Management of the penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer in the descending thoracic aorta

Penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers present with an insidious onset with a reported mortality of 9%, varying across populations. With vast arrays of risk factors and potentially ominous complications, it is vital to efficiently provide optimum strategies for management. There exists controversy in the literature regarding management, especially for Type B penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers; the decision-making framework encompasses numerous factors in considerations for medical management versus invasive intervention and choice of endovascular versus open repair in the latter. The concomitant presence of intramural haematoma adds further complexity to the already intricate decision-making for management. We performed searches through PubMed and SCOPUS analysing studies reporting outcomes for management strategies for penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers treatment, focusing on Type B, further seeking to analyse studies reporting their experiences of PAU patients with concomitant intramural haematoma. Our review highlights the ambiguity and controversy existing in the literature, comprising studies burdened by their inherent hindering limitations of their single-centre retrospective experiences. Endovascular therapy has come to the forefront of penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers management, often considered first line therapy. In the case of penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers alongside intramural haematoma, there have been reports of potential hybrid surgical approaches to management. Studies further show misdiagnosis of penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers in earlier data sets further complicates management. However, it is clear we must progress on the journey towards precision medicine, allowing delivery of optimum care to our patients.

A "sneaky" symptom of aortic dissection. Brief literature review, physiopathology and diagnostic tools management

Aortic diseases cover a large spectrum of conditions, such as aortic aneurysm and acute aortic syndromes (i.e., dissections, intramural hematoma, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, traumatic aortic injuries, and pseudoaneurysms), genetic diseases (e.g., Marfan syndrome) and congenital abnormalities, such as coarctation of the aorta. These conditions may have an acute presentation; thus, if the acute aortic syndrome is the first sign of the disease, the prognosis is extremely poor. Prompt diagnosis and timely therapy are therefore mandatory. In this paper, we discuss a deceptive symptom of painless aortic dissection and its physiopathology. Furthermore, we briefly review the literature and discuss the management of diagnostic tools.

Demystifying penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer of aorta: unrealised tyrant of senile aortic changes

This review article describes demographic features, comorbidities, clinical and imaging findings, prognosis, and treatment strategies in penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (PAU) and closely related entities using google scholar web search. PAU is one of the manifestations of the acute aortic syndrome (AAS) spectrum. The underlying aorta invariably shows atherosclerotic changes or aneurysmal dilatation. Hypertension is the most common contributing factor, with chest or back pain being the usual manifestation. Intramural hematoma (IMH) is the second entity associated with both PAU and aortic dissection (AD), more so with the latter. Chest radiograph can show mediastinal widening, pleural, or pericardial fluid in rupture. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) is the imaging modality of choice to visualize PAU, with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) adding diagnostic value. Lesser-known entities of intramural blood pool (IBP), limited intimal tears (LITs), and focal intimal disruptions (FID) are also encountered. PAU can form fistulous communication with adjacent organs whereas IMH may propagate to dissection. CTA aids in defining the management, open or endovascular options in surgical candidates.

Long-term outcomes of intervention between open repair and endovascular aortic repair for descending aortic pathologies: a propensity-matched analysis

Background The long-term complication rates of open repair and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) have not yet been determined. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes and aortic reintervention rates between open repair and TEVAR in patients with descending thoracic aortic pathologies. Methods Between January 2002 and December 2017, 230 patients with descending thoracic aortic pathologies underwent surgery. Of these, 136 patients were included in this retrospective study: 45 patients (10, 2, and 33 with dissection, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, and pseudoaneurysm, respectively) underwent open repair and 91 patients (27, 1, and 63 with dissection, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, and pseudoaneurysm, respectively) underwent TEVAR. The primary end points were in-hospital mortality, and short-term complications. The secondary end points were long-term mortality and reintervention rates. Based on the propensity score matching (PSM), 35 patients who underwent open repair were matched to 35 patients who underwent TEVAR (ratio = 1:1). Results The mean follow-up period was 70.2 ± 51.9 months. Shorter intensive care unit and hospital stay were seen in the TEVAR group than in the open repair group before and after PSM (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). However, in-hospital mortality, and spinal cord ischemia were not significantly different among the two groups (before PSM: p = 0.068 and p = 0.211, respectively; after PSM: p = 0.303 and p = 0.314, respectively). The cumulative all-cause death and aorta-related death showed no significant differences between the two groups (before PSM: p = 0.709 and p = 0.734, respectively; after PSM: p = 0.888 and p = 0.731, respectively). However, aortic reintervention rates were higher in the TEVAR group than in the open repair group before and after PSM (p = 0.006 and p = 0.013, respectively). Conclusion The TEVAR group was superior in short-term recovery outcomes but had higher reintervention rates compared to the open repair group. However, there were no significant differences in long-term survival between the two groups.

Non-traumatic thoracic aortic emergencies: imaging diagnosis and management

The major component of non-traumatic thoracic aortic emergencies is the acute aortic syndromes. These include acute aortic dissection, intramural haematoma and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, grouped together because they are indistinguishable clinically and highly fatal. All three entities involve disruption to the tunica intima and media and may be complicated by rupture, end-organ ischaemia or aneurysmal transformation. Early diagnosis is vital to allow timely and appropriate management. Paired unenhanced and electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography angiography of the chest, extending more distally if required, is recommended for diagnosis. Specific computed tomography features of all three entities are reviewed, with a focus on morphological features associated with complications. Those with type A pathology are usually managed with open surgery because this has a high risk of complication. Patients with uncomplicated type B pathology are usually managed with best medical therapy whereas those with complicated type B pathology are usually offered either surgery or thoracic endovascular aortic repair. The limited evidence regarding the use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with subacute uncomplicated type B pathology is briefly discussed.