Key result
Novel modular triple-branched endografts prove anatomically suitable for ~67% of patients with aortic arch pathologies.
Why the study?
This study aimed to assess the anatomical feasibility of a novel modular triple-branched endograft for aortic arch diseases.
Is a novel modular triple-branched endograft anatomically feasible for patients with aortic arch pathologies?
Cross-Sectional (n=132)
No
Is a novel modular triple-branched endograft anatomically feasible for patients with aortic arch pathologies?
A novel modular triple-branched endograft is anatomically feasible in approximately two-thirds of patients with aortic arch pathologies, though limited by proximal landing zone and branch vessel dimensions.
Anatomical feasibility in selected patients supports device iteration; leaves open clinical safety and efficacy in aortic arch repair.
Objectives This study aimed to assess the anatomical feasibility of a novel modular triple-branched endograft for aortic arch diseases.Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted on 314 patients with aortic arch pathologies treated at a single center from January 2018 to December 2023. Preoperative computed tomography angiography images were analyzed with three-dimensional reconstruction to quantify anatomical features. Feasibility was based on endograft anatomical criteria, and logistic regression identified risk factors for unsuitability.Results Out of 132 patients included in the study, 67.4% were deemed anatomically suitable for the triple-branched device. A total of 36 (27.3%) patients were deemed inapplicable due to a large diameter of the proximal landing zone, 12 (9%) patients due to a small diameter of the left common carotid artery, and 1 (0.8%) patient due to a small diameter of the left subclavian artery. Logistic regression identified large proximal landing zone diameter and small left common carotid artery diameter were significant factors for unsuitability (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively).Conclusions The novel triple-branched endograft demonstrated promising anatomical feasibility in two-thirds of patients. However, anatomical constraints limited its applicability. Future device iterations should focus on accommodating a broader range of anatomical variations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Niu et al. (2024) conducted a cross-sectional in aortic arch pathologies (n=132). Novel modular triple-branched endograft was evaluated on anatomical suitability for the triple-branched device. A novel modular triple-branched endograft was anatomically suitable for 67.4% of patients with aortic arch pathologies.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: