Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with chimney technique for aortic arch diseases

Hemodynamic analysis of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with left subclavian artery reconstructed by chimney stent

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to investigate the hemodynamic consequences of thoracic endovascular aortic repair which reconstructed left subclavian artery by chimney stent (ch-TEVAR).MethodsTwo patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and left subclavian artery (LSA) reconstruction using chimney stents were selected. Preoperative and postoperative CTA images were collected to reconstruct hemodynamic models for comparing and analyzing blood pressure, blood flow velocity, and wall shear stress in the aortic arch and its major branches. Concurrently, morphological alterations and position of chimney stent were also assessed.ResultsAfter the reconstruction of LSA in ch-TEVAR, no endoleak was seen, but the stent in LSA was compressed. The blood flow velocity of the LSA increased and disordered, the pressure was reduced, and the WSS was increased. Even more, there were a large amount of turbulence found in the LSA of one case, and its LSA was blocked.ConclusionChimney stent reduces the occurrence of endoleak due to its excellent deformation ability, but the compressed stent has a greater impact on the hemodynamics of LSA and eventually leads to LSA occlusion; in order to keep the LSA unobstructed, it is necessary to pay attention to the position of the chimney stent and keep it straight and do not fold or twist. Chimney stent has little influence on the aortic arch and the rest of the aortic arch branches.

A Scoping Review of Definitions of Success in Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair

INTRODUCTION

The present standard of care to treat aortic arch pathologies is open surgical repair with cardiopulmonary bypass and deep hypothermic arrest. With approaches for total endovascular and extra-anatomic cervical debranching hybrid arch repair becoming more diverse, understanding what is considered a successful operation is prerequisite for a rigorous comparison of techniques. This review describes the specific outcomes reported, the rates of success, and the definitions of technical and clinical success in total endovascular and extra-anatomic cervical debranching hybrid aortic arch repair.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed. Studies with patients undergoing total endovascular or hybrid extra-anatomic cervical debranching repair of the aortic arch were included. Any publications including only patients with Ishimaru zone 2 or distal repairs were excluded from this review. Studies with less than 5 patients were excluded. Data extraction was performed by one author. Data items included were study design, procedure type, procedural details, underlying pathology, type of cervical debranching, type of endograft repair, surgical outcomes, definition of cerebrovascular events, technical success, and the definition of technical success.

RESULTS

Of 1754 studies screened for review, 85 studies with 5521 patients were included. By frequency, the included studies examined the following interventions: fenestrated devices, branched devices, parallel grafting. Most studies were retrospective single-institution studies. There were no randomized controlled trials. Short-term mortality and cerebrovascular events were nearly universally reported, present in 99% and 95% of studies reviewed, respectively. Only 27% of studies provided an explicit definition for cerebrovascular events. While 75% of studies reported a technical success rate, only 45% of those studies provided explicit criteria. Clinical success rates were infrequently reported, present in only 5.9% of studies reviewed.

CONCLUSION

The definitions of technical success that were provided fell short of analogous defined reporting standards in nearly all studies, inflating technical success rates. Definitions of cerebrovascular events and technical success require stringent criteria to uniformly compare various methods of endovascular aortic arch repair. A societal consensus document for reporting standards of endovascular aortic arch repair would allow for higher-quality outcomes research.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Total endovascular and extra-anatomic cervical debranching hybrid operations are being increasingly utilized for complex aortic arch repair. These techniques, however, can be associated with serious complications. Currently, there is no accepted metric to define technical or report clinical outcomes. Due to the paucity of high-quality data, use of these approaches may be limited in clinical practice. This study emphasizes the need for the development of standards for reporting outcomes in endovascular aortic arch repair. Future studies can then utilize these benchmarks, whcih will allow for improved efficacy and safety in these techniques.

Comparative Evaluation of the Short-Term Outcome of Different Endovascular Aortic Arch Procedures

Objectives: There are several endovascular treatment options to treat aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts. This study seeks to assess endovascular treatment methods for aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), comparing different treatment methods and evaluating technical success, intraoperative parameters and short-term outcomes. Methods: All patients undergoing elective or emergency endovascular treatment of aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies, with no acceptable landing zone for standard TEVAR, between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2024, at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany were included. An acceptable landing zone was defined as a minimum of 2 cm for sufficient sealing. All patients were not suitable for open surgery. Patients were categorized by an endovascular treatment method for a comprehensive comparison of pre-, intra- and postoperative variables. IBM SPSS29 was used for data analysis. Results: The patient cohort comprised 21 patients, predominantly males (81%), with an average age of 70.9 ± 9 years with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard TEVAR procedure. The most treated aortic pathologies were penetrating aortic ulcers and chronic post-dissection aneurysms. Patients were sub-grouped according to the applied procedure as follows: five patients with chimney thoracic endovascular aortic repair (chTEVAR), seven patients with in situ fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (isfTEVAR), six patients with custom-made fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmfTEVAR) and three patients with custom-made branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmbTEVAR). Emergency procedures involved two patients. There were significant differences in the total procedure and fluoroscopy time, as well as in contrast agent usage among the treatment groups. cmfTEVAR had the shortest total procedure time, while chTEVAR exhibited the highest contrast agent usage. The overall mortality rate among all procedures was 9.5% (two patients) and 4.7% for elective procedures, respectively. Deaths were associated with either retrograde type A dissection or stent graft infection. Both patients were treated with chTEVAR. There was one minor and one major stroke; these patients were treated with isfTEVAR. No endoleak occurred during any procedure. The reintervention rate for chTEVAR was 20% and 0% for all other procedures during the in-hospital stay. The patients who were treated with cmfTEVAR had no complications, the shortest operating and fluoroscopy time, and less contrast agent was needed in comparison with other treatment methods. Conclusions: Complex endovascular procedures of the aortic arch with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts offer a safe solution, with acceptable complication rates for patients who are not suitable for open aortic arch repair. In terms of procedure-related parameters and complication rates, a custom-made fenestrated TEVAR is potentially advantageous compared to the other endovascular techniques.

Clinical outcomes and aortic remodeling after Castor single-branched stent-graft implantation for type B aortic dissections involving left subclavian artery

Background

The left subclavian artery (LSA) can be intentionally covered by a stent graft to acquire adequate landing zones for a proximal entry tear near the LSA during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The Castor single-branched stent graft is designed to treat type B aortic dissection (TBAD) to retain the LSA during TEVAR. This study investigates clinical outcomes, aortic remodeling, and abdominal aortic perfusion patterns after TEVAR with the novel Castor device.

Methods

From November 2020 to June 2023, 29 patients with TBAD involving the LSA were treated with the Castor single-branched stent graft. In-hospital clinical outcome and aortic computed tomography angiography (CTA) data were analyzed. CTA was performed preoperatively and at follow-up to observe stent morphology; branch patency; endoleak; change in true lumen (TL), false lumen (FL), and transaortic diameters; and abdominal aortic branch perfusion pattern.

Results

The technical success rate was 96.6%. One failure was that the branch section did not completely enter the LSA and the main body migrated distally. No in-hospital mortality, paraplegia, or stroke occurred. During follow-up, one type Ib endoleak, four distal new entry tears, and one recurrent type A dissection arose from a new entry tear at the ascending aorta, no stent migration was observed, and the branch patency rate was 100%. At the thoracic aorta, TL diameters significantly increased, FL diameters markedly decreased, and FL was partially or completely thrombosed in most patients at follow-up. At the abdominal aorta, we observed 33.3% of TL growth and 66.7% of TL stabilization or shrinkage. The initial TL ratio at iliac bifurcation negatively predicted abdominal TL growth after TEVAR with a cutoff of 21.0%. Of the 102 abdominal aortic branches, 94.1% of the branches showed no change in perfusion pattern, 3.9% of the branches had an increased TL perfusion, and 2.0% of the branches had an increased FL contribution.

Conclusion

The Castor unibody single-branched stent graft offers an efficient endovascular treatment for TBAD involving the LSA. TEVAR with the Castor device effectively induced thoracic FL thrombosis and thoracic TL enlargement and resulted in abdominal TL growth when the initial TL ratio at iliac bifurcation is less than 21.0%. Abdominal aortic branch perfusion patterns remain relatively stable after TEVAR with the Castor stent graft.

Mid-term results of a prospective study for aortic dissection with a gutter-plugging chimney stent graft

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to access early and mid-term outcomes of a gutter-plugging chimney stent graft for treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissections in the clinical trial Prospective Study for Aortic Arch Therapy with stENt-graft for Chimney technology (PATENCY).

METHODS

Between October 2018 and March 2022, patients with Stanford type B aortic dissections were treated with the Longuette chimney stent graft in 26 vascular centres. The efficiency and the incidence of adverse events over 12 months were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients were included. The technical success rate was 99.33% (149/150). The incidence of immediate postoperative endoleak was 5.33% (8/150, type I, n = 6; type II, n = 1; type IV, n = 1) neurologic complications (stroke or spinal cord ischaemia); the 30-day mortality was 0.67% (1/150) and 1.33% (2/150), respectively. During the follow-up period, the median follow-up time was 11.67 (5-16) months. The patent rate of the Longuette graft was 97.87%. Two patients with type I endoleak underwent reintervention. The follow-up rate of the incidence of retrograde A type aortic dissection was 0.67% (1/150). There was no paraplegia, left arm ischaemia or stent migration.

CONCLUSIONS

For revascularization of the left subclavian artery, the Longuette chimney stent graft can provide an easily manipulated, safe and effective endovascular treatment. It should be considered a more efficient technique to prevent type Ia endoleak. Longer follow-up and a larger cohort are needed to validate these results.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER

NCT03767777.

Experience with the Ankura Thoracic Stent Graft and In-situ Fenestration for the Left Subclavian Artery with the Fu-Through Needle - a Technical Overview and Comparison to Similar Endovascular Techniques

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a widespread minimally invasive procedure prevalently used to treat thoracic aortic pathologies. However, when the left subclavian artery (LSA) is involved in the pathology, a more complex surgical approach is required to guarantee the perfusion of the vertebral and brachial arteries. In fact, coverage of the LSA has been proven to be associated with a higher risk of stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and arm ischemia.Historically, carotid-subclavian bypass or subclavian transposition has been the only treatment options to restore the perfusion of the LSA. For the past 10 years, different endovascular techniques have been implemented in the endovascular armamentarium to reduce the risk of complications related to surgical treatment such as infection, bleeding, and chylothorax.Currently, physician-modified grafts, in situ fenestration, chimneys, and branched or fenestrated devices are available. The aim of this overview is to describe the technique with the Ankura thoracic stent graft and in situ fenestration with the Futhrough needle and thus to shed light on the different approaches by comparing their pros and cons.

Gore cTAG sleeve-associated maldeployment for traumatic aortic injury with aberrant right subclavian artery

A 30-year-old woman presented following a motor vehicle collision with a grade III blunt thoracic aortic injury and an aberrant right subclavian artery. Using intraoperative ultrasound and diagnostic subtraction angiography, we deployed an aortic endograft (cTAG; W.L. Gore & Associates), excluding the injury and aberrant right subclavian artery. The patient immediately lost arterial waveforms in her left arm, confirming incidental coverage of the left subclavian artery, likely due to the polytetrafluoroethylene sheath of the endograft. Her pulses returned after placement of a left subclavian chimney via retrograde brachial artery access.