Endovascular management of type B aortic dissection with coverage of proximal entry tear with a TEVAR and bare metal stenting of renal and mesenteric vessels to maintain visceral perfusion

Abstract Background Endovascular management of type B aortic dissection has been well established and accepted in the community. However, due to the lack of information on long-term outcome, endovascular management remains controversial in the setting of connective tissue disorders such as Marfan syndrome. Although surgical repair is recommended in type B aortic dissection with connective tissue disorders, recent studies demonstrated both feasibility and safety of endovascular interventions in those patients at least short term. Purpose Single centre experience and documentation of long-term outcomes after endovascular management of aortic conditions in patients with connective tissue disorders. Methods All patients with genetic confirmation of connective tissue disorders who underwent endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta were identified and evaluated retrospectively. Perioperative, procedure-specific and follow-up data were extracted from medical records of a structured surveillance program. Results Between 2002 and 2020, 18 patients were identified having undergone TEVAR procedures and protocol follow-up. The median age was 35.5 (IQL 30.0 – 42.7), and 12 (66.7%) were males; median ACEF II score was 0.6 (IQL 0.5 – 0.925). This cohort comprised 15 (83.3%) patients with genetically confirmed Marfan syndrome, two (11.1%) with Loeys-Dietz, and one (5.6%) with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Of these, 13 (72.2%) patients had undergone aortic root or aortic root/ascending aorta replacement independently in the past. The indication for a TEVAR procedure was seen in one case for degenerative aneurysmal disease (5.6%), in one case for elephant trunk stenosis (5.6%), in five cases for residual aortic dissection (27.8%), and in 11 cases for new type B dissection (61.1%). The most frequently used stent-graft was Valiant™ (Medtronic) in 10 cases (55.6%), followed by TAG® (Gore®) in four cases (22.2%), Zenith® (COOK®) in two cases (11.1%), and for Relay® (Bolton) and Sinus-XL® (Optimed) in one case each (5.6%). The average total covered length was 192.2±40.2 mm. Median follow-up duration was 77.5 months (IQR 35.8 - 131); three (16.7%) cases revealed failure of TEVAR and led to conversion to open surgery. Two patients (11.1%) had died including one patient in the perioperative phase. At the last follow-up, complete thrombosis of the false lumen was observed in 14 cases (82.3%), and 15 cases (88.2%) showed no aortic expansion or progression during the follow-up period resulting in an overall endovascular success rate of 72.2%. Conclusion Thoracic endovascular aortic repair can be performed for selected patients with connective tissue disorders at relatively low long-term mortality and morbidity. With improved devices and technical skills, mid- and long-term surveillance revealed promising outcomes and a low rate of aneurysmal degeneration. Structured surveillance remains crucial to detect emerging late complications and to accumulate more long-term data. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Download Full-text

Distal bare metal stent implantation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair is beneficial to treat complicated type B aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Vascular ◽

10.1177/1708538120968404 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 170853812096840

Author(s):

Xuanzhu Kong ◽

Li Peng ◽

Fengrui Wu ◽

Jiaxue Bi ◽

Hongrui Pan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Aortic Dissection ◽

Statistical Method ◽

Bare Metal Stent ◽

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽

Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽

Bare Metal ◽

Type B ◽

Metal Stent ◽

Type B Aortic Dissection

Objective To explore whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) plus distal bare metal stent (BMS) implantation leads to favorable clinical outcomes compared with standard TEVAR in treating acute complicated type B aortic dissection. Methods Relevant publications were found through a precise search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Count data were calculated as the odd ratio (OR)and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the Mantel–Haenszel statistical method, quantitative data were calculated as mean difference and 95% CI using Inverse Variance statistical method. When the data heterogeneity was large, with an I2 > 50%, a random-effects model and sensitivity analysis were performed. The analysis tool we used was the software Revman 5.3 and G*power 3.1. Results There were 7 publications involving 958 patients who were enrolled ultimately. The incidence of unplanned secondary intervention and postoperative adverse events in the TEVAR + BMS were lower than standard TEVAR (OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.75); OR, 0.57, (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.90)), and the pooled number needed to treat was 15 for unplanned secondary intervention and 15 for postoperative adverse events. There were no significant difference in the aortic-related or all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.25 to 2.61); OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.22)), aortic-related, all-cause mortality at least 6 months or incidence of the postoperative endoleak (OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.32); OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.06); OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.32 to 2.05)). Conclusion There is no significant outcome difference except for reduced reintervention but this does not seem to adversely affect survival. It is unclear whether this justifies the additional cost of placing it in every complicated type B aortic dissection regardless of anatomy after standard TEVAR alone. Besides, more data are needed to verify the adjunctive distal bare metal stents’ performance at different dissection stages.

Download Full-text