Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in proximal (type A) aortic dissection: Ready for a broader application?

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has demonstrated encouraging results and is gaining increasing acceptance as a treatment option for aortic aneurysms and dissections. Yet, its role in managing proximal aortic pathologies is unknown-this is important because in proximal (Stanford type A) aortic dissections, 10% to 30% are not accepted for surgery and 30% to 50% are technically amenable for TEVAR. We describe our case series of type A aortic dissections treated by using TEVAR. METHODS: Between year 2009 and 2016, 12 patients with acute, subacute, or chronic type A aortic dissection with the proximal entry tear located between the coronaries and brachiocephalic artery were treated with TEVAR at 3 centers. Various stent-graft configurations were used to seal the proximal entry tear in the ascending aorta under rapid pacing. RESULTS: A total of 12 patients (9 male, 3 female), mean age 81 ± 7 years, EuroSCORE II 9.1 ± 4.5, underwent TEVAR for the treatment of type A aortic dissection. Procedural success was achieved in 11 of 12 patients (91.7%). There was 1 minor stroke and 1 intraprocedural death. No additional deaths were reported at 30 days. At 36 months, there were 4 further deaths (all from nonaortic causes). The mean survival of these 4 deceased was 23 months (range 15-36 months). Follow-up computed tomography demonstrated favorable aortic remodeling. CONCLUSIONS: TEVAR is feasible and reveals promising early results in selected patients with type A aortic dissection who are poor candidates for surgical repair. The current iteration of stent-graft technology, however, needs to be adapted to features specific to the ascending aorta.

Endovascular "neobranching" to manage acute aortic syndrome.

Acute aortic syndrome was coined in 2001 to describe a spectrum of acute aortic wall pathologies. The syndrome represents a cluster of aortic conditions such as aortic dissection, intramural hematoma and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer. Acute aortic dissection is more common than the latter two pathologies with an incidence of up to 6 cases per 100,000 per year. The following report focuses on an unusual case presentation emphasizing the newest management techniques including "neobranching" whilst dealing with challenging patient anatomy and refractory hypertension. We believe this case report eventually broadens our understanding of acute aortic syndrome whilst addressing an entry tear outside the aorta by placing "neobranches". © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Aortic dissection.

Aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition caused by a tear in the intimal layer of the aorta or bleeding within the aortic wall, resulting in the separation (dissection) of the layers of the aortic wall. Aortic dissection is most common in those 65-75 years of age, with an incidence of 35 cases per 100,000 people per year in this population. Other risk factors include hypertension, dyslipidaemia and genetic disorders that involve the connective tissue, such as Marfan syndrome. Swift diagnostic confirmation and adequate treatment are crucial in managing affected patients. Contemporary management is multidisciplinary and includes serial non-invasive imaging, biomarker testing and genetic risk profiling for aortopathy. The choice of approach for repairing or replacing the damaged region of the aorta depends on the severity and the location of the dissection and the risks of complication from surgery. Open surgical repair is most commonly used for dissections involving the ascending aorta and the aortic arch, whereas minimally invasive endovascular intervention is appropriate for descending aorta dissections that are complicated by rupture, malperfusion, ongoing pain, hypotension or imaging features of high risk. Recent advances in the understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of aortic dissection have led to more patients being considered at substantial risk of complications and, therefore, in need of endovascular intervention rather than only medical or surgical intervention.

Evaluation of methods for sizing and counting of ultrasound contrast agents.

A precise, accurate and well documented method for the sizing and counting of microbubbles is essential for all aspects of quantitative microbubble-enhanced ultrasound imaging. The efficacy of (a) electro-impedance volumetric zone sensing (ES) also called a Coulter counter/multisizer; (b) optical microscopy (OM); and (c) laser diffraction (LD), for the sizing and counting of microbubbles was assessed. Microspheres with certified mean diameter and number concentration were used to assess sizing and counting reproducibility (precision) and reliability (accuracy) of ES, OM and LD. SonoVue™ was repeatedly (n = 3) sized and counted to validate ES, OM and LD sizing and counting efficacy. Statistical analyses of intra-method variability for the SonoVue™ mean diameter showed that the best microbubble sizing reproducibility was obtained using OM with a mean diameter sizing variability of 1.1%, compared with a variability of 4.3% for ES and 7.1% for LD. The best microbubble counting reproducibility was obtained using ES with a number concentration variability of 8.3%, compared with a variability of 22.4% for OM and 32% for LD. This study showed that no method is fully suited to both sizing and counting of microbubbles.