Standard Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Research Articles

Comparative Evaluation of the Short-Term Outcome of Different Endovascular Aortic Arch Procedures.

Objectives: There are several endovascular treatment options to treat aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts. This study seeks to assess endovascular treatment methods for aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), comparing different treatment methods and evaluating technical success, intraoperative parameters and short-term outcomes. Methods: All patients undergoing elective or emergency endovascular treatment of aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies, with no acceptable landing zone for standard TEVAR, between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2024, at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany were included. An acceptable landing zone was defined as a minimum of 2 cm for sufficient sealing. All patients were not suitable for open surgery. Patients were categorized by an endovascular treatment method for a comprehensive comparison of pre-, intra- and postoperative variables. IBM SPSS29 was used for data analysis. Results: The patient cohort comprised 21 patients, predominantly males (81%), with an average age of 70.9 ± 9 years with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard TEVAR procedure. The most treated aortic pathologies were penetrating aortic ulcers and chronic post-dissection aneurysms. Patients were sub-grouped according to the applied procedure as follows: five patients with chimney thoracic endovascular aortic repair (chTEVAR), seven patients with in situ fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (isfTEVAR), six patients with custom-made fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmfTEVAR) and three patients with custom-made branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmbTEVAR). Emergency procedures involved two patients. There were significant differences in the total procedure and fluoroscopy time, as well as in contrast agent usage among the treatment groups. cmfTEVAR had the shortest total procedure time, while chTEVAR exhibited the highest contrast agent usage. The overall mortality rate among all procedures was 9.5% (two patients) and 4.7% for elective procedures, respectively. Deaths were associated with either retrograde type A dissection or stent graft infection. Both patients were treated with chTEVAR. There was one minor and one major stroke; these patients were treated with isfTEVAR. No endoleak occurred during any procedure. The reintervention rate for chTEVAR was 20% and 0% for all other procedures during the in-hospital stay. The patients who were treated with cmfTEVAR had no complications, the shortest operating and fluoroscopy time, and less contrast agent was needed in comparison with other treatment methods. Conclusions: Complex endovascular procedures of the aortic arch with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts offer a safe solution, with acceptable complication rates for patients who are not suitable for open aortic arch repair. In terms of procedure-related parameters and complication rates, a custom-made fenestrated TEVAR is potentially advantageous compared to the other endovascular techniques.

Six Years' Experience With a Novel Dissection-Specific Stent-Graft to Prevent Distal Stent-Graft-Induced New Entry.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in chronic dissection is associated with a risk for distal stent-graft-induced new entry (dSINE) in up to a quarter of cases. We assess the mid-term outcome of a novel dissection-specific stent-graft (DSSG), which is a custom-made device based on the Cook Alpha platform, with a modified graft design and a distal endovascular elephant trunk without any supporting stent to reduce the radial force on the dissection membrane at the distal landing zone. A retrospective single-center study of chronic dissection patients at high risk of dSINE who received an elective endovascular repair with DSSG from January 2017 to June 2023. The primary outcome is Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimated freedom from dSINE during follow-up. Secondary outcomes included technical success, aortic remodeling, and anatomical evaluation of the distal landing zone in cases with dSINE during follow-up versus those without. Thirty patients (24 males) with a median age of 66 years [range=31-78] underwent elective TEVAR with the DSSG. The majority, n=27 (90%), had previous aortic repair; 7 (23%) had established connective tissue disease, and 6 (20%) had established dSINE after previous stent-graft implantation as an indication for TEVAR. Technical success was achieved in n=29 (97%). Median follow-up was 38.5 months (4.3-76.4), and KM estimated freedom from dSINE at 1 and 3 years was 95.6% (SE 0.043) and 89% (SE 0.081), respectively Four cases developed dSINE during follow-up. The median distance from the distal stent-graft to the coeliac trunk was 74mm (range=18-123) in the dSINE group versus 26mm (range=0-74) in the non-dSINE group (p=0.049). Median proximal tangential aortic angulation in the distal landing zone was 38.5° (range=26°-50°) in the dSINE group compared to 21° (range=3-61°) in the non-dSINE group (p=0.052). The Use of a novel DSSG with low radial force for TEVAR in the setting of chronic dissection is safe and feasible, with remodeling outcomes comparable with standard TEVAR. The reduced distal radial force in the DSSG does not eliminate the risk for dSINE over time, with new entries occurring, particularly in cases where the distal landing zone is in a tortuous aortic segment and not close to the coeliac trunk. Using the novel dissection-specific stent-graft with reduced radial force is safe and feasible but does not completely eliminate the risk of dSINE occurring over time. The exact positioning of the distal stent-graft in a straight aortic segment, close to the coeliac trunk, may be of importance to further mitigate the risk.

STABILISE (Stent-Assisted Balloon-Induced Intimal Disruption and Relamination in Aortic Dissection Repair) Is Associated With Good Anatomical Results on the Distal Thoracoabdominal Aorta at 2 Years.

The aim of this comparative study was to evaluate the increased aortic diameter of the distal aorta after implementing the STABILISE technique in complicated type B aortic dissection (AD). This is a comparative monocentric retrospective study. All patients who underwent an STABILISE procedure for complicated AD between 2018 and 2020 were included and compared with a historic cohort treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) alone. Aortic diameters were measured at 6 different levels on the thoracic and abdominal aorta. The primary end point was an increased aortic diameter at 1 and 2 years. The exclusion criterion was the absence of a computed tomography (CT) scan at 1 or 2 years. A total of 55 patients were included: 24 in the TEVAR group and 31 in the STABILISE group. At the level of the stent graft, there was a decrease in aortic diameters in both groups without significant differences. At the level of the distal aorta, there was an increase in aortic diameters in both groups without significant differences. There were significantly more patients in the TEVAR group with an unfavorable increase in aortic diameter >5 mm of the distal aorta at 2 years than in the STABILISE group: 8 (33%) vs 1 (3%) (p=0.01). For chronic ADs, a significantly greater increase in aortic diameters of the distal aorta was observed in the STABILISE group. The STABILISE technique is technically feasible and potentially leads to decreased longer re-intervention rates; indeed, more patients had an unfavorable increase in aortic diameter in the TEVAR group than in the STABILISE group at 2 years. The high rate of long-term distal aortic aneurysm progression and reintervention after TEVAR alone suggests that this option is not sufficient to definitively treat these complex patients. This article reported the results of stent assisted balloon induced intimal disruption and relamination (STABILISE) with a follow-up at 2 years. This is the first comparative study between STABILISE, which has emerged as a new technique inducing aortic remodeling and therefore better long-term outcome, and the standard technique TEVAR alone. STABILISE technique is associated with good results on the distal aorta at 2 years with a rate of patient with unfavorable aortic diameter evolution greater in TEVAR group compared to STABILISE group and could improve the long-term results on the distal aorta by inducing extensive aortic remodeling.

STOP-Bang Questionnaire Is Associated With Aortic Remodeling in Patients With Acute Type B Aortic Dissection Undergoing Standard Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

To determine whether the STOP-Bang questionnaire, which is a tool for evaluating obstructive sleep apnea, is associated with aortic remodeling after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD). Patients with TBAD who underwent standard TEVAR at our center from January 2015 to December 2020 were enrolled. For the included patients, we recorded baseline characteristics, comorbidities, preoperative computed tomographic angiography findings, procedure details, and complications. The STOP-Bang questionnaire was administered to each patient. Total scores comprised points for 4 yes/no questions and 4 clinical measurements. STOP-Bang ≥5 and STOP-Bang <5 groups were then created using the STOP-Bang total scores. We evaluated aortic remodeling 1 year after discharge and the reintervention rate, as well as false lumen complete thrombosis (FLCT) and non-FLCT length. Fifty-five patients were enrolled in the study; STOP-Bang <5, n=36, and STOP-Bang ≥5, n=19. Compared with the STOP-Bang ≥5 group, the STOP-Bang <5 group achieved statistically significantly higher descending aorta positive aortic remodeling (PAR) rates in zones 3 to 5 (zone 3: p=0.002; zone 4: p=0.039; zone 5: p=0.023), higher total descending aorta-PAR rate (66.7% vs 36.8%, respectively; p=0.004), and lower reintervention rate (8.1% vs 38.9%, respectively; p=0.005). In the logistic regression analysis, STOP-Bang ≥5 had an odds ratio of 0.12 (95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.58; p=0.008). There was no significant difference in overall survival between the groups. STOP-Bang questionnaire scores were associated with aortic remodeling after TEVAR in patients with TBAD. Increasing the frequency of surveillance after TEVAR might be beneficial in these patients. We analysed aortic remodelling 1 year after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) patients with STOP-Bang < 5 and STOP-Bang ≥ 5. Aortic remodelling was better, and the reintervention rate was higher in patients with STOP-Bang < 5 compared with patients with STOP-Bang ≥ 5. In patients with STOP-Bang ≥ 5, aortic remodelling was worse in zones 3-5 compared with zones 6-9. This study suggests that the STOP-Bang questionnaire results is associated with aortic remodelling after TEVAR in patients with TBAD.

Novel Approach to treating a COVID-19 positive patient with a Complex Arch and Descending Aneurysm and Dissection in whom open surgery is prohibitive.

Ascending aortic and arch aneurysms are a challenging group of pathologies for surgeons. These typically require a complex open repair, including hypothermic circulatory arrest and carry a high peri-operative risk. Outcomes are best when performed in centers with significant experience and expertise. Many patients, because of co-morbidities, are at a prohibitive risk for these open surgeries. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the preferred treatment of most acute descending thoracic aortic pathologies.[1] However, these require strict anatomic criteria to be successful and are usually confined to the distal arch and descending thoracic aorta. There are no commercially available endovascular devices in the United States to treat this patient population with ascending or proximal arch aneurysms or dissections, especially in an urgent or emergent setting, whose anatomy does not meet criteria for standard TEVAR. We present a novel endovascular approach, including a cerebral protection strategy, to treat a complex arch aneurysm and dissection in a patient who was not a candidate for an open repair.

Application of "Fabulous" stent system to improve aortic remodeling after TEVAR for type B aortic dissection.

Application of "Fabulous" stent system to improve aortic remodeling after TEVAR for type B aortic dissection.

Comprehensive Learning Curve Analysis of a Long-Term Experience With Thoracic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Purpose: To analyze the learning curve for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in a single center over a period of 25 years. Materials and Methods: In total, 390 consecutive standard TEVAR procedures undertaken between 1996 and 2021 were included in a retrospective, observational, single-center study. Cumulative sum charts were elaborated for the entire center experience (primary outcome) as well as for the first and second implanting physicians. Data on procedural variables (contrast volume, operative and fluoroscopy time), 30-day major adverse events (MAEs) and clinical success, and endoleak and reintervention rates were secondary outcomes and subdivided into 4 quartiles of experience (Q1–Q4) or presented as first 2 versus latest 2 quartiles (Q1–Q2 vs Q3–Q4). Results: The mean follow-up was 4.3±4.0 years. The center’s learning curve was achieved after 75 procedures, and it was similar for the first implanting physician. The surgeon coming thereafter had a significantly shorter curve (10 TEVARs). Comparing Q1–Q2 with Q3–Q4, 30-day MAEs (16.1 vs 11.3%, p=0.164), 30-day mortality (11.4% vs 3.6%, p=0.003), and intraoperative additional maneuvers (21.5% vs 13.3%, p=0.033) were reduced along with an improvement in clinical success (85.9% vs 90.3%, p=0.190). From Q1 to Q4, operative time (139.8±65.5 to 76.7±43.7 min, p=0.001), fluoroscopy time (15.1±8.8 to 7.1±5.1 min, p<0.001), and contrast volume (244.0±112.1 to 104.3±46.1 mL, p<0.001) showed a considerable reduction. Late endoleak and aortic-related mortality declined significantly from Q1–Q2 to Q3–Q4 (24.1% to 15.5%, p=0.033 and 18.6% vs 8.2%, p=0.006, respectively). Operative time (p=0.021), contrast volume (p=0.016), and fluoroscopy time (p=0.004) were independent risk factors for endoleak, causing a 1.3-fold risk increase for both each 60 minutes of additional operative time (p=0.021) and every 100 mL of additional contrast medium (p=0.016). Each 10-minute increase in fluoroscopy time determined a 1.4-fold risk increment (p=0.004). Conclusion: The learning curve shortened significantly over time with non-negligible clinical outcome improvements, suggesting that specific endovascular training is mandatory to become an effective TEVAR performer. Clinical Impact For the first time in literature, the standard TEVAR’s learning curve has been evaluated at a single vascular surgery center over a period of 25 years. The learning curve for the center and the first physician historically undertaking TEVAR was achieved at the 75th treated patient. The learning curve of the surgeons coming thereafter was significantly shorter (10 cases). This quarter-century demonstrated that intraoperative learning-related variables were associated with long-term clinical outcomes and all have improved over time. Centers approaching TEVAR for the first time and training program providers could use these data to aim to offer better clinical outcomes.

A Systematic Review on PETTICOAT and STABILISE Techniques for the Management of Complicated Acute Type B Aortic Dissection.

Extended downstream endovascular management has been applied in acute complicated type B aortic dissection (acTBAD), distally to standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), using bare metal stents, with or without lamina disruption, using balloon inflation. The aim of this systematic review was to assess technical success, 30-day mortality, and mortality during follow-up in patients with acTBAD managed with the Provisional Extension To Induce Complete Attachment (PETTICOAT) or stent-assisted balloon-induced intimal disruption and relamination (STABILISE) technique. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement was followed. A search of the English literature, via Ovid, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, until 30th August 2022, was executed. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies (published between 2000-2022), with 5 patients, reporting on technical success, 30-day mortality and mortality during the available follow-up among patients that underwent PETTICOAT or STABILISE technique for acTBAD were eligible. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was applied to assess the risk of bias. Primary outcomes were technical success and 30-day mortality, and secondary outcome was mortality during the available follow-up. Thirteen studies were considered eligible, twelve in the quantitative analysis. In total, 418 patients with acTBAD managed with the PETTICOAT (83%) or STABILISE (17%) technique were included. Technical success ranged between 97-100%, 99% for the PETTICOAT and 100% for the STABILISE sub-cohort. Thirty-day mortality was estimated at 3.7% (12/321), 1.4% for the STABILISE and 4.4% for the PETTICOAT technique. All studies reported the mean available follow-up which was estimated at 20 months (range 3-168 months), 22 months (mean value) for the PETTICOAT and 17 months (mean value) for the STABILISE technique. Twenty-three patients died during follow-up, with an estimated mortality rate at 5.7% for the total cohort. The mortality during follow-up was 0% for the STABILISE and 7.0% for the PETTICOAT approach. Both, the PETTICOAT and STABILISE techniques presented less than 4% perioperative mortality in patients with acTBAD with high technical success rate. The mid-term mortality rate was at 6%. However, the heterogeneity in the available studies' highlights the need for further prospective studies, including larger volume and longer follow-up.

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection: Pre- and Postprocedural Imaging.

Aortic dissection is a chronic disease that requires lifelong clinical and imaging surveillance, long after the acute event. Imaging has an important role in prognosis, timing of repair, device sizing, and monitoring for complications, especially in the endovascular therapy era. Important anatomic features at preprocedural imaging include the location of the primary intimal tear and aortic zonal and branch vessel involvement, which influence the treatment strategy. Challenges of repair in the chronic phase include a small true lumen in conjunction with a stiff intimal flap, complex anatomy, and retrograde perfusion from distal reentry tears. The role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) remains controversial for treatment of chronic aortic dissection. Standard TEVAR is aimed at excluding the primary intimal tear to decrease false lumen perfusion, induce false lumen thrombosis, promote aortic remodeling, and prevent aortic growth. In addition to covering the primary intimal tear with an endograft, several adjunctive techniques have been developed to mitigate retrograde false lumen perfusion. These techniques are broadly categorized into false lumen obliteration and landing zone optimization strategies, such as the provisional extension to induce complete attachment (PETTICOAT), false lumen embolization, cheese-wire fenestration, and knickerbocker techniques. Familiarity with these techniques is important to recognize expected changes and complications at postintervention imaging. The authors detail imaging options, provide examples of simple and complex endovascular repairs of aortic dissections, and highlight complications that can be associated with various techniques. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ©RSNA, 2022.

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair of Highly Tapered Type B Aortic Dissection with Proximal Tapered Stent Grafts and Distal Restrictive Stent Grafts

This study evaluated aortic remodeling in highly tapered type B aortic dissection (TBAD) patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with a proximal tapered stent graft plus a distal restrictive stent graft to maximize thoracic coverage while avoiding distal excessive oversizing. Thirty-four patients presenting with highly tapered TABD were randomized to restricted TEVAR (r-TEVAR) and standard TEVAR groups. Highly tapered TBAD was defined as the maximal diameter of the true lumen at proximal and distal thoracic aorta landing zone tapers greater than 8mm or taper ratio greater than 20%. Patients in the r-TEVAR group underwent proximal tapered stent grafts plus distal restrictive stent grafts, to match the taper ratio of the descending thoracic aorta (DTA) and extend the length of stent coverage. Patients in the standard TEVAR group underwent proximal tapered stent grafts implantation without distal restrictive stent grafts. Aortic remodeling was estimated by computed tomography angiography (CTA) during the follow-up. In total, 16 patients underwent r-TEVAR, and 18 patients underwent standard TEVAR. The taper ratio of the stent graft matched the DTA in the r-TEVAR group (24.7±3.4% vs. 27.3±4.2%, P=0.068), but did not match that in the standard TEVAR group (13.5±3.3% vs. 30.5±9.6%, P<0.001). The length of stent graft coverage in the r-TEVAR group was longer than that in the standard TEVAR group (220.4±21.1mm vs. 175.3±17.8mm, P<0.001). Compared with the standard TEVAR group, the r-TEVAR group had better complete remodeling of the DTA at 6months (40% vs. 5.6%, P=0.03), 12months (60% vs. 16.7%, P=0.027), and 24months (78.6% vs. 41.2%, P=0.036) after the operation. There was no difference in the cumulative survival rate between the r-TEVAR and standard TEVAR groups (P=0.166). The r-TEVAR with overlapping proximal tapered stent grafts and distal restrictive stent grafts can match the taper of highly tapered TABD, extend the length of stent graft coverage, and lead to better remodeling of the DTA than standard TEVAR.

The PETTICOAT-Snowshoe Technique Prevents Distal Stent Graft-Induced New Entry in Patients with Aortic Dissection

Distal stent graft-induced new entry (SINE) is a serious complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD). The PETTICOAT-snowshoe technique was developed to prevent distal SINE for double-barrel TBAD. Initially, a proximal stent-graft (SG) is deployed, followed by the extension of a bare stent above the celiac artery and deployment of a second SG within the bare stent. This study examined whether the PETTICOAT-snowshoe technique prevents distal SINE. This was a single-center, retrospective study comparing 2 groups that underwent conventional standard TEVAR between January 2013 and September 2018 and TEVAR using the PETTICOAT-snowshoe technique after October 2018 for double-barrel TBAD. Twenty-seven patients (74% male) underwent standard TEVAR (group A), while another 27 (78% male) underwent the PETTICOAT-snowshoe technique (group B). TEVAR was performed in the chronic phase on 15 patients (55.6%) in group A and on 16 (59.2%) in group B. Aorta-related mortality occurred in 1 patient in group A (3.7%). Oversizing ratios at the distal edge of the SG diameter to the major axis of the true lumen were 25% ± 26% and 25% ± 21% in groups A and B, respectively. During the follow-up period, 5 patients (18.5%) in group A and none in group B (P=0.02) developed distal SINE. 3 of 5 patients with distal SINE in group A were treated with additional TEVAR, one with thoracoabdominal aortic replacement, and one with conservative observation. The freedom from distal SINE rate was significantly higher in group B than in group A (P=0.04). The PETTICOAT-snowshoe technique significantly prevented distal SINE during the mid-term period even with the same distal SG oversizing as conventional standard TEVAR.

Aortic remodeling after false lumen occlusion using an atrial septal occluder in chronic DeBakey IIIb aortic dissection

ObjectiveRetrograde false lumen flow through distal entry tears poses a challenge in the treatment of chronic DeBakey IIIb aneurysms. In the present report, we have described the feasibility and outcomes of false lumen occlusion using an atrial septal occluder (ASO) in chronic DeBakey IIIb dissection associated with a descending aneurysm. MethodsAll the patients who had undergone thoracic endovascular aortic repair for chronic DeBakey IIIb aortic dissection at our institution from January 2014 to November 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary endpoints were technical success and in-hospital postoperative results. The secondary endpoints included the midterm survival status and aortic remodeling outcomes. ResultsA total of 37 patients (age, 56.24 ± 10.47 years) with persistent retrograde false lumen perfusion and aneurysm formation at the thoracic segment were treated using an ASO for false lumen occlusion. We achieved 100% technical success. No spinal cord ischemia or in-hospital death was observed. The median follow-up time was 36 months (interquartile range, 24-51 months). After the procedure, three patients (8.1%) had had an endoleak (type Ia in two patients and type II in one patients), and five patients had required late reintervention. The overall 5-year survival rate was 71%. One aortic-related death (2.7% of the total cohort) occurred during follow-up at 9 months. Complete thrombosis of the false lumen along the treated aortic segment was recorded postoperatively in 34 patients (91.9%) at the final follow-up using computed tomography angiography. In a mixed-effects model, a diameter analysis revealed that the thoracic true lumen diameter had increased and the thoracic false lumen diameter had decreased significantly (0.256 mm/mo, P < .001; and −0.512 mm/mo, P < .001, respectively). ConclusionsThe combination of standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair and false lumen occlusion using the ASO to promote false lumen thrombosis and remodeling in the treated segments is a technically feasible and effective alternative treatment of chronic DeBakey IIIb dissection with an associated descending aneurysm. This approach yielded satisfactory midterm survival outcomes and a low incidence of aortic-related death in our patients. However, further studies with more subjects and a prospective design should verify our findings before routine clinical implementation of this technique.

Distal bare metal stent implantation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair is beneficial to treat complicated type B aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

To explore whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) plus distal bare metal stent (BMS) implantation leads to favorable clinical outcomes compared with standard TEVAR in treating acute complicated type B aortic dissection. Relevant publications were found through a precise search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Count data were calculated as the odd ratio (OR)and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the Mantel-Haenszel statistical method, quantitative data were calculated as mean difference and 95% CI using Inverse Variance statistical method. When the data heterogeneity was large, with an I2 > 50%, a random-effects model and sensitivity analysis were performed. The analysis tool we used was the software Revman 5.3 and G*power 3.1. There were 7 publications involving 958 patients who were enrolled ultimately. The incidence of unplanned secondary intervention and postoperative adverse events in the TEVAR + BMS were lower than standard TEVAR (OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.75); OR, 0.57, (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.90)), and the pooled number needed to treat was 15 for unplanned secondary intervention and 15 for postoperative adverse events. There were no significant difference in the aortic-related or all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.25 to 2.61); OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.22)), aortic-related, all-cause mortality at least 6 months or incidence of the postoperative endoleak (OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.32); OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.06); OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.32 to 2.05)). There is no significant outcome difference except for reduced reintervention but this does not seem to adversely affect survival. It is unclear whether this justifies the additional cost of placing it in every complicated type B aortic dissection regardless of anatomy after standard TEVAR alone. Besides, more data are needed to verify the adjunctive distal bare metal stents' performance at different dissection stages.

Clinical and Morphologic Outcomes of Endovascular Repair for Subacute and Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection

The objective of the study was to assess long-term remodeling, survival, and reintervention outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for subacute and chronic type B aortic dissection (TBAD). All patients who underwent TEVAR for subacute or chronic TBAD at a tertiary referral center between 1999 and 2015 were included in this cohort study. The primary outcome was aortic remodeling, and secondary outcomes included survival, rate of major complications, and reinterventions. Fifty patients were included, with mean age of 62.4years, 10 (20%) DeBakey type IIIA and 40 (80%) DeBakey type IIIB dissection; 45 standard TEVAR, 2 branched TEVAR, 3 TEVAR combined with fenestrated or branched EVAR. Indication for TEVAR was intact (n=40) or ruptured (n=1) postdissection aneurysm, hypoperfusion (n=4), treatment-refractory pain (n=2), or a combination (n=3). Mean clinical follow-up was 76months, and median radiological follow-up was 46months. Thirty-day survival was 96%, stroke 4%, renal failure 0%, paraplegia 0%. Three- and five-year survival was 92% (95% confidence interval (CI) [79; 97]) and 77% (95% CI [61; 87]), respectively. Of 19 late deaths, 6 were confirmed aorta related. Five-year freedom from reintervention was 69% (95% CI [53-80]). Distal stent graft extension due to aortic dilatation composed most reinterventions. Mean maximal aortic diameter was 58.7mm preoperatively and 51.9mm on last follow-up (P=0.003). On thoracic level, true lumen expanded (+10.0mm, 95% CI [6.4; 13.6]) (P<0.001) and false lumen decreased (-11.9mm, 95% CI [-15.2; -8.5]) (P<0.001) from baseline to the last computed tomography. In the abdominal aorta, true lumen diameter change was +3.1mm (95% CI [1.4; 4.8]) (P=0.001); false lumen diameter change was +1.0mm (95% CI [-1.8; 3.8]) (P=0.464). TEVAR for subacute and chronic TBAD results in favorable remodeling of the thoracic but not the abdominal aorta. Five-year survival is almost 80%, but late aortic deaths still occur. Aortic dilatation distal to the treated segment requiring reintervention is common, emphasizing the importance of follow-up.

A case report of a hybrid procedure (visceral and partial aortic arch debranching) in the treatment of a challenging aneurysm of the thoracoabdominal aorta in the endovascular era

Introduction. This paper aimed to present a hybrid approach as a less invasive and acceptable treatment. Case outline. Because of respiratory failure, the patient was deemed at high risk for open repair. Standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) was unfeasible, so the patient underwent the hybrid procedure ? partial aortic arch debranching at the first stage, followed by visceral debranching and endovascular exclusion of thoracic aortic aneurysm as a final procedure. The postoperative course was uneventful and the patient was discharged 10 days after TEVAR and visceral debranching. Conclusion. Staged hybrid procedure with combined debranching of the aortic arch and visceral arteries is feasible and should be considered as an alternative treatment option in patients with high-risk for open repair.

Combined proximal descending aortic endografting plus distal bare metal stenting (PETTICOAT technique) versus conventional proximal descending aortic stent graft repair for complicated type B aortic dissections.

Aortic dissection is a separation of the aortic wall, caused by blood flowing through a tear in the inner layer of the aorta. Aortic dissection is an infrequent but life-threatening condition. The incidence of aortic dissection is 3 to 6 per 10,000 per year in the Western population, and can be up to 43 per 10,000 per year in the Eastern population. Over 20% of people with an aortic dissection do not reach a hospital alive. After admission, the mortality rates for people with an aortic dissection are between 10% and 20% for those who received endovascular treatment, and between 20% and 30% for those who had open surgery. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the standard endovascular method to treat complicated type B aortic dissection (aortic dissections without involvement of the ascending aorta). Although TEVAR is less invasive than open surgery and has a better long-term aortic remodeling effect than conservative medical treatment, favourable aortic remodelling is usually limited to the thoracic aortic segment. TEVAR cannot be extended into the abdominal aorta because it could cover the ostia of the reno-visceral arteries. Thus, the abdominal aorta is still at risk of progressive aneurysmal degeneration. The PETTICOAT (provisional extension to induce complete attachment) technique, with proximal endograft and distal bare metal stent, was proposed in 2006 to address this issue. The concept of this technique was to implant a distal bare metal stent into the aortic true lumen, distal to the proximal endograft, to stabilize the distal collapsed intimal flap, while allowing blood flow to reno-visceral arteries. Therefore, the PETTICOAT technique was considered to be related to a more extensive aortic remodelling for people with type B aortic dissection, especially in the area of the abdominal aorta. However, it is still unclear whether the PETTICOAT technique is superior to standard TEVAR. To assess the effects of combined proximal descending aortic endografting plus distal bare metal stenting versus conventional proximal descending aortic stent graft repair for treating complicated type B aortic dissections. The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 5 November 2018. We also undertook reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies. We considered all randomised controlled trials which compared the outcome of complicated type B aortic dissection, when treated by combined proximal descending aortic endografting plus distal bare metal stenting (PETTICOAT technique) versus conventional proximal descending aortic stent graft repair. Two independent review authors assessed all references identified by the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist. We planned to undertake data collection and analysis in accordance with recommendations described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We found no trials that met the inclusion criteria for this review. We identified no randomised controlled trials and therefore cannot draw any definite conclusion on this topic. Evidence from non-randomised studies appears to be favourable in the short-term, for combined proximal descending aortic endografting plus distal bare metal stenting (PETTICOAT technique) to solve the problem of unfavourable distal aortic remodeling. Randomised controlled trials are warranted to provide solid evidence on this topic. Evidence from cohort studies with large sample sizes would also be helpful in guiding clinical practice.

Outcomes of a Spinal Drain and Intraoperative Neurophysiologic Monitoring Protocol in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Adjuncts for early detection and treatment of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) in thoracic aortic surgery are supported by robust clinical experience in open repair. The utility of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage and neurophysiologic monitoring (NPM) in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is less clear. The purpose of this investigation is to determine the influence of a selective institutional spinal cord protection protocol using prophylactic NPM and CSF on outcomes for standard TEVAR. Patients undergoing standard TEVAR entered into a prospectively maintained database from a single institution from 2007 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative characteristics, aneurysm extent, and etiology were reviewed. Utilization of CSF drains including volume of fluid removed, duration of drainage, and catheter-related complications were collected. NPM data were reviewed to determine the influence on intraoperative management. Exact logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of SCI. Of 223 patients undergoing TEVAR, 130 met inclusion criteria for the study. CSF drains were used in 71 patients (54.6%), and 56 of 130 (43%) had NPM. SCI occurred in 7 patients (5.4%), of whom 5 had partial or complete recovery. Median time to symptoms of SCI was delayed in all cases (median 52hr, range 8-312), and none of the 4 of 7 patients with adjunct NPM demonstrated intraoperative changes. Intraoperative changes in NPM occurred in 26 (46%), and represented unilateral leg ischemia in all but 2 cases. In both patients, changes consistent with SCI were associated with intraoperative hypotension and resolved with blood pressure augmentation. Neither patient developed postoperative SCI. Median length of stay (22 vs. 9days, P=0.012), operative room time (262 vs. 209, P=0.040), and perioperative mortality (28.6% vs. 4.1%, P=0.046) were significantly higher for patients with SCI versus those without. Length of aortic coverage was found to be the sole independent predictor of SCI (odds ratio 8.2, P=0.026). Complications related to CSF drainage occurred in 4 patients (5.6%) with major complications occurring in 2 patients (2.8%), including 1 with an intrathecal hematoma and permanent bilateral paraparesis. Selective use of prophylactic CSF drainage in TEVAR was associated with moderate risk and questionable benefit. The use of neurophysiological monitoring allowed for early detection and treatment of spinal ischemia, but its utility is limited by logistical factors and to the minority of patients with intraoperative spinal ischemic events.

Successful endovascular coil embolization of large pseudoaneurysm of ductus arteriosus diverticulum

BackgroundPseudoaneurysm of the ductus arteriosus diverticulum, although rare in adults, may have catastrophic consequences if left untreated due to erosion and rupture of the pseudoaneurysm into adjacent thoracic structures. Although thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the standard treatment method for aneurysm closure of the ductus arteriosus diverticulum, it was not possible in our patient secondary to marked aortoiliac access vessel tortuosity, significant vascular calcific burden, and an abdominal aortic aneurysm. We describe the first reported case of endovascular coil embolization being successfully used as the definite repair of a ductus arteriosus diverticulum pseudoaneurysm.Case presentationAn 85-year-old man with history of severe coronary arterial disease presented with an enlarging pseudoaneurysm of a ductus arteriosus diverticulum. The diverticulum and thoracic aortic junction demonstrated the typical obtuse angles and wide neck, differentiating it from otherwise similar-appearing diagnostic considerations. Repair was attempted with conventional aortic stent graft but the patient’s infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm and his heavily calcified, tortuous iliac vessels could not accommodate the 24Fr introducer sheath necessary for stent graft placement. Therefore, endovascular coil embolization was successfully completed through a 4Fr directional catheter. The patient tolerated the procedure well and was discharged from the hospital in good condition on post-embolization day six.ConclusionsEndovascular coil embolization is an alternative treatment for ductus arteriosus diverticulum pseudoaneurysm closure in cases where the standard TEVAR method is unsuccessful. Instead of the wide entry point at the aorta we used the junction of the diverticulum and pseudoaneurysm as the “neck” for satisfactory and stable coil placement. Endovascular coil embolization alone may be a viable definitive therapy for occlusion of the ductus pseudoaneurysm component of the diverticulum in cases where complex anatomy or extensive vascular disease makes stent graft repair impractical if not impossible.

Total Endovascular Repair of Contained Ruptured Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms

To report perioperative and 1-year results of total endovascular repair of contained ruptured thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Between 2015 and 2017, preoperative, procedural, and postoperative data of patients with radiographic evidence of contained ruptured TAAAs treated by endovascular repair were prospectively collected. Only patients with stable hemodynamic parameters were enclosed. Primary endpoints were 30-day/in-hospital mortality, spinal cord ischemia (SCI), postoperative cardiopulmonary complications, and new onset of hemodialysis. Secondary endpoints were endoleaks, reinterventions, and overall follow-up survival. Twelve patients underwent endovascular repair for contained ruptured TAAAs. According with the Crawford/Safi's classification, 6 type II (50%), 3 type III (25%), 1 type IV (8%), and 2 type V (17%) TAAAs were treated. All patients were symptomatic. Overall, 34 target visceral vessels were planned to be revascularized. The mean time from admission to treatment was 48hours (range 4-96), with 4 patients operated within 24hours. Five patients (42%) were treated by T-branch, 3 (25%) by custom-made fenestrated/branched endografts, 3 (25%) by parallel graft technique, and 1 (8%) by standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair covering a stenotic celiac trunk. The 30-day and in-hospital mortality was 17% and 25%, respectively. Two patients (17%) developed SCI. Cardiac and pulmonary complications were reported in 1 (8%) and 3 (25%) cases, respectively. One patient (8%) needed permanent hemodialysis. Two endoleaks (17%) were detected at the postoperative computed tomography angiography (1 low-flow gutter endoleak and 1 type III endoleak). Four patients (33%) required re-interventions within 30 postoperative days. The mean follow-up was 12months (range 1-22). No late target visceral vessels occlusion, endoleak, or reintervention occurred in this series. Overall, 7/12 (59%) patients were alive, and no cases of TAAA-related mortality occurred during follow-up. According to our results, endovascular repair of contained ruptured TAAAs is feasible by a flexible approach in selected patients with anatomical suitability and stable hemodynamic conditions. Although early mortality and morbidity are significant, with frequent reintervention necessity, subsequent follow-up is free from reinterventions and TAAA-related mortality.

Aortic remodeling in Type B aortic dissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair with an aortic extender cuff implantation.

ObjectiveThis study investigated the safety and efficiency of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) plus an aortic extender cuff placement in treating Stanford Type B aortic dissections (TBADs).MethodsClinical data on 157 patients with TBADs who underwent TEVAR in two tertiary medical centers from February 2013 to March 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. An estimated mismatch rate >120% was the indication for placement of an aortic extender cuff. Results in the perioperative and follow-up periods (≥3 months) were analyzed, especially those of aortic remodeling.ResultsIn total, 106 patients (67.5%) underwent standard TEVAR, and 51 (32.5%) received TEVAR plus an aortic extender cuff placement. The primary technical success rate was 96.8% (152/157). Perioperative adverse events included endoleak (2%, 3/157), spinal cord ischemia (SCI) (1.3%, 2/157), and transient renal failure (0.6%, 1/157), with no between-group differences. The median follow-up was 15 months (range 3–71 months). Ten cases of late stent complications were observed, including three endoleak, one upper limb ischemia, one stent distortion, and five stent graft-induced distal re-dissection (SIDR). Patients with a cuff had less distal re-dissection and fewer second interventions, but the differences lacked significance. In the last follow-up, the TEVAR+Cuff group were found to have better true lumen recovery and false lumen shrinkage, and increased complete false lumen thrombosis in the thoracic and abdominal segments; however, no statistical difference was evident in comparison with the TEVAR group (P>0.05).ConclusionTEVAR plus an aortic extender cuff implantation improves remodeling of the dissected thoracic aorta, thus reducing the potential of SIDR. Furthermore, the covered stent with a length of 250 mm does not increase the rate of SCI or paraplegia. However, these results should be confirmed in a larger series of patients with longer follow-up.