Management of complicated and uncomplicated acute type B dissection. A systematic review and meta-analysis

[Early Thoracic Endografting is Safe in Patients with Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection]

There are many publications dealing with treatment options for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD). Early TEVAR (Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair) may improve aortic-specific survival and delay disease progression in the long-term. Especially in patients with uncomplicated TBAD and additional high-risk features, preemptive TEVAR may improve late outcomes.We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients treated for TBAD in our hospital between February 2017 and September 2021. Comorbidities, intraoperative data, 30-day mortality and postprocedural complications were analysed.During the above-mentioned period, 61 patients (38 males, median age 63 years) with TBAD were treated. Six patients received best medical treatment (BMT). 55 patients were treated by TEVAR and BMT. 11 patients (20%) had complicated TBAD, 12 patients (22%) had uncomplicated TBAD with high-risk features and 32 patients (58%) had uncomplicated TBAD. Technical success was 100%. No patient with uncomplicated TBAD died within the first 30 postoperative days. One patient with uncomplicated TBAD had a stroke after TEVAR. Two reinterventions were performed on day 7 and day 9 after TEVAR.Patients with uncomplicated TBAD could be treated by early TEVAR, with a low rate of perioperative complications. In patients with uncomplicated TEVAR and high-risk features, early TEVAR with BMT should be considered as the treatment of choice.

Midterm Clinical Outcomes of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Aortic Dissection with Malperfusion Syndrome

Purpose

There is limited data on the midterm results of endovascular treatment for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) with malperfusion syndrome (MS), particularly in Asia. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of endovascular treatment of acute TBAD with MS.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 27 patients who underwent endovascular treatment for acute TBAD with MS.

Results

Among the 27 patients with TBAD and MS, malperfusion was observed in the isolated renal (44.4%), visceral (7.4%) and iliofemoral (25.9%) arteries, as well as their combinations (22.2%). The patients underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) only (25.9%), selective stenting only in arteries affected by malperfusion (22.2%), or combined treatment with TEVAR and selective stenting (51.9%). Primary technical success was achieved in all the patients. No inhospital mortality or early death within 30 days after operation occurred. The rates of stroke, limb ischemia, acute kidney injury, and reintervention at 30 days were 7.4%, 3.7%, 25.9%, and 3.7%, respectively. The mean follow-up period was 4.3±3.1 years. During the follow-up, the rates of death, stroke, maintenance hemodialysis, aneurysmal change, and reintervention were 0%, 3.7%, 7.4%, 7.4%, and 7.4%, respectively. Two patients required reintervention due to limb ischemia and aneurysmal changes in the distal portion of the stent graft. Computed tomography scans revealed a significant increase in aortic diameters in patients who underwent selective stenting compared to those who underwent TEVAR over a 3-year period, with changes in aortic area measuring 878.9 mm2 vs. 188.4 mm2 at the middle of the lesion (P=0.037), 303.7 mm2 vs. 22.8 mm2 at the level of the celiac trunk (P=0.025), and 442.9 mm2 vs. 37.3 mm2 at the level of the renal artery (P=0.019).

Conclusion

The endovascular treatment of acute TBAD with MS demonstrated a high primary technical success rate and promising short- and midterm clinical outcomes.

Systematic review of the effect of cerebrospinal fluid drainage on outcomes after endovascular type B aortic dissection repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present systematic review was to determine whether prophylactic use of cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) contributes to a lower rate of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to identify all relevant studies reported before May 7, 2023. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42023441392). The primary outcome was permanent SCI. Secondary outcomes were temporary SCI and 30-day/in-hospital mortality. The data were presented as the pooled event rates (ERs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 1008 studies were screened, of which 34 studies with 2749 patients were included in the present analysis. The mean Downs and Black quality assessment score was 8.71 (range, 5-12). The pooled rate of permanent SCI with prophylactic CSFD was identical to that without prophylactic CSFD (2.0%; 95% CI, 1.0-3.0; P = 0.445). No statistically significant difference was found between the rates of permanent SCI with routine vs. selective prophylactic CSFD (P = 0.596). The pooled rate of temporary SCI was 1.0% (95% CI, 0.00-1.0%). The pooled rate for 30-day or in-hospital mortality was not significantly different (P = 0.525) in patients with prophylactic CSFD (4.0, 95% CI 2.0-6.0) or without prophylactic CSFD (5.0, 95% CI 2.0-7.0).

CONCLUSIONS

The systematic review has shown that prophylactic CSFD was not associated with a lower rate of permanent SCI and 30-day or in-hospital mortality after TEVAR for TBAD.

Staged surgically created type B aortic dissection model with endovascular reintervention for different morphological features

OBJECTIVES

Understanding morphology and how this relates to treatment strategy is critical for achieving remodelling in aortic dissection. A controllable and reproducible large animal model is required for investigating new therapeutic devices and interventions.

METHODS

Our experimental protocol involved the development of surgically created type B aortic dissection (TBAD) and endovascular reintervention-induced TBAD porcine models. The sample was randomly divided into 2 groups: 1 underwent a secondary tear creation (STC) procedure and the other underwent a false lumen extension (FLE) procedure. Anatomical features were observed at 1 and 3 months, and 2 animals in each group were euthanized at 3 months after the procedures. The aorta and main branches were harvested en bloc, cross-sectioned and prepared for histological examination.

RESULTS

All surgically created TBAD models were successfully generated, and no unintended complications occurred. The endovascular reintervention-induced TBAD model was successfully created in 11 of 12 animals, with 6 in the STC group and 5 in the FLE group. In the STC group, the intraoperative mean diameter of the new secondary tear was 7.23 mm, and a slight increase was observed at first 30 days (P = 0.0026). In the FLE group, the intraoperative new propagation length was (235.80 ± 84.94) mm. The FL propagation length at the 1-month follow-up was significantly longer than that measured intraoperatively (P = 0.0362). Histological evaluation demonstrated that the elastic fibres in the media layer of the aortic wall were disrupted and appeared to be significantly stretched on the adventitial side of the false lumen.

CONCLUSIONS

Our endovascular reintervention is a reliable, minimally invasive approach for producing specific TBAD models with different morphologies.

A Rare Case of Profound Sinus Bradycardia in a Patient With Descending Aortic Dissection

A 34-year-old uncontrolled hypertensive male presented with chest pain radiating to the back. Despite severe pain, he was persistently bradycardic at 38 beats per minute. The workup at the emergency department confirmed the presence of an acute Stanford B aortic dissection. Stanford B dissections are not usually associated with bradycardia. It is Stanford A dissections that are mostly linked with bradycardia because Stanford A dissections can cause concomitant coronary artery extension and involvement of the atrioventricular node. This case demonstrates that sinus bradycardia can exist in the acute setting of any painful aortic dissection, even though it might not necessarily involve the coronary arteries.

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 < 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 < 0.05). Pairwise comparison among groups indicated that the estimated blood loss and operation time in the CSB group were the highest (adjusted P < 0.0083; P < 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 > 0.05) The median follow-up time of CSB, CG, SBSG, and PMF groups was significantly different (P < 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.

[Intensive care management of acute diseases of the aorta]

Acute aortic diseases represent a group of complex severe and often fatal medical conditions. Although they are significantly rarer than cardiac or thromboembolic events, they are an important differential diagnosis to be ruled out, e.g., in the clinical work-up of acute chest pain.Treatment, especially surgical interventions, depends on the progression, extent and size of the pathology and whenever possible should be performed in specialized centers with the appropriate experience.Intensive care monitoring is advisable as a range of peracute complications can occur even in initially stable patients. Depending on the clinical presentation and affected structures, a number of severe complications need to be anticipated by critical care physicians. Additionally, a notable symptom is severe and refractory hypertension, especially in the acute phase. This article provides a summary of the most frequent clinical pictures and corresponding treatment options. Furthermore, the principles of initial patient stabilization and treatment as well as the perioperative management of complex surgical procedures on the aorta are discussed.

Management of acute aortic syndrome with evolving individualized precision medicine solutions: Lessons learned over two decades and literature review

Background

Thoracoabdominal acute aortic syndrome is associated with high morbidity and mortality. We aim to scrutinize our evolving strategies for acute aortic syndrome (AAS) management using minimally invasive and adaptive surgical techniques over two decades.

Methods

This is a longitudinal observational study at our tertiary vascular centre from 2002 to 2021. Out of 22,349 aortic referrals, we performed 1,555 aortic interventions over twenty years. Amongst 96 presented with symptomatic aortic thoracic pathology, 71 patients had AAS. Our primary endpoint is combined aneurysm-related and cardiovascular-related mortality.

Results

There were 43 males and 28 females (5 Traumatic Aortic Transection (TAT), 8 Acute Aortic Intramural Hematoma (IMH), 27 Symptomatic Aortic Dissection (SAD) and 31 Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm (TAA) post-SAD) with a mean age of 69. All the patients with AAS received optimal medical therapy (OMT), but TAT patients underwent emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Fifty-eight patients had an aortic dissection, of which 31 developed TAA. These 31 patients with SAD and TAA received OMT initially and interval surgical intervention with TEVAR or sTaged hybrId sinGle lumEn Reconstruction (TIGER). To increase our landing area, we performed a left subclavian chimney graft with TEVAR in twelve patients. The average follow-up duration was 78.2 months, and eleven patients (15.5%) had combined aneurysm and cardiovascular-related mortality. Twenty-six percentage of the patients developed endoleaks (EL), of which 15% required re-intervention for type II and III. Four patients who had paraplegia (5.7%) and developed renal failure died. None of our patients had a stroke or bowel ischaemia. Twenty patients had OMT, eight of these were patients with acute aortic hematoma, and all eight died within 30 days of presentation.

Conclusion

Acute aortic hematoma is a sinister finding, which must be closely monitored, and consideration is given to early intervention. Paraplegia and renal failure result in an increased mortality rate. TIGER technique with interval TEVAR has salvaged complex situations in young patients. Left subclavian chimney increases our landing area and abolishes SINE. Our experience shows that minimally invasive techniques could be a viable option for AAS.

Managing False Lumen Patency in Chronic Thoracic Aortic Dissecting Aneurysms With Coil Embolization

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair has become the preferred modality of treatment of complicated type B aortic dissections. However, persistent pressurization of the false lumen can lead to negative aortic remodeling with aneurysmal dilation. Described herein is the coil embolization technique that can be used to manage this complication and a review of the literature on the recent development of management options.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

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.

Acute type B aortic dissection in a pregnant woman with undiagnosed Marfan syndrome: A case report and review of the literature

Aortic dissection during pregnancy is rare but can be life-threatening to both the mother and the foetus. Marfan syndrome is a major risk factor for acute aortic dissection during pregnancy. Here, we present the case of a woman who had not been diagnosed with Marfan syndrome prior to pregnancy and who developed acute type B dissection at 32 weeks of gestation. The maternal hemodynamic status was stable, and foetal well-being was ensured. However, under conservative treatment, the dissection extended to the descending aorta, reaching the bilateral iliac artery 2 days later. Due to foetal distress, preterm delivery was performed via caesarean section. The primary treatment of type B aortic dissection is conservative medical treatment, with the goals of hemodynamic stabilisation, minimising the extent of the dissection and decreasing the risk of rupture. However, type B aortic dissection, even the uncomplicated type, in pregnant women may require early and aggressive obstetric interventions to improve maternal and foetal prognoses.

Complex endovascular repair of type B aortic dissection and predicting left arm ischemia: a case report

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the gold standard for surgical management of descending thoracic aortic pathology. Depending on the anatomy, TEVAR often requires deployment across the origin of the left subclavian artery (LSA) to obtain a proximal seal, thus potentially compromising perfusion to the left upper extremity (LUE). However, in most patients this is generally well tolerated without revascularization due to collateralization from the left vertebral artery (LVA).

CASE PRESENTATION

We present a complex 59-year-old Caucasian patient case of TEVAR with a history of prior arch debranching and intraoperative LSA coverage requiring subsequent LSA embolization and emergency take-back for left carotid-subclavian bypass.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this case report is to highlight an often overlooked anatomic LVA variant and an atypical, delayed presentation of acute LUE limb ischemia.

[Treatment of a patient with acute thoracoabdominal aortic dissection complicated by haemothorax]

Total left-sided haemothorax is a rare and severe complication of acute DeBakey type III aortic dissection. The primary aim of treatment is immediate arrest of haemorrhage and stabilization of the haemodynamic status of the patient. Endovascular isolation of the ruptured thoracic portion of the aorta using a stent graft (TEVAR) has recently become the 'gold standard' in treatment of acute, rupture-complicated aortic dissections of this localization. Described in the article is a clinical case report concerning successful endovascular treatment of a seriously ill patient with dissection of the thoracoabdominal portion of the aorta, rupture and massive haemorrhage into the left pleural cavity. The patient underwent endoprosthetic repair of the descending aorta in the setting of a hybrid operating room under local anaesthesia, followed by drainage of the left pleural cavity. The postoperative period was uneventful with no complications. The patient was discharged in a satisfactory condition on day 10 after the emergency surgical intervention. An important advantage of TEVAR for aortic ruptures is a minimally invasive nature of the procedure, consisting in no need to perform either sternothoracotomy or to connect a heart-lung machine, thus decreasing surgical wound, reducing the risk of perioperative life-threatening haemorrhage, and contributing to early activation of the patient.

Complicated acute type B aortic dissection: update on management and results

BACKGROUND

The role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has evolved and is now firmly established as a mainstay of therapy for acute complicated type B aortic dissection (acTBAD). However, several important issues remain unresolved including the optimal timing, sizing, graft selection, coverage length and utilization of adjunctive therapies to address false lumen perfusion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to provide a contemporary perspective on the management and results for TEVAR of acTBAD.

METHODS

All TEVAR patients (N.=159) with acTBAD from a single high-volume, academic medical center were analyzed. Comparative results across time-dependent cohorts (2005-2009 [N.=43] vs. 2010-2014 [N.=56] vs. 2015-2020 [N.=60]) are presented.

RESULTS

30-day mortality was 13%(N.=21) with a trend towards improvement over time (2005-2009, 18% vs. 2010-2020, 12%; P=0.1). Similarly, incidence of postoperative complications also declined: 2005-2009, 70% vs. 2010-2020, 36%(P-trend=0.08). One and 2-year freedom from aorta-related reintervention was 78±7% and 73±9% and did not differ across cohorts (log-rank P=0.5). Respective one and 5-year survival was 75±3% and 64±7%, but significantly improved with time (log-rank P<0.001). The corresponding one and five-year freedom from aorta-related mortality was 82±4% and 78±7% but did not change during the study interval (log-rank P=0.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes for TEVAR of acTBAD continue to improve over time. This time-dependent analysis delineates how results have changed due to increasing experience, technologic evolution, and maturation of the peer reviewed evidence. These results along with the evidence-based review provided herein, provide an update on the management and results of TEVAR of acTBAD while highlighting specific controversies unique to the management of this challenging clinical problem.

Early and mid-term outcome of frozen elephant trunk using spinal cord protective perfusion strategy for acute type A aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of spinal cord injury in total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk for acute type A aortic dissection using our spinal cord protection technique.

METHODS

Between January 2013 and December 2017, 33 patients underwent total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk for acute type A aortic dissection (mean age 67.9 ± 13.3 years). Our spinal cord protection technique involved maintaining extracorporeal circulation through the left subclavian artery in all procedures, using aortic occlusion balloon during distal anastomosis, and inserting frozen elephant trunk above Th 8 with transesophageal echocardiographic guidance. Computed tomography was performed within 1-2 weeks, 12 months, and 36 months postoperatively. We compared the degree of thrombosis of the descending aorta between preoperation and early postoperative period by Fisher's exact test. Moreover, we evaluated postoperative mortality and mobility (including spinal cord injury) at follow-up.

RESULTS

The operative mortality within 30 days was 6.1%. Neither paraplegia nor paraparesis was noted. We observed significant thrombosis of the false lumen at the distal arch and aortic valve level of the descending aorta in postoperative early term period (p < 0.01). At mid-term follow-up (mean 33.9 months), survival probability and 3-year freedom from reoperation rates were 93.9 ± 4.1% and 95.0 ± 4.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The frozen elephant trunk technique with our spinal protection strategy provides good postoperative outcomes. Our strategy can maintain spinal cord perfusion without complete ischemia time even during lower body ischemia time. Implementation of our spinal protection strategy will help prevent spinal cord injury and dilated downstream aorta.

Open stented elephant trunk for complicated Stanford type B aortic dissection: a single-center experience

Background

Open stented elephant trunk (SET) or SET with left subclavian artery (LSCA) to left common carotid artery (LCCA) bypass is proven to a potentially alternative treatment for complicated Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD). In the current study, we reported our experience with ten consecutive TBAD patients who underwent open SET.

Methods

Patients with complicated TBAD underwent open SET from May 2016 to November 2018 in our institution were included. Patients’ clinical data were obtained from the electronic medical record system, and long-term clinical outcomes were collected by telephone interviews or outpatient interviews.

Results

A total of ten patients with nine males and one female were included, and the average age was 47.3 (31–65) years. Increased D-dimer and fibrinogen degradation products were observed in all patients at admission, and two patients had renal insufficiency. The average postoperative mechanical ventilation time, length of stay in intensive care unit, and postoperative hospital length of stay were 46.9 (6.7–151.2) hours, 7.7 (4–17) days, and 15.7 (10–26) days. No postoperative death occurred. Acute kidney injury and other complications were observed, and they were recovered well when discharge. In long-term follow-up, computed tomography angiography indicated that aortas were completely well remodeled, and blood supply of the brachiocephalic trunks was normal without anastomotic complications. All patients lived well.

Conclusion

SET or SET with subclavian artery correction shows satisfactory clinical outcomes, and it could be considered as an alternative treatment. Well-designed, large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are still needed.

Total Arch and Descending Aorta Replacement for Retrograde Type A Aortic Dissection After Endovascular Stent Graft Replacement for Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD) is a severe complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). In this regard, we present our unique surgical methods for total arch and descending aorta replacement for RTAD after TEVAR for complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD). A 52-year-old man with a history of distal arch large aneurysm was diagnosed with TBAD. Because he had sustained chest pain and his aneurysm diameter was 67 mm, TEVAR was urgently performed. After a right axillary-left axillary artery bypass, a stent graft was deployed in the descending aorta via the right femoral artery. Coil embolization was performed in the left subclavian artery. After the condition of the stent graft was checked by angiography, no Type 1 endoleak and backflow from the re-entry was observed. However, seven days after the operation, he experienced chest pain suddenly.

Computed tomography (CT) revealed forward blood flow in the descending aorta (type IA endoleak) and thrombosed aortic dissection in the ascending aorta. The distal arch diameter exceeded 70 mm. A decision was taken to immediately perform an operation. Total aortic arch and descending aorta replacement were performed through a median sternotomy with left 5th interspace thoracotomy. The operation was performed under deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, and selective antegrade cerebral perfusion was accomplished. As a result of the exploration of the aortic arch, it was found that the intimal injury by the bare stent caused RTAD. The patient was successfully extubated after the operation and was discharged without any complications. RTAD can present as an early complication after descending stent grafting because of aortic instability or due to the strength of bare stents. Aortic arch and descending aorta replacement after TEVAR via a clamshell incision can be safely performed if RTAD is diagnosed early.

Use of 3D Printing in Preoperative Planning and Training for Aortic Endovascular Repair and Aortic Valve Disease

Introduction

Three-dimensional (3D) printing has become an affordable tool for assisting heart surgeons in the aorta endovascular field, both in surgical planning, education and training of residents and students. This technique permits the construction of physical prototypes from conventional medical images by converting the anatomical information into computer aided design (CAD) files.

Objective

To present the 3D printing feature on developing prototypes leading to improved aortic endovascular surgical planning, as well as transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and mainly enabling training of the surgical procedure to be performed on patient's specific condition.

Methods

Six 3D printed real scale prototypes were built representing different aortic diseases, taken from real patients, to simulate the correction of the disease with endoprosthesis deployment.

Results

In the hybrid room, the 3D prototypes were examined under fluoroscopy, making it possible to obtain images that clearly delimited the walls of the aorta and its details. The endovascular simulation was then able to be performed, by correctly positioning the endoprosthesis, followed by its deployment.

Conclusion

The 3D printing allowed the construction of aortic diseases realistic prototypes, offering a 3D view from the two-dimensional image of computed tomography (CT) angiography, allowing better surgical planning and surgeon training in the specific case beforehand.

Implications of secondary aortic intervention after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute and chronic type B dissection

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become a mainstay of therapy for acute and chronic type B aortic dissection (TBAD). Dynamic aortic morphologic changes, untreated dissected aorta, and persistent false lumen perfusion have significant consequences for reintervention after TEVAR for TBAD. However, few reports contrast differences in secondary aortic intervention (SAI) after TEVAR for TBAD or describe their influence on mortality. This analysis examined incidence, timing, and types of SAI after TEVAR for acute and chronic TBAD and determined their impact on survival.

METHODS

All TEVAR procedures for acute and chronic TBAD (2005-2016) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with staged (<30 days) or concomitant ascending aortic arch repair or replacement were excluded. Acuity was defined by symptom onset (0-30 days, acute; >30 days, chronic). SAI procedures were grouped into open (intended treatment zone or remote aortic site), major endovascular (TEVAR extension or endograft implanted at noncontiguous site), and minor endovascular (side branch or false lumen embolization) categories. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate freedom from SAI and survival. Cox proportional hazards were used to identify SAI predictors.

RESULTS

TEVAR for TBAD was performed in 258 patients (acute, 49% [n = 128]; chronic, 51% [n = 130]). Mean follow-up was 17 ± 22 months with an overall SAI rate of 27% (n = 70; acute, 22% [28]; chronic, 32% [42]; odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-2.9; P = .07]. Median time to SAI was significantly less after acute than after chronic dissection (0.7 [0-12] vs 7 [0-91] months; P < .001); however, freedom from SAI was not different (1-year: acute, 67% ± 4%, vs chronic, 68% ± 5%; 3-year: acute, 65% ± 7%, vs chronic, 52% ± 8%; P = .7). Types of SAI were similar (acute vs chronic: open, 61% vs 55% [P = .6]; major endovascular, 36% vs 38% [P = .8]; minor endovascular, 21% vs 21% [P = 1]). The open conversion rate (either partial or total endograft explantation: acute, 10% [13/128]; chronic, 15% [20/130]; P = .2) and incidence of retrograde dissection (acute, 6% [7/128]; chronic, 4% [5/130]; P = .5) were similar. There was no difference in survival for SAI patients (5-year: acute + SAI, 55% ± 9%, vs acute without SAI, 67% ± 8% [P = .3]; 5-year: chronic + SAI, 72% ± 6%, vs chronic without SAI, 72% ± 7% [P = .7]). Factors associated with SAI included younger age, acute dissection with larger maximal aortic diameter at presentation, Marfan syndrome, and use of arch vessel adjunctive procedures with the index TEVAR. Indication for the index TEVAR (aneurysm, malperfusion, rupture, and pain or hypertension) or remote preoperative history of proximal arch procedure was not predictive of SAI.

CONCLUSIONS

SAI after TEVAR for TBAD is common. Acute TBAD has a higher proportion of early SAI; however, chronic TBAD appears to have ongoing risk of remediation after the first postoperative year. SAI types are similar between groups, and the occurrence of aorta-related reintervention does not affect survival. Patients' features and anatomy predict need for SAI. These data should be taken into consideration for selection of patients, device design, and surveillance strategies after TEVAR for TBAD.

Acute medical management of aortic dissection

Acute aortic dissection is a life-threatening disease. Current therapeutic guidelines recommend medical therapy with aggressive blood pressure lowering for patients with acute aortic dissection, when they are not indicated for emergency surgery. In particular, patients with aortic dissection without ascending aorta involvement (Stanford type B) are treated medically, unless they have fatal complications. Patients with type B aortic dissection who have critical complications have higher early mortality than that in patients without complications. However, recent advances in thoracic endovascular aortic repair can improve the clinical outcomes in such patients. Accordingly, current guidelines recommend thoracic endovascular aortic repair for patients with complicated type B aortic dissection. However, patients with visceral ischemia still have a poor prognosis, even when they are treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair; an early diagnosis and intervention is crucial to prevent mortality. Understanding the pathophysiological anatomy that can induce organ malperfusion might be important for an early diagnosis and intervention. This review summarizes the current state of acute medical management in patients with acute aortic dissection, based on current evidence and expert consensus, focusing on patients with type B aortic dissection.

Validated Computational Model to Compute Re-apposition Pressures for Treating Type-B Aortic Dissections

The use of endovascular treatment in the thoracic aorta has revolutionized the clinical approach for treating Stanford type B aortic dissection. The endograft procedure is a minimally invasive alternative to traditional surgery for the management of complicated type-B patients. The endograft is first deployed to exclude the proximal entry tear to redirect blood flow toward the true lumen and then a stent graft is used to push the intimal flap against the false lumen (FL) wall such that the aorta is reconstituted by sealing the FL. Although endovascular treatment has reduced the mortality rate in patients compared to those undergoing surgical repair, more than 30% of patients who were initially successfully treated require a new endovascular or surgical intervention in the aortic segments distal to the endograft. One reason for failure of the repair is persistent FL perfusion from distal entry tears. This creates a patent FL channel which can be associated with FL growth. Thus, it is necessary to develop stents that can promote full re-apposition of the flap leading to complete closure of the FL. In the current study, we determine the radial pressures required to re-appose the mid and distal ends of a dissected porcine thoracic aorta using a balloon catheter under static inflation pressure. The same analysis is simulated using finite element analysis (FEA) models by incorporating the hyperelastic properties of porcine aortic tissues. It is shown that the FEA models capture the change in the radial pressures required to re-appose the intimal flap as a function of pressure. The predictions from the simulation models match closely the results from the bench experiments. The use of validated computational models can support development of better stents by calculating the proper radial pressures required for complete re-apposition of the intimal flap.

Type B aortic dissection: new perspectives

Background

Stanford type B aortic dissection is one of the aortic catastrophes with a high mortality and morbidity that needs immediate or delayed treatment, either surgically or endovascularly. This comprehensive review article addresses the current status of open, endovascular and hybrid treatment options for type B aortic dissections with the focus on new therapeutic perspectives.

Methods

Evaluation of currently available evidence based on randomized and registry data and personal experience.

Results

All type B dissections require prompt medical treatment to prevent aortic rupture. Acute complicated dissections are nowadays treated by endografting to reroute blood flow into the true lumen and promote false lumen thrombosis and future aortic remodeling. In acute uncomplicated situations the position of endografting is less clear and should be further delineated; however, on the long run also in these situations endografting might be protective for future aortic catastrophes in certain patient categories. In the chronic dissection with aneurysm formation of the descending thoracic and/or thoracoabdominal aorta, especially in connective tissue disorders, open surgery offers nowadays the best immediate results with long durability. Thoracic endografting plays only a minor role in these circumstances but branched and fenestrated endografting are very promising techniques. Hybrid techniques can offer the solution for high risk patients that are not suitable for open surgery.

Conclusions

Emergent thoracic endografting is the golden standard for all complicated type B dissections while uncomplicated patients with high-risk features might benefit from endovascular repair. Open surgery is limited for chronic post dissection aneurysms. Aortic surveillance is of paramount importance in all situations.

Endovascular treatment of acute Type A aortic dissection-the Endo Bentall approach

Outcome after classical surgical repair of acute Type A aortic dissection has steadily improved over the years and several modifications in cannulation and perfusion added to this achievement. However, subgroups remain where results of classical surgical repair still have room for improvement, particularly patients with severe preoperative malperfusion as well as elderly patients with a limited physiological reserve. So far, only small case series or case reports have been published on the endovascular treatment of dissected ascending aortas. However, a tube alone is not sufficient to fix the entire complex underlying problem in the vast majority of patients with acute Type A aortic dissection. In addition, these published reports are either due to a favorable anatomy or due to very localized disease processes, which are the exception and not the rule. The concept of an endovascular valve-carrying conduit may significantly increase the number of patients suitable for endovascular therapy and it may soon be common practice.

Recent evolution in use and effectiveness in mainland China of thoracic endovascular aortic repair of type B aortic dissection

A meta-analysis was performed on 175 studies selected among those published in mainland China between 2008 and 2015 on thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection (AD). Most TEVAR were performed in Shanghai, Beijing, Hubei and Guangdong in patients with mean age of 53.9 years, and acute (70%) or chronic (30%) type B AD. Procedural success rate was 99.1 ± 0.8%. Major complication rate was 1.7 ± 2.3%, with paraplegia in 0.4 ± 0.0%. Overall in-hospital mortality rate was 1.6 ± 0.9% with AD rupture in 30% (about 40% during first postoperative day); follow-up mortality rate was 2.3 ± 1.1%, with AD rupture in 39.2% (50% within first year). Compared with 2001–2007 data from China, there appeared to be improvement in rates of major complications, paraplegia and in-hospital mortality. Compared with 1999–2004 Western data, rates of procedural success, stroke, and paraplegia appeared similar, while those for major complications, in-hospital mortality, retrograde type A dissection and follow-up mortality appeared lower. Compared with more recent Western data (2006–2013) on acute complicated type B AD, stroke, paraplegia, in-hospital mortality and follow-up mortality appeared lower. Therefore, in mainland China, safety for TEVAR of type B AD appeared better between 2008 and 2015 than in previous periods in China or Western countries.

A case of blunt thoracic aortic injury requiring ECMO for acute malperfusion before TEVAR

BACKGROUND

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is associated with a high mortality rate and the paradigm of treating patients with BTAI currently favours thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) if possible. In BTAI, lethal malperfusion caused by a pseudoaneurysm has rarely been reported. We present the first report of a successful case in which a pseudoaneurysm causing the infrequent occurrence of lethal malperfusion and subsequent acute severe ischaemia in the distal portion of the thoracic descending aorta was overcome by veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) as a bridging therapy until the initiation of TEVAR.

CASE PRESENTATION

An adult woman was transferred to our emergency room after injuries sustained by falling from height. Her vital signs were unstable on admission. CT examination revealed the multiple injuries: traumatic subarachnoid haemorrhage, severe unstable pelvic fracture, and a grade III injury of the thoracic aorta. We made the decision to perform TEVAR after external fixation and transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) for the pelvic injury. During preparations for TEVAR, her lower limbs rapidly felt cold, and her blood lactate level and serum potassium rapidly increased. By the clinical data and ultrasonography and lower extremity Doppler, we diagnosed severe ischaemia in distal portion of the descending aorta caused by a pseudoaneurysm proximal to the descending thoracic aorta. Because we still had not prepared for TEVAR, we immediately started VA ECMO until TEVAR could begin. After the initiation of VA ECMO, her lactate and potassium levels could be controlled. Under VA ECMO support, she underwent TEVAR. After inpatient rehabilitation, she was discharged home without neurologic sequelae.

CONCLUSIONS

VA ECMO could be an important, less-invasive treatment as a bridging therapy for acute severe malperfusion syndrome until TEVAR is initiated for BTAI.

Update on the Therapeutic Strategy of Type B Aortic Dissection

Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a life-threatening disease. Current therapeutic guidelines recommend medical therapy with aggressive blood pressure lowering for patients with acute TBAD unless they have fatal complications. Although patients with uncomplicated TBAD have relatively low early mortality, aorta-related adverse events during the chronic phase worsen the long-term clinical outcome. Recent advances in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can improve clinical outcomes in patients with both complicated and uncomplicated TBAD. According to present guidelines, complicated TBAD patients are recommended for TEVAR. However, the indication in uncomplicated TBAD remains controversial. Recent results of randomized trials, which compared the clinical outcome in patients treated with optimal medical therapy and those treated with TEVAR, suggest that preemptive TEVAR should be considered in uncomplicated TBAD with suitable aortic anatomy. However, these trials failed to show improvement in early mortality in patients treated with TEVAR compared with patients treated with optimal medical therapy, which suggest the importance of patient selection for TEVAR. Several clinical and imaging-related risk factors have been shown to be associated with early disease progression. Preemptive TEVAR might be beneficial and should be considered for high-risk patients with uncomplicated TBAD. However, an interdisciplinary consensus has not been established for the definition of patients at high-risk of TBAD, and it should be confirmed by experts including physicians, radiologists, interventionalists, and vascular surgeons. This review summarizes the current understanding of the therapeutic strategy in patients with TBAD based on evidence and expert consensus.

Uncomplicated Acute Type B Aortic Dissection: Selection Guidelines for TEVAR

Traditionally, the surgical management of acute type B aortic dissections was reserved for patients with signs of malperfusion, rapid expansion, retrograde dissection or rupture. The adjunct of endovascular techniques has brought a paradigm shift, leaning towards preventing long term dissection complications. Multiple risk factors have been proposed to identify patients at risk for long term aortic complications. The patients, who are offered a prophylactic endovascular therapy for uncomplicated aortic dissection, should be selected carefully, and offered intervention by an experienced team in a high-volume center. (This is a review article based on the invited lecture of the 57th Annual Meeting of Japanese College of Angiology.).

Aortic arch pathologies - incidence and natural history

Endovascular interventions have made significant progress and are moving towards treating diseases of the aortic arch. Aortic arch pathologies incur substantial morbidity as well as short and long-term mortality but the progression is not well understood. This article reviews the current evidence on the natural history of aortic arch aneurysms and acute aortic syndromes, including penetrating ulcers, intramural hematomas, acute and chronic type B dissections. Risk factors for disease progression and mortality are also identified with special reference to vascular surgeons.

The new indication of TEVAR for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection

The classical therapeutic indication for type B aortic dissection is based on either medication or open surgery; medication therapy is recommended for relatively stable uncomplicated type B aortic dissection. With improvements in endovascular repair and the potential risk of disease progression, it is now necessary to evaluate the requirement for revision of the therapeutic choice of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection based on morphological features and time window. Data from 252 patients diagnosed as uncomplicated type B aortic dissection from 1992 to 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. Among these cases, 117 patients received medication therapy and 135 patients underwent endovascular repair. The 60-month survival rate in the endovascular group was higher than that in the medication group (92.3% vs 67.6%). According to the morphological evaluation, visceral artery involvement and false/true lumen ratios over 0.7 were strong risk factors for medical treatment alone. Increased surgical time and blood loss were found in patients treated in the chronic phase, compared with those who underwent endovascular repair within 14 days of the onset of symptoms. With improvements in aortic remodeling techniques, endovascular repair has been shown to improve long-term survival rates of patients with uncomplicated aortic dissection. Considering the potential risk of death, we recommend that patients with visceral artery involvement and a false/true lumen ratio over 0.7 should receive endovascular repair aggressively. Furthermore, delayed endovascular repair in the chronic phase does not improve the long-term outcome of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection.

Contemporary Management Strategies for Chronic Type B Aortic Dissections: A Systematic Review

Background

Currently, the optimal management strategy for chronic type B aortic dissections (CBAD) is unknown. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature to compare results of open surgical repair (OSR), standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or branched and fenestrated TEVAR (BEVAR/FEVAR) for CBAD.

Methods

EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched for eligible studies between January 2000 and October 2015. Studies describing outcomes of OSR, TEVAR, B/FEVAR, or all, for CBAD patients initially treated with medical therapy, were included. Primary endpoints were early mortality, and one-year and five-year survival. Secondary endpoints included occurrence of complications. Furthermore, a Time until Treatment Equipoise (TUTE) graph was constructed.

Results

Thirty-five articles were selected for systematic review. A total of 1081 OSR patients, 1397 TEVAR patients and 61 B/FEVAR patients were identified. Early mortality ranged from 5.6% to 21.0% for OSR, 0.0% to 13.7% for TEVAR, and 0.0% to 9.7% for B/FEVAR. For OSR, one-year and five-year survival ranged 72.0%-92.0% and 53.0%-86.7%, respectively. For TEVAR, one-year survival was 82.9%-100.0% and five-year survival 70.0%-88.9%. For B/FEVAR only one-year survival was available, ranging between 76.4% and 100.0%. Most common postoperative complications included stroke (OSR 0.0%-13.3%, TEVAR 0.0%-11.8%), spinal cord ischemia (OSR 0.0%-16.4%, TEVAR 0.0%-12.5%, B/FEVAR 0.0%-12.9%) and acute renal failure (OSR 0.0%-33.3%, TEVAR 0.0%-34.4%, B/FEVAR 0.0%-3.2%). Most common long-term complications after OSR included aneurysm formation (5.8%-20.0%) and new type A dissection (1.7–2.2%). Early complications after TEVAR included retrograde dissection (0.0%-7.1%), malperfusion (1.3%–9.4%), cardiac complications (0.0%–5.9%) and rupture (0.5%–5.0%). Most common long-term complications after TEVAR were rupture (0.5%–7.1%), endoleaks (0.0%–15.8%) and cardiac complications (5.9%-7.1%). No short-term aortic rupture or malperfusion was observed after B/FEVAR. Long-term complications included malperfusion (6.5%) and endoleaks (0.0%-66.7%). Reintervention rates after OSR, TEVAR and B/FEVAR were 5.8%-29.0%, 4.3%-47.4% and 0.0%-53.3%, respectively. TUTE for OSR was 2.7 years, for TEVAR 9.9 months and for B/FEVAR 10.3 months.

Conclusion

We found a limited early survival benefit of standard TEVAR over OSR for CBAD. Complication rates after TEVAR are higher, but complications after OSR are usually more serious. Initial experiences with B/FEVAR show its feasibility, but long-term results are needed to compare it to OSR and standard TEVAR. We conclude that optimal treatment of CBAD remains debatable and merits a patient specific decision. TUTE seems a feasible and useful tool to better understand management outcomes of CBAD.

[Endovascular versus conventional vascular surgery - old-fashioned thinking? Part 1: interventions on the aorta]

Endovascular therapy has widely replaced conventional open vascular surgical reconstruction. For this reason both techniques were widely considered to be competing approaches. Evidence-based data from randomized prospective trials, meta-analyses and clinical registries, however, demonstrated that both techniques should be used to complement each other. It became increasingly more evident that the use of either procedure depends on the underlying disease and the anatomical conditions, whereby a combination of both (hybrid approach) may be the preferred option in certain situations. This review focuses on the treatment of complicated acute type B aortic dissection, descending thoracic aortic aneurysms, thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms as well as asymptomatic and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Outcomes of Patients With Acute Type B (DeBakey III) Aortic Dissection: A 13-Year, Single-Center Experience

Background—

Aortic dissection remains the most common aortic catastrophe. In the endovascular era, the management of acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) is undergoing dramatic changes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term outcomes of patients with ATBAD who were treated at our center over a 13-year period.

Methods and Results—

We reviewed patients with ATBAD between 2001 and 2014, analyzing variables based on status (complicated [c] versus uncomplicated [u]) and treatment modalities. We defined cATBAD as rupture, expansion of diameter on imaging during the admission, persistent pain, or clinical malperfusion leading to a deficit in cerebral, spinal, visceral, renal, or peripheral vascular territories at presentation or during initial hospitalization. Postoperative outcomes were defined as deficits not present before the intervention. Outcomes were compared between the groups by use of Kaplan-Meier and descriptive statistics. We treated 442 patients with ATBAD. Of those 442, 60.6% had uATBAD and were treated medically, and 39.4% had cATBAD, of whom 39.0% were treated medically to 30.0% with open repair, 21.3% with thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and 9.7% with other open peripheral procedures. Intervention-free survival at 1 and 5 years was 84.8% and 62.7% for uATBAD, 61.8% and 44.0% for cATBAD-medical, 69.2% and 47.2% for cATBAD-open, and 68.0% and 42.5% for cATBAD–thoracic endovascular aortic repair, respectively (P=0.001). Overall survival was significantly related primarily to complicated presentation.

Conclusions—

In our experience, early and late outcomes of ATBAD were dependent on the presence of complications, with cATBAD faring worse. Although uATBAD was associated with favorable early survival, late complications still occurred, mandating radiographic surveillance and open or endovascular interventions. Prospective trials are required to better determine the optimal therapy for uATBAD.

Complicated Acute Aortic Syndromes Affecting the Descending Thoracic Aorta: Endovascular Treatment Compared With Open Repair

BACKGROUND

For patients with complicated acute thoracic aortic syndromes, endovascular treatment, when feasible, is preferred over open surgery. However, there are limited data on the long-term benefits of endovascular treatment in complicated acute aortic syndromes affecting the descending thoracic aorta.

HYPOTHESIS

The endovascular treatment is expected to have more favorable long-term mortality and fewer late reintervention in complicated acute thoracic aortic syndromes.

METHODS

Of 155 consecutive patients with acute aortic syndromes, 94 met the inclusion criteria of the study; 63 underwent endovascular repair (group 1) and 31 underwent open repair (group 2). Patients with a diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome localized in the descending thoracic aorta distal to the emergence of the left subclavian artery, complicated by rupture, malperfusion syndrome, and/or acute aortic expansion, were included. Indications for repair of the descending thoracic aorta included impending rupture in 70.2%, malperfusion syndrome in 29.8%, and persistence of pain with aortic expansion (aortic diameter >40 mm) in 2 patients.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period (63.0 ± 24.6 months), the cumulative survival free from cardiovascular death rates at 5 years was 92.0% and 51.4% in group 1 and 2, respectively (log rank P = 0.0001). Late mortality related to the aorta was 1.6% with thoracic endovascular aortic repair and 0% with surgical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular treatment in patients with complicated acute thoracic aortic syndromes localized at the descending thoracic aorta is feasible and safe, with a lower rate of early complications and similar long-term benefits when compared with surgical treatment.

Open surgical repair for chronic type B aortic dissection: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection (CBAD) remains complicated. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has supplanted open surgical repair (OSR) as the preferred surgical treatment for CBAD. Despite TEVAR's superior short-term results, much less is understood about its long-term outcomes. As much of the understanding of OSR originates from historical report, contemporary series, with modern surgical techniques and technologies, may present an alternative to TEVAR. The present systematic review will assess the short- and long-term outcomes of historic and contemporary series of OSR for CBAD.

METHODS

Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to March 2014. Relevant studies with OSRs for chronic type B dissection were identified. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints. Studies were sub-classified into the pre-endovascular (historic series) and endovascular era (contemporary series) depending on whether the majority of cases were performed after 1999.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were identified for inclusion for quantitative analysis. Pooled short-term mortality was 11.1% overall, and 7.5% in the nine contemporary studies. Stroke, spinal cord ischemia, renal dysfunction, and reoperation for bleeding were 5.9%, 4.9%, 8.1%, and 8.1%, respectively, for the contemporary series. Absolute late reintervention was identified in 13.3% of patients overall, and in 11.3% of patients in the contemporary series. Aggregated survival at 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-years of all patients were 82.1%, 74.1%, 66.3%, and 50.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

OSR for chronic type B dissection in the contemporary era offers acceptable results. Management approaches should be considered carefully, taking into account both short-term and long-term complications. More research is required to clarify specific indications for OSR and TEVAR in chronic type B dissections.