PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify morphologic factors affecting type I endoleak formation and bird-beak configuration after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). METHODS: Computed tomography (CT) data of 57 patients (40 males; median age, 66 years) undergoing TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysm (34 TAA, 19 TAAA) or penetrating aortic ulcer (n = 4) between 2001 and 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. In 28 patients, the Gore TAG® stent-graft was used, followed by the Medtronic Valiant® in 16 cases, the Medtronic Talent® in 8, and the Cook Zenith® in 5 cases. Proximal landing zone (PLZ) was in zone 1 in 13, zone 2 in 13, zone 3 in 23, and zone 4 in 8 patients. In 14 patients (25%), the procedure was urgent or emergent. In each case, pre- and postoperative CT angiography was analyzed using a dedicated image processing workstation and complimentary in-house developed software based on a 3D cylindrical intensity model to calculate aortic arch angulation and conicity of the landing zones (LZ). RESULTS: Primary type Ia endoleak rate was 12% (7/57) and subsequent re-intervention rate was 86% (6/7). Left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage (p = 0.036) and conicity of the PLZ (5.9 vs. 2.6 mm; p = 0.016) were significantly associated with an increased type Ia endoleak rate. Bird-beak configuration was observed in 16 patients (28%) and was associated with a smaller radius of the aortic arch curvature (42 vs. 65 mm; p = 0.049). Type Ia endoleak was not associated with a bird-beak configuration (p = 0.388). Primary type Ib endoleak rate was 7% (4/57) and subsequent re-intervention rate was 100%. Conicity of the distal LZ was associated with an increased type Ib endoleak rate (8.3 vs. 2.6 mm; p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: CT-based 3D aortic morphometry helps to identify risk factors of type I endoleak formation and bird-beak configuration during TEVAR. These factors were LSA coverage and conicity within the landing zones for type I endoleak formation and steep aortic angulation for bird-beak configuration.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify morphologic factors affecting type I endoleak formation and bird-beak configuration after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). METHODS: Computed tomography (CT) data of 57 patients (40 males; median age, 66 years) undergoing TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysm (34 TAA, 19 TAAA) or penetrating aortic ulcer (n = 4) between 2001 and 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. In 28 patients, the Gore TAG® stent-graft was used, followed by the Medtronic Valiant® in 16 cases, the Medtronic Talent® in 8, and the Cook Zenith® in 5 cases. Proximal landing zone (PLZ) was in zone 1 in 13, zone 2 in 13, zone 3 in 23, and zone 4 in 8 patients. In 14 patients (25%), the procedure was urgent or emergent. In each case, pre- and postoperative CT angiography was analyzed using a dedicated image processing workstation and complimentary in-house developed software based on a 3D cylindrical intensity model to calculate aortic arch angulation and conicity of the landing zones (LZ). RESULTS: Primary type Ia endoleak rate was 12% (7/57) and subsequent re-intervention rate was 86% (6/7). Left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage (p = 0.036) and conicity of the PLZ (5.9 vs. 2.6 mm; p = 0.016) were significantly associated with an increased type Ia endoleak rate. Bird-beak configuration was observed in 16 patients (28%) and was associated with a smaller radius of the aortic arch curvature (42 vs. 65 mm; p = 0.049). Type Ia endoleak was not associated with a bird-beak configuration (p = 0.388). Primary type Ib endoleak rate was 7% (4/57) and subsequent re-intervention rate was 100%. Conicity of the distal LZ was associated with an increased type Ib endoleak rate (8.3 vs. 2.6 mm; p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: CT-based 3D aortic morphometry helps to identify risk factors of type I endoleak formation and bird-beak configuration during TEVAR. These factors were LSA coverage and conicity within the landing zones for type I endoleak formation and steep aortic angulation for bird-beak configuration.
Authors: Stefan Wörz; Hendrik von Tengg-Kobligk; Verena Henninger; Fabian Rengier; Hardy Schumacher; Dittmar Böckler; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Karl Rohr Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2010-06-21 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: David H Stone; David C Brewster; Christopher J Kwolek; Glenn M Lamuraglia; Mark F Conrad; Thomas K Chung; Richard P Cambria Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Hillary B Alberta; Jessica L Secor; Taylor C Smits; Mark A Farber; William D Jordan; Jon S Matsumura Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2013-06-21 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Mark A Farber; Joseph S Giglia; Benjamin W Starnes; Scott L Stevens; Jeremiah Holleman; Rabih Chaer; Jon S Matsumura Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2013-05-25 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Viony M Belvroy; Hector W L de Beaufort; Joost A van Herwaarden; Jean Bismuth; Gabriele Piffaretti; Frans L Moll; Santi Trimarchi Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Moritz S Bischoff; Matthias Müller-Eschner; Katrin Meisenbacher; Andreas S Peters; Dittmar Böckler Journal: Med Sci Monit Basic Res Date: 2015-12-31