Abstract:Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the midterm and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) procedure to treat an uncomplicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection (uATBAD) with high risk for subsequent aortic complications compared with the group of patients who received a conservative treatment protocol during the same period. Materials and methods: Between 2008 and 2019, 35 patients who had TEVAR due to uATBAD and those with conservative procedure (n=18) were included in a retrospective analysis and follow-up study. The primary endpoints were false lumen thrombosis/perfusion, true lumen diameter, and aortic dilatation. The aortic-related mortality, reintervention, and long-term survival were the secondary endpoints. Results: In the study period, 53 patients (22 females) with a mean age of 61.1±13 years were included. No 30-day and in-hospital mortality was recorded. Permanent neurological deficits occurred in 2 patients (5.7%). In the TEVAR group (n=35) and in a median follow-up period of 34 months, a significant reduction of maximum aortic and false lumen diameter as well as a significant increase of true lumen diameter were detected (p<0.001 each). Complete false lumen thrombosis increased from 6% preoperatively to 60% at follow-up. The median difference in aortic, false lumen, and true lumen diameter was -5 mm (interquartile range [IQR]=-28 to 8 mm), -11 mm (IQR=-53 to 10 mm), and 7 mm (IQR=-13 to 17 mm), respectively. In 3 patients (8.6%), a reintervention was needed. Two patients (1 aortic-related) died during follow-up. The estimated survival according to Kaplan-Meyer analysis was 94.1% after 3 years and 87.5% after 5 years. Similar to the TEVAR group, no 30-day or in-hospital mortality was recorded in the conservative group. During follow-up, 2 patients died and 5 patients underwent conversion-TEVAR (28%). In a median follow-up period of 26 months (range=150), a significant increase of maximum aortic diameter (p=0.006) and a tendency to augmentation of the false lumen (p=0.06) were noted. No significant reduction of the true lumen was seen. Conclusions: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients at high risk of subsequent aortic complications in uncomplicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection is safe and is associated with favorable midterm outcomes regarding aortic remodeling. Clinical impact: In a retrospective, single center analysis of prospectively collected data with follow-up, we compared 35 patients with high-risk features who recieved TEVAR in acute and sub-acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection to a control-group (n=18). The TEVAR group showed a significant positive remoduling (reduction of max. aortic and false lumen diameter and increase of true lumen diameter (p<0.001 each)) during follow-up with an estimated survival of 94.1% after 3 years and 87.5% after 5 years.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Current Evidence in Endograft Therapy Vs Medical Treatment for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Endovascular repair versus best medical treatment for uncomplicated acute type B acute aorta dissection: a meta-analysis

Endovascular stent-graft placement or open surgery for the treatment of acute type B aortic dissection: a meta-analysis.

Comparison of thoracic endovascular aortic repair, open surgery and best medical treatment for type B aortic dissection: A meta-analysis

Endovascular Stent Versus Open Surgery in the Acute Type B Aortic Dissection: a Meta-Analysis

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Current Evidence Related to the Impact of Endovascular Repair Timing on Prognosis of Acute Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection

Early and long-term effect of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for Stanford B aortic dissection

Efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair versus medical therapy for treatment of type B aortic dissection

Early Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair of Uncomplicated Type B Thoracic Aortic Dissection: An Aorta Team Approach

Endovascular Repair of the Thoracic Aorta Combined with Drug Therapy in Acute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Long-term Results of Type B Aortic Dissection Patients with Tumor after Endovascular Repair or Optimal Medical Therapy: a Single-Center and Retrospective Cohort Study.

Aortic Outcome after Implementation of a Treatment Strategy for Type B Aortic Dissection Involving the Aortic Arch

Initial Study of the Extended STABILISE Technique for Complete Remodeling in Aortic Dissection

Favorable Remodeling After TEVAR in Uncomplicated Acute and Subacute Type B Aortic Dissection in Comparison to Conservative Treatment: A Midterm Analysis

Endovascular versus open surgical repair for complicated chronic Type B aortic dissection

Surgical treatment in the chronic phase for uncomplicated Stanford type B aortic dissection

Timing and Outcome of Endovascular Repair for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Application of Antithrombotic Drugs in Patients with Acute Type B Aortic Dissection Underwent Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Endovascular Repair Compared With Medical Management of Patients With Uncomplicated Type B Acute Aortic Dissection

Prognosis and Remodeling after Endovascular Repair for Acute, Subacute, and Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection.

Clinical Effect of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection