Minimally Invasive Endovascular Repair of Ascending Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm with Use of Local Anesthesia and Conscious Sedation

Minimally Invasive Endovascular Repair for Nondissected Ascending Aortic Disease: A Systematic Review

Objective

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of endovascular treatment for nondissected diseases of the ascending aorta. Data Sources. PubMed, Embase, and SciELO. Review Methods. In this study, we conducted a search on the PubMed, Embase, and SciELO databases for all cases of ascending aortic endovascular repair included in the literature published between January 2007 and July 2023, excluding type A aortic dissection. We reviewed 56 case reports and 7 observational studies included in this study, assessing the techniques, equipment, procedural steps, and results. We summarized the age, complications, follow-up time, and access route.

Results

This study includes 63 articles reporting 105 patients (mean age: 64.96 ± 17.08 years) who received endovascular repair for nondissected ascending aortic disease. The types of disease include aneurysm (N = 16), pseudoaneurysm (N = 71), penetrating aortic ulcer (N = 10), intramural hematoma (N = 2), thrombosis (N = 2), iatrogenic coarctation (N = 1), and rupture of the aorta (N = 3). The success rate of surgery is 99.05% (104/105). Complications include endoleak (10.48%, 11/105), stroke (5.71%, 6/105), postoperative infection (1.91%, 2/105), acute renal failure (0.95%, 1/105), aortic rupture (0.95%, 1/105), thrombosis (0.95%, 1/105), and splenic infarction (0.95%, 1/105). Five patients required conversion to open surgery, two patients underwent endovascular reintervention, and four of these five patients underwent surgery due to endoleak. Early mortality was 2.86% (3/105).

Conclusion

While the viability and results of endovascular repair for the treatment of ascending aortic disease are acknowledged in some circumstances, further research is needed to determine the safety and effectiveness of endovascular treatment for ascending aortic disease.

The Aortic Pathologies: How Far We Understand It and Its Implications on Thoracic Aortic Surgery

Thoracic aortic diseases contribute to a major part of cardiac surgeries. The severity of pathologies varies significantly from emergency and life-threatening to conservatively managed conditions. Life-threatening conditions include type A aortic dissection and rupture. Aortic aneurysm is an example of a conservatively managed condition. Pathologies that affect the arterial wall can have a profound impact on the presentation of such cases. Several risk factors have been identified that increase the risk of emergency presentations such as connective tissue disease, hypertension, and vasculitis. The understanding of aortic pathologies is essential to improve management and clinical outcomes.

Percutaneous endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with monitored anesthesia care decreases operative time but not pulmonary complications

OBJECTIVES

To report our experience and compare the results of percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (PEVAR) performed under monitored anesthesia care (MAC) to PEVAR under general anesthesia (GA).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent non-emergency endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) was completed. Patients were excluded if they had a complex repair, including fenestrated, branched, or parallel endografting. Demographics, operative data, 30-day mortality/morbidity and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 159 patients were identified with a median age of 69. 115 patients had PEVAR, 45 (39.1%) PEVAR MAC and 70 (60.9%) PEVAR GA. PEVAR MAC compared to PEVAR GA had decreased operative time (106 vs. 134 min, P < 0.001), time in the operating room (163 vs. 245 min, P = 0.016), and estimated blood loss (EBL) (115 vs. 176 mL P = 0.012). There was no statistically significant difference in the hospital length of stay (LOS) (1.9 vs. 2.7 days, P = 0.133), and post-operative complications including pulmonary (2.2 vs. 2.9%, P = 0.835). Forty-four patients had EVAR with a femoral cutdown (FC), including 14 PEVAR conversions. PEVAR conversion was associated with higher EBL (543 vs. 323 mL, P = 0.03), operative time (230 vs. 178 min, P = 0.01), and operating room time (307 vs. 275 min, P = 0.01) compared to planned EVAR with FC.

CONCLUSIONS

PEVAR under MAC is associated with shorter time in the operating room compared to PEVAR under GA. PEVAR under MAC does however not decrease overall morbidities, including postoperative pulmonary complications.

Anesthetic Considerations in Endovascular Repair of the Ascending Aorta

Since the first endovascular aortic repair in 1990, endovascular devices and the indications for their use have significantly grown. Considerable progress has been made in endovascular devices and techniques, such that endovascular repair is now considered first-line treatment for patients with descending aortic disease. However, for patients with ascending aortic disease, open surgical repair with cardiopulmonary bypass and hypothermic cardiac arrest was the only option until recently. Although the outcomes for open surgical repair of the ascending aorta have improved over the years, approximately 30% of patients with an emergent surgical indication, such as type A aortic dissection, are considered to be too high risk for open repair. For these patients, endovascular repair of the ascending aorta offers a life-saving procedure. The ascending aorta is regarded as the final frontier for endovascular therapy. Endovascular repair of it has posed a formidable challenge thus far, due to its unique anatomy, hemodynamic forces, and lack of an appropriate stent-graft designed specifically for the ascending aorta. Although currently there are no comprehensive data from randomized clinical trials, there are several case series and case reports that have shown favorable outcomes. Improvements in available devices soon will drive an exponential increase in the number of patients undergoing endovascular ascending aortic repair. In this review, the authors discuss multiple aspects of endovascular ascending aortic repair including the unique surgical and anesthetic considerations, the devices used, and the available outcomes data, and future directions are also explored.

Massive Hemoptysis Caused by an Aortobronchial Fistula Related to Pedicle Screw Impingement

We report a case of a 50-year-old man with a 10-year history of pedicle screw internal fixation in the thoracic spine and heroin abuse, who presented with sudden-onset massive hemoptysis with hemorrhagic shock and asphyxia. Urgent contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography (CT) characteristically showed thoracic aortic perforation, a paravertebral pseudoaneurysm, and an intrapulmonary hematoma. Emergency percutaneous thoracic endovascular aortic repair (pTEVAR) with the preclose technique using a vascular closure device under local anesthesia achieved success without any complications. The current case highlights the importance of understanding massive hemoptysis caused by an aortobronchial fistula related to pedicle screw impingement in clinical practice and the value of pTEVAR with the preclose technique under local anesthesia in the emergency setting.

Follow-up results of aortic arch cervical debranching performed with the help of a temporary crossover external carotid artery bypass for cerebral protection followed by endovascular thoracic aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

Treating aortic arch aneurysms with conventional open surgical and endovascular stent graft procedures is challenging due to the complex anatomy of the arch and the arteries arising from it that nourish the brain. Cerebral protection is of the utmost importance during the treatment of thoracic aneurysms involving the aortic arch.

METHODS

Between May 2014 and November 2018, 7 patients with thoracic aortic aneurysms involving the aortic arch who underwent aortic arch cervical debranching with our technique were reviewed retrospectively. Because all the patients being considered for conventional surgical aortic arch replacement had serious comorbidities, they were selected to receive hybrid therapy. The mean age of the patients was 71.2 ± 9.4 years. One patient was a woman and 6 patients were men. One patient was given general anaesthesia; the remaining 6 patients had a regional block. A crossover temporary bypass was performed between the external carotid arteries with a 6-mm polytetrafluoroethylene graft for cerebral protection in all patients. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) was successfully performed in all patients except 1 following debranching.

RESULTS

Neurological complications did not occur during the procedures. Patients were followed for a mean of 18.3 ± 4.9 months. One female patient died of exacerbating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease within the first follow-up year. Three other patients died: 1 died of natural causes; 1 died of pneumonia followed by multiorgan failure; and 1 died of myocardial infarction during the mid-term follow-up period. The remaining patients are still being followed and are event free.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular treatment of thoracic aortic diseases involving the aortic arch is facilitated when the aortic arch is debranched. Our cerebral protection method with a temporary crossover bypass between the external carotid arteries provides continuous pulsatile blood flow to the brain; hence, neurologically, it is a reliable procedure. The follow-up results of the patients who underwent aortic arch cervical debranching followed by TEVAR depended on their comorbidities.