Search

We have adopted a simple and reproducible approach, "minimal manipulation approach," since January 2021 in five patients to minimize the risk of thromboembolic events during Zone 1 and 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVARs) with shaggy aorta. The approach consists of two parts: ① Use of a 65-cm-long sheath (dry seal) to deliver the endografts without touching the protruding atheroma. Covering the atheroma with the first endograft delivered at Zone 3 to the mid-descending aorta (paving the aorta), and second endograft insertion and deployment through the paved aorta with first endograft. ② Protection of the left subclavian artery using balloon catheter during TEVAR. No in-hospital mortality was recorded, and none of the patients had stroke, spinal cord ischemia, or distal embolic events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Total endovascular repair of aortic arch aneurysms is feasible in select patients. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and early outcomes of total endovascular arch repair using 3-vessel company-manufactured devices (CMDs) and physician-modified endo grafts (PMEGs). Methods: Patients unfit for open repair who underwent 3-vessel total arch repair at a single institution from 2018 to 2021 were reviewed. Patients received either 3-vessel inner-branch CMDs or PMEGs. Three-vessel designs were used to incorporate the innominate, left common carotid, and left subclavian arteries. The antegrade inner branches in both devices were accessed via right brachial or carotid approach. The left carotid was accessed via carotid cutdown or femoral approach. The left subclavian artery was accessed via transfemoral approach. The study endpoints included procedural technical success, patient survival, neurologic events, cardiac complications, reinterventions, and target artery patency. Results: Nine patients underwent treatment. Four patients were treated with PMEGs, and 5 with CMDs. Procedural technical success was 100%. There were no in-hospital deaths. There were no strokes, transient ischemic attacks, myocardial infarction, or spinal ischemia in the perioperative period. Major adverse events occurred in 3 patients (33%). Two (22%) vascular access complications and one (11%) acute kidney injury occurred. One (11%) patient required early reintervention for an access complication. The median follow-up period was 358 days (CMD, 392 days; PMEG, 198 days). There was a late reintervention and conversion to open repair at 142 days of follow-up in a patient with a PMEG that developed an aortic infection, leading to death on postoperative day 239. The mean length of stay was 7±4 days. Computed tomography imaging obtained during the immediate postoperative period revealed endoleak in 6 (66%) patients, out of which 5 resolved spontaneously and 1 required reintervention via left subclavian artery stenting. Target artery patency was 100% at the end of the follow-up period. Conclusions: Three-vessel total endovascular aortic arch repair using a CMD or PMEG is feasible with optimal early outcomes. Physician-modified stent-grafts are a feasible option for patients who do not meet anatomic criteria for CMDs. Clinical Impact: Management of aortic arch disease remains a significant challenge in vascular surgery. This study showcases the feasibility and safety of using a total endovascular approach to repair the aortic arch, which could potentially reduce morbidity and mortality associated with traditional surgical approaches. The results suggest that this minimally invasive technique could be an alternative treatment option for high-risk patients and could significantly improve outcomes for those requiring aortic arch repair. Overall, this study represents a promising development in the field of endovascular surgery and highlights the potential to improve patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To investigate the value of dual-source CT combined with volumetric measurement in the follow-up of Stanford Type B aortic dissection (TBAD) intrathoracic aortic repair (TEVAR). Methods: 40 TBAD patients in our hospital were treated with TEVAR and followed up at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. Dual-source CT and volumetric measurements were used to calculate the diameters and areas of the true and false lumen and the total lumen of the left subclavian artery at a distance of 2 cm (P1), the middle part of the descending aorta (P2), the opening of the abdominal trunk (P3) and the anterior bifurcation of the abdominal aorta (P4) before and after surgery. The maximum diameter, maximum area, volume and modified aortic remodeling index (MARI) of the true and false lumen of the distal abdominal aortic dissection were measured to evaluate the postoperative vascular remodeling. Results: The true cavity diameter of P1 and P2 increased gradually, the false cavity diameter decreased gradually (P < 0.05), and the total and true cavity diameter of P3 and P4 increased (P < 0.05). After operation, the true cavity area of P1 and P2 gradually increased, and the false cavity area decreased (P < 0.05). The total area of P3, P4, and true cavity increased gradually after operation (P < 0.05). There were statistically significant differences in true and false lumen volume and MARI before and after surgery (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Compared with diameter measurement and area measurement, volume measurement can more accurately reflect the remodeling of the true and false lumen of the uncoated aortic dissection. Clinical trial number: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES Thoracic/abdominal aortic aneurysms and aortic stenosis may be concomitant diseases requiring both transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and endovascular aneurysm repair (T/EVAR) in high-risk patients for surgical approaches, but temporal management is not clearly defined yet. The aim of the study was to analyse outcomes of simultaneous versus staged TAVI and T/EVAR. METHODS Retrospective observational multicentre study was performed on patients requiring TAVI and T/EVAR from 2016 to 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups: 'Simultaneous group' if T/EVAR + TAVI were performed in the same procedure and 'Staged group' if T/EVAR and TAVI were performed in 2 steps, but within 3 months. Primary outcomes were technical success, 30-day mortality/major adverse events and follow-up survival. Secondary outcomes were procedural metrics and length of stay. RESULTS Forty-four cases were collected; 8 (18%) had T/EVAR and 36 (82%) had EVAR, respectively. Upon temporal determination, 25 (57%) and 19 (43%) were clustered in Simultaneous and Staged groups, respectively. In Staged group, median time between procedures was 72 (interquartile range—IQR: 57–87) days. Preoperative and intraoperative figures were similar. There was no difference in 30-day mortality (Simultaneous: 0/25 versus Staged: 1/19; P = 0.43). Pulmonary events (Simultaneous: 0/25 versus Staged: 5/19; P = 0.01) and need of postoperative cardiac pacemaker (Simultaneous: 2/25 versus Staged: 7/19; P = 0.02) were more frequent in Staged patients. The overall length of stay was lower in the Simultaneous group [Simultaneous: 7 (IQR: 6–8) versus Staged: 19 (IQR: 15–23) days; P = 0.001]. The median follow-up was 25 (IQR: 8–42) months and estimated 3-year survival was 73% with no difference between groups (Simultaneous: 82% versus Staged: 74%; P = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS Both Simultaneous or Staged T/EVAR and TAVI procedures are effective with satisfactory outcomes. Despite the small numbers, simultaneous repair seems to reduce length of stay and pulmonary complications, maintaining similar follow-up survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES We aimed to evaluate early and late outcomes by comparing open total arch repair and endovascular arch repair using proximal landing zone analysis in a multicentre cohort. METHODS From 2008 to 2019, patients treated surgically for aortic arch disease at 6 centres were included, excluding cases with type A aortic dissection, additional aortic root replacement and extensive aortic aneurysm. In all patients and populations with proximal landing zones 0/1 (N  = 144) and 2 (N  = 187), early and late outcomes were compared using propensity score matching. RESULTS A total of 1052 patients, including 331 (31%) and 721 (69%) patients undergoing endovascular arch repair and open total arch repair, respectively, were enrolled. After propensity score match (endovascular arch repair, 295; open total arch repair, 566), no significant difference was observed in in-hospital mortality rate (endovascular arch repair, 6.8%; open total arch repair, 6.2%; P  = 0.716). Open total arch repair was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death [log-rank test; P  = 0.010, hazard ratio (HR) 1.41 (95% confidence interval 1.17–1.71)]. The incidence of aorta-related death was higher in endovascular arch repair [Gray's test; P  = 0.030, HR; 1.44 (95% confidence interval 1.20–1.73)]. When compared to endovascular arch repair with proximal landing zone 0/1, open total arch repair was associated with lower risks of all-cause death [log-rank test; P  < 0.001, HR 2.04 (95% confidence interval 1.43–2.90)] and aorta-related death [Gray's test; P  = 0.002, HR 1.67 (95% confidence interval; 1.25–2.24)]. There was no difference in the risk of all-cause death [log-rank test; P  = 0.961, HR 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.67–1.46)] and aorta-related death [Gray's test; P  = 0.55, HR 1.31 (95% confidence interval 1.03–1.67)] between endovascular arch repair with proximal landing zone 2 and open total arch repair. CONCLUSIONS Open total arch repair was considered the 1st choice based on early and late results; however, endovascular arch repair may be a useful option if the proximal landing zone is limited to zone 2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the outcomes of totally percutaneous in situ microneedle puncture for left subclavian artery (LSA) fenestration (ISMF) and chimney technique in type B aortic dissection (TBAD) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Materials and methods: Data on patients who underwent either chimney–TEVAR (n = 89) or ISMF–TEVAR (n = 113) from October 2018 to April 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcomes were mortality and major complications at 30 days and during follow-up. Results: The technical success rate was 84.3% in the chimney group and 93.8% in the ISMF group (p = 0.027). The incidence of immediate endoleakage was significantly higher in the chimney than ISMF group (15.7% vs 6.2%, respectively; p = 0.027). The 1- and 3-year survival rates in the chimney and ISMF groups were 98.9% ± 1.1% vs 98.1% ± 0.9% and 86.5% ± 6.3% vs 92.6% ± 4.1%, respectively (log-rank p = 0.715). The 3-year rate of cumulative freedom from branch occlusion in the chimney and ISMF group was 95.4% ± 2.3% vs 100%, respectively (log-rank p = 0.023). Conclusion: Both ISMF–TEVAR and chimney–TEVAR achieved satisfactory short- and mid-term outcomes for the preservation of the LSA in patients with TBAD. ISMF–TEVAR appears to offer better clinical outcomes with higher patency and lower reintervention rates. However, ISMF–TEVAR had longer operation times with higher procedure expenses. Clinical relevance statement: When LSA revascularization is required during TEVAR, in situ, fenestration, and chimney techniques are all safe and effective methods; in situ, fenestration-TEVAR appears to offer better clinical outcomes, but takes longer and is more complicated. Key Points: LSA revascularization during TEVAR reduces post-operative complication rates. Both in situ ISMF–TEVAR and chimney–TEVAR are safe and effective techniques for the preservation of the LSA during TEVAR. The chimney technique is associated with a higher incidence of endoleakage and branch occlusion, but ISMF–TEVAR is a more complicated and expensive technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAA) in elective settings has demonstrated successful clinical outcomes. However, life-threatening conditions such as rupture are more often managed with open surgical repair due to the high complexity of arch endovascular repair, lack of available off-the-shelf devices, and limited long-term data. Case Summary: A 49-year-old female with a recent history of prior ascending aortic repair for Type A10 aortic dissection presented with chest pain and dyspnea. Chest computed tomography angiogram (CTA) revealed acute bilateral pulmonary emboli and a 6.2 cm post dissection aneurysm of the posterior aortic arch with the dissection extending to the right iliac artery. She was treated with thrombolysis and subsequently became hemodynamically unstable. Repeat CTA revealed a massive left hemithorax with concern for aortic arch rupture. Given significant cardiorespiratory compromise and recent open repair, she was considered unfit for redo open repair. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with a physician-modified endograft (PMEG) was planned. An Alpha Zenith endograft was modified adding an internal branch for the innominate artery and a fenestration for the left common carotid artery. The left subclavian artery was occluded with a microvascular plug and coil embolization up to the level of the vertebral artery. TEVAR PMEG extension to the celiac artery was performed followed by deployment of a Zenith dissection stent to the aortic bifurcation. Completion angiogram demonstrated successful aneurysm exclusion and patency of target vessels. Conclusion: Endovascular treatment of ruptured TAA with PMEGs is feasible. This approach may be an alternative for unfit patients for open repair in emergent settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endovascular stent grafting is becoming more common in treating complex thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissections. When it becomes necessary to cover the supra-aortic vessels, maintaining blood supply through the supra-aortic branches can be achieved by performing in situ needle fenestration. We present a case of a 65-year-old man with a type B aortic dissection that extended from the origin of the left subclavian artery. A stent graft was inserted into the thoracic aorta distally of the origin of the left common carotid artery. Due to the stent graft moving distally and not adequately sealing the subclavian artery, a second stent graft was placed more proximally. Both stent grafts were successfully in situ fenestrated using a needle, and a stent graft was inserted into the subclavian artery. In conclusion, during thoracic endovascular aortic repair, in situ needle fenestration can be successfully carried out on two overlapping thoracic stent grafts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to create a morphology grading system, solely based on 2D images from computed tomography angiography, to predict negative aortic remodelling (NAR) for patients with high risk uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). This single centre retrospective cohort study extracted and analysed consecutive patients diagnosed with high risk uncomplicated TBAD. Negative aortic remodelling was defined as an increase in the false lumen or total aortic diameter, or decrease in the true lumen diameter. The multivariable Cox regression model identified risk factors and a prediction model was created for two year freedom from NAR. A three category grading system, in which patients were classified into low, medium, and high risk groups, was further developed and internally validated. Of 351 patients included, 99 (28%) developed NAR. The median age was 52 years (interquartile range 45, 62 years) and 56 (16%) were female. The rate of two year freedom from NAR was 71% (95% CI 65 – 77%). After the multivariable Cox regression analysis, Patent false lumen, Aberrant right subclavian artery, Taper ratio, abdominal circumferential Extent, coeliac artery or reNal artery involved, and four channel dissection (Three false lumens) remained independent predictors and were included in the PATENT grading system. The risk score was statistically significantly associated with NAR (HR 1.21; 95% CI 1.14 – 1.29; p <.001). The medium and high risk groups demonstrated a higher rate of NAR (medium risk, HR 2.82; 95% CI 1.57 – 5.01; p =.001; high risk, HR 4.39; 95% CI 2.58 – 7.48; p <.001). The grading system was characterised by robust discrimination with Harrell's C index of 0.68 (95% CI 0.63 – 0.75). The PATENT grading system was characterised by good discrimination and calibration, which may serve as a clinician friendly tool to aid risk stratification for TBAD patients after TEVAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adequate proximal and distal seal zones are necessary for successful thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Often, the achievement of an adequate distal seal zone requires celiac artery (CA) coverage by endograft with or without preservation of CA blood flow. The outcomes of CA coverage without its flow preservation were studied only in small case series. This study aims to determine the difference in outcomes between CA coverage with vs without preservation of CA blood flow during TEVAR using a multi-institutional national database. The Vascular Quality Initiative database was reviewed for all TEVAR patients distally landing in zone 6. The cohort was divided into TEVAR with vs without CA flow preservation. Demographic, clinical, and perioperative characteristics, as well as postoperative mortality, morbidities, and complications, were compared between the groups. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed. Of 25,549 reviewed patients, 772 had a distal landing in Zone 6, 212 of which (27.5%) had TEVAR without CA flow preservation, whereas 560 (72.5%) underwent TEVAR with CA flow preservation. Indications for TEVAR were aneurysm in 431 (55.8%), dissection in 247 (32.0%), or other in 94 (12.2%) cases. Patients who underwent TEVAR without CA flow preservation had statistically significantly higher rates of 30-day mortality (11.3% vs 5.9%; P =.010), 30-day disease/treatment-related mortality (8.0% vs 4.3%; P =.039), as well as a tendency of increased intestinal ischemia requiring intervention (1.9% vs 0.5%; P =.077). After adjusting for potential confounders, CA coverage without flow preservation was associated with more than a two-fold increase in the overall 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-5.92; P =.006) and 30-day disease/treatment-related mortality (OR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.11-6.72; P =.029). In a sub-group analysis based on disease pathology, these results persisted only in the aneurysm group (30-day mortality [OR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.01-5.48; P =.047]; 30-day disease/treatment-related mortality [OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.08-7.67; P =.034]), whereas there was no significant association between CA flow preservation status and the endpoints in the dissection subgroup (30-day mortality [OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.22-6.05; P =.856], 30-day disease/treatment-related mortality [OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.16-5.19; P =.911]). CA coverage during TEVAR without preservation of its blood flow is associated with significantly higher mortality in patients with aortic aneurysm, but not dissection. In patients with aortic aneurysm, CA flow should be preserved during TEVAR whenever feasible, whereas in patients with dissection, it may be safe to cover CA without preservation of its flow. Prospective studies should be done to confirm these findings and compare the open vs endovascular revascularization techniques on outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to determine the influences of varying severity of sleep apnea syndrome (SAS) on the outcomes after thoracic endovascular aorta repair (TEVAR) in patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD). This observational study focused on individuals with TBAD plus SAS who received TEVAR between January 2018 and December 2022. Patients were divided into groups according to the results of the portable sleep-breathing monitoring systems: mild SAS (MSAS) and moderate-to-severe SAS (MSSAS). Clinical profiles were collected and analyzed. A total of 121 cases with TBAD plus SAS who underwent TEVAR were enrolled in this study. Two groups were formed by stratifying these cases: MSAS (74 cases) and MSSAS (47 cases). The MSSAS cases were found to be older relative to MSAS cases (51.7 ± 8.3 years vs 57.1 ± 12.8 years; P =.012) and had a higher body mass index (BMI; 25.7 ± 2.3 kg/m2vs 27.0 ± 2.3 kg/m2; P =.038). The investigation did not find any appreciable differences between the MSAS and MSSAS groups in terms of complications (endoleak, P =.403; stent-induced new entry, P >.999; and stent displacement: P >.999). However, the MSSAS group exhibited a significantly higher overall mortality rate compared with the MSAS group (log-rank P =.027). The tendency continued when examining cases with Marfan syndrome combined with MSSAS, where the overall mortality rate was significantly greater compared with Marfan syndrome cases with MSAS (log-rank P =.037). The absence of a significant difference was noteworthy in the freedom from reintervention between the MSAS and MSSAS groups (log-rank P =.278). The overall mortality rate was significantly higher in MSSAS group even after adjusting for varying potential confounders in the multivariate cox regression analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.875; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.238-2.586; P =.012). A markedly higher rate of distal stent dilation in the MSSAS group was also observed compared with the MSAS group (HR, 2.5 mm/year [95% CI, 2-3 mm/year] vs HR, 4 mm/year [95% CI, 2.0-5.5 mm/year]; P =.029). MSSAS is associated with a significantly higher risk of overall mortality and dilation rate of the distal stent after TEVAR for TBAD patients. Hence, aggressive efforts to reverse the severity of SAS in time in these individuals seem to be necessary. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The advent of endovascular aortic surgery has led to the rise of novel techniques and devices in treating pathologies of the aorta. While endovascular surgery has been well established in the descending thoracic and abdominal aorta, the endovascular treatment of the aortic arch represents a new and exciting territory for aortic surgeons. This article will discuss the different aortic diseases amenable to endovascular treatment, currently available aortic arch stent grafts and their limitations, and the future of endovascular aortic arch therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES To evaluate gender-related outcomes during endovascular treatment of thoracic and thoraco-abdominal aortic diseases (TEVAR). METHODS Multicentre, retrospective, observational cohort study. All TEVARs between January 2005 and April 2023 were identified. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and cumulative survival. Secondary outcomes were vascular access complications, and freedom from TEVAR-related reintervention. Interventions performed in male patients were matched to females on the basis of a one-to-one coarsened exact matching. RESULTS We identified 151 males who were matched with 151 females. Mortality at 30 days was not statistically different between females and males (11.2% vs 11.2%; P  =   1.0). At binary logistic regression analysis, duration of intervention (P  =   0.001) and emergency TEVAR (P  =   0.001) were associated with mortality at 30 days. Gender did not impact the access vessel complication rate [ n  = 6 (4.0%) vs n  = 5 (3.3%); P  =   1.0]. The median follow-up was 46 (interquartile range, 7–84) months with no difference between males and females [median 50 (11–95) vs 37.5 (3.5–71.2); P  =   0.153]. Estimated survival was not statistically different between females and males [log-rank χ2 = 0.6, P  =   0.442; 95% confidence interval (CI) 110.7–207.3]. At Cox's regression analysis, gender did not impact overall survival (hazard ratio 0.8; 95% CI 0.6–1.3; P  =   0.450). Estimated freedom from TEVAR-related reinterventions was not statistically different between females and males (log-rank χ2 = 0.4, P  =   0.837; 95% CI 187.8–219.3). CONCLUSIONS Female gender itself was not associated with worse 30-day mortality and late survival than males with similar access vessel complication as well as TEVAR-related reintervention rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the results of isolated left subclavian artery in-situ fenestration (ISF) during 'zone 2' thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using a new adjustable needle puncturing device system. METHODS It is a multicentre, retrospective, physician-initiated cohort study of patients treated from 28 July 2021 to 3 April 2024. Inclusion criteria were isolate left subclavian artery revascularization for elective or urgent/emergent 'zone 2' TEVAR. The primary outcome was technical success and freedom from ISF TEVAR-related reintervention or endoleak. RESULTS We treated 50 patients: 28 (56.0%) atherosclerotic thoracic aneurysms, 12 (24.0%) type B aortic dissection and 10 (20.0%) penetrating aortic ulcers. Elective intervention was carried out in 46 (92.0%) cases. ISF was successful in all cases, with a procedural primary technical success in 47 (94.0%) cases. The median time of intervention was 184 min (interquartile range 135–220) with a median fenestration time of 20 min (interquartile range 13–35). Operative mortality did not occur. We observed 1 case of spinal cord ischaemia and 2 cases of bilateral posterior non-disabling stroke. Mortality at 30 days occurred in 1 (2.0%) patient (not aorta-related). The median follow-up was 4 months (interquartile range 1–12.25). Bridging stent graft patency was 100% with no ISF-related endoleak. ISF-related reintervention was never required CONCLUSIONS ISF TEVAR using the Ankura™-II device with the self-centring adjustable needle system showed high technical success, promising stability and stable aortic-related outcomes. Owing to these results, it represents a safe and effective alternative for standard 'zone 2' TEVAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the preferred treatment for severe blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAI). Successful outcomes rely on accurate endograft sizing, but initial imaging may underestimate aortic diameters. This study examines the impact of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) on endograft sizing and clinical outcomes in BTAI patients. Methods: A prospectively collected multi-institutional dataset from the Aortic Trauma Foundation was analyzed. Patients with BTAI undergoing TEVAR with IVUS were compared to patients who underwent TEVAR alone. Demographics and operative variables were compared, focusing on IVUS effects on endograft sizing by examining maximal proximal and distal aortic diameter on initial CT imaging compared to the graft diameters used during TEVAR. Results: 293 patients underwent TEVAR for BTAI with IVUS utilized in 124 cases (42.3%). The average graft size in the IVUS and non-IVUS groups were similar proximally (26.91 ± 4.3 mm IVUS vs 27.77 ± 4.7 mm non-IVUS, P = 0.116) and distally (25.96 ± 4.7 mm IVUS vs 26.51 ± 4.7 mm non-IVUS). IVUS did not impact the difference between graft size and initial CT measurements proximally (4.32 ± 4.8 mm IVUS vs 4.23 ± 3.9 mm non-IVUS, P = 0.859) or distally (4.17 ± 5.9 mm IVUS vs 4.50 ± 4.3 mm non-IVUS, P = 0.606). Although delayed hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke occurred less frequently in IVUS patients (0.8% IVUS vs 7.1% non- IVUS, P = 0.024), in-hospital mortality was similar between groups (5.6% IVUS vs 7.7% non-IVUS, P = 0.581). Conclusions: IVUS is not associated with significant changes in endograft sizing compared to sizing based on CT scan alone in BTAI patients. IVUS was not associated with differences in mortality but was associated with a decrease in delayed hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke. Routine IVUS in BTAI patients may not be necessary for accurate sizing, but there may be a relationship between IVUS and stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To report the long-term outcomes of patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and quick fenestrated (QF)-assisted in situ fenestration (ISF). Methods: Between October 2017 and December 2018, 15 patients with TBAD requiring revascularization of the supra-aortic trunks underwent TEVAR with QF-assisted ISF at our institution. Results: Thirteen of the 15 patients were male, and the mean age was 52.87 ± 11.26. The technical success rate was 100%. Thirty-day mortality rate was 0. The median follow-up period was 41 months (range, 35–49). During follow-up, one non-aortic-related death was recorded, no fenestration lost its alignment, and no stroke or stent graft migration was observed. Two patients underwent another successful endovascular repair. One case of type Ib endoleak occurred 19 months postoperatively. This was caused by aortic progression distal to the stent graft. Another stent graft with a larger diameter was implanted in the descending aorta. One case of type Ic endoleak was observed 35 months postoperatively. The patient was diagnosed during the annual follow-up without any symptoms. Another bridging stent graft was implanted into the left subclavian artery distal to the already existing one, and the type Ic endoleak was successfully treated. Conclusions: TEVAR with QF-assisted ISF may be an effective treatment for ISF in type B aortic dissection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the midterm and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) procedure to treat an uncomplicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection (uATBAD) with high risk for subsequent aortic complications compared with the group of patients who received a conservative treatment protocol during the same period. Materials and Methods: Between 2008 and 2019, 35 patients who had TEVAR due to uATBAD and those with conservative procedure (n=18) were included in a retrospective analysis and follow-up study. The primary endpoints were false lumen thrombosis/perfusion, true lumen diameter, and aortic dilatation. The aortic-related mortality, reintervention, and long-term survival were the secondary endpoints. Results: In the study period, 53 patients (22 females) with a mean age of 61.1±13 years were included. No 30-day and in-hospital mortality was recorded. Permanent neurological deficits occurred in 2 patients (5.7%). In the TEVAR group (n=35) and in a median follow-up period of 34 months, a significant reduction of maximum aortic and false lumen diameter as well as a significant increase of true lumen diameter were detected (p<0.001 each). Complete false lumen thrombosis increased from 6% preoperatively to 60% at follow-up. The median difference in aortic, false lumen, and true lumen diameter was −5 mm (interquartile range [IQR]=−28 to 8 mm), –11 mm (IQR=−53 to 10 mm), and 7 mm (IQR=−13 to 17 mm), respectively. In 3 patients (8.6%), a reintervention was needed. Two patients (1 aortic-related) died during follow-up. The estimated survival according to Kaplan-Meyer analysis was 94.1% after 3 years and 87.5% after 5 years. Similar to the TEVAR group, no 30-day or in-hospital mortality was recorded in the conservative group. During follow-up, 2 patients died and 5 patients underwent conversion-TEVAR (28%). In a median follow-up period of 26 months (range=150), a significant increase of maximum aortic diameter (p=0.006) and a tendency to augmentation of the false lumen (p=0.06) were noted. No significant reduction of the true lumen was seen. Conclusions: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients at high risk of subsequent aortic complications in uncomplicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection is safe and is associated with favorable midterm outcomes regarding aortic remodeling. Clinical Impact: In a retrospective, single center analysis of prospectively collected data with follow-up, we compared 35 patients with high-risk features who recieved TEVAR in acute and sub-acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection to a control-group (n=18). The TEVAR group showed a significant positive remoduling (reduction of max. aortic and false lumen diameter and increase of true lumen diameter (p<0.001 each)) during follow-up with an estimated survival of 94.1% after 3 years and 87.5% after 5 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization has been used in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD), with inadequate proximal landing zone (PLZ). The outcomes of comparisons between TEVAR and hybrid procedure on patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ, are rarely reported. This study sought to compare and clarify the early and midterm outcomes between TEVAR and hybrid procedure in patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ. Materials and Methods: Between January 2019 and December 2021, 93 patients with TBAD, with inadequate PLZ, who underwent TEVAR or hybrid procedure, were retrospectively evaluated in Beijing Anzhen hospital. Demographics, comorbidities, preoperative imaging features, periprocedural details, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. Survival was analyzed according to Kaplan–Meier method. Results: TEVAR procedures were performed on 41 patients (TEVAR group) and hybrid procedures on 52 patients (hybrid group). Early events, 30 day mortality, and all-cause mortality, were not significantly different between the 2 groups. However, patients receiving TEVAR had significantly shorter procedure time (p<0.001), hospital stay (p<0.001), and intensive care unit (ICU) stay (p=0.001) compared with those in the hybrid group. Patients receiving TEVAR had significantly lower midterm events (p=0.014) and re-intervention (p=0.015) compared with those in the hybrid group. Conclusion: The study indicated that TEVAR with LSA revascularization for TBAD with inadequate PLZ is associated with a trend toward lower rates of midterm events, while the early and midterm mortalities were comparable with those in hybrid procedure. Clinical Impact: This study is novel as it compared the outcomes between thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and hybrid procedure in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD), with inadequate proximal landing zone, which has been rarely reported previously. We believe that our study makes a significant contribution to the literature because it is clinically relevant as it demonstrated that TEVAR with left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization for TBAD with inadequate proximal landing zone is associated with a trend toward lower rates of mid-term events, while the early and mid-term mortalities were comparable with those in the hybrid procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To describe snare-assisted vessel targeting to selectively overcome a dissection in the iliac bifurcation and gain antegrade access to the hypogastric artery (HA). Technique: The technique is demonstrated in a 64-year-old woman with an asymptomatic Crawford type III thoracoabdominal aneurysm. A 2-stage endovascular repair, consisting of a thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and a branched endovascular aortic repair was planned. In the control angiography after TEVAR, a disrupted plaque with consequent dissection in the right iliac bifurcation was detected. The perfusion of the common iliac artery and external iliac artery resulted impaired. The targeting of the right HA through a contralateral antegrade approach failed, whereas an ipsilateral retrograde approach was possible but unsuitable for therapeutic purposes. Using the catheter of the retrograde ipsilateral access, a snare from a contralateral crossover was cached and dragged into the HA, allowing the targeting of the vessels and further endovascular therapy with angioplasty and stenting. Follow-up 8 months postoperatively demonstrated the patency of the stents and well-preserved perfusion in the right iliac bifurcation. Conclusion: The snare-dragging technique can be used to gain access to vessels presenting challenging conformations or dissections. This application may be a valuable support for complex endovascular treatment in a variety of patients. Clinical Impact: The snare-dragging technique can be used to gain access to vessels presenting challenging conformations or dissections. It allows the catheterization to be establish from the easiest and safest approach and then "transferred" from one access to the other. It avoids the risk of repeated loss of catheterization due to unstable and unfavorable working angles, and it saves time and radiation. It permits different material combinations, adapting to the available resources and materials. We believe that the current technique may increase the strategy spectrum available for endovascular therapy and complex endovascular procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background To evaluate the clinical outcomes and the validity of the in situ needle fenestration (ISNF) technique during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for patients with aortic arch conditions. Methods A total of 115 patients with aortic arch conditions treated with ISNF during TEVAR between January 2018 and December 2021 were incorporated. Results The median age of the patients was 62.0 years, and 10.4% (12/115) were female. The median follow-up time was 31.0 months. A total of 175 supra-arch branches were reconstructed. A single branch was fenestrated in 80 patients, while the left subclavian artery (LSA) and left common carotid artery (LCCA) were fenestrated simultaneously in 11 patients, and all supra-arch branches were fenestrated in 24 patients. The rate of technical success was 100%, 30-day mortality was 3.5% (4/115), overall mortality was 8.7% (10/115), and aortic-related mortality was 2.6% (3/115). Aortic-related reintervention was required in 7.8% (9/115) of patients. Among the major postoperative complications, four patients developed retrograde type A dissection requiring emergent open surgery, three patients had cerebrovascular accidents, and one patient had an endoleak. No occlusions or stenoses of the main or branch aortic stents were observed. Conclusions The mid-term results of the ISNF technique during TEVAR for aortic arch conditions were within the acceptable range; however, further follow-up results are needed and long-term stability and durability needs to be assessed. Related fenestration devices also require further development.

Objective: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) remains a debilitating complication, occurring in 10% of patients. Studies have shown that extended aortic coverage is a risk factor for SCI. This study evaluates whether extended aortic length coverage is a significant risk factor for SCI. Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed 277 consecutive patients who underwent TEVAR successfully between 2006 and 2021 at a single institution. The patients were classified into 2 groups: ≥205 mm and

Abstract Background Techniques in endovascular therapy have evolved to offer a promising alternative to medical therapy alone for Type B aortic dissections (TBADs). Aim The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare mortality and overall complications between thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and best medical therapy (BMT) in patients with TBADs. Methods We included randomized control trials and prospective or retrospective cohort studies that compared TEVAR and BMT for the treatment of type B aortic dissection. Multiple electronic databases were searched. Results Thirty-two cohort studies including 150,836 patients were included. TEVAR was associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality rate than BMT (RR = 0.79, CI = 0.63, 0.99, P = 0.04), notably in patients ≥ 65 years of age (RR = 0.78, CI = 0.64, 0.95, P = 0.01). The TEVAR group had a significantly prolonged hospital stay (MD = 3.42, CI = 1.69, 5.13, P = 0.0001) and ICU stay (MD = 3.18, CI = 1.48, 4.89, P = 0.0003) compared to the BMT. BMT was associated with increased stroke risk (RR = 1.52, CI = 1.29, 1.79, P

Abstract This study aimed to establish a predictive model for the risk of post-thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) post-implantation syndrome (PIS) in type B aortic dissection (TBAD) patients, assisting clinical physicians in early risk stratification and decision management for high-risk PIS patients. This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 547 consecutive TBAD patients who underwent TEVAR treatment at our hospital. Feature variables were selected through LASSO regression and logistic regression analysis to construct a nomogram predictive model, and the model's performance was evaluated. The optimal cutoff value for the PIS risk nomogram score was calculated through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, further dividing patients into high-risk group (HRG) and low-risk group (LRG), and comparing the short to midterm postoperative outcomes between the two groups. In the end, a total of 158 cases (28.9%) experienced PIS. Through LASSO regression analysis and multivariable logistic regression analysis, variables including age, emergency surgery, operative time, contrast medium volume, and number of main prosthesis stents were selected to construct the nomogram predictive model. The model achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.86 in the training set and 0.82 in the test set. Results from calibration curve, decision curve analysis (DCA) and clinical impact curve (CIC) demonstrated that the predictive model exhibited good performance and clinical utility. Furthermore, after comparing the postoperative outcomes of HRG and LRG patients, we found that the incidence of postoperative PIS significantly increased in HRG patients. The duration of ICU stay and mechanical assistance time was prolonged, and the incidence of postoperative type II entry flow and acute kidney injury (AKI) was higher. The risk of aortic-related adverse events (ARAEs) and major adverse events (MAEs) at the first and twelfth months of follow-up also significantly increased. However, there was no significant difference in the mortality rate during hospitalization. This study established a nomogram model for predicting the risk of PIS in patients with TBAD undergoing TEVAR. It serves as a practical tool to assist clinicians in early risk stratification and decision-making management for patients.

Background: Techniques in endovascular therapy have evolved to offer a promising alternative to medical therapy alone for Type B aortic dissections (TBADs). Aim: The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare mortality and overall complications between thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and best medical therapy (BMT) in patients with TBADs. Methods: We included randomized control trials and prospective or retrospective cohort studies that compared TEVAR and BMT for the treatment of type B aortic dissection. Multiple electronic databases were searched. Results: Thirty-two cohort studies including 150,836 patients were included. TEVAR was associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality rate than BMT (RR = 0.79, CI = 0.63, 0.99, P = 0.04), notably in patients ≥ 65 years of age (RR = 0.78, CI = 0.64, 0.95, P = 0.01). The TEVAR group had a significantly prolonged hospital stay (MD = 3.42, CI = 1.69, 5.13, P = 0.0001) and ICU stay (MD = 3.18, CI = 1.48, 4.89, P = 0.0003) compared to the BMT. BMT was associated with increased stroke risk (RR = 1.52, CI = 1.29, 1.79, P < 0.00001). No statistically significant differences in late mortality (1, 3, and 5 years) or intervention-related factors (acute renal failure, spinal cord ischemia, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, and sepsis) were noted between the groups. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis revealed a significant association between the TEVAR group and a decreased mortality rate of TBAD compared to the medical treatment group, especially in patients aged 65 years or older. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical management is the standard treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection (CTBAD). However, the roles of open surgical repair (OSR) and thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) in patients with CTBAD remain controversial. Thus, this study aimed to assess and compare the mid- and long-term clinical outcomes of OSR via left thoracotomy with that of TEVAR for CTBAD. The data of 85 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for CTBAD from April 2007 to May 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups: Group G, which included patients who underwent OSR, and Group E, which included patients who underwent TEVAR. Groups G and E comprised 33 and 52 patients, respectively. Preoperative and postoperative computed tomography (CT) studies were retrospectively analyzed for the maximum diameter. The mean duration of the follow-up period was 5.8 years. Operative mortality did not occur. There was no difference in complications, such as stroke (G: 2 vs. E: 0, p = 0.30), paraplegia (G: 1 vs. E: 1, p = 0.66), and respiratory failure (G: 2, vs. E: 0, p = 0.30). The difference in preoperative factors was observed, including the intervals between onset and operation (G; 4.9 years vs. E; 1.9 years, p < 0.01), maximum diameter in preoperative CT (G; 59.0 mm vs. E; 50.5 mm, p < 0.001), and maximum false lumen diameter (G; 35.5 mm vs. E; 29.0 mm, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the mid- and long-term survival rates (p = 0.49), aorta-related deaths (p = 0.33), and thoracic re-intervention rates (p = 0.34). Postoperative adverse events occurred in Group E: four cases of retrospective type A aortic dissection, two cases of aorto-bronchial fistula, and one case of aorto-esophagus fistula. Aorta-related death and re-intervention rates crossed over in both groups after seven years postoperatively. Although endovascular repair of CTBAD is less invasive, the rate of freedom from re-intervention was unsatisfactory. Some fatal complications were observed in the endovascular group, and the mid- and long-term outcomes were reversed compared with those in the OSR group. Although OSR is an invasive procedure, it could be performed safely without perioperative complications. OSR has more feasible mid- and long-term outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study sought to elucidate clinical and imaging findings predictive for malperfusion syndrome after blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI). Background: There is limited literature on malperfusion syndrome after BTAI, and the timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with this condition has not been defined. Methods: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients with BTAI treated between January 2021 and October 2023. Clinical and thoracic aortic (TA) imaging data, time to TEVAR, in-hospital death, and malperfusion/reperfusion sequelae (paraplegia, renal/visceral/limb ischemia, and compartment syndromes) were assessed. Correlations between clinical and imaging findings, time to TEVAR, and outcomes were evaluated. Results: Of the 19,203 trauma patients evaluated, 13,717 (71%) had blunt injuries and 77 (0.6%) had BTAI. The majority (67.5%) were male, with a median age of 40 years (IQR: 33-55). TEVAR was performed in 42 (54.5%) patients. Seven (9.1%) patients presented with clinical and TA imaging criteria for traumatic thoracic aortic coarctation (TTAC), including diminished/absent femoral pulses and TA luminal narrowing of 50% to 99%. The median time to TEVAR was 9 (IQR: 5-32), 11, and 4 hours for all non-TTAC and TTAC BTAI patients, respectively (P= 0.037). Only TTAC patients presented/developed malperfusion/reperfusion sequelae. In-hospital mortality rates were 7.8%, 5.8%, and 29% for all non-TTAC and TTAC BTAI patients, respectively (P= 0.09). Aortic-related mortality occurred in only 2 (2.6%) TTAC patients. Conclusions: Patients with clinical and TA imaging manifestations of TTAC are predisposed to malperfusion/reperfusion sequelae if TEVAR is delayed. We recommend the emergent repair of all BTAIs with TTAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to modify a laser Doppler flowmeter designed and assembled at our institute. After measuring sensitivity evaluation in ex vivo experiments, we confirmed the efficacy of this new device for monitoring real-time esophageal mucosal blood flow changes after thoracic stent graft implantation by simulating various clinical situations in an animal model. Thoracic stent graft implantation was performed in a swine model (n = 8). Esophageal mucosal blood flow decreased significantly from baseline (34.1 ± 18.8 ml/min/100 g vs. 16.7 ± 6.6 ml/min/100 g, P < 0.05) in the lower esophagus (Th6–Th8) where the stent graft covered the aorta. In the hemorrhagic shock model (shock index ≥ 1.0), esophageal mucosal blood flow showed a remarkable change from baseline in the upper esophagus (Th1–Th3), where the stent graft did not cover the aorta (20.8 ± 9.8 ml/min/100 g vs. 12.9 ± 8.6 ml/min/100 g, P < 0.01); however, it returned to the baseline value within a 30-min period. Mucosal blood flow remained stable in the esophagus, where the stent graft did not cover the aorta. After elevating the mean blood pressure to > 70 mmHg with continuous intravenous noradrenaline infusion, esophageal mucosal blood flow increased significantly in both regions; however, the reaction was different between the two regions. Our newly developed laser Doppler flowmeter could measure real-time esophageal mucosal blood flow changes in various clinical situations during thoracic stent graft implantation in a swine model. Hence, this device can be applied in many medical fields by downsizing it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) is the primary treatment for Stanford type B aortic dissection (type B AD). However, patients often encounter significant difficulties post-TEVAR that endanger their safety when transitioning from hospital- to home-based care. Moreover, information on the ideal transitional care for patients with type B AD post-TEVAR is scarce in China. This single-masked randomized clinical trial aimed to assess the effectiveness of the Assess, Advise, Agree, Assist, and Arrange (5As) model-based transitional care in improving discharge preparation level and transitional care quality post-TEVAR among patients with type B AD in China. Methods: This study was conducted at a hospital in China between January 2021 and October 2021. Patients with type B AD were randomly divided into intervention and control groups. Participants in the intervention group received the 5As model-based transitional nursing care. The 5As model is an evidence-based intervention strategy comprising: (1) Assess: assessing the preoperative cardiovascular risk behavior of patients with AD. (2) Advise: making suggestions according to the risk behaviors of the patients. (3) Agree: reaching a consensus on goals and action plans by making decisions with the patients and their families. (4) Assist: assisting patients in solving obstacles to implementing health plans. (5) Arrange: arranging follow-up visits according to the actual situation of the patients and guiding them in adhering to a schedule. The control group received the usual nursing care for the same duration and number of follow-up visits. A trained research nurse collected all the baseline data of the patients on admission, assessed discharge readiness level (using the Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale) on the day of discharge, and collected transitional quality of care (by the Care Transition Measure-15) data on day 30 after discharge. Results: Overall, 72 patients with type B AD were recruited. Discharge readiness level and transitional care quality in the intervention group were significantly superior to those in the control group. Conclusions: This study showed that the 5As model-based transitional care program can effectively promote discharge readiness and transitional care quality of patients with type B AD post-TEVAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Non-A non-B aortic dissection (AD) is a rare and life-threatening medical emergency, and it has been controversial whether it should be managed as type B aortic dissection (TBAD). The study aims to compare in-hospital and follow-up outcomes between patients with non-A non-B AD and those with TBAD treated by endovascular based treatment (EBT). Methods: From January 2017 to December 2021, 96 consecutive patients with non-A non-B AD met the inclusion criteria and underwent EBT. Patients with TBAD were matched to patients with non-A non-B AD at a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching analysis to correct for baseline confounding factors. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Aortic-related events were defined as dissection-related death, aortic rupture, retrograde type A aortic dissection, reintervention, and type Ia endoleak. Results: Patients with non-A non-B AD required more TEVAR-related adjunctive procedures compared to TBAD patients during EBT and they required a longer ICU length of stay (36.0 vs 24.0 hours, P <.05) as well as a longer hospitalization (8.0 vs 7.0 days, P <.05) after EBT. There was no statistical difference in overall survival after EBT for patients with TBAD and non-A non-B AD. However, compared to patients with TBAD, non-A non-B AD patients had a higher rate of reintervention and experienced more aortic-related late events during follow-up. Conclusion: Patients with non-A non-B acute AD who are treated with EBT do not have higher in-hospital or follow-up mortality rates compared to patients with type B AD. However, there is an increased risk of reintervention and aortic-related late events after the intervention during follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) and Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) has been increasing; however, in terms of etiology, the differences of long term after TEVAR outcomes remain unexplored. Thus, we investigated etiology-specific long-term results of TEVAR for TAA and TBAD. A total of 421 TEVAR procedures were performed at our institution from July 2007 to December 2021; 249 TAA cases and 172 TBAD cases were included. Traumatic aortic dissection and aortic injury cases were excluded. The mean observation duration was 5.7 years. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 1.4% (n = 6), with 1.2% (n = 3) in the TAA group and 1.7% (n = 3) in the TBAD group. The overall incidence of postoperative stroke was 0.9% (n = 4), with 1.2% (n = 3) and 0.6% (n = 1) in the TAA and TBAD groups, respectively (p = 0.90). Paraplegia developed in 1.7% (n = 7) of patients, with 2.4% (n = 6) in the TAA group and 0.6% (n = 1) in the TBAD group. Freedom from aortic-related death was not significantly different between the two etiologies; however, thoracic reintervention was more common in the TBAD group (p = 0.003), with endoleak being the most common indication for reintervention. Additionally, retrograde type A aortic dissection occurred in four TBAD cases, while migration occurred in three TAA cases. The perioperative results of TEVAR for TAA and TBAD were satisfactory. The long-term results were unfavorable owing to the occurrence of etiology-specific and common complications. In terms of the high frequency of reintervention, the long-term complications associated with TEVAR are etiology specific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the usefulness of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) for intra-operative monitoring to detect the risk of spinal cord ischaemia (SCI) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Risk factors for SCI in TEVAR were also analysed. Among 330 TEVARs performed from February 2009 to October 2018, 300 patients underwent intra-operative MEP monitoring. SCI risk groups were extracted based on MEP amplitude changes using a cutoff value of 50%. When the amplitude decreased to < 50% of the pre-operative value, intra-operative mean arterial pressure (MAP) was increased by about 20 mmHg using noradrenaline, whereas MAP was usually controlled to about 80 mmHg during surgery. Other efforts were also made to increase MEP amplitude by increasing cardiac output, correcting anaemia, and finishing the surgery promptly. Based on MEP amplitude data, SCI risk groups were extracted and risk factors for SCI in TEVAR were analysed. A total of 283 non-SCI risk patients and 17 SCI risk patients by MEP monitoring were extracted; only 1.0% developed immediate paraplegia and none developed delayed paraplegia. Bivariable analysis showed significant differences in chronic kidney disease, haemodialysis, artery of Adamkiewicz closure, and stent graft (SG) covered length ≥ 8 vertebral bodies. Logistic regression analysis showed hyperlipidaemia (odds ratio [OR] 3.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08 – 11.67; p =.037), SG covered length ≥ 8 vertebral bodies (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.02 – 1.78; p =.034), and haemodialysis (OR 27.78, 95% CI 6.02 – 128.22; p <.001) were the most influential risk factors for SCI in TEVAR. MEPs might be a useful monitoring tool to predict SCI in TEVAR. In addition, hyperlipidaemia, SG covered length ≥ 8 vertebral bodies, and haemodialysis represent key risk factors for SCI during TEVAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: An accurate distal deployment is essential for successful thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of a paradiaphragmatic aortic aneurysm. This study aimed to investigate the anatomical and intraoperative factors that affect the accuracy of distal deployment during TEVAR. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of preoperative and postoperative computed tomography scans of 426 patients undergoing TEVAR at our institution between October 2008 and May 2021, of which the stent-graft was attempted to be deployed just above the celiac axis or the superior mesenteric artery in 56 patients. Based on the anatomical factors related to the malposition (deployed >10 mm away from the target vessel) and the greater curve to the straight-line ratio (G/S ratio), the patients were categorized as severe tortuosity (n=21) and mild tortuosity (n=35) groups to compare the operative and clinical outcomes. Result: Stent-graft malpositioning occurred in 21 cases. Among all anatomical variables, only the G/S ratio was significantly larger in the malpositioned cases (p=0.049). A cutoff G/S ratio value of 1.15 was determined using the receiver operating curve analysis. In the severe tortuosity group, the distal end of the stent-graft was significantly farther (median: 10.0 [interquartile range (IQR): 2.5–19.5] mm vs 3.0 [0–8.0] mm; p=0.015) from the target vessel, and the tilt angle of the stent-graft's distal edge was larger (median: 21.4 [IQR: 15.8–24.5] vs 9.5 [5.5–12.5] degree; p<0.01) than that in the mild tortuosity group. Both groups were comparable for the incidence of a primary type Ib endoleak (p=0.454), a secondary type Ib endoleak (p=1.0), and the rate of distal reintervention (p=0.276). Conclusion: Severe tortuosity in the distal descending thoracic aorta is associated with a malpositioned and tilted distal end of the stent-graft. Clinical Impact: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for paradiaphragmatic thoracic aortic aneurysms requires accurate distal landing. In this paper, a retrospective CT analysis revealed that the greater curve to the straight-line ratio (G/S ratio) was associated to affects the malposition of the stent graft, defined as being deployed more than 10 mm away from the target vessel. Further, a comparative analysis based on the G/S ratio demonstrated that severe aortic tortuosity was associated with a more distal and tilted deployment of the stent graft. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the optimal sizing of an aortic stent graft in patients with blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI), considering the decrease in diameter in hypovolemic status. Materials and Methods: From 2014 to 2020, 25 patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for BTAI were included. Hemodynamic parameters in the emergency room (ER) and just before the main procedure (MP) were collected. The aortic sizes were measured during initial computed tomography (CT) on arrival in the ER, aortography (AG) during TEVAR, and final CT in the outpatient clinic. The appropriateness of the inserted stent graft size was investigated. Results: The mean values of the final CT/initial CT and final CT/initial AG (proximal descending thoracic aorta [pDTA]) were 113% and 105%, respectively. The final CT/initial CT (pDTA; 122.2% vs 108.8%, p=0.01) and final CT/initial AG (pDTA; 113.4% vs 102.1%, p<0.01) were significantly higher in patients with systolic blood pressure (SBP; MP) ≤90 mm Hg. The final CT/initial CT (pDTA; 120.4% vs 109.0%, p=0.03) and final CT/initial AG (pDTA; 111.4% vs 102.6%, p=0.01) were significantly higher in patients with mean blood pressure (MBP; MP) ≤70 mm Hg. On an average, the inserted stent grafts were oversized by 130% on initial AG. Based on the final CT scan, the inserted stent graft was as large as 122%. Conclusion: In the case of hemodynamic instability with SBP (MP) ≤90 mm Hg or MBP (MP) ≤70 mm Hg, despite adequate resuscitation, an oversized TEVAR stent graft of 130% can reduce the occurrence of endoleak and is sufficiently safe. Clinical Impact: Despite sufficient resuscitation, the aorta size measured during TEVAR in patients with hemodynamic instability with systolic BP <90 mmHg and mean BP <70 mmHg may be reduced by more than 15% compared to that in the normal state. In this study, the mean size of the stent grafts were oversized by 130% on initial aortography, but were oversized by 122% based on final CT. When the stent graft was oversized by 130% in TEVAR for hemodynamic unstable patient with BTAI, the patient reached the proper oversizing subsequent to hemodynamic recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To describe a completely percutaneous approach for endovascular arch repair (arch–percutaneous endovascular aortic repair [PEVAR]) with a triple inner-branch device: the "Innominate Approach." Technique: After right axillary and single common femoral arteries percutaneous access, the arch stent-graft is introduced and deployed transfemorally using fusion overlay. The brachiocephalic artery (BCA) and the corresponding inner branch are cannulated from the axillary access. Through this access, a steerable-sheath guides antegrade cannulation of the left common carotid artery (LCCA) through its inner branch. Optionally, a wire preloaded through the left subclavian artery (LSA) and the LCCA branch, is snared from the BCA access providing LCCA through and through access. A 10 Fr sheath is then positioned from the BCA branch in the LCCA branch and a second, trans-axillary wire through the same sheath is used to catheterize the LCCA. The LCCA is then stented antegradely (regardless of approach). Finally, the BCA and LSA are bridged to complete the procedure. An additional novelty described is the use of VBX (W. L. Gore) as a bridging stent for the BCA. Conclusion: Arch-PEVAR is feasible with the use of adjuncts that are well-known for physicians performing complex endovascular repair. The "Innominate Approach" avoids access and exposure of the carotid arteries. Clinical Impact: We aim to describe the feasibility of the axillary artery as the main route to perform the brachiocephalic artery (BCA) and the left common carotid artery bridging stenting in case of arch endovascular repair (arch-EVAR) with a triple Inner-Branch Device. According to the present "Innominate Approach", percutaneous arch-EVAR is feasible using either a steerable sheath or a preloaded through-&-through wire. The Innominate approach, including a VBX bridging stent for the BCA, avoids carotid access and exposure, reduces the number of vascular accesses, and allows the downsizing of the trans-axillary devices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to establish a predictive model for the risk of post-thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) post-implantation syndrome (PIS) in type B aortic dissection (TBAD) patients, assisting clinical physicians in early risk stratification and decision management for high-risk PIS patients. This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 547 consecutive TBAD patients who underwent TEVAR treatment at our hospital. Feature variables were selected through LASSO regression and logistic regression analysis to construct a nomogram predictive model, and the model's performance was evaluated. The optimal cutoff value for the PIS risk nomogram score was calculated through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, further dividing patients into high-risk group (HRG) and low-risk group (LRG), and comparing the short to midterm postoperative outcomes between the two groups. In the end, a total of 158 cases (28.9%) experienced PIS. Through LASSO regression analysis and multivariable logistic regression analysis, variables including age, emergency surgery, operative time, contrast medium volume, and number of main prosthesis stents were selected to construct the nomogram predictive model. The model achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.86 in the training set and 0.82 in the test set. Results from calibration curve, decision curve analysis (DCA) and clinical impact curve (CIC) demonstrated that the predictive model exhibited good performance and clinical utility. Furthermore, after comparing the postoperative outcomes of HRG and LRG patients, we found that the incidence of postoperative PIS significantly increased in HRG patients. The duration of ICU stay and mechanical assistance time was prolonged, and the incidence of postoperative type II entry flow and acute kidney injury (AKI) was higher. The risk of aortic-related adverse events (ARAEs) and major adverse events (MAEs) at the first and twelfth months of follow-up also significantly increased. However, there was no significant difference in the mortality rate during hospitalization. This study established a nomogram model for predicting the risk of PIS in patients with TBAD undergoing TEVAR. It serves as a practical tool to assist clinicians in early risk stratification and decision-making management for patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Aortic dissection, a rare but serious condition, requires timely diagnosis and treatment. Case report: A case report involving a 33-year-old female with Stanford type B aortic dissection at 32 + 3 weeks gestational age highlights the importance of being alert to the symptoms and signs of this condition, particularly in patients with hypertension or a history of connective tissue disorders. The case report suggests a delivery first strategy followed by TEVAR procedure as the preferred approach for managing aortic dissection in pregnancy. This approach can alleviate pressure on the aorta, reduce the risk of rupture, and provide time for stabilization and preparation for the TEVAR procedure. Conclusion: The case report emphasizes the criticality of recognizing and treating aortic dissection in pregnant patients promptly, given its potential life-threatening impact on both mother and fetus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair may disturb the implantation of a cardiac implantable electronic device in the anterior thoracic region. In case 1, the bypass graft between the right axillary artery, left axillary artery, and left common carotid artery disturbed pacemaker implantation from the left anterior thoracic region. Therefore, right‐sided implantation was selected. By contrast, in case 2, the bypass graft between axillary arteries in the anterior thoracic region was visible on fluoroscopy, and we performed conventional left‐sided pacemaker implantation with extra‐thoracic puncture. The pacemaker implantations were successful in both cases. The implantation strategies were affected by the number of debranched arteries and visibility of the bypass graft. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the midterm outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair（TEVAR）combined with left subclavian artery（LSA）fenestration for aortic arch diseases. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the perioperative period and midterm follow⁃up clinical data of 111 patients who underwent TEVAR combined with LSA fenestration in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from January 2018 to December 2021. Results: Overall, the success rate of the surgery was 100%（111/ 111), the mortality rate within 30 days was 3.6%（4/111). The median postoperative follow ⁃ up time was 33.0 months, the all ⁃ cause mortality was 6.3%（7/111), the aorta⁃related mortality was 2.7%（3/111). Among the main complications, there were 3 patients（2.7%） of cerebrovascular accident, 2 patients（1.8%）of paraplegia, 1 patient（0.9%）of retrograde type A dissection（RTAD), 2 patients （1.8%）of endoleak, and 3 patients（2.7%）of distal stent ⁃induced new entry（dSINE). Four patients（3.6%）underwent the second aortic intervention, of which 3 patients（2.7%）were performed endovascular surgery and 1 patient（0.9%）was performed thoracotomy and artificial vascular replacement. Conclusion: The mid ⁃term outcomes of TEVAR combined with LSA fenestration for aortic arch diseases were within the acceptable range, however, further follow⁃up results are needed and long⁃term stability and durability needs to be assessed. In addition, the technical process of fenestration needs to be standardized and unified, and related equipment needs to be further developed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between sex and outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for intact isolated descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (iiDTAA). Background: Data regarding sex-related long-term outcomes after TEVAR for iiDTAA are limited and conflicting results regarding perioperative outcomes have been reported. Methods: We included all TEVAR for iiDTAA between 2014 and 2019 in the Vascular Quality Initiative linked to Medicare claims, allowing reliable assessment of long-term outcome data. Primary outcomes included 5-year mortality, reinterventions, and ruptures of the thoracic aorta. Secondarily, we assessed perioperative outcomes. Results: We identified 685 patients, of which 54% were females. Females had higher aortic size index {females vs males: 3.31 [interquartile range (IQR), 2.81--3.85] cm/m2 vs 2.93 (IQR, 2.42--3.36) cm/ m2; P < 0.001}, were more frequently symptomatic (31% vs 20%; P = 0.001), had longer procedure time [111 (IQR, 72--165) minutes vs 97 (IQR, 70--146) minutes] and more iliac procedures (16% vs 7.6%; P = 0.001). Compared with males, females had similar rates of 5-year mortality [58% vs 53%; hazard ratio (HR), 0.93; 95% CI: 0.71--1.22; P = 0.61), reinterventions (39% vs 30%; HR, 1.12; 95% CI: 0.73--1.73; P = 0.60), and late ruptures (0.6% vs 1.2%; HR, 0.87; 95% CI: 0.12--6.18; P = 0.89). After adjustment, these outcomes remained similar through 5 years. Furthermore, perioperative mortality was not significantly different between sexes (4.1% vs 2.2%; P = 0.25), as were rates of any complication as a composite outcome (16% vs 21%; P = 0.16), as well as of individual complications (all P > 0.05). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that females who undergo TEVAR for iiDTAA have similar 5-year and perioperative outcomes as compared with males. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Malnutrition is a poor prognostic factor in a wide range of diseases. Nevertheless, there is a lack of data investigating the association between malnutrition and outcomes of patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to report the prevalence and clinical impact of malnutrition assessed by the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score in TBAD patients undergoing TEVAR. Methods: The retrospective study indicated that a total of 881 patients diagnosed with TBAD and treated with TEVAR from January 2010 to December 2017 were categorized into subgroups based on their CONUT score (low ≤5 vs. high >5). To assess the correlation between malnutrition and early and follow-up outcomes of TBAD patients, logistic and Cox regression analysis were utilized, incorporating inverse probability weighting. Results: Malnutrition was present in 20.3% of patients according to the CONUT score. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that pre-operative CONUT score modeled as a continuous variable was an independent risk factor for prolonged intensive care unit stay (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.17; p = 0.015), 30-day death (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.19–1.72; p < 0.001), delirium (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01–1.23; p = 0.035) and acute kidney injury (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01–1.16; p = 0.027). During a median follow-up of 70.8 (46.1–90.8) months, 102 (11.8%) patients died (high CONUT group: 21.8% vs. low CONUT group: 9.0%; p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models showed that malnutrition was an independent predictor for follow-up mortality (hazard ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.11–2.53; p = 0.014). Results remained consistent across various sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Malnutrition assessed by the CONUT score could profoundly affect the early and follow-up prognosis in patients undergoing TEVAR. Routine preintervention nutritional evaluation might provide valuable prognostic information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Marfan syndrome is a rare inherited connective tissue disorder that can result in significant morbidity and mortality. We report a case of a 29-year-old pregnant woman presenting with an acute type B aortic dissection. Owing to cardiopulmonary decompensation and intestinal malperfusion, she underwent an emergency cesarean section followed by left subclavian to carotid transposition and thoracic endovascular aortic repair that was complicated by a retrograde type A aortic dissection and was managed surgically. Molecular testing confirmed the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome. This case highlights that multidisciplinary and hybrid management of challenging cases of acute aortic syndromes can result in a favorable outcome.

Isolated left vertebral artery (ILVA) is one of the most frequent vertebral abnormalities. When performing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), the ILVA may have to be closed depending on the position of the stent graft; in these cases, the decision to reconstruct the ILVA depends on the state of cerebral blood flow. Here, we report a case of a 68-year-old male, in whom the Willis arterial circle was incomplete; we therefore performed a reconstructive method during zone 2-landing TEVAR that ensured ILVA and left subclavian artery blood flow without the use of artificial vessels. Only one supraclavicular incision was required for reconstruction. This method has some procedural difficulties; however, it does not use artificial blood vessels and can be performed with a single incision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The potential of adverse events (AEs) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with type B aortic dissection (TBAD) has been reported. To avoid the occurrence of AEs, it is important to recognize high-risk population for prevention in advance. The data of 261 patients with TBAD who received TEVAR between June 2017 and June 2021 at our medical center were retrospectively reviewed. After the implementation of exclusion criteria, 172 patients were finally included, and after 2.8 years (range from 1 day to 5.8 years) of follow up, they were divided into AEs (n = 41) and non-AEs (n = 131) groups. We identified the predictors of AEs, and a prediction model was constructed to calculate the specific risk of postoperative AEs at 1, 2, and 3 years, and to stratify patients into high-risk (n = 78) and low-risk (n = 94) group. The prediction model included seven predictors: Age > 75 years, Lower extremity malperfusion (LEM), NT-proBNP > 330 pg/ml, None distal tear, the ratio between the diameter of the ascending aorta and descending aorta (A/D ratio) > 1.2, the ratio of the area of the false lumen to the total aorta (FL ratio) > 64%, and acute TEVAR, which exhibited excellent predictive accuracy performance and discriminatory ability with C statistic of 82.3% (95% CI 77.3–89.2%). The prediction model was contributed to identify high-risk patients of postoperative AEs, which may serve to achievement of personalized treatment and follow-up plans for patients.

OBJECTIVES The management of aortic arch disease is complex. Open surgical management continues to evolve, and the introduction of endovascular repair is revolutionizing aortic arch surgery. Although these innovative techniques have generated the opportunity for better outcomes in select patients, they have also introduced confusion and uncertainty regarding best practices. METHODS In New York, we developed a collaborative group, the New York Aortic Consortium, as a means of cross-linking knowledge and working together to better understand and treat aortic disease. In our meeting in May 2023, regional aortic experts and invited international experts discussed the contemporary management of aortic arch disease, differences in interpretation of the available literature and the integration of endovascular technology into disease management. We summarized the current state of aortic arch surgery in this review article. RESULTS Approaches to aortic arch repair have evolved substantially, whether it be methods to reduce cerebral ischaemia, improve haemostasis, simplify future operations or expand options for high-risk patients with endovascular approaches. However, the transverse aortic arch remains challenging to repair. Among our collaborative group of cardiac/aortic surgeons, we discovered a wide disparity in our practice patterns and our management strategies of patients with aortic arch disease. CONCLUSIONS It is important to build unique institutional expertise in the context of complex and evolving management of aortic arch disease with open surgery, endovascular repair and hybrid approaches, tailored to the risk profiles and anatomical specifics of individual patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The standard vascular surgical procedure (SV) for the treatment of distal aortic arch pathologies involves a hybrid approach using a left carotid-subclavian bypass and thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Considering the introduction of a thoracic side branch prosthesis (TBE), the aim of this study was to analyze the cost-revenue aspects of both procedures. Material and methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on cases treated by SV from 2017 to 2022. To draw conclusions regarding the use of TBE, the main diagnoses and procedures of SV were recoded based on current classifications (ICD/OPS 2023) for revenue calculations and regrouped according to aG-DRG 2023. An OPS modification and regrouping were performed for modeling TBE revenues. Results: A total of 13 cases were identified (mean age 62.5 ± 13.8 years; 10 males). After regrouping, the following DRGs were obtained: F42Z in N = 5, F51A in N = 4, F08B in N = 2, and F07A and F36B each in N = 1. The total revenue after regrouping was € 666,514.13, including an additional payment (ZE) of € 132,729.14. With the modeled application of TBE, a total revenue of € 659,212.19 was achieved. Compared to SV, this represents a revenue decrease of € 16,886.71 (changed DRG), but with an increase in ZE revenue by € 65,559.78 (different ZE). The use of TBE resulted in a saving of 74 occupancy days, including 13.5 days in intensive care. Conclusion: A cost coverage seems probable with a change in the procedure, despite the yet to be determined pricing of TBE. This is highly dependent on the coding quality and the future development of ZE, given the annually changing DRG relative weights. Precise and transparent performance and cost documentation are essential for determining the pricing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to investigate the correlation between post-implantation syndrome (PIS) and long-term prognosis in patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). This retrospective study included 547 consecutive patients diagnosed with TBAD who underwent TEVAR at our institution between January 2014 and December 2019. Patients were categorized into two groups: the PIS group (patients with post-TEVAR PIS) and the non-PIS group (patients without post-TEVAR PIS). In-hospital and follow-up data were analyzed. The incidence of PIS was 28.9% (158/547 patients). No baseline differences were observed between the PIS (n = 158) and the non-PIS (n = 389) groups. The proportion of emergency surgery in the PIS group was higher than that in the non-PIS group (44.9% vs 26.0%; P <.001), the operation time was longer (median, 65.0; interquartile range [IQR], 56.0-75.0 minutes vs 56.0; IQR, 45.0-66.0 minutes; P <.001), the volume of contrast medium used (median, 65.0; IQR, 56.0-75.0 mL vs 56.0; IQR, 45.0-66.0 mL; P <.001), and the average number of trunk stents (1.85 ± 0.4 vs 1.34 ± 0.5 pieces; P <.001) and branch stents (0.7 ± 0.7 vs 0.2 ± 0.5 pieces; P <.001) used were more in the PIS group than in the non-PIS group. The incidence of supra-aortic branch procedures was higher in the PIS group than in the non-PIS group. There was no significant difference in device-related complications (DRCs) or 30-day mortality between the two groups (2.5% vs 4.4%; P =.442 and 1.3% vs 1.3%; P =.688, respectively). Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that emergency surgery, number of trunk stents >1, operation time >58.5 minutes, and contrast medium volume >75 mL were risk factors for PIS, and the odds ratios of emergency operation, number of trunk stents >1 piece, operation time >58.5 minutes, and contrast medium volume >75 mL were 2.526 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.530-4.173), 4.651 (95% CI, 2.838-7.624), 3.577 (95% CI, 2.201-5.815), and 7.356 (95% CI, 4.111-13.160), respectively. Follow-up was completed in 98.5% (532/540) of the patients, with a median follow-up of 67 months (IQR, 50-86 months). There was no significant difference in survival between the PIS and non-PIS groups (12.4% vs 10.3%; P =.476) during follow-up. The incidences of DRCs (7.8% vs 11.6%; P =.200) and aortic false lumen thrombosis (75.8% vs 79.2%; P =.399) were comparable between the PIS and non-PIS groups. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that PIS had no effect on long-term follow-up mortality, DRCs, entry flow, or aortic false lumen thrombosis rate. PIS is relatively common after TEVAR and emergency surgery; number of trunk stents >1, operation time >58.5 minutes, and contrast medium volume >75 mL are of high predictive value for the assessment of PIS after TEVAR. However, PIS had little effect on early and late postoperative mortality or DRCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aimed to elucidate the treatment approach for blunt splenic injuries concurrently involving the aorta. We hypothesized that non-operative management failure rates would be higher in such cases, necessitating increased hemorrhage control surgeries. Methods: Data from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program spanning 2017 to 2019 were utilized. All patients with blunt splenic trauma were considered for inclusion. We conducted comparisons between blunt splenic trauma patients with and without thoracic or abdominal aortic injuries to identify any potential disparities in treatment. Results: Among the 32,051 patients with blunt splenic injuries during the study period, 752 (2.3%) sustained concurrent aortic injuries. Following 2:1 propensity score matching, it was determined that the presence of aortic injuries did not significantly affect the utilization of splenic transarterial angioembolization (TAE) (7.2% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.243) or the necessity for splenectomy or splenorrhaphy (15.3% vs. 15.7%, p = 0.853). Moreover, aortic injuries were not a significant factor contributing to TAE failure, regardless of the location or severity of the injury. Patients with simultaneous splenic and aortic injuries required more red blood cell transfusion within first 4 hours (0 ml [0, 900] vs. 0 ml [0, 650], p = 0.001) and exhibited a higher mortality rate (10.6% vs. 7.9%, p = 0.038). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that patients with concurrent aortic and splenic injuries presented with more severe conditions, higher mortality rates, and extended hospital stays. The presence of aortic injuries did not substantially influence the utilization of TAE or the necessity for splenectomy or splenorrhaphy. Patients of this type can be managed in accordance with current treatment guidelines. Nonetheless, given their less favorable prognosis, they necessitate prompt and proactive intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aims to investigate the incidence and in-hospital outcomes of surgical repair for type B aortic dissection (TBAD) in Australia. Methods: Data were obtained from the Australasian Vascular Audit (AVA) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). The former is a total practice audit mandated for all members of the Australian and New Zealand Society for Vascular Surgery (ANZSVS) while the latter is an independent government agency which records all healthcare data in Australia. All cases of TBAD which underwent surgical intervention (endovascular or open repair) between 2010 and 2019 were identified using prospectively recorded data from the AVA (New Zealand data was excluded). The primary outcomes were temporal trends in procedures and hospital mortality; secondary outcomes were complications and risk factors for mortality. All admissions and procedures for, and hospital deaths from, TBAD in Australia were identified in AIHW datasets using the relevant diagnosis and procedure codes, with age-standardized rates calculated for the period 2000–01 to 2018–19. Results: A total of 567 cases of TBAD underwent vascular surgical intervention (AVA data, Australia). Of these, 96.3% were treated by endovascular repair. There was an increase in the annual procedure number from 45 in 2010 to 88 in 2019. In-hospital mortality was 4.8% for endovascular repair and 19% for open repair (p = 0.021). From 2000-01 to 2018-19, the age-standardized procedure rates for TBAD (Australia) doubled, the proportion of admitted patients undergoing a procedure rose from 28% to 43%, and in-hospital deaths fell by 25%. Conclusion: There has been an increasing incidence of vascular surgical intervention for TBAD in Australia. The majority of patients received endovascular therapy while the mortality from surgically managed TBAD appears to be falling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]