Combined fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of the aortic arch and the thoracoabdominal aorta.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal
/ diagnostic imaging
Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic
/ diagnostic imaging
Blood Vessel Prosthesis
Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation
/ adverse effects
Endovascular Procedures
/ adverse effects
Europe
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications
/ etiology
Prosthesis Design
Retrospective Studies
Stents
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Complete endovascular aortic repair
Fenestrated-branched abdominal aortic repair
Fenestrated-branched aortic arch repair
Thoracoabdominal aneurysm
Journal
Journal of vascular surgery
ISSN: 1097-6809
Titre abrégé: J Vasc Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8407742
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
received:
16
05
2019
accepted:
16
08
2019
pubmed:
23
2
2020
medline:
3
11
2020
entrez:
22
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of our study was to evaluate patients who underwent extensive endovascular aortic stent graft coverage (from the aortic arch to abdominal aorta) in terms of early and midterm clinical outcomes. A retrospective multicenter study was undertaken. All patients were treated with extensive endovascular aortic stent graft coverage with fenestrated and branched endografts at three experienced endovascular centers. Between 2012 and 2017, there were 33 patients (22 male [67%]) treated with a combination of fenestrated-branched stent grafts in the aortic arch and the thoracoabdominal aorta. Most of the patients (20/33 [61%]) had fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (fb-EVAR) of the thoracoabdominal aorta as a second-stage procedure after thoracic arch (fb-Arch) repair, 10 had fb-Arch repair as the first procedure, and three patients had a single-stage procedure. The mean age was 67 ± 13 years, and the mean interval between procedures was 13 ± 12 months. For fb-Arch repair, 20 fenestrated and 13 branched devices were used; for fb-EVAR, 23 fenestrated, 5 branched, and 5 composite devices were used. The use of spinal drainage was more common in fb-EVAR (20/33 [61%]). Technical success was 100%. Mean hospital stay was 15 ± 13 days for fb-Arch repair and 12 ± 9 days for fb-EVAR. Two patients died in the hospital after fb-EVAR, resulting in a 30-day mortality of 6% (2/33). No deaths occurred during the fb-Arch repair component or in the single-stage cases. Four patients developed spinal cord injury (12%), 1 had permanent paraplegia (3%), and 2 patients had a neurologic event (1 stroke [3%] and 1 transient ischemic attack [3%]). Six patients (18%) died during a mean follow-up of 23 ± 17 months. The survival at 12 months after the second procedure was 72%, and the freedom from any reintervention was 82%. The 12-month freedom from reintervention was 87% for fb-Arch repair and 81% for fb-EVAR. Extensive endovascular coverage of the aorta for aortic disease seems to be a feasible procedure in experienced centers, with acceptable perioperative morbidity and mortality. Spinal cord ischemia appears acceptable despite extensive aortic coverage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32081476
pii: S0741-5214(19)32337-7
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.08.261
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1825-1833Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.