Search

With an aging population and advancements in imaging, recurrence of thoracic aortic dissection is becoming more common. All patients enrolled in the International Registry of Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2023 with type A and type B acute aortic dissection were identified. Among them, initial dissection and recurrent dissection were discerned. The study period was categorized into 3 eras: historic era, 1996 to 2005; middle era, 2006 to 2015; most recent era, 2016 to 2023. Propensity score matching was applied between initial dissection and recurrent dissection. Outcome of interests included long-term survival and cumulative incidence of major aortic events defined by the composite of reintervention, aortic rupture, and new dissection. The proportion of recurrent dissection increased from 5.9% in the historic era to 8.0% in the most recent era in the entire dissection cohort. In patients with type A dissection, propensity score matching between initial dissection and recurrent dissection yielded 326 matched pairs. Kaplan–Meier curves showed similar long-term survival between the 2 groups. However, the cumulative incidence of major aortic events was significantly higher in the recurrent dissection group (40.3% ± 6.2% vs 17.8% ± 5.1% at 4 years in the initial dissection group, P =.02). For type B dissection, 316 matched pairs were observed after propensity score matching. Long-term survival and the incidence of major aortic events were equivalent between the 2 groups. The case volume of recurrent dissection or the ability to detect recurrent dissection has increased over time. Acute type A recurrent dissection was associated with a higher risk of major aortic events than initial dissection. Further judicious follow-up may be crucial after type A recurrent dissection. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As it remains unclear whether there are sex-based differences in clinical outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), this meta-analysis aimed to evaluate differences in early outcomes and overall survival between female and male patients who underwent TEVAR. The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for eligible studies published through June 10, 2023, that reported sex-based differences in clinical outcomes after TEVAR. The primary outcome was operative mortality; second outcomes included stroke, spinal cord ischemia, acute kidney injury, hospital length of stay, and overall survival. Patient characteristics, operative data, and early outcomes were aggregated using the random-effects model, presenting pooled risk ratio (RR) or standardized mean difference along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Overall survival was assessed by reconstructing individual patient data to generate sex-specific pooled Kaplan-Meier curves. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023426069). Of the 1785 studies retrieved, 14 studies met all eligibility criteria, encompassing a total of 17,374 patients, comprising 5026 female and 12,348 male patients. Female patients were older, had a smaller maximum aortic diameter, had lower rates of smoking and coronary artery disease, and had higher rates of anemia. Intraoperatively, female patients were more likely to use iliac conduits and require blood transfusions. There were no sex-based differences in operative mortality (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.90-1.40; P =.309), stroke (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.95-1.38; P =.165), spinal cord ischemia (RR: 1.33, 95% CI: 0.83-2.14; P =.234), acute kidney injury (RR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.52-1.17; P =.228), and hospital length of stay (standardized mean difference: 0.09, 95% CI: −0.03 to 0.20; P =.141). Pooled Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a worse overall survival in female patients compared with male patients (87.2% vs 89.8% at 2 years, log-rank P =.001). Among patients treated by TEVAR, female sex was not associated with increased risk of operative mortality or major morbidity. However, female patients exhibited a lower overall survival after TEVAR compared with male patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The application of cardiovascular magnetic resonance angiography (CMRA) for the assessment of thoracic aortic disease is often associated with prolonged and unpredictable acquisition times and residual motion artefacts. To overcome these limitations, we have integrated undersampled acquisition with image-based navigators and inline non-rigid motion correction to enable a free-breathing, contrast-free Cartesian CMRA framework for the visualization of the thoracic aorta in a short and predictable scan of 3 min. Methods: 35 patients with thoracic aortic disease (36 ± 13y, 14 female) were prospectively enrolled in this single-center study. The proposed 3D T2-prepared balanced steady state free precession (bSSFP) sequence with image-based navigator (iNAV) was compared to the clinical 3D T2-prepared bSSFP with diaphragmatic-navigator gating (dNAV), in terms of image acquisition time. Three cardiologists blinded to iNAV vs. dNAV acquisition, recorded image quality scores across four aortic segments and their overall diagnostic confidence. Contrast ratio (CR) and relative standard deviation (RSD) of signal intensity (SI) in the corresponding segments were estimated. Co-axial aortic dimensions in six landmarks were measured by two readers to evaluate the agreement between the two methods, along with inter-observer and intra-observer agreement. Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, Mann–Whitney U (MWU), Bland–Altman analysis (BAA), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used for statistical analysis. Results: The scan time for the iNAV-based approach was significantly shorter (3.1 ± 0.5 min vs. 12.0 ± 3.0 min for dNAV, P = 0.005). Reconstruction was performed inline in 3.0 ± 0.3 min. Diagnostic confidence was similar for the proposed iNAV versus dNAV for all three reviewers (Reviewer 1: 3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 3.8 ± 0.4, P = 0.7; Reviewer 2: 4.0 ± 0.2 vs. 3.9 ± 0.3, P = 0.4; Reviewer 3: 3.8 ± 0.4 vs. 3.7 ± 0.6, P = 0.3). The proposed method yielded higher image quality scores in terms of artefacts from respiratory motion, and non-diagnostic images due to signal inhomogeneity were observed less frequently. While the dNAV approach outperformed the iNAV method in the CR assessment, the iNAV sequence showed improved signal homogeneity along the entire thoracic aorta [RSD SI 5.1 (4.4, 6.5) vs. 6.5 (4.6, 8.6), P = 0.002]. BAA showed a mean difference of < 0.05 cm across the 6 landmarks between the two datasets. ICC showed excellent inter- and intra-observer reproducibility. Conclusions: Thoracic aortic iNAV-based CMRA with fast acquisition (~ 3 min) and inline reconstruction (3 min) is proposed, resulting in high diagnostic confidence and reproducible aortic measurements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The best approach for aortic root disease remains controversial. Composite valve-graft conduit (CVG) replacement offers good results at short-term and long-term follow-up; on the other hand, valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) has proven to be an excellent treatment alternative. This study aimed to analyse the outcomes after VSARR and compare whether preoperative moderate or severe aortic regurgitation (AR) and or the need for aortic valve repair (AVR) during this procedure influenced survival and freedom from reoperation rates.Methods: From September 2005 to June 2018, 104 patients underwent VSARR using the reimplantation technique: 64% presented with preoperative moderate or severe AR, concomitant AVR was performed in 43.3%, Marfan syndrome was present in 16.3%, and 12.5% had a bicuspid aortic valve. Complete follow-up was obtained in 91% of the sample, echocardiographic results were available for 86% and the mean follow-up time was 1,893 days.Results: In-hospital mortality was 2.9% and one death occurred 42 days after hospital discharge. In the latest echocardiographic assessment, 88.3% presented with mild AR or better. Freedom from reoperation at 8 years was 95.4%. There was no case of endocarditis and one patient had a stroke 2 years after the operation. There were no between-group differences in morbidity, mortality and complications during the follow-up.Conclusion: VSARR can be performed with low mortality rates and reasonable durability of the aortic valve. Neither moderate or severe AR nor the need for aortic valve repair during the procedure altered survival and freedom from reoperation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impact of sex on outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) represents an area of increased interest over the last decade, and long-term data are lacking. The aim of the present study was to investigate sex-related differences in long-term outcomes after TEVAR using real-world data from the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment. Data were obtained retrospectively after querying the multicenter, sponsored Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment. Patients treated with TEVAR between December 2010 and January 2021 were selected regardless of the type of thoracic aortic disease. The primary outcome was sex-specific all-cause mortality at 5 years and maximum follow-up. Secondary outcomes were sex-specific all-cause mortality at 30 days and 1 year, and aorta-related mortality, major adverse cardiac events, neurological complications, and device-related complications or reinterventions at 30 days, 1 year, 5 years, and maximum follow-up. A total of 805 patients were analyzed; 535 (66.5%) were males. Females were older (median, 66 years [interquartile range (IQR), 57-75 years] vs 69 years [IQR, 59-78 years], P <.001). Males had more frequently a history of coronary artery bypass grafting and renal insufficiency (8.7% vs 3.7% [ P =.010] and 22.4% vs 11.6% [ P <.001]). The median follow-up was 3.46 years (IQR, 1.49-4.99 years) for males and 3.18 years (IQR, 1.29-4.86 years) for females. Indications for TEVAR were mostly descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (n = 307 [38.1%]) type B aortic dissections (n = 250 [31.1%]) or others (n = 248 [30.8%]). Freedom from 5-year all-cause mortality was similar for males and females (67% [95% CI, 62.1-72.2] vs 65.9% [95% CI, 58.5-74.2]; P =.847), and there were no differences in secondary outcomes. Multivariable Cox regression showed females to have lower all-cause mortality rates; however, this difference did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.72-1.30; P =.834). Additional subgroup analyses based on the indication for TEVAR did not identify differences between both sexes for the primary and secondary outcomes except more endoleak type II in females with complicated type B aortic dissection (1.8% vs 12.1%; P =.023). The present analysis suggests that long-term outcomes of TEVAR performed irrespective of the type of aortic disease are similar for males and females. Further studies are needed to clarify existing controversies regarding the impact of sex on outcomes of TEVAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two guidelines from the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and collaborating societies address the risk of aortic dissection in patients with bicuspid aortic valves and severe aortic enlargement: The “2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Thoracic Aortic Disease” ( J Am Coll Cardiol . 2010;55:e27-130) and the “2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease” ( J Am Coll Cardiol . 2014;63:e57-185). However, the 2 guidelines differ with regard to the recommended threshold of aortic root or ascending aortic dilatation that would justify surgical intervention in patients with bicuspid aortic valves. The ACC and AHA therefore convened a subcommittee representing members of the 2 guideline writing committees to review the evidence, reach consensus, and draft a statement of clarification for both guidelines. This statement of clarification uses the ACC/AHA revised structure for delineating the Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence to provide recommendations that replace those contained in Section 9.2.2.1 of the thoracic aortic disease guideline and Section 5.1.3 of the valvular heart disease guideline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To examine the potential of aortic arch variants, specifically bovine aortic arch, isolated left vertebral artery, and aberrant right subclavian artery, as markers for thoracic aortic disease (TAD). Methods We screened imaging data of 556 patients undergoing surgery due to TAD for presence of aortic arch variations. Demographic data were collected during chart review and compared with a historical control group of 4617 patients. Results Out of 556 patients with TAD, 33.5% (186 patients) demonstrated anomalies of the aortic arch, compared with 18.2% in the control group ( P < .001). Three hundred seventy (66.5%) had no anomaly of the aortic arch. Bovine aortic arch emerged as the most common anomalous branch pattern with a prevalence of 24.6% (n = 137). Thirty-five patients (6.3%) had an isolated left vertebral artery, and 10 patients (1.8%) had an aberrant right subclavian artery. When compared with the control group, all 3 arch variations showed significant higher prevalence in patients with TAD ( P < .001). Patients with aortic aneurysms and anomalous branch patterns had hypertension less frequently (73.5% vs 81.8%; P = .048), but had a higher rate of bicuspid aortic valve (40.8% vs 30.6%; P = .042) when compared with patients with aneurysms but normal aortic arch anatomy. Patients with aortic branch variations were significantly younger (58.6 ± 13.7 years vs 62.4 ± 12.9 years; P = .002) and needed intervention for the aortic arch more frequently than patients with normal arch anatomy (46% vs 34.6%; P = .023). Conclusions Aortic arch variations are significantly more common in patients with TAD than in the general population. Atypical branching variants may warrant consideration as potential anatomic markers for future development of TAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The best time to intervene in traumatic aortic injuries has long been a matter of debate. While emergency surgery is characterized by high morbidity and mortality, initial medical management of uncomplicated aortic injury and subsequent delayed surgery resulted in better outcome. Methods and results: From analysis of medical literature of the last 10 years, major paradigm shift in management of traumatic injuries includes the use of different imaging methods for diagnosis, with a almost complete elimination of aortography and transesophageal echocardiography in favour of CT scan, and a significant change in method of definitive repair, shifting from exclusively open techniques in 1997 to predominantly endovascular repairs in 2007. At present several reports in literature provide data on comparative results of endovascular therapy with respect open surgery, supporting the use of stent-graft in traumatic injuries, both in acute and chronic cases. The authors'' personal experience comprises 58 patients treated with endovascular stent-graft repair, with no mortality or treatment failure even during 11 years follow-up. Conclusions: For many years traumatic aortic injury has been considered a highly lethal lesion and a potential cause of death in blunt chest trauma. Because of the lower invasivity endovascular repair can be applied in traumatic aortic injury with very low risk and limited impact on trauma destabilization. Long term follow-up seems indicate a substantial durability of the procedure. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Endovascular treatment of aortic disease has emerged as an alternative mode of treatment that is particularly attractive for patients with severe comorbidities who would not be ideal candidates for open surgery. Actually, short-term morbidity and mortality rates, of large series, compare favorably with those from surgery, and stent-graft placement is proving to be a safe, minimally invasive, and effective treatment for thoracic aortic diseases. However, although endoluminal interventions are minimally invasive, they are associated with complications, as are surgical methods. In this article, indications, technical aspects, and results of endovascular TAA repairs will be reviewed. We will also examine the advantages and limitations of stent-graft treatment. Finally, we will discuss the management of complications following aortic stent-graft implantation. We intentionally do not cover the topic of thoracic dissection, as it is being covered in another article in this volume. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Endovascular treatment of thoracic aortic pathology has become a valuable alternative therapeutic option to open surgery, however complications both during implantation and the postoperative period may occur. In this case report we present an intimal dehiscence during endovascular procedure. Diagnosis was made by transoesophageal echocardiography. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]