Evaluation of EndoAnchor Aortic Wall Penetration After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-247
Author(s):  
Andrés Reyes Valdivia ◽  
Sara Busto Suárez ◽  
África Duque Santos ◽  
Ahmad Amer Zanabili Al-Sibbai ◽  
Claudio Gandarias Zúñiga ◽  
...  

Purpose: To analyze aortic wall penetration of Heli-FX EndoAnchors after use in seal zones in the aortic arch or descending thoracic aorta during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Materials and Methods: From May 2014 to May 2019, 25 patients (mean age 70.5±10 years; 16 women) were treated with TEVAR and adjunctive use of the Heli-FX device in 3 academic vascular surgery departments. Computed tomography scans were retrospectively reviewed to determine the location [arch or descending thoracic aorta (DTA)] of the EndoAnchors and the adequacy of aortic wall penetration, defined as adequate (≥2 mm), partial (<2 mm), or inadequate wall penetration (including loss). Endoleaks, reinterventions, and mortality were assessed. Results: A total of 161 EndoAnchors were deployed (median 7 per patient, range 4–9). Twenty-two EndoAnchors were place in the arch (zones 0–2) and 139 in the DTA (zones 3–5). A larger proportion of arch deployments (27%) had suboptimal penetration compared with the DTA (6.5%; p<0.005), resulting in a 91% adequate wall penetration rate for the series overall. Three EndoAnchors were lost (and only 1 retrieved) in 3 different patients, with no additional morbidity; thus, an overall deployment success rate of 88% was achieved. At a mean follow-up of 16.6±14 months, 4 patients required 5 (successful) reinterventions, including one for a type Ia endoleak treated with chimney TEVAR. One patient died 10 months after treatment due to endograft infection, without an opportunity for surgical correction. Conclusion: EndoAnchors have a higher risk of maldeployment in the arch, though this may be attributable to the small learning curve experience in this location. The best aortic wall penetration for this series was in the DTA, where EndoAnchors proved useful for distal endograft fixation during TEVAR.

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 346-353
Author(s):  
Yaojun Dun ◽  
Yi Shi ◽  
Hongwei Guo ◽  
Yanxiang Liu ◽  
Xiangyang Qian ◽  
...  

Abstract OBJECTIVES Our goal was to investigate the surgical strategy for type Ia endoleak after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) by reporting our experiences. METHODS From November 2012 to September 2019, a total of 23 patients received surgical management for type Ia endoleak after TEVAR. RESULTS The operations included total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique in 15 patients, direct closure of the endoleak in 2 patients, hybrid aortic arch repair in 4 patients, arch debranching with TEVAR in 1 patient and left common carotid artery to left subclavian artery bypass with TEVAR in 1 patient. Among 21 patients with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), the mean CPB and aortic cross-clamp times were 146.7 ± 42.2 and 81.0 ± 43.3 min, respectively. The selective cerebral perfusion time was 18.8 ± 8.2 min in 17 patients with hypothermic circulatory arrest. The in-hospital mortality was 8.7% (2/23). Type Ia endoleak was sealed successfully after surgery in 95.5% (21/22) of patients. The follow-up data were available for all 21 survivors. The median follow-up period was 18 months (range 1–84 months). During the follow-up period, a total of 8 patients died or had aortic events, including 5 deaths and 6 aortic events. CONCLUSIONS Different surgical strategies could be selected to treat patients with type Ia endoleak after TEVAR, with acceptable early and late outcomes.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Clelia Gervasi ◽  
Carlo Alberto De Pasqual ◽  
Jacopo Weindelmayer ◽  
Luca Mezzetto ◽  
Lorenzo Scrsone ◽  
...  

Abstract Bleeding from the thoracic aorta is potentially fatal in patients with advanced esophageal cancer (AEC). Esophageal malignancy is the third most common cause of aorto-esophageal fistula (AEF), after thoracic aortic aneurysm and ingestion of foreign body. The involvement of aortic wall often contraindicates chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) treatment, thus reducing life expectancy of these patients. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a well described mini-invasive technique that can be also applied for coverage of aortic lumen in case of invasion by esophageal cancer (EC). Only few cases have been published with this atypical indication. Between 2016 and 2018, in our tertiary hospital three patients affected by AEC involving the thoracic aorta were treated by means of prophylactic TEVAR (ProTEVAR). We did not observe procedure-related complications and all patients were reconsidered fit for preoperative or definitive CRT.


2021 ◽  
Vol 104 (5) ◽  
pp. 733-739

Objective: To analyze the incidence and predictive factors of endoleaks and associated increased aneurysm size after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Materials and Methods: The medical records and computed tomography (CT) angiography imaging of 69 patients with thoracic aortic aneurysm that underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair at a single institute between June 2012 and May 2019 were reviewed. The incidences of endoleak were calculated. The patients’ demographic data, operative details, and imaging data were collected. The risk factors of endoleak occurrence were analyzed between endoleak and non-endoleak groups. The association between endoleak and aneurysm enlargement was also evaluated. Results: Endoleaks were noted in twenty-nine cases (42.0%) including four type Ia (5.8%), six type Ib (8.7%), seventeen type II (24.6%), and two type III (2.9%). Fifty-nine percent of the patients with endoleak were found with aneurysm enlargement. The predictive factors of endoleak were bird beak configuration and distal neck length of less than 20 mm (p=0.014 and 0.019, respectively). For type Ia, endoleak presented with short proximal neck length (p=0.031). Short distal neck and angulation of distal stent less than 160 degrees were the predictive factors of type Ib endoleak (p=0.045 and <0.001, respectively). Increased number of intercostal arteries is the only significant risk factor of type II endoleak (p=0.005). The other complications were endograft migration in about 5.8%, endograft infection in 2.9%, cerebrovascular complications in 5.8%, and ruptured aortic aneurysm in 2.9%. Conclusion: Interval follow up CT angiography is recommended to detect endoleak and other late complications after TEVAR. Special considerations are noted in the underlying renal insufficiency and the young patient for radiation dose in long term follow up. Keywords: Endoleak, Thoracic endovascular aortic repair, Thoracic aortic aneurysm, CT angiography, Aneurysm enlargement


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 740-749 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Piffaretti ◽  
Giovanni Pratesi ◽  
Guido Gelpi ◽  
Mario Galli ◽  
Frank J. Criado ◽  
...  

Purpose: To analyze the results of isolated left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using carotid-subclavian bypass (CSbp) or chimney grafts (CGs). Methods: A retrospective multicenter, observational study identified 73 patients (mean age 68±13 years, range 22–87; 56 men) with acute or chronic thoracic aortic lesions who underwent TEVAR with isolated LSA revascularization using either CSbp (n=42) or CGs (n=31) from January 2010 and February 2017. Primary endpoints were TEVAR-related mortality, postoperative stroke, freedom from type Ia endoleak, and LSA patency. Results: Primary technical success was achieved in all cases. Early TEVAR-related mortality was 4.2% (CSbp 2% vs CG 6%, p=0.571). Two (3%) patients had major ischemic strokes (one in each group). Mean follow-up was 24±21 months (range 1–72; median 15). Estimated freedom from TEVAR-related mortality was 93%±3% (95% CI 84.3% to 97.0%) at 12 and 36 months, with no significant difference between CSbp and CG (p=0.258). Aortic reintervention did not differ between the groups (CSbp 5% vs CG 6%, p=0.356); nor did freedom from type Ia endoleak (CSbp 98% vs CG 87%, p=0.134). Gutter-related endoleaks occurred in 4 (13%) CG patients, but none of the patients experienced sac enlargement or the need for reintervention and none died. Primary patency of the LSA was 100% for the entire group during the observation period. Conclusion: In our experience, LSA revascularization proved most satisfactory and equally effective with both the CSbp and CG techniques, without discernible differences at midterm follow-up.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 801-804
Author(s):  
Catharina Gronert ◽  
Nikolaos Tsilimparis ◽  
Giuseppe Panuccio ◽  
Ahmed Eleshra ◽  
Fiona Rohlffs ◽  
...  

Purpose: To report a case of chronic intermittent spinal cord ischemia (SCI) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and its successful treatment using hypogastric artery stenting. Case Report: A 79-year-old patient presented in May 2013 with a thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) and a contained rupture. He urgently underwent TEVAR that covered 274 mm of descending thoracic aorta without immediate postoperative signs of acute SCI. At 3-month follow-up, he reported repeating incidents of sudden lower extremity weakness leading to a fall with a humerus fracture. A neurological consultation revealed the tentative diagnosis of intermittent SCI caused by TEVAR and initially recommended a conservative approach. During the following year there was no clinical improvement of the symptoms. Computed tomography angiography showed a high-grade stenosis of the right hypogastric artery, which was stented in November 2014 to improve the collateral network of spinal cord perfusion. Following treatment, the patient had no further neurological symptoms; at 32 months after the reintervention, the imaging follow-up documented a patent stent and continued exclusion of the TAA. Conclusion: Intermittent neurological symptoms after TEVAR should be suspected as chronic intermittent SCI. The improvement of collateral networks of the spinal cord by revascularization of the hypogastric artery is a viable treatment option.


2021 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 355-360
Author(s):  
Sally H. J. Choi ◽  
Gary K. Yang ◽  
Keith Baxter ◽  
Joel Gagnon

Background: Adequate seal for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) commonly requires landing in zone 2, but can prove to be challenging due to the tortuous and angulated anatomy of the region. Objectives: Our objective was to determine the proximal landing accuracy of zone 2-targeted TEVARs following carotid-subclavian revascularization (CSR) and its impact on clinical outcomes. Methods: Retrospective review of patients that underwent CSR for zone 2 endograft delivery at a tertiary institute between January 2008 and March 2018 was conducted. Technical outcomes were assessed by examining the incidence of intraoperative corrective maneuvers, 1a endoleaks and reinterventions. Distance to target and incidence of LSA stump filling were examined as radiographic markers of landing accuracy. Results: Zone 2-targeted TEVAR with CSR was performed in 53 patients for treatment of dissections (49%), aneurysms (30%) or trauma (21%). Nine (17%) cases required intraoperative corrective procedures: 5 (9%) proximal cuffs due to type 1a endoleak and 4 (8%) left common carotid artery (LCCA) stenting due to inadvertent coverage. Cases performed using higher resolution hybrid fluoroscopy machine compared to mobile C-arm were associated with increased proximal cuff use (OR 8.8; 95% CI 1.2-62.4). Average distance between the proximal edge of the covered graft to LCCA was 8 ± 1 mm and larger distances were not associated with higher rates of 1a endoleak. Twenty-eight (53%) cases of antegrade LSA stump filling were noted on follow-up imaging, but were not associated with higher rates of reinterventions (OR 0.8, 95% CI [0.2-4.6]). Three (6%) patients had a stroke within 30 days and 4 (8%) patients expired within 1 month. Intraoperative corrective maneuvers, post-operative 1a endoleak and reinterventions were not associated with higher rates of stroke or mortality. Conclusion: Using current endografts and imaging modalities, zone 2-targeted TEVARs have suboptimal technical accuracy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 233-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaspar Mestres ◽  
Marvin E. Garcia ◽  
Xavier Yugueros ◽  
Rodrigo Urrea ◽  
Paolo Tripodi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document