Dataset Information

Complex two-stage open surgical repair of an aortoesophageal fistula after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

ABSTRACT: Aortoesophageal fistula after thoracic endovascular aortic repair is a rare but fatal complication, and no clear guidelines exist in the literature for optimal management. Herein, we report a complex case of a patient with an infected thoracic endograft that led to an aortoesophageal fistula. The treatment comprised a two-stage open surgical approach-an extra-anatomic aortic bypass in the first stage, followed by explantation of the infected endograft with ligation of the descending thoracic aorta in the second. This approach controls the focus of infection while allowing flow to the aorta distal to the infected endograft, minimizing visceral ischemia time.

SUBMITTER: Ochoa Chaar CI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6601018 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Complex two-stage open surgical repair of an aortoesophageal fistula after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Ochoa Chaar Cassius Iyad CI Zafar Mohammad A MA Velasquez Camilo C Saeyeldin Ayman A Elefteriades John A JA

Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques 20190625 3

Aortoesophageal fistula after thoracic endovascular aortic repair is a rare but fatal complication, and no clear guidelines exist in the literature for optimal management. Herein, we report a complex case of a patient with an infected thoracic endograft that led to an aortoesophageal fistula. The treatment comprised a two-stage open surgical approach-an extra-anatomic aortic bypass in the first stage, followed by explantation of the infected endograft with ligation of the descending thoracic aor ...[more]

PMID: 31304437

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been adopted rapidly for treating traumatic thoracic aortic injury (TAI). The long-term durability and efficacy remain unknown.ObjectiveTo determine the long-term outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair and those of open repair (OR) for traumatic TAI.Design, setting, participantsThis nationwide cohort study used Taiwan's National Health Insurance Database to evaluate patients with traumatic TAI between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2013. This single-payer National Health Insurance program covered more than 99.9% of the Taiwanese population. Those who received OR or TEVAR for TAI by propensity score matching were included. Data analysis was conducted in October 2017.ExposuresThoracic endovascular aortic repair vs open repair.Main outcomes and measuresIn-hospital outcomes, all-cause mortality, aorta reintervention, and stroke during follow-up.ResultsOf the 287 patients (mean [SD] age, 41.66 [17.98] years; 80.5% male) who received OR or TEVAR for TAI, propensity score matching yielded 100 patients each in the OR and TEVAR groups. After propensity score matching, in-hospital mortality risk was significantly lower in the TEVAR group (9 [9.0%]) than in the OR group (27 [27.0%]; TEVAR vs open repair: odds ratio, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.12-0.60). With a mean (SD) follow-up of 2.80 (2.63) years, the proportion of survivors was 71.9% at 1 year, 70.8% at 2 years, 68.2% at 3 years, and 65.1% at 5 years in the OR group vs 88.9% at 1 year, 88.9% at 2 years, 88.9% at 3 years, and 88.9% at 5 years in the TEVAR group (log-rank test, P < .001). The TEVAR group had only 2 events (2%) of late reintervention and 1 event (1%) of late cerebrovascular accident. The proportion of freedom from reintervention was 100% at 1 year, 100% at 2 years, 100% at 3 years, and 100% at 5 years in the OR group vs 97.4% at 1 year, 97.4% at 2 years, 97.4% at 3 years, and 97.4% at 5 years in the TEVAR group (log-rank test, P = .18).Conclusion and relevanceCompared with OR, TEVAR was associated with better long-term outcomes, mainly owing to lower mortality during the perioperative period. In addition, TEVAR was associated with a similar rate of survival and reintervention after hospital discharge.

Project description:Importance:Knowledge regarding the long-term outcomes of elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is increasing. However, data with greater than 10 years' follow-up remain sparse and are lacking from population-based studies. Objective:To determine the long-term outcomes of EVAR compared with open surgical repair (OSR) for elective treatment of AAA. Design, Setting, and Participants:This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked administrative health data from Ontario, Canada, to identify all patients 40 years and older who underwent elective EVAR or OSR for AAA repair from April 1, 2003, to March 31, 2016, with follow-up terminating on March 31, 2017. A total of 17 683 patients were identified using validated procedure and billing codes and were propensity score matched. Analysis was conducted from June 26, 2018, to January 16, 2019. Exposures:Elective EVAR or OSR for AAA. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival, defined as being free of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; reintervention; and secondary rupture. Results:Among 17 683 patients who received elective AAA repairs (mean [SD] age, 72.6 [7.8] years; 14 286 [80.8%] men), 6100 (34.5%) underwent EVAR and 11 583 (65.5%) underwent OSR. From these patients, 4010 well-balanced propensity score-matched pairs of patients were defined, with a mean (SD) age of 73.0 (7.6) years and 6583 (82.1%) men. In the matched cohort, the mean (SD) follow-up was 4.4 (2.7) years, and maximum follow-up was 13.8 years. The overall median survival was 8.9 years. Compared with OSR, EVAR was associated with a higher survival rate up to 1 year after repair (91.0% [95% CI, 90.1%-91.9%] vs 94.0% [95% CI, 93.3%-94.7%]) and a higher major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival rate up to 4 years after repair (69.9% [95% CI, 68.3%-71.3%] vs 72.9% [95% CI, 71.4%-74.4%]). Cumulative incidence of reintervention was higher among patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR at the 7-year follow-up (45.9% [95% CI, 44.1%-47.8%] vs 42.2% [95% CI, 40.4%-44.0%]). Survival analyses demonstrated no statistically significant differences in long-term survival, reintervention, and secondary rupture for patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR. Kaplan-Meier analysis suggested superior long-term major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival among patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR (32.6% [95% CI, 26.9%-38.4%] vs 14.1% [95% CI, 4.0%-30.4%]; stratified log-rank P < .001) during a maximum follow-up of 13.8 years. Conclusions and Relevance:Endovascular aortic repair was not associated with a difference in long-term survival during more than 13 years' maximum follow-up. The reasons for these findings will require studies to consider specific graft makes and models, adherence to instructions for use, and types and reasons for reintervention.

Dataset Information

Complex two-stage open surgical repair of an aortoesophageal fistula after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Publications

Complex two-stage open surgical repair of an aortoesophageal fistula after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets