Contemporary results of open surgical repair of descending thoracic aortic aneurysms

RETRACTED: Anesthesic and surgical guideline for the treatment of the thoraco-abdominal aorta. Consensus Document of the Spanish Societies of Anesthesia and Cardiovascular Surgery

Este artículo ha sido retirado por indicación del Editor Jefe de la revista, después de constatar que parte de su contenido había sido plagiado, sin mencionar la fuente original: European Heart Journal (2014) 35, 2873 926.: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/35/41/2873/407693#89325738 El autor de correspondencia ha sido informado de la decisión y está de acuerdo con la retirada del artículo. El Comité Editorial lamenta las molestias que esta decisión pueda ocasionar. Puede consultar la política de Elsevier sobre la retirada de artículos en https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal

Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: What Should the Anaesthetist Know?

The surgical repair of descending thoracic aortic (DTA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) presents one of the greatest challenges for anaesthesiologists. The challenge comes from the fine balance of complex medical issues in the setting of altered physiology that occurs during the perioperative period. Patients presenting for TAAA repair usually have multiple pre-existing comorbid conditions involving their cardiac, pulmonary and renal systems; and aneurysm repair poses a direct and immediate threat to these systems in addition to that to the gastrointestinal and neurologic systems. Operative mortality in thoracoabdominal aortic surgery is quite high to the extent of 5%-12% with a 5-year survival rate of 70%-79% for DTA aneurysm and 59% for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm surgeries. Complex haemodynamic changes associated with the clamping and declamping of aorta requires thorough knowledge and expertise for the management of TAAA. We present a brief review on the anaesthetic management and possible complications that anaesthetists should be aware of during TAAA repair.

A population-based analysis of endovascular aortic stent graft therapy in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are effective and minimally invasive treatments for high-risk surgical candidates. However, information about the management of EVAR and TEVAR in liver cirrhosis (LC) is lacking. The aim of our study was to evaluate outcomes after EVAR and TEVAR in patients with LC.

METHODS

Using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, we retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent EVAR and TEVAR therapy between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2013.

RESULTS

A total of 146 patients with LC and 730 matched patients without LC were eligible for analysis after propensity score matching. In-hospital mortality and perioperative complications were not statistically significantly different between the two cohorts, although the LC group had an increased volume of blood transfusion and a trend toward a lower survival rate (P of stratified Cox = .092). However, patients with LC had a higher adjusted hazard ratio for death (1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-2.12; P < .001) in the sensitivity analysis by traditional multivariable adjustment. The LC cohort had a higher risk of liver-related death (4.1% vs 0.7%; P = .001) and liver-related readmission (6.2% vs 0.3%; P < .001). As expected, the advanced LC group had a higher mortality rate than the early LC group (P = .022). The risk for reintervention, redo open aortic surgery (P = .859), and redo stent graft therapy (P = .179) was not statistically significantly different between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term results after EVAR and TEVAR are promising in patients with LC, despite poor long-term outcomes, because of the nature of LC. Innovations in endovascular therapy for aortic disease have improved surgical outcomes, even in high-risk patients with LC.

Cohort comparison of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with open thoracic aortic repair using modern end-organ preservation strategies

BACKGROUND

Pivotal trials showed that thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has improved outcomes compared with open surgery for treating descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. However, those trials included historical open controls in which modern end-organ preservation strategies were not routinely employed. To create a more level assessment, we compared our outcomes of elective TEVAR with modern open thoracic aortic repair (OTAR) controls.

METHODS

A retrospective review of thoracic aortic aneurysm patients undergoing TEVAR was compared with a contemporaneous cohort of OTAR patients. Partial bypass or hypothermic circulatory arrest was used in all OTAR patients. Cerebrospinal fluid drain placement was attempted in all patients. Preoperative characteristics, operative variables, and outcomes were recorded, and the Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival estimates.

RESULTS

The main outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative spinal cord ischemia (SCI) or stroke, and any persistent neurologic deficit 30 days following the operation. During the study period, 62 patients underwent TEVAR and 56 underwent OTAR with median follow-up of 23.7 months and 36.4 months, respectively. No difference existed between the TEVAR and OTAR with respect to overall neurologic complications (8.1% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.55) as well as any residual neurologic deficit at 30 days (0% vs. 5.4%, P = 0.10). TEVAR patients had fewer complications including pneumonia (P = 0.02), rebleeding (P = 0.02), and acute kidney injury (P = 0.001). There was no difference in 30-day mortality (1.6% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.10), 1-year mortality (12.2% vs. 14%, P = 0.80), or 5-year mortality (53.9% vs. 44%, P = 0.48) between TEVAR and OTAR, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR continues to show improved perioperative outcomes with a trend toward decreased 30-day mortality and fewer major adverse events compared with OTAR. However, with the routine use of end-organ preservation strategies during OTAR, neurologic deficits, particularly SCI, can be safely reduced to comparable levels with those of TEVAR and 1-year all-cause mortality rates are similar between the groups. These OTAR results may serve as a benchmark as TEVAR is increasingly applied for other aortic pathologies, such as chronic dissection, wherein long-term efficacy is not proven.

Open Versus Endovascular Repair of Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms

Purpose:

Endovascular repair of descending thoracic aortic aneurysms has become an acceptable surgical option over the past decade. We sought to compare the results of open versus endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysms (TEVAR) in the United States.

Methods:

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was queried to identify all patients undergoing elective repair of a thoracic aortic aneurysm from 1998 to 2007 in the United States. Patient demographic data, preoperative comorbidities, and postoperative complications were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed comparing open versus endovascular repair. Multivariate analyses were conducted controlling for preoperative comorbidities including the presence of diabetes mellitus, cardiac, respiratory, and renal comorbidities as well as patient’s age, gender, and ethnicity. The primary end point was mortality. Secondary end points were postoperative neurologic, cardiac, and respiratory complications.

Results:

There were 8967 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 8255 (92%) had an open repair and 712 (8%) had an endovascular repair. The overall mortality was 4.5% (4.6% for open and 3.6% for endovascular). On multivariate analysis, the odds of death were reduced by 46% among patients undergoing endovascular repair when compared to open repair (odds ratio [OR]: 0.54; P = .016). There was also reduced odds of a postoperative neurologic complication (OR: 0.48; P = .015), cardiac complication (OR: 0.24; P < .001), and respiratory complication (OR: 0.38: P = .001) in the endovascular group.

Conclusions:

Nationwide data comparing open and TEVAR in the United States reveal decreased postoperative mortality and a decreased incidence of postoperative neurologic, cardiac, and respiratory complications for TEVAR.

Gore TAG®Thoracic Endoprosthesis: the first US FDA-approved thoracic endograft

Open surgical repair of thoracic aortic lesions carries a significant risk of complications, including death. Minimally invasive approaches, however, may improve outcomes. Clinical trials of the Gore TAG Thoracic Endoprosthesis device indicate that subjects receiving the graft are less likely to experience major adverse events, less intraprocedural blood loss, shorter intensive care unit and hospital stays, and reduced recovery times than surgical patients. The US FDA approved the device in March 2005. Since then, the device has been used widely, although a 0.30% rate of complications related to infolding or partial compression of the device prompted a 'Dear Doctor' letter in January 2006. This article profiles the TAG device and evaluates endografting technology in general.

National trends and regional variation of open and endovascular repair of thoracic and thoracoabdominal aneurysms in contemporary practice

OBJECTIVES

Successful surgical management of thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) has historically relied upon open surgical repair (OSR). More recently, the advent and application of thoracic endovascular stent graft aneurysm repair (TEVAR) permutations have become increasingly performed in contemporary practice. To better determine the effect of TEVAR techniques on OSR, we examined national and regional trends in treatment use.

METHODS

All Medicare patients from 1998 through 2007 undergoing isolated TAA and TAAA repair were analyzed using a clinically validated algorithm using diagnostic International Classification of Disease 9th revision (ICD-9; 441.1, 441.2, 441.6, 441.7, 441.9) codes and procedural (ICD-9 OSR: 38.35, 38.45 and TEVAR: 39.73, 39.79) codes. Differential rates of OSR and TEVAR were compared across census tract regions during the study interval.

RESULTS

Total complex aortic repairs increased by 60%, from 10.8 to 17.8/100,000, between 1998 and 2007 (P < .001). A dramatic increase occurred in TEVAR (not performed in 1998, 5.8/100,000 in 2007) during the study period, but OSR rates remained stable during the same interval (10.7 to 12.0/100,000 in 2007, P = NS). There was substantial regional variation for both OSR and TEVAR. This regional variation was greater in OSR (range, 8.8-16.7/100,000) than in TEVAR (range, 4.5-6.9/100,000).

CONCLUSIONS

Degenerative TAA and TAAA aneurysms are being repaired in the United States at an increasing rate. This reflects the rapid acceptance of TEVAR, which apparently supplements rather than supplants OSR. There appears to be greater regional variation in OSR compared with TEVAR. These data may have significant implications for those interested in the effect of new technologies on health care and cost containment.

Neurologic outcomes from high risk descending thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic operations in the era of endovascular repair

INTRODUCTION

Spinal cord ischemia and stroke are recognized complications of descending thoracic (DTA) and thoracoabdominal aortic (TAA) operations. However, there are limited data available on outcomes since the advent of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

We reviewed charts from consecutive patients who underwent open DTA and TAA operations, excluding type IV repair, from January, 2000 through April, 2005.

RESULTS

A total of 224 open DTA and TAA operations were included in the analysis. During this period 108 additional patients received TEVAR, accounting for 66% of all DTA repairs. Among the 224 patients who underwent open surgery, 63 patients (28%) developed spinal ischemia postprocedure, 13 (6%) had a stroke, and 9 (4%) had both. The 30 day in-hospital mortality was 18%. Neurologic complications were strongly associated with mortality: 64% of patients with stroke died compared to 17% without (P < 0.001) and 39% of patients with spinal ischemia died compared to 14% without (P < 0.001). At discharge, 29% had a poor outcome from surgery, defined as death or moderate-to-severe neurologic disability. A multivariable logistic regression incorporating characteristics known prior to surgery resulted in a score to stratify risk of poor outcome by giving one point each for age > or =60, history of cerebrovascular disease, Crawford extent II or III repair, and acute rupture. Patients with score > or =3 had an estimated 60% risk for poor outcome, while those with score < or =1 had an estimated risk of 7-11%.

CONCLUSIONS

Ischemic neurologic complications were frequent and strongly associated with poor outcomes after open DTA and TAA repair among patients not eligible for TEVAR. Risk of death or neurologic disability can be estimated based on factors known prior to surgery.

Technical tips for thoracic aortic endografting

Thoracic aortic endografting is proving to be extremely useful for correcting a variety of lesions with few complications. Endovascular intervention avoids sternotomy or thoracotomy, the use of chest tubes, respirators, and general anesthesia, and limits blood loss. Compared with traditional open surgery, complications such as paraplegia, renal failure, and cardiac and pulmonary difficulties are minimized; hospital and rehabilitation times are also reduced. Selection of patients on the basis of favorable anatomy and pathology for a specific device is critical to procedural success. In some cases, a retroperitoneal conduit may be useful. In addition, left carotid-subclavian bypass or a transposition of the left subclavian artery to the left common carotid artery may be necessary before endografting, and spinal cord fluid drainage may be important when there is potential for cord ischemia.

Caring for patients with traumatic injuries of the thoracic aorta

Trauma is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in the United States, with blunt traumatic injuries of the thoracic aorta continuing to occur despite the increased use of seatbelts and airbags. Emerging from crash analysis are effective interventions and provides increased awareness of the occult nature of these types of injuries. This article describes those interventions that healthcare providers must embed throughout the continuum of care for patients experiencing thoracic aortic injuries. Outcomes will be dependent upon the healthcare provider's knowledge of the physics of the event and the urgency of the diagnosis, as well as the ability to assess and manage all the variables involved. Current procedural issues are delineated and case studies are used to illustrate the processes of care needed by these patients.

Rat Models of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury to Assess Motor Recovery

Devastating motor, sensory, and autonomic dysfunctions render long-term personal hardships to the survivors of traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). The suffering also extends to the survivors' families and friends, who endure emotional, physical, and financial burdens in providing for necessary surgeries, care, and rehabilitation. After the primary mechanical SCI, there is a complex secondary injury cascade that leads to the progressive death of otherwise potentially viable axons and cells and that impairs endogenous recovery processes. Investigations of possible cures and of ways to alleviate the hardships of traumatic SCI include those of interventions that attenuate or overcome the secondary injury cascade, enhance the endogenous repair mechanisms, regenerate axons, replace lost cells, and rehabilitate. These investigations have led to the creation of laboratory animal models of the different types of traumatic human SCI and components of the secondary injury cascade. However, no particular model completely addresses all aspects of traumatic SCI. In this article, we describe adult rat SCI models and the motor, and in some cases sensory and autonomic, deficits that each produces. Importantly, as researchers in this area move toward clinical trials to alleviate the hardships of traumatic SCI, there is a need for standardized small and large animal SCI models as well as quantitative behavioral and electrophysiological assessments of their outcomes so that investigators testing various interventions can directly compare their results and correlate them with the molecular, biochemical, and histological alterations.

Stent-graft versus open-surgical repair of the thoracic aorta: Mid-term results

OBJECTIVE

Pivotal and comparative trial data are emerging for stent graft (SG) vs open repair of the thoracic aorta. We reviewed procedure-related perioperative morbidity, mortality, and mid-term outcomes in a contemporary series of patients treated with SG of the thoracic aorta. The data were compared with those of a patient cohort concurrently treated with open surgical repair confined to the descending aorta.

METHODS

A review of patients undergoing SG procedures and open surgery of the thoracic aorta from January 1, 1996, to November 30, 2005, was performed from a prospectively compiled database. Study end points included perioperative complications, late survival, freedom from reinterventions, and graft-related complications. Multivariate methods were used to assess variables potentially associated with study end points; late outcomes were compared with actuarial methods.

RESULTS

In 105 patients (mean age, 70 years; 66 male [62.9%]) SG repairs were done for 68 degenerative aneurysms (64.7%), 12 penetrating ulcers (11.4%), 15 pseudoaneurysms (14.3%), 9 traumatic tears (8.6%), and 1 acute dissection (0.9%). Mean follow-up was 22 months (range, 0 to 101 months). Eighty-nine (84.8%) SG patients were asymptomatic at presentation and underwent elective repair, whereas 16 (15.2%) presented with acute conditions and underwent urgent repair. Perioperative mortality was 7.6% (8/105), and actuarial survival at 48 months was 54% +/- 7%. The perioperative mortality rate among SG patients treated for degenerative pathology was 10.4% (8/77). Seven (6.7%) of 105 patients experienced spinal cord ischemic complications, including 2 patients with transient paraparesis that resolved by the time of discharge. Reinterventions were performed in 10.5% of patients (11/105), with freedom from reintervention approaching 81% by 48 months. Over the same interval, 93 patients were treated with open-surgical repair for descending thoracic aneurysm (anastomosis cephalad to the celiac axis). Perioperative mortality in the open cohort was 15.1% (14/93; P = .09 vs SG repair), and the 48-month actuarial survival was 64% +/- 6%. The incidence of spinal cord ischemic complications was 8.6% (8/93), including 4 patients with transient paraparesis (P = .44 vs SG repair). Nine patients (9.7%) required surgical reintervention during the follow-up period, with 48-month freedom from reintervention approaching 79% (P = .73 vs SG repair).

CONCLUSIONS

Operative mortality was halved with SG, with similar late survival for both cohorts. Reinterventions were required at a nearly identical rate for open repair and SG, and both groups experienced similar rates of spinal cord ischemic complications.