Endovascular Repair for Acute Type B Aortic Dissection With Unfavorable Proximal Landing Zone

Efficacy and safety of single-branched stent graft in the treatment of type B aortic dissection: a meta-analysis of cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) is the most commonly employed method for treating type B aortic dissection (TBAD). One of the primary challenges in TEVAR is the reconstruction of the left subclavian artery (LSA). Various revascularization strategies have been utilized, including branch stent techniques, fenestration techniques, chimney techniques, and hybrid techniques. Among these, the single-branched stent graft (SBSG) has emerged as one of the most promising methods. This study employs a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SBSG in treating TBAD, thereby providing robust evidence to guide clinical practice.

METHODS

Published literatures on the treatment of TBAD with SBSG were collected from CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. The search period ranged from the inception of each database to December 1, 2024. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies involving 660 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The results demonstrated that, compared to other surgical methods, SBSG significantly reduced the perioperative neurological complication rate (OR = 0.23, 95%CI(0.07, 0.76), P = 0.02), type I endoleak rate (OR = 0.30, 95%CI(0.15, 0.61), P = 0.001), and left upper limb ischemia rate (OR = 0.06, 95%CI(0.01, 0.49), P = 0.008). Additionally, SBSG was associated with a shorter operation time (SMD = 0.59, 95%CI(0.04, 1.14), P = 0.04). However, no significant differences were observed between SBSG and other surgical methods in terms of technique success rate (OR = 1.51, 95%CI(0.55, 4.14), P = 0.42), hospital length of stay (OR = 1.51, 95%CI(0.55, 4.14), P = 0.42), aortic false lumen thrombosis rate (OR = 1.30, 95%CI(0.55, 3.07), P = 0.56), pulmonary infection rate (OR = 0.50, 95%CI(0.16, 1.58), P = 0.24), and 30-day postoperative mortality (OR = 0.41, 95%CI(0.12, 1.35), P = 0.41).

CONCLUSION

SBSG demonstrates safety and efficacy in the treatment of TBAD by significantly reducing the perioperative neurological complexity rate, type I leakage rate, and left upper limb ischemia rate, while also decreasing operative time.

Aortic arch anatomical differences in male type B aortic dissection patients vs. healthy male individuals

BACKGROUND

Understanding the distinct anatomical differences between patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) and control patients (CPs) can enhance our knowledge of normal and pathological aortic dimensions. This study aimed to deepen our knowledge of these dimensions by measuring and comparing the anatomical indices of the aortic arch in male patients with TBAD and non-TBAD male patients.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional observational study, 62 TBAD patients (TBADPs) and 43 CPs were assessed. Using a fit centerline approach, we identified three pivotal anatomical landmarks: Point A, Point B, and Point C. These landmarks represented intersections of the aortic arch with the brachiocephalic trunk, left common carotid artery, and left subclavian artery, respectively. These points defined Zones 1, 2, and 3, which collectively span the entire proximal aorta from the proximal end of the aortic valve to Point C. Our analyses compared key anatomical indices such as diameter of the circumscribed circle (Dcirc), ellipticity, curvature, tortuosity between TBADP and CP at critical points and regions.

RESULTS

TBADPs showed a more circular cross-sectional shape at Points A, B and C, as indicated by reduced values of Dcirc_A (P = 0.031), ellipticity_A (P = 0.034) and ellipticity_B (P = 0.048), together with a significant decrease in Dcirc_C (P = 0.015) and ellipticity_C (P = 0.007). The aortic arch in TBADPs showed enhanced tortuosity in Zone 1 (p = 0.002) and extended elongation in Zone 3 (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The study found that the aortic arch in male TBAD patients is more circular near its primary branches, has greater tortuosity in Zone 1, and is longer in Zone 3 compared to male control patients.

Treatment for Stanford type B aortic dissection with insufficient anchoring region using castor integrated branched aortic stent graft

Background

To investigate the clinical efficacy of Castor integrated branched aortic stent graft for the treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissection with insufficient anchoring area.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of clinical data of 26 patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection with insufficient anchoring region (<15 mm) treated by Castor branched aortic stent graft from September 2018 to June 2022 at Ganzhou People's Hospital, including 23 acute cases and 3 chronic cases.

Results

Surgical procedures were successfully performed in all 26 patients, and during the perioperative period no complications occurred, such as cerebrovascular accident, stenosis or occlusion of left subclavian artery, progression of reverse avulsion of aortic dissection, and paraplegia. During the operation 2 patients had a small amount of type I endoleak, which disappeared during the postoperative follow-up. The other patients had good postoperative follow-up results. Review of the aortic CTA indicated good stent morphology with patency of the left subclavian artery.

Conclusions

The Castor integrated branched aortic stent graft expanded the indications for endoluminal treatment for Stanford type B aortic dissection, which can avoid open surgery and has good clinical outcomes.

Endovascular repair of thoracic aortic disease with isolated left vertebral artery and unfavorable proximal landing zone using fenestrated castor stent-graft

Objective

The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Castor single-branched stent-graft combined with fenestrated technique in treatment of thoracic aortic disease (TAD) with unfavorable proximal landing area (PLZ) and isolated left vertebral artery (ILVA).

Methods

From January 2018 to March 2022, 8 patients with TAD (6 patients with type B aortic dissections, 1 patient with type B intramural hematomas, and 1 patient with thoracic aortic aneurysm) underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair with fenestrated Castor stent-graft due to the existence of ILVA and unfavorable PLZ. Demographic characteristics, surgical details, postoperative complications, follow-up and postoperative CTA imaging results were collected and analyzed.

Results

The primary technical success rate was 100%. The mean operation time was 115 min (range, 70-180 min). All the left subclavian arteries (LSAs) and ILVAs of the eight patients were revascularized by fenestrated Castor stent-grafts. During the follow-up period, no deaths and complications were observed. No internal leakage, aortic rupture, retrograde type A dissection were found on computed tomography angiography. All of the LSAs and ILVAs maintained patency without stenosis.

Conclusion

Castor single-branched stent-graft implantation combined with fenestration technique may be safe and feasible for TAD patients with ILVA and unfavorable PLZ.

Homemade fenestration and chimney techniques for the left subclavian artery revascularization during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Background

To investigate the safety and efficacy of homemade fenestration and chimney techniques for the left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Methods

From February 2017 to February 2021, 41 patients undergoing fenestration technique (group A) and 42 patients undergoing chimney technique (group B) to preserve the LSA during zone 2 TEVAR were enrolled in the present study. The procedure was indicated for dissections with unsuitable proximal landing zone with refractory pain and hypertension, rupture and malperfusion, and high-risk radiographic features. The baseline characteristics, peri-procedure, and follow-up clinical and radiographic data were recorded and analyzed. The primary endpoint was clinical success, and the secondary endpoints were rupture-free survival, LSA patency, and complications. Aortic remodeling, defined as patency, partial and complete thrombosis of the false lumen, was also analyzed.

Results

Technical success was achieved in 38 and 41 patients in groups A and B, respectively. Four intervention-related deaths were confirmed, two in each group. Immediate post-procedural endoleaks were detected in two and three patients in group A and B, respectively. No other major complications were found in either group, except for one retrograde type A dissection in group A. During follow-up, the initial clinical success rates were 90.24% and 92.86% in groups A and B, respectively. The primary and secondary mid-term clinical success rates were 87.5% and 90% in group A, and both of them were 92.68% in group B. Rupture-free survival and LSA patency were not significantly different between the two groups. The incidence of complete thrombosis in the aorta distal to the stent graft was 67.65% and 61.11% in groups A and B, respectively.

Conclusions

Apart from the lower clinical success rate of fenestration technique, both physician-modified techniques are available for LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR and significantly promote favorable aortic remodeling.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery with a Castor stent graft

OBJECTIVE

Despite the rapid development of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), it is still a challenge to maintain the blood flow of the branch arteries above the aortic arch in Stanford type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery (LSA). The Castor stent graft is an integrated, customized, single-branch stent that enables reconstruction of the LSA. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of the Castor stent graft for type B aortic dissection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An extensive electronic literature search (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022322146) was undertaken to identify all articles published up to August 2022 that described thoracic aortic repair with branch stents in the treatment of type B aortic dissection involving the LSA. The quality of the included studies was analyzed using the MINORS criteria. The primary outcome measures were the technical success rate, early mortality rate, endoleak rate, and 1-year survival rate. The secondary outcome measures were the stroke rate, left upper extremity ischemia rate, and target vessel patency rate.

RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 415 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. The LSA was successfully preserved in all procedures. The technical success rate was 97.5% (95% CI: 0.953-0.991); the intraoperative endoleak rate was 0.1% (95% CI: 0.000-0.012); the intraoperative LSA patency rate was 99.52%; the intraoperative LSA stent deformation and stenosis rate was 0.15% (95% CI: 0.000-0.051); the early type I endoleak rate was 1.6% (95% CI: 0.003-0.035); the 30-day mortality rate was 0.96%; the early reintervention rate was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.000-0.040); and the perioperative stroke rate was 0% (95% CI: 0.000-0.005). The 1-year survival rate was 99.7% (95% CI: 0.976-1.000). The half-year LSA patency rate was 99.3%, the 1-year LSA patency rate was 97.58%, and the 2-year LSA patency rate was 95.23%. During the follow-up period, the leakage rate was 0.3% (95% CI: 0.000-0.017), the incidence of left upper extremity ischemia rate was 0.5% (95% CI: 0.000-0.035), and the deformation and stenosis rate of the LSA stent was 2.2% (95% CI: 0.06-0.046).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that endovascular repair of type B aortic dissection using the Castor stent-graft may be technically feasible and effective. However, this conclusion needs to be interpreted with caution, as the quality of evidence for all outcomes is between low and very low.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42022322146].

Single-center experience with a unibody single-branched stent graft for zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair

To provide an adequate proximal landing zone, left subclavian artery (LSA) reconstruction has become an important part of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). This study evaluates the short and medium term efficacy of a novel unibody single-branched stent graft for zone 2 TEVAR. Fifty-two patients (mean age, 56 ± 10.9 years; 42 men) with distal aortic arch lesions requiring LSA reconstruction received unibody single-branched stents from September 2019 to March 2021. Computed tomography angiography was performed 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery to observe stent morphology, branch patency, endoleaks, stent-related adverse events, and changes in the diameter of true and false lumens. All stents were deployed adequately, and the technical success rate was 100%. The mean operation time was 121.8 ± 47.0 min. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 6.2 ± 3.7 days, and the mean follow-up was 16.8 ± 5.2 months (range, 12–24 months). During follow-up, there were no deaths and complications such as stent displacement or fracture, stenosis, fracture, occlusion, and type Ia endoleaks. The patency rate of the branched segment was 100%. In 42 patients with aortic dissection (AD), the true lumen diameter of the aortic isthmus was 29.4 ± 2.9 mm after surgery, significantly larger than before surgery (20.6 ± 5.4 mm, P < 0.05). Postoperative aortic isthmus false lumen diameter was significantly smaller than that before operation (6.1 ± 5.2 mm vs. 16.0 ± 7.6 mm, P < 0.05). The new unibody single-branched stent for zone 2 TEVAR is safe and accurate, and its efficacy is good in the short and medium term.

Surgical Debranching versus Branched Endografting in Zone 2 Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

INTRODUCTION

Left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization is recommended in patients undergoing elective thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with proximal zone 2 landing requiring coverage of the LSA. The gold-standard remains surgical LSA revascularization, but recently the feasibility of branched endografts has been demonstrated. We compared the perioperative and mid-term outcomes of these approaches.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing TEVAR with proximal zone 2 landing at a single center from 2014-2020 was performed. Patients were divided into cohorts for comparison: those undergoing surgical revascularization (SR-TEVAR group) and those undergoing thoracic branched endografting with an investigational device (TBE group). Patients who did not receive LSA revascularization were excluded. Perioperative outcomes including procedural success, death, stroke, limb ischemia, and length of stay were compared. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared with the log-rank test. The cumulative incidences of device-related endoleak (type I and III) and device-related reintervention, accounting for death as a competing hazard, were compared with the Fine-Gray test.

RESULTS

A total of 55 patients were included: 31 (56%) SR-TEVAR and 24 (44%) TBE. Preoperative demographics and comorbidities were similar between the groups. Procedural success was 100% in both cohorts, and there were no periprocedural strokes or left upper extremity ischemic events. One operative/30-day mortality (TBE 4.2% vs SR-TEVAR 3.2%, p=0.99) occurred in each cohort. Total operative time (minutes, TBE 203 ± 79 vs SR-TEVAR 250 ± 79 p=0.03) and total length of stay (days, TBE 5.2 ± 3.6 vs SR-TEVAR 9.9 ± 7.2, p=0.004) were both significantly shorter in the TBE group. There was no difference in mid-term survival (log-rank p=0.50), nor the cumulative incidence of device-related endoleak (Fine-Gray p=0.51) or reintervention (Fine-Gray p=0.72). There have been no occlusions of the TBE graft nor surgical bypass/transpositions after a mean follow-up for 28 ± 16 and 34 ± 24 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic branched endografting can be performed with similar procedural success and comparable safety profile to TEVAR with surgical revascularization, while reducing total length of stay, in patients requiring proximal zone 2 coverage. Mid-term outcomes of each approach are also similar. Prospective, randomized comparisons of these techniques are warranted.