PURPOSE: To analyze the results of isolated left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using carotid-subclavian bypass (CSbp) or chimney grafts (CGs). METHODS: A retrospective multicenter, observational study identified 73 patients (mean age 68±13 years, range 22-87; 56 men) with acute or chronic thoracic aortic lesions who underwent TEVAR with isolated LSA revascularization using either CSbp (n=42) or CGs (n=31) from January 2010 and February 2017. Primary endpoints were TEVAR-related mortality, postoperative stroke, freedom from type Ia endoleak, and LSA patency. RESULTS: Primary technical success was achieved in all cases. Early TEVAR-related mortality was 4.2% (CSbp 2% vs CG 6%, p=0.571). Two (3%) patients had major ischemic strokes (one in each group). Mean follow-up was 24±21 months (range 1-72; median 15). Estimated freedom from TEVAR-related mortality was 93%±3% (95% CI 84.3% to 97.0%) at 12 and 36 months, with no significant difference between CSbp and CG (p=0.258). Aortic reintervention did not differ between the groups (CSbp 5% vs CG 6%, p=0.356); nor did freedom from type Ia endoleak (CSbp 98% vs CG 87%, p=0.134). Gutter-related endoleaks occurred in 4 (13%) CG patients, but none of the patients experienced sac enlargement or the need for reintervention and none died. Primary patency of the LSA was 100% for the entire group during the observation period. CONCLUSION: In our experience, LSA revascularization proved most satisfactory and equally effective with both the CSbp and CG techniques, without discernible differences at midterm follow-up.

Comparison of Two Different Techniques for Isolated Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Zone 2

Piffaretti, Gabriele
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
;
Fontana F
Investigation
;
Piacentino F
Data Curation
;
Macchi E
Data Curation
;
Tozzi M
Supervision
;
Castelli P
Supervision
;
XODO, ANDREA
Data Curation
;
2018-01-01

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyze the results of isolated left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using carotid-subclavian bypass (CSbp) or chimney grafts (CGs). METHODS: A retrospective multicenter, observational study identified 73 patients (mean age 68±13 years, range 22-87; 56 men) with acute or chronic thoracic aortic lesions who underwent TEVAR with isolated LSA revascularization using either CSbp (n=42) or CGs (n=31) from January 2010 and February 2017. Primary endpoints were TEVAR-related mortality, postoperative stroke, freedom from type Ia endoleak, and LSA patency. RESULTS: Primary technical success was achieved in all cases. Early TEVAR-related mortality was 4.2% (CSbp 2% vs CG 6%, p=0.571). Two (3%) patients had major ischemic strokes (one in each group). Mean follow-up was 24±21 months (range 1-72; median 15). Estimated freedom from TEVAR-related mortality was 93%±3% (95% CI 84.3% to 97.0%) at 12 and 36 months, with no significant difference between CSbp and CG (p=0.258). Aortic reintervention did not differ between the groups (CSbp 5% vs CG 6%, p=0.356); nor did freedom from type Ia endoleak (CSbp 98% vs CG 87%, p=0.134). Gutter-related endoleaks occurred in 4 (13%) CG patients, but none of the patients experienced sac enlargement or the need for reintervention and none died. Primary patency of the LSA was 100% for the entire group during the observation period. CONCLUSION: In our experience, LSA revascularization proved most satisfactory and equally effective with both the CSbp and CG techniques, without discernible differences at midterm follow-up.
LSA preservation; carotid-subclavian bypass; chimney graft; endoleak; intramural hematoma; left subclavian artery; mortality; reintervention; thoracic aortic aneurysm; thoracic aortic disease; thoracic endovascular aortic repair; type B aortic dissection
Piffaretti, Gabriele; Pratesi, Giovanni; Gelpi, Guido; Galli, Mario; Criado, Frank J; Antonello, Michele; Fontana, F; Piacentino, F; Macchi, E; Tozzi, M; Castelli, P; Barbante, M; Ippoliti, A; Romagnoni, C; Antona, C; Paggi, A; Xodo, Andrea; Grego, F.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
LSA comparison.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: DRM non definito
Dimensione 535.57 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
535.57 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11383/2078299
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 15
social impact