Background: While the standard of care for suspected tracheo-innominate artery fistula (TIF) necessitates sternotomy, perioperative mortality remains high. Endovascular interventions have been attempted, but reports have been anecdotal. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the outcomes of endovascular management of TIF by pooling the existing evidence. Methods: An electronic database search of Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was performed to identify all studies examining endovascular treatment of TIF. Patients greater than 14 years of age who underwent endovascular intervention for TIF were included. 25 studies consisting of 27 patients met the inclusion criteria. Results: 48.1% (13/27) of patients were male and median age was 39.0 [IQR 16.0, 47.5] years. Tracheostomy was present in 96.3% (26/27) of cases. Median duration from tracheostomy to TIF presentation was 2.2 months [0.5, 42.5]. On presentation, 84.6% (22/26) had tracheal hemorrhage, and 22.8% (6/27) were hemodynamically unstable. 96.3% (26/27) underwent covered stent graft placement while 1 patient (3.8%) had coil embolization. 18.5% (5/27) of patients required repeat endovascular intervention for recurrent bleeding, while 11.1% (3/27) required rescue sternotomy. Median hospital length of stay was 30 days [16.0, 46.5], and overall mortality was 29.6% (8/27) with a median follow-up time of 5 months [1.2, 11.5]. Conclusion: While uncommon, endovascular treatment of TIF may be a feasible alternative to sternotomy. The approach may be useful in those who are unable to undergo surgery or are likely to have adhesions from prior chest operations.
Background: Bronchial artery revascularization (BAR) during lung transplantation has been hypothesized to improve early tracheal healing and delay the onset of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS). We aimed to assess the outcomes of BAR after lung transplantation.Methods: Electronic search in Ovid Medline, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Scopus, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCTR) databases was performed to identify all relevant studies published about lung transplantation with BAR. Studies discussing lung transplantation utilizing BAR were included while those without outcome data such as BOS and survival were excluded.Cohort-level data were extracted and pooled for analysis. A binary outcome meta-analysis of proportions with logit transformation was conducted. Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for risk of bias assessment.Results: Seven studies were selected for the analysis comprising 143 patients. Mean patient age was 47 (95% CI: 40-55) years. 61% (48-72%) were male. 73% (65-79%) of patients underwent double lung transplant while 27% (21-25%) underwent single lung transplant. In patients with postoperative angiography, successful BAR was demonstrated in 93% (82-97%) of all assessed conduits. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality was 6% (3-11%). 79% (63-89%) of patients were free from rejection at three months. 83% (29-98%) of patients were free from signs of airway ischemia at three and six months. Pooled survival at one year and five years was 87% (78-92%) and 71% (46-87%), respectively, with a mean follow-up time of 21 (3-38) months. Pooled freedom from bronchiolitis obliterans was 86% (77-91%) at two years.Conclusions: While this systematic review and meta-analysis is limited by the available surgeons, institutions, and papers discussing a highly specialized technique, it does show that BAR is a viable technique to minimize BOS and early anastomotic intervention following lung transplantation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.