Prognostication of Asymptomatic Penetrating Aortic Ulcers: A Modern Approach

Initial Triage and Management of Patients with Acute Aortic Syndromes

The acute aortic syndromes (AAS) are life-threatening vascular compromises within the aortic wall. These include aortic dissection (AD), intramural hematoma (IMH), penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU), and blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury (BTTAI). While patients classically present with chest pain, the presentation may be highly variable. Timely diagnosis is critical to initiate definitive treatment and maximize chances of survival. In high-risk patients, treatment should begin immediately, even while diagnostic evaluation proceeds. The mainstay of medical therapy is acute reduction of heart rate and blood pressure. Surgical intervention is often required but is informed by patient anatomy and extent of vascular compromise.

Successful Interventional Endovascular Management of Ruptured Penetrating Aortic Ulcer with Associated Enormous Right Pleural False Aneurysm

Penetrating aortic injuries represent critical medical emergencies that necessitate immediate intervention to prevent life-threatening consequences. When accompanied by the presence of an enormous right pleural false aneurysm, the clinical scenario becomes exceptionally rare and complex. This case report details the successful management of a patient who presented with a penetrating aortic ulcer and an extensive false aneurysm within the right pleura, employing an interdisciplinary approach involving cardiac surgeons, cardiologists, interventional cardiologists, and radiologists. The pivotal intervention involved the deployment of a covered and bare stent graft into the descending thoracic aorta to seal the aortic rupture. The patient's clinical condition stabilized postoperatively, with no signs of recurrent hemorrhage. This case underscores the importance of rapid diagnosis, timely intervention, and the collaborative efforts of a specialized medical team in successfully managing such complex vascular injuries. Early recognition and referral to specialized centers are essential for improving patient outcomes in cases of penetrating aortic injuries with associated giant pseudoaneurysms.

Aortic calcification correlates with pseudoaneurysm or penetrating aortic ulcer of different etiologies

Chronic risk factors for pseudoaneurysm (PSA) or penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) have not been fully clarified. This study aims to evaluate the association of aortic calcification with PSA or PAU of different etiologies. Totally 77 pseudoaneurysms, 80 PAU, and 160 healthy controls (HCs) were retrospectively included, of which 30 were infected, 34 were immunological, and 93 were atherosclerotic etiologies. The aortic calcification status, position of aortic tears/ulcers, and risk factors for disease or acute aortic syndrome (AAS) were identified. Atherosclerotic patients aged more than 65 and infective patients aged more than 60 had significantly higher calcification scores. The immunological group had a lower level of calcification in the infrarenal aorta. For patients of infective or atherosclerotic etiology, 60% (18/30) and 60.22% (56/93) of the tears/ulcers occurred at the aortic parts with the highest level of calcification. Patients with longitudinal calcification exceeding 1/3 of the aortic arch had an increased risk of acquiring diseases (OR = 13.231). The presence of longitudinal calcification of the descending aorta or cross-sectional calcification of the infrarenal aorta increased the risks of acquiring diseases (OR = 8.484 and 8.804). After adjusting for age, longitudinal calcification of the descending aorta exceeding 1/3 length was found to be associated with AAS (OR = 4.662). Tears/ulcers of pseudoaneurysm and PAU were both generally found at the part of the aorta with most calcification. Distinct aorta calcification characteristics were observed for lesions of different etiologies. Longitudinal thoracic and cross-sectional infrarenal abdominal aortic calcification increased the risk of acquiring diseases, and descending aortic calcification was associated with symptomatic patients.

Asymptomatic Penetrating Atherosclerotic Ulcer Findings on 18 F-FDG PET/CT

ABSTRACT

We present a case of an 84-year-old man with a history of smoking, hypertension, and coronary artery disease with an incidental spiculated left apical pulmonary nodule, suspicious for a stage I non-small cell lung cancer. 18 F-FDG PET/CT performed for staging, which confirmed a small metabolically active pulmonary nodule. As an incidental finding, there was focal FDG uptake in the proximal descending aorta corresponding to a partially thrombosed outpouching of the aortic wall, in keeping with a penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer.

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

STRUCTURE

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

Abdominal Penetrating Aortic Ulcer and Endovascular Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Abdominal penetrating aortic ulcer (aPAU) is defined as an ulceration of the aortic intima and media lamina, even with rupture of the internal elastic lamina. Recently, there have been an increasing number of publications on endovascular treatment for aPAU. This review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment and provide clinicians with the latest evidence-based medical data.

METHODS

3 academic databases (Embase, PubMed, and Scopus) were systematically searched for literature reporting on aPAU from 1986 (the earliest appearance of the concept of aPAU) to September 1, 2021, and related data were collected and evaluated. A fixed/random effects model was used to construct the forest plots. Funnel plots and linear regression tests were used to assess the publication bias.

RESULTS

6 articles including 121 patients were included in the analysis. The average age was 71.4 years, with 72.7% of males and 85.6% with hypertension. Saccular aneurysms (SA) were the most prevalent complication (35.5%). Endovascular treatment had a perioperative mortality rate of .24% (95% CI, .00-2.70). The technical success rate was 99.15% (95% CI, 96.49-100). The type-II endoleak rate was 5.69% (95% CI, .00-12.13). The 1-year survival rate was 95.69% (95% CI, 90.49-100). The revascularization rate was 7.20% (95% CI, .07-14.32). Endovascular treatments for aPAU would lead to a high rate of technical success, few complications, and satisfactory 1-year survival.

CONCLUSIONS

aPAU are a common disease that mainly affects elderly males with hypertension and hyperlipidemia. Endovascular treatment is required when an ulcer progresses rapidly or manifests symptoms. Endovascular treatment is associated with high technical success, low complication, and satisfactory 1-year survival. Further investigation into the long-term results of endovascular treatment is necessary.

Systematic Review on Abdominal Penetrating Atherosclerotic Aortic Ulcers: Outcomes of Endovascular Repair

PURPOSE

To systematically review existing evidence on outcomes of endovascular repair of abdominal atherosclerotic penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cochrane Central Registry of Registered Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. The systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol (PRISMA-P 2020). The protocol was registered in the international registry of systematic reviews (PROSPERO CRD42022313404). Studies reporting on technical and clinical outcomes of endovascular PAU repair in 3 or more patients were included. Random effects modeling was used to estimate pooled technical success, survival, reinterventions, and type 1 and type 3 endoleaks. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Pooled results are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study quality was assessed using an adapted version of the Modified Coleman Methodology Score.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies including 165 patients with a mean/median age ranging from 64 to 78 years receiving endovascular therapy for PAU between 1997 and 2020 were identified. Pooled technical success was 99.0% (CI: 96.0%-100%). In all, 30-day mortality was 1.0% (CI: 0%-6.0%) with an in-hospital mortality of 1.0% (CI: 0.0%-13.0%). There were no reinterventions, type 1, or type 3 endoleaks at 30 days. Median/mean follow-up ranged from 1 to 33 months. Overall, there were 16 deaths (9.7%), 5 reinterventions (3.3%), 3 type 1 (1.8%), and 1 type 3 endoleak (0.6%) during follow-up. The quality of studies was rated low according to the Modified Coleman score at 43.4 (+/- 8.5) of 85 points.

CONCLUSION

There is low-level evidence on outcomes of endovascular PAU repair. While in the short-term endovascular repair of abdominal PAU seems safe and effective, mid-term and long-term data are lacking. Recommendations with regard to treatment indications and techniques in asymptomatic PAU should be made cautiously.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This systematic review demonstrated that evidence on outcomes of endovascular abdominal PAU repair is limited. While in the short-term endovascular repair of abdominal PAU seems safe and effective, mid-term and long-term data are lacking. In the context of a benign prognosis of asymptomatic PAU and lacking standardization in current reporting, recommendations with regard to treatment indications and techniques in asymptomatic PAUs should be made cautiously.

Endovascular Repair of Penetrating Thoracic Aortic Ulcers Using Tubular Stent Grafts Versus Stent Grafts With a Proximal Scallop

PURPOSE

In penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs), limited data support tubular thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) as a viable treatment option. For treatment of more proximal PAUs, hybrid approaches and-more recently-scalloped TEVAR (scTEVAR) have been advocated. Outcomes of scTEVAR specifically for PAUs have not yet been reported. This study reports long-term outcomes for tubular and scTEVAR in PAUs and compares the safety profile in both cohorts regarding the significantly more proximal landing zone (LZ) for scTEVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study includes all nonacute patients treated for complicated PAU with scTEVAR and tubular TEVAR. Patient and PAU characteristics as well as procedural success, complication and reintervention rates, and all-cause and aortic mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 212 TEVAR procedures reviewed, 21 patients with tubular TEVAR and 19 patients with scTEVAR were included. Patient and PAU characteristics were similar, and LZ was significantly more proximal in the scTEVAR cohort (p=0.0001), with similar number and types of supra-aortic revascularization procedures. Clinical success was reached in all 40 patients (100%), and reintervention rate was 2/21 (9.5%) and 1/19 (5.3%), respectively. Over the mean follow-up of 63 (TEVAR) and 53 (scTEVAR) months, clinical success was stable in all patients with one (abdominal) aortic-related mortality in the scTEVAR cohort.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of complicated PAUs with TEVAR as well as scTEVAR provides excellent and similar clinical success, stability of clinical success, and aortic survival with acceptable complication and reintervention rates. Scalloped TEVAR safely lengthens the proximal sealing zone to address more proximal pathologies.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Treatment of asymptomatic complicated penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs) with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) provides excellent clinical success and acceptable complication and reintervention rates. More patients become amenable to endovascular treatment by including scalloped TEVAR (scTEVAR) as a means to safely lengthen the proximal sealing zone to address more proximal pathologies.

Midterm results of complicated penetrating abdominal aortic ulcer treated by aortobi-iliac endograft and embolization

BACKGROUND

Penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) is determined by atherosclerotic degeneration of the tunica media with disruption of the intima. Usually it is detected in the thoracic aorta, with few series describing an abdominal location. The aim of the study was to report early and late outcomes of the endovascular repair of complicated infrarenal abdominal PAU (a-PAU) by aortobi-iliac endograft and embolization.

METHODS

Data from all complicated a-PAU submitted to endovascular repair by aortobi-iliac endograft (Cook-Zenith Alpha) between 2016 and 2021 (February) were analyzed. The a-PAU coil embolization was performed to decrease the risk of persistent type II endoleak whenever possible. Complicated a-PAU were defined according with the presence of symptoms, aortic rupture, or saccular or pseudo-aneurysm. Technical success, 30-day morbidity and mortality, and reinterventions were assessed as early outcomes. Survival, endoleaks, and freedom from reinterventions were evaluated during follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 1153 endovascular aortic procedures, 45 cases (4%) of complicated a-PAU were identified. Fourteen cases (31%) were managed in urgent setting (symptoms, n = 10 [22%]; shock, n = 4 [9%]). The median diameter of a-PAU was 49 mm (interquartile range, 14 mm). Thirteen patients (29%) had severe femoral or iliac access (angle >90°, circumferential calcification [>50%], hemodynamic iliac stenosis or obstruction, an external iliac artery diameter of less than 7 mm, or a previous femoral surgical graft). The a-PAU embolization was performed in 30 cases (67%). Technical success was achieved in all patients. Postoperative cardiac, pulmonary and renal morbidity occurred in one (2%), two (4%), and eight (18%) patients, respectively. Two patients (4%) required reintervention within 30 days for access related complications. The 30-day mortality was 2%. At a median follow-up of 24 months (interquartile range, 18 months), no type I or III endoleaks, iliac leg occlusion, or graft infection occurred and no patient required late reinterventions; the 36-month survival rate was 72%. No a-PAU enlarged or ruptured during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair of complicated a-PAU by a low-profile aortobi-iliac endograft and embolization is safe and effective. Excellent technical results are reported even in challenging anatomic features. Midterm clinical results are satisfactory in terms of aortic-related complications or mortality, freedom from reintervention, and survival.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

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

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

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

METHODS

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

STRUCTURE

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

Natural history and clinical significance of aortic focal intimal flaps

Objective

Focal intimal flaps (FIF) are a variety of defects of the aorta that result in a short, flap-like projection into the lumen, and are often encountered in asymptomatic patients undergoing computed tomography angiography (CTA) surveillance for aortic aneurysm, but the natural history and clinical significance of such lesions has not yet been studied.

Methods

We retrospectively identified patients with an asymptomatic FIF and available imaging follow-up (>1 year). FIF was defined as flap-like intimal irregularity < 4 cm in length involving the thoracic aorta (TA), abdominal aorta (AA) or common iliac arteries (CIA). FIF characteristics included length and circumferential extent as well as the presence and size (width and depth) of associated penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs). Patient characteristics, adverse events and history of surgical repair was determined by chart review. FIFs and associated PAUs were assessed for progression by comparing baseline and follow-up CTA studies.

Results

A total of 84 FIFs were identified in 77 patients. Average age was 69.2 ± 10.1 years, and 81% were male (81%). Common co-morbidities included: hypertension (78%), hyperlipidemia (68%), smoking (60%), coronary artery disease (41%), aortic aneurysm (34%), type II diabetes mellitus (27%) and prior cardiovascular surgery (25%). FIFs were most commonly located in the abdominal aorta (n = 50, 60%). Nearly all FIFs were associated with local atherosclerotic plaque (93%). Mean follow-up interval was 3.5 ± 2.6 years (259 cumulative follow-up years). Change in FIF length and local aortic diameter over follow-up were 0.7 ± 2.3 mm and 0.8 ± 1.1 mm, respectively. Nearly half (47%) of FIFs were associated with penetrating aortic ulcers (PAU) with baseline depth of 7.3 mm (IQR: 6.1–10.2) and change in depth of 0.5 ± 1.4 mm. Only 12% of FIFs and 0% of associated PAUs demonstrated growth (≥3 mm) at follow-up. No acute pathology developed in the location of FIFs and no aortic interventions were performed specifically to treat FIFs.

Conclusion

Focal intimal flaps identified in asymptomatic patients with aortic disease were co-localized with atherosclerotic plaque and PAUs, and demonstrated indolent behavior, not leading to significant growth or acute aortic events, supporting a conservative management approach.

Management of penetrating aortic ulcer and intramural hematoma in the thoracic aorta

Acute aortic syndrome is a broad clinical entity that encompasses several pathologies. Aortic dissection is a well-studied disorder, but the other most prominent disorders within the scope of acute aortic syndrome, penetrating aortic ulcer and intramural hematoma, are more nebulous in terms of their pathophysiology and treatment strategies. While patient risk factors, presenting symptoms, and medical and surgical management strategies are similar to those of aortic dissection, there are indeed nuanced differences unique to penetrating aortic ulcer and intramural hematoma that surgeons and acute care providers must consider while managing patients with these diagnoses. The aim of this review is to summarize patient demographics, pathophysiology, workup, and treatment strategies that are unique to penetrating aortic ulcer and intramural hematoma.

Diagnosis and Management of Acute Aortic Syndromes: Dissection, Penetrating Aortic Ulcer, and Intramural Hematoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute aortic syndromes, including aortic dissection, intramural hematoma, and penetrating aortic ulcer, are a group of highly morbid, related pathologies that are defined by compromised aortic wall integrity. The purpose of this review is to summarize current management strategies for acute aortic syndromes.

RECENT FINDINGS

All acute aortic syndromes have potential for high morbidity and mortality and must be quickly identified and managed with the appropriate algorithm to prevent suboptimal outcomes. Recent trials suggest that TEVAR is increasingly useful in stabilizing pathology of the descending thoracic aorta but when possible should be applied in a delayed fashion and with limited coverage to minimize neurologic complications. Treatment for acute aortic syndrome is frequently dictated by the anatomic location and extent of the wall compromise as well as patient comorbidities. Therapy is often individualized and often includes some combination of medical, procedural, and surgical intervention.