Safety and Efficacy of Inner Branched Stent-Graft in the Treatment of Aortic Arch Disease: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.5 2区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Journal of Endovascular Therapy Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-30 DOI:10.1177/15266028231197395
Kristine J S Kwan, Hai-Lei Li, Yiu Che Chan, Stephen W K Cheng
{"title":"Safety and Efficacy of Inner Branched Stent-Graft in the Treatment of Aortic Arch Disease: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Kristine J S Kwan, Hai-Lei Li, Yiu Che Chan, Stephen W K Cheng","doi":"10.1177/15266028231197395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To provide a descriptive overview on the contemporary outcomes of thoracic endovascular arch repair with inner branched endoprosthesis (bTEVAR) for the treatment of aortic arch pathologies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Pre-defined search terms were used to interrogate PubMed and OVID Medline databases from January 1999 to July 2022. Patient characteristics, indication for treatment, procedural data, mortality rates, postoperative complications, and reintervention rate during follow-up were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen articles were included, encompassing a total of 618 patients who received bTEVAR, most of which were double-branched (63.9%, n=395). The main indication for treatment was aneurysm secondary to chronic aortic dissection (38.8%, n=240/618) with a mean maximum diameter of 58.3±11.4 mm. Pooled mean technical success rate was 97.4±4.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]=95.1%-99.5%); 2 and 3 patients required conversion to chimney technique and open repair, respectively. Among the pooled rates of early complications, postoperative stroke was the highest (10.5%; 95% CI=6.8%-14.3%). Thirty-day and in-hospital mortality rate was 5.5% (95% CI=2.6%-9.7%). Forty patients (6.5%; 95% CI=2.5%-9.5%) required early reintervention. During a mean follow-up of 20.7±13.5 months, the mortality rate was 18.2% (n=108/593; 95% CI=8.6%-20.6%) where 12 (11.1%) were aortic-related. Pooled late reintervention rate was 9.6% (95% CI=4.8%-14.3%). Comparison of demographics and outcomes found no significant difference between single and double bTEVAR.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair is a promising approach for aortic arch pathologies with a high technical success rate despite a steep learning curve. However, contemporary outcomes reflect that postoperative stroke remains the predominant concern. Further experience and long-term follow-up are required to sufficiently elucidate the safety and durability of bTEVAR in the management of aortic pathologies for high-risk patients.Clinical ImpactThis systematic review summarized the contemporary outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with different inner branched stent-grafts for the management of aortic arch pathologies. Pooled results from nineteen studies with 618 patients demonstrated a high technical success rate and an acceptable mortality rate. However, postoperative stroke remains the major concern. Long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate its durability.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"911-920"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028231197395","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To provide a descriptive overview on the contemporary outcomes of thoracic endovascular arch repair with inner branched endoprosthesis (bTEVAR) for the treatment of aortic arch pathologies.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Pre-defined search terms were used to interrogate PubMed and OVID Medline databases from January 1999 to July 2022. Patient characteristics, indication for treatment, procedural data, mortality rates, postoperative complications, and reintervention rate during follow-up were evaluated.

Results: Nineteen articles were included, encompassing a total of 618 patients who received bTEVAR, most of which were double-branched (63.9%, n=395). The main indication for treatment was aneurysm secondary to chronic aortic dissection (38.8%, n=240/618) with a mean maximum diameter of 58.3±11.4 mm. Pooled mean technical success rate was 97.4±4.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]=95.1%-99.5%); 2 and 3 patients required conversion to chimney technique and open repair, respectively. Among the pooled rates of early complications, postoperative stroke was the highest (10.5%; 95% CI=6.8%-14.3%). Thirty-day and in-hospital mortality rate was 5.5% (95% CI=2.6%-9.7%). Forty patients (6.5%; 95% CI=2.5%-9.5%) required early reintervention. During a mean follow-up of 20.7±13.5 months, the mortality rate was 18.2% (n=108/593; 95% CI=8.6%-20.6%) where 12 (11.1%) were aortic-related. Pooled late reintervention rate was 9.6% (95% CI=4.8%-14.3%). Comparison of demographics and outcomes found no significant difference between single and double bTEVAR.

Conclusion: Branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair is a promising approach for aortic arch pathologies with a high technical success rate despite a steep learning curve. However, contemporary outcomes reflect that postoperative stroke remains the predominant concern. Further experience and long-term follow-up are required to sufficiently elucidate the safety and durability of bTEVAR in the management of aortic pathologies for high-risk patients.Clinical ImpactThis systematic review summarized the contemporary outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with different inner branched stent-grafts for the management of aortic arch pathologies. Pooled results from nineteen studies with 618 patients demonstrated a high technical success rate and an acceptable mortality rate. However, postoperative stroke remains the major concern. Long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate its durability.

内支支架移植治疗主动脉弓疾病的安全性和有效性:系统综述。
目的:对胸椎血管内弓修复术(bTEVAR)治疗主动脉弓病变的临床效果进行综述。方法:根据系统评价和荟萃分析声明的首选报告项目进行全面的文献检索。从1999年1月到2022年7月,使用预定义的搜索词对PubMed和OVID Medline数据库进行查询。随访期间评估患者特征、治疗指征、手术资料、死亡率、术后并发症和再干预率。结果:纳入19篇文章,共纳入618例接受bTEVAR的患者,其中大部分为双支(63.9%,n=395)。治疗主要指征为慢性主动脉夹层继发性动脉瘤(38.8%,n=240/618),平均最大直径58.3±11.4 mm。合并平均技术成功率为97.4±4.4%(95%可信区间[CI]= 95.5% ~ 99.5%);2例和3例患者分别需要转换为烟囱技术和开放式修复。在早期并发症的总发生率中,术后卒中发生率最高(10.5%;95% CI = 6.8% - -14.3%)。30天和住院死亡率为5.5% (95% CI=2.6%-9.7%)。40例(6.5%;95% CI=2.5%-9.5%)需要早期再干预。平均随访20.7±13.5个月,死亡率为18.2% (n=108/593;95% CI=8.6%-20.6%),其中12例(11.1%)与主动脉相关。合并晚期再干预率为9.6% (95% CI=4.8%-14.3%)。比较人口统计学和结果发现单次和双次bTEVAR之间没有显著差异。结论:胸支血管内主动脉修复是治疗主动脉弓病变的一种很有前途的方法,尽管学习曲线陡峭,但技术成功率高。然而,目前的结果表明,术后卒中仍然是主要的关注点。需要进一步的经验和长期随访来充分阐明bTEVAR在高危患者主动脉病变治疗中的安全性和持久性。临床影响本系统综述总结了不同内支支架胸椎血管内主动脉修复术治疗主动脉弓病变的临床效果。涉及618名患者的19项研究的综合结果表明,技术成功率高,死亡率可接受。然而,术后中风仍然是主要问题。需要长期随访来评估其持久性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
203
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endovascular Therapy (formerly the Journal of Endovascular Surgery) was established in 1994 as a forum for all physicians, scientists, and allied healthcare professionals who are engaged or interested in peripheral endovascular techniques and technology. An official publication of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists (ISEVS), the Journal of Endovascular Therapy publishes peer-reviewed articles of interest to clinicians and researchers in the field of peripheral endovascular interventions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信