Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization Research Articles

Double homemade fenestrated stent graft for total endovascular aortic arch repair

ObjectiveThe aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the outcomes of physician-modified double fenestrated stent grafts for total endovascular aortic arch repair: one proximal large fenestration for the brachiocephalic trunk and the left common carotid artery and one distal fenestration for the left subclavian artery (LSA). MethodsFrom January 2017 through February 2018, 17 patients (88.2% elective) underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with double homemade fenestrated stent graft for total endovascular aortic arch repair to maintain supra-aortic trunk patency. Indications were degenerative aortic arch aneurysm (n = 7), dissecting aortic arch aneurysms subsequent to surgical treatment of acute type A dissections (n = 6), chronic complicated type B aortic dissection (n = 3), and acute complicated type B aortic dissection (n = 1). Routine postoperative follow-up imaging with computed tomography angiography was performed to assess TEVAR and supra-aortic trunks patency and endoleak. ResultsThe median time for stent graft modification was 19 minutes (range, 16-20 minutes). Endovascular exclusion of the aortic arch was achieved in all the cases. One LSA catheterization failed and LSA revascularization was performed by carotid axillary bypass and coverage of the LSA fenestration by additional stent graft placement. Additional planned endovascular procedures were required in three patients: closure of supra-aortic trunks re-entry tears in two cases of dissecting aortic arch aneurysms and one transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe native aortic valve regurgitation. One stroke, with no long-term deficit, was observed. No patients died. All left supra-aortic trunks are patent. No type I endoleak was observed. We only observed one patient with a type II endoleak. During a mean follow up of 7 ± 2 months, there were no conversions to open surgical repair, aortic rupture, paraplegia, or retrograde dissection. ConclusionsDouble homemade fenestrated TEVAR is both feasible and effective for maintaining the patency of the supra-aortic trunks and allows total endovascular aortic arch repair. Durability concerns will need to be assessed in additional studies with long-term follow-up.

Implementation and results of a practical grading system for blunt thoracic aortic injury

ObjectiveWe previously proposed a grading system for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) designed to guide therapy. This study analyzed our outcomes since implementing this system. MethodsA single-center, retrospective study was conducted of consecutive patients presenting with BTAI between January 2014 and December 2017. This grading system classified injuries into minimal, moderate, or severe on the basis of computed tomography imaging. Primary end points included timing of operation and mortality. Secondary end points included associated injuries, aortic anatomy, and operative details as well as 30-day follow-up. ResultsDuring the study period, 87 patients with BTAI were identified. The majority of patients had a moderate injury occurring just distal to the left subclavian artery (LSA); 59 patients underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), whereas none of the patients with minimal injury (n = 24) required surgical treatment. The mean time to repair was 53 hours (1-191 hours) for moderate injury and 3.6 hours (0-7 hours) for severe injury. The average diameter and length of the endograft was 26 mm and 112 cm, respectively, and the LSA was covered in 42% of patients. Intravascular ultrasound to confirm sizing was used in 83% of cases. Most patients (92%) received intravenous heparin during TEVAR; the remainder received only heparin sheath flush because of concern for intracranial hemorrhage. None of the patients underwent LSA revascularization or developed stroke or spinal cord ischemia as a result of the procedure. Operative complications were seen in 6% of patients and included 1 femoral pseudoaneurysm, 1 lower extremity compartment syndrome, 1 type II endoleak requiring LSA embolization, and 1 intracranial bleed. The 30-day mortality was 7% (one aorta-related death). On 30-day postoperative follow-up, computed tomography imaging uniformly revealed positive aortic remodeling, and no secondary aortic intervention was required. ConclusionsInstitutional implementation of our grading system has streamlined treatment of BTAI, and our results confirm the following: patients with minimal injury do not require surgical treatment; patients with moderate injury can safely undergo TEVAR in a semielective manner once they are stable from other injuries; and patients with severe injury require emergent repair. These procedures are expeditious and can be successfully performed percutaneously with a single endograft. Complications are rare, and follow-up reveals excellent remodeling of the aorta, likely resulting in lengthened interval surveillance requirements for these patients.

Outcome Comparison of TEVAR with and without Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization from Analysis of Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) without and with left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. NIS records from 2005 to 2013 were retrospectively analyzed to identify patients undergoing TEVAR without and with LSA revascularization. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. The LSA revascularization group was further subdivided to compare perioperative outcomes if the revascularization was performed pre- or post-TEVAR or if the revascularization was performed open versus endovascular. Comparisons were examined using univariable analysis and multivariable logistic regression. Multivariable models were constructed using a forward selection approach with P<0.05 required for model entry. Odds ratios are expressed per standard deviation change for continuous covariates. Continuous variables were compared between different groups using t-test, and categorical variables were compared using the chi-squared test. All statistical analyses were performed using R (cran.r-project.org). 7,773 TEVAR patients were included in this study. 6,411 (82.5%) were performed without and 1,362 (17.5%) with LSA revascularization. The rate of revascularization for LSA coverage during TEVAR doubled after the Society for Vascular Surgery Guidelines recommending revascularization were published in 2009. Groups were not significantly different in age (65.5±15.8 and 66.1±14.4years old, respectively), gender, or race. Multivariable analysis showed that although rates of spinal cord ischemia and upper extremity ischemia were similar, perioperative cardiac complications (OR 1.5, 95% CI [1.2, 1.9], P=0.025), stroke (OR 2.1, 95% CI [1.6, 2.8], P=0.001), and pulmonary complications (OR 1.9, 95% CI [1.7, 2.3], P<0.001) were significantly higher in the patients undergoing TEVAR with LSA revascularization than those without. Of the 1,362 patients with LSA revascularization, 1,251 (91.9%) were performed pre-TEVAR and 111 (8.1%) were performed post-TEVAR. Among the 1,251 patients with pre-TEVAR LSA revascularization, 583 had open surgery and 553 had stenting. In 115 patients, LSA revascularization was coded as both open and endovascular. Compared with pre-TEVAR revascularization, post-TEVAR revascularization was associated with higher risks of pulmonary complications and spinal cord ischemia. Endovascular LSA revascularization had lower pulmonary and stroke morbidity versus open LSA revascularization. The perioperative outcomes for the LSA revascularization subgroups are summarized. TEVAR with LSA revascularization is associated with significantly increased rates of perioperative stroke and cardiopulmonary complications. LSA revascularization before TEVAR, compared with post-TEVAR revascularization, had lower perioperative complications. In high-risk patients, endovascular LSA revascularization may be recommended over open surgery.

Comparison of Two Different Techniques for Isolated Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Zone 2

Comparison of Two Different Techniques for Isolated Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Zone 2

Midterm results of laser generated in situ fenestration of the left subclavian artery during thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair

ObjectiveTo analyze the midterm result of in situ fenestration (ISF) of the left subclavian artery (LSA) during thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR). MethodsIn this clinical study, between 2014 and 2016, ISF for LSA revascularization was attempted during TEVAR in 10 patients (7 males; median age, 68 years). An excimer laser, placed from the left brachial artery, was used to create a fenestration and all fenestrations were stented with covered stent grafts. Follow-up included computed tomography scans 1 month postoperatively and annually thereafter. Survival was analyzed according to Kaplan-Meier. ResultsNine of the 10 laser-assisted ISF were successful. No 30-day mortality occurred. One patient had a transient ischemic attacked in the left carotid territory. After a median follow-up of 27 months, all fenestrations were patent. At 1 month, computed tomography follow-up showed nonspecific endoleaks of unknown origin in five of the nine patients. At 27 months follow-up, only two endoleaks remained. One reintervention was done after 24 months owing to a type Ic endoleak from the LSA. Overall TEVAR success, defined as survival with no aneurysm expansion, was eight of nine. One patient showed aneurysm expansion after 14 months. Two deaths occurred (at 33 and 31 months postoperative), one of unknown reason and one aneurysm related. ConclusionsLaser fenestration might be an option for LSA revascularization during emergent or semiurgent TEVAR and electively in patients with hostile neck anatomy (eg, previous neck radiation, short and adipose necks) that might make a carotid–subclavian bypass difficult. The LSA fenestration has excellent patency and TEVAR success was not affected by nonspecific endoleaks around the LSA.

Outcomes After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair With Overstenting of the Left Subclavian Artery

Our study aim was to evaluate the impact of left subclavian artery (LSA) flow preservation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) on outcome. Between August 2001 and October 2016, 176 patients (mean age, 61.3 ± 15.8 years) underwent TEVAR with complete LSA coverage. Fifty-five of those patients (31.3%) also underwent LSA revascularization, whereas 121 patients (68.7%) did not. Perioperative data were acquired retrospectively for statistical analysis at the three study institutions. Overall in-hospital and follow-up mortality was 8.5% (n= 15) and 9.1% (n= 16), respectively, including 88 urgent and emergent cases (50%). Stroke (independent of location) and permanent paraplegia rates were 6.8% and 6.3%, respectively, for the entire cohort. Isolated upper-left extremity malperfusion exclusively occurred in 12 (9.9%) of the 121 patients without LSA revascularization. Left-hemispheric stroke was observed four times more often in patients without LSA revascularization and left arm malperfusion (16.7% versus 3.7%, p= 0.095). Multivariate analysis identified no LSA revascularization (odds ratio [OR] 3.779, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.096 to 13.029, p= 0.035), two or more endografts (OR 3.814, 95% CI: 1.557 to 9.343, p= 0.003), and coronary artery disease (OR 3.276, 95% CI: 1.262 to 8.507, p= 0.015) as independent risk factors for procedure-related adverse events (left-hemispheric stroke, left arm malperfusion, and permanent paraplegia) after TEVAR with complete LSA overstenting. Every 10th patient with LSA overstenting and no revascularization experienced left arm malperfusion. No LSA revascularization, extensive aortic coverage with two or more endografts, and coronary artery disease increased the risk of permanent paraplegia, left-hemispheric stroke, and left arm malperfusion. Patients should undergo LSA revascularization to prevent left vertebral artery-associated central neurologic complications and to maintain upper-left extremity perfusion.

Risk of spinal cord ischemia after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a recognized grave complication after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The present study aimed to evaluate the incidence and investigate risk of SCI after TEVAR based on current prophylactic strategies designed against established risk factors. The study retrospectively reviewed a prospectively maintained database to investigate patients who underwent TEVAR successfully between January 2009 and December 2012 in a single cardiovascular center. Detailed assessment of SCI risk was routinely performed for all patients before TEVAR was carried out. Prophylactic measures, including left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization, blood pressure augmentation and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure control after TEVAR, were employed in high-risk patients and physical neurological examinations were regularly done to evaluate SCI after TEVAR. Patients were further divided into SCI group and non-SCI group. A total of 650 patients were enrolled in the study. Eleven patients (1.69%) developed SCI after TEVAR. Baseline level of hemoglobin was significantly lower in the SCI group (113.00 vs. 128.50, P=0.023). More patients in the SCI patients in the SCI group underwent TEVAR under general anesthesia (45.5% vs. 17.7%, P=0.033). A significantly higher incidence of post TEVAR hypotension was found in the SCI group (2.7% vs. 27.3%, P=0.004). Logistic regression analysis revealed that post-TEVAR hypotension (OR, 8.379; 95% CI, 1.833-38.304; P=0.006) was strongly associated with development of SCI and high normal baseline hemoglobin was a protective factor (OR, 0.969; CI, 0.942-0.998; P=0.037). The mortality in hospital and mortality at 1 year were not significant different between the SCI and the non-SCI group (0% vs. 1.6% P=1.000; 9.1% vs. 3.0%, P=0.294, respectively). While length of post-TEVAR stay (13.00 vs. 7.00 days, P=0.000) and length of hospital stay (20.00 vs. 13.00 days, P=0.001) were significantly greater in the SCI group. Our study revealed that, based on current prophylactic measures to curtail SCI, including LSA revascularization, blood pressure augmentation and CSF pressure control after TEVAR, post-TEVAR hypotension remains a major and independent risk factor for SCI and high normal baseline hemoglobin level is protective. SCI results in longer post-TEVAR stay and hospital stay, but not associated with increased mortality. Robust precautions should be taken against underlying causes for post-TEVAR hypotension and low level of hemoglobin should be avoided.

Outcomes of Chimney Technique for Preservation of the Left Subclavian Artery in Type B Aortic Dissection

To report outcomes of the chimney technique for preservation of the left subclavian artery (LSA) in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD). A retrospective analysis was performed of a prospectively maintained database from August 2012 to October 2017. Primary endpoints were 30 day and overall mortality. Secondary endpoints were technical success, type Ia endoleak, chimney stent occlusion, aortic rupture, stroke, spinal cord ischaemia, and re-intervention rate. A total of 159 patients (mean age 54 ± 11 years; 141 men) with TBAD were treated using the chimney technique for LSA revascularisation. Acute, subacute, and chronic TBAD accounted for 64%, 28%, and 8% of cases, respectively. One hundred and six cases (67%) were complicated TBAD. One hundred and fifty-six patients (98%) were treated electively, while three (2%) were treated urgently because of intestinal or lower extremity ischaemia. The 30 day mortality and morbidity rates were 2% (3/159) and 4% (7/159), respectively. The technical success rate was 81% (129/159) and immediate type Ia endoleak occurred in 30 (19%) patients. Three major strokes, two spinal cord ischaemia and one aortic rupture, occurred early on. During a mean follow up of 23 ± 16 months (range 1-65 months), three more patients died: from aortic rupture, cerebral haemorrhage, and rectal cancer, respectively. Chimney stent occlusions were observed in four patients and all these chimney stents were self expanding. During follow up, two major strokes, one late type Ia endoleak and one re-intervention, occurred. According to the Kaplan-Meier curve, the estimated one and three year survival rates were 98.1 ± 1.1% and 94.4 ± 2.4%, respectively. Short and mid-term outcomes in the present study demonstrate that the chimney technique is safe and feasible for preservation of the LSA in patients with TBAD, but the durability of chimney stent needs to be evaluated carefully and immediate type Ia endoleak is a concern.

Comparison of Two Different Techniques for Isolated Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Zone 2

Purpose: To analyze the results of isolated left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using carotid-subclavian bypass (CSbp) or chimney grafts (CGs). Methods: A retrospective multicenter, observational study identified 73 patients (mean age 68±13 years, range 22–87; 56 men) with acute or chronic thoracic aortic lesions who underwent TEVAR with isolated LSA revascularization using either CSbp (n=42) or CGs (n=31) from January 2010 and February 2017. Primary endpoints were TEVAR-related mortality, postoperative stroke, freedom from type Ia endoleak, and LSA patency. Results: Primary technical success was achieved in all cases. Early TEVAR-related mortality was 4.2% (CSbp 2% vs CG 6%, p=0.571). Two (3%) patients had major ischemic strokes (one in each group). Mean follow-up was 24±21 months (range 1–72; median 15). Estimated freedom from TEVAR-related mortality was 93%±3% (95% CI 84.3% to 97.0%) at 12 and 36 months, with no significant difference between CSbp and CG (p=0.258). Aortic reintervention did not differ between the groups (CSbp 5% vs CG 6%, p=0.356); nor did freedom from type Ia endoleak (CSbp 98% vs CG 87%, p=0.134). Gutter-related endoleaks occurred in 4 (13%) CG patients, but none of the patients experienced sac enlargement or the need for reintervention and none died. Primary patency of the LSA was 100% for the entire group during the observation period. Conclusion: In our experience, LSA revascularization proved most satisfactory and equally effective with both the CSbp and CG techniques, without discernible differences at midterm follow-up.

Procedure selection of left subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair

In order to require ideal proximal landing zone and durable long-term outcome, it is necessary to reconstruct the left subclavian artery(LSA) blood supply as much as possible in thoracic aortic endovascular repair(TEVAR). With the advent and progress of diverse assisted techniques and devices, several procedures for the reconstruction of the left subclavian artery have been developed and widely utilized, including surgical LSA bypass or transposition, chimney technique, periscope technique, fenestration and branched stent-graft, which have expanded the proximal landing zone and widened the indication for original TEVAR. This article describes the advantages and pitfalls of each revascularization methods. Anatomies of aortic arch and LSA, urgency and types of pathologies, proficiency of the surgeon with different revascularization techniques and pre-operative risk score of patient should be evaluated in procedure selection. In clinical application, patient-specific evaluations and individualized considerations are essential for initialize the therapeutic strategy and decision making.

NESVS9. Chimney Stent Graft for Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization During Thoracic Endograft Placement

NESVS9. Chimney Stent Graft for Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization During Thoracic Endograft Placement

Left Subclavian Artery Coverage Association With Neurologic Events in Trauma Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Repair

The trauma patient population presents unique challenges to the vascular surgeon. Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) outcomes have been studied with interest in complications related to left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage in patients with atherosclerotic pathologies. The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes after TEVAR for traumatic aortic injury based on LSA coverage. The Vascular Quality Initiative thoracic endovascular aortic repair module (2008-2016) was analyzed. Patients were included if they had a traumatic aortic injury requiring TEVAR. Patients were placed in two groups based on proximal zone of coverage of the primary endograft (zones 1 and 2 versus zone 3 or higher). The primary outcome measures were cerebrovascular symptoms and spinal cord ischemia. Additional clinical and resource use outcomes were analyzed. We included 484 patients in the study; 194 patients had the LSA covered during the endovascular aortic repair and 290 had a patent LSA. The mean aortic injury grade was 2.88 ± 0.056 versus 2.88 ± 0.049 in the covered versus noncovered group (P = .957). Glasgow Coma Scale and each component of the Injury Severity Score were not different between the groups. There were no differences between groups for cerebrovascular symptoms (3% vs 4%; P > .999). However, spinal cord ischemia was more significant in the covered LSA group (2% vs 0%; P = .025). Other significant differences in complications including cardiac outcomes, mortality and resource use are included in the Table. This is the largest series to evaluate complications based on LSA coverage after TEVAR in a trauma population. Coverage of the LSA relates to patient outcomes as well as resource use. This association may be related to factors inherent to more proximal zones of injury, a more severe injury state, or the hemodynamic compromise associated with LSA exclusion. As such, LSA revascularization strategies, while possible, are not directly supported by these data.TableOutcomes after coverage of LSA after endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) for trauma patientsLSA not involved (n = 290)±SE or %LSA involved (n = 194)±SE or %P valueAortic injury grade2.880.0562.880.049.957Cerebrovascular symptoms1124%5830%.171Spinal cord ischemia00%42%.025Myocardial infarction52%63%.360Dysrhythmia155%2010%.047Renal ischemia10%63%.018Intestinal ischemia21%74%.033Total procedure time, minutes92.23.66109.96.46.011Death related to disease/treatment31%84%.032 Open table in a new tab

In-Situ Laser Fenestration of a PTFE Thoracic Aortic Stent Graft for Delayed Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization Following Frozen Elephant Trunk Repair of Type an Aortic Dissection

Left subclavian artery revascularization during endovascular repair of aortic dissection is often accomplished by left carotid-subclavian artery bypass or transposition. In-situ fenestration of thoracic stent grafts provides an alternative method of revascularization without manipulation of the left carotid artery. We describe a novel technique of delayed in-situ laser fenestration, combined with catheter-directed thrombectomy to revascularize a thrombosed left subclavian artery in a patient with frozen elephant trunk repair of type A aortic dissection.

Outcomes from the Gore Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B dissection

ObjectiveThe Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) is a prospective multicenter registry collecting real-world data on the performance of W. L. Gore (Flagstaff, Ariz) aortic endografts. The purpose of the present study was to analyze the implementation and outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in GREAT patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD). MethodsFrom 2010 to 2016, >5000 patients were enrolled in the GREAT from 113 centers in 14 countries across 4 continents. The study population comprised those treated for TBAD. The primary outcomes of interest were mortality and freedom from aortic events (AEs). ResultsA total of 264 patients (80% male; mean age, 62 years) underwent TEVAR for the treatment of 170 (64%) acute and 94 (36%) chronic cases of TBAD. Chronic TBAD patients required significantly longer endograft coverage than did acute TBAD patients (P = .05). Early postoperative complications occurred in 9% of patients, with no difference in chronic vs acute dissection (P = .11). The 30-day aortic mortality and all-cause mortality were 1.5% and 2.3%, respectively, with no differences based on chronicity. During a mean follow-up of 26 months, the total aortic mortality was 2.7% and the total all-cause mortality was 12.5%. The all-cause mortality was significantly greater for chronic vs acute TBAD (19.2% vs 8.8%, respectively; P = .02). On multivariate analysis, patients with acute uncomplicated dissections had significantly improved overall survival compared with all other categories of dissections (93% vs 83% at 2 years; P < .05). A proximal landing zone diameter >40 mm was associated with an increased risk of retrograde type A dissection (18% vs 2%; P = .02). Patients undergoing left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage experienced a twofold greater rate of AEs compared with noncoverage patients (P < .01). Patients who underwent LSA revascularization experienced a 1.5-fold greater rate of AEs compared with patients covered without revascularization (P = .04). ConclusionsTEVAR for TBAD using the conformable GORE TAG thoracic endoprosthesis device can be performed with a low incidence of aortic mortality and complications. Acute uncomplicated TBAD patients had a significantly lower mortality rate than that of other patients. Larger proximal landing zones were associated with more frequent retrograde type A dissection. LSA involvement (coverage and/or revascularization) was associated with an increased risk of AEs during follow-up.

The strategies and outcomes of left subclavian artery revascularization during thoracic endovascular repair for type B aortic dissection

This study was to analyze the outcomes of left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissections (TBAD). From 2011 to 2017, TBAD patients who underwent LSA revascularization during TEVAR were enrolled. Technical success, endoleaks, mortality, complication, reintervention, and patency of target vessels were analyzed. 38 patients were included, 14 underwent carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB), and 24 underwent chimney graft (CG) implantation. Technical success rates were 92.9% and 100% in CSB and CG group. Eleven immediate type I endoleak (EL-I) was detected, including one from CSB group and ten from CG group. Three immediate type II endoleak (EL-II) was detected in CSB group. Perioperative complications showed no difference, but CSB group had longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay time. Median follow-up time was 26.2 months, and overall mortality was 14.3% and 0% in each group. Three EL-I and one EL-II underwent reintervention. All the LSA showed good patency, except one suffered from CG collapse. Both CSB and CG were feasible strategies to preserve the antegrade blood flow of LSA, and each strategy had its advantages and disadvantages. Based on our current experience, we preferred CG for high-risk patients. However, the evidence was still not strong enough, further well-designed studies are necessary to identify the criteria for LSA revascularization strategy during TEVAR.

VESS23. Implementation and Results of Practical Grading System for Thoracic Blunt Aortic Injury

Abstract Objective We previously proposed a grading system for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) designed to guide therapy. This study analyzed our outcomes since implementing this system. Methods A single-center, retrospective study was conducted of consecutive patients presenting with BTAI between January 2014 and December 2017. This grading system classified injuries into minimal, moderate, or severe on the basis of computed tomography imaging. Primary end points included timing of operation and mortality. Secondary end points included associated injuries, aortic anatomy, and operative details as well as 30-day follow-up. Results During the study period, 87 patients with BTAI were identified. The majority of patients had a moderate injury occurring just distal to the left subclavian artery (LSA); 59 patients underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), whereas none of the patients with minimal injury (n = 24) required surgical treatment. The mean time to repair was 53 hours (1-191 hours) for moderate injury and 3.6 hours (0-7 hours) for severe injury. The average diameter and length of the endograft was 26 mm and 112 cm, respectively, and the LSA was covered in 42% of patients. Intravascular ultrasound to confirm sizing was used in 83% of cases. Most patients (92%) received intravenous heparin during TEVAR; the remainder received only heparin sheath flush because of concern for intracranial hemorrhage. None of the patients underwent LSA revascularization or developed stroke or spinal cord ischemia as a result of the procedure. Operative complications were seen in 6% of patients and included 1 femoral pseudoaneurysm, 1 lower extremity compartment syndrome, 1 type II endoleak requiring LSA embolization, and 1 intracranial bleed. The 30-day mortality was 7% (one aorta-related death). On 30-day postoperative follow-up, computed tomography imaging uniformly revealed positive aortic remodeling, and no secondary aortic intervention was required. Conclusions Institutional implementation of our grading system has streamlined treatment of BTAI, and our results confirm the following: patients with minimal injury do not require surgical treatment; patients with moderate injury can safely undergo TEVAR in a semielective manner once they are stable from other injuries; and patients with severe injury require emergent repair. These procedures are expeditious and can be successfully performed percutaneously with a single endograft. Complications are rare, and follow-up reveals excellent remodeling of the aorta, likely resulting in lengthened interval surveillance requirements for these patients.

Short-term results of left subclavian artery salvage in blunt thoracic aortic injury with short proximal landing zones

ObjectiveThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the standard treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI). The concept of seal was derived from the treatment of aneurysms and has been adopted for BTAI. Given the location of injury in BTAI, left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage is sometimes necessary. In these often healthier aortas, a shorter proximal landing zone may be acceptable and beneficial in avoiding some complications. Current practice patterns vary, and long-term effects of LSA coverage remain unknown. MethodsA single-institution experience with BTAI for TEVAR was examined from 2006 to 2017. The primary outcome was failure of sealing, endoleak, or persistent aortic injury on follow-up imaging. A centerline was used to measure the length of the landing zone, aortic diameter, and other parameters. Post-TEVAR computed tomography scans were examined for evidence of residual aortic injury. ResultsA total of 30 TEVARs were performed for BTAI. The mean age of the patients was 38.7 years (standard deviation [SD], 19.8 years), and 70% were male. The mean injury severity score was 36.75 (SD, 13.1). Treated patients had grade 2 (36.7%) or grade 3 (63.3%) BTAI. The LSA was salvaged in 23 cases and covered in seven cases. The mean landing zone in LSA uncovered cases was 16 mm (SD, 10.4 mm). There were 15 patients (65%) who had a landing zone <20 mm, and eight (35%) patients had a landing zone >20 mm. The mean landing zone in the seven covered cases was 1.8 mm (SD, 2.4 mm). Procedural success was 96% for the uncovered group and 100% for the covered group. On follow-up imaging, there was only one residual endoleak in all surviving patients (n = 25). Five patients did not have postoperative imaging, two (7%) of whom died of nonaorta-related issues. ConclusionsTEVAR for BTAI in patients with short proximal landing zones of 10 to 20 mm as well as in select patients with landing zones of 5 to 10 mm appears to be safe and efficacious. The aorta demonstrates no residual injury after TEVAR, with the graft acting potentially more as a bridge to allow healing. Long-term issues regarding LSA coverage have been difficult to ascertain and to evaluate because of historically poor follow-up in this population of patients. However, potential issues with LSA coverage and revascularization may be avoided by preserving the subclavian artery even with shorter proximal landing zones.

Surgical left subclavian artery revascularization for thoracic aortic stent grafting: a single-centre experience in 101 patients.

To evaluate the indications, perioperative strategy and postoperative outcome of surgical left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization combined with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) covering the LSA. Between 2000 and 2017, a total of 101 consecutive patients underwent surgical revascularization of the LSA prior to, concomitant or following TEVAR. Revascularization was performed through a small supraclavicular incision and consisted of a transposition or bypass graft, using intraoperative transcranial Doppler monitoring. Data regarding indication, procedural details and postoperative results were retrospectively analysed. In total, 63 subclavian-carotid bypass grafts and 38 subclavian-carotid transpositions were performed in the context of TEVAR. The majority was performed prior to stent grafting to reduce the risk of stroke (n = 50), spinal cord ischaemia (n = 20), left arm malperfusion (n = 10) or to preserve a patent left internal mammary artery coronary bypass graft (n = 2). Secondary revascularization was performed in 14 patients, 2 times immediately due to acute left arm malperfusion and 12 times to treat invalidating left arm claudication. No in-hospital mortality and permanent spinal cord ischaemia occurred. Two (2%) ischaemic strokes were observed in patients with concomitant procedures, and none when separate, staged procedures were performed. Additional complications observed were permanent peripheral nerve palsies (9%), chyle leakage requiring diet (6%) and 1 bypass occlusion requiring a redo procedure. In patients predominantly selected upon the anticipated risk of (posterior) stroke, spinal cord ischaemia and left arm malperfusion, surgical revascularization of the LSA proved to be a safe treatment option to preserve antegrade LSA flow in the context of TEVAR.

Complex endovascular repair of postdissection arch and thoracoabdominal aneurysms

ObjectiveWe report our experience of the treatment of postdissection arch aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) by endovascular repair using fenestrated and branched endografts. MethodsThis study includes all patients presenting with chronic postdissection aneurysms >55 mm in diameter deemed unfit for open surgery and treated by complex endografting between October 2011 and April 2017. Where appropriate, staged management strategies including left subclavian artery revascularization, thoracic endografting, dissection flap fenestration, and tear enlargement were performed before the complex endovascular repair. Outcome data were collected prospectively, specifically including technical success, endoleaks, target vessel patency, aneurysm diameter, adverse events, reinterventions, and mortality. ResultsWe treated 40 patients with a median age of 63 years (55-71 years). In total, 43 procedures were performed: 19 arch repairs using inner branch endografts (one to three branches) and 24 TAAA repairs using fenestrated or branched endografts. Three patients were treated using both arch and TAAA repair. The median time between initial presentation with acute dissection and the first complex aortic repair was 5 years (3.0-10.0 years). Staged procedures were performed in 33 of 40 patients (82.5%). The technical success rate was 93%, the median procedure length was 240 minutes (170-285 minutes), and the median dose-area product was 80 Gy · cm2 (54.3-138.4 Gy · cm2). The 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates were 2.3% (1/43) and 4.7% (2/43), respectively. The spinal cord ischemia rate was 7% and occurred only after TAAA repair. One stroke with partial recovery and one transient ischemic attack were observed (4.7%) after arch repair. Six early reinterventions (14%) were performed: three for access complications, two to treat acute hemorrhage, and one to treat a type II endoleak. Median follow-up was 25.5 months (11-42.25 months). The 1- and 5-year survival rates were 90% and 76.4%, respectively. Late reinterventions were required in eight patients, two in the arch group (to treat endoleaks at 3 and 33 months) and six in the TAAA group (2 iliac and 1 bifurcated endograft extensions, 2 additional renal stents, 1 inferior mesenteric artery embolization). Aneurysm diameter was stable (72%) or shrank (23%) during follow-up. Enlargement was shown in two patients with endoleaks. ConclusionsComplex endovascular repair of postdissection aneurysms is a safe procedure in patients deemed unfit for open surgery. Our experience suggests that close follow-up is mandatory as secondary procedures are frequently required to completely exclude the false lumen.

Association of left subclavian artery coverage without revascularization and spinal cord ischemia in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A Vascular Quality Initiative® analysis

Objectives Investigate the impact of left subclavian artery coverage without revascularization on spinal cord ischemia development in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Methods The Vascular Quality Initiative thoracic endovascular aortic repair module (April 2011-July 2014) was analyzed. Patients undergoing left subclavian artery coverage were divided into two groups according to revascularization status. The association between left subclavian artery revascularization with the primary outcome of spinal cord ischemia and the secondary outcome of stroke was assessed with multivariable analysis adjusting for between-group baseline differences. Results The left subclavian artery was covered in 508 (24.6%) of the 2063 thoracic endovascular aortic repairs performed. Among patients with left subclavian artery coverage, 58.9% underwent revascularization. Spinal cord ischemia incidence was 12.1% in the group without revascularization compared to 8.5% in the group undergoing left subclavian artery revascularization (odds ratio (95%CI): 1.48(0.82-2.68), P = 0.189). Multivariable analysis adjustment identified an independent association between left subclavian artery coverage without revascularization and the incidence of spinal cord ischemia (adjusted odds ratio (95%CI): 2.29(1.03-5.14), P = 0.043). Although the incidence of stroke was also higher for the group with a covered and nonrevascularized left subclavian artery (12.1% versus 8.5%), this difference was not statistically significant after multivariable analysis (adjusted odds ratio (95%CI): 1.55(0.74-3.26), P = 0.244). Conclusion For patients undergoing left subclavian artery coverage during thoracic endovascular aortic repair, the addition of a revascularization procedure was associated with a significantly lower incidence of spinal cord ischemia.