A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Anatomic suitability for "off-the-shelf" thoracic single side-branched endograft in patients with type B aortic dissection. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: Treatment of type B aortic dissections with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been adopted in many centers with the goal of covering the proximal entry tear. Coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSCA) is commonly required to achieve a dissection-free proximal seal zone. A novel thoracic single side-branched (TSSB) endograft device offers a potential off-the-shelf option to achieve total endovascular incorporation of LSCA during zone 2 TEVAR. The aim of this study was to determine what percentage of patients with type B aortic dissection who require zone 2 TEVAR meet the anatomical requirements for this device.

Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing TEVAR for type B aortic dissections at a single institution from 2006 to 2016 were evaluated. Three-dimensional centerline reconstruction of preoperative computed tomography angiography was performed to identify the diameter of the aorta, distances between branch vessels, diameter of the target branch vessel, and location of the primary entry tear. Only patients who met criteria for zone 2 TEVAR were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was percentage of patients that meet all anatomical requirements for TSSB. Individual criteria were evaluated independently, and results were stratified by dissection chronicity.

Results: Eighty-seven patients who underwent TEVAR for Stanford type B aortic dissections were reviewed. Fifty-seven (66%) would have required zone 2 TEVAR. Indications for TEVAR were malperfusion (12), aneurysm (15), persistent pain (22), rupture (3), uncontrolled hypertension (5), and other (3). Mean follow-up was 19 months (range, 1-72 months). Only 16 of the 57 patients (28%) met all the requirements for anatomic suitability. The primary contributor was that only 49% of patients had sufficient length between arch branches to prevent coverage of a proximal branch.

Conclusions: Although the new TSSB device can allow for a more proximal seal zone and eliminate the need for open aortic arch debranching, only 28% of patients with type B dissection who required zone 2 TEVAR met all the anatomic requirements for this device. Future devices will need to account for the short distance between the left carotid and LSCA to be more broadly applicable.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2019.04.461DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

type aortic
20
zone tevar
20
patients type
12
aortic dissections
12
patients
9
tevar
9
anatomic suitability
8
thoracic single
8
single side-branched
8
aortic dissection
8

Similar Publications