Dataset Information

Aortic arch aneurysms and dissection-open repair is the gold standard.

ABSTRACT: The aortic arch repair is one of the most complex surgeries and carries a high risk of complications as well as mortality. Since 1975, when the arch repair was first done by Randall B. Griepp using hypothermic circulatory arrest, many new technologies were introduced. But even with the use of antegrade and retrograde perfusion techniques and improvement of surgical techniques and grafts, the rate of mortality, cerebral, spinal, and visceral damage was much higher as compared to any other cardiac surgeries. With further developments aimed at less invasive approaches, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) along with de-branching of supra-aortic vessels or the frozen elephant trunk was introduced. Here, in this article, we review the myriad of approaches to the aortic arch and have come to a conclusion that while traditional open surgery is considered as the gold standard for treatment of extensive aortic arch pathologies, one school of thought suggests hybrid techniques such as the frozen elephant trunk and aortic arch vessel de-branching as more appropriate procedures for high-risk patients, where co-morbidities may contraindicate cardiopulmonary bypass and longer operative times required for traditional repair. No randomized trials are present to compare between open and hybrid or endovascular procedure in normal or high-risk patients. The meta-analysis of most of the studies defines open surgery as the gold standard for arch pathology because the hybrid procedures did not provide any proven survival benefits or decrease in stroke rate and spinal ischemia when compared to open surgery in early, mid, or long-term results.

SUBMITTER: Srivastava S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7525865 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Aortic arch aneurysms and dissection-open repair is the gold standard.

Srivastava Swarnika S Bhan Anil A

Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery 20190522 Suppl 2

The aortic arch repair is one of the most complex surgeries and carries a high risk of complications as well as mortality. Since 1975, when the arch repair was first done by Randall B. Griepp using hypothermic circulatory arrest, many new technologies were introduced. But even with the use of antegrade and retrograde perfusion techniques and improvement of surgical techniques and grafts, the rate of mortality, cerebral, spinal, and visceral damage was much higher as compared to any other cardiac ...[more]

PMID: 33061079

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:ObjectiveMortality after open repair for emergent complex abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is poorly defined. This study evaluated the 30-day mortality of open complex AAA repair performed for rupture or other emergent indication using a national surgical registry. We subsequently identified factors associated with mortality.MethodsThe targeted vascular module from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried to identify patients undergoing open repair for juxtarenal and suprarenal AAAs or type IV thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAAs) for rupture or other emergent indication from 2011 to 2017. Univariate analyses were performed using the Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors independently associated with mortality.ResultsWe included 374 patients who underwent an emergent complex open AAA repair during the study period. There were 142 (38%) cases performed for rupture with hypotension, 141 (38%) for rupture without hypotension, 40 (11%) for symptomatic AAA, and 51 (14%) for another indication. The distribution by aneurysm type was 224 juxtarenal AAAs, 122 suprarenal AAAs, and 28 type IV TAAAs. Overall, there was a 30-day mortality of 32% (118 deaths). For those with juxtarenal AAA repair, 67 (30%) patients died within 30 days; there were 38 (31%) deaths within 30 days in those with suprarenal AAA, and 13 (46%) deaths within 30 days in those with type IV TAAA. On univariate analysis, preoperative variables associated with death were increasing age, use of a transperitoneal surgical approach, lower preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, low baseline albumin concentration (<3.5 g/dL), need for preoperative transfusion, low body mass index (<18.5 kg/m2), and hypotension at presentation. Intraoperative variables associated with mortality were supraceliac clamp location and concurrent renal revascularization. On multivariable analysis, factors independently associated with death included rupture with associated hypotension (reference: other emergent indication; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 3.28; confidence interval [CI], 1.75-5.41; P < .001), age >60 years (reference: <60 years; AOR, 1.59; CI, 1.18-2.13; P = .002), longitudinal laparotomy incision (reference: retroperitoneal; AOR, 3.28; CI, 1.75-6.16; P < .001), and supraceliac cross-clamp (reference: clamp above one renal artery; AOR, 2.14; CI, 1.31-3.50; P = .003).ConclusionsNearly one-third of patients die within 30 days of emergent open complex AAA repair. Mortality is particularly high for patients with type IV TAAAs, approaching 50%. Predictors of 30-day mortality include rupture with associated hypotension, increasing age, supraceliac clamp location, and longitudinal transperitoneal repair approach. These results will help inform surgical decisions preoperatively and intraoperatively.

Project description:For descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs), it is generally considered that thoracic endovascular aortic repairs (TEVARs) reduce operative morbidity and mortality compared with open surgical repair. However, long-term differences in survival of patients have not been demonstrated, and an increased need for aortic reintervention has been observed. Many assume that TEVAR becomes less cost-effective through time because of higher rates of reintervention and surveillance imaging. This study investigated midterm outcomes and hospital costs of TEVAR compared with open TAA repair.This was a retrospective, single-institution review of elective TAA repairs between 2005 and 2012. Patient demographics, operative outcomes, reintervention rates, and hospital costs were assessed. The literature was also reviewed to determine commonly observed complication and reintervention rates for TEVAR and open repair. Monte Carlo simulation was used to model and to forecast hospital costs for TEVAR and open TAA repair up to 3 years after intervention.Our cohort consisted of 131 TEVARs and 27 open repairs. TEVAR patients were significantly older (67.2 vs 58.7 years old; P = .02) and trended toward a more severe comorbidity profile. Operative mortality for TEVAR and open repair was 5.3% and 3.7%, respectively (P = 1.0). There was a trend toward more complications in the TEVAR group, although not statistically significant (all P > .05). In-hospital costs were significantly greater in the TEVAR group ($52,008 vs $37,172; P = .001). However, cost modeling by use of reported complication and reintervention rates from the literature overlaid with our cost data produced a higher cost for the open group in-hospital ($55,109 vs $48,006) and at 3 years ($58,426 vs $52,825). Interestingly, TEVAR hospital costs, not reintervention rates, were the most significant driver of cost in the TEVAR group.Our institutional data showed a trend toward lower mortality and complication rates with open TAA repair, with significantly lower costs within this cohort compared with TEVAR. These findings were likely, at least in part, to be due to the milder comorbidity profile of these patients. In contrast, cost modeling by Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated lower costs with TEVAR compared with open repair at all time points up to 3 years after intervention. Our institutional data show that with appropriate selection of patients, open repair can be performed safely with low complication rates comparable to those of TEVAR. The cost model argues that despite the costs associated with more frequent surveillance imaging and reinterventions, TEVAR remains the more cost-effective option even years after TAA repair.

Dataset Information

Aortic arch aneurysms and dissection-open repair is the gold standard.

Publications

Aortic arch aneurysms and dissection-open repair is the gold standard.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets