Why the study?
Open surgery for acute type A aortic dissection carries extreme risk or futility in some elderly patients, but data on alternative endovascular treatment approaches remain limited to case reports and small series.
Can endovascular treatment approaches (TEVAR) be used as an alternative management for acute type A aortic dissection in high-risk non-surgical candidates?
Can endovascular treatment approaches (TEVAR) be used as an alternative management for acute type A aortic dissection in high-risk non-surgical candidates?
Endovascular treatment (TEVAR) represents a potential alternative for high-risk patients with acute type A aortic dissection, but significant technical and anatomical challenges remain.
Endovascular options for high-risk type A dissection remain constrained; leaves open dedicated device development and prospective trials.
Open surgery remains the mainstay of treatment for acute type A aortic dissection and should be offered to most patients. However, there are elderly patients in which surgical treatment may be deemed extremely high risk or futile. Endovascular treatment approaches have been applied to a small number of these patients and data are limited to case reports and small series. The application of endovascular therapies to ascending aorta is currently limited by anatomical and technical challenges posed by the dynamic motion of the ascending aorta and the proximity of vital structures to intended landing zones (aortic valve, coronary arteries, and supra-aortic branches) and lack of specially designed endografts to address these issues. While thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has replaced open aortic repair for a suitable lesion in distal aortic dissection, some selected patients with type A aortic dissection at high surgical may be candidates. Hence, there is potential because, in proximal (Stanford type A) dissections, 10-30% of patients are not accepted for surgery, and 30-50% are technically amenable for TEVAR. Recent experience has shown that carefully selected patients with favorable anatomical characteristics may be subject to endovascular stent-graft treatment as a last resort with mixed results. Technical improvement is necessary to offer. satisfactory endovascular options in non-surgical candidates.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yuan et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: