Case Of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Research Articles

TEVAR with fenestrations of all supra-aortic branches for traumatic aortic pseudoaneurysm: Case report and systematic review.

Blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAIs) involving the aortic arch are a challenging condition. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with fenestration, which expands the proximal landing zone, is able to exclude the injury while preserving blood flow in supra-aortic branches. Here we report a case of TEVAR with fenestrations of all supra-aortic branches for traumatic aortic pseudoaneurysm and perform a systematic review. A 24-year-old man suffering a blunt thoracic injury and a left femoral fracture was sent to our hospital. A pseudoaneurysm was found in the aortic arch between the brachiocephalic artery and the left common carotid artery. The patient underwent emergent TEVAR with fenestrations of all supra-aortic branches, which excluded the pseudoaneurysm and preserved the patency of all branches. The orthopedic team then treated the femoral fracture. The patient's recovery was unremarkable. We performed a systematic review on TEVAR with fenestrations for BTAI. Six patients (75%) received TEVAR with single fenestration, 1 patient (12.5%) received TEVAR with two fenestrations, and 1 patient (12.5%) had fenestrations of all supra-aortic branches. Except one patient died in the perioperative, other patients survived without stent-related complications in the short-term follow-up. TEVAR with fenestration is feasible for treating BTAI involving the aortic arch in selected patients.

Stent-induced new entry and device migration associated with hemodynamic stress after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B chronic aortic dissection using computational fluid dynamics analysis: a case report

BackgroundStent graft-induced new entry (SINE) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a serious adverse event which leads to stent graft migration and rupture. SINE is known to be more frequent in cases of chronic dissection and oversizing. However, few studies have evaluated the influence of hemodynamic stress on SINE in patients with chronic dissection. Here, we report a rare case of TEVAR for chronic dissection with a dissection stent, inducing SINE 6 years after the first surgery. In addition, we analyze the hemodynamic stress for the aortic event using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis.Case presentationA 69-year-old male underwent TEVAR with left subclavian artery debranching for chronic type B aortic dissection, using a stent graft and dissection stent. The postoperative course was uneventful, but follow-up computed tomography (CT) showed that the stent graft and bare-metal stent had dislodged 4 years after surgery. The gap between the bare-metal stent and the stent graft increased over time, and the proximal edge of the bare-metal stent led to SINE at the descending aorta 6 years after surgery. We performed reintervention to cover the SINE. The patient recovered well and was discharged at 6 days postoperatively. He is currently in good condition 6 months after reintervention. CFD analysis of the patient’s CT image suggested that the local change in wall shear stress at the stent graft and dissection stent might be related to the aortic event.ConclusionHemodynamic stress is a factor affecting SINE and device migration. CFD may be useful for evaluating patient-specific risk of aortic events.

On the necessity to include arterial pre-stress in patient-specific simulations of minimally invasive procedures.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are minimally invasive procedures for treating aortic valves and diseases. Finite element simulations have proven to be valuable tools in predicting device-related complications. In the literature, the inclusion of aortic pre-stress has not been widely investigated. It plays a crucial role in determining the biomechanical response of the vessel and the device-tissue interaction. This study aims at demonstrating how and when to include the aortic pre-stress in patient-specific TAVI and TEVAR simulations. A percutaneous aortic valve and a stent-graft were implanted in aortic models reconstructed from patient-specific CT scans. Two scenarios for each patient were compared, i.e., including and neglecting the wall pre-stress. The neglection of pre-stress underestimates the contact pressure of 48% and 55%, the aorta stresses of 162% and 157%, the aorta strains of 77% and 21% for TAVI and TEVAR models, respectively. The stent stresses are higher than 48% with the pre-stressed aorta in TAVI simulations; while, similar results are obtained in TEVAR cases. The distance between the device and the aorta is similar with and without pre-stress. The inclusion of the aortic wall pre-stress has the capability to give a better representation of the biomechanical behavior of the arterial tissues and the implanted device. It is suggested to include this effect in patient-specific simulations replicating the procedures.

National UK Survey of Radiation Doses During Endovascular Aortic Interventions

PurposeEndovascular aortic repair (EAR) interventions, endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), are associated with significant radiation exposures. We aimed to investigate the radiation doses from real-world practice and propose diagnostic reference level (DRL) for the UK.Materials and MethodsRadiation data and essential demographics were retrospectively collected from 24 vascular and interventional radiology centres in the UK for all patients undergoing EAR—standard EVAR or complex, branched/fenestrated (BEVAR/FEVAR), and TEVAR—between 2018 and 2021. The data set was further categorised according to X-ray unit type, either fixed or mobile. The proposed national DRL is the 75th percentile of the collective medians for procedure KAP (kerma area product), cumulative air kerma (CAK), fluoroscopy KAP and CAK.ResultsData from 3712 endovascular aortic procedures were collected, including 2062 cases were standard EVAR, 906 cases of BEVAR/FEVAR and 509 cases of TEVAR. The majority of endovascular procedures (3477/3712) were performed on fixed X-ray units. The proposed DRL for KAP was 162 Gy cm2, 175 Gy cm2 and 266 Gy cm2 for standard EVAR, TEVAR and BEVAR/FEVAR, respectively.ConclusionThe development of DRLs is pertinent to EAR procedures as the first step to optimise the radiation risks to patients and staff while maintaining the highest patient care and paving the way for steps to reduce radiation exposures.

Mortality and Survival Following Early TEVAR for Complicated and Uncomplicated Type B Dissection

The use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) to treat patients with both uncomplicated and complicated acute type B aortic dissections (tB-Ad) continues to rise, yet there exists limited national data evaluating outcomes and predictors of adverse events. Therefore, we compared the presentation and clinical features of early TEVAR for complicated and uncomplicated aortic dissections as well as outcomes and survival following repair. We queried the Vascular Quality Improvement registry (2011-2022) for TEVAR cases for acute (<2 weeks) and subacute (2-12 weeks) tB-Ad, dichotomizing patients into uncomplicated vs complicated dissections. Complicated dissection was defined as presentation with visceral malperfusion, rupture, or rapidly increasing aortic size, with uncomplicated dissection including all other presentations. Outcomes included postoperative morbidity and mortality, thoracoabdominal life-altering events (TALE defined as a composite of stroke, death, dialysis, or paraplegia), and 3-year survival. Risk adjusted analyses were performed using logistic regression clustering by center and Cox proportional hazard regression. Among 1749 patients treated for acute and subacute tB-Ad, 775 (44%) presented with complicated dissections. Patients with complicated dissection were more likely to be male (70% vs 61%; P < .01) and older (61.3 vs 59.7 years; P < .02), with longer procedural time (150 minutes vs 115 minutes; P < .01). Complicated dissections had higher unadjusted rates of 30-day mortality (16% vs 4.4%; P < .01), spinal cord ischemia (11% vs 4.6%; P < .01), stroke/transient ischemic attack (8.9% vs 4.7%; P < .01), new dialysis (5.8% vs 1.2%; P < .01), TALE (31% vs 12%; P < .01), and higher reintervention during index hospitalization (21% vs 9.0%; P < .01). Furthermore, complicated dissections had lower 3-year survival (82% vs 72%; P < .01) (Figure). After adjustment, complicated dissection was independently associated with higher odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-3.4; P < .01) and postoperative complications (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.4; P < .01). Factors associated with increased three-year mortality included emergency repair (hazard ratio [HR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.5-3.4]; P < .01), preoperative dialysis (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7-4.7; P < .01), and coronary artery disease (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4; P < .01). These data present contemporary results of TEVAR for tB-Ad, showing excellent mortality and morbidity for both uncomplicated and complicated presentations as compared to prior reports of medical and operative therapy. In light of these findings, and the risk of late aortic-related mortality shown in the literature, early aggressive intervention with TEVAR remains a necessity for complicated presentation and should be strongly considered in patients with acute uncomplicated tB-Ad. Further analyses regarding optimal timing for TEVAR in patients with tB-Ad are warranted.

Early Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair of Uncomplicated Type B Thoracic Aortic Dissection: An Aorta Team Approach.

Although uncomplicated Type B aortic dissection (uTBAD) is traditionally treated with optimal medical therapy (OMT) as per guidelines, recent studies, performed primarily in interventional radiology or surgical operating rooms, suggest superiority of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) over OMT due to recent advancements in endovascular technologies. We report a large, single-center, case control study of TEVAR versus OMT in this population, undertaken solely in a cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) with a cardiologist and surgeon. We aimed to determine if TEVAR for uTBAD results in better outcomes compared with OMT. This was a retrospective chart review of all patients with uTBAD during the last 13 years, with 46 cases (TEVAR group) and 56 controls (OMT group). In the TEVAR group, the procedure duration of 2.5 hours resulted in 100% procedural success for stent placement, with 63% undergoing protective left subclavian artery bypass, 0% mortality or stroke, and a lower readmission rate (1 vs. 2%; p = 0.04 in early TEVAR cases), but a longer length of stay (12.9 vs. 8.5 days: p = 0.006). The risk of all-cause long-term mortality was markedly reduced in the TEVAR group (RR = 0.38; p = 0.01), irrespective of early (<14 days) versus late intervention. On follow-up computed tomography imaging, the false lumen stabilized or decreased in 85% of cases, irrespective of intervention timing. TEVAR performed solely in the CCL is safe and effective, with lower all-cause mortality than OMT. These data, in collaboration with previous data on TEVAR in different settings, call for consideration of an update of practice guidelines.

Effectiveness of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury.

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has a high mortality rate, and the occurrence of clinical complications is high. Several studies have reported the efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for BTAI. This study aimed to clarify the use of TEVAR for BTAI. We analyzed 10 cases of TEVAR for BTAI from July 2011 to December 2020 at our hospital. Five of 10 cases of BTAI were caused by road traffic accidents, while five were caused by falls from a height. The mean patient age was 59.3 years. When arriving at our hospital, seven of 10 patients were in shock. Nine of 10 cases of BTAI were at the aortic isthmus. With respect to BTAI severity, five of 10 patients were categorized as grade IV. Ps of non-survivors were extremely low. All patients underwent TEVAR. The mean surgical duration and volume of intraoperative blood loss were 77.5 minutes and 234 ml, respectively. The results of TEVAR for BTAI at our institution support previous reports, which show excellent clinical results. To further improve the outcomes, we must clarify the adaptation of nonoperative management (delayed repair), the optimal timing of invasive treatment, and the importance of long-term follow-up.

Preoperative Spinal Drain Placement is Associated with Reduced Risk of Spinal Cord Ischemia in Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Aortic Dissection

Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a rare but serious complication of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR). Several measures including spinal drain (SD) placement have been proposed to reduce the risk of SCI in TEVARs performed for aneurysms. However, there are no specific large-scale data on potential benefits of SD placement in Stanford Type B aortic dissection (TBAD). We aimed to assess the impact of preoperative SD placement on preventing SCI during TEVARs performed for TBAD. We included all TEVAR cases performed for TBAD in Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) from 2012 to 2021. Patients with connective tissue disease, open conversion, rupture, proximal disease>zone 5, proximal landing zone <2 or SCI on presentation were excluded. One-to-one propensity score matching was used to balance patients on 34 dimensions by the nearest neighbor principle to compare patients based on preoperative SD placement. The primary outcome was SCI. Secondary outcomes included 30-day and 90-day mortality, perioperative complications, and 90-day2intervention. A total of 2,683 TEVARs were performed for TBAD with 1,227 (45.7%) undergoing preoperative SD placement. Propensity matching produced 672 well-matched pairs. In the matched cohort, SD placement was not associated with significant reduction in temporary SCI (3.0% vs. 3.7%, P=0.45). However, SD placement was associated with significant reduction of the risk of permanent SCI at discharge (1.3% vs. 3.4%, P=0.012). SD was also associated with lower risk of 30-day mortality (3.7% vs 6.4%, P=0.025) and shorter length of stay but not 90-day mortality or 90-day reintervention. Our study suggests that preoperative SD placement in patients undergoing TEVAR for TBAD is beneficial in reducing the risk of permanent SCI without increasing risks of perioperative complications. Further prospective studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Long Term Monitoring of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Using Transcaval Aortic Access.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has reduced the morbidity and mortality associated with the treatment of thoracic aortic pathologies. However, TEVAR's use is often predicated on sufficiently large femoral access for the delivery of the endograft device. Transcaval access, or the delivery of endovascular device via the vena cava before crossing into the aorta, has been used successfully for the deployment of transcatheter aortic valves. Our institution previously reported on a case of TEVAR using transcaval access. We now report on the long-term follow-up outcome of this case. At 6years post-surgery, computed tomography angiography (CTA) indicates stable aortic repair without any concerning findings associated with the site of transcaval access into the aorta. The patient is clinically without signs of lower extremity vascular or cardiopulmonary compromise. Overall, transcaval access for TEVAR is a promising alternative to traditional femoral artery access in highly-select patients with the appropriate anatomical and pathological indications.

A novel preoperative risk score for nonhome discharge after elective thoracic endovascular aortic repair

BackgroundNonhome discharge (NHD) to a rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility after vascular surgery is poorly described despite its large impact on patients. Understanding postsurgical NHD risk is essential to providing adequate preoperative counseling and shared decision making, particularly for elective surgeries. We aimed to identify independent predictors of NHD after elective thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAA) and to create a clinically useful preoperative risk score. MethodsElective TEVAR cases for descending TAA were queried from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative from 2014 to 2018. A risk score was created by splitting the dataset into two-thirds for model development and one-third for validation. A parsimonious stepwise hierarchical multivariable logistic regression controlling for hospital level variation was performed in the development dataset, and the beta-coefficients were used to assign points for a risk score. This score was then cross-validated and model performance assessed. ResultsOverall, 1469 patients were included and 213 (14.5%) required NHD. At baseline, patients who required NHD were more likely to be ≥80 years old (35.2% vs 19.4%), female (58.7% vs 40.6%), functionally dependent (42.3% vs 24.0%), and anemic (46.5% vs 27.8%), and to have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (41.3% vs 33.4%), congestive heart failure (18.8% vs 11.1%), and American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥4 (51.6% vs 39.8%; all P < .05). Multivariable analysis in the development group identified independent predictors of NHD that were used to create an 18-point risk score. Patients were stratified into three groups based upon their risk score: low risk (0-7 points; n = 563) with an NHD rate of 4.3%, moderate risk (8-11 points; n = 701) with an NHD rate of 17.0%, and high risk (≥12 points; n = 205) with an NHD rate of 34.2%. The risk score had good predictive ability with a c-statistic of 0.75 for model development and a c-statistic of 0.72 in the validation dataset. ConclusionsThis novel risk score can predict NHD after TEVAR for TAA using characteristics that can be identified preoperatively. The use of this score may allow for improved risk assessment, preoperative counseling, and shared decision making.

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair With Left Subclavian Artery Coverage Is Associated With a High 30-Day Stroke Incidence With or Without Concomitant Revascularization

Purpose: To evaluate the perioperative stroke incidence following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with differing left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage and revascularization approaches in a real-world setting of a nationwide clinical registry. Materials and Methods: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry was interrogated from 2005 to 2017 to identify all nonemergent TEVAR and/or open LSA revascularization procedures. In this time frame, 2346 TEVAR cases met the selection criteria for analysis. The 30-day stroke incidence was compared between patients undergoing TEVAR with (n=888) vs without (n=1458) LSA coverage, for those with (n=228) vs without (n=660) concomitant LSA revascularization among those with coverage, and following isolated LSA revascularization for occlusive disease (n=768). Multivariable logistic regression was employed for risk-adjusted analyses and to identify factors associated with stroke following TEVAR. Results of the regression analyses are presented as the adjusted odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The stroke incidence was 2.3% following TEVAR without vs 5.2% with LSA coverage (p<0.001). In TEVARs with LSA coverage, the stroke incidence was 7.5% when the LSA was concomitantly revascularized and 4.4% without concomitant revascularization, while stroke occurred in 0.5% of isolated LSA revascularizations. Of 33 TEVAR patients experiencing a perioperative stroke, 8 (24%) died within 30 days. LSA coverage was associated with stroke both with concomitant revascularization (OR 4.0, 95% CI 2.2 to 7.5, p<0.001) and without concomitant revascularization (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.8, p=0.002). Other preoperative factors associated with stroke were dyspnea (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.0, p=0.014), renal dysfunction (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.8, p=0.049), and international normalized ratio ≥2.0 (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 13, p=0.045). Conclusion: Stroke following TEVAR with LSA coverage occurs frequently in the real-world setting, and concurrent LSA revascularization was not associated with a lower stroke incidence.

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

BackgroundAs many as 20% of patients who have undergone previous thoracic aortic repair will require reintervention, which could entail thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). A paucity of data is available on mortality and the incidence of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) and other postoperative complications associated with TEVAR after previous aortic repairs exclusive to the thoracic aorta. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of previous thoracic aortic repair on the 30-day mortality and SCI outcomes for patients after TEVAR. MethodsThe Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for all cases of TEVAR from 2012 to 2018. Patients were excluded if they had undergone previous abdominal aortic repair, the TEVAR had extended beyond aortic zone 5, or SCI data were missing. The 3 cohorts compared were TEVAR with previous ascending aortic or aortic arch repair (group 1), TEVAR with previous descending thoracic aortic repair (group 2), and TEVAR without previous repair (group 3). The primary outcomes of interest were 30-day mortality and SCI. The secondary outcomes included stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiac complications, respiratory complications, postoperative length of stay, and reintervention. The patient variables were compared using χ2 tests, analysis of variance, or Kruskal-Wallis tests, as appropriate. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the predictors of 30-day mortality and SCI. ResultsA total of 4010 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 470 in group 1, 132 in group 2, and 3408 in group 3. The 30-day mortality was 4% (19 of 470) in group 1, 6% (8 of 132) in group 2, and 6% (213 of 3408) in group 3 (P = .17). The incidence of SCI was 3% (14 of 470) in group 1, 3% (4 of 132) in group 2, and 3.8% (128 of 3408) in group 3 (P = .65). Stroke, reintervention, myocardial infarction, and cardiac complications were not significantly different among the 3 groups. The incidence of respiratory complications was greatest for group 3 (11%; 360 of 3408) compared with groups 1 (9%; 44 of 470) and 2 (4%; 5 of 132; P = .034). Similarly, the postoperative length of stay was longest for group 3 (9.6 ± 19.4 days vs 8.2 ± 18.3 days for group 1 and 5.9 ± 8.6 days for group 2; P = .038). The independent predictors of 30-day mortality for all TEVAR patients included units of packed red blood cells transfused intraoperatively, urgent or emergent repairs, older age, increasing serum creatinine level, inability to perform self-care, total procedure time, occlusion of the left subclavian artery intraoperatively, distal endograft landing zone 5, and diabetes. The predictors of SCI included the total procedure time, urgent and emergent repairs, and increasing serum creatinine level. ConclusionsTEVAR after previous thoracic aortic repair was not associated with an increased risk of SCI or 30-day mortality compared with TEVAR without previous aortic repair.

Risk factors for mortality after endovascular repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury

ObjectiveDespite high use of endovascular repair, blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) leads to significant mortality. We sought to identify risk factors and create a predictive model for mortality after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) based on available preoperative clinical data. MethodsWe queried the Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR dataset from April 2011 to November 2017 to identify patients with BTAI as the indication for repair. Patient characteristics, injury grade, timing of repair, and technical aspects including left subclavian artery (LSCA) involvement and coverage were evaluated. Logistic regression was used to identify univariable predictors of the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality. A multivariable model was constructed to predict in-hospital mortality after TEVAR for traumatic aortic injury. The model was tested as a prediction tool, internally validated using 10-fold cross-validation approach, externally validated using early and late split samples, and finally simplified into a scoring system. ResultsWe identified 633 TEVAR cases performed for blunt trauma. The majority of patients were male (73.9%) with median age of 39 years (interquartile range, 27-56 years). Although 18.6% documented zone 2 or proximal involvement, 28.1% documented involvement or treatment of the LSCA. 8.9% of repairs were performed for a grade 1 injury, with an increase from 6.4% in 2014 to 16.7% in 2017 (P = .04). The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 7.3%. Independent predictors of mortality were age 60 year or greater (odds ratio [OR], 11.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.30-24.23; P < .001), creatinine 1.2 or greater (OR, 5.28; 95% CI, 2.46-11.34; P < .001), male gender (OR, 4.26; 95% CI, 1.53-11.84; P = .005), Injury Severity Score of greater than 30 (OR, 3.86; 95% CI, 1.74-8.57; P = .001), and LSCA involvement (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.11-4.53; P = .02). The model predicted in-hospital mortality with a C-statistic of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80-0.92), and a simplified model based on a point system had a similar C-statistic of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80-0.92; P = .44). ConclusionsTEVAR for BTAI is associated with a 7.3% in-hospital mortality in the Vascular Quality Initiative. Treatment of grade 1 injuries has increased significantly in recent years. Factors most strongly associated with mortality include age, male gender, renal impairment, LSCA involvement, and high ISS score. A simple point score model based on these variables robustly predicts in-hospital mortality and may assist in appropriate patient selection and risk stratification.

A New Methodology to Determine Apposition, Dilatation, and Position of Endografts in the Descending Thoracic Aorta After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Purpose: To validate computed tomography angiography (CTA)–applied software to assess apposition, dilatation, and position of endografts in the proximal and distal landing zones after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of thoracic aortic aneurysm. Materials and Methods: Twenty-two patients (median age 75.5 years; 11 men) with a degenerative descending thoracic aortic aneurysm treated with TEVAR with at least one postoperative CTA were selected from a single center’s database. New CTA-applied software was used to determine the available apposition surface in the proximal and distal landing zones, apposition of the endograft fabric with the aortic wall, shortest apposition length, endograft inflow and outflow diameters, shortest distance between the left subclavian artery and the proximal endograft fabric, and shortest distance between the celiac trunk and the distal endograft fabric on each CTA. Interobserver variability for these parameters was assessed with the repeatability coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: Excellent interobserver agreement was found for all measurements. Interobserver variability of surface and shortest apposition length calculations was larger for the distal site compared with the proximal site, with a mean difference of 10% vs 2% of the mean available apposition surface, 12% vs 5% of the endograft apposition surface, and 16% vs 8% of the shortest apposition length, respectively. Inflow and outflow diameters of the endograft showed low variability, with a mean difference of 0.1 mm with 95% of the interobserver difference within 1.8 mm. Mean interobserver differences of the proximal and distal shortest fabric distances were 1.0 and 0.9 mm (both 2% of the mean lengths). Conclusion: Assessment of apposition, dilatation, and position of the proximal and distal parts of an endograft in the descending thoracic aorta is feasible after TEVAR with the new software. Interobserver agreement for all measured parameters was excellent for the proximal and distal landing zones. The new method allows detection of subtle changes during follow-up. However, a larger study is needed to quantify how parameters change over time in complicated and uncomplicated TEVAR cases and to define the real added value of the new methodology.

Percutaneous transapical access to facilitate complex thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) provides an alternative to open surgery for a variety of aortic diseases. However, complex anatomy and previous operations may preclude traditional approaches to TEVAR. Percutaneous transapical access through the left ventricle is a feasible option to facilitate externalized “rail” wire support for complex TEVAR. We present the case of TEVAR for a residual type B aortic dissection facilitated by percutaneous transapical access.

Image fusion using the two-dimensional-three-dimensional registration method helps reduce contrast medium volume, fluoroscopy time, and procedure time in hybrid thoracic endovascular aortic repairs

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of image fusion (IF) technology in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) on reducing radiation exposure (dose and time), amount of injected iodinated contrast medium needed, and procedure time. MethodsWe performed a review of our institutional endovascular aortic database of patients who had undergone TEVAR between 2008 and 2016 before and after the installation of a three-dimensional (3D) IF computed tomography system in our hybrid operating room. All patients were operated on using the same radiologic equipment with or without IF. ResultsThe 146 patients who had undergone elective or emergent TEVAR with preoperative computed tomography angiography done in 1-mm-thick slices were divided into two groups: the IF group (98 patients), in which TEVAR was performed using intraoperative IF with the two-dimensional-3D registration method; and 48 controls without the use of IF. The IF group received a significantly reduced dose of contrast material, with a median of 70 mL (interquartile range [IQR], 50-101 mL) compared with controls receiving 104 mL (IQR, 69-168 mL; P < .001).Patients who underwent hybrid TEVAR had a significantly reduced procedure time under IF guidance (n = 25) compared with controls (n = 11; median, 162 minutes [IQR, 139-199 minutes] vs 213 minutes [IQR, 189-298 minutes]; P = .015). In addition, the intraoperative fluoroscopy time was reduced to 9 minutes (IQR, 6-13 minutes) vs 23 minutes (IQR, 12-45 minutes; P < .005). However, the radiation dose (dose-area product) was similar for the two groups (P = .37).In patients who underwent plain TEVAR (n = 74) without a carotid-subclavian bypass, the IF group needed significantly less contrast material (median, 64 mL [IQR, 43-81 mL]) compared with the control group (median, 98 mL [IQR, 60-180 mL]; P = .003), whereas intraoperative radiation exposition, procedure time, and fluoroscopy time did not statistically significantly differ between the two groups. ConclusionsThe IF technology using the two-dimensional-3D registration method was associated with reduced intraoperative contrast material volume in performing TEVAR. IF seemed to shorten the operation and radiation times in the more complicated (hybrid) TEVAR cases. However, a prospective study is needed to look at the dose-area product, fluoroscopy time, and procedure time in a larger cohort of patients.

Feasibility of three-dimensional fusion imaging with multimodality roadmap system during endovascular aortic repair

ObjectiveEndovascular procedures for aortic aneurysm repair have become widely accepted as safe and effective surgical options. We investigated the efficacy of the multimodality roadmap (MMR) system with biplane fluoroscopy to attempt to reduce the use of contrast medium and exposure to radiation during surgery. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 263 consecutive cases with elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Patients were categorized into two groups, with and without introduction of the MMR system, which was applied in 164 patients (62.4%). The MMR− group included 62 EVAR and 37 TEVAR cases, and the MMR+ group consisted of 81 EVAR and 83 TEVAR cases. Radiation dose, contrast medium use, and complications were compared between the MMR− and MMR+ groups in the respective EVAR and TEVAR groups. ResultsThere was a significantly lower amount of contrast medium use in the MMR+ group compared with the MMR− group in EVAR (32.9 ± 10.6 g and 28.2 ± 10.2 g; P = .009) and TEVAR (31.7 ± 11.5 g and 26.9 ± 7.8 g; P = .009). In addition, significantly lower radiation exposure was observed in the MMR+ group of TEVAR (872 ± 623 mGy vs 638 ± 463 mGy; P = .033). The operative time of the MMR+ group was significantly shorter for patients with TEVAR compared with the MMR− group (96.4 ± 27.0 minutes vs 86.2 ± 23.9 minutes; P = .023). The incidence of access injury and other complications was similar in both EVAR and TEVAR groups. ConclusionsThe MMR system with three-dimensional fusion imaging can reduce the contrast medium dose in EVAR and the exposure to contrast medium and radiation in TEVAR.

Analysis of Risk Factors for Early Type I Endoleaks After Thoracic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Purpose: To evaluate risk factors for early (<30 days) type I endoleak following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted of 439 consecutive patients (mean age 74.0±10.0 years; 333 men) who underwent TEVAR at a single center between June 2006 and June 2013. Pathologies included 237 aortic arch aneurysms and 202 descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (dTAA). Maximum TAA diameter was 63.6±13.7 mm. Among the distal aortic arch aneurysms, 124 required coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA), while the remaining 113 arch aneurysms had debranching (n=40), the chimney technique (n=52), and a branched stent-graft (n=13). Eight patients with dilatation of the ascending aorta underwent arch replacement with elephant trunk prior to TEVAR. Predictive factors for type I endoleak were explored in univariate analysis and examined for each outcome using logistic regression models; results are given as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Among 439 TEVAR cases, 37 (8.4%) had type I endoleaks on imaging at 1 month; 31 were in the 237 arch cases (13.1%). Endoleak investigation by site indicated a low incidence (3.0%) for dTAAs and markedly low (1.4%) in zone 4. Significantly more endoleaks were observed in zones 0–2 than in zone 4 (p<0.001). On univariate analysis, significant associations were found between endoleak and LSA coverage (OR 5.8, 95% CI 2.4 to 14.4, p<0.001), operative time ≥240 minutes (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.5 to 6.2, p=0.002), and ≥270 mL of contrast (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 5.8, p=0.004). Among the aortic branch reconstruction procedures, the chimney technique was the only maneuver associated with a significant risk of endoleak (OR 5.3, 95% CI 2.3 to 11.2, p<0.001). Arch state was not correlated with endoleaks, but ≥38-mm proximal neck diameter (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 10.8, p=0.023), stent-graft diameter ≥40 mm (OR 9.9, 95% CI 1.4 to 30.5, p=0.015), and excessively oversized (≥14%) stent-grafts (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.2 to 10.3, p=0.020) were; the proximal neck length was not correlated with endoleaks if a proximal neck length >10 mm can be secured. Conclusion: Risks for early type I endoleaks after TEVAR for aneurysm were landing zone 0–2, LSA coverage, large proximal neck and stent-graft diameters, excessive oversizing, and the use of the chimney technique.

The Impact of Physician Specialization on Clinical and Hospital Outcomes in Patients Undergoing EVAR and TEVAR

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are commonly performed by interventional radiologists, cardiologists, general surgeons, cardiothoracic surgeons, and vascular surgeons, with each specialty having differences in residency structure, operative experience, and subspecialty training. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of surgeon specialty on outcomes following EVAR and TEVAR. Patients who underwent EVAR and TEVAR were identified from the 2007 to 2009 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Physician identifiers in the NIS were used to determine surgical specialty and operative experience. Multivariate analysis adjusted for mortality risk was used to compare differences in demographics, complications, outcomes, and hospital covariates. A total of 5147 EVARs were identified within the NIS, of which 88.3% were completed by vascular surgeons. There were no significant differences in demographics between the specialties. Cardiothoracic surgeons were more likely to have a postoperative stroke (3.1% vs. 0.2%, odds ratio [OR] 14.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8-117.8, P<0.05) and cardiac complications (9.4% vs. 2.0%, OR 5.0, 95% CI 1.5-16.6, P<0.01) compared with other specialties. Costs were lowest for vascular surgeons ($32,094), and highest for cardiothoracic surgeons ($41,663, P<0.05). Only vascular surgeons completed more than 10 EVARs per year. A total of 2531 TEVAR cases were completed during the study period, of which 73.8% were completed by vascular surgeons, 15.8% by cardiothoracic surgeons, 8.0% by interventional radiologists, and the remainder by interventional cardiologists and general surgeons. Interventional radiologists had significantly more elective cases (77.8%, P<0.001) than cardiothoracic surgeons (47.2%) or vascular surgeons (53.8%), but had a significantly higher rate of stroke (7.6% vs. 1.1%, P<0.001) and cardiac events (7.2% vs. 3.6%, P<0.001). Length of stay (LOS, 10.7days) and median costs ($52,156) were similar across specialties. Vascular surgeons have a low stroke rate (1.1%, P<0.05 vs. interventional radiologists) and lower rate of cardiac events (3.6% vs. 6.1%, P<0.01) despite caring for patients with higher diagnosis-related group mortality scores (3.6 vs. 3.4, P<0.05). Vascular surgeons appear to have a comparative advantage over other specialties for EVAR because not only are their complication and mortality rates comparable but overall LOS and hospital charges are lower. Furthermore, primarily only vascular surgeons are performing the high volume of annual EVARs necessary to ensure optimal patient outcomes. For TEVAR, vascular surgeons have the lowest overall morbidity compared with the other specialties, and lower mortality compared with cardiothoracic surgeons. These findings may impact patient referral patterns and hospital privileges for providers.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for degenerative distal arch aneurysm can be used as a standard procedure in high-risk patients

In recent years, supra-aortic rerouting and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for treating aortic arch pathology have emerged as a less invasive option for high-risk patients. This study aimed to assess our strategy for preventing stroke and improving late outcomes after supra-aortic rerouting and TEVAR. Between July 2008 and July 2015, we performed 280 cases of TEVAR for arch pathologies, using manufactured stent grafts. This study reviewed 101 patients who underwent supra-aortic rerouting and TEVAR for degenerative distal arch aneurysms (80 men, mean age 73.1 years, Zone 1/Zone 2 = 48/53). Since 2011, we have routinely used the brain protection method, which comprises blocking native forward flow from the left common carotid artery (LCA) and left subclavian artery (LSA) for zone 1 cases and the LSA for zone 2 cases before TEVAR. The mean operation time was 178 ± 65 min. The stroke and 30-day death rates were 3 and 1%, respectively. Before the brain protection method was introduced, the perioperative risk factor for stroke was atheroma Grade ≥III (P = 0.035). Proximal landing zone (P = 0.58) and LSA sacrifice (P = 1.00) were not risk factors for stroke. No strokes occurred after using the brain protection method (before protection: 6% and after protection: 0%). Regarding late results, the rate of freedom from aorta-related death at 1 and 4 years was 97 and 95%, respectively. The rate of freedom from aortic events at 1 and 4 years was 91 and 86%, respectively. During follow-up, no type Ia endoleak developed and one type A dissection was observed. Our strategy for supra-aortic rerouting and TEVAR showed satisfactory early and late results. The chief risk factor for perioperative stroke was atheroma, and blocking native forward flow from the LCA and the LSA prior to the TEVAR procedure helped prevent stroke.