Objective Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a devastating but potentially preventable complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The purpose of this analysis was to determine what ...factors predict SCI after TEVAR. Methods All TEVAR procedures at a single institution were reviewed for patient characteristics, prior aortic repair history, aortic centerline of flow analysis, and procedural characteristics. SCI was defined as any lower extremity neurologic deficit that was not attributable to an intracranial process or peripheral neuropathy. Forty-three patient and procedural variables were evaluated individually for association with SCI. Those with the strongest relationships to SCI ( P < .1) were included in a multivariable logistic regression model, and a stepwise variable elimination algorithm was bootstrapped to derive a best subset of predictors from this model. Results From 2002 to 2013, 741 patients underwent TEVAR for various indications, and 68 (9.2%) developed SCI (permanent: n = 38; 5.1%). Because of the lack of adequate imaging for centerline analysis, 586 patients (any SCI, n = 43; 7.4%) were subsequently analyzed. Patients experiencing SCI after TEVAR were older (SCI, 72 ± 11 years; no SCI, 65 ± 15 years; P < .0001) and had significantly higher rates of multiple cardiovascular risk factors. The stepwise selection procedure identified five variables as the most important predictors of SCI: age (odds ratio OR multiplies by 1.3 per 10 years; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.9-1.8, P = .06), aortic coverage length (OR multiplies by 1.3 per 5 cm; CI, 1.1-1.6; P = .002), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 1.9; CI, 0.9-4.1; P = .1), chronic renal insufficiency (creatinine concentration ≥ 1.6 mg/dL; OR, 1.9; CI, 0.8-4.2; P = .1), and hypertension (defined as chart history or medication; OR, 6.4; CI, 2.6-18; P < .0001). A logistic regression model with just these five covariates had excellent discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = .83) and calibration ( χ2 = 9.8; P = .28). Conclusions This analysis generated a simple model that reliably predicts SCI after TEVAR. This clinical tool can assist decision-making about when to proceed with TEVAR, guide discussions about intervention risk, and help determine when maneuvers to mitigate SCI risk should be implemented.
Commentary: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair in Marfan syndrome—dancing with dogma Beaver, Thomas M.; Scali, Sal
Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery/The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery/The journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery,
June 2023, 2023-06-00, 20230601, Letnik:
165, Številka:
6
Journal Article
Open repair of extent II and III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) is associated with substantial morbidity. Alternative strategies, such as hybrid operations combining proximal thoracic ...endovascular aortic repair with either staged open distal TAAA repair or visceral debranching (hybrid), as well as fenestrated/branched endografts (FEVAR), have been increasingly reported; however, benefits of these approaches compared with direct open surgery remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of these three different strategies in the management of extent II/III TAAA.
All extent II/III TAAA repairs (2002-2018) for nonmycotic, degenerative aneurysm or chronic dissection at a single institution were reviewed. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. Secondary end points included incidence of spinal cord ischemia (SCI), complications, unplanned re-operation, 90-day readmission, and out-of-hospital survival. To mitigate impact of covariate imbalance and selection bias, intergroup comparisons were made using inverse probability weighted-propensity analysis. Cox regression was used to estimate survival while cumulative incidence was used to determine reoperation risk.
One hundred ninety-eight patients (FEVAR, 92; hybrid, 40; open, 66) underwent repair. In unadjusted analysis, compared with hybrid/open patients, FEVAR patients were significantly older with more cardiovascular risk factors, but less likely to have a connective tissue disorder or dissection-related indication. Unadjusted 30-day mortality and complication rates were: 30-day mortality, FEVAR 4%, hybrid 13%, open 12% (P = .01); and complications, FEVAR 36%, hybrid 33%, open 50% (P = .11). Permanent SCI was not different among groups (FEVAR 3%, hybrid 3%, open 6%; P = .64). In adjusted analysis, 30-day mortality risk was greater for open vs FEVAR (hazard ratio, 3.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-9.2; P = .01) with no difference for hybrid vs open/FEVAR. There was significantly lower risk of any SCI for open vs FEVAR (hazard ratio, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.96; P = .04); however, no difference in risk of permanent SCI was detected among the three groups. There was no difference in complications or unplanned reoperation, but open patients had the greatest risk of unplanned 90-day readmission. There was a time-varying effect on survival probability, with open repair having a significant survival disadvantage in the first 1 to 6 months after the procedure compared with hybrid/FEVAR patients (Cox model P = .03), but no difference in survival at 1 and 5 years (1- and 5-year survival: FEVAR, 86 ± 3%, 55 ± 8%; hybrid, 86 ± 5%, 60 ± 11%; open 69 ± 7%, 59 ± 8%; Cox-model P = .10).
Extent II/III TAAA repair, regardless of operative strategy, is associated with significant morbidity risk. FEVAR is associated with the lowest 30-day mortality risk compared with hybrid and open repair when estimates are adjusted for preoperative risk factors. These data support greater adoption of FEVAR as first-line therapy to treat complex TAAA disease in anatomically suitable patients who present electively.
Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become a mainstay of therapy for acute and chronic type B aortic dissection (TBAD). Dynamic aortic morphologic changes, untreated dissected aorta, and ...persistent false lumen perfusion have significant consequences for reintervention after TEVAR for TBAD. However, few reports contrast differences in secondary aortic intervention (SAI) after TEVAR for TBAD or describe their influence on mortality. This analysis examined incidence, timing, and types of SAI after TEVAR for acute and chronic TBAD and determined their impact on survival.
All TEVAR procedures for acute and chronic TBAD (2005-2016) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with staged (<30 days) or concomitant ascending aortic arch repair or replacement were excluded. Acuity was defined by symptom onset (0-30 days, acute; >30 days, chronic). SAI procedures were grouped into open (intended treatment zone or remote aortic site), major endovascular (TEVAR extension or endograft implanted at noncontiguous site), and minor endovascular (side branch or false lumen embolization) categories. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate freedom from SAI and survival. Cox proportional hazards were used to identify SAI predictors.
TEVAR for TBAD was performed in 258 patients (acute, 49% n = 128; chronic, 51% n = 130). Mean follow-up was 17 ± 22 months with an overall SAI rate of 27% (n = 70; acute, 22% 28; chronic, 32% 42; odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-2.9; P = .07. Median time to SAI was significantly less after acute than after chronic dissection (0.7 0-12 vs 7 0-91 months; P < .001); however, freedom from SAI was not different (1-year: acute, 67% ± 4%, vs chronic, 68% ± 5%; 3-year: acute, 65% ± 7%, vs chronic, 52% ± 8%; P = .7). Types of SAI were similar (acute vs chronic: open, 61% vs 55% P = .6; major endovascular, 36% vs 38% P = .8; minor endovascular, 21% vs 21% P = 1). The open conversion rate (either partial or total endograft explantation: acute, 10% 13/128; chronic, 15% 20/130; P = .2) and incidence of retrograde dissection (acute, 6% 7/128; chronic, 4% 5/130; P = .5) were similar. There was no difference in survival for SAI patients (5-year: acute + SAI, 55% ± 9%, vs acute without SAI, 67% ± 8% P = .3; 5-year: chronic + SAI, 72% ± 6%, vs chronic without SAI, 72% ± 7% P = .7). Factors associated with SAI included younger age, acute dissection with larger maximal aortic diameter at presentation, Marfan syndrome, and use of arch vessel adjunctive procedures with the index TEVAR. Indication for the index TEVAR (aneurysm, malperfusion, rupture, and pain or hypertension) or remote preoperative history of proximal arch procedure was not predictive of SAI.
SAI after TEVAR for TBAD is common. Acute TBAD has a higher proportion of early SAI; however, chronic TBAD appears to have ongoing risk of remediation after the first postoperative year. SAI types are similar between groups, and the occurrence of aorta-related reintervention does not affect survival. Patients' features and anatomy predict need for SAI. These data should be taken into consideration for selection of patients, device design, and surveillance strategies after TEVAR for TBAD.
Objective Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a potentially devastating complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) that can result in varying degrees of short-term and permanent ...disability. This study was undertaken to describe the clinical outcomes, long-term functional impact, and influence on survival of SCI after TEVAR. Methods A retrospective review of all TEVAR patients at the University of Florida from 2000 to 2011 was performed to identify individuals experiencing SCI, defined by any new lower extremity neurologic deficit not attributable to another cause. SCI was dichotomized into immediate or delayed onset, with immediate onset defined as SCI noted upon awakening from anesthesia, and delayed characterized as a period of normal function, followed by development of neurologic injury. Ambulatory status was determined using database query, record review, and phone interviews with patients and/or family. Mortality was estimated using life-table analysis. Results A total of 607 TEVARs were performed for various indications, with 57 patients (9.4%) noted to have postoperative SCI (4.3% permanent). SCI patients were more likely to be older (63.9 ± 15.6 vs 70.5 ± 11.2 years; P = .002) and have a number of comorbidities, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and cerebrovascular disease ( P < .0001). At some point in their care, a cerebrospinal fluid drain was placed in 54 patients (95%), with 54% placed postoperatively. In-hospital mortality was 8.8% for the entire cohort (SCI vs no SCI; P = .45). SCI developed immediately in 12 patients, delayed onset in 40, and indeterminate in five patients due to indiscriminate timing from postoperative sedation. Three patients (25%) with immediate SCI had measurable functional improvement (FI), whereas 28 (70%) of the delayed-onset patients experienced some degree of neurologic recovery ( P = .04). Of the 34 patients with complete data available, 26 (76%) reported quantifiable FI, but only 13 (38%) experienced return to their preoperative baseline. Estimated mean (± standard error) survival for patients with and without SCI was 37.2 ± 4.5 and 71.6 ± 3.9 months ( P < .0006), respectively. Patients with FI had a mean survival of 53.9 ± 5.9 months compared with 9.6 ± 3.6 months for those without improvement ( P < .0001). Survival and return of neurologic function were not significantly different when patients with preoperative and postoperative cerebrospinal fluid drains were compared. Conclusions The minority of patients experience complete return to baseline function after SCI with TEVAR, and outcomes in patients without early functional recovery are particularly dismal. Patients experiencing delayed SCI are more likely to have FI and may anticipate similar life-expectancy with neurologic recovery compared with patients without SCI. Timing of drain placement does not appear to have an impact on postdischarge FI or long-term mortality.
Background In patients with Marfan syndrome, the complications of aortic degeneration, including dissection, aneurysm, and rupture represent the main cause of mortality. Although contemporary ...management of ascending aortic disease requires open surgical reconstruction, endovascular repair is now available for management of descending thoracic and abdominal aortic pathology (ie, thoracic endovascular aortic repair TEVAR, endovascular aneurysm repair EVAR). The short- and long-term benefit of endovascular repair in Marfan patients remains largely unproven. We examine our outcomes after EVAR in this patient population. Methods All patients with a diagnosis of Marfan syndrome who were treated with TEVAR/EVAR were evaluated in a retrospective review. Perioperative, procedure-specific and patient covariate data were aggregated. Primary endpoints were overall mortality and procedural success as divided into three categories: (1) successful therapy, (2) primary failure, or (3) secondary failure. Results Between 2000 and June 2010, 16 patients were identified as having undergone 19 TEVAR/EVAR procedures. These included three emergent operations (two for acute dissection/malperfusion and one for anastomotic disruption early after open repair). All 16 patients had previously undergone at least one (range, 1-5) open operation of the ascending aorta or arch at a time interval from 33 years to 1 week prior to the index endovascular repair. During a median follow-up of 9.3 months (range, 0-46 months), there were four deaths (25%). Six patients (38%) had successful endovascular interventions. Despite early success, there was one death in this group at 1 month postintervention. Seven patients (44%) experienced primary treatment failure with five undergoing open conversion and one undergoing left subclavian coil embolization (the seventh was lost to follow-up and presented 4 months later in cardiac arrest and expired without repair). There were three deaths in the primary treatment failure group. Two patients experienced secondary treatment failure. One underwent the index TEVAR for acute dissection with malperfusion and required a subsequent TEVAR for more distal aortic pathology. He is stable without disease progression. The other patient underwent open conversion after a second EVAR with four-vessel “chimney” stent grafts and is stable with his entire native aorta having been replaced. Conclusions Aortic disease associated with Marfan syndrome is a complex clinical problem and many patients require remedial procedures. Endovascular therapy can provide a useful adjunct or bridge to open surgical treatment in selected patients. However, failure of endovascular therapy is common, and its use should be judicious with close follow-up to avoid delay if open surgical repair is required.
PDF
