Mid-term outcomes of hybrid debranching endovascular aortic arch repair in landing zones 0–2

Ahmed Eleshra, Woon Heo, Kwang Hun Lee, Tae Hoon Kim, Seo A. Sim, Hesham Sharafeldin, Suk Won Song

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study is to summarize a single-center experience of hybrid debranching endovascular repair of the aortic arch and proximal descending thoracic aorta (DTA) with regard to the mid-term outcomes with highlighting the difference between the landing zones 0–2. Methods: A retrospective review of data from a prospectively collected registry (Gangnam Severance Endovascular Aortic Registry) was performed. From among 332 patients whose aortic pathology was managed with TEVAR, 112 patients who underwent hybrid arch repair during the study period between 2012 and 2016 were identified. The patients were grouped into three cohorts according to the proximal landing zones (0, 1, and 2) of Ishimaru. The early outcome (30-days) in terms of mortality, morbidity, supra-aortic vessels patency, and presence of endoleak were analyzed. The survival, freedom from re-intervention, and major complications during follow-up were demonstrated. Results: During the study period. 112 patients (mean age 65±7, 79% males) were included. The patients were distributed in three cohorts: 8 (7%) patients with proximal landing zone 0, 20 (18%) with zone 1, and 80 (75%) with zone 2 hybrid aortic arch repair. Technical success was achieved in 7 (88%), 19 (90%), and 79 (94%) patients for zones 0, 1, and 2, respectively. The mean intensive care unit (ICU) stay was shorter in zone 2 (p =.005). The mean total hospital stay was shorter in zone 2 (p =.03). The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 5% (4/112). There was no spinal cord ischemia or early surgical conversion. Renal function deterioration was seen more but not significantly in zone 0 patients (p =.08). Respiratory failure was seen significantly in zone 0 patients (p =.01). Stroke occurred in 6/44 (14%) patients with degenerative aneurysm versus 1/60 (2%) patients with aortic dissection (p =.06). Early CTA showed 100% patency of the supra-aortic vessels. The early endoleak rate was significant in zone 0 patients (p =.008). The mean follow-up period was (32±19 months). The survival rates and freedom from re-intervention were not statistically significant among the three zones. However, the survival rate and freedom from intervention tend to be higher in zone 2 versus zone 0 (p =.07 and.09), respectively. Conclusion: Hybrid debranching endovascular aortic arch repair is feasible and relatively safe with acceptable mid-term outcomes. Zone 0 patients has worse early and late outcomes in comparison to other zones. Careful patient selection and improved endovascular technology may be the key to improve the outcomes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)447-454
Number of pages8
JournalVascular
Volume31
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2022.

Keywords

  • Aorta
  • aortic arch
  • hybrid arch repair
  • stroke
  • supra-aortic debranching

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Mid-term outcomes of hybrid debranching endovascular aortic arch repair in landing zones 0–2'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this