Mid-Term Survival after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair by Indication in the Medicare Population.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is indicated for treatment of aneurysms, dissections, and traumatic injury. We describe mid-term mortality and reintervention rates in Medicare beneficiaries undergoing TEVAR. STUDY DESIGN: Patients who underwent TEVAR between 2006 and 2014 were identified by CPT codes in a 20% Medicare sample. Indication for aortic repair (aneurysm, dissection, trauma) was ascertained via ICD-9 codes. Follow-up was evaluated until 2015. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression were used to compare mortality, with reintervention and mortality rates expressed as a composite outcome in a hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (hazard ratio [HR] 95% CI). RESULTS: There were 3,095 patients who underwent TEVAR during the study period: 1,465 (47%) for aneurysm, 1,448 (47%) for dissection, and 182 (5.9%) for trauma. Mean patient age was 74.4 years, and 44.5% were female. Median follow-up was 2.7 years. The overall 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year, and 8-year survival rates were 93%, 78%, 49%, and 33%, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was highest in traumatic indications, but overall mortality was highest in patients undergoing TEVAR for aneurysm. Freedom from combined reintervention and mortality at 30 days, 1 year, 5 years, and 8 years was 89%, 73%, 43%, and 29%, respectively. Reintervention was highest in patients undergoing TEVAR for dissection (12.8%), followed by aneurysm (10.0%) and trauma (5.5%). Advanced age (HR 1.03 per year, 95% CI 1.02-1.03), congestive heart failure (CHF) (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.33-1.65), dementia (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.14-1.28), and rupture (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.24-1.54) were associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Midterm survival is lower in patients who undergo TEVAR for dissection and aneurysm compared with trauma. Aneurysmal disease, advanced age, CHF, dementia, and aortic rupture are associated with mortality and reintervention in TEVAR.

A National Analysis of Traumatic Thoracic Aortic Repair: Does Insurance Status Matter?

BACKGROUND: Traumatic thoracic aortic injuries (TAIs) carry a substantial mortality. Our study aim was to evaluate the impact of insurance status on outcomes in severely injured trauma patients after either thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or open repair using the National Trauma Data Bank Research Data Set (NTDB-RDS). METHODS: The NTDB-RDS was reviewed for outcomes in severely injured patients and TAI repair method (TEVAR vs open). Patients were divided into insured (Medicaid, Medicare, private insurance) and uninsured (self-pay) status groups. Patients were further divided by injury severity score (ISS) of 15-24 and ≥25 to adjust for injury burden. Demographic characteristics and outcome measures were compared. Chi-square, t-test, and analysis of variance were used with significance defined as P < .05. RESULTS: Within the NTDB-RDS, a review of nearly 1 million patients led to 241 that underwent repair for TAI and had insurance status and repair type documented. 88.8% (214/241) of patients were insured, while 11.2% (27/241) of patients were uninsured. There were no significant differences in repair type based on insurance status. For open repair with an ISS ≥25, mortality was significantly higher in the uninsured group compared with insured (55.5% vs 21.9%, P = .001). CONCLUSION: For open repair in patients with TAI and high injury burden, uninsured status was associated with a significant increase in mortality rate compared with insured patients. Future studies should investigate the effect of insurance type on TAI outcomes and causes of higher mortality in uninsured patients.

Is endovascular repair the first choice for all blunt aortic injury? A real-world assessment.

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) represents an infrequently encountered but lethal traumatic injury. Minimal aortic injuries are appropriately treated by medical management, while more severe injuries require endovascular or open repair. Rapidly evolving endovascular technology has largely supplanted open repair as first line operative intervention, however, the complexity of the severely injured blunt trauma patient can complicate management decisions. The development and implementation of an optimal consensus grading system and treatment algorithm for the management of BTAI is necessary and will require multi-institutional study.

Derivation and validation of thoracic sarcopenia assessment in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Sarcopenia, as assessed by computed tomography (CT)-based measurements of muscle mass, is an objective and patient-specific indicator of frailty, which is an important predictor of operative morbidity and mortality. Studies to date have primarily focused on psoas-defined sarcopenia, which may not be valid among patients with thoracic aortic disease. Using psoas sarcopenia as the reference for sarcopenia, the purpose of this study was to create and to validate a new thoracic-level method of measuring sarcopenia as a novel method to assess frailty among patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair for thoracic aortic dissection, aneurysm, or injury using a conformable thoracic graft were reviewed. Patients with preoperative abdominal and thoracic CT imaging were included. Thoracic muscle mass was measured on axial images at the T12 level using our newly established standardized computer-assisted protocol. Psoas sarcopenia was measured at the L3 level using standard methods. Optimal sex-specific diagnostic T12 measurements were determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. A subset of scans were reviewed in duplicate by two trained observers and intraobserver and interobserver reliability tested by intraclass correlation coefficient. Agreement between T12 and L3 sarcopenia was tested by Cohen κ (scale, 0-1). RESULTS: There were 147 patients included for analysis, including 34 dissection, 80 trauma, and 33 aneurysm patients. ROC curve analysis yielded sarcopenic cutoff values of 106.00 cm2/m2 for women and 110.00 cm2/m2 for men at the T12 level. Based on ROC curve analysis, overall accuracy of T12 measurements was high (area under ROC curve, 0.91 for men and 0.90 for women). Quantitative interobserver and intraobserver reliability yielded excellent intraclass correlation coefficient values (>0.95). Qualitative interobserver reliability yielded nearly perfect Cohen κ values (>0.85). Qualitative intraobserver reliability of calculating sarcopenia at both the T12 and L3 levels was fair for both readers (0.361 and 0.288). There was additionally a general correlation between changes in muscle area at L3 with changes at T12 during 48 months. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic sarcopenia can be readily and reliably reproduced from CT-derived measurement of T12-level muscle area. This approach may be used as an alternative method to objectively define sarcopenia in patients without abdominal CT imaging. Future studies to assess the predictability of thoracic vs abdominal sarcopenia on postoperative outcomes will enhance the utility of these tools.

To reduce routine computed tomographic angiography for thoracic aortic injury assessment in level II blunt trauma patients using three mediastinal signs on the initial chest radiograph: a preliminary report.

PURPOSE: CTA is routinely ordered on level II blunt thoraco-abdominally injured patients for assessment of injury to the thoracic aorta. The vast majority of such assessments are negative. The question being asked is, Does the accurate interpretation of the three mediastinal signs permit reliable determination of which patients need CTA for aortic assessment? The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the role of three specifically selected mediastinal anatomic signs on the initial supine chest radiograph (CXR) of adult level II blunt thoraco-abdominally injured patients for the presence or absence of a mediastinal hematoma. The presence of a mediastinal hematoma is typically used as an indicator for computed tomographic angiography (CTA). The three mediastinal signs are the right para-tracheal stripe (RPTS), left para-spinal line (LPSL), and the left apical extra-pleural area (LAPA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patient triage designation (level II trauma) was made by the attending physician at the time of admission. The initial CXR image and the CTA report of the 197 adult blunt level II thoraco-abdominally injured patients obtained on the day of admission were compared. The CXR of each of the 197 patients was independently assessed by each of four observers specifically for the status of the three mediastinal signs. Each observer was blinded to the CTA report until after the status of the three mediastinal sign evaluation had been determined. Two or three of the mediastinal signs being positive were required to determine that the CXR was positive for a mediastinal hematoma. RESULTS: Two or three of the selected mediastinal signs were normal in 192 (97.5%) patients. None of these patients had either a mediastinal hematoma or a major aortic injury on CTA. In each of the remaining five (2.5%) patients, two or three of the mediastinal signs were abnormal. Each of these patients had a mediastinal hematoma and a major thoracic aortic injury on CTA. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study suggests that the accurate interpretation of the three specifically selected mediastinal signs on the initial supine CXR of adult level II blunt thoraco-abdominally injured patients could reduce the need for routine CTA for thoracic aortic injury assessment, and requires verification by an additional study.

Treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury in Germany-Assessment of the TraumaRegister DGU®.

PURPOSE: Using the data delivered by the German Trauma Register DGU® from 2002 till 2013, the value of different therapies of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) in Germany was analyzed. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of patients suffering from BTAI were retrospectively analyzed with focus on the different treatment modalities for grade I-IV injuries. RESULTS: 821 patients suffering from BTAI were identified: 51.6% (424) grade I injury, 35.4% (291) grade II or III injury and 12.9% (106) grade IV injury (77.5% men [44.94 ± 20.6 years]). The main patterns of injury were high- speed accidents and falls (78.0% [n = 640], 21.8% [n = 171] respectively). Significant differences between grade I and grade II/III as well as IV injuries could be assessed for the incidence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, a Glasgow Coma Scale score below 8 and a systolic blood pressure below 90 mmHg (p-value: <0.001). In the primary admission subgroup, 44.1% (197/447) of the patients received best medical treatment, 55.9% received surgical intervention (250/447): Thereof 37.2% (93/250) received open surgery and 62.8% (147/250) had been treated by endovascular means. Significantly lower 24-h- and in-hospital-mortality rates were encountered after endovascular treatment for all gradings of BTAI (p-value: <0.001). Yet this subgroup of patients showed the lowest incidence of further severe injuries and cardiac arrest. CONCLUSION: Endovascular therapy became the treatment of choice for BTAI in Germany. Patients who have been treated by surgical means showed the highest survival rate, especially endovascular therapy showed a favorable low mortality rate.

Functional Assessment and Evaluation of Outcome After Endovascular Therapy With Coverage of the Left Subclavian Artery in Case of Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury.

BACKGROUND: Patients suffering blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) can be treated by use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). In this setting, the coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA) is frequently necessary. Nevertheless, the functionality of the upper left extremity after TEVAR had been rarely analyzed. Thus, this study intends to underline the safety of TEVAR as well as to determine the functionality of the left arm after coverage of the LSA. METHODS: All patients suffering from BTAI treated by endovascular means in 3 centers (Aachen [Germany], Maastricht [Netherlands], and Innsbruck [Austria]) between 1996 and 2009 were retrospectively analyzed. The safety of the procedure had been assessed by the morbidity and mortality rate. The mid-term functional status of the upper left extremity was evaluated by using the DASH score (disabilities of the arm shoulder and hand). RESULTS: Forty-six patients (40 male, 6 female), mean age 39.4 ± 16.9 years suffered from BTAI caused by traffic accident (n = 31 [67.39%]), by skiing injury (n = 8 [17.39%]), and by fall (n = 7 [15.21%]). All patients underwent TEVAR, the technical success rate was 100%; 1 carotid-carotid subclavian bypass implantation was necessary. LSA coverage was performed in 76% (35/46) of the cases. Total complication rate was 17.3% (8/46); the endoleak rate was 8.6% (4/46) (2 × Ib, 1 × IIa, 1 × IV). Further complications were bypass and endograft occlusion. The postoperative mortality rate was 6% (3/46), the DASH score was completed in 65% (30/46). The study population reached a mean value of 17 ± 20, which is comparable to a nonharmed reference group (10.10 ± 14.68). A significant correlation between the DASH score and patients age could be demonstrated (2-sided P value: 0.0213). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular therapy of BTAI revealed a good primary success rate. An adequate mid-term functional status of the upper left extremity could be assessed in comparison to a nonharmed reference group.

The effect of loss to follow-up on treatment of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury.

OBJECTIVE: Loss to follow-up (LTFU) can be a major difficulty for any clinical research study. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the extent of LTFU and its potential effect in studies of adult trauma patients with blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAIs). METHODS: Studies comparing management of BTAIs were systematically reviewed. Duplicate independent review was used for study selection, data abstraction, and critical appraisals. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were included for synthesis, of which 94.1% applied a retrospective cohort design to prospective institutional databases. The mean LTFU at 1 year was 26.5% ± 31.6% for endovascular repair and 20.6% ± 34.2% for open repair groups. Not having a surgical/interventional specialist as a first or senior author was associated with a 39.7% higher LTFU at 1 year (P = .002). Studies with a higher risk of bias, later publication year, or North American origin were associated with a significantly higher risk for LTFU at 1 year (P ≤ .001). Nearly half of included studies assessed in-hospital outcomes exclusively. Only 38.2% explicitly reported LTFU data. Eight studies explicitly described the method of dealing with LTFU: eight used survival analysis and one used a national Social Security Death Index. Sensitivity analyses using plausible worst-case LTFU scenarios resulted in 14% to 17% of studies changing direction of effect. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant LTFU in trauma studies comparing operative methods for BTAIs. LTFU is generally handled and reported suboptimally, and sensitivity analyses suggest that study results are sensitive to differential LTFU. This has implications for the evidence-based choice of the operative method. Some protective factors that may aid in reducing LTFU were identified, one of which was involvement of a surgical or interventional specialist as a key author.

Assessment of stent edge dissections by fractional flow reserve.

BACKGROUNDS: Edge dissections after intervention have been studied with imaging techniques, however, functional assessment has not been studied yet. We investigated the relationship between fractional flow reserve (FFR) and the angiographic type of stent edge dissections and tried to assess the use of FFR-guided management for edge dissection. METHODS: 51 edge dissections assessed by FFR were included in this prospective observational study. FFR was measured for each type of edge dissection and compared with quantitative coronary angiographic findings. Clinical outcomes were evaluated based on FFR measurements. RESULTS: Edge dissections were classified as type A (47.1%; 24/51), type B (41.2%; 21/51), type C (2.0%; 1/51) and type D (9.8%; 5/51). Mean FFR in type A dissection was 0.87 ± 0.09, in type B 0.86 ± 0.07, in type C 0.72 and in type D 0.57 ± 0.08. All type C and D dissections (6/51) had FFR ≤ 0.8 and were treated with additional stents. Among the 45 type A and B dissections, 8 had a FFR ≤ 0.8 (17.8%), and 50% received additional stenting. All dissections with FFR >0.8 were left untreated except one long dissection case. There was no death, myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization during hospitalization or the follow-up period (median 152 days; IQR 42-352 days). CONCLUSIONS: FFR correlates well with an angiographic type of edge dissection. Angiographic findings are sufficient for deciding the treatment of severe dissections such as types C and D, while FFR-guided management may be safe and effective for mild edge dissections such as types A and B.

A new aortic injury score predicts early rupture more accurately than clinical assessment.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal timing for repair of a high-grade blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is uncertain. Delayed repair is common and associated with improved outcomes, but some lesions may rupture during observation. To determine optimal patient selection for appropriate management, we developed a pilot clinical risk score to evaluate aortic stability and predict rupture. METHODS: Patients presenting in stable condition with Society for Vascular Surgery grade III or IV BTAI diagnosed on computed tomography (CT) were retrospectively reviewed. To determine clinical and radiographic factors associated with aortic rupture, patients progressing to aortic rupture (defined by contrast extravasation on CT or on operative or autopsy findings) were compared with those who had no intervention ≤48 hours of admission. A model targeting 100% sensitivity for rupture was generated and internally validated by bootstrap analysis. Clinical utility was tested by comparison with clinical assessment by surgeons experienced in BTAI management who were provided with CT images and clinical data but were blinded to outcome. RESULTS: The derivation cohort included 18 patients whose aorta ruptured and 31 with stable BTAI. There was no difference in age, gender, injury mechanism, nonchest injury severity, blood pressure, or Glasgow Coma Scale on admission between patient groups. As dichotomous factors, admission lactate >4 mM, posterior mediastinal hematoma >10 mm, and lesion/normal aortic diameter ratio >1.4 on the admission CT were independently associated with aortic rupture. The model had an area under the receiver operator curve of .97, and in the presence of any two factors, was 100% sensitive and 84% specific for predicting aortic rupture. No aortic lesions ruptured in patients with fewer than two factors. In contrast, clinical assessment had lower accuracy (65% vs 90% total accuracy, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: This novel risk score can be applied on admission using clinically relevant factors that incorporate patient physiology, size of the aortic lesion, and extent of the mediastinal hematoma. The model reliably identifies and distinguishes patients with high-grade BTAI who are at risk for early rupture from those with stable lesions. Although preliminary, because it is more accurate than clinical assessment alone, the score may improve patient selection for emergency or delayed intervention.

Outcomes of endovascular repair for patients with blunt traumatic aortic injury.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic aortic injury (TAI) remains a leading cause of death after blunt force. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been widely adopted as an alternative to open repair for the treatment of TAI. Although significant short-term benefits have been demonstrated for patients undergoing TEVAR, longer-term follow-up data are lacking. METHODS: Trauma registry data were analyzed. Follow-up data were gathered from a combination of medical records, imaging, telephone interviews, and Social Security Death Index. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, stroke, and paraplegia. Secondary outcomes included device-related adverse events (rupture, migration, or endoleak), secondary procedures, open conversion, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Between September 2005 and July 2012, 82 consecutive patients (57 males, mean [SD] age, 39.5 [20] years; mean [SD] Injury Severity Score [ISS], 34 [9.5]) underwent TEVAR for TAI. A total of 87 devices were implanted: TAG (n = 36), CTAG (n = 12) (WL Gore, Flagstaff, AZ); Talent (n = 29), Valiant (n = 5) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA); TX2 (n = 2) (Cook, Bloomington, IN); and other (n = 3). Left subclavian artery coverage was required in 32 patients (39%). Technical success rate was 100%. Rates of in-hospital mortality, stroke, and paraplegia were 5.0%, 2.4%, and 0%, respectively.Median follow-up time was 2.3 years (range, 0-7 years). The availability of follow-up data was as follows: Social Security Death Index (100%), telephone interview (68%), clinic visit (61%), and imaging (82%). The incidence of device-related adverse events was 2.4%. There were four secondary procedures: two patients underwent a carotid-subclavian bypass, and two had an open conversion for device-related complications. Survival was 95% at 30 days, 88% at 1 year, 87% at 2 years, and 82% at 5 years. CONCLUSION: At midterm follow-up, TEVAR is an effective and durable option for the treatment of TAI in properly selected patients. Device-related adverse events, secondary procedures, and open conversion are rare. Follow-up remains a challenge. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level V.

Evolution of the incidence, management, and mortality of blunt thoracic aortic injury: a population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the last decade, CT angiography has become the dominant diagnostic modality for blunt aortic injury and endovascular repair has become the leading aortic repair strategy. The impact of these shifts on incidence, aortic repair rate, and mortality remains poorly characterized. Our objective was to perform a population-based analysis of secular trends in the incidence, management, and in-hospital mortality of blunt thoracic aortic injury. STUDY DESIGN: From the population-based Canadian National Trauma Registry, we identified a cohort of all adults hospitalized between April 2002 and March 2010 with a diagnosis of thoracic aortic injury after blunt trauma. Trends over time in the incidence of hospitalization, frequency and type of aortic repair, as well as risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality, were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 487 incident cases of blunt thoracic aortic injury were identified. During the study period, the incidence of hospitalization for blunt thoracic aortic injury remained stable (trend p = 0.16). Although the proportion of repairs undertaken via an endovascular approach increased (11% to 78% of repairs; trend p < 0.001), the frequency of any repair (endovascular or open) declined (55% to 36%; trend p = 0.003). Across all patients, when controlling for age, sex, mechanism of injury, and presence of severe extrathoracic injuries, mortality remained unchanged during the study period (odds ratio = 0.92 per 1 year; 95% CI, 0.82-1.03). However, in patients managed nonoperatively, risk-adjusted mortality decreased over time (odds ratio = 0.85 per 1 year; 95% CI, 0.80-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The increasing frequency of patients managed nonoperatively and decreasing risk-adjusted mortality in these patients suggests that defining the evolving role of nonoperative management should be a major focus of research in the endovascular era.

MRI assessment of thoracic stent grafts after emergency implantation in multi trauma patients: a feasibility study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of MRI for static and dynamic assessment of the deployment of thoracic aortic stent grafts after emergency implantation in trauma patients. METHODS: Twenty patients initially presenting with a rupture of the thoracic aorta were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The deployment of the implanted stent graft was assessed by CTA and MRI, comprising the assessment of the aortic arch with and without contrast agent, and the assessment of the motion of the stent graft over the cardiac cycle. RESULTS: The stent graft geometry and motion over the cardiac cycle were assessable by MRI in all patients. Flow-mediated signal variations in areas of flow acceleration could be well visualised. No statistically significant differences in stent-graft diameters were observed between CT and MRI measurements. CONCLUSION: MRI appears to be a valuable tool for the assessment of thoracic stent grafts. It shows similar performance in the accurate assessment of stent-graft dimensions to the current gold standard CTA. Its capability of providing additional functional information and the lack of ionising radiation and nephrotoxic contrast agents may make MRI a valuable tool for monitoring patients after TEVAR.

Management of diseases of the descending thoracic aorta in the endovascular era: a Medicare population study.

OBJECTIVE: Prospective trials have shown improved perioperative outcomes with endovascular repair of thoracic aortic (TEVAR) pathologies compared with conventional surgery (OPEN). There are no long-term population data detailing the impact of TEVAR on practice patterns and results of treatment of descending thoracic aortic pathology (DTA), which are the goal of this study. METHODS: All procedures performed on the DTA captured in the Medicare database from 2004 to 2007 were identified by ICD-9 codes and stratified into OPEN and TEVAR cohorts. Outcomes included perioperative mortality (χ(2)) and 5-year actuarial survival. RESULTS: There were 11,166 patients identified (4838 [43%] TEVAR vs. 6328 [57%] OPEN) with 7247 (65%) nonruptured, degenerative thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAA), 2701 (24%) descending aortic dissections, 1033 (9%) thoracic aortic ruptures, and 185 (2%) traumatic aortic tears. The distribution of cases changed significantly during the study period (P < 0.0001) with an increase in TEVAR, decrease in OPEN, and increase in total cases over time (). The perioperative mortality was lower in the TEVAR group for the entire population (360 [7.4%] TEVAR vs. 1175 [18.5%] OPEN, P < 0.0001), and for the individual pathologies: TAA (182/3529 [5%] TEVAR vs. 451/3718 [12%] OPEN, P < 0.001), dissections (76/833 [9%] TEVAR vs. 399/1868 [21%] OPEN, P < 0.001) and ruptures (87/368 [24%] TEVAR vs. 298/665 [45%] OPEN, P < 0.0001). The Kaplan-Meier curve significantly favored TEVAR for the entire cohort because of the early mortality of the OPEN cohort but the curves converged by 5 years. The 5-year survival by indication was: entire population (53.4% TEVAR vs. 53.3% OPEN, P < 0.0001), TAA (55.8% TEVAR vs. 59.7% OPEN, P = 0.84), dissection (58.2% TEVAR vs. 50.6% OPEN, P < 0.0001), ruptures (23.3% TEVAR vs. 25.3% OPEN, P = 0.001), and trauma (62.9% TEVAR vs. 50.9% OPEN, P = 0.12). CONCLUSION: There has been a significant increase in the use of TEVAR for management of diseases of the DTA. TEVAR offers a significant perioperative survival advantage when compared with OPEN regardless of the indication for repair. However, in the Medicare population, the 5-year survival is similar between the 2 cohorts.

Thoracic aortic trauma: outcomes and hospital resource utilization after endovascular and open repair.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has evolved as a treatment option for the management of thoracic aortic trauma as an alternative to open thoracic aortic repair (OTAR). Population-level outcomes are not known and were evaluated. Secondary data analysis of the 2005-2006 Nationwide Inpatient Sample data was performed, and 1,561 patients with thoracic aortic injury (mean age 44.8 +/- 18.8 years; men 77.2%) were identified. Of these, 510 underwent emergent surgical intervention: 240 OTAR (47%) and 270 TEVAR (53%). Males were more likely to undergo any surgery (77.2% vs 22.8%; p = .03). Hospital mortality after OTAR was greater compared to TEVAR (14.61% vs 7.43%; p = .009). OTAR patients were more likely to have pulmonary complications (37.8% vs 21.65; p < .0001) but were less likely to have stroke (2.1% vs 5.8%; p = .03) compared to TEVAR patients. After adjustment, OTAR patients remained more likely to die compared to TEVAR patients (OR 11.5; 95% CI 4.0-33.2). Hospital length of stay and hospital cost were significantly greater for OTAR than for TEVAR. An increase in patients with thoracic aortic injury undergoing repair was found (23.0% vs 40.3%; p < .0002). In trauma, TEVAR was associated with decreased hospital mortality, hospital use, and pulmonary complications but increased rates of stroke. Further implementation of TEVAR for management of thoracic aortic trauma may improve future outcomes and reduce hospital resource use.

Risk factors for late mortality after endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to identify risk factors for late mortality after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of consecutive TEVAR was conducted. Medical record review, telephone contact, or query of the Social Security Death Index was used to determine 30-day and late survival. Late mortality was assessed with respect to patient characteristics at the time of the initial treatment, preoperative laboratory values, pathology, clinical presentation, and treatment adjuncts. Significant univariate predictors of death were entered into a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: From 1998 to 2009, 252 patients (149 men; mean age, 68 years) underwent TEVAR for degenerative thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA, n = 143), type B dissection (n = 62), mycotic aneurysm (n = 13), traumatic disruption (n = 12), penetrating ulcer or intramural hematoma (n = 10), anastomotic pseudoaneurysm (n = 4), or other pathology (n = 8). The 30-day mortality was 9.5%, with stroke or spinal cord injury in 5.6%. Mean follow-up was 22 +/- 22 months. Kaplan-Meier mean survival was 53 months. Predictors of late mortality by univariate analysis included age (P < .01), cardiac arrhythmia (P = .03), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = .05), aneurysm diameter (P < .01), rupture (P < .01), debranching (P = .02), leukocytosis (white blood cell count > 10.0 x 10(3)/microL; P < .01), albumin, (P < .01), and creatinine > 1.7 mg/dL (P = .01). Multivariate predictors of mortality included rupture (hazard ratio [HR], 3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-9.44; P = .03), debranching (HR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.09-4.24; P = .03), preoperative leukocytosis (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.39; P = .001), and aneurysm diameter (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P = .04). Subgroup analysis of patients undergoing TEVAR for asymptomatic, nonruptured TAA demonstrated that debranching (HR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.13-5.39; P = .02), White blood cell count (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01-1.40; P < .04), and aneurysm diameter (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05, P < .01) remain independently predictive of late mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative leukocytosis, aneurysm diameter, and concurrent debranching independently predict late mortality irrespective of clinical presentation and may assist in risk stratification.

Economic evaluation of open vs endovascular repair of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injuries.

OBJECTIVES: During the last decade, endovascular repair (EV) has replaced open surgical repair (OSR) as the preferred method of treatment of blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injuries (BTAIs) at many trauma centers. This has resulted in reductions in mortality, length of stay, and major complications, including paraplegia, with the added expense of the initial endograft, subsequent surveillance, and reinterventions. The purpose of this study was to conduct an economic evaluation comparing these two methods of repair. METHODS: We performed an economic comparison of EV and OSR for the treatment of BTAI using a decision tree analysis with transition points derived from our institution's experience and through a review of the literature. Over a 15-year period (1991-2006), 28 patients with BTAI were treated at our center (15 EV, 13 OSR). Costs were obtained from our hospital's case costing center, the Ontario Case Costing Initiative, Ontario's Drug Benefit Formulary, and Ontario's Schedule of Benefits for physician costs. Our center's results were then combined with those from the literature to arrive at an economic model. RESULTS: These combined results revealed that EV, when compared to OSR, resulted in decreased early mortality (7.2% vs 22.5%), decreased composite outcome of mortality and paraplegia (7.7% vs 27.6%) and decreased composite outcome of mortality and major complication (42.5% vs 69.8%). Patients undergoing EV also had shorter intensive care unit stays (12.2 vs 15.3 days), total hospital length of stays (22.5 vs 28.6 days), and ventilator days (8.0 vs 9.2 days). Additionally, patients undergoing EV had decreased total 1-year costs compared with OSR ($70,442 vs $72,833). CONCLUSIONS: EV repair of BTAIs offers a survival advantage as well as a reduction in major morbidity, including paraplegia, compared with OSR, and results in a reduction in costs at 1 year. As a result, from the cost-effectiveness point of view, EV is the DOMINANT therapy over OSR for these injuries.

Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta: predictors of 30-day mortality in patients on the New Zealand Thoracic Aortic Stent Database (NZ TAS).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate data in the New Zealand Thoracic Aortic Stent database to try and identify a scoring system that could predict 30-day mortality in patients undergoing stenting of the descending thoracic aorta (TEVAR). DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of the New Zealand thoracic aortic stent database between December 2001 and August 2007. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 30-day mortality of the 122 patients is 7.38% (n=9). Risk factors were recorded based on the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score. Glasgow aneurysm score was calculated and the pathology being treated analysed. Univariate analysis was carried out. RESULTS: The mortality of three pathology groups was compared. 30-day mortality was 2.04% (n=1) in the elective aneurysm group, 17.95% (n=7) in the complicated Stanford type B dissection group, and 0% (n=0) in the trauma group. Thirty-day mortality is significantly higher in the dissection group compared with the elective aneurysm (p=0.02) and trauma (p=0.03) groups. The most frequent risk factors in the dissection group of patients were peripheral vascular disease, smoking and hypertension. Although percentage mortality is higher with increasing GAS, the results are not statistically significant (p=0.34). No independent risk factors were identified from the STS risk score data. CONCLUSION: No specific risk score system seems to be able to predict mortality in TEVAR patients.

[Traumatic thoracic aorta rupture: preclinical assessment, diagnosis and treatment options]. / Traumatische thorakale Aortenruptur: Präklinische Beurteilung, Diagnostik und Therapieoptionen.

Traumatic aortic rupture is a life-threatening injury which is frequently associated with blunt thoracic trauma or found coincidentally in heavily traumatized patients. Depending on the degree of disruption of the damaged aortic wall, vascular injury is associated with a high primary mortality rate and a significant risk of secondary aortic rupture. Early clinical signs which may indicate a ruptured thoracic aorta are left sided thoracic pain, reduced ventilation, tachycardia and dyspnoe as well as hypotension in the lower extremities. The primary aim for emergency treatment is to maintain vital organ function and to hemodynamically stabilize the patient. Surgical treatment was previously performed by either direct aortic suture or segmental alloplastic graft interposition using the clamp and sew technique with or without extra-anatomic shunts or extracorporeal circulation. However, endovascular stent graft implantation has now become another treatment option for traumatic aortic rupture. According to the reported data and our own experience there is increasing evidence that endovascular aortic repair might become the treatment of choice for patients with traumatic aortic rupture, with the option of an early, less invasive intervention thus avoiding thoracotomy. Regular follow-up is necessary to detect possible stent graft migration or leakage which could require additional endovascular or open surgical re-interventions.

Endovascular repair in traumatic thoracic aortic injuries: comparison with open surgical repair.

PURPOSE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has emerged as an alternative to open surgical repair (OSR) of traumatic thoracic aortic injury (TTAI). Herein immediate and midterm outcomes of TEVAR are compared with those of OSR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Health records were used to identify patients with TTAI presenting between April 1995 and September 2006. Preoperative patient characteristics, intraoperative variables, procedural costs, and outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients were identified. Twenty-two died before treatment, 19 were treated conservatively, 36 received OSR, and 26 received TEVAR. In the OSR group, time from diagnosis to treatment was 8 hours, the 30-day mortality rate was 11.1%, and all deaths occurred intraoperatively. Thoracic nerve injury occurred in four patients (12.5%), pneumonia in 12 (37.5%), temporary renal failure in one (3%), paraparesis in three (9.4%), and paraplegia in five (15.6%). On follow-up (mean, 61 months), postthoracotomy pleural reaction was seen in three cases (9.4%). In the TEVAR group, time to treatment was 38 hours (P < .01) and the 30-day mortality rate was 7.4% with no intraoperative deaths. Pneumonia was seen in two cases (8.3%) and left arm ischemia was seen in two of 17 patients in whom the left subclavian artery was covered. On midterm follow-up (mean, 17 months), there were no graft failures or repeat aortic interventions. Costs of each procedure were initially comparable, but follow-up expenses with TEVAR were $1,284 (Canadian) greater per year. CONCLUSIONS: TEVAR of TTAI is associated with lower perioperative mortality and morbidity rates than OSR, with no significant graft-related complications on midterm follow-up. The study data support the continued use of TEVAR in this context.