1–40 months). Ten deaths were reported (4.2%); one was aortic-related (10%). Thirteen re-interventions (6.0%) were performed. Conclusions: In situ laser-FTEVAR for aortic arch repair may be performed with high technical success and low 30-day and midterm follow-up mortality, stroke, and re-intervention rates when applied in well selected patients and performed by experienced teams.

Internal iliac artery preservation during endovascular aortic repair using in situ laser fenestration

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the technical and short-term clinical outcomes of internal iliac artery (IIA) reconstruction during endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with in situ laser-assisted fenestration in cases of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in which the iliac artery is unfit for an internal branched device (IBD).

METHODS

In the present single-institution retrospective study, we analyzed patients with AAAs who had undergone EVAR with in situ laser-assisted fenestration for IIA reconstruction between January 2018 and April 2021. The study included patients with iliac artery anatomy unfit for the use of commercial IBDs. The primary safety end point was freedom from major adverse events and unplanned reinterventions within 30 days. The primary efficacy end point was freedom from IIA restenosis, reintervention, and symptoms due to pelvic ischemia at 1 year after the procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients requiring IIA reconstruction but with anatomy unfit for IBD placement were treated with in situ laser-assisted fenestration during EVAR for aortoiliac aneurysms during the study period. The mean age of our patients was 72 years, and 90% were men. The technical success rate was 100%. No patient had died within 30 days after the procedure. A suspicious IIA perforation had occurred in one patient, which was treated with an additional covered stent, for a primary safety end point of 95.0%. After a mean follow-up of 11 months, all except for one of the reconstructed IIAs were patent. Three patients reported symptoms of buttock claudication on the IIA occluded side at their 3-month follow-up after the procedure. However, these symptoms had subsided in two of these patients at 6 months. Type II endoleaks without sac expansion had occurred in two patients owing to retrograde blood flow from the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar artery. Both patients were kept under close surveillance. The rate of freedom from major adverse events and unplanned reinterventions within 30 days (primary efficacy end point) was 86.3% at 1 year after procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

In situ laser-assisted fenestration was found to be a safe and effective alternative method for IIA reconstruction during EVAR for aortoiliac aneurysms in patients with anatomy unfit for IBD.

Technical details of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with fenestrations for thoracic aortic pathologies involving the aortic arch: A Chinese expert consensus

Thoracic aortic pathologies involving the aortic arch are a great challenge for vascular surgeons. Maintaining the patency of supra-aortic branches while excluding the aortic lesion remains difficult. Thoracic EndoVascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) with fenestrations provides a feasible and effective approach for this type of disease. The devices needed in the procedure are off-the-shelf, with promising results reported in many medical centers. Up until now, there have been no guidelines focusing exclusively on the details of the TEVAR technique with fenestrations. Experts from China have discussed the technical parts of both in situ fenestrations (needle and laser) and fenestrations in vitro (direction inversion strategy and guidewire-assisted strategy), providing a technical reference to standardize the procedure and improve its results.

Clinical Validation of the Impact of Branch Stent Extension on Hemodynamics in ISF-TEVAR Involving LSA Reconstruction

Background

The study of hemodynamics regarding thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is helpful to improve the surgical efficacy.

Objective

Correlations between hemodynamic changes and branch stent extension length and interference factors for branch stent extension length of in situ fenestration TEVAR (ISF-TEVAR) involving the left subclavian artery (LSA) were evaluated.

Materials and Methods

This study retrospectively analyzed 196 patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection who received in situ laser fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair with LSA fenestration from April 2014 to March 2021. Branch stent extension to the main stent graft was evaluated by the computed tomographic angiography (CTA). Hemodynamic change of LSA was defined as a 20 mmHg interbrachial systolic pressure difference. The factors affecting the extension of the branch stent were also evaluated.

Results

All patients underwent ISF-TEVAR with LSA fenestration, and there was no recurrence during the follow-up. The mean length of the branch stent extension was 10.37 ± 0.34 mm, which was used to divide the patients into long and short groups. Asymptomatic hemodynamic changes (defined as a 20 mmHg interbrachial systolic pressure difference) in LSA were observed in 61 patients undergoing ISF-TEVAR involving LSA fenestration. The Spearman correlation analysis showed extension length of a branch stent &gt;1.5 cm elevated the risk of hemodynamic changes.

Conclusion

Overall, we conclude that branch stent extension length &gt;1.5 cm induced LSA hemodynamic changes. Appropriate shortening of the stent extension length can improve the curative effect of ISF-TEVAR, especially when faced with a type II/III aortic arch and stent angles of &lt;30 degrees.

A systematic review of experimental and clinical studies reporting on in situ laser fenestration of aortic endografts

OBJECTIVE

To summarize available in-situ laser fenestration (ISLF) literature, including experimental studies with their subsequent recommendations regarding optimal fenestration technique and fabric; as well as the short and mid-term results of clinical studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of English articles was performed in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database and EMBASE, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines by two researchers. The search period was without starting date until the 31^st August 2020, and search terms included were in situ, laser, fenestration, and endograft. Quality assessment of the studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale by two other independent researchers.

RESULTS

A total of 19 clinical studies were included, with a total of 428 patients (390 supra-aortic trunk ISLF, 38 visceral vessel ISLF). The technical success was 96.9% and 95.6% supra-aortic and visceral vessel ISLF, respectively. Most studies have less than 12-month follow-up, and the longest available follow-up (in one study) was 5-years for left-subclavian fenestration and 17-months for visceral vessel ISLF. Overall, the quality of the evaluated clinical studies was low. Six experimental studies were included, with the highest level of evidence suggesting fenestration of multifilament polyethylene terephthalate grafts, followed by dilation with either a 6- or 8-mm non-compliant balloon.

CONCLUSION

Experimental studies favour the use of multifilament polyethylene terephthalate , followed by dilation with non-compliant balloons as the most durable "in-vitro" technique for ISLF. Short-term outcomes for arch and visceral vessel revascularization are promising, with low rates of in-hospital mortality, stroke, and end-organ ischemia. Nonetheless, the long-term durability of ISLF is yet to be determined and they should be limited to selected symptomatic or urgent cases.

Aortic Dissection: Branched, Fenestrated, and Parallel Aortic Stent Grafts in the Ascending Aorta and Arch

Open surgical repair of dissections and post-dissection degenerative aneurysms involving the ascending thoracic aorta and aortic arch, whether in the acute or post-repair state, is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Recent advancements in minimally invasive endovascular techniques have expanded the role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for dissections and dissection-related arch pathologies. Image-guided endovascular techniques, such as in situ fenestrated grafts, chimney and/or periscope grafts, along with newly developed commercially available branched aortic devices, have allowed for an increasing number of high-risk operative candidates to undergo definitive repair of aortic arch pathology who otherwise would have been destined for non-operative management. This paper reviews the data, pre-procedural planning, and technical considerations for complex TEVAR techniques for ascending and aortic arch dissections and dissection-related aneurysms.

Self-Radiopaque Markers Guiding Physician-Modified Fenestration (S-Fenestration) in Aortic Arch Endovascular Repair

Backgrounds and Objectives: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has currently become the “first-line choice” for descending aortic pathologies. For pathologies located at the aortic arch, TEVAR with physician-modified fenestration (PMF) has been gained popularity as an alternative choice. However, stent fenestration is an experience-dependent technique and comes with possible adverse events such as misalignment. This study aims to introduce the self-radiopaque PMF (SF), which uses the radiopaque marker as a guiding indicator.

Methods: This is a single-center retrospective study of 125 patients who underwent the SF-TEVAR in Second Xiangya Hospital from December 2015 to December 2020. Data include basic clinical information and technique records of SF-TEVAR with follow-up results.

Results: According to the SF-TEVAR protocol, we have performed the procedures on 125 patients and obtained an instant success rate of 98.4%. A total of 140 aortic stent-grafts and 44 bridging stents have been implanted in this study. The operation time is 64.6 ± 19.3 min, X-ray exposure time (from first digital subtraction angiography (DSA) to last DSA) is 25.6 ± 14.3 min, and contrast volume is 82.2 ± 22.6 ml. The success rate of PMF alignment is 98.4%. One bailout stent-graft was implanted into the left subclavian artery (LSA) by the chimney technique (0.8%). One fenestration was successfully and immediately corrected after misalignment (0.8%). Large simultaneous fenestration was performed in six patients (4.8%) for the left common carotid artery (LCCA) and LSA and in two patients (1.6%) for IA, LCCA, and LSA. One hundred twenty-two out of 125 patients' LSAs have been kept patent by the technique during the follow-up. The bridging stent group consists of 44 patients who received LSA stents, while the non-bridging stent group includes the other 81 patients. Type I endoleak has occurred in seven patients (5.6%) 1 week after the procedure. During follow-up (23 ± 18 months), survival rate is 95.7% and branch artery patent rate is 97.4%.

Conclusions: The SF-TEVAR technique, which utilizes the radiopaque marker in stent-graft as an indication for PMF in TEVAR, seems a likely safe, effective, and efficient procedure that brings acceptable survival rate and branch artery patency rate. SF-TEVAR serves as a progressive alternative method to keep the branch artery patent in aortic arch endovascular reconstruction.

Cardiac Surgery 2020 Reviewed

In 2020, nearly 30,000 published references appeared in the PubMed for the search term "cardiac surgery." While SARS-CoV-2 affected the number of surgical procedures, it did not affect outcomes reporting. Using the PRISMA approach, we selected relevant publications and prepared a results-oriented summary. We reviewed primarily the fields of coronary and conventional valve surgery and their overlap with interventional alternatives. The coronary field started with a discussion on trial data value and their interpretation. Registry comparisons of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention confirmed outcomes for severe coronary artery disease and advanced comorbidities with CABG. Multiple arterial grafting was best. In aortic valve surgery, meta-analyses of randomized trials report that transcatheter aortic valve implantation may provide a short-term advantage but long-term survival may be better with classic aortic valve replacement (AVR). Minimally invasive AVR and decellularized homografts emerged as hopeful techniques. In mitral and tricuspid valve surgery, excellent perioperative and long-term outcomes were presented for structural mitral regurgitation. For both, coronary and valve surgery, outcomes are strongly dependent on surgeon expertise. Kidney disease increases perioperative risk, but does not limit the surgical treatment effect. Finally, a cursory look is thrown on aortic, transplant, and assist-device surgery with a glimpse into the current stand of xenotransplantation. As in recent years, this article summarizes publications perceived as important by us. It does not expect to be complete and cannot be free of individual interpretation. We aimed to provide up-to-date information for decision-making and patient information.

Laser in situ Fenestration in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Single-Center Analysis

BACKGROUND

Laser in situ fenestration (LISF) is an expanding technique for arch vessel revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). We present a single center's early and midterm outcomes using adjunctive LISF with TEVAR for treatment of various arch pathologies.

METHODS

24 patients underwent TEVAR with LISF (2017-2020). Patients were evaluated by an Aortic Team consisting of cardiothoracic and vascular surgeons and were deemed unfit for open surgical repair. Informed consent emphasized the procedure's off-label nature. Thoracic stent-grafts were sized by preoperative Computed Tomography Angiogram and intraoperative Intravascular Ultrasound, with oversizing determined by pathology. Extra-anatomic debranching was performed in staged or concurrent fashion based on urgency of repair and access site options for branch fenestration. A 2.3 mm Spectranetics laser was used, with access site determined at surgeon discretion. Covered balloon expandable stent-grafts were deployed with 0-10% oversizing.

RESULTS

In 24 patients, a total of 30 fenestrations were created (LSA N = 19, LCCA N = 3, Innominate N = 7, RSA N = 1) with 1 (N = 18) or 2 (N = 6) fenestrations/patient. Indications included aneurysm (8), chronic dissection with aneurysmal degeneration (8), acute dissection (4), intramural hematoma (2), and pseudoaneurysm (2). 13 cases were elective, and 11 were emergent. Technical success was 100%. 12 patients underwent concurrent (N = 8) or staged (N = 4) extra-anatomic bypass. The major complication rate was 21%, including stroke (N = 3) and 30-day mortality (N = 2). The overall complication rate was 58%. Over a mean follow up of 261 days (15-864 days), 7 patients (32%) have required reinterventions.

CONCLUSIONS

LISF for branch revascularization in TEVAR is technically feasible for treating various aortic arch pathologies, demonstrating practicality in both elective and emergent settings. With a morbidity and mortality profile that is favorable compared to that of open repair, LISF with TEVAR is a promising potential option for patients with complex arch pathology and prohibitive open surgical risk.

A Novel Fenestrating Device, "Quick Fenestrater," for Reconstructing Supra-aortic Arteries In Situ during Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

In situ fenestration (ISF) is an effective approach for reconstructing supra-aortic branches during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). A dedicated device is needed for ISF.

METHODS

The "Quick Fenestrater" (QF) underwent in vitro, animal-based, and initial clinical testing. In vitro, the polytetrafluoroethylene and Dacron aortic endografts were fenestrated using the QF, and the structure of the graft, fenestration hole, and shed particulate material were evaluated. Eight white swine had QF-aided ISF combined with TEVAR and bridge stent implantation. The outcomes were assessed using intraoperative angiography and biopsy. Finally, 13 patients were treated with QF-assisted ISF, combined with TEVAR, and the success rate, technical details, and intra- and post-operative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

The endograft structure was not damaged during in vitro testing. The fenestration hole was clean, and no particulate material was detected. In animal studies, all animals survived, the supra-aortic arteries were patent, and the endografts and bridge stents had normal morphology. In clinical studies, the technical success rate was 100%, and no fenestration-related neurological complications or death occurred. One patient had a local access-related hematoma perioperatively and recovered after conservative treatment. Three patients had type III endoleaks, which resolved with no additional treatment. During a mean follow-up of 22.1±6 months, no thoracic complications were identified, and the bridge stents were patent with no endoleaks. No adverse cerebrovascular events, cardiovascular events, or death occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

QF-assisted ISF is a safe and effective method for the reconstruction of supra-aortic branches during TEVAR. Intermediate-term follow-up results validate the application of the novel fenestration device.

Clinical Outcomes of Distal Tapered Restrictive Covered Stent Applied in Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Dissection Involving Zone 0

OBJECTIVE

The safety and efficacy of a distal tapered restrictive covered stent (RCS) applied in the endovascular treatment of aortic dissection involving Zone 0 was evaluated.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analysed 43 patients with acute aortic dissection involving Zone 0 who received in situ laser fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair with distal tapered RCS from January 2015 to February 2019. The indication for the distal tapered RCS procedure was an inappropriate distal size of the main stent graft. Technical success, aortic remodelling, and clinical outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in all patients. The 30 day post-operative mortality rate was 0%. All patients had complete false lumen thrombosis in the stent coverage segment. True lumen volume increased significantly (p < .001) with an average change of 87.0% ± 34.3%, while false lumen volume decreased significantly (p < .001) with an average change of -71.0% ± 13.5% between baseline and 12 months. During the follow up period (mean 28.7 months, range 12-63 months), no distal stent graft induced new entry (SINE) was observed. The average distance between the distal end of the RCS and the coeliac trunk was 57.5 mm. Two (4.7%) patients had spinal cord ischaemia (SCI) and recovered without permanent paraplegia after undergoing conservative treatment.

CONCLUSION

The distal tapered RCS applied in the endovascular treatment of aortic dissection involving Zone 0 is considered to be a feasible and effective approach along with satisfactory aortic remodelling, a low risk of SINE, and SCI. The favourable results are partly explained by selection. No patients had an entry tear near the coronary artery, nor were the coronary arteries, pericardium, or aortic valve involved at the time of repair.

Laser fenestration of aortic arch stent grafts for endovascular treatment of retrograde type A dissection

OBJECTIVES

Retrograde type A dissection (RTAD) is a rare but life-threatening event following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), and its total endovascular treatment is a huge challenge. This research aimed to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, technical success, and medical outcomes of in situ laser fenestration of aortic arch stent grafts during TEVAR of RTAD.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 15 patients with RTAD who received in situ laser fenestration of aortic arch stent grafts during TEVAR between Mar 2016 and Dec 2019. All patients were subjected to intraoperative extracorporeal brain perfusion. The preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative medical data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 15 patients was 64 ± 8 years, 8 of whom were male. The immediate overall technical success rates, including aortic stent deployment were 100% and primary fenestration success was achieved in 13 (86.7%) patients. The mean postoperative length of stay was 10 ± 4 days. Stroke occurred in 1 case. No in-hospital/30-day death nor permanent paraplegia/paresis was observed. The mean follow-up time was 13 ± 5 months. Two type Ia endoleaks were found, but no late occlusion and migration of the supra-aortic branch arteries stents during the follow-up were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The in situ laser fenestration of aortic arch stent grafts during TEVAR of RTAD is a potential total endovascular therapy of RTAD for patients unsuitable for direct surgical repair.

Challenges and experience of setting up an aortic service

Aortic surgery is a complex procedure posing high risks in comparison to other adult cardiac surgeries. Novel surgical approaches including minimally invasive procedures, sutureless aortic valve replacement, and transcatheter aortic valve implantation have been found to be acceptable alternatives to conventional surgeries. In addition, novel endovascular repair techniques and hybrid procedures have been introduced for the management of patients with thoracoabdominal aortic pathologies. However, these modalities are not readily available in every center, and such novel procedures impose a learning curve for surgeons and high costs for affected patients. In this review, we discuss the challenges of setting up an aortic service, having regard to the Iranian experience.