Hybrid venous recanalization and cardiac implantable electronic device lead revision procedures: A single-center retrospective analysis of 38 patients.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe the safety and efficacy of hybrid recanalization procedures in a series of patients with obstructed central veins requiring cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) revision. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2016, 38 consecutive patients (24 M; age 60.5 ±â€¯16.2 years; range 25-87 years) with central venous obstruction underwent 42 recanalization interventions performed in conjunction with CIED revision or extraction. Fifty percent of patients (19/38) presented with veno-occlusive symptoms, and 13% (5/38) of patients had CIED leads with an ipsilateral upper extremity dialysis conduit. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent (38/42) of all procedures resulted in successful recanalization and CIED revision. Twenty-four percent (9/38) of all patients required secondary procedures due to recurrent stenosis, and 78% (7/9) of those requiring secondary procedures had indwelling dialysis conduits and/or clinical symptoms related to venous occlusion before the initial procedure. There were complications in 2 patients related to recanalization, and in 3 related to CIED revision. CONCLUSIONS: Recanalization of central venous stenosis/occlusion in patients with CIED can be technically challenging but is successful in most patients. Symptomatic patients and those with dialysis conduits often require more aggressive revascularization interventions and may be at increased risk of complication or need for secondary interventions.

Internal iliac venous aneurysm associated with pelvic venous insufficiency.

Aneurysmal disease of the internal iliac vein is rare, with no standard indication for or accepted modality of treatment. Here we report an instance of unilateral, primary left internal iliac venous aneurysm and associated pelvic venous insufficiency. Following extensive workup for alternative causes, the aneurysm and left gonadal vein were coil embolized with good effect.

Management of type A dissection with malperfusion.

Malperfusion is a common lethal complication of acute aortic dissection following rupture, for which the optimal management strategy has yet to be clearly established. The objective of this study was to reassess the management of acute type A aortic dissection (Type A-AAD) with malperfusion. We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of all patients with Type A-AAD with malperfusion at the University of Michigan and compared the results from patients that directly underwent open surgical repair versus those who had percutaneous reperfusion prior to open surgical repair. Based on the results, we developed a patient care protocol for the treatment of all patients with acute type A dissection. We later re-analyzed the long-term outcomes for patients using the protocol. The present study demonstrated that, although the outcomes for patients with acute type A aortic dissection with malperfusion syndrome treated with initial percutaneous reperfusion and delayed open surgical intervention are not as good as the results for patients with uncomplicated Type A-AAD that undergo immediate surgical repair, their outcomes continue the long-term outcomes of the former group are superior. To outdo patients with acute type A aortic dissection with malperfusion syndrome treated with immediate open surgical intervention. In conclusion, at the University of Michigan we continue to use our patient care protocol to treat patients with Type A-AAD.

Remedial operations for failed endovascular therapy of 32 renal artery stenoses in 24 children.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) for the treatment of pediatric renovascular hypertension (RVH) in contemporary practice is accompanied with ill-defined complications. This study examines the mode of pediatric renal PTA failures and the results of their surgical management. METHODS: Twenty-four children underwent remedial operations at the University of Michigan from 1996 to 2014 for failures of renal PTA. Their clinical courses were retrospectively reviewed and results analyzed. RESULTS: Renal PTA of 32 arteries, including 13 with stenting, was performed for severe RVH in 12 boys and 12 girls, having a mean age of 9.3 years. Developmental ostial stenoses affected 22 children. PTA failures included: 27 restenoses and five thromboses. Remedial operations included: 13 renal artery-aortic reimplantations, one segmental renal artery-main renal artery reimplantation, ten aortorenal bypasses, one arterioplasty, one iliorenal bypass, and six nephrectomies for unreconstructable arteries; the latter all in children younger than 10 years. Follow-up averaged 2.1 years. Postoperatively, hypertension was cured, improved, or unchanged in 25, 54, and 21 %, respectively. There was no perioperative renal failure or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Renal PTA for the treatment of pediatric RVH due to ostial disease may be complicated by failures requiring complex remedial operations or nephrectomy, the latter usually affecting younger children.

Propensity adjusted analysis of open and endovascular thoracic aortic repair for chronic type B dissection: a twenty-year evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection (CBAD), whether open (open descending aortic repair, OAR) or endovascular (thoracic endovascular aortic repair, TEVAR), is controversial, suggesting a comparative analysis is warranted. METHODS: One hundred twenty-two of 1,049 patients (1993 to 2013) undergoing descending aortic repair required intervention for CBAD 29.2 ± 34.9 months after the initial acute event and formed the study cohort (mean age 59.7 years). Those with degenerated residual type A dissection were excluded (n = 65). Eighty-eight had extent IIIB CBAD; 11 had intramural hematoma. Indications for surgery included aneurysmal degeneration (n = 105), rupture (n = 8), acute or chronic dissection (n = 8), and extension of dissection (n = 1). Open strategy included descending (n = 71) and thoracoabdominal repair (n = 19), with hypothermic circulatory arrest used in 70 patients. The TEVAR was performed with (n = 2) or without (n = 30) visceral debranching. A treatment strategy propensity score incorporating time since initial acute event, CBAD extent, year of intervention, age, and selected comorbidities was constructed for multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Early outcome included the following: 30-day mortality 4% (n = 5); stroke 2% (n = 2); permanent paraplegia 3% (n = 4); renal failure requiring dialysis 7% (n = 8, 5 temporary and 3 permanent); and tracheostomy 3% (n = 4). Visceral aorta intervention (odds ratio [OR] 3.5, p = 0.026) and maximum aortic diameter (OR 1.1, p = 0.001) but not treatment type (p = 0.64) independently predicted an early composite outcome comprised of these variables. Ten-year survival was 56.2%. Baseline creatinine (hazard ratio [HR] 1.7, p < 0.001) and peripheral vascular disease (HR 2.5, p = 0.021), but not treatment type (p = 0.225) predicted late mortality. Ten-year freedom from aortic rupture or need for reintervention was 78.3%. Treatment efficacy was improved after OAR (3-year freedom 96.7% vs TEVAR 87.5%, p = 0.026), and this was confirmed after Cox regression (TEVAR, HR 4.6, p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Intervention for CBAD can be performed with excellent results, either by an open or endovascular approach. The higher rate of treatment failure after TEVAR warrants modification of current device design or endovascular approach before broad application of this treatment strategy.

A 20-year experience with thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular approaches (thoracic endovascular aortic repair) have revolutionized treatment of thoracic aortic disease. OBJECTIVE: We report our 20-year experience with this therapy. METHODS: Four hundred twenty patients (mean age = 69.0 years; 54% male) underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (1993-2013), predominantly for fusiform aneurysm (n = 144), saccular aneurysm (n = 94), acute (n = 64) or chronic (n = 36) dissection, or traumatic injury (n = 39). Rupture was present in 80 patients (19.1%). Most patients (78.3%) were at high risk for open repair. Mean aortic diameter was 5.5 cm. Extent of repair included arch in 218 patients, total descending aorta in 193 patients, and thoracoabdominal aorta in 35 patients. RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality occurred in 20 patients (4.8%). Neurologic events included stroke (5.0%) and spinal cord ischemia (permanent 1.7%, temporary 7.9%). Although dialysis was only required in 1.4% of the patients, 19% had renal failure by RIFLE (Risk, Injury, Failure) criteria. Endoleak occurred in 32.9% of the patients. Ten-year freedom from dissection, rupture, or need for reintervention in treated or adjacent aortic segments (ie, treatment failure) was 63.2%. Independent predictors included presentation with rupture, preexisting renal failure, or intervention on the arch aorta (all Ps < 0.03). Aortic pathology also independently predicted treatment failure (P = 0.026). The 15-year survival rate was 32.3%. Advancing age, presence of coronary artery disease, rupture, or postoperative renal failure (all Ps < 0.05), but not treatment failure (P = 0.926), independently predicted late mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair can be performed with acceptable results in a high-risk population. The risk of treatment failure persists, underscoring the importance of continued long-term endograft surveillance, but this does not seem to impact late mortality.

Alternative access techniques with thoracic endovascular aortic repair, open iliac conduit versus endoconduit technique.

BACKGROUND: Iliac artery endoconduits (ECs) have emerged as important alternatives to retroperitoneal open iliac conduits (ROICs) to aid in transfemoral delivery for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). We present, to our knowledge, the first comparative analysis between these alternative approaches. METHODS: All patients undergoing TEVAR with either ROIC (n = 23) or internal EC (n = 16) were identified. The mean age of the cohort was 72.4 ± 11.5 years (82.1% female). Device delivery was accomplished in 100% of cases. The primary outcome was the presence of iliofemoral complications, which was defined as: (1) the inability to successfully deliver the device into the aorta via the ROIC or EC approach; (2) rupture, dissection, or thrombosis of the ipsilateral iliac or femoral artery; and/or (3) retroperitoneal hematoma requiring exploration and evacuation. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and rates of limb loss, claudication, or revascularization. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 10.1 months, the incidence of iliofemoral complications was less for the EC approach compared with the ROIC technique (12.5% vs 26.1%; P = .301). No patients sustained limb loss. Revascularization was performed in two patients after ROIC. Lower extremity claudication occurred in one patient after EC. Early mortality was seen in one patient who underwent EC. Two-year Kaplan-Meier survival for the entire cohort was 74.4%, and did not differ between groups (ROIC, 78.3% vs EC, 68.8%; P = .350). Two-year Kaplan-Meier freedom from limb loss, claudication, or revascularization did not differ between the two approaches (ROIC, 91.3% vs EC, 93.8%; P = .961). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this early comparative evaluation of alternative access routes for TEVAR suggest that an EC approach is safe, effective, and associated with low rates of early mortality and late iliofemoral complications. In selected patients, the EC may be considered an appropriate delivery route for transfemoral TEVAR.

The impact of acute renal failure on early and late outcomes after thoracic aortic endovascular repair.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) after thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) is variably reported at 1% to 34%. This study utilized the RIFLE (risk, injury, failure) criteria to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and late implications of AKI after TEVAR. METHODS: In all, 350 patients without prior dialysis requirement underwent TEVAR (1993 to 2013). The mean age was 68.7 years (54% male). The mean preoperative glomerular filtration rate was 76.5 ± 37.6 mL/min, with 39 patients (11.7%) in chronic kidney stage 3 or 4. The TEVAR was performed for rupture in 20.6%. The mean contrast volume administered was 95.7 ± 52.9 mL. RESULTS: Early mortality was seen in 17 patients (4.9%). Acute kidney injury defined as RIFLE classes risk, injury, or failure was seen in 59 patients (17%; risk = 36, injury = 14, failure = 9). Independent predictors of AKI included history of saccular aneurysm, presentation with rupture, or need for arch repair or red blood cell transfusion (all p < 0.05). Only 2 patients (0.6%) needed dialysis, with none requiring permanent dialysis. Importantly, 10-year freedom from dialysis was 97.7%. Development of AKI predicted early mortality (p < 0.001, odds ratio 9.8). Ten-year survival was 38.1%. Both injury and failure AKI classes independently predicted late mortality (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of AKI after TEVAR as assessed by RIFLE criteria is higher than seen in previous reports. Despite its infrequent progression to permanent dialysis dependence, AKI remains an important risk factor for both early and late mortality. Future studies should evaluate strategies to reduce the incidence of AKI after TEVAR to improve both early and late outcomes.

Open and endovascular repair of the nontraumatic isolated aortic arch aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: Repair of isolated aortic arch aneurysms (nontraumatic) by either open (OAR) or endovascular (TEVAR) methods is associated with need for hypothermic circulatory arrest, complex debranching procedures, or use of marginal proximal landing zones. This study evaluates outcomes for treatment of this cohort. METHODS: Of 2153 patients undergoing arch repair (1993-2013), 137 (mean age, 60 years) were treated with isolated arch resection for nontraumatic aneurysms. Treatment was by open (n = 93), hybrid (n = 11), or TEVAR (n = 33) methods, with the last two approaches reserved for poor OAR candidates. Treatment was predominantly for saccular (n = 53) or fusiform (n = 30) aneurysms or dissection (n = 15). Rupture was present in 15%. Prior aortic repair was performed in the ascending (n = 30), arch (n = 40), descending (n = 24), or abdominal (n = 9) aorta. Propensity score adjustment was performed for multivariable analysis to account for baseline differences in patient groups as well as treatment selection bias. RESULTS: Early mortality was seen in nine patients (7%). Morbidity included stroke (n = 9), paraplegia (n = 1), and need for dialysis (n = 5) or tracheostomy (n = 10). A composite outcome of death and stroke was independently predicted by advancing age (P = .055) and performance of a hybrid procedure (P = .012). The 15-year survival was 59%, with late mortality predicted by increasing age, presence of peripheral vascular disease, and perioperative stroke (all P < .05). The 10-year freedom from aortic rupture or reintervention was 75% and was higher after OAR (2-year OAR, 94% vs TEVAR or hybrid, 78%; P = .018). After propensity-adjusted Cox regression analysis, both prior abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy (P = .017) and an endovascular or hybrid procedure (P = .001) independently predicted late aortic rupture or need for reintervention. CONCLUSIONS: Isolated arch repair remains a high-risk procedure occurring frequently in the reoperative setting. Despite being performed in a higher risk group, endovascular strategies yielded similar outcomes but with an increased risk for aorta-related complications. These data support ongoing efforts to develop branched endografts specifically tailored for arch disease to potentially reduce morbidity related to currently available approaches.

Iliofemoral complications associated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair: frequency, risk factors, and early and late outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors and outcomes after iliofemoral complications after thoracic aortic endovascular repair remain poorly characterized. This study was performed to characterize factors influencing perioperative iliofemoral complications during thoracic aortic endovascular repair. METHODS: All patients undergoing transfemoral thoracic aortic endovascular repair since 2005 with adequate preoperative aortoiliac 3-dimensional imaging (n = 126) were identified. Assessment of imaging was blinded with regard to occurrence of iliofemoral complications, defined as anything other than successful transfemoral device delivery and primary closure of an arteriotomy. RESULTS: The complication rate was 12% (n = 15). Univariate analysis identified that female gender, preoperative ankle-brachial index, average and minimal iliac diameters, diameter difference between iliac artery and sheath size, and iliac morphology score (calculated by combining iliac tortuosity, calcification, and vessel diameter) were associated with iliofemoral complications (all P < .05). Multivariate analysis identified the (1) difference between average iliac diameter and sheath size (P = .014), (2) iliac artery morphology score (P = .033), and (3) ankle-brachial index (P = .012) as independent predictors for iliofemoral complications. Early mortality was higher in those with complications (13.3% vs 1.8%, P = .069). Four-year freedom from limb loss, claudication, or revascularization was 97.9%. Iliofemoral complications reduced late survival primarily as a result of increased mortality within the first year (P = .047). CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic aortic endovascular repair can be performed safely via a transfemoral approach. Alternative access in patients with high preoperative iliac artery morphology scores and device delivery size requirements over the native iliofemoral size may reduce iliofemoral complications. If early complications occur, prompt repair results in low rates of ischemic limb complications at late follow-up.

Early open and endovascular thoracic aortic repair for complicated type B aortic dissection.

BACKGROUND: Aortic repair for acute (<2 weeks) or subacute (2 to 8 weeks) type B dissection is performed for rupture, impending rupture, or malperfusion. Thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) has been suggested as a more suitable, less invasive alternative to open descending aortic repair for type B dissection, but a comparative analysis is warranted. METHODS: Seventy-three patients with type B dissection (1995 to 2012) underwent early open descending aortic repair (n = 24) or TEVAR (n = 49). Mean age was 66.3 years. Intervention occurred in the acute (n = 53) or subacute (n = 20) period for malperfusion (n = 8), rupture (n = 22), or factors portending rupture, including rapid expansion (n = 26), uncontrolled pain (n = 18), aortic size greater than 5.0 cm (n = 26), or refractory hypertension (n = 2). Twenty-six had multiple indications. Patients undergoing TEVAR were older and had an increased incidence of coronary artery disease and renal impairment (all p < 0.05). RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality was 12% (n = 9). Morbidity included stroke (n = 7), dialysis (n = 6), paralysis (n = 4), and tracheostomy (n = 7). A composite outcome of mortality and these morbidities independently correlated with presentation with frank rupture (p < 0.01) or limb ischemia (p = 0.03), but not treatment strategy (p = 0.3). Ten-year Kaplan-Meier survival was 57.5% and similar between groups (p = 0.74). Independent predictors of late mortality included perioperative stroke and presentation with rupture during late follow-up (both p < 0.02). Five-year freedom from aortic reintervention or rupture was similar between TEVAR (80.0%) and open descending aortic repair (82.8%; p = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Early aortic repair for complicated type B dissection is associated with high rates of morbidity, late mortality, and reintervention. Despite its use in a higher risk group, outcomes seen with TEVAR were similar to open repair, thus supporting the recent paradigm shift toward an endovascular approach.

Composite stent-grafts are not associated with increased endoleak or reintervention rates after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Although present-generation endografts have expanded the indications for endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair, arterial anatomy frequently dictates the use of a combination of commercially available endografts and components for successful aneurysm repair. This study sought to determine whether there was an increase in endoleak or secondary intervention rates in individuals treated with composite endografts compared with noncomposite, or standard, endografts. METHODS: From 1999 to 2009, 421 endovascular abdominal aneurysm repairs were performed at a single institution. A total of 384 patients met criteria for inclusion, with at least one follow-up imaging study. Patients were then identified as having had a composite endograft, defined as any combination of two or more different commercially available endograft or stent components, versus a standard endograft. Primary outcomes measured were freedom from endoleak and secondary intervention. RESULTS: During the study period, 60 composite endograftings and 324 standard endograftings were performed. The groups were well matched for demographics, including age, gender, comorbidities, emergent need for procedure, and 30-day mortality (1.64% vs. 1.54%, nonsignificant). Median follow-up was 16.3 months (range, 19 days to 8.5 years) and 10.2 months (range, 4 days to 8.7 years) for composite and standard endografts, respectively. There was no significant difference between the groups in either endoleak or secondary intervention rates. Median time to endoleak detection was 2.0 months (range, 2 days to 3.9 years) for composite endografts and 2.8 months (range, 2 days to 6.9 years) for standard endografts. Median time to secondary intervention was 7.0 months (range, 4 days to 6.9 years) for composite endografts and 6.7 months (range, 1 day to 6.7 years) for standard endografts. CONCLUSIONS: Composite endografts, namely, the combination of different commercially available endografts or stents used for the treatment of aortic aneurysms, are not associated with increased mortality, endoleak, or secondary intervention rates compared with noncomposite endografts.

Late outcomes with repair of penetrating thoracic aortic ulcers: the merits of an endovascular approach.

BACKGROUND: Penetrating aortic ulcers (PAU) often occur in a debilitated elderly population. Although early results of repair for PAU are well described, late outcomes remain poorly characterized and are the focus in this report. METHODS: Ninety-five patients (mean age 70.7 years) underwent distal arch/descending aortic repair for PAU (1993 to 2011). Indications for intervention included rupture, saccular aneurysm, or symptoms. Associated intramural hematoma (IMH) was present in 41. Treatment was by open descending aortic repair (DTAR, n=37) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR, n=58). The DTAR group was younger (68 years versus TEVAR 72.5 years, p=0.02), and less frequently presented with rupture (24% versus TEVAR 43%, p=0.09). RESULTS: Early morbidity included death (9 patients; 9.5%), stroke (8), permanent paraplegia (2), and dialysis (5). Early adverse events were independently predicted by rupture, total descending repair, and DTAR (all p<0.01). Ten-year survival was 47.9%. Predictors of late mortality included advancing age (p=0.016) and urgent presentation (p=0.002), but not repair type. Ten-year freedom from aortic reintervention/rupture was 71.4%. Associated IMH increased the risk for reintervention/rupture (5-year freedom PAU 97.1% versus PAU/IMH 72.1%, p=0.01), primarily because of decreased efficacy after TEVAR for PAU/IMH (5-year freedom 57.7% versus DTAR 100%, p=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the presence of an older, more complex TEVAR group, late outcomes after repair for PAU were affected more by age and type of presentation than by treatment strategy. Recognizing the perils of intervention in this high-risk population, TEVAR emerges as the therapy of choice to reduce early morbidity and provide similar late survival.

The challenge of associated intramural hematoma with endovascular repair for penetrating ulcers of the descending thoracic aorta.

BACKGROUND: The presence of penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs) of the descending thoracic aorta has been associated with a poor long-term prognosis. Although early results have suggested acceptable outcomes for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for PAU, few studies have described the late outcomes of this approach. METHODS: From 1993 to 2009, 37 patients (43.2% male; mean age, 72 years) underwent TEVAR for PAU. Associated intramural hematoma was present in 19. Comorbidities included hypertension in 31, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 16, coronary artery disease in 22, and renal failure (mean preoperative creatinine, 1.4 mg/dL). Urgent or emergent indications were identified in 22 patients (59.5%), including presentation with rupture in 15 (40.5%). RESULTS: TEVAR was successfully performed in all patients. Arch repair was performed in 14 and total descending repair in 13. Concomitant procedures included coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and total arch debranching in one patient electively presenting with an asymptomatic PAU. Early morbidity included stroke (5.4%), temporary paraplegia (5.4%), and need for dialysis (2.7%). In-hospital or 30-day mortality was seen in two patients (5.4%). By Kaplan-Meier analysis, median survival was 89.8 months. Independent predictors of late mortality included urgent or emergent presentation (odds ratio, 14.7; P = .007). Actuarial freedom from TEVAR treatment failure (ie, need for open or endovascular aortic reintervention, aortic rupture, or aortic-related death) was 81.6% +/- 7.8% at 5 years. Analysis stratified by type of pathology (PAU vs PAU and intramural hematoma) showed no significant baseline differences in age, comorbidities, or extent of repair. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, however, presentation with PAU and intramural hematoma was associated with an increased risk for TEVAR treatment failure (P = .033). CONCLUSIONS: TEVAR can be safely accomplished for patients presenting with PAU. The presence of associated intramural hematoma may adversely affect the late outcomes of therapy, highlighting the need for careful planning, prudent balancing of the benefits of immediate vs delayed treatment of the fragile aortic wall, and the imperative nature of attentive follow-up in patients with PAU.

A comparative analysis of open and endovascular repair for the ruptured descending thoracic aorta.

BACKGROUND: Successful repair of the ruptured (non-traumatic) descending thoracic aorta (rTA) remains a formidable clinical challenge. Although effective for rTA, traditional open repair (DTAR) has significant associated morbidity. With expanding indications for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), we describe our experience with TEVAR and DTAR in this high-risk setting to elucidate their evolving roles. METHODS: Since the inception of our thoracic aortic endovascular program in 1993, 69 patients underwent DTAR (34) or TEVAR (35) for rTA. Patients underwent TEVAR if they were considered nonoperative candidates because of extensive comorbidities (n = 31; 88.6%) or had extremely favorable anatomy for endovascular repair (eg, mid-descending saccular aneurysm, n = 4). Aortic pathology causing rupture was fusiform aneurysm (18), saccular aneurysm/ulcer (22), and dissection (29). Associated aortobronchial fistulae (12) and aortoesophageal (1) fistulae were also present in 18.8%. Arch repair was needed in 46; total descending repair was needed in 33. Follow-up was 100% complete (mean 37.4 months). RESULTS: Mean age was 65.9 years (DTAR 60.3 year vs TEVAR 71.3 years, P = .005). In-hospital or 30-day mortality was seen in 13 patients (TEVAR n = 4; 11.4% vs DTAR n = 9; 26.5%, P = .13). Median length of stay was shorter after TEVAR (8 days vs DTAR 15 days, P = .02). Mean Kaplan-Meier survival was similar between groups (TEVAR 67.4 months vs DTAR 65.0 months, P = .7). By multivariate analysis, independent predictors of a composite outcome of early mortality, stroke, permanent spinal cord ischemia, or need for dialysis or tracheostomy included the presentation with hemodynamic instability (P < .001) and treatment with conventional open repair (P = .02). CONCLUSION: An endovascular approach for the ruptured (non-traumatic) descending thoracic aorta reduces early morbidity, mortality, and duration of hospitalization, while providing equivalent late outcomes even in an older group largely considered high risk for open repair. These data support a paradigm shift, with TEVAR emerging as the preferred therapy for all patients presenting with descending aortic rupture.

Long-term results of percutaneous management of malperfusion in acute type B aortic dissection: implications for thoracic aortic endovascular repair.

OBJECTIVE: Open repair for acute type B dissection with malperfusion is associated with significant morbidity. Thoracic aortic endovascular repair has been proposed as a less-invasive therapy for acute type B dissection with malperfusion. Benefits of thoracic aortic endovascular repair include the potential for false lumen thrombosis. Its risks include both early morbidity and mortality, and uncertain late results with potentially unstable landing zones. We present the first long-term analysis of an alternative endovascular approach consisting of percutaneous flap fenestration with true lumen and branch vessel stenting to restore end-organ perfusion. METHODS: Outcomes were analyzed for 69 patients presenting with acute type B dissection with malperfusion from 1997 to 2008. All patients were evaluated with angiography and treated with a combination of flap fenestration, true lumen, or branch vessel stenting where appropriate. RESULTS: Mean age was 57.3 years. Identified malperfused vascular beds included spinal cord (5), mesenteric (40), renal (51), and lower extremity (47). Major morbidity included dialysis need (11), stroke (3), paralysis (2), and 30-day mortality (n = 12, 17.4%). Mean Kaplan-Meier survival was 84.3 months. Although late mortality was associated with age (P < .0001), neither the type nor the number of malperfused vascular beds correlated with vital status at last follow-up (P > .4). Freedom from aortic rupture or open repair at 1, 5, and 8 years was 80.2%, 67.7%, and 54.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Presentation with acute type B dissection with malperfusion carries a significant risk for both early and late mortality. Percutaneous approaches allow for rapid restoration of end-organ perfusion with acceptable results. These long-term results can serve as comparative data by which to evaluate newer therapies for acute type B dissection with malperfusion, such as thoracic aortic endovascular repair.

Late outcomes of endovascular aortic repair for the infected thoracic aorta.

BACKGROUND: Untreated infectious thoracic aortic pathology (ITAP) has a dismal prognosis. Despite its high rates of morbidity in this setting, conventional open repair remains the gold standard therapy. Understanding the limitations of open repair, we describe outcomes for one of the largest series of ITAP treated with thoracic endovascular repair. METHODS: Of 170 patients undergoing thoracic endovascular repair (1993 to 2008), 20 presenting with ITAP were identified. Indications for intervention included aortobronchial (n = 10), aortoesophageal (n = 2), or aortocutaneous fistulae (n = 1), or mycotic aneurysms (n = 7). Underlying disease included fusiform aneurysm (n = 1), saccular aneurysm or pseudoaneurysm (n = 18), or dissection (n = 1). Four patients had ITAP from infected grafts. Follow-up was 100% complete (mean, 28.6 months). RESULTS: Median age was 73 years. A history of immunosuppression was present in 4; concurrent malignancy was present in 5. Arch repair was needed in 8; total descending, in 6. Three patients underwent hybrid thoracic endovascular repair or debranching procedures. Causes of in-hospital mortality (n = 3; 15.0%) included refractory hypoxemia (n = 1) and sepsis from tracheoesophageal fistula (n = 1) or pneumonia (n = 1). Dialysis was needed in 2; none sustained postoperative stroke or paraplegia. Mean Kaplan-Meier survival was 39.0 months. Late mortality was seen in 13 patients, with 3 attributed to recurrent ITAP. There was a trend for recurrence of ITAP when thoracic endovascular repair was originally performed in an infected graft (p = 0.08). At last imaging follow-up, 14 patients had a healed aorta. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with thoracic endovascular repair for ITAP can be accomplished with acceptable results. Late mortality is frequently related to underlying comorbidities, rather than complications from the aortic disease itself, suggesting that thoracic endovascular repair is an appropriate palliative therapeutic option in this high-risk cohort.

Cirrhotic patients with a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt undergoing major extrahepatic surgery.

BACKGROUND: A transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) can potentially reduce the risk of perioperative complications in cirrhotic patients undergoing surgery but experience is limited. The aim of our study was to assess the clinical outcomes in consecutive cirrhotic patients with a patent TIPS undergoing major extrahepatic surgery. METHODS: Between July 1992 and January 2007, 25 cirrhotic patients with a patent TIPS underwent abdominal or cardiothoracic surgery at a single center. Preoperative laboratory and clinical features and postoperative outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS: Mean subject age was 49+/-12 years. The TIPS was placed at a median of 20 days before surgery (range, 1 to 2338 d). In 19 patients, the TIPS had been previously placed for management of refractory ascites or bleeding varices whereas in 6 patients, the TIPS was specifically placed for portal decompression before planned surgery. The mean hepatic venous pressure gradient was significantly reduced from 19.6+/-5.5 to 8.7+/-2.9 mm Hg post-TIPS (P<0.001). The mean preoperative Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 15+/-7.6 and Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores were A (8%), B (64%), and C (28%). Nineteen abdominal and 6 cardiothoracic surgeries were performed under emergent (32%) or urgent (24%) circumstances. Postoperatively, severe ascites developed in 29% and encephalopathy in 17%. The median postoperative intensive care unit and hospital stay were 1 day (range, 0 to 26 d) and 7 days (0 to 32 d), respectively. During a median follow-up of 33 months, actuarial 1-year patient survival was 74%. The 3 patients (12%) who died during their hospitalization all had MELD scores > or = 25 and required emergency surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Portal decompression via TIPS may allow selected cirrhotic patients to safely undergo major surgery with an acceptable rate of short-term morbidity and mortality.