Case report of retrograde in situ fenestration of the thoracic stent graft with reentry device in a patient with aortobronchial fistula

Image fusion guidance for left subclavian artery in situ fenestration during thoracic endovascular repair

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility and clinical benefit of utilizing image fusion for thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) with in situ fenestration (ISF-TEVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2020 and December 2020, we prospectively collected 18 consecutive cases with complex thoracic aortic lesions who underwent image fusion guided ISF-TEVAR. As a control group, 18 patients were collected from historical medical records from June 2019 to December 2019. The fusion group involved the use of 3D fusion of CTA and fluoroscopic images for real-time 3D guidance, and the control group involved the use of only regular fluoroscopic images for guidance. The total contrast medium volume, hand-injected contrast medium volume, overall operative time, radiation dose and fluoroscopy time were compared between the two groups. Accuracy was measured based on preoperative CTA and intraoperative digital subtraction angiography.

RESULTS

3D fusion imaging guidance was successfully implemented in all patients in the fusion group. Hand-injected contrast medium volume and overall operative time were significantly lower in the fusion group than in the control group (p = .028 and p = .011). Compared with the control group, the fusion group showed a significant reduction in time and radiation dose-area product (DAP) for fluoroscopy (p = .004 and p = .010). No significant differences in total radiation dose (DAP) or total contrast medium volume were observed (p = .079 and p = .443). Full accuracy was achieved in 8 cases (44%), with a mean deviation of 2.61 mm ± 3.1 (range 0.0-8.4 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

3D image fusion for ISF-TEVAR was associated with a significant reduction in hand-injected contrast medium, time and radiation exposure for fluoroscopy and overall operative time. The image fusion guidance showed potential clinical benefits towards improved treatment safety and accuracy for complex thoracic endovascular interventions.

In Situ Fenestrated Thoracic Endovascular Repair Using the Upstream Peripheral Go BackTM Re-Entry Catheter

PURPOSE

The aim is to present a case of in situ fenestrated thoracic endovascular repair, using a re-entry peripheral catheter, needing urgent repair due to recurrent episodes of hemoptysis because of an aorto-bronchial fistula after previous thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

TECHNIQUE

A 74-year-old male with a previous TEVAR presented with hemoptysis, fever, and cachexia. An aorto-bronchial fistula and type Ia endoleak were depicted on computed tomography angiography (CTA). Due to the patient's frail general condition, a proximal TEVAR extension was planned, prior to thoracotomy for debridement, and long-term antibiotics. An in situ fenestrated TEVAR was performed to provide proximal sealing and revascularize the left common carotid and subclavian arteries. For fenestration creation, an Upstream Peripheral Go Back catheter (Bentley, Hechingen, Germany) was used. The Go Back catheter has been approved as a re-entry tool for complex peripheral arterial revascularization. In this case, both fenestrations were successfully created. Proximal seal and target vessel patency were confirmed on CTA. Thoracotomy confirmed aortic exclusion. A wedge lobectomy was performed in combination with pediculated omentectomy to exclude the exposed endograft.

CONCLUSION

In urgent cases, where custom-made thoracic devices are unavailable, in situ fenestrations with the Go Back catheter are an alternative to laser fenestrations.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Fenestrations are often required in acute TEVAR to achieve a proximal seal in the arch. In situ fenestrations with the Go Back catheter are an alternative to laser fenestrations and PMEGs in this setting.

A systematic review of therapies for aortobronchial fistulae

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to summarize epidemiologic data about aortobronchial fistulas and compare outcomes (mortality, recurrence, re-operation) of open, staged, and endovascular repair of aortobronchial fistula.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify eligible studies published between January of 1999 and December of 2019. The Cochrane Library, PubMed and Scopus databases were used as search engines. Eligible studies included articles reporting postoperative outcomes (death/follow-up). Literature review revealed only case reports and small case series and thus, only descriptive data with data heterogeneity was available. The corresponding authors were contacted to provide additional information or outcome updates (recurrence/reoperation/death).

RESULTS

Overall, 214 patients (90 studies) underwent 271 procedures (including re-do procedures and staged procedures). Most of the patients were treated by endovascular means (72.42%). Open surgical repair was performed in 21.96% and staged procedures in 5.6%. Aortobronchial fistulae located most often in the descending thoracic aorta (Zone 3,4) (64,6%) and in Zone 2 (23,8%). Fourteen percent of aortobronchial fistulae developed after thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair. Recurrence or infection occurred in 20% (43 patients). Recurrences were at some extend associated with the presence of endoleak. Long-term antibiotic administration (>1 month) was instituted in 63 patients (29.4%), whilst 90 patients (42%) did not receive antibiotics beyond hospitalization. From the remaining 61, 3 received life-long antibiotics and for 58 patients data were not available. Considering outcomes, mean follow-up was 25.1 months (0-188 months) and not significantly different among treatments.

LIMITATIONS

Literature review has revealed only case reports and small case series and thus, only descriptive data were available. Randomized controlled trials are not available due to the rarity of the disease which significantly decreases the power of the present study. Also, this study reflects significant data heterogeneity due to the nature of the analyzed manuscripts and would benefit from large patient cohort studies which till today have not been conducted.

CONCLUSION

Aortobronchial fistula is a complex disease. Endoleaks may be involved in the development and in recurrence process and they should not be disregarded. Considering major outcomes (length of follow-up), the available treating strategies are equal and thus, surgeons should feel confident to apply the treatment of their choice, taking in mind their experience, patient's age, and clinical condition.

Aortobronchial fistula

Aortobronchial fistulas (ABFs) are rare but fatal if left untreated. Hemoptysis is the most common symptom of the patients. ABFs may occur after any thoracic aortic lesions or maneuveurs for these lesions. The treatment of ABF can be surgical or thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair can be a safe and less invasive procedure for the treatment of ABFs. However, ABFs might occur in much shorter time after thoracic endovascular aortic repair than any other etiologies. The prognoses of patients with ABFs are poor with a high morbidity and mortality. The selection of a suitable endovascular graft and avoidance of postinterventional complications might effectively prevent the occurrence of ABFs.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair in penetrating aortic ulcer combined with isolated left vertebral artery: A case report

RATIONALE

Penetrating aorta ulcer (PAU) with isolated left vertebral artery (ILVA) is a rare condition, accounting for no more than 1% of all kinds of aorta diseases. And traditional treatment was open surgery with total arch replacement by elephant trunk. Here, we report a case of PAU combined with ILVA managed by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) technique.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 65-year-old male with chronic hypertension and Nicotine abuse underwent intermittent back pain for 2 years and aggravated a bit for 1 week.

DIAGNOSES

Preoperative computed tomography angiogram (CTA) indicated PAU combined with ILVA.

INTERVENTIONS

TEVAR was performed for PAU following with retrograde in situ fenestration and chimney technique for revascularization of ILVA and left subclavian artery (LSA), respectively.

OUTCOMES

The operation was successfully and the patient was discharged from hospital after 1 week of treatment. Postoperatively, the images of CTA illustrated the patency of aorta, ILVA, and LSA without obvious endoleak. Besides, no ischemia attack or other relative syndromes were detected at 6-months follow-up.

LESSONS

This case demonstrates that TEVAR is an alternative to elephant trunk especially for PAU with ILVA. And it also showed the precise exposure of ILVA and necessity to reconstruct ILVA during TEVAR operation in order to reduce the occurrence of ischemia attack.