G A Antoniou1, K El Sakka, M Hamady, J H N Wolfe. 1. Regional Vascular Unit, St Mary's Hospital, Praed Street, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London W2 1NY, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aortic arch disease has conventionally been the domain of open surgical repair. Hybrid open and endovascular repair has evolved as an alternative, less invasive, treatment option with promising results. A systematic literature review and analysis of the reported outcomes was undertaken. METHODS: An Internet-based literature search using MEDLINE was performed to identify all studies reporting on hybrid aortic arch repair with supra-aortic branch revascularisation and subsequent stent graft deployment. Debranching should involve at least one carotid artery, so that patients merely requiring a carotid-subclavian bypass were not included. Only reports of five patients or more were included in the analysis. Outcome measures were technical success, perioperative, 30-day and late morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Eighteen studies fulfilled our search criteria, and data from 195 patients were entered for the analysis. No comparative studies of hybrid aortic arch repair with other conventional or innovative treatment modalities were identified. Complete arch repair was performed in 122 patients (63%). The overall technical success rate was 86% (167/195). The most common reason for technical failure was endoleak (9%, 17/195). Overall perioperative morbidity and mortality rates were 21% (41/195) and 9% (18/195), respectively. The most common perioperative complication was stroke (7%, 14/195). Four aneurysm-related deaths were reported during follow-up (2%). No long-term data on hybrid aortic arch repair were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid repair of complex aortic arch disease is an alternative treatment option with acceptable short-term results. Stroke remains a frequent complication and mortality rates are significant. Further research with large comparative studies and longer follow-up is required. Copyright (c) 2010 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND:Aortic arch disease has conventionally been the domain of open surgical repair. Hybrid open and endovascular repair has evolved as an alternative, less invasive, treatment option with promising results. A systematic literature review and analysis of the reported outcomes was undertaken. METHODS: An Internet-based literature search using MEDLINE was performed to identify all studies reporting on hybrid aortic arch repair with supra-aortic branch revascularisation and subsequent stent graft deployment. Debranching should involve at least one carotid artery, so that patients merely requiring a carotid-subclavian bypass were not included. Only reports of five patients or more were included in the analysis. Outcome measures were technical success, perioperative, 30-day and late morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Eighteen studies fulfilled our search criteria, and data from 195 patients were entered for the analysis. No comparative studies of hybrid aortic arch repair with other conventional or innovative treatment modalities were identified. Complete arch repair was performed in 122 patients (63%). The overall technical success rate was 86% (167/195). The most common reason for technical failure was endoleak (9%, 17/195). Overall perioperative morbidity and mortality rates were 21% (41/195) and 9% (18/195), respectively. The most common perioperative complication was stroke (7%, 14/195). Four aneurysm-related deaths were reported during follow-up (2%). No long-term data on hybrid aortic arch repair were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid repair of complex aortic arch disease is an alternative treatment option with acceptable short-term results. Stroke remains a frequent complication and mortality rates are significant. Further research with large comparative studies and longer follow-up is required. Copyright (c) 2010 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.