Systematic Review of Reintervention After Thoracic Endovascular Repair for Chronic Type B Dissection

Guidelines on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic pathology: updates from the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (SICVE)

The aim of these Guidelines was to refresh and enhance the earlier 2015 Italian Guidelines regarding Thoracic and Thoracic - Abdominal Aortic Disease, aligning them with the National Guidelines System (SNLG) to assist all healthcare professionals in adopting the most appropriate treatment approach for this condition. The update utilized the GRADE-SIGN version methodology, adhering to the AGREE checklist for quality reporting. The initial step involved crafting clinical questions in the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) format to base the Recommendations on. Following this, systematic literature reviews were conducted for each PICO question or for related clusters of questions, leading to article selection and evaluation of their methodological quality via qualitative checklists. Subsequently, a Considered Judgment form was completed for each clinical question, assessing the overall evidence to facilitate the conversion from evidence level to recommendation strength and direction. These guidelines outline the best practices for managing thoracic-abdominal aortic disease, with a focus on screening and monitoring. They explore medical treatments and criteria for surgical intervention, including a thorough preoperative analysis of the patient's history and an assessment of surgical risks. Following the determination of surgical necessity, the guidelines compare traditional open surgery with endovascular procedures, paying particular attention to define new recommendations where there were not. Systematic literature reviews were executed for each PICO question. Considered judgments were made through evaluating the evidence level, and the recommendations, direction and strength. The document concludes by outlining protocols for both immediate and prolonged postoperative care. Recent literature has not only validated and refined previous recommendations but also introduced new ones on emerging topics.

Complications after treatment of type B aortic dissection with TEVAR stent-graft deployment in zone 2

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the outcome of 147 cases of type B aortic dissection with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

We systematically reviewed 147 patients of type B aortic dissection with stent graft deployment in zone 2 or zone 3 by TEVAR from January 2012 to December 2022. These patients were observed by computed tomography angiography after the first and third months and annually thereafter during follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed by SPSS.16.

RESULTS

The stent graft of 107 patients was deployed in zone 3, and the stent graft of 40 patients was deployed in zone 2. Severe dissection and surgery-related complications after TEVAR occurred in 19 patients, with complications arising more frequently in zone 2 than in zone 3 (12/40 vs. 7/107, P < 0.005). Endoleak was detected in 10 (6.8%, 10/147) cases, which included 6 cases of endoleak in zone 2, exceeding the 4 cases of endoleak in zone 3 (6/40 vs. 4/107, P < 0.05). Twelve (8.16%, 12/147) cases underwent re-intervention, and the 8 patients who underwent re-intervention in zone 2 exceeded the 4 patients who underwent re-intervention in zone 3 (8/40 vs. 4/107, P < 0.05). One case of subclavian steal in zone 2 (0.68%, 1/147). Two (1.36%, 2/147) cases died after TEVAR. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year overall survival rates were 99.3%, 98.6%, and 98.6%, respectively. The re-intervention rates were 5.4%, 7.5%, and 8.2%, respectively. The re-intervention rates in zone 2 were 15%, 20%, and 20%, respectively. The re-intervention rates in zone 3 were 1.9%, 2.8%, and 3.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

TEVAR is the major treatment to use if the stent graft can be deployed in zone 3. However, with the higher rate of complications and re-intervention after TEVAR, for patients whose stent graft can only be deployed in zone 2, it is not recommended that TEVAR be chosen as the preferred treatment.

Predicting adverse events after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for patients with type B aortic dissection

The potential of adverse events (AEs) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) has been reported. To avoid the occurrence of AEs, it is important to recognize high-risk population for prevention in advance. The data of 261 patients with TBAD who received TEVAR between June 2017 and June 2021 at our medical center were retrospectively reviewed. After the implementation of exclusion criteria, 172 patients were finally included, and after 2.8 years (range from 1 day to 5.8 years) of follow up, they were divided into AEs (n = 41) and non-AEs (n = 131) groups. We identified the predictors of AEs, and a prediction model was constructed to calculate the specific risk of postoperative AEs at 1, 2, and 3 years, and to stratify patients into high-risk (n = 78) and low-risk (n = 94) group. The prediction model included seven predictors: Age > 75 years, Lower extremity malperfusion (LEM), NT-proBNP > 330 pg/ml, None distal tear, the ratio between the diameter of the ascending aorta and descending aorta (A/D ratio) > 1.2, the ratio of the area of the false lumen to the total aorta (FL ratio) > 64%, and acute TEVAR, which exhibited excellent predictive accuracy performance and discriminatory ability with C statistic of 82.3% (95% CI 77.3-89.2%). The prediction model was contributed to identify high-risk patients of postoperative AEs, which may serve to achievement of personalized treatment and follow-up plans for patients.

Mid-term results of distal anastomosis to the true lumen for chronic type B aortic dissection

We investigated whether distal anastomosis to the true lumen in open surgical repair of descending aorta for chronic type B aortic dissection improved the long-term outcomes with aortic remodeling. We retrospectively reviewed 71 patients with chronic type B aortic dissection, excluding those with connective tissue disorder, from October 2001 to June 2021. The patients who underwent distal true lumen anastomosis (group T, n = 36) were compared to those with both lumens' anastomosis (group B, n = 35), regarding survival, overall and distal aortic events. The growth rates of the distal aorta (maximum diameter in descending thoracic, suprarenal and infrarenal abdominal aorta) were also investigated. Median age was significantly higher in group T (T; 66 vs B; 60, P = .001). Group T had significantly higher rates of complete and partial thrombosis formation in the false lumen than group B postoperatively (26.9 vs 0%, P = .01 for complete, 65.4 vs 3.9%, P < .0001 for partial, respectively). At median follow-up for 6.8 years of 63 patients (88.7%), survival, overall and distal aortic event-free rates, and the growth rates of the distal aorta were not significantly different between the groups. Distal anastomosis to the true lumen did not improve mid-term survival, aortic event-free rates and the growth rates of the distal aorta compared with that of both lumens for chronic type B aortic dissection.

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Endovascular Repair Versus Open Surgery for Ruptured Descending Thoracic Aorta

OBJECTIVE

The comparisons between thoracic endovascular aortic repair for ruptured thoracic aorta (TEVAR) and open surgery (OS) have not been well documented, although both procedures have been widely utilized. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness and safety between TEVAR and OS in the repair of ruptured descending thoracic aorta.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to find relevant studies to assess TEVAR and OS outcomes. The comparative parameters were perioperative mortality (30 day/in-hospital), 1 year mortality, paraplegia or paraparesis, renal insufficiency, stroke, pulmonary embolism, re-intervention rate, pulmonary complications, and cardiac complications. A fixed-effects model was applied to calculate the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) on pooled outcomes from different studies.

RESULTS

Eighteen observational trials involving 2088 patients were evaluated (TEVAR=560; OS=1528). Meta-analysis showed that TEVAR in repairing the ruptured descending thoracic aorta was associated with lower perioperative mortality (OR=0.47; 95% CI: 0.34-0.66; p<0.01), 1 year mortality (OR=0.46; 95% CI: 0.29-0.75; p<0.01), renal insufficiency incidence (OR=0.56; 95% CI: 0.33-0.93; p=0.03), and pulmonary complications (OR=0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.92; p=0.01) when compared with OS. There was no significant difference between TEVAR and OS in terms of paraplegia, stroke, pulmonary embolism, cardiac complications, and early re-intervention rates. However, the late re-intervention rate was higher in the TEVAR group than that in the OS group.

CONCLUSIONS

When repairing the ruptured descending thoracic aorta, TEVAR may be performed rapidly and safely. TEVAR is associated with lower rates of perioperative morbidity and early postoperative complications than OS.

Surgical Strategy for Chronic Type B Dissecting Aortic Aneurysm to Prevent Aorta-Related Events

BACKGROUND

This study was aimed to evaluate the outcomes of performing open repair or thoracic endovascular aortic repair for chronic type B dissecting aortic aneurysm.

METHODS

From July 2004 to February 2019, 52 patients underwent surgery as open repair (n = 32) or endovascular repair (n = 20) for chronic type B dissecting aortic aneurysm. Replacement of the aorta was limited to the aneurysmal portion with or without reconstructing the visceral arteries or the segmental arteries. Stent grafts were deployed in the true lumen above the celiac artery to cover the primary entry for even DeBakey IIIb dissection.

RESULTS

Operative mortality and morbidity rates, including spinal cord ischemia incidence, did not differ between the groups. Operative mortality and morbidity rates, including spinal cord ischemia incidence, did not differ between the groups. In the endovascular repair group, 3 patients died due to rupture of residual false lumen in the early, and late postoperative follow-up. The 5-year rate of freedom from all-cause death, aorta-related death, and aorta-related event were 84% ± 6%, 94% ± 3% and 84% ± 6%. The endovascular repair was independently associated with all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 5.7; confidence interval [CI], 1.02-31.6; P = 0.04) and aorta-related event (HR, 30.9; CI 4.9-195.0; P < 0.001). In the open group, postoperative residual aortic diameter was an independent predictor of aorta-related events, and the threshold was 41 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Open repair remains a better option than simple endovascular repair alone in DeBakey IIIb dissection, but the distal un-resected aortic portion over 41 mm was associated with late aortic events.

Predicting reintervention after thoracic endovascular aortic repair of Stanford type B aortic dissection using machine learning

OBJECTIVES

To construct models for predicting reintervention after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

A total of 192 TBAD patients who underwent TEVAR were included; 68 (35.4%) had indications for reintervention. Clinical characteristics, aorta characteristics on pre- and postoperative computed tomography angiography, and aorta characteristics on immediate postoperative aortic digital subtraction angiography were collected. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was applied to identify the risk factors for reintervention. Eight classifiers were used for modeling. The models were trained on 100 train-validation random splits with a ratio of 2:1. The performance was evaluated by the receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

Seven predictors of reintervention were identified, including maximum false lumen diameter, aortic diameter measured at the level of approximately 15 mm distal to the left subclavian artery, aortic diameter measured at the level of the diaphragm, false lumen diameter measured at the level of the celiac artery, number of bare-metal and covered stents, number of bare-metal stents, and residual perfusion of the false lumen. Logistic regression (LR) yielded the highest performance, with an area under the curve of 0.802. A nomogram built for clinical use showed good calibration. The cutoff value for dividing patients into low- and high-risk subgroups was 0.413. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the overall survival of high-risk patients was significantly shorter than that of low-risk patients (both p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our nomogram could predict the reintervention after TEVAR in patients with TBAD, which may facilitate patient selection and surveillance strategies.

KEY POINTS

• Seven risk factors of reintervention after TEVAR of TBAD were identified for modeling. • Logistic regression performed best in predicting reintervention with an AUC of 0.802. • Patients with a high risk of reintervention had shorter OS than those with a low risk.

The characteristics of distal tears affect false lumen thrombosis rate after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B dissection

OBJECTIVES

A low false lumen thrombosis rate (FLTR) is common in patients with type B aortic dissection after they have undergone thoracic endovascular aortic repair, which indicates a poor long-term prognosis. This study aimed to establish a quantitative linear regression model to predict false lumen (FL) thrombosis accurately using morphological parameters.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included 59 patients diagnosed with acute type B aortic dissection between 2014 and 2017. Morphological parameters were measured. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses were performed, and a linear regression model relating FLTR with the number of re-entry tears was proposed. Ten patients were further chosen to validate the linear relationship, and idealized aortic dissection models were adopted for haemodynamic analysis.

RESULTS

Only the total area and number of re-entry tears were negatively correlated with FL thrombosis (P < 0.001). Moreover, based on the univariable regression, the number of re-entry tears played a more crucial role in FLTR (R2 = 0.509 vs R2 = 0.298), and the linear relationship model was created as follows: thrombosis rate (%) = -11.25 × distal tear number + 105.24. This model was perfectly matched in 10 patients (concordance correlation coefficient = 0.880, P = 0.947). Moreover, when the total area of re-entry tears was constant, the net blood flow increased rapidly with an increase in the tear count.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of re-entry tears could be a crucial related factor of FL thrombosis; the larger the number of re-entry tears is, the lower the possibility of thrombosis is.

A Successful Endovascular Technique for Complete False Lumen Thrombosis in Chronic Abdominal Aortic Dissection

A 66-year-old man presented with an enlarging abdominal aorta false lumen, after type A aortic dissection repair. Residual entries were located at the left renal artery, abdominal aorta, and left external iliac artery. The patient underwent endovascular aortic repair with left renal artery stenting to close the entries. Completion aortography showed no false lumen flow without an endoleak, and contrast-enhanced computed tomography 1 month after the procedure demonstrated complete false lumen thrombosis. A total endovascular approach is possible for abdominal aneurysmal dilation in chronic aortic dissection when all entries can be closed using a one-stage procedure with stent grafts and/or branch stenting.

Burden and causes of readmissions following initial discharge after aortic syndromes

BACKGROUND

Aortic syndromes, including aortic dissection (AD), intramural hematoma (IMH), and penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU), carry significant morbidity and mortality; few data exist regarding burden and causes of related rehospitalizations following initial discharge.

METHODS

The study was conducted using the Rochester Epidemiology Project. All adult residents (age ≥18 years) with an incident diagnosis of AD, IMH, and PAU (1995-2015) were identified from the Rochester Epidemiology Project using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision codes and Hospital Adaptation of the International Classification of Diseases, second edition, codes. Assessment of any-cause (aortic and cardiovascular), aorta-related, or cardiovascular-related readmissions was determined following date of hospital discharge or diagnosis date (ie, the index event).

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients of 130 cases of AD, IMH, and PAU included in the initial study population survived the index event and were evaluated. The median age of diagnosis was 74 years, and 70 (60%) were male. A total of 79 patients (68%) experienced at least one readmission. The median time to first any-cause, cardiovascular, and aortic readmission was 143, 861, and 171 days, respectively. The cumulative incidence of any-cause readmissions at 2, 4, and 10 years was 45%, 55%, and 69%, respectively. The cumulative incidence of cardiovascular readmissions at 2, 4, and 10 years was 15%, 20%, and 28%, respectively. The cumulative incidence of aortic readmissions at 2, 4, and 10 years was 38%, 46%, and 59%, respectively. Overall survival for the entire cohort at 2, 4, and 10 years was 84%, 75%, and 50%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Readmissions following initial discharge after diagnosis of aortic syndrome are common and not different across specific disease types. Whereas aorta-related rehospitalizations occur in more than half of patients but tend to be earlier, cardiovascular-related rehospitalizations tend to happen later in about one-third of patients. This may suggest the need for early follow-up focused on aortic complications, whereas later follow-up should address cardiovascular events.

Management of acute type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

The best management of acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection is currently a controversial area. Recent advances in endovascular intervention have begun to establish pre-emptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair as a potential strategy. A review about the management for type B aortic dissection has been conducted.

METHODS

A narrative review consisting of 157 original articles, meta-analyses and guidelines was conducted. The findings were synthesized and summarized using 70 articles.

RESULTS

There are clear guidelines directing surgical management of acute complicated type B aortic dissection. However, the best management of acute uncomplicated disease is more ambiguous, which is especially concerning in a condition which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Medical management alone is generally favoured. Endovascular intervention is now being considered by some surgeons, but it can be technically difficult, while exposing the patient to potential surgical risks.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical and anatomical risk factors have been identified to help vascular surgeons make decisions about treatment in acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection. New endovascular strategies are being developed to reduce surgical risk and address technical challenges. Registry data should be used to support future best management.

Late Aortic Expansion After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Chronic DeBakey IIIb Dissection

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for chronic DeBakey IIIb aortic dissection is still under discussion. This study was performed to investigate the incidence of and risk factors for late aortic expansion after TEVAR for chronic DeBakey IIIb aortic dissection.

METHODS

From March 2014 to April 2019, a total of 35 patients with chronic DeBakey IIIb aortic dissection underwent TEVAR in our institution. Risk factors for aortic expansion events were examined by stepwise Cox regression analysis. Aortic expansion events were defined as reintervention for expansion or aortic expansion of greater than 5 mm.

RESULTS

No operative death occurred, and the 2-year survival rate was 96.8%. The 1- and 2-year rates of freedom from reintervention were 87.8% and 80.2%, respectively. During follow-up, 11 patients had late aortic expansion events (4 with expansion of the thoracic aorta and 7 with expansion of the abdominal aorta). The 1- and 2-year rates of freedom from aortic expansion were 87.8% and 68.7%, respectively. Significant risk factors for expansion events were aortic dilation at the celiac level (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11; P = .015), saccular aneurysm formation of the false lumen (HR, 5.08; P = .049), and high number of residual large reentries (>5 mm) (HR, 2.78; P = .027).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing TEVAR for chronic DeBakey IIIb aortic dissection, late aortic expansion in both the thoracic and abdominal aorta remains an important issue. Aggressive additional intervention should be considered for high-risk patients with residual large reentries and aortic dilation at the celiac level.

Long-term Results of Endovascular Treatment of Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection by Closure of the Primary Tear

BACKGROUND

The role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in the treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection is controversial. Some advocate open surgery, based on the premise that all tears must be treated, and others prefer branched endografts with the same premise. However, TEVAR, with closure of the primary tear in the thorax, has shown good results in some centers. This single-center cohort study was designed to contribute to the knowledge of the long-term evolution (mean, 4.8 years) of the patients submitted to endovascular closure of the proximal intimal tear.

METHODS

A total of 36 patients with asymptomatic chronic aortic dissection had a successful closure of the primary tear by TEVAR and were followed up for a median time of 57.2 months.

RESULTS

In 75% of the cases, there was stabilization or decrease in the maximum diameter. Twenty-five percent had diameter increase in the thoracic or abdominal aorta and indication for one or more additional procedures. One patient refused a second procedure and died from rupture one month after the last evaluation; this was the only case of rupture in the series. One patient died of unrelated cause before having been submitted to a second procedure. Thirty-four patients survived without diameter increase in the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic type B aortic dissections can be successfully treated by the coverage of the proximal tear with an endograft. Patients shall be followed carefully, and 25% of them will require one or more additional procedures to achieve a good result.

Proposed classification of endoleaks after endovascular treatment of Stanford type-B aortic dissections

Objectives

Despite two decades of experience, no dedicated classification system exists to document and prognosticate patterns of endoleak encountered after endovascular therapy of type-B aortic dissection. This nomenclature gap has led to inconsistent management and underreporting of significant findings associated with adverse outcomes after endovascular treatment of type-B aortic dissection. Our goal was to propose a reproducible and prognostically relevant classification.

Methods

A multidisciplinary team of seven experienced open and endovascular aortic surgeons was assembled to provide consensus opinion. Extensive literature review was conducted. Deficiencies in the current classification approach of the various patterns of persistent filling of false lumen after endovascular therapy were identified.

Results

Our focus was to categorize high-risk and low-risk subgroups within endoleaks after endovascular treatment of type-B aortic dissection. In this classification, type-Ia endoleak refers to persistent filling of the false lumen in an antegrade manner. Causes include failure to cover the primary entry tear and sizing or technical related proximal seal failure. False lumen filling via distal entry tears is classified as type Ib endoleak, which is further sub-classified into b1 (major branch-related tears), and b2 (multiple small branches related tears). Retrograde ascending aortic dissection and stent graft-induced new entry were classified as type-I endoleaks (type-Ir and type-Is, respectively). Another focus was reclassification type-II endoleaks, with type-IIa endoleak referring to conventional retroleak from one or more posterior branches and type-IIx referring to retroleak from major branches (visceral or left subclavian arteries).

Conclusions

The majority of endoleaks after endovascular treatment of type-B aortic dissection are related to persistent or new filling of the false lumen. We propose a new false lumen-based classification schema for endoleaks occurring after endovascular therapy of type-B aortic dissection.

Reflection of pioneers: redo thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair controversies in thoracic aortic aneurysm surgery

Reoperative thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair is frequently necessary and brings with it a unique set of challenges. Typically, most reoperative repairs are necessitated by aortic disease progressing into previously healthy aortic tissue from a replaced section of the aorta (an extension of the previous repair) or, to a lesser degree, because of a late complication of prior distal aortic repair (an open or endovascular repair failure). Characterizing the reason for the reoperation as well as the location of prior repair is the first step towards anticipating major outcomes following such repair. Since the introduction of endovascular repair for aortic aneurysms, indications for open repair have become more specific and limited; many centers have justified using endovascular approaches in patients with prior open aortic repair by deeming these patients "high risk" because of their previous incision. Our analysis found that reoperative repairs were not typically subject to worse early outcomes than patients without prior distal aortic repair, except for the more complicated types of reoperation, which involve infection.

Endovascular Treatment of Various Aortic Pathologies: Review of the Latest Data and Technologies

The technologies and innovations applicable to endovascular treatment for complex aortic pathologies have progressed rapidly over the last two decades. Although the initial outcomes of an endovascular aortic repair have been excellent, as long-term data became available, complications including endoleaks, endograft migration, and endograft infection have become apparent and are of concern. Previously, the indication for endovascular therapy was restricted to descending thoracic aortic aneurysms and abdominal aortic aneurysms. However, its indication has expanded along with the improvement of techniques and devices, and currently, it has become possible to treat pararenal aortic aneurysms and Crawford type 4 thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) using the off-the-shelf devices. Additionally, custom-made devices allow for the treatment of arch or more extensive TAAAs. Endovascular treatment is applied not only to aneurysms but also to acute/chronic dissections. However, long-term outcomes are still unclear. This article provides an overview of available devices and the results of endovascular treatment for various aortic pathologies.