A single-center experience treating renal malperfusion after aortic dissection with central aortic fenestration and renal artery stenting
Dawn M Barnes,David M Williams,Narasimham L Dasika,Himanshu J Patel,Alan B Weder,James C Stanley,G Michael Deeb,Gilbert R Upchurch Jr
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2007.12.057
Abstract:Objective: Patients with aortic dissection were studied to define (1) anatomic and physiologic derangements in renal artery blood flow, (2) differences in clinically suspected renal malperfusion and true functional malperfusion, and (3) variations in endovascular interventions for the treatment of renal malperfusion. Methods: The cohort comprised 165 patients (mean age, 58 years) with dissections who were thought to have malperfusion sufficient to require arteriography. They were treated from 1996 to 2004 for acute (n = 115) or chronic (n = 50) aortic dissections (75 had type A, 90 had type B lesions). All patients had suspected peripheral vascular malperfusion (ie, cerebral, spinal, mesenteric, renal, or lower extremity vascular beds). Renal malperfusion was suspected in 88 patients secondary to worsening hypertension (n = 34), evolving renal insufficiency (n = 37), computed tomography evidence of impaired renal blood flow (n = 13), or a combination of factors (n = 4). Patients underwent angiographic and intravascular ultrasound studies. Renal malperfusion was confirmed with a systolic gradient between the aortic root and renal hilum (average, 44 mm Hg). Results: Right renal arteries arose exclusively from the true lumen in 115 patients (70%), the false lumen in 11 (7%), and both lumens in 37 (23%). Left renal arteries arose exclusively from the true lumen in 69 patients (42%), the false lumen in 32 (20%), and both lumens in 62 (38%). Angiographic confirmation of malperfusion existed in 59 patients (67%) of the 88 suspected of such, and in 31 patients (39%) of the 79 with suspected malperfusion of nonrenal tissues. Of the 90 patients with confirmed renal malperfusion, 71 underwent endovascular therapy, including isolated renal artery stenting (n = 31), as well as proximal aortic fenestration with or without aortic stenting (n = 24), or both renal and aortic intervention (n = 16). Residual pressure gradients averaged 8.1 mm Hg after these interventions. Five procedure-related complications (7%) occurred. The periprocedural postintervention mortality rate was 21% (n = 15), including multisystem organ failure (n = 7), false lumen rupture (n = 3), reperfusion injury (n = 2), cerebral ischemia (n = 1), cardiac arrest (n = 1), and unknown (n = 1). Conclusions: Percutaneous aortic fenestration and renal artery stenting are both technically feasible and associated with an acceptable complication rate. Most patients respond well symptomatically, obviating the need for immediate surgical relief of renal artery obstruction and allowing for renal malperfusion recovery.