Laser in situ Fenestration in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Single-Center Analysis

Evans, Elizabeth; Veeraswamy, Ravikumar; Zeigler, Sanford; Wooster, Mathew

doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2021.05.006

Cited by 11 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The search strategy is presented in Supplementary Table S2 . After deduplication and article exclusion, six studies were included in this review ( Figure 1 ) [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. All of them were of a retrospective nature [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After deduplication and article exclusion, six studies were included in this review ( Figure 1 ) [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. All of them were of a retrospective nature [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. The main characteristics of the studies are presented in Table 1 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In total, 247 patients were included; 173 were males (70%) with a mean age at 63 years (range 37–82 years) [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Different aortic arch pathologies were managed including 59 (23.9%) cases of aortic arch aneurysms and 146 (59.1%) of acute or subacute dissections; 33 (22.6%) of them were type A [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Among the aneurysms, 16 (27.1%) were post-dissection.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the aneurysms, 16 (27.1%) were post-dissection. The urgency of the repair was reported in four studies; 199 (80.6%) cases were considered urgent or emergent [ 14 , 15 , 18 , 19 ]. Regarding the anatomic criteria for in situ laser FTEVAR application, coronary artery or aortic valve involvement, proximal landing less than 15–20 mm, proximal diameter ≥40 mm, extension of the disease to the supra-aortic trunks (dissected target vessels or aneurysmal orifices), and target vessel steep take off and tortuosity were considered and reported as exclusion criteria for in situ laser FTEVAR [ 15 , 17 , 19 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Systematic Review on In Situ Laser Fenestrated Repair for the Endovascular Management of Aortic Arch Pathologies

Houérou

Nana

Pernot

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In situ laser-fenestrated thoracic aortic endovascular repair (FTEVAR) has emerged as a valuable alternative for aortic arch management. This review assessed the early and follow-up outcomes of in situ laser-FTEVAR in aortic arch pathologies. Methods: The PRISMA statement was followed. The English literature was searched, via Ovid, until 15 October 2022. Observational studies, published after 2000, reporting on early and follow-up outcomes for the in situ laser-FTEVAR were eligible. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. Primary outcomes were the technical success, stroke, and mortality at 30-days, and the secondary were the mortality and reintervention during follow-up. Results: Six retrospective studies from 591 and 247 patients were included. Fifty-nine (23.9%) patients were managed for aortic arch aneurysms and 146 (59.1%) for dissections; 22.6% of them for type A. Technical success was at 98% (range 90–100%). Eight patients died (3.2%) and 11 cases presented any type of stroke (4.5%) during the 30-day follow-up. The mean follow-up was 15 months (1–40 months). Ten deaths were reported (4.2%); one was aortic-related (10%). Thirteen re-interventions (6.0%) were performed. Conclusions: In situ laser-FTEVAR for aortic arch repair may be performed with high technical success and low 30-day and midterm follow-up mortality, stroke, and re-intervention rates when applied in well selected patients and performed by experienced teams.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic Review on In Situ Laser Fenestrated Repair for the Endovascular Management of Aortic Arch Pathologies

Houérou

Nana

Pernot

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Revascularization of supra-aortic trunks with minimal cerebral hypoperfusion time is essential for a successful treatment, including LSA, reconstruction of which had gone through controversies, while currently there is an agreement for the necessity of its reconstruction (10). Different endovascular techniques had been used in the revascularization of supraaortic trunks, including the chimney technique, custom-made branched stent-graft, in situ fenestration, and f-SMSG (11)(12)(13)(14). Chimney technique was related to a higher incidence of type Ia endoleak owing to the gutter.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with fenestrated surgeon-modified stent-graft for type B aortic dissections involving the aortic arch

Zhang²,

Song³

et al. 2023

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThis retrospective analysis aimed to evaluate the early and midterm outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with fenestrated surgeon-modified stent-graft (f-SMSG) for type B aortic dissections (TBAD) involving the aortic arch.MethodsFrom March 2016 to April 2021, 47 consecutive patients were treated using TEVAR with f-SMSG. All patients were diagnosed with TBAD involving the aortic arch.ResultsIn total, 47 patients with TBAD involving the aortic arch were treated with f-SMSGs. There were 21 zone 1 and 26 zone 2 TEVAR, and 65 arteries were revascularized successfully with fenestrations. Technical success was achieved in 46 patients (97.88%). The 30-day estimated survival (± SE) and reintervention was 93.6 ± 1.0% (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 92.6–94.6%) and 91.5 ± 1.2% (95% CI, 90.3–92.7%), respectively. During a median follow-up of 51 months (range, 16–71 months), 1 patient died of rupture of aortic dissection (AD) and 3 patients died of non-aortic-related reasons. Reintervention was performed for four patients, including two patients of type IA entry flow and two patients of type IB entry flow. No occlusion of the supra-aortic trunk was observed. The estimated survival and reintervention (± SE) at 4 years was 88.7 ± 1.4% (95% CI, 87.3–90.1%) and 84.8 ± 1.5% (95% CI, 83.3–86.3%), respectively.ConclusionThoracic endovascular aortic repair with f-SMSG is an alternative treatment option for TBAD involving the aortic arch in high-volume centers.

show abstract

Mid-term Comparison of One-Piece Branched Stent-Graft and Chimney Technique Treating Aortic Arch Pathologies

Zhao

Zeng

et al. 2022

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laser in situ Fenestration in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Single-Center Analysis

Cited by 11 publications

References 21 publications

Systematic Review on In Situ Laser Fenestrated Repair for the Endovascular Management of Aortic Arch Pathologies

Systematic Review on In Situ Laser Fenestrated Repair for the Endovascular Management of Aortic Arch Pathologies

Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with fenestrated surgeon-modified stent-graft for type B aortic dissections involving the aortic arch

Mid-term Comparison of One-Piece Branched Stent-Graft and Chimney Technique Treating Aortic Arch Pathologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About