Living in High-Poverty Areas is Associated with Reduced Survival in Patients with Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm

OBJECTIVES

Studies have demonstrated socioeconomic status, insurance, race, and distance impact clinical outcomes in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). The purpose of this study was to assess if these factors also impact clinical outcomes in patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients with TAAAs confirmed by CT imaging between 2009 to 2019 at a single institution. Patients' zip codes were mapped to American Community Survey Data to obtain geographic poverty rates. We used the standard US Census definition of high-poverty concentration, as >20% of the population living at 100% of the poverty rate. Our primary outcome was overall survival, stratified by whether the patient underwent repair.

RESULTS

Of 578 patients, 575 had zip code data and were analyzed. In both the non-operative (N=268) and operative (N=307) groups there were no significant differences in age, race, co-morbidities, clinical urgency, surgery utilization, or surgery modality between patients living in high-poverty areas (N=95, 16.4%) versus not. In the non-operative group, patients from high-poverty areas were more likely to have aneurysm due to dissection (37.5 vs. 17.6%, P=0.03). In multivariate analyses, patients from high-poverty zip codes had significantly worse non-operative survival (HR 1.9, 95% 1.1-3.3, P=0.03). In the repair group, high-poverty was also a significant predictor of reduced post-operative survival (HR 1.65, 95% 1-2.63, P=0.04). Adding the Gagne Index, these differences persisted in both groups (non-operative: HR 1.93, 95% 1.01-3.70, P = 0.05; operative: HR 1.62, 95% 1.03-2.56, p = 0.04). In Kaplan-Meier analysis the difference in post-operative survival began approximately 1.5 years after repair. Private insurance was predictive of improved post-operative survival (HR 0.42, 95% 0.18- 0.95, P=0.04) but reduced non-operative survival (HR 2.05, 95% 1.01-4.14, P=0.04). Data were insufficient to determine if race impacted survival discretely from poverty status. These results were found after adjusting for age, race, sex, maximum aortic diameter, coronary artery disease, distance from the hospital, insurance, and active smoking. Interestingly, in multivariate regression, traveling greater than 100 miles was correlated with increased surgery utilization (OR 1.58, 95% 1.08-2.33, P=0.02) and long-term survival (HR 0.61, 95% 0.41-0.92, P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with TAAA living in high-poverty areas had significantly more dissections and suffered a nearly doubled risk of mortality compared to patients living outside such areas. These data suggest that these disparities are attributed to the overall impacts of poverty and highlight the pressing need for research into TAAA disparities.

Prospective randomized pilot trial comparing prophylactic vs therapeutic cerebrospinal fluid drainage during complex endovascular thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular techniques have transformed the management of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). However, spinal cord ischemia (SCI) remains a prevalent and devastating complication. Prophylactic drainage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is among the proposed strategies for prevention of SCI. Although prophylactic CSF drainage is widely used and conceptually attractive, prophylactic CSF drains have not been demonstrated to definitively prevent the occurrence nor mitigate the severity of SCI in endovascular TAAA repair. Whether or not outcomes of prophylactic drains are superior to therapeutic drains remains unknown. This pilot study was performed to determine the feasibility of a randomized clinical trial designed to investigate the role of prophylactic vs therapeutic CSF drains in the prevention of SCI in patients undergoing endovascular TAAA repair using branched and fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FBEVAR).

METHODS

This was a prospective multicenter randomized pilot clinical trial conducted at The University of Alabama at Birmingham and The University of Massachusetts. Twenty patients were enrolled and randomized to either the prophylactic drainage or therapeutic drainage groups, prior to undergoing FBEVAR for extensive TAAAs and arch aortic aneurysms. This was a pilot feasibility study that was not powered to detect statistical differences in clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was feasibility of randomization and compliance with a shared lumbar drain protocol. Secondary outcomes included rate of drain complications and SCI.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were enrolled and successfully randomized, without any crossovers, to either the control cohort (n = 10), without prophylactic drains, or the experimental cohort (n = 10), with prophylactic drains. There were no differences in age, comorbidities, or history of prior aortic surgery across the cohorts. All patients were treated with FBEVAR. Aneurysm classifications were as follows: Extent I (10%), Extent II (50%), Extent III (35%), and Extent IV (5%). The average length of aortic coverage was 207 ± 21.6 mm. The length of aortic coverage did not vary across cohorts, nor did procedural times or blood loss volume. Compliance with the SCI prevention protocol was 100% across both groups. Within the prophylactic drain cohort, one patient experienced an adverse event related to lumbar drain placement, manifested as an epidural hematoma requiring laminectomy, without neurologic deficit (n = 1/10; 10%). There was one SCI event (n = 1/20; 5%), which occurred in the prophylactic drain cohort on postoperative day 9 following an episode of hypotension related to a gastrointestinal bleed.

CONCLUSIONS

The role of prophylactic CSF drains for the prevention of SCI following endovascular TAAA repair is a topic of ongoing research, with many current practices based on expert opinion and experience, rather than rigorous scientific data. This study demonstrates the feasibility of a multicenter randomized clinical trial to evaluate the role of prophylactic vs therapeutic CSF drains in the prevention of SCI in patients undergoing endovascular TAAA repair.

Early outcomes of endovascular repairs of the aortic arch using thoracic branch endoprosthesis

OBJECTIVE

The only commercially available thoracic branched endoprosthesis (TBE) for treatment of the aortic arch was released in 2022. Limited data outside of clinical trial results have been reported. This study describes the demographics, anatomic details, and outcomes for patients treated for zone 0 to 2 using TBEs outside of a clinical trial.

METHODS

All patients treated using TBEs for zone 0 to 2 were included. Patients treated as part of the clinical trial for zone 0 to 1 (n = 6) were excluded. Patient demographics, comorbidities, anatomic and operative details, and outcomes were reported. Outcomes and survival were then compared between groups.

RESULTS

Of 40 patients, six patients underwent repair of zone 0, three of zone 1, and 31 of zone 2. There were no differences in demographics, comorbidities, or operative details by zone of treatment; however, the frequency of genetic aortopathy differed (zone 0: 0%; zone 1: 67%; and zone 2: 6.4%; P < .01). Seventy-three percent of patients were treated for dissection vs 27% with isolated aneurysms. Of the patients, 2.5% were treated for rupture, 22% were treated for symptomatic aneurysms, and 75% were treated electively. Forty-eight percent of repairs included a proximal cuff, and 83% received distal extension. Technical success was achieved in 100% of patients. Mean fluoroscopy time was 18 minutes, and median fluoroscopy dose was 416 mGy. Sixty percent of patients had prior aortic ascending/arch repair. TBE was planned as part of a complete thoracoabdominal repair in 45% of patients. Thirty-day mortality was 2.5% overall, with a single death in a zone 0 patient that occurred at day 1 due to a myocardial infarction. There were no reinterventions within 30 days. All other outcomes were similar. The 30-day stroke rate was 5.0%. The strokes occurred at day 6 (zone 1) and day 15 (zone 2); however, both were due to occlusion of a prior proximal surgical bypass and unrelated to the TBE side branch or embolization. Specifically, both patients had occlusion of a branch of their prior zone 1 or zone 2 arch replacement. An endoleak occurred in 7.5% of patients at 30-day follow-up (type II: 5.0%; unknown: 2.5%). At a mean follow-up of 6.6 months, 100% of side branches were patent.

CONCLUSIONS

Repair of the aortic arch including TBE can be performed electively and urgently with acceptable stroke and death rates. TBE provides a valuable tool for patients requiring complete repair of a thoracoabdominal aneurysm. Continued investigation is underway to assess long-term safety and efficacy outside of the clinical trial.

Outcomes of Elective and Non-elective Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Aortic Repair for Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

To describe outcomes after elective and non-elective fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs).

BACKGROUND

FB-EVAR has been increasingly utilized to treat TAAAs; however, outcomes after non-elective versus elective repair are not well described.

METHODS

Clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing FB-EVAR for TAAAs at 24 centers (2006-2021) were reviewed. Endpoints including early mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), all-cause mortality, and aortic-related mortality (ARM), were analyzed and compared in patients who had non-elective versus elective repair.

RESULTS

A total of 2603 patients (69% males; mean age 72±10 year old) underwent FB-EVAR for TAAAs. Elective repair was performed in 2187 patients (84%) and non-elective repair in 416 patients [16%; 268 (64%) symptomatic, 148 (36%) ruptured]. Non-elective FB-EVAR was associated with higher early mortality (17% vs 5%, P <0.001) and rates of MAEs (34% vs 20%, P <0.001). Median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range, 7-37 months). Survival and cumulative incidence of ARM at 3 years were both lower for non-elective versus elective patients (50±4% vs 70±1% and 21±3% vs 7±1%, P <0.001). On multivariable analysis, non-elective repair was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.92; 95% CI] 1.50-2.44; P <0.001) and ARM (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.63-3.62; P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-elective FB-EVAR of symptomatic or ruptured TAAAs is feasible, but carries higher incidence of early MAEs and increased all-cause mortality and ARM than elective repair. Long-term follow-up is warranted to justify the treatment.

Severity of acute kidney injury is associated with decreased survival after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Acute kidney injury (AKI) occurs frequently in complex aortic surgery and has been implicated in perioperative and long-term survival. This study sought to characterize the relationship between AKI severity and mortality after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (F/B-EVAR).

METHODS

Consecutive patients enrolled by the US Aortic Research Consortium in 10, prospective, nonrandomized, physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies evaluating F/B-EVAR, between 2005 and 2023, were included in this study. Perioperative AKI during hospitalization was defined by and staged using the 2012 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria. Determinants of AKI were evaluated with backward stepwise mixed effects multivariable ordinal logistic regression. Survival was analyzed with conditionally adjusted survival curves and backward stepwise mixed effects Cox proportional hazards modelling.

RESULTS

In the study period, 2413 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 74 years (IQR, 69-79 years) underwent F/B-EVAR. The median follow-up duration was 2.2 years (IQR, 0.7-3.7 years). The median baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and creatinine were 68 mL/min/1.73 m2 (IQR, 53-84 mL/min/1.73 m2) and 1.1 mg/dL (IQR, 0.9-1.3 mg/dL), respectively. Stratification of AKI identified 316 patients (13%) with stage 1 injury, 42 (2%) with stage 2 injury, and 74 (3%) with stage 3 injury. Renal replacement therapy was initiated during the index hospitalization in 36 patients (1.5% of cohort, 49% of stage 3 injuries). Thirty-day major adverse events were associated with AKI severity (all P ≤ .0001). Multivariable predictors of AKI severity included baseline eGFR (proportional odds ratio, 0.9 per 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.85-0.95 per 10 mL/min/1.73 m2]; P < .0001), baseline serum hematocrit (0.58 per 10% [95% CI, 0.48-0.71 per 10%]; P < .0001), renal artery technical failure during aneurysm repair (3 [95% CI,1.61-5.72]; P = .0006), and total operating time (1.05 per 10 minutes [95% CI, 1.04-1.07 per 10 minutes]; P < .0001). One-year unadjusted survivals for AKI severity strata were 91% (95% CI, 90%-92%) for no injury, 80% (95% CI, 76%-85%) for stage 1 injury, 72% (95% CI, 59-87%) for stage 2 injury, and 46% (95% CI, 35-59%) for stage 3 injury (P<.0001). Multivariable determinants of survival included AKI severity (stage 1, hazard ratio [HR], 1.6 [95% CI, 1.3-2]); stage 2, HR, 2.2 [95% CI, 1.4-3.4]); stage 3 HR, 4 [95% CI, 2.9-5.5]; P < .0001), decreased eGFR (HR, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9-1.3]; P = .4), patient age (HR, 1.6 per 10 years [95% CI, 1.4-1.8 per 10 years]; P < .0001), baseline chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.3-1.8]; P < .0001), baseline congestive heart failure (HR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.6-2.1]; P < .0001), postoperative paraplegia (HR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.1-4]; P = .02), and procedural technical success (HR, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-0.8]; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

AKI, as defined by the 2012 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria, occurred in 18% of patients after F/B-EVAR. Greater severity of AKI after F/B-EVAR was associated with decreased postoperative survival. The predictors of AKI severity identified in these analyses suggest a role for improved preoperative risk mitigation and staging of interventions in complex aortic repair.

Mid-term Renal and Mesenteric Artery Outcomes During Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair for Complex Abdominal and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms in the United States Aortic Research Consortium

OBJECTIVE

To report mid-term outcomes of renal-mesenteric target arteries (TAs) after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND

TA instability (TAI) is the most frequent indication for reintervention after FB-EVAR.

METHODS

Data from consecutive patients enrolled in 9 prospective nonrandomized physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies between 2005 and 2020 were reviewed. TA outcomes through 5 years of follow-up were analyzed for vessels incorporated by fenestrations or directional branches (DBs), including TA patency, endoleak, integrity failure, reintervention, and instability.

RESULTS

A total of 1681 patients had 6349 renal-mesenteric arteries were targeted using 3720 fenestrations (59%), 2435 DBs (38%), and 194 scallops (3%). Mean follow was 23 ± 21 months. At 5 years, TAs incorporated by fenestrations had higher primary (95 ± 1% vs 91 ± 1%, P < 0.001) and secondary patency (98 ± 1% vs 94 ± 1%, P < 0.001), and higher freedom from TAI (87 ± 2% vs 84 ± 2%, P = 0.002) compared with TAs incorporated by DBs, with no differences in other TA events. DBs targeted by balloon-expandable stent-grafts had significantly lower freedom from TAI (78 ± 4% vs 88 ± 1%, P = 0.006), TA endoleak (87 ± 3% vs 97 ± 1%, P < 0.001), and TA reintervention (83 ± 4% vs 95 ± 1%, P < 0.001) compared with those targeted by self-expandable stent-grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporation of renal and mesenteric TA during FB-EVAR is safe and durable with high 5-year patency rates and low freedom from TAI. DBs have lower patency rates and lower freedom from TAI than fenestrations, with better performance for self-expandable stent grafts as compared with balloon-expandable stent grafts.

A multidisciplinary multistage complete mega aorta replacement and utilization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair

A 49-year-old woman underwent a 11-month multistage complete replacement of a mega aorta. Replacement stages included ascending aorta and arch replacement in conjunction with a frozen elephant trunk thoracic endovascular aortic repair, extension of thoracic endovascular aortic repair to zone 5, and open repair of the thoracoabdominal aneurysm with the use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for circulatory support. This case illustrates the complexity of repairing a mega aorta, the multidisciplinary care and staging needed for repair, and the use of peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for circulatory perfusion during thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair.

Outcomes After Endovascular Aortic Intervention in Patients With Connective Tissue Disease

IMPORTANCE

Endovascular treatment is not recommended for aortic pathologies in patients with connective tissue diseases (CTDs) other than in redo operations and as bridging procedures in emergencies. However, recent developments in endovascular technology may challenge this dogma.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the midterm outcomes of endovascular aortic repair in patients with CTD.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

For this descriptive retrospective study, data on demographics, interventions, and short-term and midterm outcomes were collected from 18 aortic centers in Europe, Asia, North America, and New Zealand. Patients with CTD who had undergone endovascular aortic repair from 2005 to 2020 were included. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to November 2022.

EXPOSURE

All principal endovascular aortic repairs, including redo surgery and complex repairs of the aortic arch and visceral aorta.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Short-term and midterm survival, rates of secondary procedures, and conversion to open repair.

RESULTS

In total, 171 patients were included: 142 with Marfan syndrome, 17 with Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 12 with vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (vEDS). Median (IQR) age was 49.9 years (37.9-59.0), and 107 patients (62.6%) were male. One hundred fifty-two (88.9%) were treated for aortic dissections and 19 (11.1%) for degenerative aneurysms. One hundred thirty-six patients (79.5%) had undergone open aortic surgery before the index endovascular repair. In 74 patients (43.3%), arch and/or visceral branches were included in the repair. Primary technical success was achieved in 168 patients (98.2%), and 30-day mortality was 2.9% (5 patients). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 96.2% and 80.6% for Marfan syndrome, 93.8% and 85.2% for Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 75.0% and 43.8% for vEDS, respectively. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 4.7 years (1.9-9.2), 91 patients (53.2%) had undergone secondary procedures, of which 14 (8.2%) were open conversions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that endovascular aortic interventions, including redo procedures and complex repairs of the aortic arch and visceral aorta, in patients with CTD had a high rate of early technical success, low perioperative mortality, and a midterm survival rate comparable with reports of open aortic surgery in patients with CTD. The rate of secondary procedures was high, but few patients required conversion to open repair. Improvements in devices and techniques, as well as ongoing follow-up, may result in endovascular treatment for patients with CTD being included in guideline recommendations.

Effect of bridging stent graft selection for directional branches on target artery outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair in the United States Aortic Research Consortium

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of directional branches (DBs) bridging stent choice on target artery (TA) outcomes during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in nine prospective physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies in the United States between 2005 and 2020 were analyzed. All patients who had at least one TA incorporated by DB using either self-expandable (SESGs), balloon-expandable (BESGs), or hybrid stent graft combinations (HSGs). Endpoints were TA patency and freedom from TA endoleak, instability, and reintervention.

RESULTS

There were 800 patients with 2426 renal-mesenteric arteries incorporated by DBs. DB stent selection was SESGs in 1205 TAs (50%), BESGs in 1095 TAs (45%), and HSGs in 126 TAs (5%). SESGs were predominantly used in the first three quartiles of the study period, whereas BESGs comprised 75% of all stents between 2017 and 2020. The median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range, 6-35 months). At 5 years, BESGs had significantly lower freedom from TA instability (78% ± 4% vs 88% ± 1% vs 96% ± 2%; log-rank P =.010), freedom from TA endoleaks (87% ± 3% vs 97% ± 1% vs 99% ± 1%; log-rank P < .001), and freedom from TA reintervention (83% ± 4% vs 95% ± 1% vs 99% ± 2%; log-rank P <.001) compared with SESGs or HSGs, respectively. For renal arteries, there was no difference in freedom from TA instability for BESGs, SESGs, or HSGs. However, freedom from TA endoleaks and reintervention were lower for renal arteries targeted by BESGs compared with DBs targeted by SESGs and HSGs (83% ± 6% vs 98% ± 1% vs 100%; log-rank P < .001; and 70% ± 10% vs 92% ± 1% vs 96% ± 4%; log-rank P = .022). For mesenteric arteries, DBs targeted by BESGs had lower freedom from TA instability, endoleak, and reintervention than SESGs or HSGs. In stent-specific analysis, iCAST BESGs had the lowest freedom from TA instability either for renal or mesenteric arteries, primarily due to higher rates of TA endoleaks. There was no difference in patency in any scenario. Independent predictors of TA instability were age (+1-year: hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-0.99), stent diameter (+1 mm: HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.80), and BESG (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.9).

CONCLUSIONS

DBs incorporated using BESGs had lower freedom from TA instability, TA endoleak, and TA reintervention compared with SESGs and HSGs. The patency of DBs was not affected by the type of stent construction. The observed performance disadvantage associated with BESGs appears to have largely been driven by iCAST usage.

Aneurysm extent-based mortality differences in complex endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms in the Vascular Quality Initiative and the United States Aortic Research Consortium

BACKGROUND

Endovascular management of thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAA) is becoming more common. Technological advances including custom devices under the Physician-Sponsored Investigational Device Exemption (PS-IDE), physician-modified endografts (PMEG), and parallel stenting techniques have expanded the extent of disease that is amenable to endovascular treatment. Patients within the PS-IDE studies are a highly selected group of patients, whereas patients treated with PMEG as captured within the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (SVS VQI) represent a real-world experience. Research within both the SVS VQI on PMEG and the US Aortic Research Consortium (US-ARC) has demonstrated a relationship between extent of aneurysmal disease and mortality after complex endovascular TAAA repair, but no direct comparison of these cohorts has been conducted. In this study, we sought to compare outcomes of custom PS-IDE devices with off-label uses of commercially available devices for the endovascular management of TAAAs.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients presenting for elective endovascular TAAA repair for asymptomatic disease between 2011 and 2019 was conducted within both the SVS VQI registry and the US-ARC. Patients within the SVS VQI registry were treated with either PMEG or with parallel stenting techniques. Patients within the US-ARC were treated with PS-IDE custom devices. The extent of aneurysm disease was defined by the deployment zones documented for the devices entered in the registry using Crawford extents I to V. Primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year mortality rates.

RESULTS

A total of 3212 patients were included in the study: 1571 PMEG/parallel stenting within the VQI registry and 1641 with PS-IDE within the US-ARC database. The majority of patients presented with extent IV aneurysms (n = 1827 [57%]), with extent IV aneurysms being slightly more prevalent within the US-ARC cohort. Maximal aneurysm diameter within each extent did not vary between the US-ARC and VQI cohorts. Across all patients, the 30-day mortality was 4.4% and the 1-year mortality was 12.2%. Unadjusted mortality at 30-days was 6.7% within the VQI, and 2.2% in the US-ARC (P < .001). The unadjusted 1-year mortality was 14.3% within the VQI and 10.2% within the US-ARC (P < .001). When adjusted for aneurysm extent, similar differences in 30-day and 1-year survivals were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated in PS-IDE studies had better 30-day and 1-year survival rates compared with those treated with a similar extent of disease using off-label approaches in a real-world registry. These differences are complex and likely associated with a number of factors, including arterial anatomy, patient comorbidities, device construct, and volume outcomes, as well as complex and unmeasurable surgeon- and patient-specific factors.

Predictors and Outcomes of Spinal Cord Injury following Complex Branched/Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair in the US Aortic Research Consortium

OBJECTIVE

Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a well-known complication of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair and is associated with profound morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to describe predictors for the development of SCI, as well as outcomes for patients who develop SCI, after branched/fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) in a large cohort of centers with adjudicated physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies.

METHODS

We utilized a pooled dataset from 9 United States Aortic Research Consortium (US ARC) centers involved in investigational device exemption (IDE) trials for treatment of suprarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. SCI was defined as new transient weakness (paraparesis) or permanent paraplegia after repair without other potential neurologic etiologies. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of SCI, and life-table analysis and Kaplan-Meier methodology were used to evaluate survival differences.

RESULTS

A total of 1,681 patients underwent FB-EVAR over the period 2005-2020. The overall rate of SCI was 7.1% (3% transient and 4.1% permanent). Predictors of SCI on multivariable analysis were Crawford Extent I, II, and III distribution of aortic disease (OR 4.79 95% CI 4.77- 4.81, P<.001), age ≥70 (OR 1.64, 95% CI, 1.63-1.64, P=.029), packed red blood cell transfusion (OR 2.00, 95% CI, 1.99-2.00, P=.001), and history of PVD (OR 1.65, 95% CI, 1.64-1.65, P=.034). Median survival was significantly worse for patients with any degree of SCI compared to those without SCI (any SCI - 40.4 vs no SCI - 60.3 months, Log Rank <.001), and also worse in those with a permanent deficit (24.1 months) vs. those with a transient deficit (62.4 months) (Log Rank <0.001). One year survival for patients who developed no SCI was 90.8%, compared to 73.9% in patients who developed any SCI. When stratified by degree of deficit, survival was 84.8% at one year for those who developed paraparesis, and 66.2% for those who developed permanent deficits.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall rates of any SCI at 7.1% and permanent deficit at 4.1% observed in this study compare favorably to those reported in contemporary literature. Our findings confirm that increased length of aortic disease is associated with SCI and those with Crawford Extent I-III TAAAs are at highest risk. The long-term impact on patient mortality underscores the importance of preventive measures and rapid implementation of rescue protocols if and when deficits develop.

Overhead arm support reduces radiation exposure during complex endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Complex endovascular aortic surgery has been associated with increased fluoroscopic radiation exposure. The radiation dosage necessary for visualization is dependent on the amount of tissue penetration required. Elevation of a patient's arms above their head during endovascular surgery could improve visualization by removing the arms from the field of view. Furthermore, it might reduce the radiation dose required. In the present study, we sought to determine the effect of arm elevation on radiation exposure during endovascular treatment of thoracoabdominal aneurysms.

METHODS

All patients enrolled in a single-institution, physician-sponsored investigational device exemption study for endovascular treatment of thoracoabdominal aneurysms (fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair [F/BEVAR]) from 2012 to 2022 were assessed. The first 30 patients treated were excluded to account for the learning curve required with treatment. Patients treated after December 2020 were positioned with their arms elevated above their head using an overhead arm support (OAS). These patients were compared with those who had undergone F/BEVAR before the practice change. The radiation dose, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume used were compared. A subgroup analysis was performed to assess the effect for patients with brachial access.

RESULTS

A total of 145 patients were included in the present study, of whom 43 (30%) had undergone F/BEVAR with their arms supported overhead. No differences were identified in age, body mass index, aneurysm size, or prior aortic intervention between the groups with and without the use of the OAS. A history of dissection (23% vs 7.8%; P = .01) was more frequent for the patients treated with their arms elevated. Arm elevation was associated with a significant reduction in the mean radiation exposure (2261 vs 3100 mGy; P = .01). No differences were observed in the fluoroscopy time or contrast volume used between the two groups. In addition, no patient experienced palsy of the brachial plexus. Of the 145 patients, 55 (38%) had required brachial arterial access, limiting their ability to elevate both arms. In the subgroup analysis, the patients without brachial access continued to show a significant reduction in radiation exposure with arm elevation (2159 vs 3179 mGy; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Elevation of a patient's arms above their head using an OAS during F/BEVAR offered a low-cost, simple strategy that resulted in a 30% reduction in radiation exposure without added complications. This technique improved visualization and reduced radiation exposure for patients and physicians and should be included in abdominal aortic and visceral procedures work to improve patient and surgeon safety.

Comparison of upper extremity and transfemoral access for fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

The use of upper extremity (UE) access is an accepted and often implemented approach for fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR). The advent of steerable sheaths has enabled the performance of F-BEVAR using a total transfemoral (TF) approach without UE access, potentially decreasing the risks of cerebral embolic events. The purpose of the present study was to assess the outcomes of F-BEVAR using UE vs TF access.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data from nine physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies at U.S. centers were analyzed using a standardized database. All patients were treated for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) using industry-manufactured fenestrated and branched stent grafts between 2005 and 2020. The outcomes were compared between patients who had undergone UE vs total TF access. The primary composite outcome was stroke or transient ischemia attack (TIA) and 30-day or in-patient mortality during the perioperative period. The secondary outcomes included technical success, local access-related complications, and perioperative mortality.

RESULTS

Among 1681 patients (71% men; mean age, 73.43 ± 7.8 years) who had undergone F-BEVAR, 502 had had CAAAs (30%), 535 had had extent IV TAAAs (32%), and 644 had had extent I to III TAAAs (38%). UE access was used for 1103 patients (67%). The right side was used for 395 patients (24%) and the left side for 705 patients (42%). UE access was preferentially used for TAAAs (74% vs 47%; P < .001). In contrast, TF access was used more frequently for CAAAs (53% vs 26%; P < .01). A total of 38 perioperative cerebrovascular events (2.5%), including 32 strokes (1.9%) and 6 TIAs (0.4%), had occurred. Perioperative cerebrovascular events had occurred more frequently with UE access than with TF access (2.8% vs 1.2%; P = .036). An individual component analysis of the primary composite outcome revealed a trend for more frequent strokes (2.3% vs 1.2%; P = .13) and TIAs (0.54% vs 0%; P = .10) in the UE access group. On multivariable analysis, total TF access was associated with a 60% reduction in the frequency of perioperative cerebrovascular events (odds ratio, 0.39; P = .029). No significant differences were observed between UE and TF access in the technical success rate (96.5% vs 96.8%; P = .72), perioperative mortality (2.9% vs 2.6%; P = .72), or local access-related complications (6.5% vs 5.5%; P = .43).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present large, multicenter, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, a total TF approach for F-BEVAR was associated with a lower rate of perioperative cerebrovascular events compared with UE access. Although the cerebrovascular event rate was low with UE access, the TF approach offered a lower risk of stroke and TIA. UE access will continue to play a role for appropriately selected patients requiring more complex repairs with anatomy not amenable to the TF approach.

Outcomes of Endovascular Repair of Aortic Aneurysms with the GORE® Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for Left Subclavian Artery Preservation

OBJECTIVE OR BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair has emerged as the dominant paradigm for treatment of patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. For aneurysms involving the aortic arch in the region of the left subclavian artery (LSA), branch vessel preservation to maintain blood flow to the LSA is recommended. Branched aortic endografts are an alternative to surgical revascularization of the LSA.

METHODS

Across 34 investigative sites, 84 patients with Zone 2 aneurysm were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective study of a single branched aortic endograft. The thoracic branch endoprosthesis device allows for graft placement proximal to the LSA and incorporates a single side branch for left subclavian perfusion.

RESULTS

Over half of the patients were male (63%). Their average age was 70 (±11) years. The aneurysm morphology was fusiform in 43 and saccular in 41 patients. The mean aneurysm diameter at screening was 56.2 mm. The mean follow up was 30 months (range 2.6 to 50.7 months). Reported here are the patient outcomes at 1 and 12 months. Pre-defined technical success with implantation of the device in landing Zone 2 was achieved in 92% (n=77) of patients. There were no cases of aortic rupture, lesion-related mortality, or new onset renal failure. There was no peri-operative (30-day) mortality. A single case each of permanent paraplegia and paraparesis occurred. Three patients experienced a procedure-related stroke. Through 12 months, four patients died; none of the deaths were adjudicated as related to the device or procedure. One aortic reintervention was required. A single case of aortic enlargement (core laboratory) was reported at 6 months. Type 1 (n=3) and III (n=5) endoleaks occurred in 9.8% of patients of which one (Type III) required reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this device study in patients with Zone 2 aneurysm demonstrate that early safety and efficacy outcomes are maintained up to 12 months after the endovascular procedure with low mortality and reintervention rates and an acceptable frequency of procedural complications, including neurologic complications.

Secondary interventions after fenestrated/branched aneurysm repairs are common and non-detrimental to long-term survival

OBJECTIVE

Secondary interventions are common following endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms. However, the frequency and procedural details of secondary intervention following fenestrated and branched repairs (F/BEVAR) have been less well described, and the impact on long-term survival and aneurysm-related mortality is unknown.

METHODS

Consecutive patients enrolled as part of a multicenter research consortium in nine independent physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2005-2020 were evaluated. All secondary interventions performed after the initial procedure were classified as open or percutaneous and as major or minor, as per SVS reporting standards. Secondary interventions were further classified as high or low magnitude according to the physiologic impact of the intervention. Demographics, procedural details, and perioperative outcomes were compared for those who underwent secondary interventions and those who did not. Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazard Ratio analysis were utilized to evaluate long-term survival.

RESULTS

Of 1681 patients who underwent F/BEVAR, 385 (23%) underwent secondary intervention at any point in follow-up. Freedom from reintervention was 82% at 1-year and 59% at 5-year follow up. Mean follow-up was 23 months. The majority of secondary interventions were percutaneous (84%), minor (70%), and low magnitude (81%). Renal stenting (30%) and access related procedures (24%) were the most frequent percutaneous and open procedures, respectively. High magnitude operations were performed in 19% of patients. Technical success was achieved for 94% of secondary interventions and mortality from secondary intervention was less than 1%. Secondary interventions as a whole were associated with improved long-term survival (Hazard Ratio: 0.6 95% Confidence Interval: 0.5-0.7). In subgroup analysis, major (HR: 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.8), minor (HR: 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5-0.8), low magnitude (HR 0.5, 95% CI: 0.4-0.7), and percutaneous (HR: 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5-0.7) secondary interventions were associated with improved survival; however high magnitude (HR: 1.0, 95% CI: 0.7-1.5) and open secondary interventions (HR: 1.0, 95% CI: 0.7-1.5) were not. Similarly, when aneurysm-related survival was specifically assessed, low magnitude secondary interventions were found to improve survival (HR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.1-0.7), while high magnitude secondary interventions (HR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.4-5.8) and open secondary interventions (HR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.3-5.5) were associated with increased mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary interventions after F/BEVAR are frequent and are typically percutaneous, minor, and low magnitude procedures. While uncommon, high magnitude and open secondary interventions are associated with decreased long-term survival and increased aneurysm-related mortality. These data highlight the importance of close, life-long surveillance, and suggest that a significant rate of secondary intervention should be anticipated, but these do not negatively impact survival.

Sarcopenia predicts for long-term survival in patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms undergoing operative and nonoperative management

OBJECTIVE

Sarcopenia, defined as a loss of muscle mass or poor muscle quality, is a syndrome associated with poor surgical outcomes. The prognostic value of sarcopenia in patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) is unknown. The present study was designed to define sarcopenia in this patient population and assess its impact on survival among patients who had undergone operative and nonoperative management of TAAAs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients with a diagnosis of a TAAA at an academic hospital between 2009 and 2017 who had been selected for operative and nonoperative management. Sarcopenia was identified by measuring the total muscle area on a single axial computed tomography image at the third lumbar vertebra. The muscle areas were normalized by patient height, and cutoff values for sarcopenia were established at the lowest tertile of the normalized total muscle area. Long-term patient survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 295 patients were identified, of whom 199 had undergone operative management and 96 nonoperative management for TAAAs. The patients selected for nonoperative management were more likely to be women and to have chronic kidney disease, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, a higher modified frailty index, and a larger aortic diameter. The Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed significantly lower long-term survival for the patients with and without sarcopenia in the operative and nonoperative groups. In Cox regression analyses, sarcopenia was a significant predictor of shorter survival for both operative (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.99; P = .006) and nonoperative (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.00; P = .05) groups after adjusting for age, race, sex, maximum aortic diameter, modified frailty index, chronic kidney disease, and active smoking. Additionally, age was a significant predictor of shorter survival in the operative group, and smoking and aortic diameter were significant in the nonoperative group.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort of patients who had received operative and nonoperative management of TAAAs, the patients with sarcopenia had had significantly lower long-term survival, regardless of whether surgery had been performed. These data suggest that sarcopenia could be used as a predictor of survival for patients with TAAAs and might be useful for risk stratification and decision making in the management of TAAAs.

Aortic arch stenting: current strategies, new technologies and future directions

Operating on the aortic arch is a formidable challenge. Open operations remain the gold standard, but despite improvement in technique and outcomes, they are still associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The last 20 years have seen a remarkable reduction in the operative morbidity associated with treatment of the descending thoracic aorta using thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR). To improve outcomes following arch repair, new TEVAR devices, including both single-branched and multibranched designs, have come to clinical trial. This review discusses the modern state of open and hybrid repairs while introducing the reader to technology for endovascular therapy of the aortic arch. We describe important anatomical and operative considerations for the devices. Given these nuances, we believe the future of the aortic arch to be patient-individualised hybrid repairs, involving both open and endovascular options with a multidisciplinary 'thoracic aorta team' at the helm.

Sex-related outcomes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms in the U.S. Fenestrated and Branched Aortic Research Consortium

OBJECTIVE

Fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FBEVAR) has expanded the treatment of patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Previous studies have demonstrated that women are less likely to be treated with standard infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair because of anatomic ineligibility and experience greater mortality after both infrarenal and thoracic aortic aneurysm repair. The purpose of the present study was to describe the sex-related outcomes after FBEVAR for treatment of TAAAs.

METHODS

The data from 886 patients with extent I to IV TAAAs (excluding pararenal or juxtarenal aneurysms), enrolled in eight prospective, physician-sponsored, investigational device exemption studies from 2013 to 2019, were analyzed. All data were collected prospectively, audited and adjudicated by clinical events committees and/or data safety monitoring boards, and subject to Food and Drug Administration oversight. All the patients had been treated with Cook-manufactured patient-specific FBEVAR devices or the Cook t-Branch off-the-shelf device (Cook Medical, Brisbane, Australia).

RESULTS

Of the 886 patients who underwent FBEVAR, 288 (33%) were women. The women had more extensive aneurysms and a greater prevalence of diabetes (33% vs 26%; P = .043) but a lower prevalence of coronary artery disease (33% vs 52%; P < .0001) and previous infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair (7.6% vs 16%; P < .001). The women had required a longer operative time from incision to surgery end (5.0 ± 1.8 hours vs 4.6 ± 1.7 hours; P < .001), experienced lower technical success (93% vs 98%; P = .002), and were less likely to be discharged to home (72% vs 83%; P = .009). Despite the smaller access vessels, the women did not have an increased incidence of access site complications. Also, the 30-day outcomes were broadly similar between the sexes. At 1 year, no differences were found between the women and men in freedom from type I or III endoleak (91.4% vs 92.0%; P = .64), freedom from reintervention (81.7% vs 85.3%; P = .10), target vessel instability (87.5% vs 89.2%; P = .31), and survival (89.6% vs 91.7%; P = .26). The women had a greater incidence of postoperative sac expansion (12% vs 6.5%; P = .006). Multivariable modeling adjusted for age, aneurysm extent, aneurysm size, urgent procedure, and renal function showed that patient sex was not an independent predictor of survival (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-1.37; P = .46).

CONCLUSIONS

Women undergoing FBEVAR demonstrated metrics of increased complexity and had a lower level of technical success, especially those with extensive aneurysms. Compared with the men, the women had similar 30-day mortality and 1-year outcomes, with the exception of an increased incidence of sac expansion. These data have demonstrated that FBEVAR is safe and effective for women and men but that further efforts to improve outcome parity are indicated.

Fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair is a safe and effective option for octogenarians in treating complex aortic aneurysm compared with nonoctogenarians

OBJECTIVE

Open repair of complex aortic aneurysms is frequently not an option for octogenarians because of prohibitive surgical risks. This study aimed to analyze the outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) in octogenarians (≥80 years old) compared with nonoctogenarians (<80 years old).

METHODS

We reviewed 893 patients with pararenal or extent I to V thoracoabdominal aneurysms, enrolled in six prospective physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2012 to 2018. All patients were treated with either company-manufactured off-the-shelf or patient-specific F-BEVAR stent grafts. Data analyzed included demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, history of active cancer, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, aortic anatomy characteristics, and procedural data. End points included mortality, major adverse events (all-cause mortality, stroke, paralysis, acute kidney injury [RIFLE criteria], dialysis, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, and bowel ischemia), technical success, hospital length of stay, target artery instability (occlusion/stenosis, endoleak, rupture or death), and secondary interventions.

RESULTS

During the study period, 195 octogenarian patients (22%) and 698 (78%) nonoctogenarian patients were treated with F-BEVAR. Octogenarians presented more frequently with a history of cancer (17% vs 11%; P = .01), whereas nonoctogenarians more frequently had hyperlipidemia (76% vs 65%; P = .003), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (42% vs 33%; P = .04) and American Society of Anesthesiologists class III to V (78% vs 70%; P = .02). Male sex was similar between groups (68% [octogenarians] vs 70% [nonoctogenarians]; P = .62). Octogenarians had a larger mean aneurysm diameter (67 ± 1 mm vs 65 ± 1 mm; P = .002). The thoracoabdominal classification and the use of upper extremity access were similar between groups. Estimated blood loss was also similar (484 ± 454 mL [octogenarian] vs 416 ± 457 mL [nonoctogenarian]; P = .07). Octogenarians had an increased mean number of vessels incorporated into the repair (3.1 ± 1.4 vs 2.7 ± 1.7; P < .001). The technical success rate was 99% for octogenarians and 97% for nonoctogenarians (P = .19). The 30-day mortality rate was 0.5% for octogenarians and 1.3% for the nonoctogenarians (P = .70). Major adverse events (9.2% vs 9.7%), types I/III endoleak (4.6% vs 2.4%) access complication (3.1% vs 3.3%), and length of stay (8.2 ± 27 days vs 5.7 ± 6.3 days) were all similar between the groups. Freedom from target artery instability and freedom from secondary interventions at 3 years were similar between the groups. Octogenarian survival was lower at 3 years compared with nonoctogenarians on univariate analysis (log-rank P < .01) and on multivariable analysis after adjusting for history of active cancer, hyperlipidemia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite small differences in demographics, anatomic factors, and procedural data, F-BEVAR was safe and effective with nearly identical early outcomes in octogenarians in these experienced aortic centers. More extensive clinical experience and longer follow-up are needed to better delineate factors impacting longer term mortality.

Expanded Use of Preloaded Branched and Fenestrated Endografts for Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to report the expanded use of preloaded catheters and wires of fenestrations and directional branches to facilitate access to renal and mesenteric target arteries during endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

This was an observational retrospective cohort multicentre study. Prospectively collected data from six physician sponsored investigational device exemption studies at US centres were analysed. Patients were treated with fenestrated and branched aortic endografts for pararenal and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) between 2012 and 2017. Technical success was defined as successful intra-operative catheterisation and stenting of all intended target visceral arteries. Univariable and stratified analyses were performed to identify differences in outcomes between repairs using preloaded and standard devices.

RESULTS

There were 564 patients (73% men, mean age 73 ± 8 years) treated for 168 pararenal aortic aneurysms (29.8%), 216 type IV TAAAs (38.3%), and 180 type I - III TAAAs (31.9%). Preloaded grafts (PGs) were used in 387 (68.6%) patients and standard grafts (SGs) in 177 (31.4%). PGs were used preferentially for type IV TAAAs (45% vs. 24%; p < .001), whereas standard devices were used more frequently among patients with type I - III TAAAs (24% vs. 49%; p < .001). The majority of custom made devices were preloaded (95% vs. 21%; p < .001). A total of 2 157 target arteries were incorporated (mean 3.9/patient) utilising 1 469 fenestrations (68.1%), 603 directional branches (27.9%), and 85 double wide scallops (3.9%). Most PGs included fenestrations (80% vs. 43%; p < .001), whereas directional branches were more frequent in standard devices (17% vs. 53%; p < .001). Contrast volume, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and operative time were not significantly different between preloaded and standard devices. Upper extremity access was more frequent for PGs (87% vs. 72%; p < .001). Overall technical success was 98.8% and comparable for both preloaded and standard grafts (99.5% vs. 97.2%; p = .022). The 30 day stroke rate was similar for PGs and SGs (2.3% and 1.7%%, respectively). The 30 day mortality rate was 1.9%, and low for both PGs and SGs (0.8% vs. 4.5%; p = .003).

CONCLUSION

Endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysms is safe and effective. The expanded use of preloaded catheters and wires of fenestrations and directional branches for target artery incorporation is associated with a high technical success and low early mortality.

Characterization of syndromic, nonsyndromic familial, and sporadic type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

Type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is commonly thought of as a sporadic event. However, an increasing body of data has suggested that genetic factors can influence TBAD. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of heritable TBAD, defined as either syndromic TBAD or nonsyndromic familial TBAD and to detail the natural history and long-term clinical outcomes compared with patients with "sporadic" TBAD without an identified syndrome or family history.

METHODS

The clinical records of 389 patients with TBAD who had presented to a single health care system from 1995 to 2017 were reviewed. A family history was obtained by interview and/or medical record review. Syndromic TBAD was defined as TBAD in patients with Marfan, Loeys-Dietz, or vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Nonsyndromic familial TBAD was defined as a family history of aortic or arterial aneurysm or dissection and/or sudden death in a first- or second-degree relative in the absence of a known syndrome. Patients with syndromic and nonsyndromic familial TBAD were compared with patients with sporadic TBAD in terms of the comorbid conditions, aortic repair, and mortality.

RESULTS

Of 389 patients (71.2% male) with TBAD, the etiology of TBAD was heritable in 27.9% (9.6% syndromic; 18.3% nonsyndromic familial TBAD) and 72.1% sporadic of the cases. Patients with syndromic and nonsyndromic familial TBAD had been more frequently referred in the chronic phase than were the patients with sporadic TBAD (35.5% vs 44.1% vs 25.8%; P = .014) and had presented at a younger age (40.6 ± 10.9 years vs 55.2 ± 11.3 years vs 62 ± 12.9 years; P < .001) and with lower blood pressure at acute TBAD (systolic, 159.2 ± 21 mm Hg vs 178.9 ± 39.3 mm Hg vs 186.1 ± 38.4, P = .01; diastolic, 84.3 ± 17.3 mm Hg vs 91.4 ± 24.1 mm Hg vs 101.6 ± 22.3 mm Hg, P = .001). Among patients with acute TBAD surviving to discharge from the initial hospitalization, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) had been performed in 115 patients, with no significant differences in TEVAR usage in the three groups. However, those with syndromic and nonsyndromic familial TBAD had had a greater incidence of retrograde aortic dissection after TEVAR (33.3% vs 15% vs 3%; P = .006). They had also required a greater number of arch repairs (30% vs 10.5% vs 3.6%; P < .001) and had died at a younger age (47.7 ± 13.1 years vs 65.7 ± 13.7 years vs 72.8 ± 12.7 years; P < .001). Aortic-related mortality was more common among patients with syndromic TBAD (36.7% vs 12.3% vs 17.6%; P = .016).

CONCLUSIONS

In our single-institutional experience, heritable TBAD accounted for one in four patients with TBAD. Nonsyndromic familial TBAD was twice as common as syndromic TBAD and appeared to share many clinical features. Identifying these patients early in their disease course and personalizing their care might improve their survival.

Spinal cord protection practices used during endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysms by the U.S. Aortic Research Consortium

BACKGROUND

Spinal cord ischemia/infarction (SCI) is a devastating complication of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair that can result in permanent paresis or paralysis. The reported incidence of SCI after aortic interventions has ranged from 2% to 10%. Methods to prevent SCI are a topic of ongoing research, and many current practices have been based on expert opinion.

METHODS

In an effort to better delineate the best practice models for SCI prevention during endovascular thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair, a 65-question survey was completed by the eight principal investigators of the U.S. Aortic Research Consortium to capture data related to current practices and management strategies related to the prevention and treatment of SCI. Specific categories of interest included considerations for the "high-risk" classification of SCI, current perioperative prevention practices, indications for and management of spinal drains, and SCI rescue maneuvers.

RESULTS

The most common practices routinely included blood pressure elevation (7 of 8; 87.5%), with most having a mean arterial pressure goal of not less than 90 mm Hg in the perioperative period (5 of 7; 71%), a hemoglobin goal intra- and postoperatively of not less than 10 mg/dL (6 of 8; 75%), and the use of prophylactic spinal drains in high-risk patients (6 of 8; 75%). Significant variation was found among the group for the timing of the resumption of antihypertensive medications, duration of hemoglobin goals after the procedure, and management of spinal drains. Many methods described in reported studies were not routinely used by most of the group, including a perioperative steroid bolus (1 of 8; 12.5%), mannitol (2 of 8; 25%), and naloxone infusion (1 of 8; 12.5%). Rescue maneuvers included placement of a cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drain if not already present (8 of 8; 100%), decreasing the target CSF drain pop-off pressure (6 of 8; 75%), increasing the CSF drainage volume (5 of 8; 62.5%), increasing the mean arterial pressure goal (8 of 8; 100%), increasing the hemoglobin goal (8 of 8; 100%), and imaging the spine using computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (7 of 8; 87.5).

CONCLUSIONS

In general, consistent broad practices were used by most of the consortium; however, the details of specific parameters (ie, spinal drain management, therapy duration, and timing of resumption of antihypertensive medication) varied among the group. The U.S. Aortic Research Consortium group used the results of the survey for discussion and agreed on standardized SCI prevention recommendations in accordance with the group's collective expert opinion and experience. Variations in current practice were also identified to act as a foundation for future study, the most notable of which was the comparative effectiveness of therapeutic vs prophylactic use of CSF drains in the prevention of SCI.

Applicability of the Zenith Inner Branched Arch Endograft

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical and anatomical features of patients with arch pathology to better understand the applicability of the Zenith inner branched arch endograft (IBAE). Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was performed of 60 consecutive patients (mean age 62.5 years; 42 men) who presented with nonruptured aortic arch pathology at a single institution between 2009 and 2016. Patients were stratified into standard (no previous cardiac surgery, <80 years old, and no significant medical comorbidity), high (previous cardiac surgery or significant comorbidity), or prohibitive risk (turned down for operative intervention) for operative intervention. Anatomical measurements of the aorta were obtained on computed tomography scans; anatomical suitability was based on the device's instructions for use. Results: Overall, 27 (45%) patients had anatomy amenable to treatment with the existing IBAE. Inadequate proximal seal length and large ascending aortic diameters were the primary reasons for anatomical unsuitability. Shortening the inner curve seal zone from 25 to 15 mm and increasing the proximal seal zone diameter from 38 to 42 mm increased anatomical suitability to include 49 (82%) patients. Of these, 31 were in the high-risk cohort and 7 were deemed prohibitive risk; therefore, IBAE would have been strongly considered in these 38 patients. Conclusion: Based on anatomical criteria alone, nearly half of patients with aortic arch pathology have anatomy suitable to the Zenith IBAE in its current design. Arch branch vessel anatomy was not a limitation of the device. From a clinical standpoint, if endovascular repair were reserved for those at high or prohibitive risk for open repair, approximately 30% of patients would likely benefit from the IBAE in its current form.

Anatomic Eligibility for Commercial Branched Endograft Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

First-generation "off-the-shelf" branched endovascular stent grafts are in development for treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Prior studies have assessed eligibility rates among highly selected cohorts of patients referred for endovascular treatment, and the broader applicability of these devices to all patients with TAAA is unknown. The aims of this study were to assess the overall suitability of the 3 commercial 4-branched devices with or without adjunct procedure(s) in an unselected cohort of patients with TAAA and to identify areas for improvement in the next generation of devices.

METHODS

A retrospective review of three-dimensional centerline reconstructions of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) imaging was performed in consecutive patients with TAAA seen between 2013 and 2017. All patients with contrast-enhanced CT imaging were included, regardless of prior evaluation for suitability for endovascular repair. Eligibility for a device was assessed based on instructions for use (IFU) from the device manufacturer along with prespecified anatomic criteria. Adjunct procedures were defined as carotid-subclavian revascularization, target vessel endovascular intervention, and iliac conduit/revascularization.

RESULTS

Of 165 patients with TAAA, 122 had CT scans adequate for study inclusion. Eighteen patients (14.8%) were eligible for at least 1 device by IFU, and 41 (33.6%) could have been made eligible for at least 1 device by an adjunct procedure. Sixty-three (51.6%) were not eligible for any device within IFU even with adjunct procedures, including 31 of 32 patients with TAAA due to dissection. The most common reasons for ineligibility were perivisceral flow channel diameter <20 mm (n = 43) and an inadequate proximal seal zone (n = 29). Women were significantly less likely to be eligible for an off-the-shelf device (P = 0.03) and were more likely to require an iliac procedure to become eligible (P = 0.006). Almost none of the patients with dissection could receive a device even if adjunct procedures were used.

CONCLUSIONS

Over half of patients with TAAA could not be made eligible for an off-the-shelf device based on manufacturers' criteria, even with adjunct procedures. Women and patients with TAAA due to dissection had higher rates of ineligibility. These data demonstrate that custom fenestrated devices and low-profile devices are needed to expand eligibility for endovascular repair of TAAA.

Cause-specific mortality of type B aortic dissection and assessment of competing risks of mortality

OBJECTIVE

Natural history studies of type B aortic dissection (TBAD) commonly report all-cause mortality. Our aim was to determine cause-specific mortality in TBAD and to evaluate the clinical characteristics associated with aorta-related and nonaorta-related mortality.

METHODS

Clinical and administrative records were reviewed for patients with acute TBAD between 1995 and 2017. Demographics, comorbidities, presentation, and initial imaging findings were abstracted. Cause of death was ascertained through a multimodality approach using electronic health records, obituaries, social media, Social Security Death Index, and state mortality records. Causes of death were classified as aorta related, nonaorta related, or unknown. A Fine-Gray multivariate competing risk regression model for subdistribution hazard ratio was employed to analyze the association of clinical characteristics with aorta-related and nonaorta-related mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 275 individuals met inclusion criteria (61.1 ± 13.7 years, 70.9% male, 68% white). Mean survival after discharge was 6.3 ± 4.7 years. Completeness of follow-up Clark C index was 0.87. All-cause mortality was 50.2% (n = 138; mean age, 70.1 ± 14.6 years) including an in-hospital mortality of 8.4%. Cause-specific mortality was aorta related, nonaorta related, and unknown in 51%, 43%, and 6%, respectively. Compared with patients with nonaorta-related mortality, patients with aorta-related mortality were younger at acute TBAD (69.5 ± 11.2 years vs 61.6 ± 15.5 years; P = .001), underwent more descending thoracic aortic repairs (19.4% vs 45.8%; P = .002), and had a shorter survival duration (5.7 ± 3.9 vs 3.4 ± 4.5 years; P = .002). There was clear variation in cause of death by each decade of life, with higher aorta-related mortality among those younger than 50 years and older than 70 years and a stepwise increase in nonaorta-related mortality with each increasing decade (P < .001). All-cause mortality at 1 year, 3 years, and 10 years was 15%, 24%, and 57%, respectively. After accounting for competing risks, the cumulative incidence of aorta-related mortality at 1 year, 3 years, and 10 years was 8.9%, 16.5%, and 27.2%, respectively, and that of nonaorta-related mortality was 2.7%, 7.2%, and 29%, respectively. A maximum descending thoracic aortic diameter >4 cm was associated with an increase in hazard of aorta-related mortality by 84% (subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-3.28) on multivariate competing risk regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

TBAD is associated with high 10-year mortality. Those at risk for aorta-related mortality have a clinical phenotype different from that of individuals at risk for nonaorta-related mortality. This information is important for building risk prediction models that account for competing mortality risks and to direct optimal and individualized surgical and medical management of TBAD.

Outcomes of endovascular repair of chronic postdissection compared with degenerative thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms using fenestrated-branched stent grafts

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to analyze outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) for treatment of postdissection and degenerative thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs).

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data of 240 patients with extent I to extent III TAAAs enrolled in seven prospective physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2014 to 2017. All patients had manufactured off-the-shelf or patient-specific fenestrated-branched stent grafts used to target 888 renal-mesenteric arteries with a mean of 3.7 vessels per patient. End points included mortality, major adverse events (any-cause mortality, stroke, paralysis, dialysis, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, bowel ischemia, and estimated blood loss >1 L), technical success, target artery patency, target artery instability, occlusion or stenosis, endoleak, rupture or death, reintervention, and renal function deterioration.

RESULTS

There were 50 patients (21%) treated for postdissection TAAAs and 190 (79%) who had degenerative TAAAs. Postdissection TAAA patients were significantly younger (67 ± 9 years vs 74 ± 8 years; P < .001), were more often male (76% vs 52%; P = .002), and had more prior aortic repairs (84% vs 67%; P = .02) and larger renal (6.4 ± 1.2 mm vs 5.8 ± 0.9 mm; P < .001) and mesenteric (8.9 ± 1.7 mm vs 7.8 ± 1.4 mm; P < .001) target artery diameters. There was no difference in aneurysm diameter (66 ± 13 mm vs 67 ± 11 mm; P = .50), extent I or extent II TAAA classification (64% vs 56%; P = .33), and length of supraceliac coverage (22 ± 9.5 cm vs 20 ± 10 cm; P = .38) between postdissection and degenerative patients, respectively. Preloaded guidewire systems (66% vs 43%; P = .003) and fenestrations as opposed to directional branches (58% vs 24%; P < .001) were used more frequently to treat postdissection patients. Technical success was 100% for postdissection TAAAs and 99% for degenerative TAAAs (P = .14). At 30 days, there was no difference in mortality (2% postdissection, 3% degenerative), major adverse events (24% postdissection, 26% degenerative; P = .73), spinal cord injury (6% postdissection, 12% degenerative; P = .25), paraplegia (2% postdissection, 7% degenerative; P = .19), and dialysis (0% postdissection, 5% degenerative; P = .24). Mean follow-up was 14 ± 12 months. Endoleaks were significantly more frequent in patients with postdissection TAAAs (76%) compared with degenerative TAAAs (43%; P < .001). At 2 years, there was no difference in patient survival (84% ± 7% vs 72% ± 4%; P = .13), freedom from aorta-related death (98% ± 2% vs 94% ± 2%; P = .45), primary (95% ± 2% vs 97% ± 1%; P = .93) and secondary target artery patency (99% ± 1% vs 98% ± 1%; P = .48), target artery instability (89% ± 3% vs 91% ± 1%; P = .17), and freedom from reintervention (58% ± 10% vs 67% ± 5%; P = .23) for postdissection and degenerative TAAAs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite minor differences in demographics, anatomic factors, and stent graft design, F/BEVAR was safe and effective with nearly identical outcomes in patients with postdissection and degenerative TAAAs. Larger clinical experience and longer follow-up are needed to better evaluate differences in mortality, spinal cord injury, target artery instability, and reintervention.

Survival and patient-centered outcome in a disease-based observational cohort study of patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm

BACKGROUND

Much of the literature describing treatment for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) consists of operative series reported by centers of excellence. These studies are limited by referral and selection bias and exclude patients who are not candidates for the reported modality of repair. Little is known about the patients who are not referred or selected for repair. For those undergoing intervention, outcomes such as functional status after surgery are rarely reported. In this study, we address these gaps by reporting two primary end points: 1-year survival and a "good" outcome (defined as successful aneurysm exclusion, freedom from permanent loss of organ system function, and return to preoperative functional status after surgery) in a cohort of TAAA patients, including all nonoperative and operative patients, irrespective of treatment modality.

METHODS

A single-institution database was screened by diagnosis codes for TAAA from 2009 to 2017 using the International Classification of Diseases versions 9 and 10. Diagnosis was confirmed by retrospective chart review and computed tomography findings of aneurysmal degeneration ≥3.2 cm of the paravisceral aorta in continuity with aneurysmal aorta meeting standard criteria for repair. Patients <18 years of age and those with mycotic aneurysm were excluded. Patients were either managed nonoperatively or by one of four operative strategies: (i) open; (ii) endovascular with branched endografts; (iii) hybrid, defined as iliovisceral debranching followed by endograft placement; or (iv) partial repair in which the paravisceral segment was intentionally left unaddressed.

RESULTS

Among the entire cohort of 432 patients with TAAA, significant comorbidities were seen in 143 (33%). Forty-seven percent of the patients were managed nonoperatively. Of these, 65% survived to 1 year. A survival benefit was seen in the open, endovascular, and partial, but not hybrid, operative groups compared with the nonoperative group during a 3-year period. Overall 1-year survival was 81%, but only 65% had a good outcome (P = .0016).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly half of the patients in this inclusive cohort study did not undergo repair despite access to a variety of operative techniques. Many of these patients die in the short term due to high burden of comorbid disease rather than aneurysm rupture. Among those undergoing operation, a notable difference between survival and good outcome was observed. Operation appears to confer a survival advantage among appropriately selected patients with TAAA, but a large proportion are high risk and may not benefit from operative repair due to limited baseline survival and lower probability of good outcome.

Association of variant arch anatomy with type B aortic dissection and hemodynamic mechanisms

OBJECTIVE

Congenital aortic arch variations are more common in patients with thoracic aortic disease for reasons unknown. Additionally, little is understood about their relation to type B aortic dissections (TBAD) specifically. We investigated the prevalence of variant aortic arch anatomy in patients with TBAD compared with controls. To understand the implications of how variant aortic arch anatomy may contribute to degenerative aortic disease, we compared flow hemodynamics of three variations of aortic arches using four-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (4D flow MRI).

METHODS

Arch anatomy on computed tomography imaging was reviewed and compared between patients with TBAD and age/sex-matched controls free of aortic pathology. Arch variants were defined as follows: common origin of innominate and left common carotid artery (bovine arch), aberrant right subclavian artery, and right-sided aortic arch. Demographics, TBAD characteristics, and follow-up data were abstracted. Patients with TBAD with variant and conventional aortic arches were compared. Additionally, three matched healthy controls with conventional, bovine, and aberrant right subclavian artery arches underwent 4D flow MRI evaluation to assess if there were differences in flow patterns by arch type. Indices of regional hemodynamic wall sheer stress were compared.

RESULTS

Computed tomography scans of 185 patients with TBAD (mean age, 58.1 ± 12.4 years; 72.4% males; 71.4% Caucasian) and 367 controls (mean age, 62.5 ± 13.4 years; 67% males; 77.9% Caucasian) were reviewed. Variant arch anatomy was more prevalent in patients with TBAD (40.5% vs 24.5%; P < .001). In patients with TBAD, there were no differences in the mean age of presentation and descending thoracic aorta diameter among those with variant or conventional arch anatomy. Patients with TBAD with variant arch anatomy had a higher percentage of dissection related thoracic aortic repairs (54.7% vs 33.6%; P = .004) with repairs occurring predominantly in the acute phase. 4D flow MRI demonstrated a higher systolic wall shear stress along the inner curve of the bovine arch compared with the conventional aberrant right subclavian artery arches.

CONCLUSIONS

Variant aortic arch anatomy is significantly more prevalent in patients with TBAD. patients with TBAD with variant arch anatomy had a higher percentage of dissection-related aortic repair. Preliminary 4D flow MRI data show differences in hemodynamic flow patterns between variant and conventional arches. Studies of long-term outcomes based on arch anatomy may offer additional insight to TBAD genesis and possibly influence management decisions.