OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the preferred treatment for severe blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAI). Successful outcomes rely on accurate endograft sizing, but initial imaging may underestimate aortic diameters. This study examines the impact of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) on endograft sizing and clinical outcomes in BTAI patients.
METHODS: A prospectively collected multi-institutional dataset from the Aortic Trauma Foundation was analyzed. Patients with BTAI undergoing TEVAR with IVUS were compared to patients who underwent TEVAR alone. Demographics and operative variables were compared, focusing on IVUS effects on endograft sizing by examining maximal proximal and distal aortic diameter on initial CT imaging compared to the graft diameters used during TEVAR.
RESULTS: 293 patients underwent TEVAR for BTAI with IVUS utilized in 124 cases (42.3%). The average graft size in the IVUS and non-IVUS groups were similar proximally (26.91 ± 4.3 mm IVUS vs 27.77 ± 4.7 mm non-IVUS, P = 0.116) and distally (25.96 ± 4.7 mm IVUS vs 26.51 ± 4.7 mm non-IVUS). IVUS did not impact the difference between graft size and initial CT measurements proximally (4.32 ± 4.8 mm IVUS vs 4.23 ± 3.9 mm non-IVUS, P = 0.859) or distally (4.17 ± 5.9 mm IVUS vs 4.50 ± 4.3 mm non-IVUS, P = 0.606). Although delayed hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke occurred less frequently in IVUS patients (0.8% IVUS vs 7.1% non- IVUS, P = 0.024), in-hospital mortality was similar between groups (5.6% IVUS vs 7.7% non-IVUS, P = 0.581).
CONCLUSIONS: IVUS is not associated with significant changes in endograft sizing compared to sizing based on CT scan alone in BTAI patients. IVUS was not associated with differences in mortality but was associated with a decrease in delayed hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke. Routine IVUS in BTAI patients may not be necessary for accurate sizing, but there may be a relationship between IVUS and stroke.

UNASSIGNED: Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is associated with considerable mortality and morbidity. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has essentially replaced open aortic repair (OAR) with superior outcome. The objective of this study was to evaluate the early and intermediate-term outcomes in patients sustaining BTAI treated with TEVAR, and to evaluate the prevalence and impact of left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective analysis includes patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI between February 2006 and December 2022 at the Helsinki University Hospital, Finland. The primary endpoints were 30-day and 2-year mortality, technical success of stent-graft system deployment, and procedural and device-related complications. The secondary endpoints pertained to reintervention events: conversion to OAR, re-TEVAR, any endovascular/surgical reinterventions for optimal stent-graft function, or any reinterventions during follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 38 consecutive BTAI patients treated with TEVAR were included in the analyses. Median patient age was 45.5 years (range, 15-79) and 66% were male. The median follow-up period was 39 months. Technical success was 100%, 30-day mortality was 0%, and 2-year mortality was 11% in the study cohort. Coverage of LSA without revascularization (13/18) resulted in one postoperative nondisabling stroke (1/13), no paraplegia, and one had ischemic left arm findings (1/13). Only one patient required reintervention (LSA embolization; 1/38).
UNASSIGNED: In this institutional series, we provide further evidence in favor of TEVAR for BTAI treatment. We demonstrated that TEVAR is linked to highly favorable outcomes in the short and intermediate term, and coverage of LSA without revascularization was quite well tolerated.

OBJECTIVE: Blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAIs) involving the aortic arch are a challenging condition. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with fenestration, which expands the proximal landing zone, is able to exclude the injury while preserving blood flow in supra-aortic branches.
METHODS: Here we report a case of TEVAR with fenestrations of all supra-aortic branches for traumatic aortic pseudoaneurysm and perform a systematic review.
RESULTS: A 24-year-old man suffering a blunt thoracic injury and a left femoral fracture was sent to our hospital. A pseudoaneurysm was found in the aortic arch between the brachiocephalic artery and the left common carotid artery. The patient underwent emergent TEVAR with fenestrations of all supra-aortic branches, which excluded the pseudoaneurysm and preserved the patency of all branches. The orthopedic team then treated the femoral fracture. The patient\'s recovery was unremarkable. We performed a systematic review on TEVAR with fenestrations for BTAI. Six patients (75%) received TEVAR with single fenestration, 1 patient (12.5%) received TEVAR with two fenestrations, and 1 patient (12.5%) had fenestrations of all supra-aortic branches. Except one patient died in the perioperative, other patients survived without stent-related complications in the short-term follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: TEVAR with fenestration is feasible for treating BTAI involving the aortic arch in selected patients.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to assess the long-term outcomes in patients treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAI).
UNASSIGNED: From January 2010 to December 2019, this retrospective observational study was conducted at 3 centers, involving 62 consecutive BTAI patients who underwent TEVAR. Computed tomography angiography scans were planned to be conducted at 6 months post-procedure, and annually thereafter.
UNASSIGNED: Technical success was achieved in all 62 procedures (100%), which included cases of dissection (n=35, 56.45%), pseudoaneurysm (n=20, 32.26%), and rupture (n=7, 11.29%). Mean injury severity score was 31.66±8.30. A total of 21 supra-arch branches were revascularized by chimney technique, with 12 cases involving the left subclavian artery (LSA) and 9 cases involving the left common carotid artery. In addition, 11 LSAs were covered during the procedure. The in-hospital mortality rate was 1.61% (n=1). The mean follow-up time was 86.82±30.58 months. The all-cause follow-up mortality rate was 3.28% (n=2). Stenosis or occlusion of 3 supra-arch branches (4.92%) was identified at follow-up, with 2 cases (3.28%) requiring re-intervention. No spinal cord ischemia, endoleak, or migration was observed.
UNASSIGNED: Despite only including patients with long-term follow-up, this study confirms the long-term safety and effectiveness of TEVAR for BTAI. For young BTAI patients, as the thoracic aorta increases with age, longer follow-up is needed to observe the potential mismatch between the endograft and the aorta.
CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the long-term safety and effectiveness of endovascular treatment for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI). For young BTAI patients, as the thoracic aorta increases with age, longer follow-up is needed to observe the potential mismatch between the endograft and the aorta. Through a remarkably extended follow-up period (86.82±30.58 months) conducted at multiple centers in China, this study confirms the long-term safety and effectiveness of endovascular treatment for BTAI.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has dramatically reduced the morbidity and mortality of intervention. Injuries requiring zone 2 coverage of the aorta traditionally require left subclavian artery (LSA) sacrifice or open revascularization. Furthermore, these injuries are associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and long-term morbidity. Here we report 1-year outcomes of total endovascular repair of BTAI with the GORE® TAG® Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for LSA preservation.
METHODS: Across 34 investigative sites, 9 patients with BTAI requiring LSA coverage were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective study of a single-branched aortic endograft. The thoracic branch endoprosthesis device allows for graft placement proximal to the LSA and incorporates a single side branch for LSA perfusion.
RESULTS: This initial cohort included 8 male and 1 female patient with a median age of 43 (22, 76) and 12 months of follow-up. Five total years of follow-up are planned. All participants had grade 3 BTAI. All procedures took place between 2018 and 2019. The median injury severity score was 2 (0, 66). The median procedure time was 109 min (78, 162). All aortic injuries were repaired under general anesthesia and with heparinization. A spinal drain was used in one patient. Post-deployment balloon angioplasty was conducted in one case at the distal landing zone. There was one asymptomatic LSA branch occlusion 6 months after repair. It was attributed to the purposeful proximal deployment of the branch stent to accommodate an early vertebral takeoff. The occlusion did not require revascularization. There were no strokes, mortalities, or aortic adverse events (migration, endoleak, native aortic expansion, dissection, or thrombosis) through 12 months of follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Initial cohort outcomes suggest that endovascular repair of zone 2 BTAI is feasible and has favorable outcomes using the thoracic branch device with LSA preservation. Additional cases and longer-term follow-up are required for a definitive assessment of the device\'s safety and durability in traumatic aortic injuries.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) at high-volume hospitals has previously been associated with lower perioperative mortality, but the impact of annual surgeon volume on outcomes following TEVAR for BTAI remains unknown.
METHODS: We analyzed Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) data from patients with BTAI that underwent TEVAR between 2013 and 2023. Annual surgeon volumes were computed as the number of TEVARs (for any pathology) performed over a 1-year period preceding each procedure and were further categorized into quintiles. Surgeons in the first volume quintile were categorized as low volume (LV), the highest quintile as high volume (HV), and the middle three quintiles as medium volume (MV). TEVAR procedures performed by surgeons with less than 1-year enrollment in the VQI were excluded. Using multilevel logistic regression models, we evaluated associations between surgeon volume and perioperative outcomes, accounting for annual center volumes and adjusting for potential confounders, including aortic injury grade and severity of coexisting injuries. Multilevel models accounted for the nested clustering of patients and surgeons within the same center. Sensitivity analysis excluding patients with grade IV BTAI was performed.
RESULTS: We studied 1321 patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI (28% by LV surgeons [0-1 procedures per year], 52% by MV surgeons [2-8 procedures per year], 20% by HV surgeons [≥9 procedures per year]). With higher surgeon volume, TEVAR was delayed more (in <4 hours: LV: 68%, MV: 54%, HV: 46%; P < .001; elective (>24 hours): LV: 5.1%; MV: 8.9%: HV: 14%), heparin administered more (LV: 80%, MV: 81%, HV: 87%; P = .007), perioperative mortality appears lower (LV: 11%, MV: 7.3%, HV: 6.5%; P = .095), and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke was lower (LV: 6.5%, MV: 3.6%, HV: 1.5%; P = .006). After adjustment, compared with LV surgeons, higher volume surgeons had lower odds of perioperative mortality (MV: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.97; P = .039; HV: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.16-1.22; P = .12; MV/HV: 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.96; P = .038) and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke (MV: 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.81; P = .011; HV: 0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.61; P = .008). Sensitivity analysis found lower adjusted odds for perioperative mortality (although not significant) and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke for higher volume surgeons.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI, higher surgeon volume is independently associated with lower perioperative mortality and postoperative stroke, regardless of hospital volume. Future studies could elucidate if TEVAR for non-ruptured BTAI might be delayed and allow stabilization, heparinization, and involvement of a higher TEVAR volume surgeon.

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is increasingly utilized to treat blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI), but post-discharge outcomes remain underexplored. We examined 90-day readmission in patients treated with TEVAR following BTAI.
METHODS: Adult patients discharged alive after TEVAR for BTAI in the Nationwide Readmissions Database between 2016 and 2019 were included. Outcomes examined were 90-day non-elective readmission, primary readmission reasons, and 90-day mortality. As a complementary analysis, 90-day outcomes following TEVAR for BTAI were compared with those following TEVAR for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD).
RESULTS: We identified 2085 patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI. The median age was 43 years (IQR, 29-58), 65% of all patients had an ISS ≥ 25, and 13% were readmitted within 90 days. The main primary causes for readmission were sepsis (8.8%), wound complications (6.7%), and neurological complications (6.5%). Two patients developed graft thrombosis as primary readmission reasons. Compared with acute TBAD patients, BTAI patients had a significantly lower rate of readmission within 90 days (BTAI vs. TBAD; 13% vs. 29%; p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: We found a significant proportion of readmission in patients treated with TEVAR for BTAI. However, the 90-day readmission rate after TEVAR for BTAI was significantly lower compared with acute TBAD, and the common cause for readmission was not related to residual aortic disease or vascular devices. This represents an important distinction from other patient populations treated with TEVAR for acute vascular conditions. Elucidating differences between trauma-related TEVAR readmissions and non-traumatic indications better informs both the clinician and patients of expected post-discharge course. Level of evidence/study type: IV, Therapeutic/care management.

OBJECTIVE: Current societal recommendations regarding the timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) vary. Prior studies have shown that elective repair was associated with lower mortality after TEVAR for BTAI. However, these studies lacked data such as Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) aortic injury grades and TEVAR-related postoperative outcomes. Therefore, we used the Vascular Quality Initiative registry, which includes relevant anatomic and outcome data, to examine the outcomes following urgent/emergent (≤ 24 hours) vs elective TEVAR for BTAI.
METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI between 2013 and 2022 were included, excluding those with SVS grade 4 aortic injuries. We included covariates such as age, sex, race, transfer status, body mass index, preoperative hemoglobin, comorbidities, medication use, SVS aortic injury grade, coexisting injuries, Glasgow Coma Scale, and prior aortic surgery in a regression model to compute propensity scores for assignment to urgent/emergent or elective TEVAR. Perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality were evaluated using inverse probability-weighted logistic regression and Cox regression, also adjusting for left subclavian artery revascularization/occlusion and annual center and physician volumes.
RESULTS: Of 1016 patients, 102 (10%) underwent elective TEVAR. Patients who underwent elective repair were more likely to undergo revascularization of the left subclavian artery (31% vs 7.5%; P < .001) and receive intraoperative heparin (94% vs 82%; P = .002). After inverse probability weighting, there was no association between TEVAR timing and perioperative mortality (elective vs urgent/emergent: 3.9% vs 6.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-4.7; P = .90) and 5-year mortality (5.8% vs 12%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.21-4.3; P > .9).Compared with urgent/emergent TEVAR, elective repair was associated with lower postoperative stroke (1.0% vs 2.1%; adjusted OR [aOR], 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.94; P = .044), even after adjusting for intraoperative heparin use (aOR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.92; P = .042). Elective TEVAR was also associated with lower odds of failure of extubation immediately after surgery (39% vs 65%; aOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.35; P < .001) and postoperative pneumonia (4.9% vs 11%; aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13-0.91; P = .031), but comparable odds of any postoperative complication as a composite outcome and reintervention during index admission.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BTAI who underwent elective TEVAR were more likely to receive intraoperative heparin. Perioperative mortality and 5-year mortality rates were similar between the elective and emergent/urgent TEVAR groups. Postoperatively, elective TEVAR was associated with lower ischemic stroke, pulmonary complications, and prolonged hospitalization. Future modifications in society guidelines should incorporate the current evidence supporting the use of elective TEVAR for BTAI. The optimal timing of TEVAR in patients with BTAI and the factors determining it should be the subject of future study to facilitate personalized decision-making.

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is fatal and requires thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for its optimal management. Performing TEVAR requires multidisciplinary specialists and supportive facilities.  We report a case of an 89-year-old man who presented to the emergency department with blunt trauma. Whole-body computed tomography (CT) revealed grade II aortic injury with disrupted blood flow to the left kidney. Sudden paralysis of the left lower extremity and distal progression of the aortic dissection occurred. However, TEVAR could not be performed immediately. Therefore, an external shunt from the right common femoral artery to the left lower extremity was created with angioplasty, superior mesenteric artery (SMA) stenting, and celiac artery (CA) balloon dilatation. The patient\'s condition stabilized, and he was transferred to a hospital where TEVAR was performed. Selective arterial catheterization (SAC) for treating intraperitoneal organ malperfusion caused by BTAI may be an effective bridging therapy for TEVAR.