Secondary Interventions after Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissections

Endovascular management of chronic symptomatic aortic dissection with the Streamliner Multilayer Flow Modulator: Twelve-month outcomes from the global registry

“…Scali et al 30 found in their series of 80 patients with TEVAR for false lumen aneurysm formation secondary to chronic TBAD, that rates of spinal cord injury were higher than previously reported. [31][32][33][34] Khan et al 35 in their review of secondary interventions post endovascular repair of aortic dissections demonstrated 161 of 862 patients required secondary interventions for entry tears, retrograde type A dissection, false lumen degeneration with aortic expansion, graft malfunction, and various access complications. The complete false lumen thrombosis rate was 33%, and overall mortality was 18.2%.…”

A new beginning of aortic angioscopy in diagnosis and treatment in acute aortic syndrome?

“…Appropriate entry closure is mandatory for more effective treatment with TAVER procedure [9]. However, reintervention is required in up to 20% following TEVAR for type B aortic dissection patients at due to endoleak, device migration and extension or recurrence of dissection at the site of intervention, and increased with longer follow-up [10]. Disappearance of the false lumen due to complete thrombosis was associated with a lower risk for reintervention [11], otherwise continued blood flow through the false lumen with re-entry prevented aortic healing and caused progressive aortic dilatation [12].…”