Spinal cord ischemia and reinterventions following thoracic endovascular repair for acute type B aortic dissections

OBJECTIVE

The technical aspects of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD), specifically the location of proximal seal zone (PSZ) (need to cover the left subclavian artery [LSA]), distal seal zone (DSZ) (length of aortic coverage), benefit of LSA revascularization, and prophylactic lumbar drainage are still debated. Each of these issues has potential benefits but also has known risks. This study aims to identify factors associated with reintervention and spinal cord ischemia (SCI) following TEVAR for acute TBAD with a zone 3 entry tear.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for TEVARs performed for acute TBAD with zone 3 entry tear, zone 3 proximal zone of disease, treated with TEVAR extending between zone 2 and zone 5. The primary outcomes were SCI and related reintervention. Secondary outcomes were stroke, arm ischemia, and retrograde type A dissection (RTAD). The exposure variables were PSZ 2 vs 3, DSZ 4 vs 5, prophylactic lumbar drain, and LSA revascularization. Univariate analyses were conducted with χ2 analysis, and multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate association with outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 583 patients who met inclusion criteria, 266 had PSZ 2 and 317 had PSZ 3. On univariate analysis, PSZ 2 was associated with a higher rate of reintervention, but PSZ2 was not significant on multivariable analysis after accounting for age, sex, race, smoking, PSZ, DSZ, prophylactic lumbar drain, and LSA patency. PSZ 2 was not associated with SCI, arm ischemia, or RTAD. PSZ 2 was associated with a trend towards a higher rate of stroke. DSZ 4 and DSZ 5 were performed in 161 and 422 TEVARs, respectively, and DSZ 5 was associated with a higher rate of SCI on univariate (3 [1.9%] vs 39 [9.2%]; P = .01) and multivariable (odds ratio, 7.384; 95% confidence interval, 2.193-24.867; P = .001) analyses. Prophylactic lumbar drain placement was not statistically significantly associated with SCI, but lack of postoperative LSA patency was associated with SCI (odds ratio, 2.966; 95% confidence interval, 1.016-8.656; P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that PSZ 2 was not associated with lower reinterventions or higher rates of SCI but trended towards a higher rate of stroke than PSZ 3. Additionally, DSZ 5 was strongly associated with SCI when compared with DSZ 4, highlighting the importance of limiting aortic coverage to coverage of the proximal entry tear when possible.

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.

Plug-Based Embolization Techniques of Aortic Side Branches during Standard and Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair

Vascular plugs are an evolving family of vessel occluders providing a single-device embolization system for large, high-flow arteries. Nitinol mesh plugs and polytetrafluoroethylene membrane plugs are available in different configurations and sizes to occlude arteries from 3 to 20 mm in diameter. Possible applications during complex endovascular aortic procedures are aortic branch embolization to prevent endoleak or to gain an adequate landing zone, directional branch occlusion, and false lumen embolization in aortic dissection. Plugs are delivered through catheters or introducers, and their technical and clinical results are comparable to those of coil embolization. Plugs are more accurate than coils as repositionable devices, less prone to migration, and have fewer blooming artifacts on postoperative computed tomography imaging. Their main drawback is the need for larger delivery systems. This narrative review describes up-to-date techniques and technology for plug embolization in complex aortic repair.

How I do it: Established and novel methods for left subclavian revascularization with thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Left subclavian artery revascularization at the time of thoracic endovascular aortic repair has been the subject of discussion for over a decade. Contemporary viewpoints suggest that revascularization should be performed where possible to decrease the risk of perioperative stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and, to a lesser degree, loss of upper extremity function. In this article, we present traditional methods as well as descriptions of newer options and technology for preservation of left subclavian artery flow during thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

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.

Left subclavian artery revascularization is associated with less neurologic injury after endovascular repair of acute type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze patients with acute type B aortic dissection (aTBAD) requiring thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage to determine whether LSA revascularization decreased the risk of neurologic complications.

METHODS

The national Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR module was queried for all procedures performed between 2014 and 2021. Patients presenting with aortic aneurysms or aortic ruptures were excluded from the analysis. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether their LSA was revascularized (prior to or during TEVAR) or not. Univariate followed by multivariate analysis was used to account for possible confounders and evaluate the association of LSA revascularization with the primary outcome of neurologic injury (stroke or spinal cord ischemia).

RESULTS

Among patients who had TEVAR for aTBAD, 501 patients had the LSA covered. The LSA was revascularized prior to or concomitant with TEVAR in 28% of these patients (n = 139). Average age was 57 years, and 73% (n = 366) were male. Neurologic injury developed in 88 patients (18%). On univariate analysis, patients who had their LSA revascularized were significantly less likely to develop neurologic injury (10% vs 20%; P < .01). This association persisted after accounting for potential confounders (odds ratio, 0.4; P = .02). No significant difference was seen when comparing 30-day or 1-year mortality between patients who had LSA revascularization and those who did not. Follow-up averaged 1.9 years (range, 0-8.1 years). Long-term survival did not differ between the two groups on Kaplan-Meier analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of patients with aTBAD who underwent LSA coverage during TEVAR, the addition of a LSA revascularization procedure was associated with a significantly lower incidence of neurological injury including spinal cord ischemia and/or stroke.

Compensation based on work relative value unit for cardiovascular surgeons in Iran: A mixed method study

BACKGROUND

Work relative value unit (wRVU) is a tool for assessing surgeons' performance, compensation, and productivity. It appears that wRVU for cardiovascular procedures does not consider complexity and its value for lengthy operations is low. The aim of the study is to determine wRVU for cardiovascular procedures in Iran according to the proposed approach.

MATTERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted as a mixed method in teaching hospitals in Tabriz in the period of September 2020 to December 2021. According to Hospital Information System and expert opinions, six procedures in cardiovascular surgery were included in the study. They were compared with 18 procedures in neurosurgery, orthopedics, and otorhinolaryngology in terms of the operation time and wRVU/min. Then, we calculated new wRVUs for the selected procedures based on surgeons' opinions, time measurements, and anesthetists' points of view by content analysis in qualitative and statistical analysis in quantitative parts.

RESULTS

Among the six cardiac procedures, the wRVU for five was under-estimated. The wRVU/min value ranged from 0/28 to 1/15 in the studied procedures. Findings demonstrate no significant relationship between the length of operations and the wRVU announced by the Ministry of Health and Medical Education (P value >0/05). Compared to studied procedures in four specialties, thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair has the longest surgery time at 417 minutes. According to anesthesiologists, cardiovascular; orthopedics; ear, nose, and tongue; and neurosurgery specialties obtained 4/2, 2/9, 2/8, and 4, respectively, in terms of surgery duration, complexity, risk, and physical effort.

CONCLUSION

Despite policymakers' attempts to bring justice to payments, it seems that there has been little progress in paying cardiovascular surgeons. Improper payment to cardiovascular surgeons will affect the future of the workforce in this specialty. Today, the need to reconsider the wRVUs in heart specialty is felt more than before.

Teaching vascular anatomy: the anatomy we know, the anatomy we see or the anatomy we need?

PURPOSE

This article presents the evolution of the subject of vascular anatomy and discusses the associated clinical applicability.

METHODS

Clinically-driven surgical examples met in our everyday practice were used to depict characteristic anatomical paradoxes raised by the inconsistencies between classical anatomical perception, current imaging modalities and modern surgical techniques.

RESULTS

Consequent anatomy-driven modifications of medical devices comprise a characteristic example of the vivid, modern and meaningful role that anatomy can have on clinical decision-making and improvement of technical and clinical success. Clinical experience provides a feedback that shifts the focus of anatomic research towards new fields of interest, such as the role of arterial collateral networks as therapeutic targets. The clinical feedback brings into light queries and issues where traditional anatomical answers may be vague and inadequate to apply, thereby necessitating further research, refinement and reevaluation.

CONCLUSION

While the traditional teaching of vascular anatomy is based on information and illustrations derived from dissection and prosection courses, the development of modern imaging technologies applied in large numbers of living patients and application of minimally invasive techniques challenge our understanding of what should be perceived as fixed and permanent. Moreover, the recently introduced evidence-based philosophy in anatomy elaborate more robust data which not only update, validate and enrich the existing knowledge of anatomical variations but also enable subgroup analyses with respect to race, age and sex, identifying specific anatomic features associated with a significant impact on patient treatment.

Common Designs of Custom-Made Fenestrated Arch Devices and Applicability of an Off-the-Shelf Design

OBJECTIVES

To analyze device designs, similarities and overlaps of custom-made fenestrated arch endografts intended for mid/distal arch thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicenter cross-sectional study analyzing custom-made anonymized graft plans was performed. Graft plans were included from a cohort of mid/distal aortic arch repairs using custom-made fenestrated aortic endografts treated at 8 centers. Grafts targeting >2 arteries were excluded. No patient/clinical data were analyzed. A descriptive analysis was performed followed by an analysis of overlap of the designs to reach a common design in which the greatest number of grafts would overlap.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-one graft plans were included. All grafts were custom-made grafts from the COOK Medical Fenestrated arch platform. Ninety-four (71.8%) had a scallop-and-single-fenestration design, 33 (25.2%) had a single fenestration and 4 (4.3%) a single scallop. For analysis purposes, these latter 4 grafts were excluded. Two main graft plans (Plans 1 and 2) were proposed after analysis with similar configuration (1 scallop with 30 mm width, 20 mm height, 12:00 position; 1 preloaded fenestration with 8 mm diameter, 26 mm from the top of the graft and 12:00 position; tapered, with a 193 mm length and 32 mm distal diameter) but with 2 different proximal diameters of 38 mm (Plan 1) and 44 mm (Plan 2), reaching an overall feasibility of 85.8% (n=109), being 47.2% (n=60) and 38.6% (n=49) for each design, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The degree of overlap between the studied fenestrated and/or scalloped thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) graft designs was high. Future studies analyzing these designs in a real-world cohort of patients are needed to further address off-the-shelf feasibility.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In a multicenter study analyzing 127 fenestrated aortic arch endograft plans from 9 aortic centers, we found that the degree of overlap between the studied fenestrated and/or scalloped arch graft designs was high and that 2 proposed graft designs would be theoretically applicable in 85.8% of cases. Future studies analyzing these designs in a real-world cohort of patients are needed to further address off-the-shelf feasibility.

Efficacy of left subclavian artery revascularization strategies during thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with type B dissection: A single-center experience of 105 patients

Background

Left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is necessary to reduce postoperative complications in patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection and an insufficient proximal anchoring area. However, the efficacy and safety of different LSA revascularization strategies remain unclear. Here, we compared these strategies to provide a clinical basis for selecting an appropriate LSA revascularization method.

Methods

In this study, we included 105 patients with type B aortic dissection who were treated using TEVAR combined with LSA reconstruction in the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University from March 2013 to 2020. They were divided into four groups according to the method used for LSA reconstruction, namely, carotid subclavian bypass (CSB; n = 41), chimney graft (CG; n = 29), single-branched stent graft (SBSG; n = 21), and physician-made fenestration (PMF; n = 14) groups. Finally, we collected and analyzed the baseline, perioperative, operative, postoperative, and follow-up data of the patients.

Results

The treatment success rate was 100% in all the groups, and CSB + TEVAR was the most commonly used procedure in emergency settings compared with the other three procedures (P &lt; 0.05). The estimated blood loss, contrast agent volume, fluoroscopic time, operation time, and limb ischemia symptoms during the follow-up were significantly different in the four groups (P &lt; 0.05). Pairwise comparison among groups indicated that the estimated blood loss and operation time in the CSB group were the highest (adjusted P &lt; 0.0083; P &lt; 0.05). The contrast agent volume and fluoroscopy duration were the highest in the SBSG groups, followed by PMF, CG, and CSB groups. The incidence of limb ischemia symptoms was the highest in the PMF group (28.6%) during the follow-up. The incidence of complications (except limb ischemia symptoms) during the perioperative and follow-up periods was similar among the four groups (P &gt; 0.05) The median follow-up time of CSB, CG, SBSG, and PMF groups was significantly different (P &lt; 0.05), and the CSB group had the longest follow-up.

Conclusion

Our single-center experience suggested that the PMF technique increased the risk of limb ischemia symptoms. The other three strategies effectively and safely restored LSA perfusion in patients with type B aortic dissection and had comparable complications. Overall, different LSA revascularization techniques have their advantages and disadvantages.

A Systematic Review of Contemporary Outcomes from Aortic Arch In Situ Laser Fenestration During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

In situ laser fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (L-FEVAR) is a novel and creative solution for complex aortic pathologies in the urgent and emergency setting. Outcomes of this technique, however, are poorly reported. We sought to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and outcomes of L-FEVAR in aortic arch pathologies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review and analysis were conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses and Cochrane guidelines. A search was conducted using Google, PubMed, and Scopus to identify studies evaluating L-FEVAR. Two independent reviewers determined study inclusion. Case reports and series including < 10 patients were excluded. Reviewers also assessed the methodological quality and extracted data regarding outcomes. A meta-analysis of endoleak event rates was conducted using a fixed-effect model due to small sample size.

RESULTS

Eight studies met inclusion criteria between 2013 and 2021. Most studies were retrospective (87.5%) with median follow-up duration of 12.5 months (range 10-42). There were 440 patients included (range 15-148), mostly men (64%). Mean age was 61 years (range 53-68). Included patients were all symptomatic with L-FEVAR being technically successful in 93.3% of cases. The main indication for aortic arch intervention was aortic dissection. Single fenestrations occurred most frequently (68%), followed by triple (22%) then double fenestrations (9%). Meta-analysis of 8 studies (n = 440) demonstrated an endoleak event rate of 0.06 (95% confidence interval 0.04-0.09, P < 0.001) with no observed statistically significant heterogeneity of effects (Q = 7.91, P = 0.34). The median operative time was 162 min (range 53-252) with median length of stay of 10 days (range 7-17). Primary branch patency was 96.6%. Secondary patency rate was 97%. Pooled complication rates such as endoleak occurred in 4.8%, stroke in 2.0%, spinal cord ischemia in 0.2%, retrograde dissection in 0.9%, and 30-day death in 2.0%. Access complications occurred in 0.4%. Antiplatelet regimen was poorly reported in the study cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In situ laser fenestration is a feasible, safe, and effective approach to treat aortic arch disease in patients who are unsuitable for open or custom-made endovascular means. High technical success and excellent short-term branch patency can be achieved. These single-institution series exhibit promising short-term outcomes. In a similar paradigm to investigational device exemptions studies for custom-made and physician modified endografts, these preliminary data make a persuasive argument for larger long-term multi-institutional prospective study of this promising technique.

Left Subclavian Artery Sacrifice in Acute Aortic Dissection Repair using the Frozen Elephant Trunk

OBJECTIVE

Surgery of acute aortic dissection using the frozen elephant trunk (FET) can be complicated when the origin of the left subclavian artery (LSA) is dissected and sacrifice by ligation is a viable option. However, the LSA is supposed to play a role in neuroprotection as a major collateral. We, therefore, analyzed our results of LSA sacrifice in this cohort.

METHODS

We identified a total of 84 patients from our prospectively collected database who underwent FET repair of acute aortic dissection between October 2009 and April 2018. LSA was sacrificed in 19 patients (22.6%). Results were analyzed and compared with regard to neurological outcomes.

RESULTS

New postoperative stroke was seen in two patients (2.4%) and spinal cord injury in three patients (3.6%) overall, none in the LSA-sacrifice group. We observed a temporary neurological deficit in five patients (6.0%) overall, none in the LSA-sacrifice group. None of the patients developed acute ischemia of the left arm. Only two patients (12.5%) came back for carotid-subclavian artery bypass due to exertion-induced weakness of the left arm 3 to 4 months after the initial surgery. In-hospital mortality was 15.5% overall, with no difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

LSA sacrifice was not associated with elevated postoperative risk of either central or spinal neurological injury. Thus, it can facilitate FET repair of acute aortic dissection in selected cases when the left subclavian origin cannot be preserved. Carotid-subclavian artery bypass became necessary in only a small fraction of these patients and can be performed as a second-stage procedure.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery with a Castor stent graft

OBJECTIVE

Despite the rapid development of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), it is still a challenge to maintain the blood flow of the branch arteries above the aortic arch in Stanford type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery (LSA). The Castor stent graft is an integrated, customized, single-branch stent that enables reconstruction of the LSA. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of the Castor stent graft for type B aortic dissection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An extensive electronic literature search (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022322146) was undertaken to identify all articles published up to August 2022 that described thoracic aortic repair with branch stents in the treatment of type B aortic dissection involving the LSA. The quality of the included studies was analyzed using the MINORS criteria. The primary outcome measures were the technical success rate, early mortality rate, endoleak rate, and 1-year survival rate. The secondary outcome measures were the stroke rate, left upper extremity ischemia rate, and target vessel patency rate.

RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 415 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. The LSA was successfully preserved in all procedures. The technical success rate was 97.5% (95% CI: 0.953-0.991); the intraoperative endoleak rate was 0.1% (95% CI: 0.000-0.012); the intraoperative LSA patency rate was 99.52%; the intraoperative LSA stent deformation and stenosis rate was 0.15% (95% CI: 0.000-0.051); the early type I endoleak rate was 1.6% (95% CI: 0.003-0.035); the 30-day mortality rate was 0.96%; the early reintervention rate was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.000-0.040); and the perioperative stroke rate was 0% (95% CI: 0.000-0.005). The 1-year survival rate was 99.7% (95% CI: 0.976-1.000). The half-year LSA patency rate was 99.3%, the 1-year LSA patency rate was 97.58%, and the 2-year LSA patency rate was 95.23%. During the follow-up period, the leakage rate was 0.3% (95% CI: 0.000-0.017), the incidence of left upper extremity ischemia rate was 0.5% (95% CI: 0.000-0.035), and the deformation and stenosis rate of the LSA stent was 2.2% (95% CI: 0.06-0.046).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that endovascular repair of type B aortic dissection using the Castor stent-graft may be technically feasible and effective. However, this conclusion needs to be interpreted with caution, as the quality of evidence for all outcomes is between low and very low.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42022322146].

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.

Transposition of Anomalous Left Vertebral to Carotid Artery During the Management of Thoracic Aortic Dissections and Aneurysms

OBJECTIVES

Preservation of antegrade flow to the left vertebral artery is often achieved by transposition or bypass to the left subclavian artery during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). An anomalous left vertebral artery (aLVA) originating directly from the aortic arch is a common arch variant with a reported incidence of 4-6%. In addition, 6-10% of vertebral arteries terminate in a posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA), increasing the risk of stroke if not revascularized. Few series of aLVA to carotid transposition have been reported. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients who underwent aLVA to carotid transposition for the management of aortic disease.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all aLVA-carotid transpositions performed for the management of thoracic aortic dissection or aneurysm at a single center from 2018 to 2021 was performed. The primary outcomes were postoperative stroke and patency of the transposed aLVA. Secondary outcomes were spinal cord ischemia, postoperative cranial nerve injury (CNI), and Horner's syndrome.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients underwent aLVA to carotid transposition as an adjunct to management of aortic disease during the study period. Most were men (14) and the mean age was 54 (±16 years). The primary indication for aortic repair was dissection in 10, aneurysm in 6, and Kommerell diverticulum in 1. Nine patients underwent zone 2 TEVAR, seven received open total arch repair and there was one attempted total endovascular arch repair which was aborted due to unfavorable anatomy. Twelve transpositions were performed prior to or concomitant with planned aortic repair due to high-risk cerebrovascular anatomy (3 PICA termination, 6 dominant aLVA, 4 intracranial left vertebral artery stenosis), and two were performed postoperatively for treatment of type II endoleak. LVA diameter ranged from 2 - 6mm (mean 3.3 mm). Mean operative time for transposition was 178 (±38) minutes, inclusive of left subclavian artery revascularization and mean estimated blood loss was 169 (±188) mL. No patients experienced 30-day postoperative spinal cord ischemia, stroke, or mortality. There were two cases of postoperative hoarseness, presumably due to recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, both of which resolved within 4 months. There were no cases of Horner's syndrome. At follow-up (mean 306 days [6-714 days]), all transpositions were patent.

CONCLUSIONS

Vertebral-carotid transposition is a safe and effective adjunct in the management of aortic disease with anomalous origin of the LVA.

Left subclavian artery coverage during endovascular repair of thoracic aorta injury in trauma and non-trauma patients

PURPOSE

In thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), the left subclavian artery (LSA) is often occluded. Although most patients tolerate this, some develop ischemic symptoms to the brain or left upper extremity (LUE). A revascularization procedure may be associated with significant complications. The purpose of this review was to assess the incidence of LSA occlusion, resulting ischemic symptoms, and complications related to revascularization operations in trauma patients compared to non-trauma patients.

METHODS

Studies from 2010 to 2020 were fully reviewed if they discussed incidence of LSA coverage, LUE ischemia, carotid-subclavian bypass, or complications associated with carotid-subclavian bypass.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles were included in this analysis. A total of 167 patients were identified as trauma cases. Incidence of LSA occlusion in trauma was 91/167 (54%) compared to 281/1446 (19%) in the population exclusive of trauma (p < 0.001). Following LSA occlusion, the rate of LUE claudication/ischemia was 21/56 (38%) for trauma, compared to 12/193 (6%) in non-trauma cases (p < 0.001). The overall complication rate after carotid-subclavian rescue bypass was 29.2% (33/112), with phrenic nerve palsy (24%), recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (5%), and pseudoaneurysm (1.7%) being the most common.

CONCLUSION

LSA coverage following TEVAR is common and associated with significant complications, often requiring operative management. The incidence of ischemic complications after occlusion of the LSA is significantly higher in the trauma population. Revascularization procedures to correct the occlusion have a high rate of complications.

Left Subclavian Artery Coverage is Not Associated with Neurological Deficits in Trauma Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) outcomes have been studied with interest in complications related to left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage in patients with atherosclerotic pathologies; however, specific data on the management of the LSA in a trauma population is lacking. The objective of this study is to evaluate outcomes following TEVAR for traumatic aortic injury based on LSA coverage.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative thoracic endovascular aortic repair module (2010-2017) was analyzed. Patients were included if they had a traumatic aortic injury requiring TEVAR. Patients were placed in two groups based on coverage of the left subclavian artery. Patients were propensity score matched and the primary outcomes were cerebrovascular symptoms and spinal cord ischemia. Additional clinical and resource utilization outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

451 patients were included in the analysis. There were 268 patients in the LSA not covered group and 183 patients in the LSA covered group. The mean aortic injury grade was 2.88±0.056 vs 2.88±0.049 in the covered versus not-covered group (p=0.957). Glasgow coma scale and injury severity score were not different between the groups. There was no difference between groups for cerebrovascular symptoms or spinal cord ischemia, 1.4% vs 2.8% p=0.684 and 0% vs 2.1% p=0.247, after propensity score matching. Significant differences in access site complications and resource utilization were identified between groups.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest series to evaluate complications based on LSA coverage following TEVAR in trauma patients. Our data demonstrate that coverage of the LSA during TEVAR following blunt trauma is associated with no difference in CNS outcomes. As such, LSA revascularization strategies, while possible, are not directly supported by these data, and should be individualized based on each patient's specific clinical scenario.

Zone 2 hybrid thoracic endovascular aortic repair: Is it a good option for all types of thoracic aortic disease?

BACKGROUND

Zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is performed for the treatment of various thoracic aortic diseases involving the left subclavian artery. This study aimed to analyze the late clinical outcomes of zone 2 hybrid TEVAR according to the various indications.

METHODS

A total of 48 patients who underwent zone 2 TEVAR at our institution between December, 2010 and July, 2020 were enrolled. The indications were aortic aneurysm (AA, n = 15), acute type B aortic dissection (AD, n = 14), penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU, n = 8), traumatic aortic injury (TAI, n = 8), and others (n = 3). The clinical outcomes including early complications and mid-term aortic measurements were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 100% and in-hospital mortality occurred in one patient. The early postoperative complications included stroke (n = 1), transient spinal cord ischemia (n = 1), neck wound hematoma (n = 1), and left phrenic or vagus nerve injury (n = 9). In patients with AD, positive remodeling was observed in ten patients (76.9%) (false lumen regression in the entire or thoracic aorta [n = 9], false lumen thrombosis in the thoracic aorta [n = 1]). However, in patients with AA, increased aneurysm was found in six patients (40%). Persistent aneurysmal growth was found in patients with a maximal aortic diameter of > 60 mm on initial imaging (4/6, 50%). No aortic expansion was observed in those with TAI or PAU. Endoleak was noted in five patients (10.4%), and among them, aortic reintervention was required only in patients with large AAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Zone 2 hybrid TEVAR was associated with an acceptable early complication rate and provided acceptable mid-term aortic results for patients with AD, PAU, and TAI. However, patients with large AAs were at increased risk of aortic reintervention. In cases of large AA, clinicians should carefully consider whether zone 2 hybrid TEVAR or open surgical repair will be more effective for the patient.

Feasibility and Preliminary Patency of Prophylactic Hypogastric Artery Stenting for Prevention of Spinal Cord Ischemia in Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

To report early results of feasibility and patency of prophylactic hypogastric artery (HA) stenting during complex endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

This is a single centre retrospective non comparative cohort study of all consecutive patients undergoing prophylactic HA stenting during fenestrated and/or branched EVAR (F/B EVAR) in order to prevent spinal cord ischemia (SCI). Endpoints included technical success and early outcomes in terms of morbidity, mortality and patency of the implanted stents.

RESULTS

Between May 2014 and June 2019 prophylactic HA stenting was performed in 36 consecutive patients with significant HA stenosis during F/B EVAR to prevent SCI. 69.4% of patients presented with asymptomatic, 25% with symptomatic and 5.6% with ruptured aortic aneurysms. 55.6% were treated for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms, 44.4% for pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. In 13.9% aortic coverage was limited to the abdominal aorta. In 86.1% the aortic coverage was in the thoracoabdominal aortic segment. Unilateral HA stenting was performed in 91.7%, whereas 8.3% underwent bilateral stenting. Technical success was 100%. The primary patency of the implanted stents after a median follow-up time of 9.5 months was 97.5%. One intraprocedural bleeding from an HA branch occurred and was successfully treated by coil embolization. No further procedure-related complications occurred. 11.1% of the patients developed SCI.

CONCLUSIONS

HA stenting is feasible and safe with high rates of technical success and short-term patency.

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.

Management of Descending Thoracic Aortic Diseases: Similarities and Differences Among Cardiovascular Guidelines

Cardiovascular societies have developed recommendations regarding the management of thoracic aortic diseases. While improvements in treatment have been observed during the past decade in regard to patient selection, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and associated techniques, and high-volume centralization, the broad expansion of TEVAR has raised considerations about its indications, appropriateness, limitations, and application. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the similarities and differences among current cardiovascular societies' guidelines for the management of thoracic aortic diseases. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 2009 to May 2020. The initial search identified 990 articles. After exclusion of duplicate or inappropriate articles, the final analysis included 5 articles from cardiovascular societies published between 2010 and 2020. Selected controversial topics were analyzed, including diagnosis, imaging, spinal cord ischemia prevention, and management of the most important thoracic aortic pathologies. The analysis included data concerning the therapeutic approach in acute and chronic type B aortic dissection, penetrating aortic ulcer, intramural hematoma, thoracic aortic aneurysm, and traumatic aortic injury, as well a discussion of inflammatory aneurysms, aortitis, and genetic syndromes. The review presents consistent and controversial recommendations, as well as "gray zone" issues that need further investigation. There was significant overlap and agreement among the 5 societies regarding the management of thoracic aortic diseases. Especially in dissection and aneurysm management, TEVAR has established its role as the treatment of choice. However, robust evidence is still needed in many aspects of the management of thoracic aortic pathologies.

Fenestrated versus debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair for endovascular treatment of distal aortic arch and descending aortic lesions

BACKGROUND

Cervical debranching, followed by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), is well-established for treating aortic arch lesions. However, total endovascular repair with fenestrated endografts has not been adequately studied. Thus, we performed a comparison of the two techniques.

METHODS

The present study was a single-center, retrospective study comparing the treatment of thoracic aortic lesions with custom-made fenestrated stent-grafts (fenestrated TEVAR [fTEVAR]) with a single fenestration for the left subclavian artery (LSA), a scallop for the left carotid artery, and hybrid repair with a thoracic stent-graft and cervical debranching of the LSA. Emergency cases were excluded.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2018, 19 patients (58% male) underwent elective fTEVAR (group A) and 17 patients (82% male) underwent debranching TEVAR (dTEVAR; group B). The mean age ± standard deviation in group A was 65.8 ± 2 years and 68 ± 3 years in group B. Left carotid-subclavian bypass was performed in 15 of 17 patients (88%) and transposition of the LSA in 2 of 17 patients (12%) in group B. The two groups were comparable regarding comorbidities, except for peripheral arterial disease: 5 of 19 patients in group A (26%) and none in group B had had peripheral arterial disease (P = .049). Dissection or post-dissection aneurysm was the indication for treatment in 6 of 19 patients in the fTEVAR group (group A) and in 12 of 17 patients in the dTEVAR group (group B; 31.6% vs 70.6%; P = .04). The indication for the remaining patients was a degenerative aortic aneurysm. Technical success was achieved in all cases, except for one case of dTEVAR owing to a type Ia endoleak. The mean endovascular operative time was 191 ± 120 minutes for fTEVAR and 130 ± 75 minutes for dTEVAR (P = NS). The mean operative time for the debranching procedure was 181 ± 97 minutes. No deaths or major strokes had occurred in the early postoperative period (30 days). Of the 17 patients in group B, 5 (29.4%) had experienced a local complication related to the debranching procedure. The mean follow-up was 14.6 ± 2 months for group A and 17 ± 2 months for group B. Of the 19 patients in group A and 17 patients in group B, 2 (10.5%) and 6 (35.3%) had required an unplanned reintervention related to the thoracic stent-graft during the follow-up period, respectively (P = NS). The estimated freedom from unplanned reintervention at 12 months was 86% for group A and 81% for group B. Primary patency of the LSA stent-graft or the carotid-subclavian bypass/transposition was 100% in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both techniques showed excellent midterm patency rates for the target vessel and high technical success rate. The operation times were shorter for the fTEVAR group and complications related to the debranching procedure were avoided.

Staged total arch replacement, followed by fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair, for patients with mega aortic syndrome

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to review the clinical outcomes of a staged approach using total arch replacement (TAR) with an elephant trunk or a frozen elephant trunk, followed by fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) for patients with mega aortic syndrome.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data and outcomes of 11 consecutive patients (8 men; mean age, 71 ± 7 years) treated by staged TAR and F-BEVAR from January 2014 to December 2018. The F-BEVAR procedures were performed under a prospective, nonrandomized, physician-sponsored investigational device exemption protocol. All patients had had mega aortic syndrome, defined by an ascending aorta, arch, and extent I-II thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm. The endpoints were 30-day mortality, major adverse events (MAE), patient survival, freedom from reintervention, and freedom from target vessel instability.

RESULTS

Of the 11 patients, 6 had developed chronic postdissection aneurysms after previous Stanford A (three A₁₁, two A₁₀, one A₉) dissection repair and 5 had had degenerative aneurysms with no suitable landing zone in the aortic arch. The thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms were classified as extent I in four patients and extent II in seven. One patient had died within 30 days after TAR (9.0%). However, none of the remaining 10 patients who had undergone F-BEVAR had died. First-stage TAR resulted in MAE in three patients (27%), including one spinal cord injury. The mean length of stay was 12 ± 6 days. The mean interval between TAR and F-BEVAR was 245 ± 138 days with no aneurysm rupture during the interval. Second-stage F-BEVAR was associated with MAE in two patients (20%), including spinal cord injury in one patient from spinal hematoma due to placement of a cerebrospinal fluid drain. The mean follow-up period was 14 ± 10 months. At 2 years postoperatively, patient survival, primary patency, secondary patency, and freedom from renal-mesenteric target vessel instability was 80% ± 9%, 94% ± 6%, 100%, and 86% ± 8%, respectively. No aortic-related deaths occurred during the follow-up period. Four patients had required reintervention, all performed using an endovascular approach.

CONCLUSIONS

A staged approach to treatment of mega aortic syndrome using TAR and F-BEVAR is a feasible alternative for selected high-risk patients. Larger clinical experience and longer follow-up are needed.

Complications and Management of the Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Endovascular treatment in thoracic aortic diseases has increased in use exponentially since Dake and colleagues first described the use of a home-made transluminal endovascular graft on 13 patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysm at Stanford University in the early 1990s. Thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) was initially developed for therapy in patients deemed unfit for open surgery. Innovations in endograft engineering design and popularization of endovascular techniques have transformed TEVAR to the predominant treatment choice in elective thoracic aortic repair. The number of TEVARs performed in the United States increased by 600% from 1998 to 2007, while the total number of thoracic aortic repairs increased by 60%. As larger multicenter trials and meta-analysis studies in the 2000s demonstrate the significant decrease in perioperative morbidity and mortality of TEVAR over open repair, TEVAR became incorporated into standard guidelines. The 2010 American consensus guidelines recommend TEVAR to be “strongly considered” when feasible for patients with degenerative or traumatic aneurysms of the descending thoracic aorta exceeding 5.5 cm, saccular aneurysms, or postoperative pseudoaneurysms. Nowadays, TEVAR is the predominant treatment for degenerative and traumatic descending thoracic aortic aneurysm repair. Although TEVAR has been shown to have decreased early morbidity and mortality compared with open surgical repair, endovascular manipulation of a diseased aorta with endovascular devices continues to have significant risks. Despite continued advancement in endovascular technique and devices since the first prospective trial examined the complications associated with TEVAR, common complications, two decades later, still include stroke, spinal cord ischemia, device failure, unintentional great vessel coverage, access site complications, and renal injury. In this article, we review common TEVAR complications with some corresponding radiographic imaging and their management.

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.

New Preoperative Spinal Cord Ischemia Risk Stratification Model for Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

PURPOSE

Our objective was to determine significant predictors of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) following Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) and to further develop a simple and clinically orientated risk score model.

METHODS

A retrospective review of data from the Society of Vascular Surgery/Vascular Quality Initiative national data set was performed for all patients undergoing TEVAR from January, 2014 to June 2018. Preoperative demographics, procedure-related variables, and clinical details related to SCI were examined. A SCI risk score was developed utilizing a multivariable logistic regression model.

RESULTS

For the 7889 patients in the final analysis who underwent TEVAR during the study period, the mean age was 67.6 ± 13.9, range 18 to 90 years, and the majority was male (65%). Postoperative outcomes included stroke (3.0%), myocardial infarction (2.9%), inhospital mortality (5.4%), transient SCI (1.5%), and permanent SCI (2.1%). Nearly half of the overall cases were performed in high volume centers. Predictors of increased risk for SCI included age by decade (odds ratio [OR]: 1.2), celiac coverage (OR: 1.5), current smoker (OR: 1.6), dialysis (OR: 1.9), 3 or more aortic implanted devices (OR: 1.7), emergent or urgent surgery (OR: 1.5), adjunct aorta-related procedure (OR: 2.5), adjunct not related (OR: 2.6), total estimated length of aortic device (19-31 cm, OR: 1.9 and ≥32 cm, OR: 3.0), ASA class 4 or 5 (OR: 1.6), and procedure time ≥154 minutes (OR: 1.8). Two predictors decreased the risk of SCI, cases from high-volume centers (OR: 0.6) and eGFR ≥ 60 (OR: 0.6). To evaluate the risk score model, probabilities of SCI from the original regression, raw score, and raw score categories resulted in area under the curve statistics of 0.792, 0.786, and 0.738, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal cord ischemia remains one of the most feared complications of TEVAR. Incidence of SCI in this large series of patients with TEVAR was 3.6% with nearly 60% being permanent. The proposed model provides an assessment tool to guide clinical decisions, patient consent process, risk-assessment, and procedural strategy.

Previous thoracic aortic repair is not associated with adverse outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

As many as 20% of patients who have undergone previous thoracic aortic repair will require reintervention, which could entail thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). A paucity of data is available on mortality and the incidence of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) and other postoperative complications associated with TEVAR after previous aortic repairs exclusive to the thoracic aorta. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of previous thoracic aortic repair on the 30-day mortality and SCI outcomes for patients after TEVAR.

METHODS

The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for all cases of TEVAR from 2012 to 2018. Patients were excluded if they had undergone previous abdominal aortic repair, the TEVAR had extended beyond aortic zone 5, or SCI data were missing. The 3 cohorts compared were TEVAR with previous ascending aortic or aortic arch repair (group 1), TEVAR with previous descending thoracic aortic repair (group 2), and TEVAR without previous repair (group 3). The primary outcomes of interest were 30-day mortality and SCI. The secondary outcomes included stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiac complications, respiratory complications, postoperative length of stay, and reintervention. The patient variables were compared using χ2 tests, analysis of variance, or Kruskal-Wallis tests, as appropriate. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the predictors of 30-day mortality and SCI.

RESULTS

A total of 4010 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 470 in group 1, 132 in group 2, and 3408 in group 3. The 30-day mortality was 4% (19 of 470) in group 1, 6% (8 of 132) in group 2, and 6% (213 of 3408) in group 3 (P = .17). The incidence of SCI was 3% (14 of 470) in group 1, 3% (4 of 132) in group 2, and 3.8% (128 of 3408) in group 3 (P = .65). Stroke, reintervention, myocardial infarction, and cardiac complications were not significantly different among the 3 groups. The incidence of respiratory complications was greatest for group 3 (11%; 360 of 3408) compared with groups 1 (9%; 44 of 470) and 2 (4%; 5 of 132; P = .034). Similarly, the postoperative length of stay was longest for group 3 (9.6 ± 19.4 days vs 8.2 ± 18.3 days for group 1 and 5.9 ± 8.6 days for group 2; P = .038). The independent predictors of 30-day mortality for all TEVAR patients included units of packed red blood cells transfused intraoperatively, urgent or emergent repairs, older age, increasing serum creatinine level, inability to perform self-care, total procedure time, occlusion of the left subclavian artery intraoperatively, distal endograft landing zone 5, and diabetes. The predictors of SCI included the total procedure time, urgent and emergent repairs, and increasing serum creatinine level.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR after previous thoracic aortic repair was not associated with an increased risk of SCI or 30-day mortality compared with TEVAR without previous aortic repair.

Occlusion of the Celiac Artery during Endovascular Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Is associated with Increased Perioperative Morbidity and Mortality

BACKGROUND

Some studies suggest that celiac artery coverage during elective endovascular thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair is safe given sufficient collateralization of visceral organ perfusion from the superior mesenteric artery. However, there is concern that celiac artery coverage may lead to increased risk of foregut or spinal cord ischemia with an attendant increased risk of mortality. We sought to investigate rates of bowel ischemia, spinal cord ischemia, and 30-day mortality associated with celiac artery coverage during TEVAR and complex EVAR.

METHODS

The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for TEVAR and complex EVAR cases from 2012 to 2018. Inclusion criteria included TAAA pathology and endograft extension to aortic zone 6. Patients with aortic rupture, trauma, prior thoracic aortic surgery, known preoperative occlusion of the left subclavian superior mesenteric, or celiac arteries were excluded. Cases with intraoperative celiac artery occlusion (CAO) were compared retrospectively to cases with celiac artery preservation (CAP). Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality and a composite end point of 30-day mortality, spinal cord ischemia (transient or permanent lower extremity neurologic deficit), and bowel ischemia (colonoscopic evidence of ischemia, bloody stools in a patient who dies prior to colonoscopy or laparotomy, or other documented clinical diagnosis). Univariable comparisons were performed using chi-squared tests and Student's t-tests, as appropriate. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed to identify independent predictors of outcome.

RESULTS

There were 628 cases identified for inclusion in the study. Patients undergoing CAO (n = 44) were more likely to be female or to have higher rates of preoperative spinal drain use, American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3, low preop hemoglobin, and/or symptomatic presentation, but fewer mean number of aortic zones covered. CAO was associated with higher 30-day mortality (5 of 44, 11%) compared to CAP (23 of 584, 4%), P = 0.039. The composite end point occurred at a significantly greater proportion for those who had CAO (10 of 44, 23%) compared to CAP (53 of 584, 9%, P = 0.008), driven by higher rates of 30-day mortality and bowel ischemia (9% vs. 2%, P = 0.026). By multivariate analysis, CAO was predictive of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 3.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1-13.8, P = 0.04) and the composite endpoint (OR = 3.0, 95% CI = 1.1-8.5, P = 0.03). Increasing procedure time was also associated with 30-day mortality (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1-1.7, P < 0.001) and the composite end point (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1-1.6, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

For those treated for TAAAs, CAO was independently predictive of increased 30-day mortality and a composite end point of perioperative mortality, spinal cord ischemia, and bowel ischemia. When treating patients with extensive aortic aneurysmal disease, physicians should attempt to preserve the celiac artery, by revascularization or avoiding ostium coverage, whenever feasible.

Midterm Follow-up of Fenestrated and Scalloped Physician-Modified Endovascular Grafts for Zone 2 TEVAR

Purpose: To investigate the midterm outcomes of scalloped or fenestrated physician-modified endovascular grafts (PMEGs) for zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repairs (TEVAR). Materials and Methods: Between November 2013 and May 2019, 54 consecutive patients (mean age 63 years; 41 men) were treated with thoracic PMEGs modified with 7 scallops or 47 fenestrations for the left subclavian artery (LSA). Indications for aortic repair were acute complicated type B aortic dissection (17, 31%), degenerative aneurysm (13, 24%), acute traumatic rupture of the aortic isthmus (9, 16%), post chronic dissection aneurysmal evolution (8, 15%), penetrating aortic ulcer (3, 6%), intramural hematoma (2, 4%), and floating thrombus (2, 4%). Results: Technical success was 94%; 3 (6%) LSAs were unintentionally covered. An intraoperative type Ia endoleak was treated during the index procedure. One (2%) patient suffered spinal cord ischemia, with irreversible bilateral paraplegia. Three (6%) patients experience postoperative minor strokes with full neurological recovery. Four (7%) patients died in the perioperative period; 2 (2%) were due to aneurysm rupture. Mean follow-up was 26±16 months; 15 (28%) patients had at least 3 years of follow-up. Two (4%) type II endoleaks were identified and successfully treated (4% reintervention rate); no other endoleaks were identified. All the LSAs remained clinically and radiologically patent. There were no conversions to open repair, ruptures, retrograde dissection, stent fracture, migrations, or other aortic complications. Conclusion: Scalloped or single-fenestrated PMEGs for the LSA appear to be durable and safe in the midterm. Combined with low periprocedural morbidity and mortality, these results suggest that this approach can be considered as an off-label alternative to extend proximal seal to zone 2 for TEVAR. Further studies with a larger number of patients and long-term outcomes are needed to fully validate this approach.

Meta-analysis of the outcomes of revascularization after intentional coverage of the left subclavian artery for thoracic endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

Coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA) is often required to achieve complete proximal sealing during thoracic endovascular aortic repair. However, whether LSA revascularization should be performed remains controversial.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched to identify all the relevant studies. A random-effects model was applied to pool the effect measures. Dichotomous data were presented using an odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

There were 32 studies included for qualitative analysis and 31 studies for quantitative analysis. We found that patients who underwent LSA revascularization had a significantly decreased risk of spinal cord ischemia (OR, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.92; P = .02; I² = 0%), cerebrovascular accident (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42-0.95; P = .03; I² = 22%), and left upper extremity ischemia (OR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.36; P < .00001; I² = 0%). However, no significant differences were found in the risk of paraplegia (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.55-1.51; P = .71; I² = 0%) and 30-day mortality (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.59-1.36; P = .60; I² = 21%) between the groups of patients with and without LSA revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

Revascularization of the LSA is associated with decreased risks of cerebrovascular accident, spinal cord ischemia, and left upper limb ischemia in thoracic endovascular aortic repair with LSA coverage at the cost of higher local complications, such as possible vocal cord paresis.

Ischemia-induced lower extremity neurologic impairment after fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Placement of large sheaths in the iliac system during fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) leads to lower extremity (LE) ischemia that can be associated with serious neurologic complications. We sought to determine the effect of LE ischemic time on neurologic impairment after FEVAR.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent FEVAR at a single institution were analyzed. LE ischemic time was calculated from the time of large sheath (≥18F) insertion to the time of sheath removal from the iliac arteries that led to continuous LE ischemia. The primary outcome was neurologic impairment defined as any new sensory or motor deficit in either LE. Outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics and modeled with logistic regression with interaction terms. Each individual LE was used as a unit of analysis.

RESULTS

We examined 101 patients (202 lower extremities) who underwent FEVAR over a 5-year period. The median LE ischemic time was 2.75 hours (range, 0.8-5.2 hours). Neurologic impairment developed in 18 extremities (9%). Of those, 12 (67%) developed mild sensory loss, 6 (33%) complete sensory loss, 4 (22%) loss of proprioception, and 2 (11%) motor dysfunction. Sensory deficit was permanent in four limbs (2%) and motor dysfunction in one limb (0.5%). In all other cases, the neurologic examination returned to baseline by postoperative day 15. Duration of LE ischemic time (odds ratio, 6.3; 95% confidence interval, 3.1-12.4; P < .001) and common iliac artery (CIA) stenosis to a lumen of 8 mm or less (odds ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-7.3; P = .002) were independent predictors for the development of neurologic impairment. An interaction term between LE ischemic time and CIA stenosis was statistically significant (P = .042), indicating that the presence of CIA stenosis modifies the effect of LE ischemic time. In those with CIA stenosis to a lumen of 8 mm or less, the risk of neurologic impairment increased rapidly after 2.5 hours of LE ischemia, and became nearly certain after 4 hours of ischemic time. By contrast, patients without CIA stenosis tolerated longer ischemic times and demonstrated a less steep increase in the risk for LE neurologic impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

LE neurologic impairment after FEVAR is strongly associated with LE ischemic time and CIA occlusive disease to a lumen of 8 mm or less. Our data indicate that, when the LE ischemic time is expected to exceed 2.5 hours (in patients with CIA stenosis) or 3 hours (in patients without CIA stenosis), measures to ensure LE perfusion should be given consideration.

Effect of Left Subclavian Artery Revascularisation in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is an emerging therapy for thoracic aortic pathologies. However, the role of left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularisation in patients with LSA coverage in TEVAR has not been established. A systematic review and meta-analysis was done to investigate the effect of LSA revascularisation in TEVAR when the LSA was covered.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched to find relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs and cohort studies respectively. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to express differences for dichotomous outcomes. Random effects models were used to combine outcomes for studies with I² > 50%; otherwise, fixed effects models were used. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were performed to further validate the results.

RESULTS

Sixteen cohort studies with a total of 2591 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The average score of the included studies was 7.56. Of the included patients, the peri-operative stroke rate was 6.8% (n = 176/2591). The peri-operative stroke rates of the with and without LSA revascularisation groups were 5.4% and 7.8%, respectively. Compared with no LSA revascularisation, patients with LSA revascularisation had a significantly lower peri-operative stroke rate (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.45-0.82; I² = 20%) and peri-operative spinal cord ischaemia (SCI) rate (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.39-0.90; I² = 0). No significant difference was found between the with and without LSA revascularisation groups with respect to peri-operative mortality (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.60-1.21; I² = 35%) and peri-operative paraplegia (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.45-1.44; I² = 17%).

CONCLUSION

The results of this review reveal that LSA revascularisation was associated with significantly lower peri-operative stroke and SCI rates. LSA revascularisation should be recommended for patients with LSA coverage in TEVAR. High quality RCTs are needed to further validate the conclusion.