Comparison of open and endovascular left subclavian artery revascularization for zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: In patients undergoing elective thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage, routine preoperative LSA revascularization is recommended. However, in the current endovascular era, the optimal surgical approach is debated. We compared baseline characteristics, procedural details, and perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing open or endovascular LSA revascularization in the setting of TEVAR. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing TEVAR with zone 2 proximal landing and LSA revascularization between 2013-2023 were identified in the Vascular Quality Initiative. We excluded patients with traumatic aortic injury, aortic thrombus, or ruptured presentations, and stratified based on revascularization type (open vs. any endovascular). Open LSA revascularization included surgical bypass or transposition. Endovascular LSA revascularization included single-branch, fenestration, or parallel stent grafting. Primary outcomes were stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and perioperative mortality (Pearson's χ2-test). Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between revascularization type and primary outcomes. Secondarily, we studied other in-hospital complications and 5-year mortality (Kaplan-Meier, multivariable Cox-regression). Sensitivity analysis was performed in patients undergoing concomitant LSA revascularization to TEVAR. RESULTS: Of 2,489 patients, 1,842 (74%) underwent open and 647 (26%) received endovascular LSA revascularization. Demographics and comorbidities were similar between open and endovascular cohorts. Compared with open, endovascular revascularization had shorter procedure times (median 135 vs. 174min, p<.001), longer fluoroscopy time (median 23 vs. 16min, p<.001), lower estimated blood loss (median 100 vs. 123ml, p<.001), and less preoperative spinal drain use (40% vs. 49%, p<.001). Patients undergoing endovascular revascularization were more likely to present urgently (24% vs. 19%) or emergently (7.4% vs. 3.4%) (p<.001). Compared with open, endovascular patients experienced lower stroke rates (2.6% vs. 4.8%, p=.026; aOR 0.50[95%C.I., 0.25-0.90]), but had comparable spinal cord ischemia (2.9% vs. 3.5%, p=.60; 0.64[0.31-1.22]) and perioperative mortality (3.1% vs. 3.3%, p=.94; 0.71[0.34-1.37]). Compared with open, endovascular LSA revascularization had lower rates of overall composite in-hospital complications (20% vs. 27%, p<.001; 0.64[0.49-0.83]) and shorter overall hospital stay (7 vs. 8 days, p<.001). After adjustment, 5-year mortality was similar among groups (aHR 0.85[0.64-1.13]). Sensitivity analysis supported the primary analysis with similar outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing TEVAR starting in zone 2, endovascular LSA revascularization had lower rates of postoperative stroke and overall composite in-hospital complications, but similar spinal cord ischemia, perioperative and 5-year mortality rates compared with open LSA revascularization. Future comparative studies are needed to evaluate the mid- to long-term safety of endovascular LSA revascularization and assess differences between specific endovascular techniques.

The Association between Sex and Outcomes following Thoracic Endovascular Repair for Acute Type B Aortic Dissection.

OBJECTIVE: Prior literature has found worse outcomes for females following endovascular repair of AAA and mixed findings following TEVAR for TAA. However, the influence of sex on outcomes after TEVAR for acute Type B aortic dissection (aTBAD) is not fully elucidated. METHODS: We identified patients undergoing TEVAR for acute type B aortic dissection (<30 days) in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) from 2014 to 2022. We excluded patients with an entry tear or stent seal within the ascending aorta or aortic arch and patients with an unknown proximal tear location. Included patients were stratified by biological sex, and we analyzed perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality with multivariable logistic regression and Cox regression analysis, respectively. Furthermore, we analyzed adjusted variables for interaction with female sex. RESULTS: We included 1,626 patients, 33% of whom were female. At presentation, females were significantly older (65 [IQR: 54,75] years vs 56 [IQR: 49,68] years; p= 0.01). Regarding indications for repair, females had higher rates of pain (85% vs 80%; p=0.02), and lower rates of malperfusion (23% vs 35%; p<0.001): specifically mesenteric, renal, and lower limb malperfusion. Females had a lower proportion of proximal repairs in zone 2 (39% vs 48%; p< 0.01). Following TEVAR for aTBAD, female sex was associated with comparable odds of perioperative mortality compared with males (8.1 vs 9.2%; Adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 0.79 [95% CI: 0.51-1.20]). Regarding perioperative complications, female sex was associated with lower odds for cardiac complications (2.3% vs 4.7%; aOR: 0.52 [95%CI: 0.26-0.97]), but all other complications were comparable between sexes. Compared with male sex, female sex was associated with similar risk for 5-year mortality (26% vs 23%; Adjusted Hazard Ratio (aHR): 1.01 [95%CI: 0.77-1.32]). Upon testing variables for interaction with sex, female sex was associated with lower perioperative and 5-year mortality at older ages relative to males (aOR: 0.96 [0.93-0.99] | aHR: 0.97 [0.95-0.99]) and higher odds of perioperative mortality when mesenteric malperfusion was present (OR: 2.71 [1.04-6.96]). CONCLUSION: Female patients were older, less likely to have complicated dissection, and had more distal proximal landing zones. Following TEVAR for aTBAD, female sex was associated with similar perioperative and 5-year mortality compared with male sex, but lower odds of in-hospital cardiac complications. Interaction analysis showed females were at additional risk for perioperative mortality when mesenteric ischemia was present. These data suggest that TEVAR for aTBAD overall has a similar safety profile in females as it does for males.

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

OBJECTIVE: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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). CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Seven years of the transcarotid artery revascularization surveillance project, comparison to transfemoral stenting and endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This study utilizes the latest data from the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI), which now encompasses over 50,000 transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) procedures, to offer a sizeable dataset for comparing the effectiveness and safety of TCAR, transfemoral carotid artery stenting (tfCAS), and carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Given this substantial dataset, we are now able to compare outcomes overall and stratified by symptom status across revascularization techniques. METHODS: Utilizing VQI data from September 2016 to August 2023, we conducted a risk-adjusted analysis by applying inverse probability of treatment weighting to compare in-hospital outcomes between TCAR vs tfCAS, CEA vs tfCAS, and TCAR vs CEA. Our primary outcome measure was in-hospital stroke/death. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction and cranial nerve injury. RESULTS: A total of 50,068 patients underwent TCAR, 25,361 patients underwent tfCAS, and 122,737 patients underwent CEA. TCAR patients were older, more likely to have coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, and undergo coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention as well as prior contralateral CEA/CAS compared with both CEA and tfCAS. TfCAS had higher odds of stroke/death when compared with TCAR (2.9% vs 1.6%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65-2.06; P < .001) and CEA (2.9% vs 1.3%; aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 2.01-2.43; P < .001). CEA had slightly lower odds of stroke/death compared with TCAR (1.3% vs 1.6%; aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91; P < .001). TfCAS had lower odds of cranial nerve injury compared with TCAR (0.0% vs 0.3%; aOR, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00-0.00; P < .001) and CEA (0.0% vs 2.3%; aOR, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.0-0.0; P < .001) as well as lower odds of myocardial infarction compared with CEA (0.4% vs 0.6%; aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54-0.84; P < .001). CEA compared with TCAR had higher odds of myocardial infarction (0.6% vs 0.5%; aOR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.13-1.54; P < .001) and cranial nerve injury (2.3% vs 0.3%; aOR, 9.42; 95% CI, 7.78-11.4; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Although tfCAS may be beneficial for select patients, the lower stroke/death rates associated with CEA and TCAR are preferred. When deciding between CEA and TCAR, it is important to weigh additional procedural factors and outcomes such as myocardial infarction and cranial nerve injury, particularly when stroke/death rates are similar. Additionally, evaluating subgroups that may benefit from one procedure over another is essential for informed decision-making and enhanced patient care in the treatment of carotid stenosis.

Sex-related Outcomes after Thoracic Endovascular Repair for intact isolated Descending Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between sex and outcomes following TEVAR for intact isolated descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (iiDTAA). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: 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 2014-2019 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 [IQR, 2.81-3.85] cm/m2 vs. 2.93 [IQR, 2.42-3.36] cm/m2; P<.001), were more frequently symptomatic (31% vs. 20%; P=.001), had longer procedure time (111 [IQR, 72-165] min vs. 97 [IQR, 70-146] min) and more iliac procedures (16% vs. 7.6%; P=.001). Compared with males, females had similar rates of 5-year mortality (58% vs. 53%; HR, 0.93; 95%CI 0.71-1.22; P=.61), reinterventions (39% vs. 30%; HR, 1.12; 95%CI 0.73-1.73; P=.60) and late ruptures (0.6% vs. 1.2%; HR, 0.87; 95%CI 0.12-6.18; P=.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=.25), as were rates of any complication as a composite outcome (16% vs. 21%; P=.16), as well as of individual complications (all P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that females who undergo TEVAR for iiDTAA have similar 5-year and perioperative outcomes as compared with males.

Comparison of Two Generations of Thoracic Aortic Stent Grafts and Their Impact on Aortic Stiffness in an Ex Vivo Porcine Model.

Objective: Little is known about the cardiovascular changes after TEVAR and regarding the impact on aortic stiffness for different stent graft generations specifically, following changes in device design. The present study evaluated the stent graft induced aortic stiffening of two generations of the Valiant thoracic aortic stent graft. Methods: This was an ex vivo porcine investigation using an experimental mock circulatory loop. Thoracic aortas of young healthy pigs were harvested and connected to the mock circulatory loop. At a 60 bpm heart rate and stable mean arterial pressure, baseline aortic characteristics were obtained. Pulse wave velocity (PWV) was calculated before and after stent graft deployment. Paired and independent sample t tests or their non-parametric alternatives were performed to test for differences where appropriate. Results: Twenty porcine thoracic aortas were divided into two equal subgroups, in which a Valiant Captivia or a Valiant Navion stent graft was deployed. Both stent grafts were similar in diameter and length. Baseline aortic characteristics did not differ between the subgroups. Mean arterial pressure values did not change after either stent graft, while pulse pressures increased statistically significantly after Captivia (mean 44 ± 10 mmHg to 51 ± 13 mmHg, p = .002) but not after Navion. Mean baseline PWV increased after both Captivia (4.4 ± 0.6 m/s to 4.8 ± 0.7 m/s, p = .007) and Navion (4.6 ± 0.7 m/s to 4.9 ± 0.7 m/s, p = .002). There was no statistically significant difference in the mean percentage increase in PWV for either subgroup (8 ± 4% vs. 6 ± 4%, p = .25). Conclusion: These experimental findings showed no statistically significant difference in the percentage increase of aortic PWV after either stent graft generation and confirm that TEVAR increases aortic PWV. As a surrogate for aortic stiffness, this calls for further improvements in future thoracic aortic stent graft designs regarding device compliance.

Validation and Verification of High-Fidelity Simulations of Thoracic Stent-Graft Implantation.

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) is the preferred treatment option for thoracic aortic pathologies and consists of inserting a self-expandable stent-graft into the pathological region to restore the lumen. Computational models play a significant role in procedural planning and must be reliable. For this reason, in this work, high-fidelity Finite Element (FE) simulations are developed to model thoracic stent-grafts. Experimental crimp/release tests are performed to calibrate stent-grafts material parameters. Stent pre-stress is included in the stent-graft model. A new methodology for replicating device insertion and deployment with explicit FE simulations is proposed. To validate this simulation, the stent-graft is experimentally released into a 3D rigid aortic phantom with physiological anatomy and inspected in a computed tomography (CT) scan at different time points during deployment with an ad-hoc set-up. A verification analysis of the adopted modeling features compared to the literature is performed. With the proposed methodology the error with respect to the CT is on average 0.92 ± 0.64%, while it is higher when literature models are adopted (on average 4.77 ± 1.83%). The presented FE tool is versatile and customizable for different commercial devices and applicable to patient-specific analyses.

Modifications in Aortic Stiffness After Endovascular or Open Aortic Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Increased aortic stiffness (AoS) has been recognised as a risk factor in the development of cardiovascular disease. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of aortic repair on AoS. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched systematically for relevant studies evaluating the consequences of endovascular and open aortic repair on AoS. REVIEW METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement was followed to perform the research process. Papers containing data on AoS before and after both thoracic (TEVAR) and abdominal (EVAR) endovascular repair, as well as open surgical repair (OSR), were included for detailed evaluation. A fixed effects model was used to perform analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was calculated for each included study. RESULTS: The first article cluster comprised 367 papers. After removal of duplicates and the adoption of inclusion/exclusion criteria, 14 articles remained, 13 of which were selected for meta-analysis. Ten studies analysed EVAR and three analysed TEVAR. Five of the selected papers were case control studies, with OSR adopted in four of these as the EVAR comparator. Several graft types were used in the endovascular group. AoS increased after TEVAR and EVAR, in terms of pulse wave velocity (PWV), even though several spatial levels and measurement modalities were adopted. No differences were described after OSR, although no pooled data could be analysed. CONCLUSION: EVAR and TEVAR both demonstrated a significant increase in AoS measurement (PWV). Although the heterogeneity and the low number of available studies limit the strength of the results, this review highlights the potential deleterious endograft role in the cardiovascular system although further studies are needed to achieve robust evidence. Further studies are needed to improve the mutual interaction between aorta and endograft, minimising their impact on the native aortic wall properties.

A tuning point in plant acoustics investigation.

In a very recent book called Sensory Biology of Plants, published by renowned publisher Springer Nature, the authors stated that the scientific literature gathered so far regarding knowledge around the field of Plant Acoustics allows us to divert the focus from the question "whether plants perceive sound" toward the questions "how and why they are doing it" Some phenomena are well known: roots perceive the sound of flowing water and display a sound-mediated growth toward the water source, while the buzz pollination process allows plants to minimize the pollen lost and maximize which is collected by true pollinators. But plants are far more perceptive and responsive to their environment than we generally consider them to be, and they are communicating far more information than we realize if we only took all their signals (VOCs, sound, exudates, etc.) into a greater picture. Could Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) be involved in mediating more responses than we imagine? VOC synthesis and release is known to be elicited also by electrical signals caused by mechanical stimuli, touching and wounding being among these, serving as info-chemicals in the communication between plants ("eavesdropping"), and within the organs of the same plant, in order for it to get synchronized with its surroundings. This paper is an overview of the discoveries around plant perception with a focus on the link between mechanical stimuli, as sound vibrations are, and changes in plant physiology leading to VOC emission.

Management of pregnancy blood pressure increase in the emergency room: role of PlGF-based biochemical markers and relative economic impact.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the clinical and economic impact of healthcare management of pregnant women with blood pressure increase (BPI) accessing emergency room (ER) and the utility of the introduction of a PlGF-based test in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included women with single pregnancies who performed at least 1 ER access for BPI after the 20th gestational week in 2016. BPI was subsequently classified as significant if associated with preeclampsia (PE) or Fetal Growth Restriction (FGR) and not significant otherwise. Two experts evaluated potential changes in patients' management with the introduction of a PlGF-based test. The direct healthcare cost was estimated. RESULTS: We enrolled 107 patients, of which 30% showed significant BPI (17 PE cases, 13 FGR, and 2 both pathologies). Anamnestic, clinical, and laboratory evaluations were not effective in differentiating between significant and not significant BPI (p-values: .8320, .2856, and .2297, respectively). The introduction of a PlGF-based test would have reduced overtreatment and undertreatment. The test would have avoided 18% of all hospitalizations, 35% of hospitalizations for BPI, 43% of outpatient referrals, and 13% of ER accesses. The number of avoidable accesses was higher in women with not significant BPI. Overall, the mean total cost (from first ER access until delivery) was €2634 per woman and €401 would have been avoidable. CONCLUSION: The clinical integration of PlGF-based tests is advantageous in diagnostic, prognostic and economic terms, as an objective marker of placental dysfunction.