Double-barrel technique for preservation of aortic arch branches during thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) may involve either planned or inadvertent coverage of aortic branch vessels when stent grafts are implanted into the aortic arch. Vital branch vessels may be preserved by surgical debranching techniques or by placement of additional stents to maintain vessel patency. We report our experience with a double-barrel stent technique used to maintain aortic arch branch vessel patency during TEVAR. Seven patients underwent TEVAR using the double-barrel technique, with placement of branch stents into the innominate (n = 3), left common carotid (n = 3), and left subclavian (n = 1) arteries alongside an aortic stent graft. Gore TAG endografts were used in all cases, and either self-expanding stents (n = 6) or balloon-expandable (n = 1) stents were utilized to maintain patency of the arch branch vessels. In three cases the double-barrel stent technique was used to restore patency of an inadvertently covered left common carotid artery. Four planned cases involved endograft deployment proximally into the ascending aorta with placement of an innominate artery stent (n = 3) and coverage of the left subclavian artery with placement of a subclavian artery stent (n = 1). TEVAR using a double-barrel stent was technically successful with maintenance of branch vessel patency and absence of type I endoleak in all seven cases. One case of zone 0 endograft placement with an innominate stent was complicated by a left hemispheric stroke that was attributed to a technical problem with the carotid-carotid bypass. On follow-up of 2-18 months, all double-barrel branch stents and aortic endografts remained patent without endoleak, migration, or loss of device integrity. The double-barrel stent technique maintains aortic branch patency and provides additional stent-graft fixation length during TEVAR to treat aneurysms involving the aortic arch. Moreover, the technique uses commercially available devices and permits complete aortic arch coverage (zone 0) without a sternotomy. Although initial outcomes are encouraging, long-term durability remains unknown.

Endovascular stent graft repair of a thoracic aortic gunshot injury.

Endovascular treatment approaches offer minimally invasive alternative strategies for the management of vascular injuries. While endovascular stent graft repair of blunt injury to the thoracic aorta is well described, there are few reports of its application for treatment of penetrating injuries of the thoracic aorta. We report the successful treatment of a through-and-through gunshot injury of the thoracic aorta and review how this technology may be applied for the treatment of penetrating thoracic aortic injury.

Estimating the contemporary in-hospital costs of carotid endarterectomy.

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the treatment of choice for symptomatic carotid stenosis and selective asymptomatic lesions. Alternative approaches have recently been championed under the guise of increased efficacy and decreased cost. The purpose of this study was to determine the results and in-hospital costs of CEA in a university hospital in the modern era. A retrospective chart review was undertaken for all patients undergoing CEA between January 1995 and December 1997. This corresponded to the implementation of a clinical path and extended efforts toward cost reduction. Patients undergoing combined CEA and cardiopulmonary bypass were excluded (n = 3). Cost was analyzed by the hospital Office of Program Planning using TSI (Transition Systems, Inc.) software. Direct costs are related to the utilization of clinical resources and are therefore manageable by clinicians (bed, room, supplies, nursing staff, OR staff, radiology, pharmacy, etc.). Total costs additionally include administration and overhead costs not directly chargeable to patient accounts. The results of this study showed that CEA can be safely performed with brief hospital stays and reasonable hospital costs. Results of alternative interventions for the treatment of carotid stenosis should be compared to these contemporary data.