1-Year Follow-Up Study of Preemptive TEVAR for Residually Dissected Aortas after Proximal Open Repair of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection in High-Risk Patients for Late Re-Intervention

Morishita, Kiyofumi; Baba, Tosio; Shingaki, Masami; Shibata, Tuyoshi; Narayama, Kouhei

doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2019.06.537

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After a review of the abstracts, we detected 32 articles with high relevance, which were fully reviewed. Among these, seven studies were finally identified as eligible for inclusion in the review, while two more studies were found through the author's secondary search of the references of the included manuscripts (Table 1) [2,[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Additionally, studies with nonrandomized and comparative data were evaluated for their quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale [13].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is TEVAR an Effective Approach to Prevent Complications after Surgery for Aortic Dissection Type A? A Systematic Review

Schizas,

Nazou,

Samiotis

et al. 2024

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: A residual false lumen after treatment for Aortic Dissection type A (AD) has been associated with early complications, such as A malperfusion or rupture and mid-term or delayed complications, such as aneurysm formation or dissection expansion. Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) is considered an effective solution by several surgical teams to prevent future complications. In this systematic review, all published data regarding the implementation of TEVAR after previous treatment for AD were collected in order to investigate indications, methods, clinical outcomes and aortic remodeling in these patients. Methods: The aim of this study was to investigate the indications, the methods and the efficacy of TEVAR usage after surgical treatment of AD. Data for this study were collected from four widely used medical databases (MEDLINE, SCIENCE DIRECT, GOOGLE SCHOLAR, OVID). All the results for each database were recorded and were analyzed with a systematic method. Techniques and clinical outcomes were investigated. Aortic remodeling was evaluated based on the following parameters in these studies: aortic diameter, true lumen diameter, false lumen diameter, false lumen thrombosis and false lumen patency. Results: The results obtained from the search among all databases comprised 1410 articles and of these articles 9 were included in the review. The majority of the studies were retrospective (seven out of nine studies), while no study was randomized. The total number of patients was 157 and 133 of them (84.7% of patients) were treated with TEVAR in zone 3 without extension below the diaphragm intraoperatively. Among 142 patients, the calculated mortality rate was 12.7% (18 of 142 patients), with 2.8% (4 of 142 patients) presenting with stroke. The percentage of patients with total or partial thrombosis combined was 65.9% (62 patients in a population of 92). The reintervention rate was 18.7%. Conclusions: TEVAR after AD surgery is an approach usually chosen in clinical practice, but the criteria of its usage are uncertain. This method is safe and enhances aortic remodeling with an acceptable reintervention rate. Definite guidelines in this field should be created in order to delineate whether TEVAR after AD surgery is beneficial as a preventive measure to aorta-related complications and to decide under which criteria this approach should be chosen.

show abstract