Article

Stent-graft versus open-surgical repair of the thoracic aorta: Mid-term results

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery and the Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
Journal of Vascular Surgery (Impact Factor: 2.98). 01/2007; 44(6):1188-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2006.08.005
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Pivotal and comparative trial data are emerging for stent graft (SG) vs open repair of the thoracic aorta. We reviewed procedure-related perioperative morbidity, mortality, and mid-term outcomes in a contemporary series of patients treated with SG of the thoracic aorta. The data were compared with those of a patient cohort concurrently treated with open surgical repair confined to the descending aorta.
A review of patients undergoing SG procedures and open surgery of the thoracic aorta from January 1, 1996, to November 30, 2005, was performed from a prospectively compiled database. Study end points included perioperative complications, late survival, freedom from reinterventions, and graft-related complications. Multivariate methods were used to assess variables potentially associated with study end points; late outcomes were compared with actuarial methods.
In 105 patients (mean age, 70 years; 66 male [62.9%]) SG repairs were done for 68 degenerative aneurysms (64.7%), 12 penetrating ulcers (11.4%), 15 pseudoaneurysms (14.3%), 9 traumatic tears (8.6%), and 1 acute dissection (0.9%). Mean follow-up was 22 months (range, 0 to 101 months). Eighty-nine (84.8%) SG patients were asymptomatic at presentation and underwent elective repair, whereas 16 (15.2%) presented with acute conditions and underwent urgent repair. Perioperative mortality was 7.6% (8/105), and actuarial survival at 48 months was 54% +/- 7%. The perioperative mortality rate among SG patients treated for degenerative pathology was 10.4% (8/77). Seven (6.7%) of 105 patients experienced spinal cord ischemic complications, including 2 patients with transient paraparesis that resolved by the time of discharge. Reinterventions were performed in 10.5% of patients (11/105), with freedom from reintervention approaching 81% by 48 months. Over the same interval, 93 patients were treated with open-surgical repair for descending thoracic aneurysm (anastomosis cephalad to the celiac axis). Perioperative mortality in the open cohort was 15.1% (14/93; P = .09 vs SG repair), and the 48-month actuarial survival was 64% +/- 6%. The incidence of spinal cord ischemic complications was 8.6% (8/93), including 4 patients with transient paraparesis (P = .44 vs SG repair). Nine patients (9.7%) required surgical reintervention during the follow-up period, with 48-month freedom from reintervention approaching 79% (P = .73 vs SG repair).
Operative mortality was halved with SG, with similar late survival for both cohorts. Reinterventions were required at a nearly identical rate for open repair and SG, and both groups experienced similar rates of spinal cord ischemic complications.

0 Followers
 · 
81 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The immediate death rate for aortic rupture caused by pointed and sharp-edged instruments is very high; however, delayed aortic rupture following the trauma is rarely reported. A patient who had an upper abdominal stab wound was sent to our hospital, and an emergency exploratory laparotomy was performed. No traumatic aortic rupture was found at that time. However, on the fifth day after surgery, aortic rupture occurred, and a large retroperitoneal hematoma was formed. The patient eventually died. Aortic rupture was confirmed by a second emergency exploratory laparotomy and the autopsy. The information from exploratory laparotomies, post-operative observations and treatments, medical imaging reports, and reasons for delayed aortic rupture, as well as the underlying pathophysiological processes, are discussed in this case report.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Thoracoabdominal aneurysms account for roughly 3% of identified aneurysms annually in the United States. Advancements in endovascular techniques and devices have broadened their application to these complex surgical problems. This paper will focus on the current state of endovascular thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair, including specific considerations in patient selection, operative planning, and perioperative complications. Both total endovascular and hybrid options will be considered.
    Vascular Health and Risk Management 01/2014; 10:493-505. DOI:10.2147/VHRM.S46452
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: For descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs), it is generally considered that thoracic endovascular aortic repairs (TEVARs) reduce operative morbidity and mortality compared with open surgical repair. However, long-term differences in survival of patients have not been demonstrated, and an increased need for aortic reintervention has been observed. Many assume that TEVAR becomes less cost-effective through time because of higher rates of reintervention and surveillance imaging. This study investigated midterm outcomes and hospital costs of TEVAR compared with open TAA repair. This was a retrospective, single-institution review of elective TAA repairs between 2005 and 2012. Patient demographics, operative outcomes, reintervention rates, and hospital costs were assessed. The literature was also reviewed to determine commonly observed complication and reintervention rates for TEVAR and open repair. Monte Carlo simulation was used to model and to forecast hospital costs for TEVAR and open TAA repair up to 3 years after intervention. Our cohort consisted of 131 TEVARs and 27 open repairs. TEVAR patients were significantly older (67.2 vs 58.7 years old; P = .02) and trended toward a more severe comorbidity profile. Operative mortality for TEVAR and open repair was 5.3% and 3.7%, respectively (P = 1.0). There was a trend toward more complications in the TEVAR group, although not statistically significant (all P > .05). In-hospital costs were significantly greater in the TEVAR group ($52,008 vs $37,172; P = .001). However, cost modeling by use of reported complication and reintervention rates from the literature overlaid with our cost data produced a higher cost for the open group in-hospital ($55,109 vs $48,006) and at 3 years ($58,426 vs $52,825). Interestingly, TEVAR hospital costs, not reintervention rates, were the most significant driver of cost in the TEVAR group. Our institutional data showed a trend toward lower mortality and complication rates with open TAA repair, with significantly lower costs within this cohort compared with TEVAR. These findings were likely, at least in part, to be due to the milder comorbidity profile of these patients. In contrast, cost modeling by Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated lower costs with TEVAR compared with open repair at all time points up to 3 years after intervention. Our institutional data show that with appropriate selection of patients, open repair can be performed safely with low complication rates comparable to those of TEVAR. The cost model argues that despite the costs associated with more frequent surveillance imaging and reinterventions, TEVAR remains the more cost-effective option even years after TAA repair. Copyright © 2014 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Journal of Vascular Surgery 10/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2014.09.009 · 2.98 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
0 Downloads
Available from
May 2, 2015