Abstract:Objectives: There are several endovascular treatment options to treat aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts. This study seeks to assess endovascular treatment methods for aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), comparing different treatment methods and evaluating technical success, intraoperative parameters and short-term outcomes. Methods: All patients undergoing elective or emergency endovascular treatment of aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies, with no acceptable landing zone for standard TEVAR, between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2024, at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany were included. An acceptable landing zone was defined as a minimum of 2 cm for sufficient sealing. All patients were not suitable for open surgery. Patients were categorized by an endovascular treatment method for a comprehensive comparison of pre-, intra- and postoperative variables. IBM SPSS29 was used for data analysis. Results: The patient cohort comprised 21 patients, predominantly males (81%), with an average age of 70.9 ± 9 years with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard TEVAR procedure. The most treated aortic pathologies were penetrating aortic ulcers and chronic post-dissection aneurysms. Patients were sub-grouped according to the applied procedure as follows: five patients with chimney thoracic endovascular aortic repair (chTEVAR), seven patients with in situ fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (isfTEVAR), six patients with custom-made fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmfTEVAR) and three patients with custom-made branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmbTEVAR). Emergency procedures involved two patients. There were significant differences in the total procedure and fluoroscopy time, as well as in contrast agent usage among the treatment groups. cmfTEVAR had the shortest total procedure time, while chTEVAR exhibited the highest contrast agent usage. The overall mortality rate among all procedures was 9.5% (two patients) and 4.7% for elective procedures, respectively. Deaths were associated with either retrograde type A dissection or stent graft infection. Both patients were treated with chTEVAR. There was one minor and one major stroke; these patients were treated with isfTEVAR. No endoleak occurred during any procedure. The reintervention rate for chTEVAR was 20% and 0% for all other procedures during the in-hospital stay. The patients who were treated with cmfTEVAR had no complications, the shortest operating and fluoroscopy time, and less contrast agent was needed in comparison with other treatment methods. Conclusions: Complex endovascular procedures of the aortic arch with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts offer a safe solution, with acceptable complication rates for patients who are not suitable for open aortic arch repair. In terms of procedure-related parameters and complication rates, a custom-made fenestrated TEVAR is potentially advantageous compared to the other endovascular techniques.

Evaluation of custom-made Relay® stent-grafts for aortic arch landing zones 0 and I: experience from two high-volume aortic centres

One-year results with a low-profile endograft in subjects with thoracic aortic aneurysm and ulcer pathologies

Total Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair: From Dream to Reality

Three-Dimensional Printing to Guide the Application of Modified Prefenestrated Stent Grafts to Treat Aortic Arch Disease

Physician-Modified and In Situ Fenestrated Stent Grafts in Zone 0 for Aortic Arch Pathology After Ascending Aortic Replacement

Proximal sealing in the aortic arch for inner curve disease using the Custom Relay® Scalloped and Fenestrated stent graft

Comparative Evaluation of the Short-Term Outcome of Different Endovascular Aortic Arch Procedures

Midterm outcomes in patients undergoing endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysms and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers using the RelayPlus stent graft

Technical tips and clinical experience with the Nexus Endospan arch branch stent-graft

Favorable neurological outcomes in thoracic endovascular aortic repair with RELAY™ branched-An international perspective

Percutaneous Balloon–Expandable Stent Implantation to Treat Transverse Aortic Arch Obstruction: Medium- to Long-Term Outcomes of a Retrospective Multicenter Study

Hybrid Approach to Management of Complex Aortic Arch Pathologies: A Single-Center Experience in China

Editor's Choice - Sex Related Anatomical Differences in Patients With Aortic Arch Pathology and Their Impact on the Feasibility of Double and Triple Branched Endografts

Fenestrated endovascular repair for diseases involving the aortic arch

"Hybrid" Approach for the Treatment of Aortic Arch Aneurysm.

Outcome of Surgeon-Modified Fenestrated/Branched Stent-Grafts for Symptomatic Complex Aortic Pathologies or Contained Rupture

Thoracic Endovascular Repair for Aortic Arch Pathologies with Surgeon Modified Fenestrated Stent Grafts: A Multicentre Retrospective Study

Intercontinental Chinese-European Comparison on Surgeon-modified Fenestrated Endografts Vs Hybrid Management of Aortic Arch Diseases

Three-dimensional printing technique to guide the application of customized fenestrated stent grafts in aortic arch disease

One-Year Results of a Low-Profile Endograft in Acute, Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection

[Endovascular Stent-Graft Repair of Aortic Arch Aneurysms: Report of 46 Patients].