Introduction: Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAIs) is nowadays the gold standard technique in adult patients, replacing gradually the use of open repair (OR). Although randomized controlled trials will never be performed comparing TEVAR to OR for BTAIs invasive management, trauma and vascular societies guidelines today primarily recommend the former for BTAI patients with a suitable anatomy. The aim of this review is to describe past and recent data published in literature regarding pros and cons of TEVAR treatment in BTAI, and to analyze some debated issues and future perspectives. Evidence acquisition: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) were used to obtain and describe selected articles on TEVAR in BTAI. Evidence synthesis: Young (< 50 years) men were the most operated population. The use of TEVAR increased over the years, with a progressive reduction in mortality and overall postoperative complication rates when compared with OR. Lack of information remain about the percentage of urgent cases. Conclusions: TEVAR is considered nowadays the treatment of choice in BTAI patients. In case of aortic rupture (grade IV) the treatment is mandatory, while intimal tear (grade I) and intramural haematoma (grade II) can be safely managed with no operative management (NOM). Debate is still ongoing on grade III (pseudoaneurysms). Unfortunately, several aspects remain not yet clarified, including disease classification, type and grade to treat, timing (urgent versus elective), priority of vascular injuries in polytrauma patients, and TEVAR use in pediatrics and young patients.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair for traumatic aortic injuries insight from literature and practical recommendations

Piffaretti G;
2021

Abstract

Introduction: Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAIs) is nowadays the gold standard technique in adult patients, replacing gradually the use of open repair (OR). Although randomized controlled trials will never be performed comparing TEVAR to OR for BTAIs invasive management, trauma and vascular societies guidelines today primarily recommend the former for BTAI patients with a suitable anatomy. The aim of this review is to describe past and recent data published in literature regarding pros and cons of TEVAR treatment in BTAI, and to analyze some debated issues and future perspectives. Evidence acquisition: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) were used to obtain and describe selected articles on TEVAR in BTAI. Evidence synthesis: Young (< 50 years) men were the most operated population. The use of TEVAR increased over the years, with a progressive reduction in mortality and overall postoperative complication rates when compared with OR. Lack of information remain about the percentage of urgent cases. Conclusions: TEVAR is considered nowadays the treatment of choice in BTAI patients. In case of aortic rupture (grade IV) the treatment is mandatory, while intimal tear (grade I) and intramural haematoma (grade II) can be safely managed with no operative management (NOM). Debate is still ongoing on grade III (pseudoaneurysms). Unfortunately, several aspects remain not yet clarified, including disease classification, type and grade to treat, timing (urgent versus elective), priority of vascular injuries in polytrauma patients, and TEVAR use in pediatrics and young patients.
TEVAR; BTAI; blunt aortic injuries; traumatic aortic injuries; aortic trauma
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

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: http://hdl.handle.net/11383/2103986
 Attenzione

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

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 4
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 4
social impact