PURPOSE: Since its introduction more than a decade ago, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has shown promising results for patients with various thoracic aortic diseases. The aim of the current review is to assess the current literature to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TEVAR. METHODS: A thorough search of the existing literature on TEVAR was conducted on electronic databases, including Medline, Pubmed, EMBASE and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effectiveness. The most recent results were categorized according to the indications of performing TEVAR. RESULTS: A number of case-series studies and reviews have shown reduced early morbidity and mortality rates in a range of thoracic aortic diseases for TEVAR in comparison to open surgical repair. However, there is a lack of robust clinical data to suggest any improvement in long-term overall survival. CONCLUSION: Despite numerous encouraging results from a large number of publications in recent years, there remains a lack of level 1 evidence to support an improvement of long-term overall survival for patients who underwent TEVAR when compared with traditional treatment modalities. There appears to be an urgent need to conduct well-designed randomized-controlled trials in this rapidly expanding intervention.
PURPOSE: Since its introduction more than a decade ago, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has shown promising results for patients with various thoracic aortic diseases. The aim of the current review is to assess the current literature to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TEVAR. METHODS: A thorough search of the existing literature on TEVAR was conducted on electronic databases, including Medline, Pubmed, EMBASE and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effectiveness. The most recent results were categorized according to the indications of performing TEVAR. RESULTS: A number of case-series studies and reviews have shown reduced early morbidity and mortality rates in a range of thoracic aortic diseases for TEVAR in comparison to open surgical repair. However, there is a lack of robust clinical data to suggest any improvement in long-term overall survival. CONCLUSION: Despite numerous encouraging results from a large number of publications in recent years, there remains a lack of level 1 evidence to support an improvement of long-term overall survival for patients who underwent TEVAR when compared with traditional treatment modalities. There appears to be an urgent need to conduct well-designed randomized-controlled trials in this rapidly expanding intervention.
Authors: Ivancarmine Gambardella; George A Antoniou; Francesco Torella; Cristiano Spadaccio; Aung Y Oo; Mario Gaudino; Francesco Nappi; Matthew A Shaw; Leonard N Girardi Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-09-13 Impact factor: 5.501