Endovascular repair of acute uncomplicated aortic type B dissection promotes aortic remodelling: 1 year results of the ADSORB trial

Effect of False Lumen Occlusion Treatment With AFX VELATM, Candy-Plug Technique for Chronic Aortic Dissection

INTRODUCTION

We sought to examine midterm results and remodeling effect of false-lumen occlusion treatment using AFX VELA in case of chronic dissection repair.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From June 2019 to May 2022, we performed false lumen occlusion treatment using a modified Candy-Plug technique with AFX VELA on 8 chronic aortic dissection patients with a patent false lumen. We collected operative data, short-term clinical outcomes, mid-term clinical outcomes and imaging test results. We conducted follow-up examinations at postoperative, 6-month and 1-, 2- and 3-year intervals, including contrast-enhanced computed tomography to evaluate the diameter, false lumen thrombosis and any events.

RESULTS

The average time from the symptom onset to the thoracic endovascular repair was 81.5 (35-155) months. The aorta showed aneurysmal dilation with an average maximum short-axis diameter of 58.9 (41-91) mm. Two cases needed emergency surgery due to rupture and impending rupture. There were no postoperative deaths. Complete thrombosis within the false lumen was achieved in 6 cases (75%), but 2 cases had incomplete thrombosis, requiring additional treatment. The mean maximum diameter showed a significant decrease at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years postoperatively compared to preoperative measurements (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

We showed the results of false lumen occlusion treatment using the AFX VELA cuff. We observed favorable clinical outcomes and remodeling effects. While the long-term durability and efficacy of this technique in aortic remodeling will need to be monitored with further observation, the use of this cuff is considered a reliable approach to false lumen occlusion treatment.

Preemptive treatment in the acute and early subacute phase of uncomplicated type B aortic dissections with poor prognosis factors

Objective

Due to its favorable outcome regarding late morbidity and mortality, thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) is becoming more popular for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD). This study aimed to compare preemptive endovascular treatment and optimal medical treatment (OMT) and OMT alone in patients presenting uncomplicated TBAD with predictors of aortic progression.

Design

Retrospective multicenter study.

Methods

We analyzed patients with uncomplicated TBAD and risk factors of progression in two French academic centers. Aortic events [defined as aortic-related (re)intervention or aortic-related death after initial hospitalization], postoperative complications, non-aortic events, and radiologic aortic progression and remodeling were recorded and analyzed. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

Results

Between 2011 and 2021, preemptive endovascular procedures at the acute and early subacute phase (<30 days) were performed on 24 patients (group 1) and OMT alone on 26 patients (group 2). With a mean follow-up of 38.08 ± 24.53 months, aortic events occurred in 20.83% of patients from group 1 and 61.54% of patients from group 2 (p < .001). No patient presented aortic-related death during follow-up. There were no differences in postoperative events (p = 1.00) and non-aortic events (p = 1.00). OMT patients had significantly more aneurysmal progression of the thoracic aorta (p < .001) and maximal aortic diameter (p < .001). Aortic remodeling was found in 91.67% of patients in group 1 and 42.31% of patients in group 2 (p < .001). A subgroup analysis of patients in group 1 showed that patients treated with preemptive TEVAR and STABILISE had reduced maximum aortic diameters at the 1-year (p = .010) and last follow-up (p = .030) compared to those in patients treated with preemptive TEVAR alone.

Conclusion

Preemptive treatment of uncomplicated TBAD with risk factors of progression reduces the risk of long-term aortic events. Over 60% of medically treated patients will require intervention during follow-up, with no benefit in terms of postoperative events. Even after surgical treatment, patients in the OMT group had significantly more aneurysmal progression, along with poorer aortic remodeling.

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

OBJECTIVE

Thoracic 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.

METHODS

This 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.

RESULTS

The 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.

CONCLUSIONS

Intentionally 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.

Novel insights into thoracic endografts technology for prevention of distal stent-graft induced new entry (dSINE) following endovascular repair of type B aortic dissections: from bench to bedside

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular treatment of type B aortic dissections (TBAD) has currently acquired a primary therapeutic role when anatomically feasible. The main issue with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aortic dissection is the actual nature of the aortic wall, which is structurally compromised and more fragile. Indeed, a wealth of data have shown that TEVAR for TBAD will lead, in a substantial proportion of cases, to a device-related adverse event named distal stent-graft induced new entry (dSINE).

AREAS COVERED

Currently available aortic stent-grafts have not been specifically devised for the treatment of aortic dissection. A novel dissection specific stent-graft (DSSG) was developed, which is a custom-made device based on the Zenith Alpha Thoracic platform (Cook Medical). The DSSG has several unique properties that, in principle, make its use optimal in TBAD patients.

EXPERT OPINION

TEVAR in the setting of aortic dissections remains technically challenging. The occurrence of dSINE represents a unique complication in this scenario and may lead to high rates of aortic-related adverse events and need for secondary interventions. The use of a novel custom-made DSSG in the setting of chronic TBAD has been proven to be safe, feasible and effective. However, even this approach may fail to completely prevent dSINE formation.

Optimal Timing of Pre-emptive Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This network meta-analysis compares outcomes of optimal medical therapy (OMT) and pre-emptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection at different phases of chronicity.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through November 2023. Pooled short-term outcomes (short-term mortality, perioperative complications) and long-term outcomes (all-cause mortality, aortic-related mortality, aortic re-intervention rates) were calculated.

RESULTS

Systematic review identified 17 studies (2 randomized controlled trials, 3 propensity score matching, and 2 inverse probability weighting). Subacute-phase intervention had lower short-term mortality than the acute-phase (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval [CI]]=0.60 [0.38-0.94], p=0.027). No significant differences were observed in aortic rupture and paraplegia. Acute-phase TEVAR had a higher stroke incidence than subacute-phase intervention (HR [95% CI]=2.63 [1.36-5.09], p=0.042), chronic (HR [95% CI]=2.5 [1.03-6.2], p=0.043), and OMT (HR [95% CI]=1.57 [1.12-2.18], p=0.008). Acute-phase TEVAR had higher long-term all-cause mortality than subacute-phase intervention (HR [95% CI]=1.34 [1.03-1.74], p=0.03). Optimal medical therapy had elevated long-term all-cause mortality compared with subacute-phase TEVAR (HR [95% CI]=1.67 [1.25-2.33], p<0.001) and increased long-term aortic-related mortality vs acute-phase (HR [95% CI]=2.08 [1.31-3.31], p=0.002) and subacute-phase (HR [95% CI]=2.6 [1.62-4.18], p<0.01) interventions. No significant differences were observed in aortic re-intervention rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-emptive TEVAR may offer lower all-cause mortality and aortic-related mortality than OMT. Considering lower short-term mortality, perioperative stroke rate, and long-term mortality, our findings support pre-emptive TEVAR during the subacute phase.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The optimal timing of pre-emptive thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection remains uncertain. This network meta-analysis suggests that the subacute phase (14-90 days from symptom onset) emerges as the optimal timing for pre-emptive TEVAR. This window is associated with lower rates of short-term complications and higher long-term survival rates compared with alternative strategies.

Current perspectives in acute type B aortic dissections: a literature review

In this new millennial, endovascular strategies have revolutionized the treatment of acute type B aortic dissection (aTBAD). With reduced in-hospital mortality and good long-term outcomes TEVAR has become the gold standard for the treatment of complicated dissection and is gaining increasing support for its preventive applicability in some uncomplicated dissections. With this new paradigm came a shift of the treatment goal where just covering the entry tear is not enough and instead achieving long-term positive thoracoabdominal remodeling is needed. More extensive approaches with composite device designs (covered stent graft and bare metal stent) emerged to answer this aortic conundrum. At 5-year of follow-up, "Provisional ExTension To Induce COmplete Attachment technique" (PETTICOAT) and its evolution "Stent assisted balloon induced intimal disruption and relamination in aortic dissection repair" (STABILISE) seem to be safe techniques that can allow, when anatomically feasible, excellent aortic remodeling and, in some cases, even the healing of the dissection. Nevertheless, STABILISE results, although promising, are mostly based on small series and therefore need to be validated by analyzing medium-long-term results from the international registry. Given the plethora of new data and the disparity of expert opinions on the best treatment to adopt, in this review we aim to summarize the current knowledge on the results of these different strategies for acute TBAD.

Weekend Admission is Associated with Higher Kidney Failures after Thoracic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Weekend effect characterized by worse perioperative outcomes has been demonstrated in some surgery patients admitted on weekends, as opposed to weekdays. This study aimed to examine weekend effect on open surgical repair or thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

Patients who underwent TBAD repair were identified in National/Nationwisde Inpatient Sample from Q4 2015-2020. Open surgery and TEVAR were examined separately. Multivariable analyses were performed comparing in-hospital perioperative outcomes of patients under weekday and weekend admission. Adjusted preoperative variables included sex, age, race, socioeconomic status, hospital characteristics, clinical symptoms, comorbidities, and elective/non-elective admission. Also, length of stay, days from admission to operation, and total hospital charge were compared.

RESULTS

Among patients who underwent open TBAD repair, 1321 were admitted on weekdays and 340 on weekends. Among patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD, 2018 were admitted on weekdays and 440 wereadmitted on weekends. There was no difference in open repair outcomes between those admitted on weekdays vs weekends. In TEVAR, weekend admission was associated with higher post-procedural kidney failure (1.14% vs .20%, aOR = 4.11, P = .04) and superficial wound complications (2.73% vs 1.49%, aOR = 2.2, P = .03) but lower respiratory complications (5.80% vs 3.64%, aOR = .47, P = .01). Also, in TEVAR, weekend admission was associated with longer time from admission to operation (3.92 ± .27 vs 2.35 ± .09 days, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Renal malperfusion was a common indication for TBAD repair. TBAD patients admitted over the weekend and underwent TEVAR had higher post-procedural kidney failure, which may be due to delayed diagnosis and treatment.

The Evaluation of Outcomes after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Type B Aortic Dissection in Mainland China

BACKGROUND

To assess the mortality and outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) in mainland China, and to compare these outcomes with data from Western countries, while analyzing the potential reasons for differences among different countries.

METHODS

An extensive literature search spanning from January 1999 to October 2023 was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for studies on endovascular treatment for TBAD. This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Data extraction and analysis followed the guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and mid-term (< 5 years) mortality.

RESULTS

Based on 25 publications (3,080 patients), pooled estimate for in-hospital mortality was 2.2% (95% confidence interval, 1.6%-2.9%). Major perioperative complications included stroke (2.4% [1.8%-3.3%]), spinal cord ischemia (1.4% [1.0%-2.2%]), retrograde type A aortic dissection (1.2% [0.8%-1.8%]), type I endoleak (5.6% [3.6%-8.6%]), visceral ischemia (1.0% [0.5%-2.1%]), and acute renal failure (2.8% [2.0%-3.8%]). Mid-term mortality was 5.1% (3.6%-7.3%), and secondary intervention rate was 4.9% (4.0%-6.0%) with 1.7% (1.0%-2.9%) conversion rate to open surgery. In subgroup analysis based on uncomplicated TBAD, in-hospital and mid-term mortality was 0.5% (0.2%-1.5%) and 0.6% (0.2-1.7%), respectively. Compared with data from Western countries, mainland Chinese patients had a lower mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In mainland China, the outcomes of endovascular treatment for TBAD are comparable to those of Western countries. The large number of patients undergoing TEVAR in mainland China and its good performance support the use of TEVAR in uncomplicated TBAD.

Acute Aortic Syndromes from Diagnosis to Treatment-A Comprehensive Review

This work aims to provide a comprehensive description of the characteristics of a group of acute aortic diseases that are all potentially life-threatening and are collectively referred to as acute aortic syndromes (AASs). There have been recent developments in the care and diagnostic plan for AAS. A substantial clinical index of suspicion is required to identify AASs before irreversible fatal consequences arise because of their indefinite symptoms and physical indicators. A methodical approach to the diagnosis of AAS is addressed. Timely and suitable therapy should be started immediately after diagnosis. Improving clinical outcomes requires centralising patients with AAS in high-volume centres with high-volume surgeons. Consequently, the management of these patients benefits from the increased use of aortic centres, multidisciplinary teams and an "aorta code". Each acute aortic entity requires a different patient treatment strategy; these are outlined below. Finally, numerous preventive strategies for AAS are discussed. The keys to good results are early diagnosis, understanding the natural history of these disorders and, where necessary, prompt surgical intervention. It is important to keep in mind that chest pain does not necessarily correspond with coronary heart disease and to be alert to the possible existence of aortic diseases because once antiplatelet drugs are administered, a blocked coagulation system can complicate aortic surgery and affect prognosis. The management of AAS in "aortic centres" improves long-term outcomes and decreases mortality rates.

Diagnostic Ultrasound: On-Site Diagnosis of Type B Aortic Dissection During Cataract Surgery

We report a case of aortic dissection occurring during cataract surgery under local anesthesia, which was diagnosed on-site by point-of-care ultrasound. Intimal flaps were detected in the abdominal aorta, whereas the parasternal view showed no abnormalities in the aortic root or left ventricular function. According to these ultrasound findings, a Stanford type B aortic dissection was more likely than a type A aortic dissection, and imminent death was unlikely. Therefore, we decided to resume and complete the surgery. Subsequent computed tomography (CT) confirmed the point-of-care diagnosis. The patient was transferred to a tertiary hospital for medical treatment.

Treatment of Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: Optimal Medical Therapy vs TEVAR + Optimal Medical Therapy

Optimal Medical Therapy (OMT) has been the accepted mode of treatment for uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection (uTBAD). There is growing evidence that despite the short-term benefits of OMT, patients suffer deleterious consequences in the long-term with OMT alone. Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) along with OMT has emerged as an alternative option for patients with uTBAD. This study evaluates the available literature for TEVAR + OMT as an alternative to OMT for treatment of uTBAD. In addition, issues related to TEVAR as a treatment for uTBAD are discussed.

Prognostic impact of early aortic volume changes at hospital discharge in patients with acute type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Early prediction of aorta-related events is important for determining subsequent treatment strategies in patients with acute aortic dissection. However, most studies evaluated long-term aortic growth rates by annual assessment. The purpose of our study was to determine whether the in-hospital growth rate of aortic volume was associated with aorta-related events.

METHODS

We studied 116 patients with uncomplicated type B acute aortic dissection. We analyzed whether changes in aortic volume were associated with aorta-related events during a 5-year follow-up. According to the growth rate from admission to discharge, patients were divided into two groups: Increase >0 (aortic volume: n = 59, aortic diameter: n = 43) and Reduction ≤0 (aortic volume: n = 57, aortic diameter: n = 73) in maximum aortic diameter or aortic volume. The primary endpoint was the discriminative ability of the growth rate of aortic volume for aorta-related events.

RESULTS

According to the evaluation of aortic volume changes, the Increase group had significantly higher aorta-related event rates than those in the Reduction group (49.2 % vs. 3.5 %, respectively; p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristics analysis showed that the growth rate of aortic volume had a clearly useful discrimination, with an area under the curve of 0.84, whereas the discriminative ability of the growth rate of maximum aortic diameter was poor (area under the curve: 0.53). Multivariate analysis showed that the growth rate of aortic volume from admission to discharge was an independent predictor of aorta-related events (hazard ratio, 26.3; 95 % confidence interval, 2.04-286.49; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital evaluation of aortic volume was helpful to predict long-term aorta-related events in patients with uncomplicated type B acute aortic dissection.

Impact of post-implantation syndrome on outcomes in acute type B aortic syndrome patients undergoing endovascular repair

Background: The aim of this study was to explore the impact of post-implantation syndrome (PIS) on prognosis outcomes in individuals with type B acute aortic syndrome (AAS) undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Patients and methods: Data from type B AAS individuals who underwent TEVAR from January 2014 to April 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Study subjects were divided into PIS and non-PIS (nPIS) groups and postoperative clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results: Our study cohort of 74 individuals with type B AAS included 40 aortic dissection (AD), 30 intramural hematoma (IMH), 4 penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU). The incidence of PIS was 14.9%. No statistically significant differences were found in baseline characteristics. The left subclavian artery (LSCA) reconstruction was performed more frequently among the PIS group (45.5% vs 9.5%, p=.008). Major adverse events (MAE) tended to be more frequent in the PIS group, but the difference was not significant (27.3% vs 22.2%, p=.707). At 2-year follow-up, results were comparable between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that PIS was not associated with a higher incidence of mortality, endoleak, new-onset AD, or stroke. A baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) >10.3 was associated with greater incidence of MAE. In individuals with IMH, better aortic remodeling evaluated by lower total aortic diameter/true lumen diameter (TAD/TLD) was achieved in the nPIS group (1.23±0.10 vs 1.43±0.07, p<.001), and a TAD/TLD ratio >1.32 was associated with significantly more MAE. Cox multivariate regression analysis also showed that a postoperative TAD/TLD ratio >1.32 was an independent risk factor for MAE (OR, 11.36; 95% CI, 1.53-84.26; p=.017). Conclusions: PIS was associated with a trend toward a higher incidence of MAE after TEVAR. In individuals with IMH, a TAD/TLD ratio >1.32 was an independent predictor of postoperative MAE.

Neurological event rates and associated risk factors in acute type B aortic dissections treated by thoracic aortic endovascular repair

OBJECTIVES

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair is the method of choice in patients with complicated type B acute aortic dissection. However, thoracic endovascular aortic repair carries a risk of periprocedural neurological events including stroke and spinal cord ischemia. We aimed to look at procedure-related neurological complications within a large cohort of patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

Between 1996 and 2021, the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection collected data on 3783 patients with type B acute aortic dissection. For this analysis, 648 patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair were included (69.4% male, mean age 62.7 ± 13.4 years). Patients were excluded who presented with a preexisting neurologic deficit or received adjunctive procedures. Demographics, clinical symptoms, and outcomes were analyzed. The primary end point was the periprocedural incidence of neurological events (defined as stroke, spinal cord ischemia, transient neurological deficit, or coma). Predictors for perioperative neurological events and follow-up outcomes were considered as secondary end points.

RESULTS

Periprocedure neurological events were noted in 72 patients (11.1%) and included strokes (n = 29, 4.6%), spinal cord ischemias (n = 21, 3.3%), transient neurological deficits (n = 16, 2.6%), or coma (n = 6, 1.0%). The group with neurological events had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality (20.8% vs 4.3%, P < .001). Patients with neurological events were more likely to be female (40.3% vs 29.3%, P = .077), and aortic rupture was more often cited as an indication for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (38.8% vs 16.5%, P < .001). In patients with neurological events, more stent grafts were used (2 vs 1 stent graft, P = .002). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that aortic rupture (odds ratio, 3.12, 95% confidence interval, 1.44-6.78, P = .004) and female sex (odds ratio, 1.984, 95% confidence interval, 1.031-3.817, P = .040) were significantly associated with perioperative neurological events.

CONCLUSIONS

In this highly selected group from dedicated aortic centers, more than 1 in 10 patients with type B acute aortic dissection treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair had neurological events, in particular women. Further research is needed to identify the causes and presentation of these events after thoracic endovascular aortic repair, especially among women.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for hyperacute, acute, subacute and chronic type B aortic dissection: Meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data

Since the optimal timing for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in the context of type B aortic dissections (TBAD) remains an open question, we performed a systematic review with meta-analysis to evaluate outcomes of TEVAR according to the phases of TBAD - hyperacute, acute, subacute and chronic. We carried out a pooled meta-analysis of time-to-event data extracted from studies published by June 2023 for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, aortic-related mortality, and late aortic reinterventions. Thirteen studies met our eligibility criteria, comprising 4,793 patients (10.3 % hyperacute, 51.9 % acute, 25.9 % subacute, 11.9 % chronic). Considering the overall population, we observed a statistically significant difference between the groups (Log-rank test, P < 0.0001) and the main differences were found in the following comparisons: hyperacute versus acute (HR 1.61; 95 %CI 1.21-2.13; P = 0.001); hyperacute versus chronic (HR 1.70; 95 %CI 1.17-2.46; P = 0.005); subacute versus acute (HR 0.78; 95 %CI 0.63-0.98; P = 0.032). Considering the population with uncomplicated TBAD, we also observed a statistically significant difference for all-cause death between the groups (Log-rank test, P < 0.0001) and the main differences were found in the comparisons for subacute versus acute (HR 0.72; 95 %CI 0.58-0.88; P = 0.002). Furthermore, we observed statistically significant differences between the groups for aortic-related death (Log-rank test, P < 0.0001) and late aortic reintervention (Log-rank test, P < 0.0001), all favoring mostly the subacute phase as the optimal timing for TEVAR. In conclusion, there seems to be a timing-specific difference in the outcomes of TEVAR for TBAD pointing to the subacute phase as the optimal timing to achieve better long-term outcomes.

Long-term survival and risk analysis of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection

To explore the safety and efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in the treatment of patients with type B aortic dissection, and to evaluate the risk factors for long-term mortality. Our study retrospectively evaluated 729 patients with type B aortic dissection, who were divided into the thoracic endovascular aortic repair group and the optimal medical treatment group according to their treatment. In-hospital mortality, death within 30 days, and aortic-related mortality were lower in the thoracic endovascular aortic repair group than in the optimal medical treatment group (p < 0.05). The cumulative overall survival rates for the thoracic endovascular aortic repair group at 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years were 92.5%, 84.1%, and 73.5%, respectively. The Cox analysis found that TEVAR was beneficial in reducing mortality and that a vertical length of the dissection exceeding 150 mm was a risk factor for mortality.

Editor's Choice - Trends in Management and Outcomes of Type B Aortic Dissection: A Report From the International Registry of Aortic Dissection

OBJECTIVE

To describe the trends in management and outcomes of patients with acute type B aortic dissection in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

METHODS

From 1996 - 2022, 3 908 patients were divided into similar sized quartiles (T1, T2, T3, and T4). In hospital outcomes were analysed for each quartile. Survival rates following admission were compared using Kaplan-Meier analyses with Mantel-Cox Log rank tests.

RESULTS

Endovascular treatment increased from 19.1% in T1 to 37.2% in T4 (ptrend < .001). Correspondingly, medical therapy decreased from 65.7% in T1 to 54.0% in T4 (ptrend < .001), and open surgery from 14.8% in T1 to 7.0% in T4 (ptrend < .001). In hospital mortality decreased in the overall cohort from 10.7% in T1 to 6.1% in T4 (ptrend < .001), as well as in medically, endovascularly and surgically treated patients (ptrend = .017, .033, and .011, respectively). Overall post-admission survival at three years increased (T1: 74.8% vs. T4: 77.3%; p = .006).

CONCLUSION

Considerable changes in the management of acute type B aortic dissection were observed over time, with a significant increase in the use of endovascular treatment and a corresponding reduction in open surgery and medical management. These changes were associated with a decreased overall in hospital and three year post-admission mortality rate among quartiles.

Intramural hematoma in the proximal sealing zone of the thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair: frequency and safety in acute and subacute type B dissections

Introduction

To assess the outcomes after thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) in the presence of intramural hematoma (IMH) in the proximal sealing zone.

Material and methods

Patient data were retrospectively extracted from the hospital records of patients treated with TEVAR for acute and chronic aortic dissection type B in one single center. The initial, preoperative, first postoperative, and last follow-up CT scans were evaluated in the aortic 3D multiplanar reformats and the centerline regarding IMH presence in the proximal sealing zone, anatomical preconditions, and the morphological TEVAR complications including migration and bird-beak. Groups with (IMH) and without IMH (no-IMH) were compared.

Results

Overall, 84 patients (IMH:42; no-IMH:42) were treated at the age of 63(55; 72) years, of whom 23/84 (27%), 34/84 (40%), and 27/84 (32%) were in the hyperacute, acute and subacute dissection phases, respectively. The bovine arch was found in 10/84(12%) and the type III arch was most common (43/84;51%). IMH maximum extent was found in zones 0, 1, 2, and 3 in 14/84 (17%), 17/84 (20%), 18/84 (21%), and 6/84 (7%), respectively. Sealing was achieved in zone II in 71/84 (85%) and LSA was revascularized in 66/84 (79%) of the overall cohort. Early mortality and paraplegia were 2/84 (2%) each; stroke rate was 3/84 (4%). During the 22 months median follow-up (22;4;43) no RTAD was observed. Migration ≥10 mm (IMH: 11/82; no-IMH: 10/82; P = 1.0) and bird-beaks (IMH: 10/82; no-IMH: 12/82; P = 0.8036) were comparable in both groups and accompanied by a low aorta related mortality (1/82) in both groups.

Conclusion

The presence of the IMH in the proximal TEVAR sealing zone is frequent and may not be relevant for the occurrence of the RTAD, stent-graft migration, or bird-beak formation.

Twenty years' experience of type B aortic dissections: a population-based national registry study from Finland

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to investigate the incidence, treatment and survival of Stanford type B aortic dissection (BTAD) during 20 years in the Finnish population.

METHODS

Data collection was made from the Nationwide Care Register for Health Care, Finnish National Institute for Health and Welfare. All patients over 15 years of age with BTAD from 2000 to 2019 were included in the study. A data search of the Registry of Death Cause (Statistic Finland) was carried out to identify the date and cause of death.

RESULTS

There were 1742 cases of BTAD during the study period. BTAD represented 45.6% of all aortic dissections leading to hospital admission. Incidence for BTAD was 1.62 per 100 000 inhabitants per year. The median survival was 12.7 years [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.63-14.7], 12.4 years (95% CI 10.5-14.4) and 8.6 years (95% CI 7.5-9.7) for patients treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), surgery and medical treatment (MT), respectively. Survival was significantly better after TEVAR and surgery, compared to MT only (P < 0.001). Age-adjusted survival was significantly better after TEVAR compared to patients treated with MT or surgery (hazard ratio 0.578, 95% CI 0.420-0.794, P < 0.001). Aortic-related death was the most common cause of death in all groups (41%).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of BTAD seems to be similar in the Finnish population compared to other populational studies. Patients treated with TEVAR had significantly better survival compared to other patients. A high risk for late aortic-related death should be recognized in patients with BTAD.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular vs. Medical Therapy for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time to Event Data

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) vs. medical therapy in uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (TBAD).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, LILACS, CENTRAL/CCTR, Google Scholar, and reference lists of relevant articles.

REVIEW METHODS

This was a pooled meta-analysis of time to event data extracted from studies published by December 2022 for the following outcomes: all cause mortality, aortic related mortality, and late aortic interventions. Certainty of evidence was evaluated through the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool.

RESULTS

Ten studies met the eligibility criteria (eight observational; two randomised trials), comprising 17 906 patients (2 332 patients in the TEVAR groups and 15 574 patients in the medical therapy group). Compared with patients who received medical therapy, patients who underwent TEVAR had a statistically significantly lower risk of all cause death (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 - 0.87, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low) and lower risk of aortic related death (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 - 0.62, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low) without statistically significant difference in the risk of late aortic interventions (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 - 1.26, p = .56; GRADE certainty: low). In the subgroup analyses, TEVAR was associated with lower risk of all cause death when randomised controlled trials only were pooled (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 - 0.83, p = .012; GRADE certainty: moderate), younger patients only (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47 - 0.67, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low), Western populations only (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 - 0.93, p = .001; GRADE certainty: low) and non-Western populations only (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 - 0.62, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low). For all cause mortality and aortic related mortality, restricted mean survival time was overall 396 days and 398 days longer with TEVAR (p < .001), respectively, which means that TEVAR was associated with lifetime gain.

CONCLUSION

TEVAR may be associated with better midterm survival and lower risk of aortic related death in the follow up of patients treated for uncomplicated TBAD compared with medical therapy; however, randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes and longer follow up are still warranted.

Race-based outcomes of thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissections in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment

OBJECTIVE

This study characterizes racial differences in presentation, as well as short- and long-term outcomes after endovascular treatment of thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) and type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

We queried the Gore Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment for thoracic endovascular aortic repairs (TEVARs) performed between 2010 and 2016 and followed through 2022. Pathologies represented were descending TAA, complicated TBAD, and uncomplicated TBAD. Using standard statistical tests, we compared overall and pathology-specific demographics, procedural factors, and outcomes among Black and White patients undergoing TEVAR.

RESULTS

We identified 438 TEVAR cases, including 236 descending TAA, 121 complicated TBAD, and 74 uncomplicated TBAD. Overall, Black patients were younger and had a higher incidence of renal insufficiency (P = .001), whereas White patients had more chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = .003) and cardiac arrhythmias (P = .037). In patients treated for descending TAA, Black patients had increased device- and procedure-related complications (34.3% vs 17.4%; P = .014), conversion to open repair (2.9% vs 0%; P = .011) and type II endoleak (5.7% vs 1.0%; P = .040), but no differences in mortality, length of hospital stay, or major adverse cardiovascular events. Whereas outcomes of TEVAR for uncomplicated TBAD were comparable, Black patients more frequently presented with complicated TBAD than White patients (Black, 40.5% vs White, 24.8%; P = .008) and had subsequently greater reintervention rates (28.1% vs 12.4%; P = .012), all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 4.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.74-10.5; P = .002) and aortic-related mortality (hazard ratio, 16.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-186; P = .022).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increased device- and procedure-related complications, similar short- and long-term outcomes are achieved in Black and White patients undergoing TEVAR for descending TAA and uncomplicated TBAD. However, Black patients are more likely to present with, require reintervention for, and suffer mortality from complicated TBAD.

Left subclavian artery revascularization is associated with less neurologic injury after endovascular repair of acute type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze patients with acute type B aortic dissection (aTBAD) requiring thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage to determine whether LSA revascularization decreased the risk of neurologic complications.

METHODS

The national Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR module was queried for all procedures performed between 2014 and 2021. Patients presenting with aortic aneurysms or aortic ruptures were excluded from the analysis. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether their LSA was revascularized (prior to or during TEVAR) or not. Univariate followed by multivariate analysis was used to account for possible confounders and evaluate the association of LSA revascularization with the primary outcome of neurologic injury (stroke or spinal cord ischemia).

RESULTS

Among patients who had TEVAR for aTBAD, 501 patients had the LSA covered. The LSA was revascularized prior to or concomitant with TEVAR in 28% of these patients (n = 139). Average age was 57 years, and 73% (n = 366) were male. Neurologic injury developed in 88 patients (18%). On univariate analysis, patients who had their LSA revascularized were significantly less likely to develop neurologic injury (10% vs 20%; P < .01). This association persisted after accounting for potential confounders (odds ratio, 0.4; P = .02). No significant difference was seen when comparing 30-day or 1-year mortality between patients who had LSA revascularization and those who did not. Follow-up averaged 1.9 years (range, 0-8.1 years). Long-term survival did not differ between the two groups on Kaplan-Meier analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of patients with aTBAD who underwent LSA coverage during TEVAR, the addition of a LSA revascularization procedure was associated with a significantly lower incidence of neurological injury including spinal cord ischemia and/or stroke.

Aortic dissection: results of the invasive treatment in France between 2012 and 2018 according to the French national database

BACKGROUND

To evaluate results of the invasive repair in the management of acute aortic dissection (AoD) in France.

METHODS

Patients admitted to hospital with acute AoD from 2012 to 2018 were identified. Patient demographics, severity score at admission, treatment strategy and in-hospital mortality were described. For patients undergoing intervention, perioperative complications rate was reported. A secondary analysis evaluating patients' outcome as regards of the annual caseload per center was conducted.

RESULTS

Overall, 14,706 patients with acute AoD were identified (male 64%, mean age 67, median modified Elixhauser score 5). The overall incidence increased during the study period (from 3.8 in 2012 to 4.4/100,000 in 2018) associated with a North-South gradient (respectively 3.6 vs. 4.7/100,000) and a winter peak; 45.5% (N.=6697) of patients received medical treatment alone. Among those with invasive repair, 6276 (78.3%) were defined as type A AoD (TAAD), whereas type B AoD (TBAD) accounted for 1733 patients (21.7%), of whom 1632 (94%) had TEVAR and 101 (6%) had other arterial procedures; 30-day mortality was respectively 18.9% in TAAD and 9.5% for TBAD. In high-volume centers (i.e. >20 AoD/year), a lower 3-month mortality of 22.3% was noted compared to 31.4% in the low-volume centres (P<0.001); 47% of patients reported ≥1 early major complication. TEVAR exhibited less complication (P<0.001) compared to other arterial reconstructions in TBAD.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of acute AoD increased in France over the period of the study and was associated with stable postoperative early mortality. Early postoperative mortality is significantly reduced in high-volume centers.

Anatomic Utility of Single Branched Thoracic Endograft During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

INTRODUCTION

Single branched thoracic endografts (SBTEs) have been designed for pathology requiring zone 2 seal during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Numerous criteria must be met to allow for their implantation. Our aim was to analyze anatomic suitability for a next generation SBTE.

METHODS

We reviewed 150 TEVAR procedures between 2015 and 2019. Proximal seal was: zone 0 in 21 (16%), zone 1 in 4 (3%), zone 2 in 52 (40%), zone 3 in 45 (35%), and zone 4 or distal in 7 (5%). We analyzed the Zone 2 patient's angiograms and CT angiograms using centerline software to measure arterial diameters and length in relation to the left common carotid artery (LCCA), left subclavian artery (LSA) and proximal extent of aortic disease to determine if patients met anatomic criteria of a novel SBTE.

RESULTS

Zone 2 average age was 64.4 ± 16.3 years; 34 patients were male (65%). Indications for repair were aneurysm (N = 9, 17%), acute dissection (N = 14, 27%), chronic dissection with aneurysmal degeneration (N = 7, 13%), intramural hematoma (N = 9, 17%), penetrating aortic ulcer (N = 5, 10%), and blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI, N = 8, 15%). LSA revascularization occurred in 27 patients (52%). Overall, 20 (38.5%) of the zone 2 patients met anatomic criteria. Patients with dissection met anatomic criteria less frequently than aneurysm (33% [10 of 30] vs 64% [9 of 14]). Patients treated for BTAI rarely met the anatomic criteria (1 of 8, 13%). The main anatomic constraints were an inadequate distance from the LCCA to the LSA takeoff and from the LCCA to the start of the aortic disease process.

CONCLUSION

Less than half of patients who require seal in zone 2 met criteria for this SBTE. Patients with aneurysms met anatomic criteria more often than those with dissection. The device would have little applicability in treating patients with BTAI.

Longitudinal Assessment of Inflammatory Activity in Acute Type B Aortic Dissection with Integrated Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging

OBJECTIVE

The significance of the inflammatory response in the natural course of acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) is unknown. The aim was to characterise inflammation and its transformation over time in ATBAD using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

METHODS

Ten patients underwent FDG-PET/MRI within two weeks of ATBAD (acute phase), three to four months (subacute phase), nine to 12 months (early chronic phase), and 21 to 24 months (late chronic phase) after ATBAD. Target background ratios (TBRs) were measured in the ascending aorta, aortic arch, and descending aorta. MRI inflammatory markers were assessed in the descending aorta.

RESULTS

Ten patients were included: median age 69 years, median clinical follow up 32 months. In the acute phase there was increased FDG uptake in the descending aorta (maximum TBR 5.8, SD [standard deviation] 1.3) compared with the ascending aorta (TBR 3.3, SD 0.8, p < .010) and arch (TBR 4.2, SD 0.6, p = .010). The maximum TBR of the descending aorta decreased from the acute to subacute phase (TBR 3.5, SD 0.6, p = .010) and further to the early chronic phase (TBR 2.9, SD 0.4, p = .030) but was stable thereafter. The acute phase maximum TBR in the ascending aorta (TBR 3.3) and arch (TBR 4.2) decreased to the subacute phase (ascending: TBR 2.8, SD 0.6, p = .020; arch: TBR 2.7, SD 0.4, p = .010) and was stable thereafter. Four patients underwent surgical aortic repair (three for aortic dilatation at one, five, and 28 months and one for visceral ischaemia at three weeks). MRI signs of inflammation were present in all surgically treated patients vs. two of six of medically treated patients (p= .048).

CONCLUSION

ATBAD is associated with increased FDG uptake in the acute phase primarily in the descending aorta, but also involving the aortic arch and ascending aorta, indicating an inflammatory response in the whole aorta. Inflammation subsides early in the ascending aorta and arch (three months), whereas it stabilised later in the descending aorta (nine to 12 months). MRI signs of inflammation were more frequent in patients who later needed surgical treatment and merit further investigation.

Endovascular repair of acute vs. subacute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis evaluating the optimal timing for endovascular repair of acute versus subacute uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection.

Method

PubMed, EMBASE, web of science and Cochrane Library was interrogated to identify Electronic bibliographic studies updated to January 2023 to collect studies compared the clinical outcomes of endovascular repair for Acute Versus Subacute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection. Data were aggregated as pooled odds ratios (OR) using the fixed or random effects models according to the significance of heterogeneity, Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated by RevMan 5.3 and applied with fixed or random-effect models.

Result

A comprehensive literature search found 322 citations published and finally among them 6 studies containing 3,769 patients (acute group 2,642, subacute group 1,127) were included in review. There is an increased risk of 30-day complications (OR = 1.51,95%CI,1.26-1.81) 30-day mortality (OR = 2.39,95%CI, 1.55-3.67) and 1-year mortality (OR = 1.71,95%CI,1.27-2.30) for an acute uTBAD group compared to subacute ones. Similarly, reintervention was more likely in the acute group than in the subacute group (OR = 1.42,95%CI,1.05-1.91). However, no significant differences were found in long-term mortality.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis confirmed that there was no significant difference in the long-term prognosis between the acute and subacute phases in the timing of surgery. However, considering the high incidence of complications, high re-intervention rate and one-year mortality probably caused by high intima fragility in the acute phase, endovascular repair at subacute phase appears to favorably compare with acute strategy. But future studies with adequate patient numbers and longer-term follow-up are necessary to further verify the study conclusion.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021247609, identifier PROSPERO CRD42021247609.

A comparison of endovascular repair to medical management for acute vs subacute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections

OBJECTIVE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has emerged as a viable option of treatment for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (UTBAD) due to the potential for inducing favorable aortic remodeling. The aim of this study is to compare outcomes of UTBAD treated medically or with TEVAR in either the acute (1 to 14 days) or subacute period (2 weeks to 3 months).

METHODS

Patients with UTBAD between 2007 and 2019 were identified using the TriNetX Network. The cohort was stratified by treatment type (medical management; TEVAR during the acute period; TEVAR during the subacute period). Outcomes including mortality, endovascular reintervention, and rupture were analyzed after propensity matching.

RESULTS

Among 20,376 patients with UTBAD, 18,840 were medically managed (92.5%), 1099 patients were in the acute TEVAR group (5.4%), and 437 patients were in the subacute TEVAR group (2.1%). The acute TEVAR group had higher rates of 30-day and 3-year rupture (4.1% vs 1.5%; P < .001; 9.9% vs 3.6%; P < .001) and 3-year endovascular reintervention (7.6% vs 1.6%; P < .001), similar 30-day mortality (4.4% vs 2.9%; P < .068), and lower 3-year survival compared with medical management (86.6% vs 83.3%; P = .041). The subacute TEVAR group had similar rates of 30-day mortality (2.3% vs 2.3%; P = 1), 3-year survival (87.0% vs 88.8%; P = .377) and 30-day and 3-year rupture (2.3% vs 2.3%; P = 1; 4.6% vs 3.4%; P = .388), with significantly higher rates of 3-year endovascular reintervention (12.6% vs 7.8%; P = .019) compared with medical management. The acute TEVAR group had similar rates of 30-day mortality (4.2% vs 2.5%; P = .171), rupture (3.0% vs 2.5%; P = .666), significantly higher rates of 3-year rupture (8.7% vs 3.5%; P = .002), and similar rates of 3-year endovascular reintervention (12.6% vs 10.6%; P = .380) compared with the subacute TEVAR group. There was significantly higher 3-year survival (88.5% vs 84.0%; P = .039) in the subacute TEVAR group compared with the acute TEVAR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results found lower 3-year survival in the acute TEVAR group compared with the medical management group. There was no 3-year survival benefit found in patients with UTBAD who underwent subacute TEVAR compared with medical management. This suggests the need for further studies looking at the necessity for TEVAR when compared with medical management for UTBAD as it is non-inferior to medical management. Higher rates of 3-year survival and lower rates of 3-year rupture in the subacute TEVAR group compared with the acute TEVAR group suggest superiority of subacute TEVAR. Further investigations are needed to determine the long-term benefit and optimal timing of TEVAR for acute UTBAD.

Descending thoracic aortic emergencies: Past, present, and future

The most important descending thoracic aortic (DTA) pathologies are aneurysms, dissections, and traumatic injuries. In acute settings, these conditions can constitute a significant risk of bleeding or ischemia of vital organs, resulting in a fatal outcome. Morbidity and mortality associated with aortic pathologies remain significant, despite improvements in medical therapy and endovascular techniques. In this narrative review, we present an overview of the transitions in the management of these pathologies and discuss current challenges and future perspectives. Diagnostic challenges include differentiating between thoracic aortic pathologies and cardiac diseases. Efforts have been made to identify a blood test that can rapidly differentiate these pathologies. Computed tomography is the cornerstone of diagnosing thoracic aortic emergencies. Our understanding of DTA pathologies has improved substantially due to the significant advancement in imaging modalities in the last 2 decades. On the basis of this understanding, the treatment of these pathologies has been revolutionized. Unfortunately, robust evidence from prospective and randomized studies is still lacking for the management of most DTA diseases. Medical management plays a crucial role in achieving early stability during these life-threatening emergencies. This includes intensive care monitoring, heart rate and blood pressure control, and considering permissive hypotension for patients presenting with ruptured aneurysms. Over the years, surgical management of DTA pathologies changed from open repair to endovascular repair with dedicated stent-grafts. Techniques in both spectrums have improved substantially.

Efficacy and Safety of Exercise Testing and Rehabilitation for Aortic Dissection Patients: A SCOPING REVIEW

OBJECTIVE

Although physical exercise has established benefits for long-term cardiovascular health, concern regarding further aortic events has limited the evidence for exercise among aortic dissection (AD) patients. The objective was to perform a scoping review of the current concepts and gaps in the literature regarding the benefit and safety of cardiovascular testing and rehabilitation among post-AD patients.

REVIEW METHODS

A scoping review of the literature search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Eligibility criteria included any studies with AD in relation to exercise rehabilitation or testing and physical or mental health. Electronic databases were queried for relevant studies (last queried, November 1, 2021).

RESULTS

Six observational studies were included with a total of 381 patients with AD, all of whom underwent surgical intervention. Study heterogeneity prevented data synthesis and a formal systematic review, although four dominant themes emerged: cardiovascular-related outcomes, aorta-related outcomes, quality of life (QoL), and serious adverse events. Patients with AD have reduced baseline physical capacity and QoL. Rehabilitation programs may increase both physical status and QoL. Rates of serious adverse rates are minimal yet poorly defined.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the context of apparent benefits from cardiovascular testing and rehabilitation for patients with AD who have undergone intervention, this scoping review highlights the need for increased comparative research specific to exercise among patients with AD and outcomes such as mortality and reinterventions.

Early Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair of Uncomplicated Type B Thoracic Aortic Dissection: An Aorta Team Approach

BACKGROUND

 Although uncomplicated Type B aortic dissection (uTBAD) is traditionally treated with optimal medical therapy (OMT) as per guidelines, recent studies, performed primarily in interventional radiology or surgical operating rooms, suggest superiority of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) over OMT due to recent advancements in endovascular technologies. We report a large, single-center, case control study of TEVAR versus OMT in this population, undertaken solely in a cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) with a cardiologist and surgeon. We aimed to determine if TEVAR for uTBAD results in better outcomes compared with OMT.

METHODS

 This was a retrospective chart review of all patients with uTBAD during the last 13 years, with 46 cases (TEVAR group) and 56 controls (OMT group).

RESULTS

 In the TEVAR group, the procedure duration of 2.5 hours resulted in 100% procedural success for stent placement, with 63% undergoing protective left subclavian artery bypass, 0% mortality or stroke, and a lower readmission rate (1 vs. 2%; p = 0.04 in early TEVAR cases), but a longer length of stay (12.9 vs. 8.5 days: p = 0.006). The risk of all-cause long-term mortality was markedly reduced in the TEVAR group (RR = 0.38; p = 0.01), irrespective of early (<14 days) versus late intervention. On follow-up computed tomography imaging, the false lumen stabilized or decreased in 85% of cases, irrespective of intervention timing.

CONCLUSION

 TEVAR performed solely in the CCL is safe and effective, with lower all-cause mortality than OMT. These data, in collaboration with previous data on TEVAR in different settings, call for consideration of an update of practice guidelines.

Scandinavian trial of uncomplicated aortic dissection therapy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Contemporary management of uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (uTBAD) is based on the acuity and various morphological features. Medical therapy is mandatory, while the risks of early thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are balanced against the potential for rupture, complex surgery, and death. Improved aortic morphology following TEVAR is documented, but evidence for improved overall survival is lacking. The costs and impact on quality of life are also needed.

METHODS

The trial is a randomized, open-label, superiority clinical trial with parallel assignment of subjects at 23 clinical sites in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Iceland. Eligibility includes patients aged ≥ 18 with uTBAD of < 4 weeks duration. Recruited subjects will be randomized to either standard medical therapy (SMT) or SMT + TEVAR, where TEVAR must be performed between 2-12 weeks from the onset of symptoms.

DISCUSSION

This trial will evaluate the primary question of whether early TEVAR improves survival at 5 years among uTBAD patients. Moreover, the costs and the impact on quality of life should provide sorely needed data on other factors that play a role in treatment strategy decisions. The common Nordic healthcare model, with inclusion of all aortic centers, provides a favorable setting for carrying out this trial, while the robust healthcare registries ensure data validity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05215587. Registered on January 31, 2022.

Favorable Remodeling After TEVAR in Uncomplicated Acute and Subacute Type B Aortic Dissection in Comparison to Conservative Treatment: A Midterm Analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the midterm and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) procedure to treat an uncomplicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection (uATBAD) with high risk for subsequent aortic complications compared with the group of patients who received a conservative treatment protocol during the same period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2008 and 2019, 35 patients who had TEVAR due to uATBAD and those with conservative procedure (n=18) were included in a retrospective analysis and follow-up study. The primary endpoints were false lumen thrombosis/perfusion, true lumen diameter, and aortic dilatation. The aortic-related mortality, reintervention, and long-term survival were the secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

In the study period, 53 patients (22 females) with a mean age of 61.1±13 years were included. No 30-day and in-hospital mortality was recorded. Permanent neurological deficits occurred in 2 patients (5.7%). In the TEVAR group (n=35) and in a median follow-up period of 34 months, a significant reduction of maximum aortic and false lumen diameter as well as a significant increase of true lumen diameter were detected (p<0.001 each). Complete false lumen thrombosis increased from 6% preoperatively to 60% at follow-up. The median difference in aortic, false lumen, and true lumen diameter was -5 mm (interquartile range [IQR]=-28 to 8 mm), -11 mm (IQR=-53 to 10 mm), and 7 mm (IQR=-13 to 17 mm), respectively. In 3 patients (8.6%), a reintervention was needed. Two patients (1 aortic-related) died during follow-up. The estimated survival according to Kaplan-Meyer analysis was 94.1% after 3 years and 87.5% after 5 years. Similar to the TEVAR group, no 30-day or in-hospital mortality was recorded in the conservative group. During follow-up, 2 patients died and 5 patients underwent conversion-TEVAR (28%). In a median follow-up period of 26 months (range=150), a significant increase of maximum aortic diameter (p=0.006) and a tendency to augmentation of the false lumen (p=0.06) were noted. No significant reduction of the true lumen was seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients at high risk of subsequent aortic complications in uncomplicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection is safe and is associated with favorable midterm outcomes regarding aortic remodeling.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In a retrospective, single center analysis of prospectively collected data with follow-up, we compared 35 patients with high-risk features who recieved TEVAR in acute and sub-acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection to a control-group (n=18). The TEVAR group showed a significant positive remoduling (reduction of max. aortic and false lumen diameter and increase of true lumen diameter (p<0.001 each)) during follow-up with an estimated survival of 94.1% after 3 years and 87.5% after 5 years.

Acute aortic dissection: evidence, uncertainties, and future therapies

Remarkable progress has become especially apparent in aortic medicine in the last few decades, leading to essential changes in how thoracic aortic dissection is understood and treated. This state-of-the-art review article addresses the mechanisms of acute aortic dissection, explaining the role of its primary entry location, proximal, and distal dissection extension in their clinical presentation and impact on the decision-making process towards the best treatment approach. The latest evidence on novel treatment methods for acute aortic syndromes is presented, and the diverse dissection classification systems that remain uncertain are discussed, which reveals the need for shared terminology and more clarity. Finally, future aspects are discussed in treating acute aortic dissection, such as the endovascular treatment of aortic dissection Type A and biomarkers for acute aortic syndromes.

Acute aortic dissection

Although substantial progress has been made in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of acute aortic dissection, it remains a complex cardiovascular event, with a high immediate mortality and substantial morbidity in individuals surviving the acute period. The past decade has allowed a leap forward in understanding the pathophysiology of this disease; the existing classifications have been challenged, and the scientific community moves towards a nomenclature that is likely to unify the current definitions according to morphology and function. The most important pathophysiological pathway, namely the location and extension of the initial intimal tear, which causes a disruption of the media layer of the aortic wall, together with the size of the affected aortic segments, determines whether the patient should undergo emergency surgery, an endovascular intervention, or receive optimal medical treatment. The scientific evidence for the management and follow-up of acute aortic dissection continues to evolve. This Seminar provides a clinically relevant overview of potential prevention, diagnosis, and management of acute aortic dissection, which is the most severe acute aortic syndrome.

Advanced risk prediction for aortic dissection patients using imaging-based computational flow analysis

Patients with either a repaired or medically managed aortic dissection have varying degrees of risk of developing late complications. High-risk patients would benefit from earlier intervention to improve their long-term survival. Currently serial imaging is used for risk stratification, which is not always reliable. On the other hand, understanding aortic haemodynamics within a dissection is essential to fully evaluate the disease and predict how it may progress. In recent decades, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been extensively applied to simulate complex haemodynamics within aortic diseases, and more recently, four-dimensional (4D)-flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques have been developed for in vivo haemodynamic measurement. This paper presents a comprehensive review on the application of image-based CFD simulations and 4D-flow MRI analysis for risk prediction in aortic dissection. The key steps involved in patient-specific CFD analyses are demonstrated. Finally, we propose a workflow incorporating computational modelling for personalised assessment to aid in risk stratification and treatment decision-making.

Trends in the incidence, surgical management and outcomes of type B aortic dissections in Australia over the last decade

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate the incidence and in-hospital outcomes of surgical repair for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) in Australia.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Australasian Vascular Audit (AVA) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). The former is a total practice audit mandated for all members of the Australian and New Zealand Society for Vascular Surgery (ANZSVS) while the latter is an independent government agency which records all healthcare data in Australia. All cases of TBAD which underwent surgical intervention (endovascular or open repair) between 2010 and 2019 were identified using prospectively recorded data from the AVA (New Zealand data was excluded). The primary outcomes were temporal trends in procedures and hospital mortality; secondary outcomes were complications and risk factors for mortality. All admissions and procedures for, and hospital deaths from, TBAD in Australia were identified in AIHW datasets using the relevant diagnosis and procedure codes, with age-standardized rates calculated for the period 2000-01 to 2018-19.

RESULTS

A total of 567 cases of TBAD underwent vascular surgical intervention (AVA data, Australia). Of these, 96.3% were treated by endovascular repair. There was an increase in the annual procedure number from 45 in 2010 to 88 in 2019. In-hospital mortality was 4.8% for endovascular repair and 19% for open repair (p = 0.021). From 2000-01 to 201819, the age-standardized procedure rates for TBAD (Australia) doubled, the proportion of admitted patients undergoing a procedure rose from 28% to 43%, and in-hospital deaths fell by 25%.

CONCLUSION

There has been an increasing incidence of vascular surgical intervention for TBAD in Australia. The majority of patients received endovascular therapy while the mortality from surgically managed TBAD appears to be falling.

Reintervention after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair of Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Data are scarce regarding the incidence, reasons, potential risk factors, and long-term outcomes of reintervention after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD).

METHODS

Between January 2010 and December 2020, 238 patients with uncomplicated TBAD who received TEVAR were analyzed retrospectively. The clinical baseline data, aorta anatomy, dissection characteristics, and details of the TEVAR procedure were evaluated and compared. A competing-risk regression model was used to estimate the cumulative incidences of reintervention. The multivariate Cox model was used to identify the independent risk factors.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 68.6 months. A total of 27 (11.3%) cases of reintervention were observed. The competing-risk analyses showed that the 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative incidences of reintervention were 5.07%, 7.08%, and 14.0%, respectively. Reasons for reintervention included endoleak (25.9%), aneurysmal dilation (22.2%), retrograde type A aortic dissection (18.5%), distal stent-graft-induced new entry and false lumen expansion (18.5%), and dissection progression and/or malperfusion (14.8%). Multivariable Cox analysis demonstrated that a larger initial maximal aortic diameter (Hazard ratio [HR], 1.75; 95% Confidence interval [CI], 1.13-2.69, p = 0.011) and increased proximal landing zone oversizing (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.47, p = 0.033) were the significant risk factors for reintervention. Long-term survival rates were comparable between patients with or without reintervention (p = 0.915).

CONCLUSIONS

Reintervention after TEVAR in patients with uncomplicated TBAD is not uncommon. A larger initial maximal aortic diameter and excessive proximal landing zone oversizing are associated with the second intervention. Reintervention does not significantly affect long-term survival.

Aortic arch surgery for type B aortic dissection: How far should we go? The value of a hybrid approach

Traditionally, the management of type B aortic dissection has been the domain of the vascular surgeons. Timing and type of intervention still generate debate. We sought to review our early experience with the treatment of this condition based on a hybrid approach following an aortic multi-disciplinary team meeting involving close cooperation between cardiac surgeons, vascular surgeons, interventional radiologists, vascular anesthetists, and cardiac anesthetists. Four patients (age 41-56 years; 3 males; 1 female) with type B aortic dissection underwent aortic arch surgery through a hybrid approach: one elective procedure consisting of ascending aorta and hemi-arch replacement with debranching followed by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR); one redo procedure requiring aortic arch replacement with hybrid frozen elephant trunk; two acute presentations (aortic arch replacement and debranching followed by TEVAR; AVR with ascending aorta, arch, and proximal descending thoracic aorta replacement with conventional elephant trunk and debranching). Deep hypothermic circulatory arrest was required in three patients. Despite respiratory complications and slightly prolonged postoperative course, all patients survived without onset of stroke, paraplegia, malperfusion, endoleak, or need for re-exploration. Follow-up remains satisfactory. Different factors may affect outcome following complex aortic procedures. Nevertheless, close cooperation between cardiac surgeons, vascular surgeons, and interventional radiologists may reduce potential for complications and address aspects that may not be completely within the domain of individual specialists.