Search

The treatment of complex aortic pathologies requires specialized techniques and tailored approaches due to each patient's unique anatomical and clinical challenges. The European Association for Cardiothoracic Surgery (EACTS) and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) new guidelines identify the aorta as the body's 24th organ and reiterate that multidisciplinary aortic teams are recommended for shared decision-making to determine optimal treatment strategies. Patients treated for conditions such as aneurysms, dissections, intramural hematomas, or penetrating aortic ulcers may develop complex forms over time, necessitating careful follow-up and timely corrective actions. Endovascular solutions can be favorable for older patients with complex anatomies and multiple comorbidities. However, when endovascular treatment is not feasible, hybrid treatments or open surgery must be considered if the patient's condition allows it. The risk–benefit ratio of each procedure must be carefully evaluated; choosing the best intervention or deciding not to intervene becomes a critical and challenging decision. At our Cardiac Surgery Center in Verona, a multidisciplinary team with over 20 years of experience in treating complex aortic arch pathologies extensively discussed different cases of complex aortic pathologies treated with endovascular, hybrid, or surgical approaches, emphasizing the importance of considering both anatomical and patient-specific characteristics. The decisions and treatments were often challenging, and unanimity was not always achieved, reflecting the complexity of finding the best solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: There are several endovascular treatment options to treat aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts. This study seeks to assess endovascular treatment methods for aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), comparing different treatment methods and evaluating technical success, intraoperative parameters and short-term outcomes. Methods: All patients undergoing elective or emergency endovascular treatment of aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies, with no acceptable landing zone for standard TEVAR, between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2024, at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany were included. An acceptable landing zone was defined as a minimum of 2 cm for sufficient sealing. All patients were not suitable for open surgery. Patients were categorized by an endovascular treatment method for a comprehensive comparison of pre-, intra- and postoperative variables. IBM SPSS29 was used for data analysis. Results: The patient cohort comprised 21 patients, predominantly males (81%), with an average age of 70.9 ± 9 years with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard TEVAR procedure. The most treated aortic pathologies were penetrating aortic ulcers and chronic post-dissection aneurysms. Patients were sub-grouped according to the applied procedure as follows: five patients with chimney thoracic endovascular aortic repair (chTEVAR), seven patients with in situ fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (isfTEVAR), six patients with custom-made fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmfTEVAR) and three patients with custom-made branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmbTEVAR). Emergency procedures involved two patients. There were significant differences in the total procedure and fluoroscopy time, as well as in contrast agent usage among the treatment groups. cmfTEVAR had the shortest total procedure time, while chTEVAR exhibited the highest contrast agent usage. The overall mortality rate among all procedures was 9.5% (two patients) and 4.7% for elective procedures, respectively. Deaths were associated with either retrograde type A dissection or stent graft infection. Both patients were treated with chTEVAR. There was one minor and one major stroke; these patients were treated with isfTEVAR. No endoleak occurred during any procedure. The reintervention rate for chTEVAR was 20% and 0% for all other procedures during the in-hospital stay. The patients who were treated with cmfTEVAR had no complications, the shortest operating and fluoroscopy time, and less contrast agent was needed in comparison with other treatment methods. Conclusions: Complex endovascular procedures of the aortic arch with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts offer a safe solution, with acceptable complication rates for patients who are not suitable for open aortic arch repair. In terms of procedure-related parameters and complication rates, a custom-made fenestrated TEVAR is potentially advantageous compared to the other endovascular techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES To report experience with a Relay® stent-graft custom-made platform in treating different aortic arch pathology in 2 high-volume aortic centres. METHODS A retrospective analysis of all patients treated between July 2016 and July 2023 with custom-made Relay® stent-graft (custom-made device). Underlying aortic arch pathology was an aneurysm, penetrating aortic ulcer, and dissection. Three custom-made device designs were used: proximal scallop, fenestrations, and inner branches. The endpoints were technical success, perioperative stroke, death, and reintervention rate. RESULTS Thirty-five patients (89% males) with a mean age of 70 ± 11 years were treated. Indication for treatment was penetrating aortic ulcer in 14 patients (40%), aneurysm in 11 patients (31%) and aortic dissection in 10 patients (29%). The technical success rate was 100%. Twenty-eight patients (80%) had proximal sealing in zone 0, and 7 (20%) had proximal sealing in zone 1. Nine patients (25.6%) had proximal scallops, 9 (25.6%) had 1 big fenestration and 17 (48.8%) had a branched device; 1 with single branch, 15 with double branches and 1 with triple branches. Thirty patients (86%) had previous or simultaneous left subclavian artery revascularization. No patient died during 30 days. Two patients (5.7%) had stroke postoperatively; both recovered without disabling deficits. The mean follow-up was 35 ± 26 months. Six patients (17.1%) died during follow-up. One patient required reinforcement of the bridging stent in the left common carotid artery and one additional vascular plugging of the left subclavian artery. Three patients received distal extension. CONCLUSIONS The Relay® stent-graft custom-made platform showed a good performance in our study with a high technical success rate, low perioperative stroke and mortality, and low reintervention rates during the follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute Aortic Syndrome (AAS) comprises of three distinct pathological conditions: Aortic Dissection (AD), Penetrating Atherosclerotic Ulcer (PAU), and Intramural Haematoma (IMH). Although AAS and its emergencies are not common occurrences, they are considered highly dangerous and potentially fatal. Clinically, differentiating between the various types of aortic syndromes can be challenging. The prognosis of these conditions significantly depends on speedy and precise analysis. Therefore, present study emphasised the critical role of radiology in the diagnosis of AASs, with Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography (CECT) being the quickest and most consistent imaging modality. In this case series, four cases of AASs are presented, comprising three cases of AD and a case of PAU in a patient with infrarenal aortic occlusion. Notably, one of the dissection cases was accompanied by renal ischaemia. Recognising acute aortic emergencies promptly is essential for saving lives.

OBJECTIVES The goal of this multicentre retrospective cohort study was to evaluate technical success and early and late outcomes of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) with grafts deployed upside down through antegrade access, to treat thoracic aortic diseases. METHODS Antegrade TEVAR operations performed between January 2010 and December 2021 were collected and analysed. Both elective and urgent procedures were included. Exclusion criteria were endografts deployed in previous or concomitant surgical or endovascular repairs. RESULTS Fourteen patients were enrolled; 13 were males (94%) with a mean age of 71 years (interquartile range 62; 78). Five patients underwent urgent procedures (2 ruptured aortas and 3 symptomatic patients). Indications for treatment were 8 (57%) aneurysms/pseudoaneurysms, 3 (21%) dissections and 3 (21%) penetrating aortic ulcers. Technical success was achieved in all procedures. Early mortality occurred in 4 (28%) cases, all urgent procedures. Median follow-up was 13 months (interquartile range 1; 44). Late deaths occurred in 2 (20%) patients, both operated on in elective settings. The first died at 19 months of aortic-related reintervention; the second died at 34 months of a non-aortic-related cause. Two patients (14%) underwent aortic-related reinterventions for late type I endoleak. The survival rate of those having the elective procedures was 100%, 84% and 67% at 12, 24 and 36 months, respectively. Freedom from reintervention was 92%, 56% and 56% at 12, 24 and 36 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Antegrade TEVAR can seldom be considered an alternative when traditional retrograde approach is not feasible. Despite good technical success and few access-site complications, this study demonstrates high rates of late type I endoleak and aortic-related reinterventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Penetrating aortic injuries represent critical medical emergencies that necessitate immediate intervention to prevent life-threatening consequences. When accompanied by the presence of an enormous right pleural false aneurysm, the clinical scenario becomes exceptionally rare and complex. This case report details the successful management of a patient who presented with a penetrating aortic ulcer and an extensive false aneurysm within the right pleura, employing an interdisciplinary approach involving cardiac surgeons, cardiologists, interventional cardiologists, and radiologists. The pivotal intervention involved the deployment of a covered and bare stent graft into the descending thoracic aorta to seal the aortic rupture. The patient's clinical condition stabilized postoperatively, with no signs of recurrent hemorrhage. This case underscores the importance of rapid diagnosis, timely intervention, and the collaborative efforts of a specialized medical team in successfully managing such complex vascular injuries. Early recognition and referral to specialized centers are essential for improving patient outcomes in cases of penetrating aortic injuries with associated giant pseudoaneurysms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (PAU) is a type of ulcerative lesion that breaches the internal elastic lamina, allowing for the formation of a hematoma within the medial wall of the aorta (1). PAUs typically occur in advanced atherosclerotic lesions and are more commonly observed in elderly individuals with a higher cardiovascular risk. The clinical course of PAUs can vary and may involve complications such as intramural hematomas, dissection, and pseudoaneurysms (PSA) (2). If the ulcerative lesion extends through the adventitia, it can lead to a life-threatening bleeding, necessitating careful management of PAUs. We report the case of a 66-year-old patient with a known history of non-Hodgkin'slymphoma who presented to the hospital with shortness of breath, peripheral edema, vertigo, and low blood pressure persistent for the last three weeks. During hospitalization, investigations revealed the presence of pericardial effusion. On the same day, the patient experienced hemodynamic instability with cardiac tamponade, requiring pericardiocentesis. Four days after drain removal, there was a recurrence of cardiac tamponade, which was successfully managed with surgical intervention. Unfortunately, the patient passed away a few days later due to cardiac arrest. During autopsy, by then a clinically asymptomatic PSA was discovered in the ascending aorta, resulting from a PAU. The rupture of PSA was responsible for the fatal bleeding into the pericardial space during the drain removal procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This work aims to provide a comprehensive description of the characteristics of a group of acute aortic diseases that are all potentially life-threatening and are collectively referred to as acute aortic syndromes (AASs). There have been recent developments in the care and diagnostic plan for AAS. A substantial clinical index of suspicion is required to identify AASs before irreversible fatal consequences arise because of their indefinite symptoms and physical indicators. A methodical approach to the diagnosis of AAS is addressed. Timely and suitable therapy should be started immediately after diagnosis. Improving clinical outcomes requires centralising patients with AAS in high-volume centres with high-volume surgeons. Consequently, the management of these patients benefits from the increased use of aortic centres, multidisciplinary teams and an "aorta code". Each acute aortic entity requires a different patient treatment strategy; these are outlined below. Finally, numerous preventive strategies for AAS are discussed. The keys to good results are early diagnosis, understanding the natural history of these disorders and, where necessary, prompt surgical intervention. It is important to keep in mind that chest pain does not necessarily correspond with coronary heart disease and to be alert to the possible existence of aortic diseases because once antiplatelet drugs are administered, a blocked coagulation system can complicate aortic surgery and affect prognosis. The management of AAS in "aortic centres" improves long-term outcomes and decreases mortality rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to report on mid-term outcomes after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in patients with Marfan (MFS) or Loeys–Dietz (LDS) syndrome. METHODS We analysed data from 2 European centres of patients with MFS and LDS undergoing EVAR. Patients were analysed based on (i) timing of the procedure (planned versus emergency procedure) and (ii) the nature of the landing zone (safe versus non-safe). The primary end-point was freedom from reintervention. Secondary end-points were freedom from stroke, bleeding and death. RESULTS A population of 419 patients with MFS (n  = 352) or LDS (n  = 67) was analysed for the purpose of this study. Thirty-nine patients (9%) underwent EVAR. Indications for thoracic endovascular aortic repair or EVAR were aortic dissection in 13 (33%) patients, aortic aneurysm in 22 (57%) patients and others (intercostal patch aneurysm, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, pseudoaneurysm, kinking of frozen elephant trunk (FET)) in 4 (10%) patients. Thoracic endovascular repair was performed in 34 patients, and abdominal endovascular aortic repair was performed in 5 patients. Mean age at 1st thoracic endovascular aortic repair/EVAR was 48.5 ± 15.4 years. Mean follow-up after 1st thoracic endovascular aortic repair/EVAR was 5.9 ± 4.4 years. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of reinterventions between patients with non-safe landing zone and the patients with safe proximal landing zone (P  =   0.609). Furthermore, there was no increased probability for reintervention after planned endovascular intervention compared to emergency procedures (P  =   0.916). Mean time to reintervention, either open surgical or endovascular, after planned endovascular intervention was in median 3.9 years (95% confidence interval 2.0–5.9 years) and 2.0 years (95% confidence interval –1.1 to 5.1 years) (P  =   0.23) after emergency procedures. CONCLUSIONS EVAR in patients with MFS and LDS and a safe landing zone is feasible and safe. Endovascular treatment is a viable option when employed by a multi-disciplinary aortic team even if the landing zone is in native tissue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) is an emergency associated with high peri-hospital mortality rates. Variable clinical presentation makes timely diagnosis challenging and such delays in diagnosis directly impact patient outcomes. Aims and objectives: The aims of the Collaborative Acute Aortic Syndrome Project (CAASP) are to characterise and evaluate the current AAS pathways of a cohort of hospitals in the UK, USA and New Zealand to determine if patient outcomes are influenced by the AAS pathway (time to hospital admission, diagnosis and management plan) and demographic, social, geographic and patient-specific factors (clinical presentation and comorbidities). The objectives are to describe different AAS pathways and time duration between hospital admission to diagnosis and management plan instigation, and to compare patient outcomes between pathways. Methods: The study is a multicentre, retrospective service evaluation project of adult patients diagnosed on imaging with AAS. It will be coordinated by the UK National Interventional Radiology Trainee Research (UNITE) network and Vascular and Endovascular Research Network (VERN) in conjunction with The Aortic Dissection Charitable Trust (TADCT). All AAS cases diagnosed on imaging between 1st January 2018 to 1st June 2021 will be included and followed-up for 6 months. Eligibility criteria include aortic dissection (AD) Type A, Type B, non A/B, penetrating aortic ulcer, and intramural haematoma. Exclusion criteria are non-AAS pathology, acute on chronic AAS, and age<18. This project will evaluate patient demographics, timing of presentation, patient symptoms, risk factors for AD, physical examination findings, timing to imaging and treatment, hospital stay, and mortality. Univariate and multivariate analysis will be used to identify predictors associated with prolonged time to diagnosis or treatment and mortality at 30 days. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using the Ankura™ device (Lifetech Scientific, Shenzhen, China) with left subclavian artery (LSA) in-situ fenestration (ISF) using an adjustable puncture device system. Methods: It is a single center, retrospective, financially unsupported cohort study of TEVAR performed from 16 February 2007 to 10 January 2023. Inclusion criteria were isolate LSA revascularization for elective or urgent/emergent "zone 2" TEVAR, and the availability of the preoperative computed tomography angiography. Results: Post-hoc analysis identified 52 TEVARs. There were 39 (75.0%) males, and 13 (25.0%) females: median age was 74.5 years (IQR, 65.5–78). Index TEVAR was performed for atherosclerotic aneurysm in 27 (51.9%) cases, dissection-related diseases in 18 (34.6%), penetrating aortic ulcer in 5 (9.6%), and blunt traumatic aortic injury in 2 (3.8%). Access-vessel feasibility rate of TEVAR using the Ankura™ device would have been 98.1% (51/52). Considering the morphology of the aortic arch, ISF TEVAR feasibility would have been 61.5% (32/52). Binary logistic regression analysis identified LSA angulation (OR: 1.1, 95%CI: 1.03–1.14, p = 0.003) to be associated with ISF feasibility using this endograft and a self-centering adjustable needle-based puncture device. Conclusions: Potential feasibility of TEVAR using the Ankura™ endograft with ISF using a self-centering adjustable needle system was 61.5%. Left subclavian artery angulation seems to be the most important and limiting anatomical constraint. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present a case of life-threatening gastrointestinal bleeding caused by a penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (PAU) that ruptured into the esophagus. A 65-year-old man presented with pyrexia and nausea. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) performed on admission revealed a hematoma between the lower esophagus and descending aorta due to a contained rupture of a PAU, which was undiagnosed at that time. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) performed on the fifth day of admission revealed a subepithelial lesion in the lower esophagus, further complicated by ulcer formation. Biopsy did not reveal any malignant findings. On the eighth day of admission, the patient experienced substantial hematemesis with vital signs indicative of shock. Emergency EGD was performed, which revealed life-threatening bleeding in the lower esophagus. Contrast-enhanced CT revealed an aortoesophageal fistula with massive hematemesis, after which the patient died. An autopsy revealed perforation of the PAU into the esophagus without aortic dissection or a true aneurysm. Patients with atherosclerosis who develop recent-onset gastrointestinal symptoms, progressive anemia, and/or periaortic lesions should be carefully evaluated using contrast-enhanced CT, and PAU should be considered in the differential diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes). A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Single branched thoracic endografts (SBTEs) have been designed for pathology requiring zone 2 seal during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Numerous criteria must be met to allow for their implantation. Our aim was to analyze anatomic suitability for a next generation SBTE. Methods: We reviewed 150 TEVAR procedures between 2015 and 2019. Proximal seal was: zone 0 in 21 (16%), zone 1 in 4 (3%), zone 2 in 52 (40%), zone 3 in 45 (35%), and zone 4 or distal in 7 (5%). We analyzed the Zone 2 patient's angiograms and CT angiograms using centerline software to measure arterial diameters and length in relation to the left common carotid artery (LCCA), left subclavian artery (LSA) and proximal extent of aortic disease to determine if patients met anatomic criteria of a novel SBTE. Results: Zone 2 average age was 64.4 ± 16.3 years; 34 patients were male (65%). Indications for repair were aneurysm (N = 9, 17%), acute dissection (N = 14, 27%), chronic dissection with aneurysmal degeneration (N = 7, 13%), intramural hematoma (N = 9, 17%), penetrating aortic ulcer (N = 5, 10%), and blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI, N = 8, 15%). LSA revascularization occurred in 27 patients (52%). Overall, 20 (38.5%) of the zone 2 patients met anatomic criteria. Patients with dissection met anatomic criteria less frequently than aneurysm (33% [10 of 30] vs 64% [9 of 14]). Patients treated for BTAI rarely met the anatomic criteria (1 of 8, 13%). The main anatomic constraints were an inadequate distance from the LCCA to the LSA takeoff and from the LCCA to the start of the aortic disease process. Conclusion: Less than half of patients who require seal in zone 2 met criteria for this SBTE. Patients with aneurysms met anatomic criteria more often than those with dissection. The device would have little applicability in treating patients with BTAI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to evaluate the suitability of a subclavian unibody single-branch endograft among patients treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in landing zone 2 (LZ2). METHODS This is a pre-clinical, single-centre, real-world, all-comers, retrospective cohort study. Patients treated with TEVAR in LZ2 with an available preoperative computed tomography angiography were included. The primary outcome was the anatomical feasibility of the Castor endograft in patients receiving endovascular treatment in LZ2 between 1999 and 2022. Secondary outcomes were: a comparison of feasible and unfeasible patients; frequencies and description of exclusion causes; non-feasibility risk factor analysis; and analysis of the stent graft configurations necessary to treat 75% of the patients. A logistic regression model was used to find associations between baseline morphological data and non-feasibility. RESULTS A total of 473 procedures were performed and 72 patients fulfilling inclusion criteria were included. The mean distance between the left carotid artery and left subclavian artery (or between innominate artery and bovine trunk) was 12.4 ± 5.2 mm and its average diameter was 33.0 ± 10.6 mm. The pre-vertebral left subclavian artery's diameter and length were 11.3 ± 2.5 and 38.7 ± 10.8 mm. Forty-nine (68.1%) patients were suitable for Castor implantation. Twenty-one configurations were required to treat 75% of feasible patients and might be lowered to 12 configurations applying less strict criteria. CONCLUSIONS The Castor endograft was anatomically feasible in several patients requiring TEVAR in LZ2. Three-quarters of feasible patients could be treated with a reasonable number of configurations, paving the path for future off-the-shelf applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aortic pseudoaneurysms (PA) vary in size and may remain asymptomatic. PAs may be caused by vascular injury, such as trauma or surgery, or other non-traumatic causes, such as Bechet disease, infection, or penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers. The diagnosis of PAs may have been delayed for decades. We present a case of a PA detected incidentally in a male patient who experienced traumatic bowel perforation due to blunt abdominal trauma 30 years before presentation. Computed tomography (CT) displayed a 9.2 cm mass in the pelvis, initially considered a neoplasm of small bowel origin. Further analysis of the CT images suggested a thrombosed PA at the aortic bifurcation, which was confirmed via surgical exploration. Graft interposition was performed using a Dacron 16-8 mm graft and the patient recovered without any complications. This case highlights the importance of a high index of suspicion for the diagnosis of a thrombosed aortic PA.

Objective. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of endovascular treatment for nondissected diseases of the ascending aorta. Data Sources. PubMed, Embase, and SciELO. Review Methods. In this study, we conducted a search on the PubMed, Embase, and SciELO databases for all cases of ascending aortic endovascular repair included in the literature published between January 2007 and July 2023, excluding type A aortic dissection. We reviewed 56 case reports and 7 observational studies included in this study, assessing the techniques, equipment, procedural steps, and results. We summarized the age, complications, follow-up time, and access route. Results. This study includes 63 articles reporting 105 patients (mean age: 64.96 ± 17.08 years) who received endovascular repair for nondissected ascending aortic disease. The types of disease include aneurysm (N = 16), pseudoaneurysm (N = 71), penetrating aortic ulcer (N = 10), intramural hematoma (N = 2), thrombosis (N = 2), iatrogenic coarctation (N = 1), and rupture of the aorta (N = 3). The success rate of surgery is 99.05% (104/105). Complications include endoleak (10.48%, 11/105), stroke (5.71%, 6/105), postoperative infection (1.91%, 2/105), acute renal failure (0.95%, 1/105), aortic rupture (0.95%, 1/105), thrombosis (0.95%, 1/105), and splenic infarction (0.95%, 1/105). Five patients required conversion to open surgery, two patients underwent endovascular reintervention, and four of these five patients underwent surgery due to endoleak. Early mortality was 2.86% (3/105). Conclusion. While the viability and results of endovascular repair for the treatment of ascending aortic disease are acknowledged in some circumstances, further research is needed to determine the safety and effectiveness of endovascular treatment for ascending aortic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This work aims to provide a comprehensive description of the characteristics of a group of acute aortic diseases that are all potentially life-threatening and are collectively referred to as acute aortic syndromes (AASs). There have been recent developments in the care and diagnostic plan for AAS. A substantial clinical index of suspicion is required to identify AASs before irreversible fatal consequences arise because of their indefinite symptoms and physical indicators. A methodical approach to the diagnosis of AAS is addressed. Timely and suitable therapy should be started immediately after diagnosis. Improving clinical outcomes requires centralising patients with AAS in high-volume centres with high-volume surgeons. Consequently, the management of these patients benefits from the increased use of aortic centres, multidisciplinary teams and an “aorta code”. Each acute aortic entity requires a different patient treatment strategy; these are outlined below. Finally, numerous preventive strategies for AAS are discussed. The keys to good results are early diagnosis, understanding the natural history of these disorders and, where necessary, prompt surgical intervention. It is important to keep in mind that chest pain does not necessarily correspond with coronary heart disease and to be alert to the possible existence of aortic diseases because once antiplatelet drugs are administered, a blocked coagulation system can complicate aortic surgery and affect prognosis. The management of AAS in “aortic centres” improves long-term outcomes and decreases mortality rates.

Background: The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in the treatment of "primary aortic" (aneurysm, aortic dissection, penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU)) and "secondary aortic" (iatrogenic, trauma, and aortoesophageal fistula) pathologies. Methods: Retrospective review of a cohort of patients treated at a single tertiary referral center from 2015 to 2021. The primary end point was postoperative in-hospital mortality. Secondary end points were the duration of the procedure, duration of postoperative intensive care treatment, length of hospital stay, and the nature and severity of postoperative complications according to the Dindo–Clavien classification. Results: A total of 34 patients underwent TEVAR for emergency indications. Twenty-two patients were treated for primary and twelve patients for secondary aortic pathologies. Concerning in-hospital mortality, no statistically significant difference could be observed between the primary and secondary aortic groups (27.3% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.711). Patients with an aortoesophageal fistula had a mortality rate of 66.7%. Postoperative morbidity (Dindo–Clavien > 3) was also not statistically significantly different between the primary and secondary aortic groups (36.4% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.86). Preoperative hemoglobin level (p < 0.001 for mortality, p = 0.002 for morbidity), hemoglobin level difference (p = 0.022, p = 0.032), postoperative creatinine level (p = 0.009, p = 0.035), and pre- and postoperative lactate levels (p < 0.001 for both mortality and morbidity) were found to be independent factors associated with postoperative mortality and morbidity (Dindo–Clavien > 3), respectively. The preoperative creatinine level was found to be associated with mortality (p = 0.024) but not morbidity. Conclusions: Morbidity and in-hospital mortality are still considerable after emergency TEVAR for both primary and secondary aortic indications. Pre- and postoperative levels of hemoglobin, creatinine, and lactate may be valuable to predict patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectivesComputed tomography (CT) has been increasingly used in the diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome, and a number of high-risk CT imaging features have been reported. We aimed to identify CT imaging findings suggesting high-risk for acute aortic syndrome by examining clinical outcomes of patients with acute type A aortic intramural hematoma (TAIMH).MethodsThis retrospective study analyzed the relationship of clinical patient characteristics and imaging features with mortality and aortic events in 63 patients receiving initial medical treatment for TAIMH. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine the predictors of aortic events, and the Kaplan–Meier method was used to analyze survival and aortic events.ResultsDuring a median follow-up of 4.2 years, 25 patients experienced aortic events and 40% of these occurred within 7 days of admission. In total, 12 patients experienced aortic death and 12 patients underwent open aortic surgery or endovascular stenting for aortic disease. In multivariate regression analysis, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers (PAUs) or ulcer-like projections (ULPs) (P = 0.04) and pericardial effusion (P = 0.03) were independent predictors of aortic events. In the Cox regression model, PAUs/ULPs (P = 0.04) and pericardial effusion (P = 0.04) were independently associated with lower aortic event-free survival.ConclusionIdentification of high-risk CT features is important for clinical decision-making during TAIMH treatment. Early and frequent CT imaging follow-up is required in patients receiving medical treatment. PAUs/ULP and pericardial effusion were the strongest predictors of adverse aortic events.

Aim: The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This work aims to review recent literature on penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs) and intramural hematomas (IMHs), in order to identify clinical and imaging factors connected to aortic-related adverse events (AAE). Methods: We performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Metanalyses (PRISMA) guidelines. An electronic search was conducted on Medline and Embase databases. We included articles reporting on PAUs and/or IMHs localized in the descending thoracic and/or abdominal aorta and analyzing clinical and/or radiological markers of AAE. Results: Of 964 records identified through database searching, 17 were incorporated in the present review, including 193 and 1298 patients with type B PAUs and IMHs, respectively. The 30-days aortic-related mortality (ARM) was 4.3% and 3.9% for PAUs and IMHs. A total of 21% of patients with IMHs underwent intervention during the follow-up period, and 32% experienced an AAE. PAU markers of AAE were minimum depth (ranging from 9.5 to 15 mm) and diameter (≥12.5 mm). Maximum aortic diameter (MAD) cut-off values ranging from 38 to 44.75 mm were related to AAE for IMHs, together with ulcer-like projection (ULP) of the aortic wall. Conclusions: Despite data heterogeneity in the literature, this PAU- and IMH-focused review has highlighted the imaging and clinical markers of disease progression, thus identifying patients that could benefit from an early intervention in order to reduce the AAE rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present a case of penetrating atherosclerotic aortic ulcer with pseudoaneurysm which was managed by a hybrid partial debranching thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (d-TEVAR) procedure. A 68-year-old professional singer with multiple comorbidities presented with mid-chest pain radiating to the back for the past 2 months. Computed tomography aortogram revealed a penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer near the summit of the left subclavian artery (LSA) at the distal aortic arch. In view of the high risk of an open-heart surgery, TEVAR procedure with partial debranching of the aortic arch vessel was proposed. As the aneurysm was close to the origin of the LSA, an adequate proximal landing zone was not available. Hence, a bypass from the left common carotid artery to the LSA was done. Following this, an endovascular procedure was performed and the stent graft was placed covering the origin of the LSA. Check aortograms after the procedure revealed patent stent and complete obliteration of the pseudoaneurysm. There was no endoleak noted and the left carotid to subclavian artery bypass was functioning well. The postoperative period was uneventful. Follow-up over a 6-month period was satisfactory. The key elements of a successful thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair are appropriate patient selection, thorough planning, and careful procedural execution. This case demonstrates that a hybrid procedure with partial debranching and thoracic endovascular repair of penetrating aortic ulcers is a safe and less-invasive alternative for elderly, high-risk patients.

Background: The clinical outcomes and survival of patients with penetrating aortic ulcers (PAU) were evaluated in a tertiary care hospital, comparing those who underwent aortic repair to those treated conservatively. Patients and methods: A retrospective single-centre analysis included all patients that underwent a computed tomography angiography (CT-A) scan with the diagnosis of a PAU between January 2009 and May 2019. "PAU" was identified in 1,493 of 112,506 CT-A scan reports in 576 patients. Clinical and angiomorphological data were collected. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), with secondary outcomes focusing on identifying risk factors for poor OS. Survival probabilities were analysed by the Kaplan-Meier method using the log-rank test. A Cox hazard model using survival as dependent variable with stepwise backward eliminations based on the likelihood ratios was employed. Results: 315 PAUs were identified in 278 patients. The prevalence in the cohort was 0.8%. The mean age of the patients was 74.4 years, and they were predominantly male (n = 208, 74.8%). The mean ulcer depth was 11.8 mm (range 2-50 mm). Out of the patients, 232 were asymptomatic (83.5%). Among 178 PAUs (56.5%), high-risk factors, such as ulcer depth >10 mm, aortic diameter >40 mm, and ulcer length >20 mm, were observed. Aortic repair was associated with a better mean OS compared to conservatively managed patients (72.6 versus 32.2 months, p = 0.001). The Cox hazard model showed that ulcer depth >1 mm was associated with poor OS (HR 0.67, p = 0.048), while aortic repair was related to a better OS (HR 4.365, p<0.013). Conclusions: Aortic repair is associated with better OS, but this finding should be interpreted with caution because of differences in age and comorbidities between the groups. Further evaluation is warranted through prospective studies with randomized groups. Further assessment for angiomorphological parameters is recommended to identify patients at increased risk for poor OS.

Non-atherosclerotic diseases of the aorta are part of the broad spectrum of arterial diseases: aortic aneurysms, acute aortic syndromes (AAS) including aortic dissection (AD), intramural hematoma (IMH), penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (PAU) and traumatic aortic injury (TAI), pseudoaneurysm, aortic rupture, atherosclerotic and inflammatory diseases, as well as genetic diseases (e.g. Marfan syndrome) and congenital anomalies, including coarctation of the aorta (CoA, coarctation of the aorta, CoA). They are diagnosed after a long period of subclinical development or may have an acute clinical picture. They are divided into two large groups, atherosclerotic and non-atherosclerotic diseases of the aorta. Overall global mortality from aortic aneurysm, dissection, and rupture increased from 2.49 per 100,000 to 2.78 per 100,000 population between 1990 and 2010, with higher rates in men. Acute aortic syndrome is often the first manifestation of the disease, which needs rapid diagnosis and decision-making to influence the extremely poor prognosis. Special attention is given to genetic and congenital aortic diseases, since preventive measures play an important role in avoiding subsequent complications. A calcified aorta presents a serious problem with a surgical or interventional approach. Calcified coral reef aorta should be considered as an important differential diagnosis. Aortitis and aortic tumors are also considered. The most frequently applied diagnostic methods are echography with color and PW Doppler, CT angiography, MRI angiography. Patients with aortic disease usually require lifelong surveillance, regardless of the initial therapeutic strategy (pharmacologic, interventional, or surgical). This monitoring consists of clinical assessment, review of the patient's medication and therapeutic goals, and imaging of the aorta. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]