Search

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of image fusion (IF) technology in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) on reducing radiation exposure (dose and time), amount of injected iodinated contrast medium needed, and procedure time. Methods: We performed a review of our institutional endovascular aortic database of patients who had undergone TEVAR between2008and2016 beforeandafter the installation of a three-dimensional (3D) IFcomputedtomographysystem in our hybrid operating room. All patients were operated on using the same radiologic equipment with or without IF. Results: The 146 patients who had undergone elective or emergent TEVAR with preoperative computed tomography angiography done in 1-mm-thick slices were divided into two groups: the IF group (98 patients), in which TEVAR was performed using intraoperative IF with the two-dimensional-3D registration method; and 48 controls without the use of IF. The IF group received a significantly reduced dose of contrast material, with a median of 70 mL (interquartile range [IQR], 50-101 mL) compared with controls receiving 104 mL (IQR, 69-168 mL; P <.001). Patients who underwent hybrid TEVAR had a significantly reduced procedure time under IF guidance (n = 25) compared with controls (n = 11; median, 162 minutes [IQR, 139-199 minutes] vs 213 minutes [IQR, 189-298 minutes]; P =.015). In addition, the intraoperative fluoroscopy time was reduced to 9 minutes (IQR, 6-13 minutes) vs 23 minutes (IQR, 12-45 minutes; P <.005). However, the radiation dose (dose-area product) was similar for the two groups (P =.37). In patients who underwent plain TEVAR (n = 74) without a carotid-subclavian bypass, the IF group needed significantly less contrast material (median, 64 mL [IQR, 43-81 mL]) compared with the control group (median, 98 mL [IQR, 60-180 mL]; P =.003), whereas intraoperative radiation exposition, procedure time, and fluoroscopy time did not statistically significantly differ between the two

Purpose: To describe a technique for trans-ascending aorta through-and-through guidewire placement for thoracic endograft advancement and deployment. Case Report: A 55-year-old man presented with a symptomatic pseudoaneurysm of the distal aortic arch after aortic coarctation open repair. He had also undergone mechanical aortic valve replacement. Planned were a left-sided carotid-subclavian bypass and a thoracic endovascular aortic repair with a chimney graft to the left common carotid artery. After carotid-subclavian bypass, efforts to retrograde cannulate the aortic arch and advance the thoracic endograft were unsuccessful. Because of the mechanical heart valve, no transapical approach could be used. Access to the ascending aorta was gained through a midline sternotomy. A through-and-through wire was positioned from the ascending aorta to femoral artery, which provided the required stability for advancement of the thoracic endograft. Six-month computed tomography documented patent endografts and carotid-subclavian bypass and no evidence of endoleak. Conclusion: A trans-ascending aorta through-and-through guidewire is a feasible adjunct that can be added to the endovascular armamentarium when transcardiac or transbrachial approaches are impossible or ineffective.