Key result
Zone 2/3 TEVAR linked to ~15% less ascending aortic displacement and increased regional strain.
Why the study?
Changes in ascending aortic biomechanics after zone 2/3 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and their relationship to aortic growth are not well characterized.
Does zone 2/3 TEVAR alter ascending aortic biomechanics (strain, motion, and growth) compared to pre-procedure baseline and controls?
Observational (n=120)
Does zone 2/3 TEVAR alter ascending aortic biomechanics (strain, motion, and growth) compared to pre-procedure baseline and controls?
Zone 2/3 TEVAR alters ascending aortic biomechanics by increasing strain and decreasing displacement, with lower post-TEVAR strain correlating with higher progressive aortic growth.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May prompt closer ascending aorta surveillance after zone 2/3 TEVAR; this cohort study leaves open links to progressive growth.
Objective We utilized vascular deformation mapping (VDM) to assess ascending aortic motion, regional stiffness and growth in patients who underwent zone 2/3 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) to quantify changes in ascending aorta biomechanics after endograft implantation. Methods Multi-planar, multi-directional aortic motion, aortic strain, and 3D aortic growth was extracted by VDM from ECG-gated CT-angiograms. Aortic displacement and strain were compared between patients who underwent TEVAR (both pre- and post-procedure) and in patients with dilated ascending aorta (>4.0 cm) and a non-dilated control group. Results One-hundred twenty subjects were included for analysis. Between pre-TEVAR versus post-TEVAR, total displacement decreased (4.87 ± 1.52 mm vs 4.13 ± 1.43 mm, p=0.03). Ascending aortic cross-sectional area strain at the sinuses (SVS), mid-ascending (MA), and proximal arch (PA) were lower in the pre-TEVAR group (SVS: 8.3 ± 4.7%, MA: 6.2 ± 3.2%, PA: 6.3 ± 3.0%, all p < 0.001) compared with non-dilated controls (SVS: 14.0 ± 6.6%; MA: 14.9 ± 6.6%; PA: 14.9 ± 6.9%). TEVAR increased aortic strain at the MA (pre-TEVAR 6.2 ± 3.2%, post-TEVAR 8.5 ± 4.6%, p < 0.001) and PA (pre-TEVAR 6.3 ± 3.0%, post-TEVAR 9.0 ± 4.6%, p < 0.001). A moderate, negative correlation (R = -0.57, p=0.007) between MA aortic growth rate and aortic strain was observed post-TEVAR. Conclusions Zone 2/3 TEVAR introduces changes in ascending aortic biomechanics. Patients with lower post-TEVAR strain, suggesting higher aortic stiffness, may be at highest risk of progressive growth. Imaging-based assessment of aortic biomechanics may help improve risk stratification for long-term outcomes post-TEVAR
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tjahjadi et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Thoracic aortic disease requiring TEVAR (n=120). Zone 2/3 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) vs. Pre-TEVAR baseline and non-dilated controls was evaluated on Total ascending aortic displacement (p=0.03). Zone 2/3 TEVAR decreased total ascending aortic displacement (4.13 vs 4.87 mm, p=0.03) and increased aortic strain at the mid-ascending aorta and proximal arch.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: