The Evolving Role of Hybrid Arch Repair

The Call for the "Interventional/Hybrid" Aortic Surgeon: Open, Endovascular, and Hybrid Therapies of the Aortic Arch

Aortic arch pathology is relatively rare but potentially highly fatal and associated with considerable comorbidity. Operative mortality and complication rates have improved over time but remain high. In response, aortic arch surgery is one of the most rapidly evolving areas of cardiac surgery in terms of surgical volume and improved outcomes. Moreover, there has been a surge in novel devices and techniques, many of which have been developed by or codeveloped with vascular surgeons and interventional radiologists. Nevertheless, the extent of arch surgery, the choice of nadir temperature, cannulation, and perfusion strategies, and the use of open, endovascular, or hybrid options vary according to country, centre, and surgeon. In this review article, we provide a technical overview of the surgical, total endovascular, and hybrid repair options for aortic arch pathology through historical developments and contemporary results. We highlight key information for surgeons, cardiologists, and trainees to understand the management of patients with aortic arch pathology. We conclude by discussing training paradigms, the role of aortic teams, and gaps in knowledge, arguing for the need for wire skills for the future "interventional aortic surgeon" and increased research into techniques and novel devices to continue improving outcomes for aortic arch surgery.

The Use of the Ascyrus Medical Dissection Stent in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Repair Reduces Distal Anastomotic New Entry Tear

BACKGROUND

A distal anastomotic new entry tear (DANE) can occur at the time of surgical repair for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). This study aimed to compare the occurrence of DANE following a standard hemiarch repair with that following a hemiarch repair with an uncovered arch dissection stent.

METHODS

All patients who received a hemiarch repair or a hemiarch repair with an Ascyrus Medical Dissection Stent (AMDS) for ATAAD from 2017 to 2021 were included. Baseline and intra- and postoperative characteristics were collected. All available pre- and postoperative computed tomographic scans were analysed. The primary outcome measures were the incidence of DANE, positive aortic remodelling, mortality, and aortic reintervention rates at last follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients underwent repair of Debakey I ATAAD during the study period with either an isolated hemiarch (n = 77) or a hemiarch with AMDS (n = 37). There was no significant difference in mortality (P = 0.768) or other in-hospital adverse events. During the follow-up period, DANE occurred in 43.3% (n = 26) of the isolated hemiarch group and in 11.8% (n = 4) of the hemiarch with AMDS group (P = 0.002). The incidence of false lumen thrombosis and obliteration favoured the AMDS group in the aortic arch (P = 0.029), the proximal descending thoracic aorta (P = 0.031), and level of pulmonary artery bifurcation (P = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of DANE is significantly reduced with the addition of an AMDS at the time of hemiarch repair for ATAAD repair. Further follow-up is necessary to identify late aortic complications that may have been prevented by reducing the incidence of postoperative DANE.

Comprehensive review of hybrid aortic arch repair with focus on zone 0 TEVAR and our institutional experience

Even with increasing operator experience and a better understanding of the disease and the operation, intervention for aortic arch pathologies continues to struggle with relatively higher mortality, reintervention, and neurologic complications. The hybrid aortic arch repair was introduced to simplify the procedure and improve the outcome. With recent industry-driven advances, hybrid repairs are not only offered to poor surgical candidates but have become mainstream. This review discusses the evolution of hybrid repair, terminology pertinent to this technique, and results. In addition, we aim to provide a pervasive review of hybrid aortic arch repairs with reference to relevant literature for a detailed understanding. We have also discussed our institutional experience with hybrid repairs.

Current state of hybrid solutions for aortic arch aneurysms

Since its inception in the early 2000s, hybrid arch repair (HAR) has evolved from a novel approach to a well-established treatment modality for aortic arch pathology in appropriately selected patients. HAR procedures have been proposed as a means to circumvent the perioperative morbidity and mortality associated with open total arch replacement. These procedures, all of which remain off-label applications of approved endograft technology, combine more conventional open surgical techniques, to create endograft landing zones, with thoracic endovascular aortic repair to exclude the aortic pathology from the circulation. The current classification system for HAR was proposed in 2013 and consists of three types, designated by the Roman numerals I, II and III. The current system has become outdated, however, with the advent of newer technologies, and herein we propose a new, updated classification system that is more encompassing with regards to the broad array of options available to treat aortic arch disease. Likewise, an institutional algorithm to guide patient and operative selection for HAR is presented. Patients are considered for HAR if they have either high-risk comorbidities or high-risk anatomy, with an important feature of the algorithm being that any decisions about repair strategy should be made by a surgical team with expertise in both open and endovascular techniques. Despite being performed for nearly two decades, the evidence around HAR consists mainly of single center series (level B-C evidence) with no randomized controlled trials. The data suggest HAR to be a safe alternative to open repair with acceptable short and mid-term results. As we as aortic surgeons continue to move towards less invasive approaches, both conventional open and hybrid techniques will remain important tools in the toolbox for arch repair, although the advent of multi-branched arch endografts will almost certainly reduce the extent of open or hybrid repair in many patients and eliminate it altogether in others.