Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (TEVAR) in Patients With Connective Tissue Disorders.

Qato K ，Conway A ，Lu E ，Tran NN ，Giangola G ，Carroccio A ... -  《-》

National registry insights on genetic aortopathies and thoracic endovascular aortic interventions.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with genetic aortopathies (GA) is controversial, given concerns of durability. We describe characteristics and outcomes after TEVAR in patients with GA. All patients undergoing TEVAR between 2010 and 2023 in the Vascular Quality Iniatitive were identified and categorized as having a GA or not. Demographics, baseline, and procedural characteristics were compared among groups. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the independent association of GA with postoperative outcomes. Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate 5-year survival and 2-year reinterventions. Of 19,340 patients, 304 (1.6%) had GA (87% Marfan syndrome, 9% Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 4% vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome). Compared with patients without GA, patients with GA were younger (50 years [interquartile range, 37-72 years] vs 70 years [interquartile range, 61-77 years]), more often presented with acute dissection (28% vs 18%), postdissection aneurysm (48% vs 17%), had a symptomatic presentation (50% vs 39%), and were less likely to have degenerative aneurysms (18% vs 47%) or penetrating aortic ulcer (and intramural hematoma) (3% vs 13%) (all P < .001). Patients with GA were more likely to have prior repair of the ascending aorta/arch (open, 56% vs 11% [P < .001]; endovascular, 5.6% vs 2.1% [P = .017]) or the descending thoracic aorta (open, 12% vs 2% [P = .007]; endovascular, 8.2% vs 3.6% [P = .011]). No significant differences were found in prior abdominal suprarenal repairs; however, patients with GA had more prior open infrarenal repairs (5.3% vs 3.2%), but fewer prior endovascular infrarenal repairs (3.3% vs 5.5%) (all P < .05). After adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and disease characteristics, patients with GA had similar odds of perioperative mortality (4.6% vs 7.0%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-1.9; P = .75), any in-hospital complication (26% vs 23%; aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.92-1.6; P = .14), or in-hospital reintervention (13% vs 8.3%; aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.84-1.80; P = .25) compared with patients without GA. However, patients with GA had a higher likelihood of postoperative vasopressors (33% vs 27%; aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9; P = .006) and transfusion (25% vs 23%; aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.03-1.9; P = .006). The 2-year reintervention rates were higher in patients with GA (25% vs 13%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.4-2.9; P < .001), but 5-year survival was similar (81% vs 74%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.70-1.50; P = .1). TEVAR for patients with GA seemed to be safe initially, with similar odds for in-hospital complications, in-hospital reinterventions, and perioperative mortality, as well as similar hazards for 5-year mortality compared with patients without GA. However, patients with GA had higher 2-year reintervention rates. Future studies should assess long-term durability after TEVAR compared with the recommended open repair to appropriately weigh the risks and benefits of endovascular treatment in patients with GA.

Gomez-Mayorga JL ，Yadavalli SD ，Allievi S ，Wang SX ，Rastogi V ，Straus S ，Mandigers TJ ，Black JH ，Zettervall SL ，Schermerhorn ML ... -  《-》

Long-term results of total endovascular repair of arch-involving aortic pathologies using parallel grafts for supra-aortic debranching.

We evaluated the long-term morphologic and clinical outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair combined with parallel grafts (PG-TEVAR) for arch-involving aortic pathologies. We performed a retrospective analysis of perioperative and follow-up data of patients who had undergone PG-TEVAR at a single vascular surgery center from November 2010 to April 2018. Patients with prior or simultaneous open chest or cervical debranching procedures or arch repair were excluded. The primary endpoint was freedom from overall PG-TEVAR-related reintervention. The secondary endpoints were parallel graft sealing zone failure (presence of gutter-related type I or Ic endoleak), PG failure (occlusion or reintervention), stroke, and 30-day and overall PG-TEVAR-related and all-cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate the freedom from reintervention and survival. Receiver operating characteristics curves were used to find the optimal cutoff to prevent type Ia endoleak-related reintervention. A total of 33 patients, including 8 women, with a median age of 74 years (interquartile range, 67-79 years) had undergone PG-TEVAR (chimney, periscope, and sandwich in 20, 15, and 13 patients, respectively) with proximal landing in Ishimaru zone 0, 1, or 2 in 4, 5, and 24 patients, respectively. The aortic pathologies included type B aortic dissection (acute and chronic, eight and six, respectively), degenerative aneurysm (n = 10), type Ia endoleak (n = 3), para-anastomotic/patch aneurysm (n = 4), left subclavian artery aneurysm (n = 1), and traumatic rupture (n = 1). The perioperative stroke rate and 30-day mortality was 6% and 9%, respectively. Direct postoperative computed tomography revealed 28 endoleaks (gutter-related type Ia, 12; gutter-related type Ib, 9; type Ia, 2; type Ic, 2; type III, 1; undetermined, 2) in 27 patients. The technical and clinical success rate was 37% and 30%, respectively. The mean follow-up for survival was 48 ± 31 months. The latest radiologic follow-up demonstrated 12 remaining and 1 new endoleak. The early and overall PG sealing zone failure and PG failure was 73% and 36% and 9% and 18%, respectively. The overall PG-TEVAR-related reintervention rate was 33% (n = 11). The estimated freedom from overall PG-TEVAR-related reintervention was 68% at 60 months. The main graft oversizing and length oversizing rates were not significantly associated statistically with the type Ia endoleak-related reintervention rate. The PG-TEVAR-related and all-cause mortality were 18% and 34%, respectively. PG-TEVAR for total endovascular repair of arch-involving aortic pathologies resulted in a high rate of type I endoleaks and the need for long-term reintervention. Gutter-related endoleaks might be more frequent than reported and should not be underestimated because they can lead to sac enlargement and reintervention. Frequent radiologic surveillance is mandatory. Further studies comparing PG-TEVAR to other total endovascular alternatives are required to confirm these findings.

Dueppers P ，Reutersberg B ，Rancic Z ，Messmer F ，Menges AL ，Meuli L ，Rychla M ，Zimmermann A ... -  《-》

Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for chronic aortic dissections.

Open surgical repair remains the "gold standard" treatment for chronic type B aortic dissection (cTBD) with aneurysm. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has gained popularity in recent years for the treatment of thoracic aortic diseases, including cTBD. We assessed the effectiveness of TEVAR in the treatment of cTBD using the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database. The VQI registry identified 4713 patients treated with TEVAR from July 2010 to November 2015, including 125 repairs for cTBD. We analyzed TEVAR outcomes in this cohort per the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards for TEVAR. Median age was 65.0 years (interquartile range [IQR], 56.0-72.0 years), and 85 (68.0%) were male. Median aneurysm diameter was 5.5 cm (IQR, 4.8-6.3 cm). Sixty-two (49.6%) patients were asymptomatic on presentation, 57 (45.6%) were symptomatic, and 6 (4.8%) presented with rupture. Median length of stay was 8.0 days (IQR, 4.0-11.0 days). Fluoroscopy time was 17.3 minutes (IQR, 10.5-25.6 minutes). The distal landing zone was aortic zone 4 in 27 (21.6%) and aortic zone 5 and distal in 98 (78.4%) patients. Successful device delivery occurred in 123 (98.4%) patients. Conversion to open repair occurred in one (0.8%) patient. A type IA endoleak was present in 2 (1.6%), type IB endoleak in 2 (1.6%), and type II endoleak in 2 (1.6%) patients. Perioperative complications included stroke in 1 (0.8%), respiratory complications in 6 (4.8%), and spinal cord ischemia symptoms present at discharge in 3 (2.4%) patients. In-hospital mortality occurred in three (2.4%) patients. Reintervention was required in two (1.6%) patients for false lumen perfusion and in two (1.6%) patients for extension of the dissection. Follow-up was available for 43 patients at a median time of 239 days (IQR, 38-377 days). Median change in sac diameter was -0.2 cm (IQR, -0.5 to 0.1 cm). Sac shrinkage of 0.5 cm was noted in 12 (27.9%), with sac growth >0.5 cm in four (9.3%) patients. Extent of stent graft coverage did not affect sac shrinkage (P = .65). Patients with aneurysms ≥5.5 cm compared with <5.5 cm were more likely to demonstrate shrinkage (-0.6 cm vs 0.0 cm; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-11.7; P = .04). TEVAR for cTBD may be performed with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality. Changes in sac diameter in the midterm are promising. Long-term data are needed to determine whether this approach is durable.

Conway AM ，Qato K ，Mondry LR ，Stoffels GJ ，Giangola G ，Carroccio A ... -  《-》

Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair using aortic arch chimney stents in high-risk patients.

Aortic arch disease is a challenging clinical problem, especially in high-risk patients, in whom open repair can have morbidity and mortality rates of 30% to 40% and 2% to 20%, respectively. Aortic arch chimney (AAC) stents used during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are a less invasive treatment strategy than open repair, but the current literature is inconclusive about the role of this technology. The focus of this analysis is on our experience with TEVAR and AAC stents. All TEVAR procedures performed from 2002 to 2015 were reviewed to identify those with AAC stents. Primary end points were technical success and 30-day and 1-year mortality. Secondary end points included complications, reintervention, and endoleak. Technical success was defined as a patient's surviving the index operation with deployment of the AAC stent at the intended treatment zone with no evidence of type I or type III endoleak on initial postoperative imaging. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival. Twenty-seven patients (age, 69 ± 12 years; male, 70%) were identified, and all were described as being at prohibitive risk for open repair by the treating team. Relevant comorbidity rates were as follows: coronary artery disease/myocardial infarction, 59%; oxygen-dependent emphysema, 30%; preoperative creatinine concentration >1.8 mg/dL, 19%; and congestive heart failure, 15%. Presentations included elective (67%; n = 18), symptomatic (26%; n = 7), and ruptured (7%; n = 2). Eleven patients (41%) had prior endovascular or open arch/descending thoracic repair. Indications were degenerative aneurysm (49%), chronic residual type A dissection with aneurysm (15%), type Ia endoleak after TEVAR (11%), postsurgical pseudoaneurysm (11%), penetrating ulcer (7%), and acute type B dissection (7%). Thirty-two brachiocephalic vessels were treated: innominate (n = 7), left common carotid artery (LCCA; n = 24), and left subclavian artery (n = 1). Five patients (19%) had simultaneous innominate-LCCA chimneys. Brachiocephalic chimney stents were planned in 75% (n = 24), with the remainder placed for either LCCA or innominate artery encroachment (n = 8). Overall technical success was 89% (one intraoperative death, two persistent type Ia endoleaks in follow-up). The 30-day mortality was 4% (n = 1; intraoperative death of a patient with a ruptured arch aneurysm), and median length of stay was 6 (interquartile range, 4-9) days. Seven (26%) patients experienced a major complication (stroke, three [all with unplanned brachiocephalic chimney]; respiratory failure, three; and death, one). Nine (33%) patients underwent aorta-related reintervention, and no chimney occlusion events occurred during follow-up (median follow-up, 9 [interquartile range, 1-23] months). The 1-year and 3-year survival is estimated to be 88% ± 6% and 69% ± 9%, respectively. TEVAR with AAC can be performed with high technical success and acceptable morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients. Unplanned AAC placement during TEVAR results in an elevated stroke risk, which may be related to the branch vessel coverage necessitating AAC placement. Acceptable midterm survival can be anticipated, but aorta-related reintervention is not uncommon, and diligent follow-up is needed.

Voskresensky I ，Scali ST ，Feezor RJ ，Fatima J ，Giles KA ，Tricarico R ，Berceli SA ，Beck AW ... -  《-》