The strategies and outcomes of left subclavian artery revascularization during thoracic endovascular repair for type B aortic dissection

Mid-term results of a prospective study for aortic dissection with a gutter-plugging chimney stent graft

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to access early and mid-term outcomes of a gutter-plugging chimney stent graft for treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissections in the clinical trial Prospective Study for Aortic Arch Therapy with stENt-graft for Chimney technology (PATENCY).

METHODS

Between October 2018 and March 2022, patients with Stanford type B aortic dissections were treated with the Longuette chimney stent graft in 26 vascular centres. The efficiency and the incidence of adverse events over 12 months were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients were included. The technical success rate was 99.33% (149/150). The incidence of immediate postoperative endoleak was 5.33% (8/150, type I, n = 6; type II, n = 1; type IV, n = 1) neurologic complications (stroke or spinal cord ischaemia); the 30-day mortality was 0.67% (1/150) and 1.33% (2/150), respectively. During the follow-up period, the median follow-up time was 11.67 (5-16) months. The patent rate of the Longuette graft was 97.87%. Two patients with type I endoleak underwent reintervention. The follow-up rate of the incidence of retrograde A type aortic dissection was 0.67% (1/150). There was no paraplegia, left arm ischaemia or stent migration.

CONCLUSIONS

For revascularization of the left subclavian artery, the Longuette chimney stent graft can provide an easily manipulated, safe and effective endovascular treatment. It should be considered a more efficient technique to prevent type Ia endoleak. Longer follow-up and a larger cohort are needed to validate these results.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER

NCT03767777.

Predicting the need for subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the effectiveness of left subclavian artery revascularization compared with non-revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and to summarize the current evidence on its indications.

METHODS

A computerized search was conducted across multiple databases, including MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, for studies published up to November 2023. Study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment (using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) were independently conducted by two reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots.

RESULTS

In the 76 included studies, left subclavian artery revascularization was associated with reduced risks of stroke (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.98; n = 15,331), spinal cord ischemia (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56-0.99; n = 11,995), and arm ischemia (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.59; n = 8438). No significant reduction in paraplegia (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.21-1.47; n = 1802) or mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.53-1.12; n = 11,831) was observed. Moreover, the risk of endoleak was comparable in both groups (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.55-2.84; P = .60; n = 793), whereas the risk of reintervention was significantly higher in the revascularization group (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.03-3.83; P = .04; n = 272). Both groups had similar risks of major (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.19-1.09; P = .08; n = 1113), minor (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.01-3.45; P = .27; n = 183), renal (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.12-3.06; P = .55; n = 310), and pulmonary (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.16-2.15; P = .42; n = 8083) complications. The most frequent indications for left subclavian artery revascularization were primary prevention of spinal cord ischemia, augmentation of the landing zone, and primary stroke prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

Left subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair was associated with reduced neurological complications but was not found to impact mortality. The study highlights important indications for revascularization as well as significant predictors of complications, providing a basis for clinical decision-making and future research.

Subclavian artery revascularization with subclavian-carotid transposition for TEVAR and non-TEVAR patients

BACKGROUND

Subclavian artery revascularization (SAR) has become an increasingly performed technique in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR), in order to optimize the proximal landing zone, or in patients with significant atherosclerotic diseases. SAR was usually achieved through carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB) which is daunted by graft and patency-related issues, or through subclavian carotid transposition (SCT) which has recently been reconsidered as a potential solution. Nowadays, multiple endovascular strategies including parallel grafts, chimney graft and branch-fenestrated repair, are available in patients unfit for open SAR. However, there is no consensus on the preferable technique in both TEVAR- and non TEVAR-patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our experience with SCT in terms of overall postoperative adverse events and mid-term patency rate.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study, including all patients who underwent SCT between June 2014 and March 2020 at our Division. Preoperative risk factors, symptoms, intraoperative details, postoperative outcomes and follow-up data were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 27 patients were included in this study. Indications for SCT included aortic arch debranching for TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysm and type B dissection and symptomatic subclavian steal syndrome (SSS). There were no major perioperative adverse events or major neurological complications; five minor adverse events occurred (18.5%) (3 Horner' Syndrome, 1 hematoma requiring reoperation,1 pneumothorax). Peripheral nerve injuries and lymphatic lesions were not recorded. On a mean follow-up of 21±16 months, SCT patency was confirmed in all patients and no deaths occurred. Comparison of baseline and operative characteristics and intraoperative details between groups of patients with or without adverse events did not found differences.

CONCLUSIONS

SCT should be considered a feasible, effective and safe technique for SAR, with low perioperative complications and optimal mid-term patency. This surgical technique appears to provide a lower risk of neurological events and mortality, particularly in TEVAR patients, reducing the complications caused by the coverage of the left subclavian artery.

Comparison of surgical and endovascular left subclavian artery revascularization during thoracic aortic endovascular repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to incorporate data from the latest clinical studies and compare the safety and efficacy of surgical left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization and endovascular LSA revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Methods

This study was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered with the PROSPERO database on 16 April 2023 (CRD42023414579). The Embase, MEDLINE (PubMed), and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from January 2000 to May 2023.

Results

A total of 14 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 1,695 patients, were included for review. The peri-operative stroke rates of the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 3.8% and 2.6%, respectively (P = 0.97). The peri-operative technical success rates for the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 95.6% and 93.0%, respectively (P = 0.24). The peri-operative spinal cord ischemia rates were 1.6% (n = 18) and 1.9% (n = 7) in the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups, respectively (P = 0.90). The peri-operative type Ⅰ endoleak rates for the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 6.6% and 23.2%, respectively (P = 0.25). The subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of peri-operative type I endoleak in the parallel stent group was significantly higher than that in the surgical LSA revascularization group (P < 0.0001). The peri-operative left upper limb ischemia rates for the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 1.2% and 0.6%, respectively (P = 0.96). The peri-operative mortality rates of the surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization groups were 2.0% and 2.0%, respectively (P = 0.88).

Conclusion

There was no significant difference in the terms of short-term outcomes when comparing the two revascularization techniques. The quality of evidence assessed by GRADE scale was low to very-low. Surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization during TEVAR were both safe and effective. Compared with surgical LSA revascularization techniques, parallel stent revascularization of LSA significantly increased the rate of type I endoleak.

Early and midterm outcomes of in situ fenestration via adjustable puncture needle for Ankura aortic stent graft: A single-center experience

OBJECTIVES

An analysis was conducted to demonstrate early and midterm outcomes of using adjustable puncture needle-based in situ fenestration (ISF) technique for Ankura aortic stent graft to reconstruct the supra-arch branch in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 68 cases of aortic lesions with insufficient proximal anchoring area admitted to our department from March 2017 to December 2021 was performed. In situ fenestration thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) was performed at the same time during the operation. Among them, there were fifty-eight cases of thoracic aortic dissection, seven cases of thoracic aortic aneurysm, and three cases of thoracic aortic ulcer. Intraoperative adjustable puncture with needle was used for the Ankura aorta stent graft to perform ISF and reconstruction of the supra-arch branch.

RESULTS

The success rate of ISF was 94.1% (64/68). Only in four cases, attempts were made to create ISF in the left subclavian artery (LSA), and all the four were unsuccessful because of sharp and tortuosity angle. Among them, forty-four cases were only LSA fenestration, and one case was left common carotid artery (LCCA) fenestration + LSA embolism. LSA + left vertebral artery (LVA) fenestration was performed in two cases, LSA fenestration +LCCA chimney was performed in fourteen cases, LCCA + LSA fenestration + innominate artery (INA) chimney was performed in one case, and LCCA fenestration + INA chimney + LSA embolism was performed in two cases. The overall neurologic event rate was 3.1% (spinal cord ischemia 0, with stroke observed in two cases). Postoperatively, one patient (1.6%) died on the third day after TEVAR due to the retrograde dissections. There were four cases of endoleak (6.3%; three type I and one type II). The average follow-up was 29.2 ± 14.4 months, and no patient died during the follow-up period. Three cases of endoleak disappeared, and one case did not increase further. In addition, other two cases of retrograde dissections were observed at 3 and 5 months after TEVAR. Fortunately, they were scheduled for emergency surgery with ascending aorta replacement and improved well. There was only one case of LSA occlusion after ISF which was reconstructed by endovascular treatment. Two patients were found with distal stent graft-induced new entries (dSINE), and TEVAR was performed again during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Early and midterm outcomes demonstrated that ISF via the adjustable puncture needle device for the Ankura aorta stent graft is a feasible and effective treatment method, which can achieve high technical success and satisfactory short-term results.

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.

MANAGEMENT OF LEFT SUBCLAVIAN ARTERY IN TYPE-B AORTIC DISSECTION TREATED WITH THORACIC ENDOVASCULAR AORTA REPAIR

OBJECTIVE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been the favored approach for the treatment of type B aortic dissection (TBAD). To obtain an adequate proximal landing zone, coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA) will often be necessary. The occurrence of possible neurologic complications has continued to be debated. We investigated the management of the LSA in patients with TBAD undergoing endovascular repair.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed and MEDLINE databases to October 2020 for studies of TEVAR for TBAD. Data on the study design, demographics, endograft details, LSA coverage and revascularization, mortality, complications, and follow-up were extracted and analyzed. The effects of LSA coverage and revascularization on neurologic complications and outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 26 reports (24 retrospective and 2 prospective) were deemed eligible for our study. A total of 1483 patients (mean age, 56.9 ± 6.2 years) had undergone TEVAR for acute (n = 932; 62.9%), subacute (n = 36; 2.4%), or chronic (n = 515; 34.7%) TBAD, with a success rate of 97.8% and hospital mortality of 4.9%. The LSA origin had been covered for 707 patients (47.7%), and 326 had undergone LSA revascularization (surgical, n = 96; endovascular, n = 170; unspecified or not reported, n = 60). LSA revascularization was concomitant for 68.1% of cases, after TEVAR for 1.8%, and not reported for 30.1%. Of 1146 patients, 10 (0.9%) had experienced left arm claudication, and the overall stroke rate was 3.3% (2.7% for the LSA group and 1% for the uncovered LSA group; P = .0815). Of the patients with stroke and a covered LSA, 1% (2 of 203) had undergone LSA revascularization and 4.8% (5 of 105) had not (P = .0478). Twenty-six patients (1.9%) had developed paraplegia: 0.7% (3 of 433) with a covered LSA, 1.4% (7 of 491) with an uncovered LSA (P = .3508), and not reported for 16 patients. Endoleak was present in 138 patients (13.4%) at a mean follow-up of 32.1 ± 25.6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review has shown that LSA coverage during endovascular repair for complicated TBAD will does not significantly increase the risk of neurologic complications; however, revascularization of the LSA should be always recommended.

Comparison of techniques for left subclavian artery preservation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of both endovascular and surgical revascularization

Background

Currently, the optimal technique to revascularize the left subclavian artery (LSA) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) remains controversial. Our study seeks to characterize early and late clinical results and to assess the advantages and disadvantages of endovascular vs. surgical strategies for the preservation of LSA.

Methods

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library searches were conducted under the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analyses) standards. Only literature published after January 1994 was included. Studies reporting on endovascular revascularization (ER), surgical revascularization (SR) for LSA preservation were included. 30-day mortality and morbidity rates, restenosis rates, and rates of early and late reintervention are measured as outcomes.

Results

A total of 28 studies involving 2,759 patients were reviewed. All articles were retrospective in design. Single-arm analysis found no significant statistical differences in ER vs. SR in terms of 30-day mortality and perioperative complication rates. The mean follow-up time for the ER cohort was 12.9 months and for the SR cohort was 26.6 months, respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed a higher risk of perioperative stroke (4.2%) and endoleaks (14.2%) with the chimney technique compared to the fenestrated and single-branched stent approaches. Analysis of the double-arm studies did not yield statistically significant results.

Conclusion

Both ER and SR are safe and feasible in the preservation of LSA while achieving an adequate proximal landing zone. Among ER strategies, the chimney technique may presents a greater risk of neurological complications and endoleaks, while the single-branched stent grafts demonstrate the lowest complication rate, and the fenestration method for revascularization lies in an intermediate position. Given that the data quality of the included studies were relatively not satisfactory, more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to provide convincing evidence for optimal approaches to LSA revascularization in the future.

Outcomes of Endovascular Repair of Aortic Aneurysms with the GORE® Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for Left Subclavian Artery Preservation

OBJECTIVE OR BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair has emerged as the dominant paradigm for treatment of patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. For aneurysms involving the aortic arch in the region of the left subclavian artery (LSA), branch vessel preservation to maintain blood flow to the LSA is recommended. Branched aortic endografts are an alternative to surgical revascularization of the LSA.

METHODS

Across 34 investigative sites, 84 patients with Zone 2 aneurysm were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective study of a single branched aortic endograft. The thoracic branch endoprosthesis device allows for graft placement proximal to the LSA and incorporates a single side branch for left subclavian perfusion.

RESULTS

Over half of the patients were male (63%). Their average age was 70 (±11) years. The aneurysm morphology was fusiform in 43 and saccular in 41 patients. The mean aneurysm diameter at screening was 56.2 mm. The mean follow up was 30 months (range 2.6 to 50.7 months). Reported here are the patient outcomes at 1 and 12 months. Pre-defined technical success with implantation of the device in landing Zone 2 was achieved in 92% (n=77) of patients. There were no cases of aortic rupture, lesion-related mortality, or new onset renal failure. There was no peri-operative (30-day) mortality. A single case each of permanent paraplegia and paraparesis occurred. Three patients experienced a procedure-related stroke. Through 12 months, four patients died; none of the deaths were adjudicated as related to the device or procedure. One aortic reintervention was required. A single case of aortic enlargement (core laboratory) was reported at 6 months. Type 1 (n=3) and III (n=5) endoleaks occurred in 9.8% of patients of which one (Type III) required reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this device study in patients with Zone 2 aneurysm demonstrate that early safety and efficacy outcomes are maintained up to 12 months after the endovascular procedure with low mortality and reintervention rates and an acceptable frequency of procedural complications, including neurologic complications.

Early and Mid-Term Outcomes of Open versus Endovascular Left Subclavian Artery Debranching for Thoracic Aortic Diseases

Purpose: To compare open versus endovascular left subclavian artery debranching for thoracic endovascular aortic repair of thoracic aortic pathologies.

Methods: This is a retrospective study of patients receiving left subclavian artery debranching in our institution from October 2009 to January 2020. The primary outcome was freedom from aortic reintervention. Secondary outcomes were type I endoleaks, left subclavian artery (LSA) debranching failure, stroke, technical or clinical success, procedure-related reintervention, as well as 30-day or overall all-cause and aorta-related mortality.

Results: Forty-eight patients received parallel graft-based (n = 24, ENDO; median age 75 years [70–80 years]) or open (n = 24, OPEN; median age 71 years [59–75 years]) debranching for type B aortic dissection (n = 25), degenerative aneurysm (n = 12), type IA endoleak (n = 6), suture-associated (n = 3) or ostial LSA aneurysm (n = 1), or penetrating aortic ulcer (n = 1). The median follow-up was 36 months (13–61 months). After 16 months, aortic reintervention-free survival in groups OPEN and ENDO was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79 to 100%) and 86% (73 to 100%) (p = 0.71), respectively. After 36 months, all-cause survival in groups OPEN and ENDO was 74% (95% CI: 55 to 99%) and 79% (95% CI: 64 to 97%) (p = 0.74), respectively; freedom from aorta-related mortality was 81% (95% CI: 62 to 100%) and 91% (95% CI: 80 to 100%) (p = 0.78), respectively. Group OPEN presented less type I endoleaks (OPEN/ENDO = 3/19, p <0.001) and higher technical (OPEN/ENDO = 81/36%, p = 0.003) and clinical success rates (OPEN/ENDO = 67/36%, p = 0.047). No statistical differences were found for other outcomes.

Conclusion: Both strategies achieved comparable reintervention and mortality rates, but open debranching should be preferred due to its higher technical and clinical success and less type I endoleaks.

Narrative review on endovascular techniques for left subclavian artery revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair and risk factors for postoperative stroke

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to present a narrative review on endovascular techniques (ET) for revascularization of the left subclavian artery (LSA) during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and on risk factors for postoperative stroke following TEVAR procedures.

METHODS

Non-systematic search of the literature from the PubMed, Ovid and Scopus databases to identify relevant English-language articles fully published in the period 1 January 2010-1 August 2020.

RESULTS

Current general agreement is that LSA revascularization should be always attempted in the elective setting. Under urgent circumstances, it can be delayed but might be considered during the same session on a case-by-case basis. Three ET are currently available: (i) chimney/snorkels (also known as parallel grafts), (ii) fenestrations or branches and (iii) proximal scallops. The main issue with ET is the potential for increased peri-operative stroke risk owing to increased manipulation within the aortic arch. Also, they are relatively novel and further assessment of their long-term durability is needed. Intra-operative embolism and loss of left vertebral artery perfusion are hypothesized as the main causes of stroke in patients undergoing TEVAR.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall risk of stroke seems higher without LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR. As LSA revascularization might have a direct effect in preventing posterior stroke, it should be routinely performed in elective cases, while a case-by-case evaluation can be made under urgent circumstances. While ET can provide effective options for LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR, they are novel and need further durability assessment. Stroke after TEVAR is a multifactorial pathological process and preventing TEVAR-related cerebral injury remains a significant unmet clinical need.

In Situ Laser Stent Graft Fenestration of the Left Subclavian Artery during Thoracic Endovascular Repair of Type B Aortic Dissection with Limited Proximal Landing Zones: 5-Year Outcomes

PURPOSE

To assess safety and feasibility of in situ laser stent graft fenestration to revascularize the left subclavian artery (LSA) during thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) of type B aortic dissection (TBAD) with limited proximal landing zones with 5 years of follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a single-center retrospective study, 130 patients with TBAD with limited proximal landing zones (≤ 1.5 cm) underwent in situ laser stent graft fenestration revascularizing the LSA during TEVAR from April 2014 to April 2019. Outcomes were assessed by CT angiography and clinic visits, including technical success rate, operative time, LSA patency, ischemic events, and late aorta-related complications during follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 53 y (range, 33-73 y). Primary technical success rate was 96.9% (126/130). Three chimney stents were placed instead of fenestration, and 1 LSA fenestration was combined with a left common carotid artery (LCCA) chimney stent. Mean operative time was 53 min ± 28 with fluoroscopy time of 40 min ± 15. There were no neurologic complications and no deaths, with a mean duration of hospital stay of 9 d (range, 5-21 d). At a mean follow-up of 42 mo (range, 5-60 mo), there was a 97% primary LSA patency. Four patients had a type I endoleak, which disappeared during follow-up. One LCCA became occluded after 6 months. No type II or III endoleaks were found. Retrograde type A aortic dissection and stent graft-induced new distal entry were not found during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In situ laser fenestration to revascularize the LSA during TEVAR of TBAD with limited proximal landing zones was efficient, safe, and feasible based on 5-year follow-up.

Periscope sandwich stenting as an alternative to open cervical revascularization of left subclavian artery during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

Revascularization of the left subclavian artery (LSA) during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) maintains collateral circulation to decrease ischemic complications, including stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and upper extremity ischemia. Both open surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization techniques have been described, each with unique risks and benefits. We describe our "periscope sandwich" technique for the LSA during zone 2 TEVAR, which maintains antegrade access to the distal abdominal aorta if subsequent interventions are necessary. Technical results and short-term outcomes are compared with LSA open surgical debranching.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review was performed for patients requiring zone 2 TEVAR with LSA revascularization by periscope sandwich technique or open surgical debranching with subclavian to carotid transposition (SCT) or carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB). The presenting aortic disease and perioperative details were recorded. Intraoperative angiography and postoperative computed tomography images were reviewed for occurrence of endoleak and branch patency.

RESULTS

Between January 2013 and December 2018, the LSA was revascularized by periscope sandwich in 18 patients, SCT in 22 patients, and CSB in 13 patients. Compared with open surgical debranching, periscope sandwich had a lower median estimated blood loss (100 mL vs 200 mL for pooled SCT and CSB; P = .03) and lower median case duration (133.5 minutes vs 226 minutes; P < .001). Contrast material volume (120 mL vs 120 mL; P = .98) and fluoroscopy time (13.1 minutes vs 13.3 minutes; P = .92) did not differ significantly between the groups. There was no difference in aorta-related mortality (P = .14), and LSA patency was 100%. Median follow-up for the periscope sandwich group was 11 months, with an overall estimated 91% freedom from gutter leak at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

LSA periscope sandwich technique provides safe and effective LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR. LSA periscope sandwich can be used emergently with off-the-shelf endovascular components and facilitates future branched-fenestrated endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic diseases.

Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Repair for Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection with Aberrant Right Subclavian Artery

PURPOSE

To evaluate the early and midterm outcomes of endovascular repair of Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) with an aberrant right subclavian artery (ARSA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From November 2012 to July 2018, 15 patients (13 male, 2 female) who had TBAD with ARSA underwent total endovascular repair, including thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), left subclavian artery (LSA) chimney technique, LSA fenestration technique, and double chimney technique (LSA chimney and ARSA periscope). The mean age was 55 years. Kommerell diverticulum (KD) occurred in 2 patients, which were covered by means of oversized aortic stents. All patients had preoperative imaging examinations for assessing cerebral blood flow and the dominant vertebral arteries.

RESULTS

All procedures were completed successfully. There was no in-hospital mortality. The mean procedural time was 98 ± 40 minutes (range 50-190). The mean preoperative diameters of the maximum descending aorta, false lumen, and true lumen in the descending aorta versus postoperative were 37 ± 10 mm (range 28-67), 18 ± 9 mm (range 9-41), and 19 ± 6 mm (range 10-35) versus 34 ± 9 mm (range 25-64), 5 ± 8 mm (range 0-28), and 28 ± 5 mm (range 19-37), respectively. Right upper extremity weakness was observed in 2 patients, which recovered gradually during follow-up. Immediate type Ia endoleak was detected in 1 patient. The mean follow-up time was 33 ± 20 months. During follow-up, no ARSA steal syndrome, spinal cord ischemia, or strokes were not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular treatment for TBAD with ARSA was feasible and safe with a satisfactory midterm follow-up outcome.