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: 3.02). 01/2007; 44(6):1188-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2006.08.005
Source: PubMed


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.

Download full-text


Available from: Thomas Chung, May 02, 2015
  • Source
    • "Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has rapidly become an accepted treatment option for numerous aortic pathologies [1–4]. An important requirement for successful endografting is confirming the health of the aorta in the landing zone where the graft is deployed. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The management of the left subclavian artery when coverage is necessary during thoracic aorta endografting remains a matter of debate. A retrospective analysis of a single-centre experience with thoracic endovascular aorta repair (TEVAR) was performed. Between April 2004 and October 2012, 125 cases of TEVAR were performed. The analysis focused on patients who required coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA). We analysed mortality and morbidity with special attention to the rates of cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) and spinal cord ischaemia (SCI) in the early and midterm. Of the 125 patients, 53 (42 %, group A) required an intentional coverage of the LSA to obtain an adequate proximal seal for the endograft; the remaining patients constituted group B. None of the patients in group A had protective LSA revascularisation prior to TEVAR. The primary technical success rate was 79.2 vs. 90.3 % (group A vs. group B, p = 0.08), and the primary clinical success rate was 77.4 vs. 82 % (group A vs. group B, p = 0.53). The 30-day mortality rate was 11.3 vs. 11.1 % (group A vs. group B, p = 0.97). The 30-day morbidity was 7.5 vs. 13.9 % (group A vs. group B, p = 0.4). CVA occurred in 1.9 % of group A patients, compared to 1.4 % of patients from group B (p = 0.82). The SCI incidence rate was 0 vs. 1.4 % (p = 0.39). The mean follow-up of group A was 24.1 months (range 2-64.6 months, SD = 19). Additionally, the 1-year estimated survival was 85.5 %, and the 3-year estimated survival was 78 %. There were no midterm CVAs; one event of SCI occurred in the seventh post-operative month in group A. Our analysis, although retrospective and based on one institution experience, shows a realistic population of TEVAR patients. We prove that TEVAR with coverage of LSA origin can be accomplished with minimal neurological morbidity in this patient population. The study shows that LSA revascularisation is not mandatory before endograft deployment, especially in emergency settings. We also prove that although zone 2 TEVAR extends the proximal landing zone, it does not prevent type IA endoleaks from appearing. A multicentre randomised control trial with higher number of patients is necessary for proper, robust conclusion to be established.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2014 · Langenbeck s Archives of Surgery
  • Source
    • "Mixed (Gore TAG, Talent, Vanguard, Excluder extension cuffs) Rousseau et al., 2005 (70) 64 Trauma Historic Europe 1981–2003 Mixed (Talent, Thoracic Excluder, Vanguard) Stampfl et al., 2006 (71) 10 Trauma Historic Europe 1993–2004 Mixed (Talent or Gore) Stone et al., 2006/Conrad et al., 2008 (72) (76) "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) reduces death and morbidity compared with open surgical repair for descending thoracic aortic disease. Background The role of TEVAR versus open surgery remains unclear. Metaregression can be used to maximally inform adoption of new technologies by utilizing evidence from existing trials. Methods Data from comparative studies of TEVAR versus open repair of the descending aorta were combined through meta-analysis. Metaregression was performed to account for baseline risk factor imbalances, study design, and thoracic pathology. Due to significant heterogeneity, registry data were analyzed separately from comparative studies. Results Forty-two nonrandomized studies involving 5,888 patients were included (38 comparative studies, 4 registries). Patient characteristics were balanced except for age, as TEVAR patients were usually older than open surgery patients (p = 0.001). Registry data suggested overall perioperative complications were reduced. In comparative studies, all-cause mortality at 30 days (odds ratio [OR]: 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33 to 0.59) and paraplegia (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.63) were reduced for TEVAR versus open surgery. In addition, cardiac complications, transfusions, reoperation for bleeding, renal dysfunction, pneumonia, and length of stay were reduced. There was no significant difference in stroke, myocardial infarction, aortic reintervention, and mortality beyond 1 year. Metaregression to adjust for age imbalance, study design, and pathology did not materially change the results. Conclusions Current data from nonrandomized studies suggest that TEVAR may reduce early death, paraplegia, renal insufficiency, transfusions, reoperation for bleeding, cardiac complications, pneumonia, and length of stay compared with open surgery. Sustained benefits on survival have not been proven.
    Full-text · Article · Mar 2010 · Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Von März 1999 bis August 2002 wurden 15 Patienten notfallmäßig aufgrund einer traumatischen Ruptur der thorakalen Aorta Loco Typico mit einer endovaskulär eingebrachten Stentprothese versorgt. In dieser Arbeit wurden die eingesetzten Endoprothesen im Verlauf mittels Multidetektor Computertomografie untersucht und vermessen. Der mittlere Beobachtungszeitraum lag bei 410 Tagen. Im Median lagen 3 computertomographische Untersuchungen pro Patient vor. Unser besonderes Interesse galt dabei den Veränderungen der Stents im Bereich der ehemaligen Rupturstelle (Messbereich A). Die erhobenen Daten wurden verglichen mit Messergebnissen vom gestenteten aber nicht verletzten Gefäßabschnitt (Messbereich B) und vom nicht gestenteten und nicht verletzten Gefäßabschnitt (Messbereich C). Wir konnten zeigen, dass die Tendenz zur Dilatation eines Gefäßabschnittes in Zusammenhang mit der vorangegangenen Verletzung und der endovaskulären Stenttherapie steht. Ursächlich für die unterschiedliche Ausdehnungstendenz der Aorta könnten die Expansionskraft der Endoprothese sowie die verminderte Resistance der Aorta im geschädigten Areal sein. Trotz der teilweise erheblichen Konfigurationsänderungen der einzelnen Prothesen wurde bei unseren Patienten bisher keine klinische Komplikation durch die Prothesen selbst beobachtet. Eine weitere Nachbeobachtung der Patienten mit regelmäßigen Kontrollen der Prothesen muss auf dem Boden dieser Daten weiterhin dringend empfohlen werden. Nur so können mögliche sich ergebende Komplikationen zeitnah diagnostiziert und angegangen werden.
    Preview · Article ·
Show more