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

PURPOSE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

CLINICAL IMPACT

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

A systematic review and meta-analysis of retrograde type A aortic dissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Retrograde type A dissection (RTAD) is a devastating complication of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) with low incidence but high mortality. The objective of this study is to report the incidence, mortality, potential risk factors, clinical manifestation and diagnostic modalities, and medical and surgical treatments.

METHODS

A systematic review and single-arm and two-arm meta-analyses evaluated all published reports of RTAD post-TEVAR through January 2021. All study types were included, except study protocols and animal studies, without time restrictions. Outcomes of interest were procedural data (implanted stent-grafts type, and proximal stent-graft oversizing), the incidence of RTAD, associated mortality rate, clinical manifestations, diagnostic workouts and therapeutic management.

RESULTS

RTAD occurred in 285 out of 10,600 patients: an estimated RTAD incidence of 2.3% (95% CI: 1.9-2.8); incidence of early RTAD was approximately 1.8 times higher than late. Wilcoxon signed-rank testing showed that the proportion of RTAD patients with acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) was significantly higher than those with chronic TBAD (P = .008). Pooled meta-analysis showed that the incidence of RTAD with proximal bare stent TEVAR was 2.1-fold higher than with non-bare stents: risk ratio was 1.55 (95% CI: 0.87-2.75; P = .13). Single arm meta-analysis estimated a mortality rate of 42.2% (95% CI: 32.5-51.8), with an I2 heterogeneity of 70.11% (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

RTAD is rare after TEVAR but with high mortality, especially in the first month post-TEVAR with acute TBAD patients at greater risk as well as those treated with proximal bare stent endografts.

The STABILISE technique to address malperfusion on acute-subacute type B aortic dissections

Endovascular treatment is the current standard of care for complicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection. Closure of the primary entry tear with thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) is often insufficient to induce complete false lumen thrombosis and a positive aortic remodeling. Moreover, TEVAR does not solve all the cases of malperfusion. The Provisional ExTension to Induce COmplete ATtachment (PETTICOAT) technique (deploying self-expandable bare metal stents in the true lumen in addition to TEVAR) can re-expand the true lumen, stabilize the lamella and promote aortic remodeling, but it does not recreate a single-lumen aorta and long-term aneurysmal degeneration of the aorta is frequent. Endovascular treatment by means of TEVAR + PETTICOAT does not recreate a single-lumen aorta so long-term aneurysmal degeneration of the aorta is frequent. The stent-assisted, balloon-induced intimal disruption and relamination of aortic dissection (STABILISE) technique may help to this purpose disrupting the intimal lamella and creating a relaminated uni-luminal aorta.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

TEVAR for complicated and uncomplicated type B aortic dissection-Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Type B aortic dissection (TBAD), is defined as a dissection involving the aorta distal to left subclavian artery with the ascending aorta and the aortic arch not affected. TBAD is classified due to the time frame and presence of complications. Complicated TBAD (co-TBAD) patients have a greater mortality rate than uncomplicated TBAD (un-TBAD) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is considered the gold-standard intervention for these clinical challenges.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic review of the literature regarding TEVAR intervention in co-TBAD and un-TBAD. A comprehensive search was undertaken across four major databases and was evaluated and assessed until June 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 16,104 patients were included in the study (7772 patients co-TBAD and 8352 un-TBAD). A significantly higher proportion of comorbidities were seen in co-TBAD patients compared with un-TBAD. Acute dissection was more frequent in the co-TBAD group (73.55% vs. 66.91%), while chronic dissection was more common in un-TBAD patients (33.8% vs. 70.73%). Postprocedure stroke was higher in co-TBAD (5.85% vs. 3.92%; p < .01), while postprocedural renal failure was higher in un-TBAD patients (7.23 vs. 11.38%; p < .01). No difference was observed in in-hospital mortality however the 30 days mortality was higher in the co-TBAD group. One-year survival was higher in the uncomplicated group but this difference was not observed in the 5-year survival.

CONCLUSION

In our analysis we can appreciate that despite significantly higher comorbidities in the co-TBAD cohort, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality between the two groups and the 5-year survival did not have any difference.

Distal bare metal stent implantation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair is beneficial to treat complicated type B aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) plus distal bare metal stent (BMS) implantation leads to favorable clinical outcomes compared with standard TEVAR in treating acute complicated type B aortic dissection.

METHODS

Relevant publications were found through a precise search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Count data were calculated as the odd ratio (OR)and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the Mantel-Haenszel statistical method, quantitative data were calculated as mean difference and 95% CI using Inverse Variance statistical method. When the data heterogeneity was large, with an I² > 50%, a random-effects model and sensitivity analysis were performed. The analysis tool we used was the software Revman 5.3 and G*power 3.1.

RESULTS

There were 7 publications involving 958 patients who were enrolled ultimately. The incidence of unplanned secondary intervention and postoperative adverse events in the TEVAR + BMS were lower than standard TEVAR (OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.75); OR, 0.57, (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.90)), and the pooled number needed to treat was 15 for unplanned secondary intervention and 15 for postoperative adverse events. There were no significant difference in the aortic-related or all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.25 to 2.61); OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.22)), aortic-related, all-cause mortality at least 6 months or incidence of the postoperative endoleak (OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.32); OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.06); OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.32 to 2.05)).

CONCLUSION

There is no significant outcome difference except for reduced reintervention but this does not seem to adversely affect survival. It is unclear whether this justifies the additional cost of placing it in every complicated type B aortic dissection regardless of anatomy after standard TEVAR alone. Besides, more data are needed to verify the adjunctive distal bare metal stents' performance at different dissection stages.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Distal Extended Endovascular Aortic Repair PETTICOAT: A Modified Technique to Improve False Lumen Remodeling in Acute Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Data from the literature suggest that in patients with acute, complicated type B aortic dissection (cTBAD), initial successful treatment with thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) is not necessarily associated with favorable remodeling of the dissected aorta during follow-up, and long-term results indicate that TEVAR failed to completely suppress false lumen patency. Sealing of all relevant distal reentries, infrarenal and/or iliac, seems to be the key issue to induce total false lumen thrombosis in abdominal aorta as well as the iliac arteries, especially in complicated patients presenting with malperfusion or complete true lumen collapse.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Of the 34 consecutive patients diagnosed with cTBAD at our hospital from January 2015 to April 2018, 30 had complicated dissections receiving endovascular treatment according to the standard Provisional ExTension To Induce COmplete ATtachment (PETTICOAT) technique and were excluded from this study, whereas 4 patients with radiologic evidence of multiple reentry tears at detached lumbar arteries and iliac bifurcation with complete true lumen collapse and clinical evidence of malperfusion were treated with a modified PETTICOAT technique with distal extension of the aortic stent, balloon expansion of the stented true lumen, and use of the AFX bifurcated endograft system to preserve the natural aortic bifurcation and provide complete distal sealing of reentry tears.

RESULTS

Primary technical success was achieved in all patients. No postoperative deaths were observed, but 1 patient experienced an hemorrhagic shock on the second postoperative day. No patient suffered postoperative stroke, paraplegia, paraparesis, or acute renal failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Using an abdominal aortic bifurcated endograft with PETTICOAT to treat acute cTBAD seems to be a feasible approach in high-risk patients to improve aortic remodeling. The AFX bifurcated endograft system meets the requirements of anatomical fixation and sealing of distal tears.

Treatment with transfemoral bare-metal stent of residual aortic arch dissection after surgical repair of acute type an aortic dissection

Background

Here we evaluate the usefulness of transfemoral uncovered stent implantation to avoid secondary conventional surgery for residual type A aortic dissection (TAAD) of the aortic arch after ascending aorta replacement.

Methods

From June 2009 to April 2015, 11 patients were treated with transfemoral implantation of uncovered stents in the aortic arch after surgical replacement of ascending aorta performed on average 4.7±2.3 years earlier. An enlarged dissected aortic arch or a dangerous median growth of more than 5 mm/yr or impending rupture presenting as chest pain were indications for treatment. The dissected aortic tracts diameter must not exceed 45 mm. Five patients (45.5%) were treated with Djumbodies Dissection System, 6 patients (54.5%) with Jotec E-XL aortic stent.

Results

There were no perioperative deaths or permanent neurologic complications. Primary procedural success was obtained in all patients and the residual TAAD in aortic arch was obliterated, with disappearance of the false lumen. Median intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 24 hours; post-operative hospital stay was 5.2±1.4 days. One death, not aortic related, occurred during follow-up period (mean 5.2±1.9 years). Descending thoracic aorta diameter significantly increased in 3 patients (27.3%): one patient (9.0%) needed a secondary conventional surgery, the other 2 (18.2%) of a distal extension with PETTICOAT approach.

Conclusions

Endovascular approach with uncovered metal bare stent is surely an evolving strategy to perform a purely endovascular treatment, indicated only for treatment of an aortic arch with a diameter of less than 40 or 45 mm, to avoid progressive thoracic aortic dilatation and/or rupture.