Delayed intimal blowout after endovascular repair of aortic dissection.

The authors have seen four cases of asymptomatic delayed intimal injury adjacent to a stent graft diagnosed 7 to 16 months after thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Endovascular repeat intervention was successfully performed in three of the four cases as described in the present report. A second consecutive "intimal blowout" in one patient remains under close radiologic surveillance. Possible causes for the intimal blowouts, including stent-graft size, landing zone anatomy, and intrinsically weak aortic tissue, are discussed.

A Systematic Review of Total Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair: A Promising Technology.

BACKGROUND: Total endovascular aortic arch repair (TEAAR) represents an emerging alternative for the treatment of aortic arch disease in patients at prohibitive risk for open surgery. A systematic review of TEAAR was performed to delineate early outcomes with this new technology. METHODS: All studies (excluding single-patient case reports) of CE-certified "custom made" or "off-the-shelf" zone 0 stent graft deployments were included. The primary search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane CENTRAL registry was supplemented with searches of Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and conference abstracts (within last 3 years), and a hand search of citations within relevant articles. Articles underwent 2-stage screening by 2 independent reviewers before inclusion. RESULTS: Fifteen relevant investigations were identified. Indications for TEAAR were chronic arch dissection with degenerative aneurysmal disease (54%, 148/273), pure arch aneurysm (41%, 112/273), penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (2%, 5/273), and type IA endoleak from a zone 2 thoracic endograft (1%, 3/273). Double-branch (70%, 192/273), triple-branch (19%, 53/273), and single-branch (into innominate artery; 10%, 28/273) devices were used. Adjunct left carotid-subclavian bypass occurred in 90% of double- and single-branch procedures. Procedural success with TEAAR was 93% (95% CI 85.8%-96.3%). The proportion of all-cause mortality was 16% (95% CI 8%-26%), stroke 14% (8%-24%), peripheral vascular events 7% (1%-33%), and myocardial infarction 4% (2%-7%). Endoleaks were identified in 13% (7%-25%) of the study population. CONCLUSIONS: TEAAR represents an emerging option for the management of aortic arch disease wth high procedural success rates and acceptable early outcomes in a high-risk patient population.

Aortic arch endovascular branch and fenestrated repair: Initial Canadian experience with novel technology.

Objective: The objective is to describe the initial Canadian experience using novel aortic arch branched endograft technologies. Methods: We performed a retrospective consecutive case series of all patients undergoing aortic arch branched repair with newly available endograft technology since 2020 at our site. We describe the patient characteristics, treatment characteristics, and postoperative outcomes. Results: Eleven patients received arch branched endografts, indicated for penetrating aortic ulcer in seven patients (64%), arch degeneration after prior aortic dissection repair in three (27%), and acute aortobronchial fistula in one patient (9%). Their average age was 72 ± 7 years. Complete arch repair from zone 0 to 4 was performed in six cases (55%); the remaining repairs landed proximally in zones 1 or 2. Seven repairs used a single retrograde facing inner branch (thoracic branch endoprosthesis; W.L. Gore & Associates), three used double antegrade inner branch (Bolton Relay; Terumo Interventional Systems), and one emergent case used double in situ fenestrations. Seven repairs (64%) used an adjunctive extra-anatomic bypass to complete great vessel perfusion, two of which were created during a prior aortic repair. Inferior vena cava balloon inflow occlusion during deployment was used in all cases. No mortalities, transient or permanent spinal cord paralysis, myocardial infarction, dialysis dependence, venous thromboembolism, or bleeding requiring reintervention occurred. No patient undergoing elective arch branch repair experienced a stroke. The one patient undergoing emergent repair did suffer a stroke. The median length of stay was 5 days (interquartile range, 2-8 days). Two endoleaks developed: a type Ia endoleak successfully treated with a Palmaz stent (Cordis) during the index admission, and a type II endoleak with ongoing sac regression on postoperative follow-up. Postoperatively, one patient suffered a suspected aortic graft infection that was treated with lifelong antibiotics. During a mean radiographic follow-up of 7.2 months, no cases of branch vessel instability (ie, no migration, reintervention, arterial rupture, intraluminal thrombus, occlusion, stenosis, or kinking of the branch grafts) developed. Three patients experienced sac regression of >5 mm, and no patient experienced continued postoperative dilation. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest reported Canadian volume of aortic arch repair using novel branched or fenestrated technology. The series demonstrates that a multidisciplinary program and properly selected patients can yield excellent results using endovascular repair for complex aortic arch pathology.

The Aortic Team Model for the Management of the Distal Arch, Descending Thoracic and Thoracoabdominal Aorta: Appraisal at 3 Years.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess feasibility, logistical challenges, and clinical outcomes associated with the implementation of an Aortic Team model for the management of distal arch, descending thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic disease. METHODS: An Aortic Team care pathway was implemented in November 2019. Working as a unit, two cardiac surgeons, two vascular surgeons, an interventional radiologist, a cardiologist, and an anesthesiologist collectively determined care decisions via multispecialty presence at an Aortic Clinic. Cardiac and vascular surgeons operated in tandem for open procedures. Interventional radiology participated alongside cardiac and vascular for endovascular procedures. Cardiology aided in medical therapies for heritable and degenerative disease, and had a lead role for genetics and high-risk pregnancy referrals. The model spanned three hospitals. Clinical outcomes at 3 years were assessed. RESULTS: There were 35 descending thoracic and thoracoabdominal surgeries and 77 thoracic endovascular aortic repairs. Endoarch devices were used in 7 cases (Gore Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis, 4, Terumo RelayBranch, 3) and an endothoracoabdominal device in 4 cases (Cook Zenith t-branch). The Aortic Clinic acquired 456 patients, with yearly increases (54 patients [year 1], 181 patients [year 2], 221 patients [year 3]). For surgery, mortality was 8.6% (3/35), permanent paralysis 5.7% (2/35), stroke 8.6% (3/35), permanent dialysis 0%, and reinterventions 8.6% (3/35). For endovascular cases, mortality was 3.9% (3/77), permanent paralysis 3.9% (3/77), stroke 5.2% (4/77), permanent dialysis 1.3% (1/77), and reinterventions 16.9% (13/77). CONCLUSION: An Aortic Team model is feasible and ensures all treatment options are considered. Conventional open thoracoabdominal procedures showed acceptable outcomes. Endoarch technology shows early promise.

Zone 0 Aortic Arch Reconstruction Using the RelayBranch Thoracic Stent Graft.

Endovascular therapies have had a considerable impact on contemporary management of thoracic aortic disease. Still, with the anatomic challenges of the aortic arch, endovascular experience with devices that traverse the arch and deploy in the Zone 0 position remains limited. We report the first Canadian experience with the RelayBranch Thoracic Stent Graft (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FL) with Zone 0 deployment for total endovascular aortic arch repair in a patient at very high risk for redo open surgery. We demonstrate safe deployment of the device and successful treatment of a type 1A endoleak. Features of the RelayBranch design that mitigate challenges of arch deployment are also discussed.

Les traitements endovasculaires ont eu un impact considérable sur la gestion contemporaine des pathologies de l'aorte thoracique. Pourtant, en raison des contraintes anatomiques de la crosse aortique, l'expérience endovasculaire avec des dispositifs qui traversent la crosse et se déploient dans la zone 0 reste limitée. Nous rapportons la première expérience canadienne de l'endoprothèse thoracique RelayBranch avec déploiement (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FL) en zone 0 pour une réparation endovasculaire totale de la crosse aortique chez un patient présentant un risque très élevé de reprise de chirurgie ouverte. Nous décrivons le déploiement en toute sécurité du dispositif et le traitement réussi d'une endofuite de type 1A. Enfin, nous examinons les caractéristiques du système RelayBranch qui limitent les difficultés liées au déploiement du dispositif dans la crosse aortique.

Multidimensional Analysis of Descending Aortic Growth After Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: After repair of acute type A aortic dissection, typical geometric variables of conventional aortic surveillance focus on maximum diameter and its rate of growth, potentially missing important geometric changes elsewhere. We determined additional information provided by a semiautomated, 3-dimensional (3D), nonlinear growth model of the descending thoracic aorta after repair of type A aortic dissection. METHODS: Computed tomographic angiography data were retrospectively collected after hemiarch repair of type A aortic dissection. The descending aorta was systematically reconstructed to generate a 3D model made up of individual segments. The baseline and follow-up diameters were measured semiautomatically for each segment, and the nonlinear interval growth was determined. RESULTS: The fastest growing segment expanded at a rate of 3.8 mm/y (interquartile range, 2.2 to 5.4 mm/y) vs 0.6 mm/y (interquartile range, -0.3 to 1.7 mm/y) when measured at the original site of maximum diameter (P < .01). The maximum baseline diameter was a poor predictor of location with fastest growth (r = 0.10, P > .1). Using the society recommended growth limits, a greater proportion of patients would be considered "at risk" when assessed by our method vs conventional surveillance measures. CONCLUSIONS: Our model identifies areas of rapid aortic growth after repair of type A dissection that would likely be missed using current surveillance techniques. The increased precision, resolution, and reproducibility provided by our technique may improve on limitations of current surveillance techniques, provide novel geometric data on aortic remodeling, and contribute to the pursuit of a comprehensive patient-specific approach to aortic risk stratification.

Extended-arch repair for acute type-A aortic dissection: perioperative and mid-term results.

OBJECTIVES: Extended-arch techniques offer the potential to comprehensively treat acute type-A aortic dissection (ATAAD), but add surgical complexity compared to the standard hemiarch technique. This study describes both perioperative and mid-term outcomes following the introduction of an extended-arch technique for ATAAD. METHODS: Ours is a retrospective single-centre observational study of 95 consecutive patients with ATAAD from 2011 to 2016. The decision to perform extended-arch or hemiarch repair was individualized based on clinical and radiological features. Extended-arch repair was defined as replacement of the ascending aorta and arch with reimplantation of head vessels with or without distal endovascular extension. Clinical follow-up was 100% complete. Cross-sectional double-oblique measurements were performed for aortic remodelling analysis. RESULTS: Extended-arch (n = 28) and hemiarch (n = 67) repair resulted in a in-hospital mortality of 10% (n = 3) and 10%, (n = 7), and permanent neurological deficit rate of 7% and 12%, respectively. At a mean imaging follow-up duration of 2.7 ± 1.5 years, false lumen thrombosis was achieved in 57% and 9% of patients undergoing extended-arch and hemiarch repair, respectively. Rate of growth in the proximal descending aorta was 0.7 ± 2.3 mm/year in the extended-arch group vs 2.7 ± 3.9 mm/year in the hemiarch group. At a mean clinical follow-up time of 3.0 ± 1.6 years, open surgical aortic reoperation was 0% in the extended-arch group and 22% in the hemiarch group. CONCLUSIONS: Extended-arch repair of ATAAD can be introduced in the acute setting without increase in perioperative mortality or morbidity. At mid-term follow-up, extended-arch for ATAAD improves aortic remodelling and reduces the need for open surgical reoperation.

Association of Mortality and Acute Aortic Events With Ascending Aortic Aneurysm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The natural history of ascending aortic aneurysm (AsAA) is currently not well characterized. Objective: To summarize and analyze existing literature on the natural history of AsAA. Data Sources: A search of Ovid MEDLINE (January 1, 1946, to May 31, 2017) and Embase (January 1, 1974, to May 31, 2017) was conducted. Study Selection: Studies including patients with AsAA were considered for inclusion; studies were excluded if they considered AsAA, arch, and descending thoracic aneurysm as 1 entity or only included descending aneurysms, patients with heritable or genetic-related aneurysms, patients with replaced bicuspid aortic valves, patients with acute aortic syndrome, or those with mean age less than 16 years. Two independent reviewers identified 20 studies from 7198 unique studies screened. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data extraction was performed according to the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline; 2 reviewers independently extracted the relevant data. Summary effect measures of the primary outcomes were obtained by logarithmically pooling the data with an inverse variance-weighted random-effects model. Metaregression was performed to assess the relationship between initial aneurysm size, etiology, and the primary outcomes. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary composite outcome was incidence of all-cause mortality, aortic dissection, and aortic rupture. Secondary outcomes were growth rate, incidence of proximal aortic dissection or rupture, elective ascending aortic repair, and all-cause mortality. Results: Twenty studies consisting of 8800 patients (mean [SD] age, 57.75 [9.47] years; 6653 [75.6%] male) with a total follow-up time of 31 823 patient-years were included. The mean AsAA size at enrollment was 42.6 mm (range, 35.5-56.0 mm). The combined effect estimate of annual aneurysm growth rate was 0.61 mm/y (95% CI, 0.23-0.99 mm/y). The pooled incidence of elective aortic surgery was 13.82% (95% CI, 6.45%-21.41%) over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 4.2 (2.9-15.0) years. The linearized mortality rate was 1.99% per patient-year (95% CI, 0.83%-3.15% per patient-year), and the linearized rate of the composite outcome of all-cause mortality, aortic dissection, and aortic rupture was 2.16% per patient-year (95% CI, 0.79%-3.55% per patient year). There was no significant relationship between year of study completion and the initial aneurysm size and primary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: The growth rate of AsAA is slow and has implications for the interval of imaging follow-up. The data on the risk of dissection, rupture, and death of ascending aortic aneurysm are limited. A randomized clinical trial may be required to understand the benefit of surgical intervention compared with surveillance for patients with moderately dilated ascending aorta.

Hybrid Arch for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: When to Deploy the Endograft? Debate: Frozen versus Staged?

Advances in open and endovascular techniques have resulted in novel approaches to repair of acute Type A aortic dissection. Hybrid arch procedures involve open arch resection and stent grafting of the descending aorta with stent graft insertion in one of two ways: Frozen or Staged. In this article, pros and cons of the two different paradigms of emerging hybrid arch techniques for acute Type A aortic dissections are discussed.

Classification and outcomes of extended arch repair for acute Type A aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objectives: Distal extent of repair in patients undergoing surgery for acute Type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is controversial. Emerging hybrid techniques involving open and endovascular surgery have been reported in small numbers by select individual centres. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to investigate the outcomes following extended arch repair for ATAAD. A classification system is proposed of the different techniques to facilitate discussion and further investigation. Methods: Using Ovid MEDLINE, 38 studies were identified reporting outcomes for 2140 patients. Studies were categorized into four groups on the basis of extent of surgical aortic resection and the method of descending thoracic aortic stent graft deployment; during circulatory arrest (frozen stented elephant trunk) or with normothermic perfusion and use of fluoroscopy (warm stent graft): (I) surgical total arch replacement, (II) total arch and frozen stented elephant trunk, (III) hemiarch and frozen stented elephant trunk and (IV) total arch and warm stent graft. Perioperative event rates were obtained for each of the four groups and the entire cohort using pooled summary estimates. Linearized rates of late mortality and reoperation were calculated. Results: Overall pooled hospital mortality for extended arch techniques was 8.6% (95% CI 7.2-10.0). Pooled data categorized by surgical technique resulted in hospital mortality of 11.9% for total arch, 8.6% total arch and frozen stented elephant trunk, 6.3% hemiarch and frozen stented elephant trunk and 5.5% total arch and 'warm stent graft'. Overall incidence of stroke for the entire cohort was 5.7% (95% CI 3.6-8.2). Rate of spinal cord ischaemia was 2.0% (95% CI 1.2-3.0). Pooled linearized rate of late mortality was 1.66%/pt-yr (95% CI 1.34-2.07) with linearized rate of re-operation of 1.62%/pt-yr (95% CI 1.24-2.05). Conclusions: Perioperative results of extended arch procedures are encouraging. Further follow-up is required to see if long-term complications are reduced with these emerging techniques. The proposed classification system will facilitate future comparison of short- and long-term results of different techniques of extended arch repair for ATAAD.