OBJECTIVE: To provide a contemporary institutional comparative analysis of expedient correction of acute catastrophes of the descending thoracic aorta (ACDTA) by traditional direct thoracic aortic repair (DTAR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). DESIGN: Single-center retrospective review (April 2001-January 2010). SETTING: Academic medical center. PATIENTS: One hundred patients with ACDTA treated with either TEVAR (n = 76) or DTAR (n = 24). Indications for repair included ruptured degenerative aneurysm (n = 41), traumatic transection (n = 27), complicated acute type B dissection (n = 20), penetrating ulcer (n = 4), intramural hematoma (n = 3), penetrating injury (n = 3), and embolizing lesion (n = 2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographics and 30-day and late outcomes were analyzed using multivariate analysis over a mean follow-up of 33.8 months. RESULTS: Among the 100 patients, mean (SD) age was 58.5 (17.3) years (range, 18-87 years). Demographics and comorbid conditions were similar between the 2 groups, except more patients in the DTAR group had prior aortic surgery (P = .02) and were older (P = .01). Overall 30-day mortality was significantly better among the TEVAR group (8% vs 29%; P = .007). Incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction, acute renal failure, stroke, and paraplegia/paresis was similar between the 2 treatment groups (TEVAR, 5%, 12%, 8%, and 8% vs DTAR, 13%, 13%, 9%, and 13%, respectively). Major respiratory complications were lower in the TEVAR group (16% vs 48%; P < .05). Mean length of hospital stay was also shorter after TEVAR (13.5 vs 16.3 days; P = .30). Independent predictors of patient mortality included age (P = .004) and DTAR (P = .001). CONCLUSION: Patients presenting with ACDTA are best treated with TEVAR whenever feasible.
OBJECTIVE: To provide a contemporary institutional comparative analysis of expedient correction of acute catastrophes of the descending thoracic aorta (ACDTA) by traditional direct thoracic aortic repair (DTAR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). DESIGN: Single-center retrospective review (April 2001-January 2010). SETTING: Academic medical center. PATIENTS: One hundred patients with ACDTA treated with either TEVAR (n = 76) or DTAR (n = 24). Indications for repair included ruptured degenerative aneurysm (n = 41), traumatic transection (n = 27), complicated acute type B dissection (n = 20), penetrating ulcer (n = 4), intramural hematoma (n = 3), penetrating injury (n = 3), and embolizing lesion (n = 2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographics and 30-day and late outcomes were analyzed using multivariate analysis over a mean follow-up of 33.8 months. RESULTS: Among the 100 patients, mean (SD) age was 58.5 (17.3) years (range, 18-87 years). Demographics and comorbid conditions were similar between the 2 groups, except more patients in the DTAR group had prior aortic surgery (P = .02) and were older (P = .01). Overall 30-day mortality was significantly better among the TEVAR group (8% vs 29%; P = .007). Incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction, acute renal failure, stroke, and paraplegia/paresis was similar between the 2 treatment groups (TEVAR, 5%, 12%, 8%, and 8% vs DTAR, 13%, 13%, 9%, and 13%, respectively). Major respiratory complications were lower in the TEVAR group (16% vs 48%; P < .05). Mean length of hospital stay was also shorter after TEVAR (13.5 vs 16.3 days; P = .30). Independent predictors of patient mortality included age (P = .004) and DTAR (P = .001). CONCLUSION:Patients presenting with ACDTA are best treated with TEVAR whenever feasible.
Authors: Elliot L Chaikof; Jan D Blankensteijn; Peter L Harris; Geoffrey H White; Christopher K Zarins; Victor M Bernhard; Jon S Matsumura; James May; Frank J Veith; Mark F Fillinger; Robert B Rutherford; K Craig Kent Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Manuel Garcia-Toca; Peter A Naughton; Jon S Matsumura; Mark D Morasch; Melina R Kibbe; Heron E Rodriguez; William H Pearce; Mark K Eskandari Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2010-07
Authors: Frederik H W Jonker; Santi Trimarchi; Hence J M Verhagen; Frans L Moll; Bauer E Sumpio; Bart E Muhs Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Frederik H W Jonker; Hence J M Verhagen; Peter H Lin; Robin H Heijmen; Santi Trimarchi; W Anthony Lee; Frans L Moll; Husam Athamneh; Bart E Muhs Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-06-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mark G Davies; Houssam K Younes; Patricia W Harris; Faisal Masud; Bryan A Croft; Michael J Reardon; Alan B Lumsden Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Peter A Naughton; Manuel Garcia-Toca; Jon S Matsumura; Heron E Rodriguez; Mark D Morasch; Scott A Resnick; Mark K Eskandari Journal: Vasc Endovascular Surg Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 1.089
Authors: Philippe Demers; D Craig Miller; R Scott Mitchell; Stephen T Kee; Daniel Sze; Mahmood K Razavi; Michael D Dake Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Mark D Morasch; Melina R Kibbe; Mary E Evans; Wendy S Meadows; Mark K Eskandari; Jon S Matsumura; William H Pearce Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 4.268