Proximal Landing Zone Research Articles

Technical Aspects and Outcome of Multi-Staged and Single-Staged Thoracoabdominal Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair.

In some cases of endovascular thoracoabdominal or juxtarenal aortic aneurysm repair, a thoracic endograft in combination with a fenestrated renovisceral device may be needed in order to create a sufficient proximal landing zone. This study aimed to evaluate the technical aspects and postoperative morbidity of a single- or 2-stage approach. Eighty-seven consecutive patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in combination with elective fenestrated repair (fenestrated endovascular aortic repair [FEVAR]; fenestrated Anaconda device) from 2015 to 2022 were included in this retrospective bicentric study. Underlying pathologies, aortic morphology, technical details, and postoperative morbidity were recorded. Single-staged ("1S," n=61) and 2-staged ("2S," n=26) interventions were compared. Indications were thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAAs) (Crawford I-IV) (n=56, 64%) and juxtarenal aneurysms (n=31, 36%). In 2S, the proportion of TAAA was higher than in 1S (2S: 77%, 1S: 59%; p=0.001). In 2S, the covered length of the descending aorta was longer (1S: 128±60 mm, 2S: 202±64 mm; p=0.003). Temporary aneurysm sack perfusion (TASP) was established in 11 (18%) of 1S and 1 (4%) of 2S patients (p=0.079), as well as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage catheter in 48 (79%) of 1S and 19 (73%) of 2S. The rate of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) and the severity of SCI were not different in both groups, with a total of 3 cases of persisting paraplegia. The rate of access complications was higher in 2S (n=6, 23%) than in 1S (n=4, 7%; p=0.027). Postoperative 30 day morbidity did not significantly differ in both groups and neither did 30 day mortality (4.6% in 1S vs 3.8% in 2S; p=0.083). The combination of TEVAR and FEVAR using a fenestrated endograft is feasible and safe. Aortic morphology does not change significantly after endovascular repair. A single-staged strategy is feasible with excellent results, especially in Crawford IV, Crawford V, or juxtarenal aneurysms. Two-staged repair is recommended in cases with long aortic coverage and a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class. Follow-up data are needed to evaluate the long-term stability of the TEVAR/FEVAR interconnection. Our study has revealed the safety and efficacy of the combination of TEVAR and FEVAR in the treatment of TAAAs and juxtarenal aneurysms with compromised supravisceral landing zones. A single-staged concept is not necessary in all cases. Staged procedures may reduce postoperative morbidity in cases with long aortic coverage and higher ASA class.

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.

Abstract 3008: Aortic Arch Endovascular Stent Grafts With Zone 0 Proximal Landing Zones For Geometrically Complex Aortas

Objectives: Fluctuation in total curvature (δK) significantly outperforms all other available measurements of shape in predicting clinical outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). We aim to identify if the Nexus® Aortic Arch Stent Graft System is a suitable and safe treatment modality for aortas with high δK. Methods: Twenty-five patients that underwent transcatheter aortic arch repair using the Nexus stent graft were included. 3D aortic models were segmented from the CTA image data using Simpleware ScanIP. The aorta segmentations were then smoothed and the outer surface isolated. A triangular mesh from the outer surface was generated in Python, and the mesh was divided into a number of partitions. δK was calculated by the sum of per partition total curvatures and the fluctuation in total curvature across the entire manifold surface. Failed TEVAR was defined by a) any device-related mortality or b) unplanned or device-related secondary surgical intervention 30 days from index TEVAR. This data was plotted into a pre-defined (δK,L –1 )-feature space with pre-established machine learning-derived boundary conditions. Results: Within a (δK,L –1 )-feature space defined by patients with aortic stent grafts with zone 2 or 3 proximal landing zones, our group used predictive modeling to classify patients into three zones (normal, successful TEVAR, and unsuccessful TEVAR) with 92.8% mean accuracy. Within this pre-defined boundary zone of unsuccessful TEVAR, 72.2% (13/18) of patients with the Nexus stent graft with zone 0 proximal landing zone underwent a successful TEVAR without need for re-intervention. Conclusions: Transcatheter aortic arch repair with a single branch, two-stent graft system with a zone 0 proximal landing zone can offer patients with a high degree of aortic shape fluctuation a greater chance at successful TEVAR than traditional aortic stent grafts with zone 2 or 3 landing zones.

Early survival benefit of a low-profile endograft in blunt traumatic aortic injury

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a low-profile thoracic endograft (19-23 French) in subjects with blunt traumatic aortic injury. MethodsA prospective, multicenter study assessed the RelayPro thoracic endograft for the treatment of traumatic aortic injury. Fifty patients were enrolled at 16 centers in the United States between 2017 and 2021. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. ResultsThe cohort was mostly male (74%), with a mean age of 42.4 ± 17.2 years, and treated for traumatic injuries (4% Grade 1, 8% Grade 2, 76% Grade 3, and 12% Grade 4) due to motor vehicle collision (80%). The proximal landing zone was proximal to the left subclavian artery in 42%, and access was primarily percutaneous (80%). Most (71%) were treated with a non-bare stent endograft. Technical success was 98% (one early type Ia endoleak). All-cause 30-day mortality was 2% (compared with an expected rate of 8%), with an exact two-sided 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.1%, 10.6% below the performance goal upper limit of 25%. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated freedom from all-cause mortality to be 98% at 30 days through 4 years (95% CI, 86.6%-99.7%). Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from major adverse events, all-cause mortality, paralysis, and stroke, was 98.0% at 30 days and 95.8% from 6 months to 4 years (95% CI, 84.3%-98.9%). There were no strokes and one case of paraplegia (2%) during follow-up. ConclusionsRelayPro was safe and effective and may provide an early survival benefit in the treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injury.

Efficacy of intentional undersized thoracic endovascular repair for Stanford type B aortic dissection

ObjectiveThoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) is widely used for the treatment of aortic dissection. Endograft oversizing is a risk factor for stent graft-induced new entry tears and retrograde type A aortic dissection. However, there is no clear consensus on the optimal graft size selection for Stanford type B acute or subacute aortic dissection (TBAD). Herein, we examined the safety and efficacy of TEVAR using an intentionally undersized endograft to treat TBAD. MethodsThis retrospective chart review study included 82 patients who underwent TEVAR for acute or subacute Stanford TBAD between 2015 and 2022. We measured the true lumen diameter just distal to the subclavian artery and opted for a stent graft of the same diameter. In instances where deformation resulting from false lumen pressure displacement was pronounced, we measured the diameter at the site just proximal to the subclavian artery. Patients’ characteristics, procedural, in-hospital, and follow-up data, and aortic remodeling were analyzed. The aortic diameter was analyzed using one-way analysis of variance followed by Dunnett’s test. Survival and freedom from reintervention were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. ResultsThe follow-up rate was 98.4%. The mean age was 58.3 ± 12.3 years, and 76 were men (92.7%). The mean diameters of the stent graft and native proximal landing zone were 30.9 ± 3.2 mm and 30.8 ± 3.0 mm, respectively. The oversize rate of the stent graft in relation to the native proximal aortic diameter was 0.3% ± 4.7%. In-hospital mortality was observed in one patient, retrograde type A aortic dissection in one patient, distal stent graft-induced new entry tear in zero patients, and type 1a endoleak in 22 patients (26.8%). Type 1a endoleaks, characterized by antegrade false lumen blood flow originating from the primary entry, in 12 patients spontaneously disappeared within 1 year of follow-up. According to aortic remodeling, 59 patients (86.8%) achieved complete aortic remodeling at the aortic arch level and 51 (75.0%) at the eighth thoracic vertebral level. The diameters of the aortic arch and descending aorta were significantly reduced compared with the postoperative measurements (P <.001). Survival rates were 97.5% and 93.6% at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Freedom from reintervention was 84.7% and 84.7% at 1 and 3 years, respectively. ConclusionsIntentionally undersized TEVAR was safe and achieved acceptable aortic remodeling despite a high rate of type 1a endoleaks. A type 1a endoleak was acceptable as it primarily diminished during the mid-term follow-up.

Endovascular repair of bilateral isolated common iliac artery aneurysms with unsuitable anatomy utilizing an aortic bifurcated unibody endograft and modified sandwich technique to preserve pelvic blood flow: a case series

Bilateral isolated common iliac artery aneurysms (CIAAs) are rare, and endovascular repair of CIAAs has emerged as an alternative to traditional open surgical repair. The primary goal of therapy is to exclude the aneurysm sac while maintaining perfusion of at least one internal iliac artery (IIA) to prevent pelvic ischemia. Although the iliac branch device (IBD) has improved the feasibility of preserving the IIA, its applicability is limited to a specific subset of aneurysm anatomy. We present a case series of three patients with bilateral isolated CIAAs in whom preoperative CT scans revealed an absence of a landing zone, the diameter of proximal CIA diameter was less than 13.0 mm, and normal diameter of the nonaneurysmal infrarenal aorta, making it challenging to use an IBD alone or a standard bifurcated aortic endograft to provide a proximal landing zone for iliac artery stenting. To overcome the small diameter of the infrarenal aorta, we implanted an aortic bifurcated unibody endograft. Then, we utilized a balloon-expandable covered stent-graft with overdilation as a modified sandwich technique to create an “eye of the tiger” configuration to prevent gutter leakage. The final angiography performed during the procedure revealed successful exclusion of the aneurysms, with blood flow to the right IIA and no type III endoleak. During the postoperative follow-up period, no patients exhibited symptoms associated with pelvic ischemia. There were no endoleaks or sac expansions on the two-year follow-up CT scans, and all external and internal iliac graft limbs were patent. This study demonstrated that a combination of an aortic bifurcated unibody endograft and a modified sandwich technique can effectively treat bilateral isolated CIAAs with certain anatomical constraints.

Surgeon-modified fenestrated endovascular grafts and thoracoscope-assisted fixation for treatment of thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Total endovascular technique with fenestrated endovascular graft might be hampered for the late dilatation of proximal landing zone, which may cause endografts migration. We describe a successful urgent hybrid procedure for extent III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm with aortic intramural hematoma. A 55-year-old female with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm was considered at high surgical risk and unfit for open repair due to multiple comorbidities. Therefore, a hybrid procedure of surgeon-modified fenestrated endovascular graft combined with thoracoscope-assisted Transaortic epicardial fixation of endograft was finally chosen and performed in the endovascular operating room. A 3-port technique was performed through a left video-assisted thoracoscopic approach. After the first tampering stent-graft was deployed, a double-needle suture was penetrated both the aortic wall and stent-graft to fixate it in the proximal descending aorta. Then the second endograft, which had been fenestrated on table, was introduced and oriented extracorporeally by rotating superior mesenteric artery and left renal artery fenestration radiopaque markers and deployed with perfect apposition between the fenestrations and target visceral artery. Each vessel was sequentially stented using Viabahn self-expandable stent to finish target vessel stenting. An Ankura cuff stent was deployed in the distal abdominal aortic artery. Surgeon-modified fenestrated endovascular graft combined with thoracoscope-assisted fixation may be an innovative and viable alternative for selected high-risk patients with extent III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm. A longer follow-up is needed to ascertain the success of this approach.

Branched and fenestrated endovascular aortic arch repair in patients with native proximal aortic landing zone

ObjectiveFenestrated and branched thoracic endovascular repair (f/bTEVAR) have been successfully applied in patients with diverse aortic arch pathologies. The aim of this study is to present the early and mid-term outcomes of patients with native proximal aortic landing (NPAL) managed with f/bTEVAR. MethodsA single-center retrospective analysis of patients with NPAL, managed with f/bTEVAR, between September 1, 2011, and June 30, 2022, was conducted. All patients were treated with custom-made devices (Cook Medical) with landing within Ishimaru zones 0 to 2. Primary outcomes were technical success, mortality, stroke, and retrograde type A dissection at 30 days. Follow-up outcomes were considered secondary. ResultsA total of 126 patients were included (69.8% males; mean age, 70.8 ± 4.2 years; 18.3% urgent). The main indications (60.4%) for repair were aortic arch (29.4%) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (31.0%). Seventy-two patients (57.1%) were managed with fTEVAR. Proximal landing in zone 0 and 1 was chosen in 97.6%. Technical success was 94.4%, and 30-day mortality was 11.9%. Strokes were diagnosed in 13.5% of patients and major strokes were identified in 7.9% cases. Retrograde type A dissection rate was 3.9%. The multivariate analysis confirmed landing in Ishimaru zone 0 as an independently related factor for stroke (P = .005), whereas stroke (P < .001), pericardial effusion (P < .001), and acute kidney injury (P < .001) were independently related to 30-day mortality. Mean follow-up was 17.5 ± 9.3 months. The estimated survival rate and the freedom from reintervention rate were 72.6% (standard error, 4.4%) and 46.4% (standard error, 6.0%) at 24-month follow-up, respectively. ConclusionsStroke rate after endovascular arch repair was alarming among patients with NPAL. Proximal landing to zone 0 was related to higher risk of stroke. Reinterventions were common within the 24-month follow-up.

Total aortic arch repair with double-fenestrated physician-modified endografts, at least 3-year follow-up

ObjectiveThis study aims to report the efficacy and safety of double-fenestrated physician-modified endovascular grafts (PMEGs) for total aortic arch repair with at least 3 years of follow-up. MethodsAll consecutive patients with a pathological aortic arch who underwent aortic arch repair combined with a homemade double-fenestrated stent graft from 2017 to 2020 were reviewed. Results74 patients were treated for pathological arch conditions with a double-fenestrated PMEG. Of these, 81% were male, the mean age was 69.9 years, and 59% were classified as American Society of Anesthesiology 3 or 4. Thirty-five percent were treated for a postdissection aneurysm, 36% for a degenerative aneurysm, and 14% for acute type B dissection. Fifteen percent had supra-aortic trunk dissection. Fenestration on the subclavian artery was performed in 96%; if not, a carotid-subclavian bypass was carried out. Technical success was 100%. The proximal landing zone is consistently in zone 0. Early outcomes revealed a 3% occurrence of type 1 endoleak, which was successfully treated by prompt reintervention. One retrograde dissection occurred, and one patient died from hemorrhage on an iliac conduit. A 5% stroke rate was reported. During long-term follow-up (mean time 40.7 months), one type 1 endoleak appeared and was successfully treated; no type 2 or type 3 endoleak requiring intervention occurred. No stent fractures or migrations were reported. Four percent of patients required reintervention, but no surgical conversion to open surgical repair was needed on the aortic arch. No patient died from a cause related to the main procedure. ConclusionsTotal aortic arch repair with double-fenestrated PMEGs is associated with acceptable early and midterm major morbidity and mortality. It is suitable for the main aortic pathologies. Moreover, it is easily available for emergency situations.

Modified upside-down technique with Gore tapered iliac limbs for isolated iliac artery aneurysms.

To describe the off-label use of tapered iliac limbs for the treatment of isolated iliac aneurysms with proximal landing zone significantly larger than distal landing zone. Inversion of a Gore Excluder tapered leg (W. L. Gore & Associates Inc, Flagstaff, Arizona) with a modified upside-down technique is described. The endoprosthesis, with the olive at the tip of the releasing system previously cut, is inserted in a tip-to-tip fashion into a 15 Fr introducer sheath. The graft is released inside the introducer. An 18 Fr introducer sheath is advanced up to the proximal sealing zone. Following the removal of the 18 Fr dilator, the 15 Fr introducer with the pre-released graft is inserted co-axially into the 18 Fr introducer. A pre-cut 15 Fr dilator is brought up to the endograft and used as a pusher. A pull-back maneuver of the co-axial system, countertractioning with the dilator maintained in position, allows the delivery of the endograft. This technique might offer a feasible option in case of endovascular exclusion of isolated iliac artery aneurysms with significant landing zone diameter mismatch. Extracorporeal inversion is time-saving and could be safer in terms of graft damage and infection.

A Retrospective Analysis of 10-year Experience on Branched and Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair.

This study aimed to present the early and mid-term outcomes of fenestrated/branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (f/bTEVAR) for aortic arch pathologies. f/bTEVAR represents a less invasive treatment option for aortic arch diseases. Previous published series showed decreased early mortality and morbidity compared to open repair. A single-center retrospective analysis of consecutive patients, managed with f/bTEVAR (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) between 01.09.11and 30.06.22 was conducted. Primary outcomes were technical success, 30-day mortality and stroke. Data during follow-up and factors affecting early mortality and stroke were analyzed. 209 patients were included (38.3% females; mean age 69.8±3.4years; mean aortic diameter 61±4.7mm); 14.4% were managed urgently. Fenestrations/scallop configuration was used in 39.7%, branched devices in 55.5% and branch/scallop combination in 4.8%. Landing to zone 0 was performed in 65.5% and in zone 1 in 32.1%. Non-native aortas were used for landing in 39.2%. Technical success was 97.1% and 30-day mortality 9.5%. Strokes were identified in 10%; 5.7% major. Non-native proximal aortic landing zone was an independent protective factor for stroke (P=0.002). Post-operative stroke (P<0.001) and pericardial effusion (P<0.001) were independently related to 30-day mortality. The mean follow-up was 21±8 months. The estimated survival and freedom from reintervention rates were 79.5% (standard error; SE3.1%) and 47.1% (SE 4.3%) at 24months, respectively. f/bTEVAR presented high technical success and acceptable 30-day mortality. Non-native proximal landing zone was related to lower stroke rate. Half of patients needed a reintervention within the 24-month follow-up.

Surgical Treatment for Type A Aortic Dissection after Endovascular Aortic Repair: A 12-year, Single-Center Study.

This study aims to investigate the clinical manifestations, operative techniques, and outcomes of patients who undergo open repair after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). From January 2010 to June 2022, 113 consecutive type A aortic dissection (TAAD) patients underwent secondary open operation after TEVAR at our institution, and the median interval from primary intervention to open surgery was 12 (1.9-48.0) months. We divided the patients into two groups (RTAD (retrograde type A dissection) group, N = 56; PNAD (proximal new aortic dissection) group, N = 57) according to their anatomical features. Survival analysis during the follow-up was evaluated using a Kaplan-Meier survival curve and a log-rank test. The 30-day mortality was 6.2% (7/113), the median follow-up period was 31.7 (IQR 14.7-65.6) months, and the overall survival at 1year, 5years, and 10years was 88.5%, 88.5%, and 87.6%, respectively. Fourteen deaths occurred during the follow-up, but there were no late aorta-related deaths. Three patients underwent total thoracoabdominal aortic replacement 1year after a second open operation. The RTAD group had a smaller ascending aorta size (42.5 ± 7.7mm vs 48.4 ± 11.4mm; P < .01) and a closer proximal landing zone (P < .01) compared to the PNAD group. However, there were no differences in survival between the two groups. TAAD can present as an early or a late complication after TEVAR due to stent-grafting-related issues or disease progression. Open operation can be performed to treat TAAD, and this has acceptable early and mid-term outcomes. Follow-up should become mandatory for patients after TEVAR because these patients are at increased risk for TAAD.

Endovascular aortic repair in patients with Marfan and Loeys-Dietz syndrome is safe and durable when employed by a multi-disciplinary aortic team.

The aim of this study was to report on mid-term outcomes after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in patients with Marfan (MFS) or Loeys-Dietz (LDS) syndrome. We analysed data from 2 European centres of patients with MFS and LDS undergoing EVAR. Patients were analysed based on (i) timing of the procedure (planned versus emergency procedure) and (ii) the nature of the landing zone (safe versus non-safe). The primary end-point was freedom from reintervention. Secondary end-points were freedom from stroke, bleeding and death. A population of 419 patients with MFS (n = 352) or LDS (n = 67) was analysed for the purpose of this study. Thirty-nine patients (9%) underwent EVAR. Indications for thoracic endovascular aortic repair or EVAR were aortic dissection in 13 (33%) patients, aortic aneurysm in 22 (57%) patients and others (intercostal patch aneurysm, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, pseudoaneurysm, kinking of frozen elephant trunk (FET)) in 4 (10%) patients. Thoracic endovascular repair was performed in 34 patients, and abdominal endovascular aortic repair was performed in 5 patients. Mean age at 1st thoracic endovascular aortic repair/EVAR was 48.5 ± 15.4 years. Mean follow-up after 1st thoracic endovascular aortic repair/EVAR was 5.9 ± 4.4 years. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of reinterventions between patients with non-safe landing zone and the patients with safe proximal landing zone (P = 0.609). Furthermore, there was no increased probability for reintervention after planned endovascular intervention compared to emergency procedures (P = 0.916). Mean time to reintervention, either open surgical or endovascular, after planned endovascular intervention was in median 3.9 years (95% confidence interval 2.0-5.9 years) and 2.0 years (95% confidence interval -1.1 to 5.1 years) (P = 0.23) after emergency procedures. EVAR in patients with MFS and LDS and a safe landing zone is feasible and safe. Endovascular treatment is a viable option when employed by a multi-disciplinary aortic team even if the landing zone is in native tissue.

Early and Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair Using In Situ Laser Fenestration.

The aim of this study is to present single-center outcomes in patients treated with in situ laser fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair (LFTEVAR) for various aortic arch pathologies and assess the impact of increasing experience. The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was followed. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected single aortic center data was conducted, including baseline information and peri- and post-operative outcomes of consecutive patients managed with LFTEVAR for aortic arch pathologies. Patients were enrolled from April 1, 2017 to January 31, 2023. The cohort was dichotomized to compare early (2017-2019) and late experience (2020-2023). Primary outcomes were peri-operative mortality and cerebrovascular morbidity. Thirty patients were included (63.3% males, mean age 69.8±9.6 years); 21.4% presented with aortic ruptures. Aortic aneurysm involving the aortic arch was the most frequent pathology (53.3%). Forty target vessels (TVs) were revascularized, including 19 left subclavian arteries (47.5%) and 17 left common carotid arteries (42.5%). Double fenestrations were performed in 10 patients. The proximal landing zone was Ishimaru zone 0 in 5 patients (16.7%) and zone 1 in 13 patients (43.3%). Technical success was 93%. No spinal cord ischemia was recorded, and 3 patients (10%) suffered a post-operative stroke, of which 1 was major (3.3%). The median follow-up was 12 months (range=1-48 months). Thirty-day and follow-up mortality rates were 13.5% and 15.3%, respectively. Target vessel instability was 10%, of which 3.8% required reintervention. There was no statistically significant difference in outcomes between the early and late experience groups. Laser fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair of the aortic arch performed in experienced aortic centers is associated with low early mortality and stroke rates. It is a safe and effective therapeutic option in patients considered unfit for open repair. Custom-made devices for arch pathologies requiring urgent repair are not an option because of manufacturing delays. Off-the-shelf devices with single branch arch prostheses, and outside IFU techniques such as parallel-grafts and surgeon-modified endografts have been proposed in this setting. Another off-the-shelf alternative is in situ laser fenestration thoracic endovascular repair (LFTEVAR), which addresses many limitations of the other off-the-shelf options. Our study reports the outcomes of 30 patients treated with LFTEVAR, showing that it is a viable therapeutic option in patients considered unfit for open repair acknowledging that sufficient experience with complex endovascular aortic repair is mandatory to achieve acceptable outcomes in these high-risk patients with challenging aortic anatomies.

Clinical comparative analysis of 3D printing-assisted extracorporeal pre-fenestration and Castor integrated branch stent techniques in treating type B aortic dissections with inadequate proximal landing zones

BackgroundThis study aims to compare the clinical effects of two distinct surgical approaches, namely 3D printing-assisted extracorporeal pre-fenestration and Castor integrated branch stent techniques, in treating patients with Stanford type B aortic dissections (TBAD) characterized by inadequate proximal landing zones.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 84 patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery (LSA) reconstruction at our center from January 2022 to July 2023. Based on the different surgical approaches, the patients were divided into two groups: the group assisted by 3D printing for extracorporeal pre-fenestration (n = 44) and the group using the castor integrated branch stent (n = 40). Clinical indicators: including general patient information, operative time, surgical success rate, intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, re-intervention rate, and mortality, as well as postoperative aortic remodeling, were compared between the two groups. The endpoint of this study is the post-TEVAR mortality rate in patients.ResultsThe surgical success rate and device deployment success rate were 100% in both groups, with no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). However, the group assisted by 3D printing for extracorporeal pre-fenestration had a significantly longer operative time (184.20 ± 54.857 min) compared to the group using the castor integrated branch stent (152.75 ± 33.068 min), with a statistically significant difference (t = 3.215, p = 0.002, P < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of postoperative cerebral infarction and beak sign was significantly lower in the group assisted by 3D printing for extracorporeal pre-fenestration compared to the castor-integrated branch stent group, demonstrating statistical significance. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of other postoperative complication rates and aortic remodeling (P > 0.05). Notably, computed tomography angiography images revealed the expansion of the vascular true lumen and the reduction of the false lumen at three specified levels of the thoracic aorta. The follow-up duration did not show any statistically significant difference between the two groups (10.59 ± 4.52 vs. 9.08 ± 4.35 months, t = 1.561, p = 0.122 > 0.05). Throughout the follow-up period, neither group experienced new endoleaks, spinal cord injuries, nor limb ischemia. In the castor-integrated branch stent group, one patient developed a new distal dissection, prompting further follow-up. Additionally, there was one case of mortality due to COVID-19 in each group. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of re-intervention rate and survival rate (P > 0.05).ConclusionBoth 3D printing-assisted extracorporeal pre-fenestration TEVAR and castor-integrated branch stent techniques demonstrate good safety and efficacy in treating Stanford type B aortic dissection with inadequate proximal anchoring. The 3D printing-assisted extracorporeal pre-fenestration TEVAR technique has a lower incidence of postoperative cerebral infarction and beak sign, while the castor-integrated branch stent technique has advantages in operative time.

Utilizing physician modified fenestration on the castor branched stent technique for reconstruction of an isolated left vertebral artery on the aortic arch

The study aimed to provide physician modified fenestration (PMF) on a single-branched stent for the aortic arch (Castor) to protect the isolated left vertebral artery (ILVA) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Patients who underwent TEVAR involving ILVA reconstruction through PMF performing on the Castor branched stent were included in a retrospective, multi-centre study from June 2018 to December 2022. In these patients, all proximal landing zones of "Castor" were positioned in Ishimaru zone 2a. A total of twenty-five patients met the inclusion criteria and the achievement rate showed 25/25 (100%) success in them. The twenty-five patients had a median follow-up length of 28.5 ± 14.6 months. One patient (4.0%) suffered from postoperative ischemic stroke before discharge. One patient (4.0%) died from a hemodialysis-related brain hemorrhage before discharge on the 29th day after the procedure. One patient died of advanced liver cancer in the 33th month after discharge. Aortic rupture, stroke or spinal cord injury did not occur throughout the follow-up period after discharge. Two patients (8.0%) experienced endoleak at the fenestration, however, resulting in only one’s necessity for reintervention. Notably, the procedure effectively maintained ILVAs patency for all patients during follow up. According to our preliminary findings, performing a TEVAR under local anaesthesia using PMF on a Castor branched stent for ILVA preservation appeared practical, secure, and effective.

Impact on early outcome after endovascular repair of type B dissection without proximal landing zone using Castor single-branched stent graft-a retrospective cohort study.

The early safety and efficacy of Castor branch stents have been demonstrated. However, the effect of aortic arch morphology on endovascular therapy remains an unresolved issue. This study aims to assess the impact of aortic arch morphology on the early outcomes of endovascular repair using Castor stent graft in patients who have acute type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery (LSA). This is a retrospective cohort study. From January 2019 to December 2021, forty-one patients scheduled for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of TBADs from Beijing Anzhen Hospital were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study and divided into two groups based on the length of the proximal landing zone left common carotid artery-LSA (PLZ LCCA-LSA), specifically the distance between the LCCA and the LSA (group A ≤10 mm and group B >10 mm). The study recorded technical success, mortality and aortic-related post-operative adverse events. Morphological indices were analyzed including the bird-beak configuration. The bird-beak configuration refers to the wedge-shaped gap between the undersurface of the endograft and the lesser curvature of the arch. The relationship between the risk of bird-beak configuration and PLZ was assessed with logistic regression analysis. Meanwhile, the relationship between the risk of aortic-related adverse events and bird-beak configuration was assessed with logistic regression analysis. Follow-up data were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier life table analysis. The study included 41 patients with a mean age of 63.1±9.2 years, of which 80.5% were male. 18 patients from group A and 23 patients from group B were included in the comparative analysis. There were no significant differences in aortic-related adverse events, bird-beak phenomenon and re-intervention between groups A and B in 30-day outcomes. Six-month outcomes: aortic-related adverse events and the bird-beak phenomenon were observed in 11 (26.8%) and 12 (29.3%) patients, respectively. There was a significant difference in the occurrence of aortic-related adverse events (P=0.036) and bird-beak phenomenon (P=0.002) between groups A and B. In comparison to group B, the aortic-related adverse event rate was significantly higher in group A, with event-free rates of 83.3%, 83.3%, and 72.2% at 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively (P=0.020). Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that PLZ LCCA-LSA length [odds ratio (OR) 0.79; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.97; P=0.026] was significantly associated with the occurrence of the bird-beak configuration, and bird-beak (OR 17.19; 95% CI: 2.24 to 131.81; P=0.006) was a significant risk factor for aortic-related adverse events. TEVAR with LSA revascularization has good early outcomes. However, it is more susceptible to aortic adverse events when the PLZ LCCA-LSA is less than 10 mm in length. This should be carefully considered, taking into account the risks and benefits.

Hemodynamic changes for half cover left subclavian artery ostium during thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Some clinicians use endografts to cover half the left subclavian artery (LSA) ostium to cure some cases with insufficient proximal landing zone (PLZ) in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) treatment. We used computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to study the hemodynamic changes in the LSA because they may cause acute thrombosis or arteriosclerosis. The digital model of the aortic arch was established and named model A, which only included the supraarch branch of the LSA. By directly covering half of the LSA ostium, which was named as model B. All established models were imported into the Gambit grid division software for grid division and were subsequently imported into the Fluent software for hemodynamic numerical simulation and calculation to analyze the related changes in LSA hemodynamic parameters after stent implantation. Under the same aortic inlet flow, in model B, the local blood flow velocity of the LSA ostium increased and the whole blood flow velocity at the distal end decreased. The average wall shear stress (WSS) of the LSA was significantly decreased. Meanwhile there was an obvious turbulent flow in the LSA lumen, and the related blood flow state was disordered. CFD research confirmed that the implantation of an endograft covering half the LSA ostium can cause obvious hemodynamic changes, which is likely to cause a long-term arteriosclerosis or acute thrombosis of the LSA, finally increasing the risk of stroke. Once this operation is performed in some specific clinical cases for simplicity and economy, it seems that we should actively antiplatelet and follow up regularly.

Urgent endovascular treatment of juxtarenal aneurysm using a parallel grafts technique.

Abdominal aortic aneurysms can constitute a therapeutic challenge in several anatomical scenarios, making endovascular treatment more complex. A juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (JR-AAA) is defined by the absence of a proximal landing zone in the infrarenal segment and, therefore, techniques must be used to obtain an adequate neck for fixing the endoprostheses without provoking occlusion of renal arteries and visceral branches. The parallel grafts technique, physician-modified stent-graft, industry customized endoprostheses, and off-the-shelf branched endoprosthesis are techniques used in abdominal aneurysms with inadequate proximal neck, but each technique has its indications, limitations, and risks. In this therapeutic challenge, we present a case of urgent endovascular treatment of a JR-AAA using a parallel grafts technique, with good medium-term results, and discuss the therapeutic options.

Impact of chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease on outcomes after complex endovascular and open aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveChronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease are traditionally associated with worse outcomes after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and open aneurysm repair (OAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). However, there needs to be more data on complex AAA repair involving the aorta's visceral segment. This study stratifies complex AAA repair outcomes by CKD severity and dialysis dependence. MethodsAll patients undergoing elective OAR and fenestrated/branched EVAR (F-BEVAR) for complex AAA with preoperative renal function data captured by the Vascular Quality Initiative between January 2003 and September 2020 were analyzed. Patients were stratified by CKD class as follows: normal/mild (CKD 1 and 2), moderate (CKD class 3a), moderate to severe (CKD 3b), severe (CKD class 4 and 5), and dialysis. Only patients with clamp sites above one of the renal arteries were included for complex OAR. For F-BEVAR, patients with proximal landing zones below zone 5 (above celiac artery) were included, and distal landing zones between zones 1 and 5 were excluded. Primary outcomes were perioperative and 1-year mortality. Predictors of mortality were identified by Cox multivariate regression models. ResultsWe identified 7849 elective complex AAA repairs: 4230 (54%) complex OARs and 3619 (46%) F-BEVARs. Most patients were White (89%) and male (74%), with an average age of 72 ± 8 years. The patients who underwent F-BEVAR were older and had more comorbidities. Elective F-BEVAR for complex AAA started in 2012 and increased from 1.4% in 2012 to 58% in 2020 (P < .001). The OAR cohort had more perioperative complications, but less 1-year mortality. The normal/mild CKD cohort had the highest 1-year survival compared with other groups after both complex OAR and F-BEVAR. On Cox regression analysis, when compared with CKD 1-2, worsening CKD stage (CKD 3b: hazard ratio [HR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.82-3.40; P < .001; CKD 4-5: HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.16-3.26; P = .011; and dialysis: HR, 4.4; 95% CI, 2.53-7.72; P < .001) were independently associated with 1-year survival after F-BEVAR. After complex OAR, worsening CKD stage but not dialysis was associated with 1-year mortality compared with CKD 1-2 (CKD 3b: HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.13-2.35; P = .009; CKD 4-5: HR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.03-5.79; P < .001). ConclusionsCKD severity is an essential predictor of perioperative and 1-year mortality after complex AAA repair, irrespective of the treatment modality, which may reflect the natural history of CKD. Consideration should be given to raising the threshold for elective AAA repair in patients with moderate to severe CKD and end-stage renal disease, given the high 1-year mortality rate.