Comparison of bare and nonbare stent grafts during thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair of the aortic arch

OBJECTIVE

We compared the outcomes of patients treated with nonbare stents (NBS) and proximal bare stents (PBS) endografts with a proximal landing zone in the aortic arch during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort, observational, multicenter study that included 361 consecutive TEVAR procedures undertaken between November 2005 and December 2021. TEVAR patients with both BS and NBS Relay stent graft configurations with proximal landing in zones 1, 2, or 3 were enrolled. Preoperative anamnestic and morphological data, clinical outcomes, and aortic modifications 30 days after surgery and at the latest follow-up available were collected. The primary outcome was freedom from proximal endoleak (type IA) comparing the two configurations. Total and detailed endoleak rates, clinical and technical success, intraoperative additional maneuvers, major adverse events, and reinterventions were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 4.9 (interquartile range, 2.0-8.1) years. No statistically significant difference between NBS and PBS patients concerning 30-day major adverse events, retrograde aortic dissection, disabling stroke, or late type IA endoleak (10.8% vs 7.8%; P = .597). Aneurysmal disease (P = .026), PLZ diameter of >34 mm (P = .026), aortic tortuosity index of >1.4 (P = .008), type III aortic arch (P = .068), and PLZ thrombus (P = .014) identified as risk factors by univariate Cox regression analysis. PLZ thrombus was the only type IA endoleak risk factor at multivariate Cox regression (P = .016).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no statistically significant difference in freedom from type IA endoleak, retrograde dissection, or disabling stroke observed between the NBS and the BS configuration of the Relay endograft. Proximal landing zone thrombotic apposition was a prominent risk factor for type IA endoleak after TEVAR.

Early survival benefit of a low-profile endograft in blunt traumatic aortic injury

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a low-profile thoracic endograft (19-23 French) in subjects with blunt traumatic aortic injury.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter study assessed the RelayPro thoracic endograft for the treatment of traumatic aortic injury. Fifty patients were enrolled at 16 centers in the United States between 2017 and 2021. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The cohort was mostly male (74%), with a mean age of 42.4 ± 17.2 years, and treated for traumatic injuries (4% Grade 1, 8% Grade 2, 76% Grade 3, and 12% Grade 4) due to motor vehicle collision (80%). The proximal landing zone was proximal to the left subclavian artery in 42%, and access was primarily percutaneous (80%). Most (71%) were treated with a non-bare stent endograft. Technical success was 98% (one early type Ia endoleak). All-cause 30-day mortality was 2% (compared with an expected rate of 8%), with an exact two-sided 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.1%, 10.6% below the performance goal upper limit of 25%. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated freedom from all-cause mortality to be 98% at 30 days through 4 years (95% CI, 86.6%-99.7%). Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from major adverse events, all-cause mortality, paralysis, and stroke, was 98.0% at 30 days and 95.8% from 6 months to 4 years (95% CI, 84.3%-98.9%). There were no strokes and one case of paraplegia (2%) during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

RelayPro was safe and effective and may provide an early survival benefit in the treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injury.

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

Introduction

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

Material and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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.

Learning Curve and Long-Term Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Repair With the Relay Stent-Graft

PURPOSE

To define the learning curve of a widely employed stent-graft for thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) by analyzing procedural variables and their impact on long-term outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Standard TEVARs for each major aortic thoracic disease were included excluding procedures using thoracoabdominal, arch fenestrated/branched devices and/or chimneys. The primary outcome was the learning curve analysis using the cumulative sum chart method. The secondary outcomes, presented as early (Q1-Q2) versus latest (Q3-Q4) quartiles of experience, were 30-day major adverse events (MAEs); procedural details (additional maneuvers, operative and fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume); 30-day clinical success; endoleak; aorta-related reintervention; and overall and aorta-related survival.

RESULTS

Between November 2005 and September 2021, 220 consecutive TEVAR procedures involving the Relay endograft (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FL, USA) were performed and included in the present analysis. The mean follow-up was 4.5 ± 3.9 years. The learning curve was reached after 10 patients. Secondary outcomes improved significantly over experience. Thirty-day MAE occurrence was 14.5% versus 11.8% (p=0.550). Additional maneuvers (p=0.009), access-vessel additional maneuvers (p=0.010), operative time (p=0.004), Relay Plus (p=0.001), and implantation of multiple stent-grafts (p=0.034) were independent risk markers for MAEs. Operative time (125.9 ± 66.7 vs 86.7 ± 48.5 minutes, p<0.001), contrast volume (185.4 ± 112.8 vs 140.5 ± 88.2 mL, p=0.003), and fluoroscopy time (12.4 ± 12.7 vs 8.8 ± 7.5 minutes, p=0.017) decreased significantly. Late endoleak occurrence was 19.5% with a nonsignificant reduction (21.8% vs 17.3%, p=0.395). Fluoroscopy time (hazard ratio [HR]=1.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.0-1.1; p=0.008), contrast volume (HR=1.0; 95% CI=1.0-1.1; p=0.018), and type III aortic arch (HR=3.3; 95% CI=1.7-6.4; p<0.001) were independent risk markers for endoleak. Fluoroscopy time (HR=1.0; 95% CI=1.0-1.1; p=0.032) and type III aortic arch (HR=3.6; 95% CI=1.7-7.4; p=0.001) confirmed their significant association in a multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

In a high-volume center with a consistent previous endovascular experience, the Relay graft presented satisfactory long-term results with a short learning curve supporting its reliability.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The manuscript addresses the understanding of how many TEVAR procedures with a currently implanted device have been required to reach the learning curve for an endovascular skilled center. Our TEVAR experience with the Relay stent-graft (Terumo Aortic) demonstrated that ten implantations were required to achieve the device-related learning curve. The fifteen-year analyzed period showed that intraoperative learning-related variables were associated with long-term clinical outcomes and both improved over time. The Relay stent-graft presented satisfactory long-term results along with a short learning curve in a high-volume endovascular center supporting its ongoing implantation.

Mid-term outcomes of the use of endoanchors during thoracic endovascular aortic repair in multicentre analysis

Objective

To describe mid-term outcomes of the use of EndoAnchors as an adjunct for arch and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

Methods

A retrospective multicentre series from nine centres using the Heli-FX EndoAnchor System (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, USA) at TEVAR over May 2014–May 2019 is presented. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with number NCT04100499. The primary outcome was freedom from Type I endoleak at EndoAnchors deployments; secondary outcomes included evaluation of aortic wall penetration (AWP) at first computed tomography scan, EndoAnchor-related issues and mortality.

Results

54 high-risk patients (35 males/19 females, age 73 ± 11 years) with arch, thoracic and thoracoabdominal aneurysmal disease (3 chronic post-dissection and one patch pseudoaneurysm), with a mean neck length 19.7 ± 6.6 mm that were treated with multiple hybrid and endovascular techniques were included. A total of 329 EndoAnchors were used with a mean of 6.1 ± 2.5 per patient. Overall adequate AWP was 86%, whereas arch (Ishimaru’s zones 0–2) deployments achieved 80.6% when compared to 87.3% in descending thoracic aorta (dTA); although there was no statistical significance. Freedom from type I endoleaks was 88% at 2 year follow-up, due to 4 type IA endoleaks, two of them successfully treated, one with conservative treatment due to complexity of repair and remaining patient died 1 year later due to endograft infection. There were reported five EndoAnchor-related issues; four losses and one renal stent-graft was crushed due to catheter deflection solved with balloon reinflation. None of the losses had clinical significance. Overall mortality is described for 7 (9.5%) patients, one of them aneurysm-related.

Conclusions

The adjunctive use of EndoAnchors in TEVAR and complex TEVAR procedures achieved acceptable outcomes at midterm in a high-risk series with hostile seal zones. Still, they should be still judiciously used as there is lack of data to suggest a more liberal use; therefore, the landing zone should not be compromised in favour of their use.

Association between aortic arch angulation and bird-beak configuration after thoracic aortic stent graft repair of type B aortic dissection

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to investigate factors favouring the bird-beak configuration after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 76 patients with type B aortic dissection who underwent landing zone 1 and 2 TEVAR from December 2015 to January 2018. Preoperative aortic arch geometry (aortic arch length, maximal diameter and angulation), stent graft details and operative details were evaluated. A bird-beak configuration was defined as a ≥5-mm gap between the proximal end of the stent and the aortic wall of the lesser curvature.

RESULTS

Patients were stratified into those with (n = 46) and without (n = 30) a bird-beak configuration. The baseline demographics, dissection chronicity, clinical features and implanted devices were largely similar between the 2 groups. No significant difference was observed in the arch length or maximal arch diameter. However, the mean aortic arch angulation was greater in patients with than without a bird-beak configuration (61.4° vs 51.3°; P < 0.001). No influence of either the stent graft brand or the proximal stent graft type was observed. The multivariable analysis showed that the aortic arch angulation was an independent risk factor for a bird-beak configuration (odds ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.24; P < 0.001). A cut-off angle of 59.15° was predictive of a bird-beak configuration (sensitivity 59%; specificity 77%).

CONCLUSIONS

The preoperative aortic arch angulation was an independent predictor of a postoperative bird-beak configuration in patients with type B aortic dissection who underwent TEVAR that involved the aortic arch. An angle of >59.15° may imply a relatively hostile anatomy with a higher risk of a bird-beak configuration.

Vascular plug oversizing to treat an endoleak after hybrid surgery of the aortic arch

A patient with prior ascending aortic replacement for a type A acute dissection and a bovine arch presented with an asymptomatic chronic dissecting innominate artery aneurysm extending to both carotid arteries. As the patient refused redo open surgery, we performed a hybrid procedure with reverse extra-anatomic aortic arch debranching and a fenestrated endograft. The aneurysm was still partially perfused due to an endoleak and corrected 1 week later with vascular plugs.

Early results of a low-profile stent-graft for thoracic endovascular aortic repair

PURPOSE

To assess outcomes of a low-profile thoracic stent-graft in the treatment of thoracic aortic pathologies.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients with aortic thoracic pathologies treated with the RelayPro device in two university hospitals between October 2018 and July 2019.

RESULTS

23 patients (65% men; mean age 63.4 ± 15 years) were treated. Pathologies included aortic dissections (n = 10), 5 residual type A (22%) and 5 type B (22%), 6 degenerative aortic aneurysms (26%), 4 penetrating aortic ulcers (17%), and aortic erosion, intramural hematoma and aortic rupture (n = 1 and 4% in each case). Two cases (9%) were emergent and two urgent. Proximal landing was achieved in zones 0 (4%), 1 (4%), 2 (43%), and 3 (26%). Five grafts were frozen elephant trunk extensions. Technical success was 100% with accurate device deployment in the intended landing zone of the aortic arch in all 23 patients and with no Ia/III endoleaks and three (13%) type II endoleaks. Apposition was adequate in 96%. Two patients had post-implantation syndromes (one fever, one leukocytosis). Mean follow-up was 11.6 ± 3.7 months (range, 2-16) with no other complications, secondary interventions or conversions to open surgery. There was no 30-day mortality and no aortic-related mortality; all-cause mortality was 4% during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

A 3-4 French reduced profile in the current generation of stent-grafts facilitates TEVAR particularly in patients with smaller vessels access. Early safety and effectiveness outcomes are favorable, even in endpoints such as deployment accuracy and apposition which may be surrogates for longer-term clinical success and durability.

How to minimize air embolisms during thoracic endovascular aortic repair with Relay Pro?

The aim of this study was to evaluate the volume of air released from Relay Pro NBS thoracic stent grafts using different de-airing methods. The gas volume was measured in an in vitro experimental setting. Stent grafts were de-aired via (i) standard saline flushing (40 ml), (ii) increased volume saline flushing (120 ml), (iii) carbon dioxide followed by 40 ml saline flushing and (iv) de-airing with 40 ml of saline in an ultrasound bath. The volume of gas released was measured separately while introducing the folded stent graft in the delivery device into the simulated aorta (step 1) and while deploying it outside the delivery device (step 2). Median air volumes released during steps 1 and 2 after flushing with 40 ml of saline were 0.09 (1st-3rd quartile 0.06-0.21) and 0.14 (0.11-0.15) ml, respectively. The volume of air released during step 2 was significantly less [0.09 (0.08-0.10) ml] after de-airing with 120 ml saline (P = 0.049). Neither de-airing with carbon dioxide nor in an ultrasonic bath led to a reduction in the volume of gas released during step 2. Air remaining after de-airing with a standard 40 ml of saline was released partially during stent graft introduction into the aorta and partially during final deployment. The most effective method of reducing air volume was de-airing with increased saline volume.

Elongation of the Aorta after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A longitudinal study

Aortic morphology is associated with age, with the diameter being larger in older people. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a treatment for aortic diseases, such as aortic dissection. When evaluating patients, aortic elongation could interfere with the classification of TEVAR complications. The longitudinal change in aortic length has not been studied in detail. In patients receiving thoracic endovascular aortic repair between 2007 and 2013, we determined the aortic length between the sinotubular junction, left common carotid artery, subclavian artery, and celiac artery on their first five annual follow-up computed tomography (CT) exams. Using the immediate post-TEVAR follow-up CT as the comparison reference and a lengthening of the aortic segment by 10 mm or more as the definition of elongation, 16 of 41 (39%) showed elongation between the innominate artery and celiac artery. When compared with the immediate follow-up CT, a higher proportion of patients showed elongation at the fifth year’s follow-up CT than the first year’s follow-up CT (p < 0.01), and the average lengthening per year was 1.7 mm. There was progressive lengthening of the aorta after TEVAR.