Dynamic Morphology of Dilated Ascending Aorta and its Implications for Proximal Landing During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

IF 1.7 2区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Denis Skrypnik, Moritz S Bischoff, Katrin Meisenbacher, Matthias Hagedorn, Samuel Kilian, Fabian Rengier, Florian Andre, Dittmar Böckler, Henning Steen
{"title":"Dynamic Morphology of Dilated Ascending Aorta and its Implications for Proximal Landing During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.","authors":"Denis Skrypnik, Moritz S Bischoff, Katrin Meisenbacher, Matthias Hagedorn, Samuel Kilian, Fabian Rengier, Florian Andre, Dittmar Böckler, Henning Steen","doi":"10.1177/15266028241292462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To improve the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), we investigated the dynamic morphology of dilated and nondilated ascending aortas (AAs) to determine whether an appropriate proximal landing zone for TEVAR exists if the middle AA is dilated.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients with dilated (diameter 40-50 mm) and nondilated (<40 mm) AAs underwent electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography angiography of the entire AA in the systolic and diastolic phases. For each plane of each AA segment, the maximal and minimal diameters in systole and diastole were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 105 patients were enrolled (54% male; median age: 80 years [IQR 78-85]). A total of 35 patients were included in the dilated AA group (DG), and 70 patients were included in the nondilated AA group (n-DG). The aortic planes of the AA segment at the sinotubular junction (STJ) showed a more oval-shaped morphology compared with the distal planes of the same segment (the differences between the maximum and minimum diameters were 8.9% to 9.4% and 4.8% to 5.6%, respectively). If the mid-ascending aorta was dilated, the aortic segment at the STJ showed a more pronounced reversed-funnel 3D morphology, with a 14% (IQR 11%-19%) difference in diameters between the proximal and distal segmental planes shown in the n-DG and 18% (IQR 16%-22%, p<0.001) in the DG.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>If the middle AA is dilated, it is considered unsuitable to perform TEVAR using conventional endografts without additional proximal fixation in the aortic segment at the STJ due to its pronounced reversed-funnel segmental morphology. By contrast, the aortic segment at the brachiocephalic trunk seems to be promising for performing TEVAR using an endograft of the appropriate size and conformability. Moreover, endograft sizing using the average aortic diameter instead of the maximal AA diameter in an oval-shaped aortic plane morphology should be considered.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>If the middle ascending aorta is dilated, it is considered unsuitable to perform TEVAR with a proximal landing in the aortic segment at the sinotubular junction due to its pronounced reversed-funnel segmental morphology and high risk of type Ia endoleak and endograft migration. By contrast, the aortic segment at the brachiocephalic trunk seems to be promising for performing TEVAR due to its moderate funnel morphology using an endograft of appropriate size and conformability.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","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/10.1177/15266028241292462","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: To improve the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), we investigated the dynamic morphology of dilated and nondilated ascending aortas (AAs) to determine whether an appropriate proximal landing zone for TEVAR exists if the middle AA is dilated.

Materials and methods: Patients with dilated (diameter 40-50 mm) and nondilated (<40 mm) AAs underwent electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography angiography of the entire AA in the systolic and diastolic phases. For each plane of each AA segment, the maximal and minimal diameters in systole and diastole were recorded.

Results: A total of 105 patients were enrolled (54% male; median age: 80 years [IQR 78-85]). A total of 35 patients were included in the dilated AA group (DG), and 70 patients were included in the nondilated AA group (n-DG). The aortic planes of the AA segment at the sinotubular junction (STJ) showed a more oval-shaped morphology compared with the distal planes of the same segment (the differences between the maximum and minimum diameters were 8.9% to 9.4% and 4.8% to 5.6%, respectively). If the mid-ascending aorta was dilated, the aortic segment at the STJ showed a more pronounced reversed-funnel 3D morphology, with a 14% (IQR 11%-19%) difference in diameters between the proximal and distal segmental planes shown in the n-DG and 18% (IQR 16%-22%, p<0.001) in the DG.

Conclusion: If the middle AA is dilated, it is considered unsuitable to perform TEVAR using conventional endografts without additional proximal fixation in the aortic segment at the STJ due to its pronounced reversed-funnel segmental morphology. By contrast, the aortic segment at the brachiocephalic trunk seems to be promising for performing TEVAR using an endograft of the appropriate size and conformability. Moreover, endograft sizing using the average aortic diameter instead of the maximal AA diameter in an oval-shaped aortic plane morphology should be considered.

Clinical impact: If the middle ascending aorta is dilated, it is considered unsuitable to perform TEVAR with a proximal landing in the aortic segment at the sinotubular junction due to its pronounced reversed-funnel segmental morphology and high risk of type Ia endoleak and endograft migration. By contrast, the aortic segment at the brachiocephalic trunk seems to be promising for performing TEVAR due to its moderate funnel morphology using an endograft of appropriate size and conformability.

扩张的升主动脉的动态形态及其对胸腔内血管主动脉修复时近端着陆的影响
简介:为了改善胸腔内血管主动脉修复术(TEVAR)的疗效,我们研究了扩张和未扩张升主动脉(AA)的动态形态,以确定如果中段AA扩张,是否存在适合TEVAR的近端着床区:扩张(直径 40-50 毫米)和未扩张(直径 40-50 毫米)的升主动脉(AA)患者:共有 105 名患者入选(54% 为男性;中位年龄:80 岁 [IQR 78-85])。扩张 AA 组(DG)共有 35 名患者,未扩张 AA 组(n-DG)共有 70 名患者。位于窦管交界处(STJ)的 AA 段主动脉平面与同一段的远端平面相比,显示出更多的椭圆形形态(最大和最小直径之间的差异分别为 8.9% 至 9.4% 和 4.8% 至 5.6%)。如果升主动脉中段扩张,STJ 处的主动脉节段显示出更明显的反向漏斗状三维形态,n-DG 显示近端和远端节段平面直径相差 14%(IQR 11%-19%),p 结论:如果 AA 中段扩张,STJ 处的主动脉节段显示出更明显的反向漏斗状三维形态:如果 AA 中段扩张,由于其明显的反向漏斗状节段形态,如果不对 STJ 处的主动脉节段进行额外的近端固定,就不适合使用传统的内植物进行 TEVAR。相比之下,肱脑干处的主动脉节段似乎很有希望使用尺寸和适形性合适的内植物进行 TEVAR。此外,在椭圆形主动脉平面形态中,应考虑使用主动脉平均直径而非 AA 最大直径来确定内植物的大小:临床影响:如果升主动脉中段扩张,则认为不适合在窦管交界处的主动脉段进行近端着床的 TEVAR,因为该段具有明显的反向漏斗段形态,存在 Ia 型内漏和内移植物移位的高风险。相比之下,肱脑干处的主动脉段由于其适度的漏斗状形态,使用适当大小和适形性的内植物,似乎很有希望进行 TEVAR。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信