OBJECTIVES Our goal was to evaluate results of endovascular aortic arch repair using the Relay Branch system. METHODS Forty-three patients with thoracic aortic pathology involving the aortic arch have been treated with the Relay Branch system (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FL, USA) in 10 centres. We assessed in-hospital mortality, neurological injury, treatment success according to current reporting standards and the need for secondary interventions. In addition, outcome was analysed according to the underlying pathology: non-dissective disease versus residual aortic dissection (RAD) (defined as remaining dissection after previous type A repair, chronic type B aortic dissections). RESULTS In-hospital mortality was 9% (0% in patients with RAD). Disabling stroke occurred in 7% (0% in patients with RAD); non-disabling stroke occurred in 19% (7% in patients with RAD). Early type IA and B endoleak formation occurred in 4%. Median follow-up was 16 ± 18 months. During the follow-up period, 23% of the patients died. Aortic-related deaths were low (3% in patients with RAD). CONCLUSIONS The results of endovascular aortic arch repair using the Relay Branch system in a selected patient population with regard to technical success are good. In-hospital mortality is acceptable, the number of disabling strokes is low and technical success is high. Non-disabling stroke is a major concern, and every effort has to be taken to reduce this to a minimum. The best outcome is seen in patients with underlying RAD. Finally, more data are needed.

No abstract

Background: Our retrospective single-center study aimed to evaluate the safety of the carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in comparison to patients with untreated asymptomatic carotid stenosis ≥60% before CABG. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included 174 patients with asymptomatic unilateral carotid stenosis treated between 2004 and 2017 with CABG. Thereof 106 patients had CEA before cardiac surgery either by a simultaneous (n = 62) or staged (n = 44) approach. Patients with untreated carotid stenosis served as control (no-CEA group; n = 68). Results: The mean stenosis grade was higher in the CEA group (CEA 83% (±1), no-CEA 71% (±1) p < 0.0001). The overall stroke rate was 5/174 (3%) and was due to a high incidence of stroke in the no-CEA group (CEA: 0/106 (0%); No-CEA 5/68 (7%) p = 0.0083). The overall mortality was 1% and comparable between the groups (CEA: 2/106 (2%); No-CEA 0/68 (0%) p = 0.5211). Stroke related mortality was not observed. The groups were similar regarding the incidence of myocardial infarction (p = 1.0), atrial fibrillation (p = 0.1931), delirium (p = 0.2106) and IMC/ICU stay (p = 0.1542). No significant difference in the subgroup analysis was found between the simultaneous and staged approach regarding the myocardial infarction (simultaneous: 1/62 (1%); staged: 1/44 (1%); p = 1.0). Conclusions: CEA performed as a staged procedure in local anesthesia or a simultaneous procedure in general anesthesia, may reduce the stroke risk prior to CABG.

OBJECTIVES Our aim was to compare aortic remodelling in type B dissections after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or conservative treatment. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of computed tomography (CT) data sets at dissection onset and at the last follow-up in a group with conservative (group A) and TEVAR treatment (group B). An additional analysis of the preoperative CT images was performed in patients from group A, who were converted to TEVAR during follow-up. Diameters and lengths of all aortic segments were measured and growth rates were calculated. RESULTS We included 74 patients: 50 patients in group A (follow-up time: 1625 ± 209 days) and 24 patients in group B (follow-up time: 554 ± 129 days). The mean aortic diameter growth rate was significantly higher in group A than in group B in the mid-descending aorta (A: +7 mm/year; B: −4 mm/year; P = 0.003). Length growth difference was only present in the abdominal aortic segment and was more pronounced in group A (+2 vs ±0 mm/year; P = 0.009). The conversion rate from conservative treatment to TEVAR was 36% (n = 18). A false lumen diameter of &gt;22 mm at baseline was associated with a higher rate of conversion (P = 0.036). After conversion, the mean growth rate in the proximal descending and mid-descending aorta decreased from preoperative +11 and +18 mm/year to postoperative −9 and −14 mm/year, respectively (P &lt; 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In acute type B dissections, TEVAR stops aortic enlargement in the thoracic aorta, but promotes distal dilatation compared to the conservative treatment group. After conversion to TEVAR in conservatively pretreated chronic type B dissections, a more pronounced diameter decrease in the descending aorta was observed than in patients treated in the acute phase.

No abstract