Midterm results of stent-graft repair of acute and chronic aortic dissection with descending tear: the complication-specific approach

A systematic review and meta-analysis of retrograde type A aortic dissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Retrograde type A dissection (RTAD) is a devastating complication of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) with low incidence but high mortality. The objective of this study is to report the incidence, mortality, potential risk factors, clinical manifestation and diagnostic modalities, and medical and surgical treatments.

METHODS

A systematic review and single-arm and two-arm meta-analyses evaluated all published reports of RTAD post-TEVAR through January 2021. All study types were included, except study protocols and animal studies, without time restrictions. Outcomes of interest were procedural data (implanted stent-grafts type, and proximal stent-graft oversizing), the incidence of RTAD, associated mortality rate, clinical manifestations, diagnostic workouts and therapeutic management.

RESULTS

RTAD occurred in 285 out of 10,600 patients: an estimated RTAD incidence of 2.3% (95% CI: 1.9-2.8); incidence of early RTAD was approximately 1.8 times higher than late. Wilcoxon signed-rank testing showed that the proportion of RTAD patients with acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) was significantly higher than those with chronic TBAD (P = .008). Pooled meta-analysis showed that the incidence of RTAD with proximal bare stent TEVAR was 2.1-fold higher than with non-bare stents: risk ratio was 1.55 (95% CI: 0.87-2.75; P = .13). Single arm meta-analysis estimated a mortality rate of 42.2% (95% CI: 32.5-51.8), with an I2 heterogeneity of 70.11% (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

RTAD is rare after TEVAR but with high mortality, especially in the first month post-TEVAR with acute TBAD patients at greater risk as well as those treated with proximal bare stent endografts.

Current Understanding of Aortic Dissection

The aorta is the largest artery in the body, delivering oxygenated blood from the left ventricle to all organs. Dissection of the aorta is a lethal condition caused by a tear in the intimal layer of the aorta, followed by blood loss within the aortic wall and separation of the layers to full dissection. The aorta can be affected by a wide range of causes including acute conditions such as trauma and mechanical damage; and genetic conditions such as arterial hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and connective tissue disorders; all increasing the risk of dissection. Both rapid diagnostic recognition and advanced multidisciplinary treatment are critical in managing aortic dissection patients. The treatment depends on the severity and location of the dissection. Open surgical repair is the gold standard of treatment for dissections located to the proximal part of the aorta and the arch, while endovascular interventions are recommended for most distal or type B aortic dissections. In this review article, we examine the epidemiology, pathophysiology, contemporary diagnoses, and management of aortic dissection.

Five-Year Results of Aortic Remodeling for Acute, Subacute, and Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection Following Endovascular Repair

Background

This study was performed to compare aortic remodeling and clinical outcomes in patients with acute, subacute, and chronic type B aortic dissection (TBAD) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Methods

We retrospectively examined 323 consecutive patients with acute (n = 129), subacute (n = 161), and chronic (n = 33) TBAD who underwent TEVAR from June 2013 to December 2016 in in multicenter institution. Patient demographics, clinical data, and imaging characteristics were recorded and compared among the three groups.

Results

The three groups had comparable baseline characteristics. Perioperative mortality rates were similar among the acute (2.3%), subacute (0.0%), and chronic (0.0%) groups (P = 0.34). Perioperative morbidity rates, including the rates of visceral and lower limb malperfusion and cerebral infraction, were also similar. The rate of perioperative endoleak was significantly higher in the chronic group (18.1%) than in the acute (3.9%) and subacute (3.7%) groups (P = 0.02). The mean follow-up duration was 78 ± 22 months (range, 36–101 months). The mortality rates were comparable among the three groups. The rates of reintervention and lower limb malperfusion were higher in the chronic group than in the acute and subacute groups. FL diameter reduction were more robust in the acute and subacute groups than in the chronic group.

Conclusion

Patients with acute, subacute, and chronic TBAD had different outcomes in this study. Patients with acute and subacute TBAD had fewer complications than those with chronic TBAD. Aortic remodeling after TEVAR was more favorable in patients with acute and subacute TBAD than in patients with chronic TBAD. TEVAR promotes more positive remodeling at the stent graft level than at the distal level of the aorta.

Thoracic endovascular repair of chronic type B aortic dissection: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

At present, the optimal management strategy for chronic type B aortic dissection (CTBAD) remains unknown, as equipoise remains regarding medical management versus endovascular treatment versus open surgery. However, the results over recent years of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in CTBAD appear promising. The aim of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive analysis of the available data reporting outcomes and survival rates for TEVAR in CTBAD.

METHODS

Electronic searches of six databases were performed from inception to April 2021. All studies reporting outcomes, specifically 30-day mortality rates, for endovascular repair of CTBAD were identified. Relevant data were extracted, and a random-effects meta-analysis of proportions or means was performed to aggregate the data. Survival data were pooled using data derived from original Kaplan-Meier curves, which allows reconstruction of individual patient data.

RESULTS

Forty-eight studies with 2,641 patients were identified. Early (<30 days) all-cause and aortic-related mortality rates were low at 1.6% and 0.5%, respectively. Incidence of retrograde type A dissection in the post-operative period was only 1.4%. There were also low rates of cerebrovascular accidents and spinal cord injury (1.1% and 0.9%, respectively). Late follow-up all-cause mortality was 8.0%, however, late aortic-related mortality was only 2.4%. Reintervention rates were 10.1% for endovascular and 6.7% for surgical reintervention. Pooled rates of overall survival at 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year were 91.5%, 84.7%, 77.7% and 56.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant heterogeneity in the available evidence and absence of consensus reporting standards are important considerations and concern when interpreting the data. Evaluation of the evidence suggests that TEVAR for CTBAD is a safe procedure with low rates of complications. However, the optimal treatment strategy for CTBAD remains debatable and requires further research. Evidence from high-quality registries and clinical trials are required to address these challenges.

A S-Shaped Association of Distal Oversizing Ratio with Distal Stent-Graft-Induced New Entry Following Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Stanford B Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to evaluate the nonlinear association of the distal oversizing ratio with distal stent-graft-induced new entry (dSINE) following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) and to find the optimal value of the distal oversizing ratio for prevention strategy of dSINE.

METHODS

Total of 177 patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD from the Registry Of type B aortic dissection with the Utility of STent graft were retrospectively investigated. Patients were stratified into two groups on the median distal oversizing ratio: lower group (≤16%, n = 88) and higher group (>16%, n = 89). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the cumulative incidence of dSINE. The multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify the association of the distal oversizing ratio with dSINE. Restricted cubic smoothing spline plots and two-piecewise regression were used to analyze the possible nonlinear association.

RESULTS

Eleven patients developed dSINE (6.21%) during the median follow-up time of 12.37 months (interquartile range, 8.07-18.17 months). An S-shaped association of the distal oversizing ratio with dSINE was identified. When the distal oversizing ratio was ≤40%, the risk of dSINE increased with distal oversizing ratio, and the risk of dSINE was highest when the distal oversizing ratio reached 40% (adjusted HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.17; P = 0.011). A larger distal oversizing ratio over 40% did not generate a greater risk of dSINE (adjusted HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.87-1.05; P = 0.455).

CONCLUSIONS

This study substantiated previous findings that the dSINE was associated with the increasing distal oversizing ratio. We also found an S-shaped association between the distal oversizing ratio and dSINE after TEVAR for TBAD. The distal oversizing ratio of 40% can be used for stratified management of patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD.

Management of Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Acute aortic dissection has an incidence of approximately half that of symptomatic abdominal and thoracic aneurysm of the aorta and more than twice the mortality of population-based controls. While urgent undelayed open surgery is the strategy of choice in proximal dissection, medical management has been the mainstay of treatment for uncomplicated distal or type B aortic dissection, but endovascular intervention is now considered a potential treatment option for all type B dissection due to its success in complicated cases. Endovascular repair can be technically demanding in aortic dissection, and timing of the repair can have a significant influence on anatomical and clinical outcome. Observational reports of feasibility and reasonable safety are flanked by only two randomised trials; the Acute Dissection Stent Grafting or Best Medical Treatment (ADSORB) trial demonstrated improved remodelling in acute dissection and the INvestigation of STEnt grafts in patients with type B Aortic Dissections (INSTEAD) trial showed better long-term survival in patients treated endovascularly in the subacute phase. Meta-analyses and other large clinical studies have demonstrated mixed results. Due to some risks associated endovascular repair and the requirement of specialist aortic care (which is not always available), a pragmatic approach for current management could involve high intensity serial imaging in the acute phase of a type B aortic dissection, thereby identifying complicated cases for early intervention and selection of patients at high risk of disease progression for deferred endovascular management in the subacute phase within 90 days.

Quantification of Mesenteric Blood Flow by Magnetic Resonance Flow Imaging in Patients with Arterial Dissection

Mesenteric ischemia is an infrequent, but potentially dangerous, complication of aortic or mesenteric artery dissection. Severe mesenteric ischemia presenting as a malperfusion syndrome, caused by aortic dissection or isolated mesenteric dissection, should be treated immediately by central aortic repair or angioplasty. However, treatment of non-critical, symptomatic mesenteric ischemia without narrowing true lumen of the aorta or localized mesenteric artery dissection was difficult. We treated two distinctly different cases of non-critical, symptomatic mesenteric ischemia superior mesenteric artery ischemia needing intensive care and mesenteric blood flow was determined by quantification with cine-phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging.

Acute medical management of aortic dissection

Acute aortic dissection is a life-threatening disease. Current therapeutic guidelines recommend medical therapy with aggressive blood pressure lowering for patients with acute aortic dissection, when they are not indicated for emergency surgery. In particular, patients with aortic dissection without ascending aorta involvement (Stanford type B) are treated medically, unless they have fatal complications. Patients with type B aortic dissection who have critical complications have higher early mortality than that in patients without complications. However, recent advances in thoracic endovascular aortic repair can improve the clinical outcomes in such patients. Accordingly, current guidelines recommend thoracic endovascular aortic repair for patients with complicated type B aortic dissection. However, patients with visceral ischemia still have a poor prognosis, even when they are treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair; an early diagnosis and intervention is crucial to prevent mortality. Understanding the pathophysiological anatomy that can induce organ malperfusion might be important for an early diagnosis and intervention. This review summarizes the current state of acute medical management in patients with acute aortic dissection, based on current evidence and expert consensus, focusing on patients with type B aortic dissection.

Validated Computational Model to Compute Re-apposition Pressures for Treating Type-B Aortic Dissections

The use of endovascular treatment in the thoracic aorta has revolutionized the clinical approach for treating Stanford type B aortic dissection. The endograft procedure is a minimally invasive alternative to traditional surgery for the management of complicated type-B patients. The endograft is first deployed to exclude the proximal entry tear to redirect blood flow toward the true lumen and then a stent graft is used to push the intimal flap against the false lumen (FL) wall such that the aorta is reconstituted by sealing the FL. Although endovascular treatment has reduced the mortality rate in patients compared to those undergoing surgical repair, more than 30% of patients who were initially successfully treated require a new endovascular or surgical intervention in the aortic segments distal to the endograft. One reason for failure of the repair is persistent FL perfusion from distal entry tears. This creates a patent FL channel which can be associated with FL growth. Thus, it is necessary to develop stents that can promote full re-apposition of the flap leading to complete closure of the FL. In the current study, we determine the radial pressures required to re-appose the mid and distal ends of a dissected porcine thoracic aorta using a balloon catheter under static inflation pressure. The same analysis is simulated using finite element analysis (FEA) models by incorporating the hyperelastic properties of porcine aortic tissues. It is shown that the FEA models capture the change in the radial pressures required to re-appose the intimal flap as a function of pressure. The predictions from the simulation models match closely the results from the bench experiments. The use of validated computational models can support development of better stents by calculating the proper radial pressures required for complete re-apposition of the intimal flap.

Short term outcome of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with thoracic aortic diseases

AIM AND BACKGROUND

Open surgical repair for thoracic aortic diseases is associated with a high perioperative mortality and morbidity. Most of type B aortic dissections are uncomplicated and are medically treated which carries a high mortality rate. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair is the first-line therapy for isolated aneurysms of the descending aorta and complicated type B aortic dissection. The aim of this study is to test the safety of early thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with uncomplicated type B aortic dissection and patients with thoracic aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

A total of 30 patients (24 men and 6 females; mean age 59 ± 8 years) with uncomplicated type B aortic dissection and descending thoracic aortic aneurysm who underwent endovascular aortic repair in National Heart Institute and Cairo University hospitals were followed up. Clinical follow-up data was done at one, three and twelve months thereafter. Clinical follow-up events included death, neurological deficits, symptoms of chronic mal-perfusion syndrome and secondary intervention. Multi-slice computed tomography was performed at three and six months after intervention.

RESULTS

Of the 30 patients, 24 patients had aortic dissection, and 6 patients had an aortic aneurysm. 7 patients underwent hybrid technique and the rest underwent the basic endovascular technique in whom success rate was 100%. Two patients developed type I endoleak, however both improved after short term follow up. The total mortality rate was 10% throughout the follow-up. Both death and endoleak occurred in subacute and chronic cases, while using TEVAR in acute AD and aneurysm showed no side effects. Early thoracic endovascular aortic repair showed better results and less complications.

CONCLUSION

Along with medical treatment, early thoracic endovascular aortic repair in uncomplicated type B aortic dissections and thoracic aortic aneurysms is associated with better outcome.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair to treat uncomplicated Stanford type B aortic dissection: The surgeon's dilemma to preventing future complications

Uncomplicated type B aortic dissections have traditionally been managed non-operatively with aggressive blood pressure control. However, the best medical treatment is associated with a considerable risk of disease progression to complicated dissection or aneurysmal degeneration of the affected aortic segment. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair could prevent long-term complications but, because the dissected aorta is vulnerable, it is a high-risk procedure performed in asymptomatic patient. Therefore, endovascular treatment is not a solution for all patients and it should be performed only in the subgroup prone to developing progression of the disease and future complications. A number of studies have suggested several prognostic factors of early or late adverse events such as the patency of the false lumen in the follow-up, an initial aortic diameter ≥4 cm with a patent false lumen, an initial false lumen diameter ≥22 mm in the proximal descending aorta, visceral involvement and recurrent or refractory pain or hypertension. Partial false lumen thrombosis and a proximal entry tear size >10 mm have also been suggested to be associated with an increased rate of aortic growth. We need randomised trials focused on these prognostic factors to reach level 1, class A recommendation for the optimal timing of intervention. Meanwhile, we have to discuss with the patient the pro and cons of this prophylactic, low-invasive but high-risk treatment to personalise medical care and provide the optimal risk-to-benefit ratio.

Aortic remodelling after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute and subacute type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in the current era has gained widespread acceptance as the modality of choice for the treatment of complicated aortic dissection (AD). However, reports on clinical results of TEVAR treatment of AD patients are mainly comparisons and analyses of results between patients in the acute and chronic phases, few reports have described the postoperative aortic remodelling of patients with subacute AD after TEVAR. The aim of this study was to investigate aortic remodelling after TEVAR in acute and subacute Stanford type B AD patients.

METHODS

The clinical data of 38 Stanford type B AD patients who received TEVAR treatment in our hospital between July 2012 and December 2017 were retrospectively analysed. The maximum diameters of the aorta, the mean diameters of the true lumens (TLs) and the false lumens (FLs) of the aorta in the dissection range before and after TEVAR treatment were measured. All diameters between different groups or in the same group before and after therapy were compared using nonparametric tests. Count data were examined using the χ² test.

RESULTS

The 38 patients were 31.0-82.0 years old with a mean age of 57.0±11.0 years, including 31 men and 7 women, with 22 patients in the acute phase and 16 patients in the subacute phase. Among the 38 patients included in this study, 7 (18.4%) patients had endoleaks after treatment. No perioperative deaths occurred. Analyses of computed tomography angiography measurement results showed that the baseline maximum diameters of the aorta, TLs and FLs before TEVAR between the acute and subacute groups were not significantly different (P=0.193, P=0.301 and P=0.067, respectively). After TEVAR treatment, the maximum diameters of the aorta and the diameters of the FLs were different between the two groups (P=0.005 and P=0.012), but the diameters of the TLs were not (P=0.069). The diameters of the TLs increased, and those of FLs decreased significantly in the acute and subacute groups after TEVAR (P<0.001, P<0.001, P<0.001 and P=0.007, respectively); the maximum diameters of the aorta decreased significantly in the acute group (P<0.001), but they did not change obviously in the subacute group (P=0.121).

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR offers satisfactory results for the treatment of type B AD. Acute AD may be associated with better aortic remodelling compared to subacute AD after TEVAR.

Conservative management versus endovascular or open surgery in the spectrum of type B aortic dissection

Background

Type B aortic dissection is a life-threatening acute aortic condition often with acute ischemic signs or symptoms. With initial management focusing on alleviating malperfusion and pain, and avoiding propagation of dissection or rupture both systolic blood and pulse pressure should be reduced initially by an aggressive medical approach. In the setting of persistent signs of complications endovascular strategies have replaced open surgery and led to a fourfold increase in early survival and better long-term outcomes.

Methods

An electronic health database search was performed on articles published between January 2006 and July 2017. Publications were included in this review if (I) the index aortic pathology was type B aortic (distal) dissection; (II) when medical management, open surgical replacement or thoracic endovascular aortic repair were among those options; (III) when at least one of all basic outcome criteria such as survival, spinal cord ischemia and cerebrovascular accident was reported; (IV) when ≥15 serial patients were included. A total of 62 studies were eligible and analysed.

Results

Our manuscript has summarized data collected over 12 years on management specific outcomes in the setting of distal aortic dissection and provides an up-to-date interpretation of the published evidence. For complicated cases, treated acutely, the 30-day or in-hospital mortality was 7.3% when managed by endovascular means, whereas the pooled rate for 30-day or in-hospital mortality was 19.0% when subjected to open repair. For acute uncomplicated type B dissection usually treated with blood pressure lowering medications, the pooled 30-day or in-hospital mortality rate was 2.4%. Survival rates at 5 years averaged at 60% (40% mortality). Freedom from any aortic event ranged from 34.0% to 83.9%, underlining an inherent risk of progression and late complications. For chronic complicated type B dissection, the rates of stroke, paraplegia and operative mortality following endovascular repair ranged from 5% to 13%, 2% to 13% and 2 to 13%, respectively, while 5-year survival rates after open repair ranged from 60% to 90%. In chronic uncomplicated type B dissection almost 90% of patients survive initial hospitalization and were subjected to medical management with a 5-year survival of 50-80%. However, up to 20-55% of medically treated patients develop aneurysmal degeneration after 5 years with an unknown risk of rupture.

Conclusions

Currently, the less invasive strategy of endovascular repair (as compared to open surgery) provides improved 30-day or in-hospital survival in the setting of complicated acute type B aortic dissection and may seek broad application. Open surgical aortic reconstruction should be left to experienced aortic centres if endovascular management is not an option.

Update on the Therapeutic Strategy of Type B Aortic Dissection

Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a life-threatening disease. Current therapeutic guidelines recommend medical therapy with aggressive blood pressure lowering for patients with acute TBAD unless they have fatal complications. Although patients with uncomplicated TBAD have relatively low early mortality, aorta-related adverse events during the chronic phase worsen the long-term clinical outcome. Recent advances in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can improve clinical outcomes in patients with both complicated and uncomplicated TBAD. According to present guidelines, complicated TBAD patients are recommended for TEVAR. However, the indication in uncomplicated TBAD remains controversial. Recent results of randomized trials, which compared the clinical outcome in patients treated with optimal medical therapy and those treated with TEVAR, suggest that preemptive TEVAR should be considered in uncomplicated TBAD with suitable aortic anatomy. However, these trials failed to show improvement in early mortality in patients treated with TEVAR compared with patients treated with optimal medical therapy, which suggest the importance of patient selection for TEVAR. Several clinical and imaging-related risk factors have been shown to be associated with early disease progression. Preemptive TEVAR might be beneficial and should be considered for high-risk patients with uncomplicated TBAD. However, an interdisciplinary consensus has not been established for the definition of patients at high-risk of TBAD, and it should be confirmed by experts including physicians, radiologists, interventionalists, and vascular surgeons. This review summarizes the current understanding of the therapeutic strategy in patients with TBAD based on evidence and expert consensus.

Retrograde Type A Aortic Dissection After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD) is a potentially lethal complication after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). However, data are limited regarding the development of RTAD post‐TEVAR. This systematic review aims to define the incidence, mortality, and potential risk factors of RTAD post‐TEVAR.

Methods and Results

Multiple electronic searches were performed. Fifty publications with a total of 8969 patients were analyzed. Pooled estimates for incidence and mortality of RTAD were 2.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0–3.1) and 37.1% (95% CI, 23.7–51.6), respectively. Metaregression analysis evidenced that RTAD rate was associated with hypertension (P=0.043), history of vascular surgery (P=0.042), and American Surgical Association (P=0.044). The relative risk of RTAD was 1.81 (95% CI, 1.04–3.14) for acute dissection (relative to chronic dissection) and 5.33 (95% CI, 2.70–10.51) for aortic dissection (relative to a degenerative aneurysm). Incidence of RTAD was significantly different in patients with proximal bare stent and nonbare stent endografts (relative risk [RR]=2.06; 95% CI, 1.22–3.50). RTAD occurrence rate in zone 0 was higher than other landing zones.

Conclusions

The pooled RTAD rate after TEVAR was calculated at 2.5% with a high mortality rate (37.1%). Incidence of RTAD is significantly more frequent in patients treated for dissection than those with an aneurysm (especially for acute dissection), and when the proximal bare stent was used. Rate of RTAD after TEVAR varied significantly according to the proximal Ishimaru landing zone. The more‐experienced centers tend to have lower RTAD incidences.

Serial CT Volume and Thrombus Length Measurements after Endovascular Repair of Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection

Purpose:

To evaluate the outcome of stent-graft placement in Stanford type B aortic dissection using contrast-enhanced spiral computed tomographic (CT) measurements of true and false lumen volumes and thrombus length.

Methods:

Among 18 consecutive patients (13 men; mean age 60 years, range 44–79) who underwent endovascular repair of Stanford type B dissection, 12 completed at least a 12-month follow-up, which included CT measurements of true and false lumen volumes and thrombus lengths prior to discharge and at 6 and 12 months postimplantation. Volumes were assessed in 3 different aortic segments (A1, A2, A3) extending from the proximal attachment site of the prosthesis to the aortic bifurcation. In addition, thrombus length was measured to evaluate the influence of clot formation on outcome of the false lumen volume.

Results:

Mean follow-up was 27 months (range 12–60). Within 12 months, mean true lumen volumes showed statistically significant increases in the A1 (p<0.001) and A2 (p=0.003) segments; false lumen volumes showed a significant decrease in the A1 segment (p=0.002) but an insignificant increase in the A2 segment. No substantial volume changes were observed in the A3 segment. Extension of clot formation in the false lumen varied among patients and over time. Length of stent-grafts, percentage of stented dissection length, or visceral arteries originating from the false lumen did not significantly influence thrombus development, nor did these parameters or thrombus formation distal to the prosthesis have a relationship to false lumen volumes.

Conclusions:

Volumetric analysis after endovascular repair of Stanford type B dissection shows optimal technical outcome in the stented segment, whereas the false lumen in the segment immediately adjacent to the stent-graft seems to be a vulnerable area. Extension of clot formation beyond the endograft seems to be no reliable predictor of outcome.

Endografting of the Aortic Arch

In recent years, endovascular repair with stent-grafts has made great advances as a minimally invasive alternative to conventional open surgery in the treatment of aortic aneurysm and dissection. Although many commercial endograft systems are now used worldwide for the treatment of these pathologies in the abdominal aorta, only a few dedicated stent-grafts have been developed for use in the thoracic aorta. However, these second-generation commercial endografts have almost identical specifications and performance profiles in terms of structure, function, and delivery mechanism as stent-graft systems employed in the abdominal aorta. Thus, endografts have been used in the thoracic aorta with little consideration to the morphological and hemodynamic characteristics specific to the aortic arch and the deployment techniques needed to navigate this curved region of the thoracic aorta. This review will survey the literature on aortic arch stent-graft repair and identify key elements critical to the successful design of an endograft to treat lesions in the aortic arch.

Contemporary endovascular treatment of type B aortic dissection in China

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular stent-grafts have been used in China to treat type B aortic dissection since 1999, and there is a plethora of cohort studies in the contemporary literature. The aim of this review was to analyse the published results of endovascular treatment for type B aortic dissection in China.

METHOD

A systematic literature review of all published literature from January 1999 to October 2014 on endovascular treatment of type B aortic dissection in China was undertaken using PubMed, Medline, and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure databases.

RESULTS

Seventy papers were retrieved (4 English, 66 Chinese) with a total of 4208 patients; 3396 (80.7%) were male, and the mean age ranged from 43 to 65 years. Procedural success was reported in 99.4% ± 1.7%. Complications were reported in 14.6% ± 11.1%, with major complications in 1.7% ± 2.9%, and the most devastating neurologic complications in 1.1% ± 2.2% (stroke 0.9% ± 2.4%, paraplegia 1.5% ± 0.7%). Postoperative endoleak occurred in 8.1% ± 7.6%. The 30-day postoperative mortality was 2.4% ± 3.3%. During follow-up, false-lumen thrombosis occurred in 92.1% ± 11.7%. Reintervention was performed in 1.3% ± 3.3%. The incidence of proximal and distal stent-graft-induced new entry was 0.5% ± 1.3% and 0.9% ± 2.7%, respectively, with endoleak in 2.7% ± 4.4% and mortality of 2.2% ± 3.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that use of endovascular stent-grafts for type B aortic dissection in China is feasible and safe with low rates of perioperative complications and short-term mortality. However, a standardised reporting system and long-term follow-up data are lacking.

The new indication of TEVAR for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection

The classical therapeutic indication for type B aortic dissection is based on either medication or open surgery; medication therapy is recommended for relatively stable uncomplicated type B aortic dissection. With improvements in endovascular repair and the potential risk of disease progression, it is now necessary to evaluate the requirement for revision of the therapeutic choice of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection based on morphological features and time window. Data from 252 patients diagnosed as uncomplicated type B aortic dissection from 1992 to 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. Among these cases, 117 patients received medication therapy and 135 patients underwent endovascular repair. The 60-month survival rate in the endovascular group was higher than that in the medication group (92.3% vs 67.6%). According to the morphological evaluation, visceral artery involvement and false/true lumen ratios over 0.7 were strong risk factors for medical treatment alone. Increased surgical time and blood loss were found in patients treated in the chronic phase, compared with those who underwent endovascular repair within 14 days of the onset of symptoms. With improvements in aortic remodeling techniques, endovascular repair has been shown to improve long-term survival rates of patients with uncomplicated aortic dissection. Considering the potential risk of death, we recommend that patients with visceral artery involvement and a false/true lumen ratio over 0.7 should receive endovascular repair aggressively. Furthermore, delayed endovascular repair in the chronic phase does not improve the long-term outcome of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection.

Contemporary Management Strategies for Chronic Type B Aortic Dissections: A Systematic Review

Background

Currently, the optimal management strategy for chronic type B aortic dissections (CBAD) is unknown. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature to compare results of open surgical repair (OSR), standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or branched and fenestrated TEVAR (BEVAR/FEVAR) for CBAD.

Methods

EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched for eligible studies between January 2000 and October 2015. Studies describing outcomes of OSR, TEVAR, B/FEVAR, or all, for CBAD patients initially treated with medical therapy, were included. Primary endpoints were early mortality, and one-year and five-year survival. Secondary endpoints included occurrence of complications. Furthermore, a Time until Treatment Equipoise (TUTE) graph was constructed.

Results

Thirty-five articles were selected for systematic review. A total of 1081 OSR patients, 1397 TEVAR patients and 61 B/FEVAR patients were identified. Early mortality ranged from 5.6% to 21.0% for OSR, 0.0% to 13.7% for TEVAR, and 0.0% to 9.7% for B/FEVAR. For OSR, one-year and five-year survival ranged 72.0%-92.0% and 53.0%-86.7%, respectively. For TEVAR, one-year survival was 82.9%-100.0% and five-year survival 70.0%-88.9%. For B/FEVAR only one-year survival was available, ranging between 76.4% and 100.0%. Most common postoperative complications included stroke (OSR 0.0%-13.3%, TEVAR 0.0%-11.8%), spinal cord ischemia (OSR 0.0%-16.4%, TEVAR 0.0%-12.5%, B/FEVAR 0.0%-12.9%) and acute renal failure (OSR 0.0%-33.3%, TEVAR 0.0%-34.4%, B/FEVAR 0.0%-3.2%). Most common long-term complications after OSR included aneurysm formation (5.8%-20.0%) and new type A dissection (1.7–2.2%). Early complications after TEVAR included retrograde dissection (0.0%-7.1%), malperfusion (1.3%–9.4%), cardiac complications (0.0%–5.9%) and rupture (0.5%–5.0%). Most common long-term complications after TEVAR were rupture (0.5%–7.1%), endoleaks (0.0%–15.8%) and cardiac complications (5.9%-7.1%). No short-term aortic rupture or malperfusion was observed after B/FEVAR. Long-term complications included malperfusion (6.5%) and endoleaks (0.0%-66.7%). Reintervention rates after OSR, TEVAR and B/FEVAR were 5.8%-29.0%, 4.3%-47.4% and 0.0%-53.3%, respectively. TUTE for OSR was 2.7 years, for TEVAR 9.9 months and for B/FEVAR 10.3 months.

Conclusion

We found a limited early survival benefit of standard TEVAR over OSR for CBAD. Complication rates after TEVAR are higher, but complications after OSR are usually more serious. Initial experiences with B/FEVAR show its feasibility, but long-term results are needed to compare it to OSR and standard TEVAR. We conclude that optimal treatment of CBAD remains debatable and merits a patient specific decision. TUTE seems a feasible and useful tool to better understand management outcomes of CBAD.

Update in the management of type B aortic dissection

Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a life-threatening aortic disease. The initial management goal is to prevent aortic rupture, propagation of the dissection, and symptoms by reducing the heart rate and blood pressure. Uncomplicated TBAD patients require prompt medical management to prevent aortic dilatation or rupture during subsequent follow-up. Complicated TBAD patients require immediate invasive management to prevent death or injury caused by rupture or malperfusion. Recent developments in diagnosis and management have reduced mortality related to TBAD considerably. In particular, the introduction of thoracic stent-grafts has shifted the management from surgical to endovascular repair, contributing to a fourfold increase in early survival in complicated TBAD. Furthermore, endovascular repair is now considered in some uncomplicated TBAD patients in addition to optimal medical therapy. For more challenging aortic dissection patients with involvement of the aortic arch, hybrid approaches, combining open and endovascular repair, have had promising results. Regardless of the chosen management strategy, strict antihypertensive control should be administered to all TBAD patients in addition to close imaging surveillance. Future developments in stent-graft design, medical therapy, surgical and hybrid techniques, imaging, and genetic screening may improve the outcomes of TBAD patients even further. We present a comprehensive review of the recommended management strategy based on current evidence in the literature.

Biomechanical Changes After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Type B Dissection

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has evolved into an established treatment option for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) since it was first introduced 2 decades ago. Morbidity and mortality have decreased due to the minimally invasive character of TEVAR, with adequate stabilization of the dissection, restoration of true lumen perfusion, and subsequent positive aortic remodeling. However, several studies have reported severe setbacks of this technique. Indeed, little is known about the biomechanical behavior of implanted thoracic stent-grafts and the impact on the vascular system. This study sought to systematically review the performance and behavior of implanted thoracic stent-grafts and related biomechanical aortic changes in TBAD patients in order to update current knowledge and future perspectives.

Endovascular repair of Stanford B aortic dissection using two stent grafts with different sizes

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to introduce a novel strategy for thoracic endovascular aortic repair of Stanford B aortic dissection using two-stent graft implantation (TSI), in which the proximal stent and distal stent with different sizes are sequentially deployed, and to summarize our experience with this technique.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of 72 consecutive patients (61 men; mean age, 55 ± 7 years; range, 41-67 years) with Stanford type B aortic dissection who underwent TSI treatment between January 2012 and May 2013. Among all patients, 43 (59.7%) involved the infrarenal aorta and 29 (40.3%) involved the whole thoracic and abdominal aorta; mean aortic involvement length was 226 ± 13 mm (range, 182-312 mm). Eight cases were for acute dissection (within 2 weeks from onset of symptoms), 11 cases were for chronic dissection (>3 months after initial dissection), and 53 cases were for subacute dissection (between 2 weeks and 3 months). Twenty-two cases (30.6%) were uncomplicated type and 50 cases (69.4%) were complicated type. Follow-up was performed postoperatively at 1 month, 6 months, and yearly thereafter. Technique success, aorta morphology, and procedure-related complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 100%; 72 pairs of stent grafts (144 thoracic stent grafts) and 10 left subclavian artery chimney stents were used. The mean aortic length coverage by the stent grafts was 197.6 ± 20.3 mm, and mean taper diameter span was 7.5 ± 1.8 mm. All patients were followed up from 6 to 16 months (mean, 10 ± 4 months); 95.8% (69 of 72) had a thrombosed false lumen in the aortic coverage, and the true lumen expanded on average 57% ± 11% (23%-100%). No significant changes were found in aortic diameters of the proximal and distal ends of the two stent grafts and the angles between centerlines of the distal end of the stent and the aorta during follow-up. Procedure-related complications included transient paraplegia (coverage of the left subclavian artery without revascularization and extensive coverage of aorta >220 mm) due to acute spinal cord ischemia (n = 1) and malapposition of the distal stent (primary tear closed, true lumen expansion led to oversize rate insufficient in distal stent diameter; n = 1). No death or malperfusion complications were observed during the perioperative period and follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term outcomes showed TSI to be a flexible and effective approach to accurately repair Stanford B aortic dissection that could potentially address the limitations of currently available stent grafts. Further prospective clinical studies are warranted to evaluate its long-term efficacy.

Current Treatment Strategies for Acute Type B Aortic Dissection

Acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) is a medical emergency that is a common occurrence in patients with atherosclerotic disease. The presentation is usually severe, with tearing pain that radiates to the back, and various levels of end-organ ischemia and malperfusion, even rupture, may occur. Everyone agrees that prompt and aggressive blood pressure control with β-blockers and nitroprusside is imperative, but when to surgically intervene is still not well characterized. However, the advent of minimally invasive stent graft placement has reshaped our thoughts regarding therapeutic intervention for ATBAD. This review is an attempt to define the current surgical indications for treating ATBAD.

Predictors of late aortic events after Stanford type B acute aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

Patients with Stanford type B acute aortic dissection usually receive medical treatment during the acute phase. The present study aimed to elucidate the factors predicting late aortic events in patients treated conservatively for acute type B dissections.

METHODS

From March 1991 to March 2011, 117 patients were enrolled in the present study, with a mean follow-up period of 5.1 ± 4.1 years. The patients were divided into 4 groups according to their false lumen status at onset: group F, fully open (n = 26, 22.2%); group P, partially thrombosed (n = 23, 19.6%); group U, ulcer-like projections (n = 22, 18.9%); and group T, completely thrombosed (n = 46, 39.3%).

RESULTS

Long-term survival did not significantly differ among the groups. The Kaplan-Meier event-free rate curve showed that aortic events occurred less frequently in group T than in the other 3 groups; the 5-year event-free rate was 65.4%, 58.8%, 36.1%, and 95.7% for groups F, P, U, and T, respectively. Cox regression analysis showed that the presence of ulcer-like projections (P = .016) and a maximum aortic diameter of ≥ 40 mm (P = .003) were predictors of late aortic events.

CONCLUSIONS

When patients have a maximum aortic diameter of ≥40 mm or ulcer-like projections at onset, early surgical intervention should be considered to prevent positive remodeling of the aorta.

Comparison of long-term clinical outcome between patients with chronic versus acute type B aortic dissection treated by implantation of a stent graft: a single-center report

BACKGROUND

Stent grafting for treatment of type B aortic dissection has been extensively used. However, the difference in the long-term clinical outcome between patients with chronic versus acute type B aortic dissection remains unknown. This study aimed to analyze the difference in long-term clinical outcome after endovascular repair for patients with chronic (≥2 weeks) versus acute (<2 weeks) type B aortic dissection.

METHODS

Between May 2000 and June 2011, a total of 174 patients with type B aortic dissection (56 chronic, 118 acute) treated by endovascular repair were studied prospectively. Follow-up three-dimensional computed tomography scanning and aortoangiography were scheduled at 3-6 months after the index procedure. Propensity score matching was used to compare the difference in the endpoint between the two groups.

RESULTS

The procedure-related event rate was 18.6% in the acute group and 5.4% in the chronic group (P = 0.021), but this difference became nonsignificant after propensity score matching. At the end of follow-up (mean 2.49 years), overall and aorta-related mortality was 11.0% and 7.6%, respectively, in the acute group, and was not significantly different from that in the chronic group (3.6% and 3.6%, P = 0.148 and P = 0.506, respectively). Both false and true lumina showed significant remodeling over time, with >93% complete false-lumen thrombosis. Untreated tear and type I endoleak were predictors of clinical events during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Comparable long-term clinical results were achieved in patients with chronic or acute type B aortic dissection after implantation of a stent graft.

Restrictive bare stent for prevention of stent graft-induced distal redissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

Stent graft-induced distal redissection (SIDR) is one of the major concerns in the durability of endovascular repair for complicated Stanford type B aortic dissection. The characteristics and means of prevention of this complication remain unknown.

METHODS

From April 1997 to March 2010, 674 patients with type B aortic dissections were treated primarily by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) at our center. Criteria for inclusion in this study were treatment primarily with TEVAR and an estimated mismatch rate (ratio of distal diameter of stent graft to long diameter of true lumen) greater than 120%. By this protocol, 465 patients were included in this study and were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 266 patients were treated in the acute phase, and 199 were treated in the chronic phase.

RESULTS

A total of 311 patients were treated with standard TEVAR and 154 patients with TEVAR + restrictive bare stent (RBS). The preoperative mismatch rate (measured as the preoperative long diameter of the true lumen at the level of the intended distal end of the stent graft) of the SIDR was significantly higher than that of the non-SIDR (192.7 ± 54.9% vs 131.9 ± 10.4%; P ＜ .05). The follow-up mismatch rate of the SIDR was significantly higher than that of the non-SIDR (145.4 ± 34.6 vs 120.3 ± 16.1; P ＜ .05). Compared with the standard TEVAR, TEVAR + RBS was associated with a lower incidence of SIDR (0% vs 2.9%; P = .033) and less secondary intervention (3.9% vs 9.3%; P = .040). Placement of the RBS significantly expanded the true lumen at the level of the descending aorta with the narrowest true lumen and at the level of the distal end of the stent graft.

CONCLUSIONS

The mismatch between the distal diameter of the stent graft and the diameter of the compressed true lumen seems to be the major factor in the occurrence of SIDR. Placement of an RBS, as an adjunctive technique to TEVAR, could reduce the incidence of SIDR. On the basis of early- to midterm observations, RBSs may improve morphological remodeling of the dissected aorta at certain levels.

Evidence, lack of evidence, controversy, and debate in the provision and performance of the surgery of acute type A aortic dissection

Acute type A aortic dissection is a lethal condition requiring emergency surgery. It has diverse presentations, and the diagnosis can be missed or delayed. Once diagnosed, decisions with regard to initial management, transfer, appropriateness of surgery, timing of operation, and intervention for malperfusion complications are necessary. The goals of surgery are to save life by prevention of pericardial tamponade or intra-pericardial aortic rupture, to resect the primary entry tear, to correct or prevent any malperfusion and aortic valve regurgitation, and if possible to prevent late dissection-related complications in the proximal and downstream aorta. No randomized trials of treatment or techniques have ever been performed, and novel therapies-particularly with regard to extent of surgery-are being devised and implemented, but their role needs to be defined. Overall, except in highly specialized centers, surgical outcomes might be static, and there is abundant room for improvement. By highlighting difficulties and controversies in diagnosis, patient selection, and surgical therapy, our over-arching goal should be to enfranchise more patients for treatment and improve surgical outcomes.

A systematic review of mid-term outcomes of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) of chronic type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN

The role of Thoracic Endovascular Repair (TEVAR) in chronic type B aortic dissection remains controversial and its mid-term success as an alternative to open repair or best medical therapy remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to provide a systematic review of mid-term outcomes of TEVAR for chronic type B aortic dissection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medline, trial registries, conference proceedings and article reference lists from 1950 to January 2011 were searched to identify case series reporting mid-term outcomes of TEVAR in chronic type B dissection. Data were extracted for review.

RESULTS

17 studies of 567 patients were reviewed. The technical success rate was 89.9% (range 77.6-100). Mid-term mortality was 9.2% (46/499) and survival ranged from 59.1 to 100% in studies with a median follow-up of 24 months. 8.1% of patients (25/309) developed endoleak, predominantly type I. Re-intervention rates ranged from 0 to 60% in studies with a median follow-up of 31 months. 7.8% of patients (26/332) developed aneurysms of the distal aorta or continued false lumen perfusion with aneurysmal dilatation. Rare complications included delayed retrograde type A dissection (0.67%), aorto-oesophageal fistula (0.22%) and neurological complications (paraplegia 2/447, 0.45%; stroke 7/475, 1.5%).

CONCLUSION

The absolute benefit of TEVAR over alternative treatments for chronic B-AD remains uncertain. The lack of natural history data for medically treated cases, significant heterogeneity in case selection and absence of consensus reporting standards for intervention are significant obstructions to interpreting the mid-term data. High-quality data from registries and clinical trials are required to address these challenges.

Endovascular treatment of thoracic dissection

Type A aortic dissection remains fatal if untreated. Although classical medical therapy for type B dissection is considered the therapy of choice in uncomplicated cases, the paradigm is changing as greater experience is accrued with endovascular treatments and technical advances improve the long-term outlook. Diagnosis is also becoming more sophisticated, allowing greater appreciation of the anatomy of dissections and improving the knowledge base as their natural history is assessed.

[Management of aortic dissection. Stent grafts for who?]

Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) describes several life threatening aortic pathologies. Acute aortic syndrome include intramural haematoma, penetrating aortic ulcer and acute aortic dissection. Advances in both imaging and endovascular treatment has led to an increase in diagnosis and improved management of these often catastrophic pathologies. The current place of stent-grafts for the AAS management is defined on the basis of the most recent literature.

Combined open and endovascular repair for aortic arch pathology

Background and Objectives

We describe our experience with combined open and endovascular repair in patients who have aortic arch pathology.

Subjects and Methods

This study is a retrospective analysis of 7 patients who underwent combined open and endovascular repair for aortic arch pathology. Medical records and radiographic information were reviewed.

Results

A total of 7 consecutive patients (5 men, 71.4%) underwent thoracic stent graft implantation. The mean age was 59.9±16.7 years. The indication for endovascular repair was aneurysmal degeneration in 5 patients, and rupture or impending rupture in 2 patients. In all 7 cases, supra-aortic transposition of the great vessels was performed successfully. Stent graft implantation was achieved in all cases. Surgical exposure of the access vessel was necessary in 2 patients. A total of 9 stent grafts were implanted (3 stent grafts in one patient). The Seal thoracic and the Valiant endovascular stent graft were implanted in 6 patients and 1 patient, respectively. There were no post-procedure deaths or neurologic complications. In 2 patients, bleeding and injury of access vessel were noted after the procedure. Postoperative endoleak was noted in 1 patient. One patient died at 10 months after the procedure due to a newly developed ascending aortic dissection. No patients required secondary intervention during the follow-up period. The aortic diameter decreased in 4 patients. In 3 patients, including 1 patient with endoleak, there was no change in aortic diameter.

Conclusion

Our experience suggests that combined open and endovascular repair for aortic arch pathology is safe and effective, with few complications.

Acute complicated and uncomplicated type III aortic dissection: an endovascular perspective

Type III aortic dissection is associated with high morbidity and mortality. There is a shifting paradigm in the treatment of complicated and uncomplicated acute type III aortic dissection toward earlier endovascular repair. In this review, the authors present the current perspective on the endovascular management of acute complicated and uncomplicated type III aortic dissection.

Endovascular therapy for thoracic aneurysm diseases: PRO

Although the long-term durability of stent grafts is still a concern, stent-graft treatment is already the best option in a large number of patients with descending thoracic aortic diseases who are poor candidates for surgical repair, or in an acute setting. With improved capability to recognize proper anatomy and select clinical candidates, the choice of endovascular stent-graft placement may offer a strategy to optimize management and improve prognosis.

Randomized comparison of strategies for type B aortic dissection: the INvestigation of STEnt Grafts in Aortic Dissection (INSTEAD) trial

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) represents a novel concept for type B aortic dissection. Although life-saving in acute emergencies, outcomes and survival of TEVAR in stable dissection are unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

One hundred forty patients in stable clinical condition at least 2 weeks after index dissection were randomly subjected to elective stent-graft placement in addition to optimal medical therapy (n=72) or to optimal medical therapy alone (n=68) with surveillance (arterial pressure according to World Health Organization guidelines < or =120/80 mm Hg). The primary end point was all-cause death at 2 years, whereas aorta-related death, progression (with need for conversion or additional endovascular or open surgery), and aortic remodeling were secondary end points. There was no difference in all-cause deaths, with a 2-year cumulative survival rate of 95.6+/-2.5% with optimal medical therapy versus 88.9+/-3.7% with TEVAR (P=0.15); the trial, however, turned out to be underpowered. Moreover, the aorta-related death rate was not different (P=0.44), and the risk for the combined end point of aorta-related death (rupture) and progression (including conversion or additional endovascular or open surgery) was similar (P=0.65). Three neurological adverse events occurred in the TEVAR group (1 paraplegia, 1 stroke, and 1 transient paraparesis), versus 1 case of paraparesis with medical treatment. Finally, aortic remodeling (with true-lumen recovery and thoracic false-lumen thrombosis) occurred in 91.3% of patients with TEVAR versus 19.4% of those who received medical treatment (P<0.001), which suggests ongoing aortic remodeling.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first randomized study on elective stent-graft placement in survivors of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection, TEVAR failed to improve 2-year survival and adverse event rates despite favorable aortic remodeling.

Retrograde type A aortic dissection after endovascular stent graft placement for treatment of type B dissection

BACKGROUND

Retrograde type A aortic dissection has been deemed a rare complication after endovascular stent graft placement for type B dissection. However, this life-threatening event appears to be underrecognized and is worth being investigated further.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Eleven of 443 patients developed retrograde type A aortic dissection during or after stent grafting for type B dissection from August 2000 to June 2007. Of these 11 patients, 3 had Marfan syndrome. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of freedom from this event at 36 months is 97.4% (95% confidence interval, 0.95 to 0.99). The new entry was located at the tip of the proximal bare spring of the stent graft in 9 patients, was within the anchoring area of the proximal bare spring in 1, and remained unknown in 1 patient. Eight patients were converted to open surgery, and 2 received medical treatment. One patient suddenly died 2 hours after the primary stent grafting, and 2 died within 1 week after the surgical conversion, so mortality reached 27.3%. During the follow-up from 3 to 50 months, type I endoleak was identified in 1 patient 3 months after the surgical exploration and disappeared at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Retrograde type A aortic dissection after stent grafting for type B dissection appears not to be rare and results from mixed causes. Fragility of the aortic wall and disease progression may predispose to it, whereas stent grafting-related factors make important and provocative contributions. Avoiding aortic arch stent grafting in Marfan patients, preferably selecting the endograft without the proximal bare spring for patients with a kinked aortic arch or with Marfan syndrome (if endografting is used), improving the device design, and standardizing endovascular manipulation might lessen its occurrence.