LONG-TERM SURVIVAL AND REINTERVENTION FOLLOWING THORACIC ENDOVASCULAR AORTIC REPAIR IN BLUNT TRAUMATIC THORACIC AORTIC INJURY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.

INTRODUCTION: Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) represents one of the most devastating scenarios of vascular trauma. Different management strategies are available with varying clinical outcomes. However, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the first-line option for most BTAI patients, mainly owing to its minimally invasive nature, yielding improved immediate results. This meta-analysis aims to investigate mortality, long-term survival, and reintervention following TEVAR in BTAI. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review conducted a comprehensive literature search on multiple electronic databases using strict search terms. Twenty-seven studies met the set inclusion/exclusion criteria. A proportional meta-analysis of extracted data was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software v.4. RESULTS: 1498 BTAI patients who underwent TEVAR were included. Using the SVS grading system, 2.6% of the population had Grade 1 injuries, 13.6% Grade 2, 62.2% Grade, 19.6% Grade 4, and 1.9% unspecific. All-cause mortality did not exceed 20% in all studies except one outlier with a 37% mortality rate. Using the random-effects model, the pooled estimate of overall mortality was 12% (95%CI 5.35-8.55%; I2 = 70.6%). This was 91% (95%CI, 88.6-93.2; I2 = 30.2%) at 6 months, 90.1% (95%CI, 86.7-92.3; I2 = 53.6%) at 1-year, 89.2% (95%CI, 85.2-91.8; I2= 62.3%) at 2 years, and 88.1% (95%CI, 83.3-90.9; I2 = 69.6%) at 5 years. Moreover, the pooled estimate of reintervention was 6.4% (95%CI, 0.1-0.49%; I2 = 81.7%). CONCLUSION: Despite the high morbidity and mortality associated with BTAI, TEVAR has proven to be a safe and effective management strategy with favourable long-term survival and minimal need for reintervention. Nevertheless, diagnosis of BTAI requires a high index of suspicion with appropriate grading and prompt transfer to trauma centres with appropriate TEVAR facilities.

Expert-Based Narrative Review on Contemporary Use of an Off-The-Shelf Multibranched Endograft for Endovascular Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Device Design, Anatomical Suitability, Technical Tips, Perioperative Care, Clinical Applications, and Real-World Experience.

Advanced endovascular techniques, such as fenestrated stent grafts, are nowadays available that permit minimally invasive treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms. However, thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm patients have anatomic limitations to fenestrated stent-grafts given a large lumen, that is, the gap between the endograft and the inner aortic wall. This has led to the development of branched endovascular aneurysm repair as the ideal option for such patients. The Zenith t-Branch multibranched endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN), which has been commercially available in Europe to treat thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm since June 2012, represents a feasible off-the-shelf alternative for treatment of such pathologies, especially in the urgent setting, for patients who cannot wait the time required for manufacturing and delivery of custom-made endografts. The device's anatomical suitability should be considered, especially for female patients with smaller iliofemoral vessels. Several tips may help deal with particularly complex scenarios (such as, for instance, in case of narrow inner aortic lumens or when treating patients with failure of prior endovascular aneurysm repair), and a broad array of techniques and devices must be available to ensure technical and clinical success. Despite promising early outcomes, concerns remain particularly regarding the risk for spinal cord ischemia and further assessment of long-term durability is needed, including the rate of target vessel instability and need for secondary interventions. As the published evidence mainly comes from retrospective registries, it is likely that reported outcomes may suffer from an intrinsic bias as most procedures reported to date have been carried out at high-volume aortic centers. Nonetheless, with the never-ceasing adoption of new and refined techniques, outcomes are expected to ameliorate.

Aortic Arch Debranching and Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for Type B Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Since its introduction, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has revolutionized the treatment of type B aortic dissections (TBADs). However, the proximal aspect of the aortic pathology treated may infringe on the origin of the left subclavian artery or even more proximally. Hence, to ensure durable outcomes, the origin of these vessels needs to be covered, but an extra-anatomical bypass is required to perfuse vital branches, known as aortic arch debranching. This series aims to describe and delineate the disparities of aortic arch debranching during TEVAR for TBAD. METHODS: A retrospective review and analysis of a multicenter international database was conducted to identify patients with TBAD treated with TEVAR between 2005 and 2021. Data analyzed included patient demographics, disease characteristics, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes with follow-up on mortality and reintervention. All statistical analyses were carried out using IBM SPSS 26. Patient survival was calculated using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and a P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients were included in the analysis, of which 27 (46.6%) presented with complicated disease and 31 were uncomplicated, of which 10 (17.2%) were classed as high risk and 21 (36.2%) low risk. Zone 2 was the most common proximal landing zone for the stent graft. Left subclavian artery bypass was performed selectively (26%), with 1 stroke occurring, likely due to embolic reasons. A further 6 underwent more proximal aortic debranching before TEVAR (10%) and was a significant risk factor for mortality and the number of stents deployed. The overall rates of reintervention and mortality were 17.2% (n = 10) and 29.3% (n = 17). CONCLUSIONS: Aortic arch debranching and TEVAR for TBAD is associated with significant mortality. Future developments to treat aortic arch pathology could incorporate branched graft devices, eliminating the need for debranching, improving stroke rates, and reducing future reinterventions.

Endovascular Solutions for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Fenestrated, Branched and Custom-Made Devices.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has a prevalence of 4.8%. AAA rupture is associated with significant mortality, thus surgical intervention is generally required once the aneurysm diameter exceeds 5.5 cm. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the predominant repair modality for AAA. However, in patients with complex aortic anatomy, fenestrated or branched EVAR is a superior repair option vs standard EVAR. Fenestrated and branched endoprostheses can be off-the-shelf or custom-made, which offers a more individualised approach. AIM: To summarise and evaluate the clinical outcomes achieved by fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) and branched EVAR (BEVAR), and to explore the role of custom-made endoprostheses in contemporary AAA management. METHODS: A literature search using Ovid Medline and Google Scholar was conducted to identify literature pertaining to the use and outcomes of fenestrated, branched, fenestrated-branched and custom-made endoprostheses for AAA repair. RESULTS: FEVAR is an effective repair modality for patients with AAA that offers similar early survival, improved early morbidity but higher rates of reintervention in comparison to open surgical repair (OSR). Compared with standard EVAR, FEVAR is associated with similar in-hospital mortality yet higher rates of morbidity, especially regarding renal outcomes. BEVAR outcomes are rarely reported exclusively in the context of AAA repair. When reported, BEVAR is an acceptable alternative to EVAR in the treatment of complex aortic aneurysms and has similar reported complication issues to FEVAR. Custom-made grafts are a good alternative treatment option for complex aneurysms where hostile aneurysm anatomy precludes the use of conventional EVAR and sufficient time is available for the manufacturing of such devices. CONCLUSION: FEVAR offers a very effective treatment for patients with complex aortic anatomy and has been well-characterised over the past decade. RCTs and longer-term studies are desirable for unbiased comparison of non-standard EVAR modalities.

Organ ischaemia after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and outcomes of ischaemic organ complications after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). METHODS: This is a multicentre, retrospective, observational cohort study. We analysed data from patients treated with TEVAR between 22 June 2001 and 10 December 2022. Primary outcomes were postoperative overall organ ischaemic complications and early (≤30 days) survival. Secondary outcomes were long-term survival and freedom from aorta-related mortality. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients were included in this study. We performed 233 (91.4%) isolated TEVARs, 14 (5.5%) fenestrated or branched TEVARs and 8 (3.1%) TEVARs in combination with normal infrarenal stent graft. Overall, 31 organ ischaemic complications were detected in 29 (11.4%) cases, out of which 8 (3.1%) complications were cerebrovascular, 8 (3.1%) spinal cord, 6 (2.3%) visceral, 4 (1.6%) renal, 2 (0.8%) peripheral and 3 (1.2%) myocardial. Binary logistic regression analysis identified grade III-IV aortic arch atheroma [odds ratio (OR): 6.6, P = 0.001; 95% confidence interval: 2.9-14.9] and shaggy aorta (OR: 12.1, P = 0.003; 95% confidence interval: 2.3-64.1) to be associated with the development of organ ischaemic complications. In patients with organ ischaemia, we observed higher early (≤30 days) mortality (20.7% vs 6.2%; OR: 3.6, P = 0.016), prolonged hospitalization (P = 0.001) and inferior estimated survival (log-rank, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Aortic arch atherosclerotic overload as well as the presence of shaggy aorta are predictors of organ ischaemic complications following TEVAR. They are neither uncommon nor negligible and are associated with perioperative mortality, prolonged hospitalization and a negative impact on long-term survival.

Outcomes and Economic Impact of Hypogastric Artery Management During Elective Endovascular Aortic Repair for Aorto-Iliac Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: To analyze clinical outcomes and perform a macro-costing evaluation of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for aorto-iliac aneurysms. METHODS: This is a retrospective, financially unsupported, physician-initiated observational cohort study. Patients with iliac artery involvement treated with EVAR between January 1st, 2014 and December 31st, 2021 were identified. Inclusion criteria were intact aneurysm, elective EVAR with at least 1 hypogastric artery (HA) treatment, use of bifurcated endograft (EG), and at least 6 months of follow-up. Primary outcomes of interest were overall survival, freedom from aneurysm-related mortality (ARM), freedom from EVAR-related reintervention, and overall EVAR(procedure)-related costs. RESULTS: We studied 122 (9.1%) patients: 119 (97.5%) were male and 3 (2.5%) females. Median age of patients was 76 years (range, 68.75-81). Overall, 107 (87.7%) patients had both HAs preserved according to following strategy: 45 (36.9%) with flared limbs, 13 (10.6%) with bilateral branched device, and 49 (40.2%) with a combination of flared limb on 1 side and branched device on the contralateral side. Bilateral overstenting was performed in 15 (12.3%) patients. Estimated overall survival was not different between groups of EVAR (Log-rank, P = 0.561). There was only 1 (0.8%) ARM ascertained during the follow-up. Estimated freedom from EVAR-related reintervention was not different among groups (Log-rank, P = 0.464). During the follow-up, 9 (7.4%) patients developed buttock claudication (Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) grade 1, n = 4, SVS grade 2, n = 5), more frequently in HA overstenting (hazard ratio (HR): 3.6; 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 0.96-13.5, P = 0.058). When all cots were included, branched EVAR still carried the highest burden (P = 0.001) in comparison with the mixed subgroup, the overstenting subgroup, and the flared limbs subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Early mortality and pelvic ischemic syndromes rate were acceptably low in all techniques. Hypogastric artery preservation showed lower complication rate in comparison with HA overstenting which, however, appears to be safe an effective for option with similar overall costs for patients who are not candidates for HA preservation based on aortic anatomy.

Impact of patient demographics and intraoperative characteristics on abdominal aortic aneurysm sac following endovascular repair.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has become the preferred treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Its main aim is to seal the perfusion of the aneurysmal sac and, thus, induce sac regression and subsequent aortic remodelling. Aneurysmal sac regression has been linked to the short- and long-term clinical outcomes post-EVAR. It has also been shown to be influenced by endograft device choice, with several of these available commercially. This review summarises and discusses current evidence on the influence of pre- and intraoperative factors on sac regression. Additionally, this review aims to highlight the device-specific variations in sac regression to provide an overall holistic approach to treating AAAs with EVAR. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using multiple electronic databases to identify and extract relevant data. RESULTS: Female sex, >70 mm original sac diameters, higher pre-procedural fibrinogen levels, smoking and low intra-aneurysmal pressure were found to positively impact sac regression. Whereas renal impairment, ischemic heart disease, high intra-aneurysmal pressure and aneurysm neck thrombus negatively influenced sac regression. Patent lumbar arteries, age, statins and hypercholesterolaemia displayed conflicting evidence regarding sac regression. Regarding the EVAR endografts compared, newer generation devices such as the Anaconda mainly showed the most optimal results. CONCLUSION: Sac regression following EVAR in AAA is an important prognostic factor for morbidity and mortality. Nevertheless, several pre- and intraoperative factors can have an influence on sac regression. Therefore, it is necessary to take them into account when assessing AAA patients for EVAR to optimise outcomes. The choice of EVAR stent-graft can also affect sac regression, with evidence suggesting that the Fenestrated Anaconda is associated with the most favourable results.

Myths and methodologies: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing for surgical risk stratification in patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm; balancing risk over benefit.

The extent to which patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) should exercise remains unclear, given theoretical concerns over the perceived risk of blood pressure-induced rupture, which is often catastrophic. This is especially pertinent during cardiopulmonary exercise testing, when patients are required to perform incremental exercise to symptom-limited exhaustion for the determination of cardiorespiratory fitness. This multimodal metric is being used increasingly as a complementary diagnostic tool to inform risk stratification and subsequent management of patients undergoing AAA surgery. In this review, we bring together a multidisciplinary group of physiologists, exercise scientists, anaesthetists, radiologists and surgeons to challenge the enduring 'myth' that AAA patients should be fearful of and avoid rigorous exercise. On the contrary, by appraising fundamental vascular mechanobiological forces associated with exercise, in conjunction with 'methodological' recommendations for risk mitigation specific to this patient population, we highlight that the benefits conferred by cardiopulmonary exercise testing and exercise training across the continuum of intensity far outweigh the short-term risks posed by potential AAA rupture.

Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: Challenges in Diagnosis and Categorization.

BACKGROUND: Acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a rare disease that is likely under-diagnosed in the UK. As a progressive, dynamic clinical entity, many patients initially diagnosed with uncomplicated TBAD deteriorate, developing end-organ malperfusion and aortic rupture (complicated TBAD). An evaluation of the binary approach to the diagnosis and categorisation of TBAD is needed. METHODS: A narrative review of the risk factors predisposing patients to progression from unTBAD to coTBAD was undertaken. RESULTS: Key high-risk features predispose the development of complicated TBAD, such as maximal aortic diameter > 40 mm and partial false lumen thrombosis. CONCLUSION: An appreciation of the factors that predispose to complicated TBAD would aid clinical decision-making surrounding TBAD.

Ethnic & Sex Disparities in Type B Aortic Dissection Patients Undergoing Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: An International Perspective.

BACKGROUND: There has been a revolution in the management of type B aortic dissection (TBAD) over the last 2 decades due to the increasing development of endovascular techniques, with the prime example being thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). However, many controversies concerning the use of TEVAR in TBAD exist. For instance, there is little available evidence suggesting any differences in demographics, disease characteristics, intervention technicalities, and clinical outcomes between males and females as well as different ethnicities when undergoing TEVAR for TBAD, both in the short and long term. Also, there is no risk prediction model/tool available. The objective of this international study is to describe and delineate the disparities between male and female patients of different ethnicities in terms of demographics, disease and interventional characteristics, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Over 17 years a total of 58 TBAD patients were admitted to 2 tertiary vascular centres and treated using TEVAR. Mortality, postoperative complications and reintervention data were recorded for the first 30 days after the procedure as well as during follow-up. Follow-up for all patients lasted until the study endpoint or until a patient's death. Data were analysed retrospectively using IBM SPSS statistical package 26 for Windows. RESULTS: The mean age was similar between the 2 groups, with the majority of patients in both being Caucasian. More than half of the males had complicated TBAD, while the majority of females were classed as having uncomplicated disease. The most commonly utilized proximal and distal landing zone for the TEVAR stent graft was zone 2 and zone 4, respectively. The mean proximal stent diameter was significantly larger in males compared to females (P = 0.004). The difference in mean distal diameter between the 2 groups was insignificant (P = 0.721). The mean total stent coverage of the thoracic aorta was 251.3 mm in male patients compared to 291.2 mm in females (P = 0.203). A total of 32 patients underwent adjunctive procedures. Seven (17%) of the males had one or more postoperative complications compared to 2 (12%) females. Nine (22%) males underwent a reintervention procedure post TEVAR compared to only 1 (6%) female (P = 0.136). Overall, males had a mortality rate of 24% (n = 10) compared to 41% of females (n = 7) (P = 0.201). Estimated survival of males and females post TEVAR was 80.4 ± 9.6 months and 69.7 ± 14.4 months (P = 0.428). For the total population, the number of stent grafts was inversely correlated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the favourable clinical outcomes achieved by TEVAR in TBAD, there remains a grey area concerning its management. Thus, it is important to perform risk stratification of individual patients using their demographics and comorbidities, particularly scrutinizing patient sex and ethnic origin, when considering intervention for TBAD to achieve optimum results.

Dynamic and Static Vessel Malperfusion as a Consequence of Acute Type B Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is relatively uncommon with an estimated incidence of up to 8 cases per 100,000 individuals annually. It can be classified based on presenting clinical and radiological features into complicated and uncomplicated. Following the initial tear, the direction and extent of the dissection flap is unpredictable, possibly propagating proximally or distally. One consequence of a dissection flap is the occurrence of organ malperfusion by occlusion of the origin of the branch vessel. The 2 types of malperfusion in TBAD are static and dynamic, with the latter being the more common mechanism. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has demonstrated its high safety and efficacy when used for TBAD and subsequent malperfusion. AIMS: This original study specifically examines patients diagnosed with acute TBAD and treated with TEVAR at a single vascular unit, focusing on those presenting with organ malperfusion. METHODS: Over 16 years, 28 TBAD patients were admitted to a single center and treated using TEVAR. After clinical examination, all patients underwent computed tomography of the thorax and abdomen/pelvis to confirm the diagnosis and classify the extent of the dissection proximally and distally. Once diagnosed, patients were transferred to the high dependency unit and started on blood pressure medication. Subsequent computed tomography scans were performed to classify patients, after which TEVAR was performed. RESULTS: Twenty five patients underwent TEVAR for TBAD, of which 8 (32%) had symptoms of organ malperfusion. The majority of cases presented with hypertension (89%), describing a sudden onset of upper/midthoracic pain. The origin of the left subclavian artery was occluded in 14 (56%) patients with 9 (64%) needing an extra-anatomical bypass. There was only a single mortality due to a posterior circulation stroke 2 days after TEVAR. Median (range) length of coverage of thoracic aorta by the stent-graft was 33 (15-35) cm. The true lumen (TL) perfused the celiac artery in 6/8 malperfusion patients, superior mesenteric artery in 7/8, right renal artery in 6/8, and, conversely, left renal artery in only 2/8. CONCLUSIONS: Complicated TBADs behave in an unpredictable manner as it seems the propagating intimal flap invariably maintains vital organ perfusion via the TL. Maintenance of abdominal vessels perfusion from the TL following TEVAR is vital to ensuring optimal results.

Population risk profile analysis of acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

BACKGROUND: Uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (unTBAD) comprises the estimated majority of type B aortic dissection (TBAD), presenting without any of the complications associated with complicated TBAD (coTBAD). Although first-line treatment for coTBAD is thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), and despite the fact that TEVAR has proven its safety and effectiveness in the treatment of unTBAD, unTBAD is still being predominantly managed conservatively with medical therapy, with a small proportion of patients being offered TEVAR. AIMS: The main scope of this review is to highlight the evidence in the literature of the demographic characteristics and associated co-morbidities of unTBAD patients undergoing TEVAR in order to produce a risk stratification system to achieve favourable outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using multiple electronic databases including PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and EMBASE. RESULTS: Multiple demographic characteristics and associated co-morbidities of unTBAD patients affecting TEVAR outcomes were identified, assessed, and investigated, including age, gender, race, genetics, medical conditions, such as hypertension and diabetes, and lifestyle factors such as smoking. Most factors were associated with increased risks of mortality and morbidity, while others, such as race, were identified as being protective against those when it comes to TEVAR. CONCLUSION: Despite the favourable results yielded by TEVAR in unTBAD, there remains a grey area concerning its management. Thus, it is important to incorporate the demographics and co-morbidities of unTBAD patients' when into clinical judgement when assessing indications for TEVAR intervention to ensure optimum results can be achieved.

Cost Analysis of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Type B Aortic Dissection: How Much Does Quality Cost?

BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening medical emergency that affects an estimated 3-4 people per 100,000 annually, with 40% of cases classified as type B AD (TBAD). TBAD can be further classified as being complicated (co-TBAD) or uncomplicated (un-TBAD) based on the presence or absence of certain features such as malperfusion and rupture. TBAD can be managed conservatively with optimal medical therapy (OMT), or invasively with open surgical repair (OSR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), depending on several factors such as type of TBAD and its clinical acuity. The cost-effectiveness, or cost-benefit profile, of these strategies must be given equal consideration. However, TBAD studies featuring cost analyses are limited within the literature. This narrative review aims to address the gap in the literature on cost-effectiveness of TBAD treatments by providing an overview of cost analyses comparing OMT with TEVAR in un-TBAD and TEVAR with OSR in co-TBAD. Another aim is to provide a market analysis of the commercially available TEVAR devices. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using several search engines including PubMed, Ovid, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase to identify and extract relevant studies. RESULTS: Several TEVAR devices are available commercially on the global market costing $12,000-19,495. Nevertheless, the Terumo Aortic RELAY® stent graft seems to be the most cost-effective, yielding highly favourable clinical outcomes. Despite the higher initial cost of TEVAR, evidence in the literature strongly suggest that it is superior to OMT for un-TBAD on the long-term. In addition, TEVAR is well established in the literature as being gold-standard repair technique for co-TBAD, replacing OSR by offering a more optimal cost-benefit profile through lower costs and improved results. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of TEVAR has revolutionized the field of aortovascular surgery by offering a highly efficacious and long-term cost-effective treatment for TBAD.

Fate and Consequences of the False Lumen After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Type B Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Type B aortic dissection (TBAD) occurs due to an entry tear in the intimal layer of the aorta distal to the origin of the left subclavian artery where blood enters the newly formed false lumen (FL) and extends distally or proximally to form a dissection over an indeterminate length of the aorta which, over time, may eventually rupture. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) aims to seal off the entry tear proximally with the stent-graft, occluding the origin of the dissection and excluding the FL. Nevertheless, in some cases, the perfusion to the FL is maintained, hindering the aortic remodelling process and increasing the risk of aneurysmal degeneration and rupture, particularly in the abdominal aorta where evidence suggest that remodelling is slower. This review examines the long-term effects of a patent or partially thrombosed FL on clinical outcomes following TEVAR in TBAD, also highlighting the pathological processes behind negative aortic remodelling. Another aim of this review is to provide an overview and appraisal of the currently available techniques for managing a patent or partially thrombosed FL to prevent long-term morbidity occurring. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using several search engines including PubMed, Ovid, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase to identify and extract relevant studies. RESULTS: Evidence in the literature show that a partially thrombosed FL is more dangerous than a patent FL due to the occlusion of the distal re-entry tears, impeding outflow and increasing mean arterial and diastolic pressures, whereas the latter is decompressed via distal re-entry sites. FL thrombosis and satisfactory remodelling is sometimes achieved in as few as 40% of patients after TEVAR due to the maintained perfusion of the FL either at the level of the thoracic or abdominal aorta. However, although the thoracic aorta is predominantly covered by the TEVAR stent-graft, poorer remodelling and more dilation is seen in the abdominal aorta. Several techniques are available to embolize the FL, including the Provisional Extension to Induce Complete Attachment, Stent Assisted Balloon Induced Intimal Disruption and Relamination in Aortic Dissection Repair, candy-plug, and Knickerbocker techniques. CONCLUSIONS: The management of TBAD is invariably TEVAR to seal off the proximal entry tear while extending the repair distally to completely exclude the FL. A risk of aortic wall dilatation distal to TEVAR stent-graft remains; hence, regular monitoring and accurate imaging are essential. At present, a patent FL can be treated using a range of different endovascular techniques.

Can the Fenestrated Anaconda™ salvage failed competitor endografts? An international frame of reference.

INTRODUCTION: An abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a life-threatening abnormal dilation of the abdominal aorta that can be repaired either endovascularly or with open surgery. However, endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has become the main treatment modality for AAA due to its more optimal results. EVAR devices can either be standard, fenestrated, or branched, with fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) seemingly achieving superior prospects. Although EVAR is associated with excellent outcomes, it still carries a risk of certain complications requiring reintervention or 'rescue'. Several commercial EVAR devices are available on the global market, nevertheless, the Fenestrated Anaconda developed by Terumo Aortic can be considered the superior device due to the wide range of endovascular solutions that it offers along with its unique custom-made approach, excellent results and its highly promising potential to be used as a 'rescue' device for failed competitor endografts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current study represents a 9-year cross-sectional international analysis of a custom-made Fenestrated Anaconda™ device. For the statistical analysis, SPSS 28 for Windows and R were utilised. Pearson Chi-square analysis was used to assess differences in cumulative distribution frequencies between select variables. Statistical significance for all two-tailed tests was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Out of 5058 EVARs performed using the Fenestrated Anaconda, 2987 (59%) were 'rescue' procedures for migrated Gore (n = 252) and Medtronic (n = 2735) devices. The Fenestrated Anaconda™ was indicated as the reintervention device either due to unsuitable/complex anatomy for the competitor (n = 2411) or based on surgeon preference (n = 576). Overall, the Fenestrated Anaconda was utilised to rescue 3466 (68.5%) failed previous EVARs using competitor devices. Yet, the primary endovascular solution offered by the Fenestrated Anaconda was FEVAR (91.3%), with 112 (2.2%) devices using custom-made iliac stents. DISCUSSION: The use of the Fenestrated Anaconda endograft as a 'rescue' device to salvage failed competitor devices is well-established in the literature with excellent clinical outcomes achieved. The evidence in the literature also highlights the distinctive custom-made approach that the Fenestrated Anaconda offers which enables it to treat extremely complex aortic anatomy.

Frozen Elephant Trunk Sizing: A 30,000-Feet Perspective with Thoraflex Hybrid Stent Graft.

There is currently no standard, evidence-based approach for sizing the Thoraflex Hybrid prosthesis in frozen elephant trunk surgery. We present regional data on 906 Thoraflex grafts implanted in the United Kingdom between December 2012 and August 2021 to emphasize the heterogeneity in sizing practices and evaluate the impact this may have on clinical outcomes. Highlighting this heterogeneity will help develop an evidence-based approach to prosthesis sizing, thereby aiding decision-making for arch repair.

The frozen elephant trunk procedure: indications, outcomes and future directions.

The treatment of complex multi-segment disease concomitantly affecting the aortic arch and descending thoracic aorta is technically challenging. Until the 1990s, such extensive pathology was addressed by median sternotomy for aortic arch replacement followed by a traumatic thoraco-abdominal incision for reconstruction of the descending aorta as a single- or two-stage procedure. The advent of the conventional elephant trunk procedure by Borst in 1983 simplified the second-stage of this procedure by eliminating the need for clamping of the descending thoracic aorta. However, graft-related complications and the considerable inter-stage mortality were significant limitations associated with the conventional elephant trunk procedure. The emergence of endovascular technology and availability of dedicated arch prostheses culminated in a major paradigm change with the introduction of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) concept by Kato and colleagues in the mid-1990s. This one-stage procedure permits concurrent total aortic arch replacement with antegrade delivery of a descending aortic stent-graft which itself functions as a proximal landing zone to facilitate prospective endovascular intervention to treat residual or de novo disease in the more distal aorta. The frozen elephant technique has been applied extensively in acute aortic dissection to restore true lumen patency, occlude descending aortic intimal tears and promote false lumen thrombosis, as well as for chronic degenerative arch aneurysms. The Thoraflex Hybrid and E-vita Open are the two most common commercially available hybrid FET prostheses. This review aims to discuss the development, indications, surgical technique, currently available prostheses, clinical outcomes and future directions regarding the FET procedure.

Predicting early mortality following single-stage coronary artery or valve surgery and carotid endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of coexisting cardiac disease and extra-cranial carotid artery disease is a controversial area of debate. Thus, in this challenging scenario, risk stratification may play a key role in surgical decision making. AIM: To report the results of single-stage coronary/valve surgery (CVS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and to identify predictive factors associated with 30-day mortality. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective study of prospectively maintained data from three academic tertiary referral hospitals. For this study, only patients treated with single-stage CVS, meaning coronary artery bypass surgery or valve surgery, and CEA between March 1, 2000 and March 30, 2020, were included. Primary outcome measure of interest was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were neurologic events rate, and a composite endpoint of postoperative stroke/death rate. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 386 patients who underwent the following procedures: CEA with isolated coronary artery bypass graft in 243 (63%) cases, with isolated valve surgery in 40 (10.4%), and combination of coronary artery bypass grafting and valve surgery in 103 (26.7%). Postoperative neurologic event rate was 2.6% (n = 10) which includes 5 (1.3%) transient ischemic attacks and 5 (1.3%) strokes (major n = 3, minor n = 2). The 30-day mortality rate was 3.9% (n = 15). Predictors of 30-day mortality included preoperative left heart insufficiency (odds ratio [OR]: 5.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.63-18.17, p = .006), and postoperative stroke (OR: 197.11, 95% CI: 18.28-2124.93, p < .001). No predictor for postoperative stroke and for composite endpoint was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that postoperative stroke rate and mortality was acceptably low, single-stage approach is an effective option in such selected high-risk patients.