Background—Aortic dissection remains the most common aortic catastrophe. In the endovascular era, the management of acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD) is undergoing dramatic changes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term outcomes of patients with ATBAD who were treated at our center over a 13-year period.Methods and Results—We reviewed patients with ATBAD between 2001 and 2014, analyzing variables based on status (complicated [c] versus uncomplicated [u]) and treatment modalities. We defined cATBAD as rupture, expansion of diameter on imaging during the admission, persistent pain, or clinical malperfusion leading to a deficit in cerebral, spinal, visceral, renal, or peripheral vascular territories at presentation or during initial hospitalization. Postoperative outcomes were defined as deficits not present before the intervention. Outcomes were compared between the groups by use of Kaplan-Meier and descriptive statistics. We treated 442 patients with ATBAD. Of those 442, 60.6% had uATBAD and were treated medically, and 39.4% had cATBAD, of whom 39.0% were treated medically to 30.0% with open repair, 21.3% with thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and 9.7% with other open peripheral procedures. Intervention-free survival at 1 and 5 years was 84.8% and 62.7% for uATBAD, 61.8% and 44.0% for cATBAD-medical, 69.2% and 47.2% for cATBAD-open, and 68.0% and 42.5% for cATBAD–thoracic endovascular aortic repair, respectively (P=0.001). Overall survival was significantly related primarily to complicated presentation.Conclusions—In our experience, early and late outcomes of ATBAD were dependent on the presence of complications, with cATBAD faring worse. Although uATBAD was associated with favorable early survival, late complications still occurred, mandating radiographic surveillance and open or endovascular interventions. Prospective trials are required to better determine the optimal therapy for uATBAD.

REVAR for rAAA does not seem to conclusively confer either acute or late survival advantages. Routine use of REVAR should be deferred until prospective, randomized trial data become available.

TAEIs can be used successfully to treat patients with critical limb ischemia with acceptable limb salvage rates. Special attention should be given to patients with extensive tissue loss or gangrene because they are at risk for early restenosis and subsequent limb loss. Strict wound and hemodynamic surveillance, wound care, and timely reinterventions are crucial to achieve successful outcomes in this patient population. Amputation or alternative revascularization options, when feasible, should be considered in patients with restenosis and tissue loss given the high rate of limb loss with tibial reinterventions.

This multi-institutional, contemporary experience of ACD examines the treatment and outcomes of ACD. The majority of patients can be identified preoperatively; surgical repair, consisting of cyst excision with arterial reconstruction or bypass alone, provides the best long-term symptomatic relief and reduced need for intervention to maintain patency.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the midterm outcomes of fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of pararenal (PRA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Summary Background Data: FB-EVAR has been associated with decreased morbidity compared to open repair, but there is limited midterm data. Methods: A total of 430 patients (302 males, mean age 74 AE 8 years) treated by FB-EVAR were enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized investigational device exemption study. Endpoints included 30-day mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), freedom from all cause and aortic-related mortality, target vessel patency, and freedom from secondary intervention and target vessel instability. Results: There were 133 PRAs and 297 TAAAs with 1673 renal-mesenteric arteries incorporated by fenestrations or directional branches (3.9 AE 0.5 vesvessels/patient). At 30 days or within the hospital stay if longer than 30 days, there were 4 (0.9%) deaths. MAEs included new-onset dialysis in 8 patients (2%), permanent paraplegia or stroke in 10 patients each (2%), and respiratory failure requiring tracheostomy in 2 patients (0.5%). After a mean follow-up of 26 AE 20 months, there were 3 (0.7%) aortic-related deaths from SMA stent occlusion, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or complications of open arch repair. At 5 years, freedom from all-cause and aortic-related mortality were 57% AE 5% and 98% AE 1%, respectively. Freedom from secondary intervention was 64% AE 4%, primary target vessel patency was 94% AE 1%, and freedom from target vessel instability was 89% AE 2% at same interval. One patient (0.2%) had nonfatal aneurysm treated using endovascular repair. Conclusion: FB-EVAR is safe and effective for treatment of PRA and TAAAs with low rate of aortic-related mortality and aneurysm rupture on midterm follow-up.