Mid-term Results of Chimney and Periscope Grafts in Supra-aortic Branches in High Risk Patients

Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair using fenestrated stent grafts in patients with thoracic aortic distal arch aneurysms

OBJECTIVES

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aortic arch aneurysms is challenging because of anatomical restrictions and the presence of cervical branches. Revascularization of the cervical branch is required when conventional commercial stent grafts are used. TEVAR using fenestrated stent grafts (FSG) often does not require additional procedures to revascularize cervical branches. This study aimed to evaluate the features and initial and midterm outcomes of TEVAR using fenestrated stent grafts.

METHODS

From April 2007 to December 2016, 101 consecutive patients underwent TEVAR using fenestrated stent grafts for distal aortic arch aneurysms at a single centre. Technical success, complications, freedom from aneurysm-related death, secondary intervention and aneurysm progression were retrospectively investigated.

RESULTS

All the patients underwent TEVAR using fenestrated stent grafts. The 30-day mortality rate was zero. Cerebral infarction, access route problems and spinal cord injury occurred in 4, 3 and 2 patients, respectively. Each type of endoleak was observed in 38 of the 101 patients during the course of the study; 20/38 patients had minor type 1 endoleaks at the time of discharge. The endoleak disappeared in 2 patients and showed no significant change in 8 patients; however, the aneurysm expanded over time in 10 patients. Additional treatment was performed in 8 of the 10 patients with type 1 endoleaks and dilatation of the aneurysm. The rate of freedom from aneurysm-related death during the observation period was 98%.

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR with FSG is a simple procedure, with few complications. Additional treatment has been observed to reduce aneurysm-related deaths, even in patients with endoleaks and enlarged aneurysms. Based on this study, the outcomes of endovascular repair of aortic arch aneurysms using a fenestrated stent graft seem acceptable.

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

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

Outcomes of Fenestrated and Branched Endografts for Partial and Total Endovascular Repair of the Aortic Arch - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Fenestrated and branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (F/B-TEVAR) of the aortic arch is a viable approach in patients unsuitable for open repair. The aim was to summarise the published results of manufactured F/B-TEVAR devices for partial and total repair of the aortic arch, and to compare fenestrated with branched configurations.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus and The Cochrane Library were searched for articles (2018 - 2021) about patients with elective, urgent, or emergency aortic requiring a proximal landing zone in the aortic arch (zone 0 - 1 - 2) and treated by F/B-TEVAR.

REVIEW METHODS

The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Open repair, supra-aortic trunk (SAT) debranching + standard TEVAR, and in situ physician modified and parallel grafts were excluded. Primary outcomes were technical success and 30 day mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were 30 day major adverse events, and overall survival and procedure related endpoints during follow up.

RESULTS

Of 458 articles screened, 18 articles involving 571 patients were selected. Indications for intervention were chronic dissections (50.1%), degenerative aneurysms (39.6%), penetrating aortic ulcers (7.4%), and pseudoaneurysms (2%). F-TEVAR, B-TEVAR, and F+B-TEVAR were used in 38.4%, 54.1%, and 7.5% of patients, respectively. Overall, technical success was 95.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93 - 0.97; I2 = 0%; p for heterogeneity (Het) = .77) and the 30 day mortality rate was 6.7% (95% CI 0.05 - 0.09; I2 = 0%; p Het = .66). No statistical differences were found comparing fenestrated with branched endografts, except for a higher rate of type I - III endoleaks in F-TEVAR (9.8% vs. 2.6%; p = .034). The overall survival rate and freedom from aortic related death at the one year follow up ranged between 82 - 96.4% and 94 - 94.7%, respectively. Thirteen and five studies were considered at moderate and high risk of bias, respectively.

CONCLUSION

F/B-TEVAR for the treatment of the aortic arch, according to experience in dedicated centres, now enjoys a satisfactory level of technical success together with a progressively reduced early mortality rate. There are several limitations, and further studies are needed to reach clearer conclusions.

Chimney Technique and Single-Branched Stent Graft for the Left Subclavian Artery Preservation During Zone 2 Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Type B Acute Aortic Syndromes

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair assisted by the chimney technique or single-branched stent graft for the preservation of the left subclavian artery, and summarize our single-center experience with the techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From February 2017 to June 2020, 137 patients who underwent left subclavian artery revascularization during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair were enrolled. Patients had acute type B aortic dissection and penetrating aortic ulcer associated with intramural hematoma. The chimney technique was performed in 68 patients (group A), and single-branched stent graft was deployed in 69 patients (group B). All procedures were performed during the acute phase. Primary technical success, immediate postoperative endoleak, neurologic complications (stroke or spinal cord ischemia), 30-day mortality, 1-year technical success, all-cause mortality, patency of the left subclavian artery, and reintervention were analyzed. Comparing the occurrence of the Bird-Beak Configuration, defined as a gap between the aortic wall and the sent graft with stent protrusion into the aortic lumen more than 5 mm, was also performed.

RESULTS

Primary technique success was achieved in 66 and 67 patients in groups A and B, respectively. The incidence of immediate postoperative endoleak, neurologic complications (stroke or spinal cord ischemia), and 30-day mortality were 5.9%, 1.5%, and 4.4% in group A, and 2.9%, 2.9%, and 2.9% in group B, respectively. During follow-up, the 1-year technical success rate was similar in both groups. All-cause mortality was similar in both groups (3.1% in group A and 4.5% in group B). The patency of the left subclavian artery was not significantly different between the 2 groups with 2 and 3 occlusions in groups A and B, respectively. The rate of reintervention was higher in group B (3.1% vs 1.6%, p=0.536), with a non-significant difference. Bird-Beak Configuration was more prominent in group B with the incidence of 59.42%.

CONCLUSIONS

Acting as minimally invasive alternatives, both techniques are feasible for left subclavian artery preservation during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B acute aortic syndromes with encouraging mid-term outcomes. Long-term follow-up is required to confirm these findings.

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.

Mid-term outcomes of left subclavian artery revascularization with Castor stent graft in treatment of type B aortic dissection in left subclavian artery

Background

Here we analyzed mid-term data of thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) surgery with Castor single-branched stent graft placement for the management of Stanford type B aortic dissection (STBAD) involving the left subclavian artery (LSA).

Methods

Between April 2014 and February 2019, 32 patients with STBAD involving a Castor single-branched stent graft were included. We analyzed their outcomes, including technical success rate (TSR), surgical duration (SD), presence of ischemia, perioperative complications, LSA patency, and survival rate (SR), using computed tomography angiography and clinical evaluation during mid-term follow-up.

Results

The mean patient age was 54.63 ​± ​12.37 years (range, 36-83 years). The TSR was 96.88% (n ​= ​31/32). The mean SD was 87.44 ​± ​10.89 with a mean contrast volume of 125.31 ​± ​19.30 ​mL. No neurological complications or deaths occurred during the study period. The patients had a mean hospital stay of 7.84 ​± ​3.20 days. At a mean follow-up of 68.78 ​± ​11.26 months, four non-aortic deaths (12.5%) were observed. The LSA patency rate was 100% (n ​= ​28/28). There was only one case of type I endoleak immediately after surgery (3.12%) (type I from LSA). However, none of the patients experienced type II endoleaks, and there were no cases of retrograde type A aortic dissection or stent graft-driven new distal entry. Finally, all patients exhibited good LSA patency.

Conclusion

TEVAR using a Castor single-branched stent graft may be a highly feasible and efficient procedure for the management of STBAD involving the LSA.

NEXUS Arch: A Multicenter Study Evaluating the Initial Experience With a Novel Aortic Arch Stent Graft System

OBJECTIVE

To assess the initial clinical experience with a novel endograft system (NEXUS Aortic Arch Stent Graft System) designed to treat aortic arch pathologies and address the morphology and hemodynamic challenges of the aortic arch.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The aortic arch remains the most challenging part of the aorta for both open and endovascular repair. Transcatheter aortic arch repair has the potential to significantly reduce surgical risks.

METHODS

Patients underwent transcatheter aortic arch repair with a single branch, 2 stent graft system, implanted over a through-and-through guidewire from the brachiocephalic trunk, to the descending aorta with an ascending aorta stent graft. The ascending aorta stent graft is deployed into a designated docking sleeve to connect the 2 stent grafts and isolate the aortic arch pathology. Proximal landing zone in all cases was in Zone 0. Anatomical inclusion criteria included adequate landing zone in the ascending aorta, brachiocephalic trunk, and descending thoracic aorta. Preparatory debranching procedure was performed in all patients with carotid-carotid crossover bypass and left carotid to left subclavian bypass, or parallel graft from descending aorta to left subclavian artery. Safety and performance were evaluated through 1 year. Survival analysis used the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients, 79% males, with a mean age of 72.2 ± 6.2 years were treated with 100% procedural success. Isolated aortic arch aneurysm was the principle pathology in 17 (60.7%) of patients, while chronic aortic dissection was the principle pathology in 6 (21.4%) of patients. The remaining 5 (17.8%) had combined or other pathologies. At 1 month, the vascular pathology was excluded in 25 of 26 alive patients (96.1%). The 30 days mortality rate was 7.1%, stroke rate was 3.6% (all nondisabling), and combined mortality/stroke rate was 10.7%. One-year mortality was 10.7%, without device or aneurysm-related death. Two patients (7.1%) reported stroke or transient ischemic attack at 1 year that recovered completely. One year combined mortality/stroke rate was 17.8%. There were 3 patients (10.7%) that had device-related unplanned reinterventions through 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

The NEXUS Aortic Arch Stent Graft System, a novel single branch, 2 stent graft system used for endovascular aortic arch repair that requires landing in the ascending aorta, demonstrates a high success rate with excellent 1 year safety and performance.

Differences of mid-term outcomes in debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair between zone 0 and zone 1-2 landing

OBJECTIVE

Debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair (d-TEVAR) for zone 0 landing (Z0-TEVAR) remained challenging in aortic arch aneurysms. This study aimed to compare the mid-term outcomes between Z0-TEVAR and Z1/2-TEVAR to assess the appropriateness of Z0-TEVAR as the first-line therapy for aortic arch aneurysms in high-risk patients.

METHODS

Medical records of 200 patients who underwent d-TEVAR from 2007 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Of these, 40 patients who underwent Z0-TEVAR (70% males; the median age of 82 years) and 160 Z1/2-TEVAR (78% males; the median age of 77 years) were compared. In each group, 39 patients were matched using propensity scores (PS) to adjust for differences in patient backgrounds.

RESULTS

Freedom from all-cause mortality (p < 0.001), aorta-related mortality (p < 0.001), and stroke (p = 0.001) were significantly lower in Z0-TEVAR than in Z1/2-TEVAR. Freedom from reintervention was similar between the two groups (p = 0.326). Type A dissection post-TEVAR was observed in 3 (7.5%) of Z0-TEVAR, but none in Z1/2-TEVAR (p = 0.006). Pneumonia was also more frequent in Z0-TEVAR (n = 8, 30%) than Z1/2-TEVAR (n = 4, 2.5%) (p < 0.001). PS matching also yielded worse outcomes (all-cause mortality, p = 0.017; aorta-related mortality, p = 0.046; and stroke, p = 0.027) in Z0-TEVAR than Z1/2-TEVAR.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher mid-term mortality and stroke rates after Z0-TEVAR were confirmed by PS matching. Z0-TEVAR would be an alternative for high-risk patients with arch aneurysms requiring zone 0 landing but not a reliable method.

Physician-modified fenestration or in situ fenestration for preservation of isolated left vertebral artery in thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Objective

To present our experience of preserving the isolated left vertebral artery (ILVA) with physician-modified fenestration (PM-F) or in situ fenestration (ISF) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aortic pathologies involving aortic arch.

Methods

This is a single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study. Between June 2016 and December 2021, 9 patients (8 men; median age 60.0 years old) underwent TEVAR with ILVA reconstruction (PM-F, n = 6; ISF, n = 3) were identified and analyzed.

Results

The technical success rate was 100%. No early (<30 days) death occurred. No aortic rupture, major stroke or spinal cord injury was observed. The median follow up was 38.0 (rang: 1.0-66.0) months. One death occurred at 56 months, while the reason cannot be identified. No aortic rupture, major stroke or spinal cord injury was observed during follow up. No patient required reintervention. Out of the 22 successfully revascularized target vessels, 2 ILVAs were found occluded in 2 patients at 6 months and 7 months, respectively. However, these two patients were asymptomatic.

Conclusions

Our initial experience reveals that PM-F or ISF for ILVA preservation was feasible, safe, and effective during TEVAR for complex thoracic aortic pathologies. However, the patency of preserved ILVA should be improved.

Non-invasive estimation of the parameters of a three-element windkessel model of aortic arch arteries in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Background: Image-based computational hemodynamic modeling and simulations are important for personalized diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular diseases. However, the required patient-specific boundary conditions are often not available and need to be estimated. Methods: We propose a pipeline for estimating the parameters of the popular three-element Windkessel (WK3) models (a proximal resistor in series with a parallel combination of a distal resistor and a capacitor) of the aortic arch arteries in patients receiving thoracic endovascular aortic repair of aneurysms. Pre-operative and post-operative 1-week duplex ultrasound scans were performed to obtain blood flow rates, and intra-operative pressure measurements were also performed invasively using a pressure transducer pre- and post-stent graft deployment in arch arteries. The patient-specific WK3 model parameters were derived from the flow rate and pressure waveforms using an optimization algorithm reducing the error between simulated and measured pressure data. The resistors were normalized by total resistance, and the capacitor was normalized by total resistance and heart rate. The normalized WK3 parameters can be combined with readily available vessel diameter, brachial blood pressure, and heart rate data to estimate WK3 parameters of other patients non-invasively. Results: Ten patients were studied. The medians (interquartile range) of the normalized proximal resistor, distal resistor, and capacitor parameters are 0.10 (0.07-0.15), 0.90 (0.84-0.93), and 0.46 (0.33-0.58), respectively, for common carotid artery; 0.03 (0.02-0.04), 0.97 (0.96-0.98), and 1.91 (1.63-2.26) for subclavian artery; 0.18 (0.08-0.41), 0.82 (0.59-0.92), and 0.47 (0.32-0.85) for vertebral artery. The estimated pressure showed fairly high tolerance to patient-specific inlet flow rate waveforms using the WK3 parameters estimated from the medians of the normalized parameters. Conclusion: When patient-specific outflow boundary conditions are not available, our proposed pipeline can be used to estimate the WK3 parameters of arch arteries.

Tratamiento endovascular con técnica de chimenea para patologías del arco aórtico

Introducción. La patología del arco aórtico se ha tratado principalmente con cirugía por vía abierta, pero con una alta morbimortalidad. Las técnicas endovasculares híbridas y las reconstrucciones en “chimenea” son una técnica válida y segura para disminuir el riesgo y la mortalidad. Métodos. Se presentan dos pacientes con patología del arco aórtico y contraindicación de manejo quirúrgico abierto, atendidos en el Servicio de Cirugía Vascular, Hospital Universitario Clínica de San Rafael, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia. Resultados. Se realizaron dos procedimientos endovasculares del arco aórtico para tratar un aneurisma torácico roto y una úlcera aórtica sintomática, con cubrimiento de los troncos supra aórticos con una endoprótesis y canalización de los vasos supra aórticos con prótesis cubiertas y uso de la “técnica de chimenea”, de manera exitosa. Discusión. La patología del arco aórtico es de alta complejidad y se asocia con una morbimortalidad elevada por lo que, en los últimos 20 años se han desarrollado diferentes técnicas utilizando procedimientos percutáneos. Conclusión. La “técnica de chimenea” se puede realizar de una manera mínimamente invasiva en pacientes con patología del arco aórtico, no candidatos para cirugía abierta, con resultados exitosos.

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.

Mid-term Comparison of One-Piece Branched Stent-Graft and Chimney Technique Treating Aortic Arch Pathologies

PURPOSE

We compared the mid-term outcomes of a one-piece branched stent-graft with the chimney technique in the treatment of aortic arch pathologies.

METHODS

Between August 2012 and December 2017, a retrospective analysis of 279 patients with thoracic aortic dissection (TAD) or aneurysm (TAA) who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair with b-TEVAR (n = 69, 58 TAD and 11 TAA) or c-TEVAR (n = 210, 151 TAD and 59 TAA) was performed.

RESULTS

Forty-five double-chimney for the left subclavian artery (LSA) and left common carotid artery LCCA and 165 single-chimney for the LSA were performed in chimney-TEVAR (c-TEVAR) and 69 branched-TEVAR (b-TEVAR) with 36 single-branched stent-grafts and 33 branched stent-grafts combined with fenestration technique. The c-TEVAR group experienced more in-hospital complications than the b-TEVAR group (19.5 vs. 7.2%, p = 0.017), primarily because the c-TEVAR group experienced more in-hospital cerebral ischemia events (6.2 vs. 0%, p = 0.043) and intra-operative type I endoleaks (31.9 vs. 5.8%, p < 0.01). There were significantly more follow-up type I endoleaks (21.9 vs. 4.3%, p = 0.002), cerebral ischemia events (11.0 vs. 2.9%, p = 0.042), and re-interventions (12.9 vs. 4.3%, p = 0.048) in the c-TEVAR group than in the b-TEVAR group. However, follow-up mortality was not significantly different between the c-TEVAR and b-TEVAR groups (5.2 vs. 2.9%, p = 0.638).

CONCLUSION

In patients with aortic pathologies involving the arch branches, customized b-TEVAR may result in fewer cerebral ischemia events and endoleaks than c-TEVAR. However, c-TEVAR should be considered an off-the-shelf treatment option for patients in need of emergency treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4, Case Series.

Current state of hybrid solutions for aortic arch aneurysms

Since its inception in the early 2000s, hybrid arch repair (HAR) has evolved from a novel approach to a well-established treatment modality for aortic arch pathology in appropriately selected patients. HAR procedures have been proposed as a means to circumvent the perioperative morbidity and mortality associated with open total arch replacement. These procedures, all of which remain off-label applications of approved endograft technology, combine more conventional open surgical techniques, to create endograft landing zones, with thoracic endovascular aortic repair to exclude the aortic pathology from the circulation. The current classification system for HAR was proposed in 2013 and consists of three types, designated by the Roman numerals I, II and III. The current system has become outdated, however, with the advent of newer technologies, and herein we propose a new, updated classification system that is more encompassing with regards to the broad array of options available to treat aortic arch disease. Likewise, an institutional algorithm to guide patient and operative selection for HAR is presented. Patients are considered for HAR if they have either high-risk comorbidities or high-risk anatomy, with an important feature of the algorithm being that any decisions about repair strategy should be made by a surgical team with expertise in both open and endovascular techniques. Despite being performed for nearly two decades, the evidence around HAR consists mainly of single center series (level B-C evidence) with no randomized controlled trials. The data suggest HAR to be a safe alternative to open repair with acceptable short and mid-term results. As we as aortic surgeons continue to move towards less invasive approaches, both conventional open and hybrid techniques will remain important tools in the toolbox for arch repair, although the advent of multi-branched arch endografts will almost certainly reduce the extent of open or hybrid repair in many patients and eliminate it altogether in others.

Long-term results of total endovascular repair of arch-involving aortic pathologies using parallel grafts for supra-aortic debranching

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the long-term morphologic and clinical outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair combined with parallel grafts (PG-TEVAR) for arch-involving aortic pathologies.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of perioperative and follow-up data of patients who had undergone PG-TEVAR at a single vascular surgery center from November 2010 to April 2018. Patients with prior or simultaneous open chest or cervical debranching procedures or arch repair were excluded. The primary endpoint was freedom from overall PG-TEVAR-related reintervention. The secondary endpoints were parallel graft sealing zone failure (presence of gutter-related type I or Ic endoleak), PG failure (occlusion or reintervention), stroke, and 30-day and overall PG-TEVAR-related and all-cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate the freedom from reintervention and survival. Receiver operating characteristics curves were used to find the optimal cutoff to prevent type Ia endoleak-related reintervention.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients, including 8 women, with a median age of 74 years (interquartile range, 67-79 years) had undergone PG-TEVAR (chimney, periscope, and sandwich in 20, 15, and 13 patients, respectively) with proximal landing in Ishimaru zone 0, 1, or 2 in 4, 5, and 24 patients, respectively. The aortic pathologies included type B aortic dissection (acute and chronic, eight and six, respectively), degenerative aneurysm (n = 10), type Ia endoleak (n = 3), para-anastomotic/patch aneurysm (n = 4), left subclavian artery aneurysm (n = 1), and traumatic rupture (n = 1). The perioperative stroke rate and 30-day mortality was 6% and 9%, respectively. Direct postoperative computed tomography revealed 28 endoleaks (gutter-related type Ia, 12; gutter-related type Ib, 9; type Ia, 2; type Ic, 2; type III, 1; undetermined, 2) in 27 patients. The technical and clinical success rate was 37% and 30%, respectively. The mean follow-up for survival was 48 ± 31 months. The latest radiologic follow-up demonstrated 12 remaining and 1 new endoleak. The early and overall PG sealing zone failure and PG failure was 73% and 36% and 9% and 18%, respectively. The overall PG-TEVAR-related reintervention rate was 33% (n = 11). The estimated freedom from overall PG-TEVAR-related reintervention was 68% at 60 months. The main graft oversizing and length oversizing rates were not significantly associated statistically with the type Ia endoleak-related reintervention rate. The PG-TEVAR-related and all-cause mortality were 18% and 34%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

PG-TEVAR for total endovascular repair of arch-involving aortic pathologies resulted in a high rate of type I endoleaks and the need for long-term reintervention. Gutter-related endoleaks might be more frequent than reported and should not be underestimated because they can lead to sac enlargement and reintervention. Frequent radiologic surveillance is mandatory. Further studies comparing PG-TEVAR to other total endovascular alternatives are required to confirm these findings.

Endovascular Treatment of Post Type A Chronic Aortic Arch Dissection With a Branched Endograft: Early Results From a Retrospective International Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of endovascular aortic arch repair for chronic dissection with a custom-made branched endograft.

BACKGROUND

Acute type A aortic dissections are often treated with prosthetic replacement of the ascending aorta. During follow-up, repair of an aneurysmal evolution of the false lumen distal to the ascending prosthesis can be a challenge both for the surgeon and the patient.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study of consecutive patients from 14 vascular units treated with a custom-made, inner-branched device (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) for chronic aortic arch dissection. Rates of in-hospital mortality and stroke, technical success, early and late complications, reinterventions, and mortality during follow-up were evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventy consecutive patients were treated between 2011 and 2018. All patients were considered unfit for conventional surgery. In-hospital combined mortality and stroke rate was 4% (n = 3), including 1 minor stroke, 1 major stroke causing death, and 1 death following multiorgan failure. Technical success rate was 94.3%. Twelve (17.1%) patients required early reinterventions: 8 for vascular access complication, 2 for endoleak correction, and 2 for pericardial effusion drainage. Median follow-up was 301 (138-642) days. During follow-up, 20 (29%) patients underwent secondary interventions: 9 endoleak corrections, 1 open repair for prosthetic kink, and 10 distal extensions of the graft to the thoracic or thoracoabdominal aorta. Eight patients (11%) died during follow-up because of nonaortic-related cause in 7 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular treatment of aortic arch chronic dissections with a branched endograft is associated with low mortality and stroke rates but has a high reintervention rate. Further follow-up is required to confirm the benefits of this novel approach.

Midterm Outcomes of Zone 0 Antegrade Endograft Implantation During Type I Hybrid Aortic Arch Repair

OBJECTIVE

Type I hybrid arch repair has become popular as a procedure that is less invasive than total arch replacement. The major advantage of this technique is that antegrade endograft implantation can be performed during the procedure, thereby avoiding the complications of introducing the endograft from the groin. The aim of this study was to assess the midterm outcomes of type I hybrid aortic arch repair with antegrade endograft implantation.

METHODS

Thirty consecutive patients who underwent type I hybrid repair with antegrade endograft implantation from 2009 to 2015 were reviewed retrospectively. Patient demographics, and peri-operative and late results were collected from a prospective database and analysed.

RESULTS

Four patients (13%) were female and the median age was 78 years. Median aneurysm size was 64 mm. Six patients (20%) developed stroke, and the 30 day mortality rate was 3%. Two patients suffered aortic dissection at the site of debranching anastomosis. The median follow up was 5.2 years. All aneurysms remained stable or had decreased in size at three years, and 82% were stable at five years. Overall survival was 79% at three years and 71% at five years. The rates of freedom from aorta related death were 86% at three and five years, respectively. During the follow up period, three additional left subclavian artery embolisations and one endograft relining due to type IIIb endoleak were required.

CONCLUSION

Midterm outcomes of type I hybrid aortic arch repair with antegrade endograft implantation for aortic arch aneurysms are reported. Although the incidence of peri-operative stroke was high, late sac behaviour was acceptable.

Hybrid zone zero debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair of ascending aortic injury after surgery and radiotherapy for breast cancer

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair of the ascending aorta remains challenging. We have reported the case of an 81-year-old woman with ascending aortic injury who underwent a life-saving hybrid repair. The patient had previously undergone extended radical mastectomy and postoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer, which had resulted in a right thoracic wall defect and bone exposure and osteonecrosis of the sternum. Therefore, the ascending aorta was directly compressed by the sternum at the level of the brachiocephalic artery bifurcation, causing persistent bleeding from the thoracic wall. Hybrid zone 0 debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair with a left subclavian artery inflow was emergently performed and achieved hemostasis.

Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissection Involving the Left Subclavian Artery by Castor Stent Graft: A Multicentre Prospective Trial

OBJECTIVE

The left subclavian artery (LSA) origin can be intentionally covered by stent grafts, to provide adequate proximal landing zones during thoracic endovascular repair for Stanford type B aortic dissections (TBADs). To preserve the LSA, a novel single branched stent graft, named "Castor" was designed and a clinical trial conducted to investigate its suitability.

METHODS

From April 2013 to March 2015, 73 patients with TBAD were treated by Castor stent grafts at 11 Chinese tertiary hospitals as part of a single arm prospective clinical trial. There were 50 acute (<2 weeks [68.5%]) and 23 chronic aortic dissections (>2 weeks [31.5%]).

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 97% (n = 71/73). The two failures were caused by occlusion of the branch section of the stent graft. There were four intra-operative endoleaks (two type Ia, two type B from the LSA). The endoleak rate was 5% (n = 4/73). There was one in hospital death and no major complications. The median follow up time was 61 months (range 48-72 months). The mortality was 5% (n = 4/73) within one year and 7% within six years (n = 5/73). Two deaths were of unknown cause and three were not related to the aorta. Two new entry tears were found on the proximal or distal edge of the stent graft and were retreated endovascularly. Six occlusions of the branch section of the Castor stent graft were found, and the follow up patency rate of the branch section was 93% (n = 63/68). Two intra-operative endoleaks were left during follow up and eventually disappeared according to the latest computed tomography angiograms.

CONCLUSION

For patients with TBADs needing anchoring proximal to the origin of LSA, the Castor single branched stent graft may provide an easily manipulated, safe, and effective endovascular treatment.

Secondary Open Arch Operation After Prior Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

Many patients required secondary open arch operation due to new aortic pathologies or complications after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). In this study, we investigated the outcome of secondary open arch operation after prior TEVAR.

METHODS

Fifty-seven consecutive patients underwent secondary open arch operation after prior TEVAR. The major indications were retrograde type A aortic dissection (n = 24), proximal new aortic dissection (n = 8), and type Ⅰa endoleak (n = 16). An elective operation was performed in 35 patients and an emergent operation in 22. The survival and freedom from aortic events during the follow-up were evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier survival curve and the log-rank test. The survival was also analyzed with the Cox analysis.

RESULTS

The in-hospital mortality was 7.0% (4 of 57). The mean follow-up time was 32.2 ± 19.7 months. Five late deaths occurred. The overall survival at 1 year, 3 years, and 6 years was 89.5%, 84.6%, and 79.9%, respectively. Aortic events developed in 7 patients. Freedom from aortic events after the operation at 1 year, 3 years, and 6 years was 94.2%, 83.0%, and 77.8%, respectively. There were no differences in survival and freedom from aortic events between the elective group and the emergent group. The Cox analysis identified additional coronary artery bypass grafting and hypothermic circulatory arrest as independent factors predicting survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary open arch operation could be performed to treat the arch pathologies after TEVAR with acceptable early and midterm outcomes.

Endovascular aortic repairs combined with looping-chimney technique for repairing aortic arch lesions and reconstructing left common carotid artery

Background

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repairs (TEVAR) combined with looping chimney technique (LCT) for repairing aortic arch lesions and reconstructing left common carotid artery.

Methods

Total of 14 patients (mean age 52.86±14.46 years; range, 27–79; 10 men, 4 women) were included in the study from December 2016 to December 2018. Aortic arch pathologies of all patients with insufficient proximal landing zone (PLZ) were repaired by TEVAR under local anesthesia, before TEVAR, the left common carotid artery (LCCA) was protected by the guiding sheath from the retrograde brachial access, after aortic stent graft deployed, chimney graft was implanted to restore LCCA by LCT if necessary. All patients underwent computed tomography angiograph (CTA) 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after surgery.

Results

Pathology results of 14 patients included: type B aortic dissection (n=8), penetrating aortic ulcers (n=1), retrograde type A aortic dissection (n=1), thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) (n=2), and thoracic aortic pseudoaneurysm (n=2). In all patients, aortic arch lesions were repaired by TEVAR; while LCCA were successfully reconstructed by the LCT. In one case, the innominate artery (IA) was simultaneously reconstructed through the same percutaneous right brachial artery (RBA) access. Coiling eliminated type Ia endoleak in 3 patients, and type II endoleak vanished by plugging left subclavian artery (LSA) in 2 patients. In four patients, the chimney stent (CG) of LCCA was partially compressed and then another bare stent was implanted to restore patency rate. The mean follow-up duration was 9.77±6.64 months (range, 0–24) and no combinations were observed in 13 patients; except in one patient who died of cerebral hemorrhage due to abnormal coagulation function.

Conclusions

TEVAR combined with LCT has shown to be suitable surgical approach for aortic arch lesions. Either covered intentionally or inadvertently, the LCCA could be safely and effectively reconstructed via percutaneous RBA access. Short-term follow-up demonstrated satisfactory morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients; however, longer follow-up is required to assess the effectiveness and durability of this innovative endovascular procedure.

Evaluation of EndoAnchor Aortic Wall Penetration After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Purpose: To analyze aortic wall penetration of Heli-FX EndoAnchors after use in seal zones in the aortic arch or descending thoracic aorta during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Materials and Methods: From May 2014 to May 2019, 25 patients (mean age 70.5±10 years; 16 women) were treated with TEVAR and adjunctive use of the Heli-FX device in 3 academic vascular surgery departments. Computed tomography scans were retrospectively reviewed to determine the location [arch or descending thoracic aorta (DTA)] of the EndoAnchors and the adequacy of aortic wall penetration, defined as adequate (≥2 mm), partial (<2 mm), or inadequate wall penetration (including loss). Endoleaks, reinterventions, and mortality were assessed. Results: A total of 161 EndoAnchors were deployed (median 7 per patient, range 4–9). Twenty-two EndoAnchors were place in the arch (zones 0–2) and 139 in the DTA (zones 3–5). A larger proportion of arch deployments (27%) had suboptimal penetration compared with the DTA (6.5%; p<0.005), resulting in a 91% adequate wall penetration rate for the series overall. Three EndoAnchors were lost (and only 1 retrieved) in 3 different patients, with no additional morbidity; thus, an overall deployment success rate of 88% was achieved. At a mean follow-up of 16.6±14 months, 4 patients required 5 (successful) reinterventions, including one for a type Ia endoleak treated with chimney TEVAR. One patient died 10 months after treatment due to endograft infection, without an opportunity for surgical correction. Conclusion: EndoAnchors have a higher risk of maldeployment in the arch, though this may be attributable to the small learning curve experience in this location. The best aortic wall penetration for this series was in the DTA, where EndoAnchors proved useful for distal endograft fixation during TEVAR.

Endovascular repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm associated with crossed fused renal ectopia

Chimney/snorkel endovascular aneurysm repair (Ch-EVAR) enables the minimally invasive treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm in anatomically challenging and high-risk surgical cases. Here, we present the case of a 77-year-old man with an abdominal aortic aneurysm associated with crossed fused renal ectopia and an ectopic renal artery arising directly from the aneurysm sac. After successful implementation of Ch-EVAR, computed tomography angiography at 18 months revealed no endoleaks, patency of the parallel graft, and normal renal vascularization and function. This report underscores the feasibility of Ch-EVAR in a case with high anatomic complexity.

Chimney Endografting for Zone 2 Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Using The Reorientation Technique

The purpose of this report was to describe the reorientation of the chimney graft technique to downsize brachial artery access during thoracic endovascular aortic repair and thus preserve left subclavian artery flow. In the case described herein, the chimney graft was advanced not from the brachial or axillary artery, but from the common femoral artery, over a brachiofemoral pull-through wire. The chimney graft was then turned out into the ascending aorta by balloon dilatation via percutaneous brachial access (“reorientation”). Despite the use of a large-diameter chimney graft, the chimney technique with percutaneous brachial access was successfully performed using the reorientation technique.

A Shorter Aortic Arch Sealing Ring (< 10 mm) Distal to the Most Distal Chimney Seems to Be an Additional Important Factor Contributing to a Gutter Endoleak in Aortic Arch TEVAR

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to define the possible anatomical and technical parameter that might predict the occurrence of gutter endoleak or type Ia endoleak (EL Ia) in patients treated with the chimney graft (CG) technique for the brachiocephalic trunk (BCT) and left common carotid artery (LCCA) due to aortic arch pathologies.

METHODS

We reviewed our institutional endovascular aortic database of patients, who between 2010 and 2018 had undergone thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with chimney graft technique (ChTEVAR) as a debranching method of the supraaortic arteries.

RESULTS

ChTEVAR was performed in 45 patients of whom a chimney in both the LCCA and the BCT was used in 32 patients, only in the LCCA in twelve patients, and only in the BCT in one patient. Eight patients (17.8%) had an EL Ia (based on postoperative computed tomography angiography). No late EL Ia was detected during the follow-up period. All patients with a postoperative EL Ia received 2 CGs with one each for the BCT, and LCCA had either no or a sealing ring distal to the most distal chimney of less than 10 mm versus patients with a longer sealing zone (P = 0.043). Patients with an endoleak did not differ from those without endoleak with respect to stent-graft oversizing, the diameter of the proximal and distal landing zones, or the aortic diameter directly proximal to the pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

A sealing ring distal to the most distal chimney of more than 10 mm seems to be associated with a reduced risk of an EL Ia. The relatively few patients and the single-center nature require larger studies to verify the present results.

Long-term outcomes of balloon-expandable bare stent as chimney stent in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for supra-aortic branches reconstruction

Background

To report the long-term outcomes of balloon-expandable bare stent (BEBS) as chimney stent (CS) in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for supra-aortic branches reconstruction.

Methods

A total of 33 patients with thoracic aortic diseases underwent TEVAR using BEBSs as CSs for supra-aortic branches reconstruction in our center from 2010 to 2015. The demographics and procedural details were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed. All patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6 months and every 1 year thereafter. Postoperative complications and long-term outcomes were recorded.

Results

The technical success rate was 100%. A total of 36 BEBSs were utilized as CSs to reconstruct the supra-aortic branches during TEVAR. The rate of immediate endoleak was 42.4% (14/33), including 12 (36.4%) type Ia endoleaks and 2 (6.1%) type II endoleaks. Two of type Ia endoleaks were managed by balloon dilation and disappeared, while the rest were left with close follow-up. Two type II endoleaks were embolized by coils and excluded by a plug, respectively. One patient (3.0%) died 2 days after the procedure due to the acute rupture of aortic dissection. The mean follow-up time was 61.8 (ranged from 12 to 102) months. The unmanaged 10 type Ia endoleaks were closely observed during the follow-up, of which 7 disappeared at 1 year and 1 disappeared at 2 years. The rest 2 type Ia endoleaks existed without further dilation of the aorta. One patient (3.0%) was re-intervened for the increased false lumen due to the distal residual tears. The long-term mortality was 9.1% (3/33). All CSs kept patent till the end of follow-up. No other complications were found.

Conclusions

The balloon-expandable stent (BES) is a feasible choice as CS for supra-aortic branches reconstruction with long-term patency during TEVAR. However, BEBS may be related to a higher rate of early endoleak.

Anatomic and hemodynamic investigation of an occluded common carotid chimney stent graft for hybrid thoracic aortic aneurysm repair

We examined the possible reasons for common carotid artery chimney stent graft occlusion through computational fluid dynamics analyses of follow-up imaging of a patient-specific aortic configuration reconstructed from computed tomography aortography. Anatomic and hemodynamic parameters were extracted for the bilateral common carotid and subclavian arteries before and after endograft placement. Results suggested that postoperative reduction in lumen diameter within the chimney stent graft combined with an increased flow rate led to complex hemodynamics with high wall shear stress, probably resulting in high-shear thrombogenesis and chimney stent graft occlusion 2.6 years after the primary repair. Early postoperative duplex ultrasound imaging might help identify at-risk conditions.

Hybrid Aortic Arch Repairs

Hybrid aortic arch repair (HAAR) consists of thoracic stent-graft repair and procedures to maintain cerebral blood flow. Several hybrid techniques have been used, including arch artery debranching, parallel graft technique, fenestration or branching of endograft, or a combination of these. We provided an overview of HAAR by presenting literature reviews as well as our clinical experience. The experience consisted of 172 patients who had undergone HAAR. The 30-day mortality was 3% (5/172). Persistent neurologic deficits occurred in 7 patients (4%), respiratory failure in 5 (3%), de novo aortic dissection in 3 and spinal cord injury in 2. 17% of the patients experienced type Ia endoleak. Seventeen patients required redo thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Fifty-six late deaths occurred during the follow-up period, including aortic-related death in 9 patients. In conclusion, hybrid arch debranching repair should be performed for elderly or high-surgical-risk patients. However, refining techniques and device technology is likely to reduce late endograft-related events. (This is a translation of Jpn J Vasc Surg 2018; 27: 385-391.).

Emergency Endovascular Management of a Symptomatic Pseudoaneurysm of the Left Subclavian Artery Ostium Using a Combination of an Abdominal Aortic Stent-Graft Extension Cuff and a Periscope Stent Graft

A pseudoaneurysm located at the subclavian artery ostium is an infrequent but life-threatening pathology that usually requires major thoracic surgery with a high risk of mortality and morbidity. Endovascular therapy applied to the aortic arch branches is a recent alternative technique, which is still in its early stages because dedicated endovascular devices for the aortic arch are lacking. In this article, we present the emergency endovascular management of a symptomatic pseudoaneurysm of the left subclavian artery ostium which was presumably secondary to an atherosclerotic plaque rupture. Endovascular exclusion required a combination of an abdominal aortic stent-graft extension cuff, which was placed via a retroperitoneal iliac access, and a subclavian artery periscope stent graft.