Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Retrograde Type A Aortic Intramural Hematoma

Objectives: To evaluate the effects of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in descending aorta for retrograde type A aortic intramural hematoma (re-TAIMH).Methods: From January 2013 to September 2019, 65 consecutive patients diagnosed with re-TAIMH and treated by TEVAR were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study, of whom 44 patients presented with entry tear in descending aorta (Group A) and 21 with penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (Group B). The clinical data, including baseline characteristics, adverse events, aortic remolding, and overall survival were reviewed.Results: The mean age of all the patients was 52.0 ± 8.3 years, and 54 (83.1%) patients were men. The mean maximal ascending aortic diameter (MAAD) was 43.1 ± 5.4 mm, and the mean maximal ascending aortic hematoma thickness (MAAHT) was 9.6 ± 4.7 mm. TEVAR was performed under general anesthesia in 53 (81.5%) patients, while 12 (18.5%) patients were treated under local anesthesia. There were two deaths during hospitalization (one with rupture and another with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome), and overall survival at 1, 4, and 7 years for all 65 patients was 93.8, 92.0, and 87.4%, respectively. The MAAD and MAATH decreased significantly after TEVAR (p < 0.05) in the two groups, so did the mean descending aortic diameter at the pulmonary bifurcation level. Type I endoleak, dialysis, progression to type A aortic dissection, and enlargement in MAAHT and MAAD were more common complications, which occurred in four, three, two, and two patients, respectively.Conclusion: Patients with retrograde TAIMH treated by TEVAR had a favorable prognosis including late survival and aortic remolding. However, some post-intervention complications were not negligible.

Aortic intramural hematoma and classic aortic dissection: two sides of the same coin within the acute aortic syndrome for an interventional radiologist

management of acute type B aortic intramural hematoma (AIH) still represents a challenging issue. Although most resolve spontaneously or with conservative therapy, several cases of AIH may complicate into classic aortic dissection with subsequent risk of aortic rupture and visceral malperfusion, thus needing urgent or preemptive thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR). Despite the long-term aorta-related survival, TEVAR might lead to graft obstruction, migration, infection, stroke/paraplegia, visceral ischemia, endoleak and, last but not least, retrograde aortic dissection (AD), frequent in the acute phase and associated with a high mortality risk. In order to highlight such a close relationship between AIH and AD and the possibility to perform endovascular treatment, we report the experience of an adult female patient with an aortic intramural hematoma evolving into a classic aortic dissection. Despite successful thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR), our patient developed an aortic dissection type A at one month with subsequent indication for cardiac surgery, still representing the elective approach in case of pathologies including the ascending aorta. Thus, the aim of our discussion is to create a debate on the most appropriate management for the treatment of descending AIH.

Therapeutic management of acute type A aortic intramural hematoma

Objectives The proper therapeutic management for acute type A aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes following emergency surgery or conservative treatment for patients with this disease. Methods From January 2015 to December 2018, 124 consecutive patients were diagnosed with an acute type A aortic IMH and were included in this study. According to our surgical indications, they were divided into two groups: an operation group (OG) and a conservative treatment group (CG). Results Of 124 patients, 83 (66.9%) patients accepted emergency surgery and 41 (33.1%) patients accepted strict conservative treatment. There were no differences between these two groups in early mortality and complications. However, the late mortality of patients in the CG was significantly higher than for patients in the OG. A maximum aortic diameter in the ascending aorta and aortic arch ≥ 45 mm and maximum thickness of IMH in the same section ≥ 8 mm were risk factors for IMH related death in patients undergoing conservative treatment. Conclusions The mortality associated with emergency surgery for patients with acute type A aortic IMH was satisfactory. In clinical centers with well-established surgical techniques and postoperative management, emergency surgical treatment may provide a better outcome than medical treatment for patients with acute type A aortic IMH.

Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma

To explore the difference of curative effect between different treatment modalities, in order to provide reference for the treatment of aortic intramural hematoma (IMH). 168 patients with aortic intramural hematoma diagnosed and treated from January 2010 to July 2020 were selected in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. Among them, 48 patients were diagnosed with Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma and 120 were diagnosed with Stanford B aortic intramural hematoma. According to the therapeutic methods, patients were divided into conservative treatment group and endovascular treatment group (TEVAR). For endovascular treatment group, according to the different timing of surgery, can be divided into acute phase group (onset within 72 h) and non-acute phase group (time of onset > 72 h).The clinical data and follow-up data were collected and analyzed by variance analysis and χ2 test. There were 168 patients diagnosed with aortic intramural hematoma 39 of them were (81.25%) Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma patients with pleural or pericardial effusion. For patient with Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma, endovascular treatment was performed in 15 patients (31.2%), and 33 cases (68.8%) for conservative treatment. The average follow-up (24.9 ± 13.9) was months. There were 120 patients with Stanford type B aortic intramural hematoma (71.4%), 60 patients received endovascular treatment (50%), and 60 patients (50%) received conservative treatment, with an average follow-up of (27.8 ± 14.6) months. For Stanford A type aortic intramural hematoma patients when the maximum aortic diameter ≥ 50 mm or hematoma thickness ≥ 11 mm, with high morbidity and mortality, positive endovascular treatment can reduce complications and death. For patients with Stanford type B aortic intramural hematoma, when the maximum aortic diameter ≥ 40 mm or hematoma thickness ≥ 10 mm, with high morbidity and mortality, positive endovascular treatment can reduce complications and death. Both Stanford type A and B aortic intramural hematoma patients could benefit from the endovascular treatment when the initial maximum aortic diameter is ≥ 50 mm or the hematoma thickness is ≥ 11 mm.