Introduction
Aortic arch disease is a challenging clinical problem, especially in high-risk patients where open repair can have morbidity and mortality rates of 30–40% and 2–20%, respectively. Aortic arch “chimney”(AAC) stents used during thoracic endovascular aortic repair(TEVAR) are a less invasive treatment strategy than open repair, but the current literature is inconclusive about the role of this technology. The focus of this analysis is to describe our experience with TEVAR and AAC stent(s).
Methods
All TEVAR procedures performed from 2002–15 were reviewed to identify those with AAC stents. Primary end-points were technical success, as well as 30-day and 1-year mortality. Secondary end-points included complications, reintervention, and endoleak. Technical success was defined as a patient surviving the index operation with deployment of the AAC stent(s) at the intended treatment zone with no evidence of type 1 or 3 endoleak on initial postoperative imaging. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival.
Results
Twenty-seven patients(age:69±12 years[male 70%]) were identified, and all were described as prohibitive risk for open repair by the treating team. Relevant comorbidity rates were: coronary artery disease/myocardial infarction(59%), O2-dependent emphysema(30%), preoperative creatinine>1.8mg/dL(19%), and congestive heart failure(15%). Presentations included: elective-67%(n=18), symptomatic-26%(n=7), and ruptured-7%(n= 2). Eleven(41%) had prior endovascular and/or open arch/descending thoracic repair. Indications were: degenerative aneurysm(49%), chronic residual type A dissection with aneurysm(15%), type 1a endoleak after TEVAR(11%), post-surgical pseudoaneurysm(11%), penetrating ulcer(7%), and acute type B dissection(7%). 32 BC vessels were treated: innominate, n=7; left common carotid artery(LCCA), n=24; left subclavian artery(LSA), n=1. Five patients(19%) had simultaneous innominate-LCCA chimneys. BCC stents were planned in 75%(n=24) with the remainder placed for either LCCA or innominate artery encroachment(n=8). Overall technical success was 89%(1-intraoperative death, 2-persistent type 1a endoleaks in follow-up).
30-day mortality was 4%(n=1; intraoperative in a patient with a ruptured arch aneurysm) and median LOS was 6[IQR 4, 9] days. Seven(26%) patients experienced a major complication(stroke-3[all with unplanned BCC], respiratory failure-3, and death-1). Nine(33%) patients underwent aorta-related reintervention, and no chimney occlusion events occurred during follow-up(median follow-up:9[IQR 1,23] months). One and 3-year survival is estimated to be 88±6% and 69±9%, respectively.
Conclusions
TEVAR with AAC can be performed with high technical success and acceptable morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients. Unplanned AAC placement during TEVAR results in an elevated stroke risk, which may be related to the branch vessel coverage necessitating AAC placement. Acceptable mid-term survival can be anticipated, but aorta-related reintervention is not uncommon, and diligent follow-u...