Comparison of Two Different Techniques for Isolated Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Zone 2

Author:

Piffaretti Gabriele1ORCID,Pratesi Giovanni2,Gelpi Guido3,Galli Mario4,Criado Frank J.5,Antonello Michele6,Fontana Federico,Piacentino Filippo,Macchi Edoardo,Tozzi Matteo,Castelli Patrizio,Barbante Matteo,Ippoliti Arnaldo,Romagnoni Claudia,Antona Carlo,Paggi Anita,Xodo Andrea,Grego Franco

Affiliation:

1. Vascular Surgery, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Insubria School of Medicine, Circolo University Hospital, Varese, Italy

2. Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy

3. Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Sacco Hospital, Milan, Italy

4. Interventional Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Sant’Anna Hospital, Como, Italy

5. Division of Vascular Surgery, MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA

6. Vascular Surgery, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua School of Medicine, Padua University Hospital, Padua, Italy

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the results of isolated left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using carotid-subclavian bypass (CSbp) or chimney grafts (CGs). Methods: A retrospective multicenter, observational study identified 73 patients (mean age 68±13 years, range 22–87; 56 men) with acute or chronic thoracic aortic lesions who underwent TEVAR with isolated LSA revascularization using either CSbp (n=42) or CGs (n=31) from January 2010 and February 2017. Primary endpoints were TEVAR-related mortality, postoperative stroke, freedom from type Ia endoleak, and LSA patency. Results: Primary technical success was achieved in all cases. Early TEVAR-related mortality was 4.2% (CSbp 2% vs CG 6%, p=0.571). Two (3%) patients had major ischemic strokes (one in each group). Mean follow-up was 24±21 months (range 1–72; median 15). Estimated freedom from TEVAR-related mortality was 93%±3% (95% CI 84.3% to 97.0%) at 12 and 36 months, with no significant difference between CSbp and CG (p=0.258). Aortic reintervention did not differ between the groups (CSbp 5% vs CG 6%, p=0.356); nor did freedom from type Ia endoleak (CSbp 98% vs CG 87%, p=0.134). Gutter-related endoleaks occurred in 4 (13%) CG patients, but none of the patients experienced sac enlargement or the need for reintervention and none died. Primary patency of the LSA was 100% for the entire group during the observation period. Conclusion: In our experience, LSA revascularization proved most satisfactory and equally effective with both the CSbp and CG techniques, without discernible differences at midterm follow-up.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging,Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3