Objective: Endoluminal aortic stent grafting offers a potentially less invasive alternative to open chest surgery, especially in patients with polytrauma. We compare the results of conventional surgical repair and endovascular treatment of traumatic aortic rupture. Methods: Retrospectively, 74 patients with acute traumatic aortic rupture were analyzed. Most of the patients had a rupture limited to the isthmus, and severe associated injuries. Thirty-five patients (6 female, 29 male, mean age 36 years) underwent surgical repair. Two patients were operated upon without cardiopulmonary bypass. In 39 patients (5 female, 34 male, mean age 36 years) thoracic endografts were implanted. The delay between trauma and treatment was comparable in the two groups. Results: Hospital mortality was 20% (7 of 35 patients) in the surgical group and 7.7% (3 of 39 patients) in the endovascular group. The most common cause of death in the surgical group was brain death in severe traumatic patients. Ten surgical complications occurred in 5 patients: respiratory insufficiency (n = 3), pulmonary infection (n = 2), recurrent nerve palsy (n = 2), repeat thoracotomy (n = 2), and compartment syndrome (n = 1). No patient in this group had paraplegia. Except for one case, which required conversion to conventional surgery, stent-graft implantation was successful in all cases, without peri-interventional complications or procedure-induced paraplegia. In 9 patients the left subclavian artery was covered with the device. Two patients underwent surgical repair 15 days and 4 months after endografting because of injury of the aortic wall by the stent and development of a spurious aneurysm, respectively. Conclusions: In the treatment of traumatic thoracic aortic rupture, the early outcome of patients treated with endovascular stent grafts appears to be better than that with conventional surgical repair. The new technique allows safe and successful repair of this life-threatening injury in the early phase of trauma management. How far this potential benefit is sustained in the long term remains unclear at present. #

The outcome of transapical aortic valve implantation was very favorable and already reproducible during the learning curve. The method has become de facto our institutional primary choice for treatment of high-risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.

No abstract

No abstract

Background— Iatrogenic damage of different structures of the aortic root, in the region of the so-called “device landing zone,” may occur during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). It is mostly considered difficult to treat or even untreatable. Methods and Results— We performed a retrospective analysis of the occurrence, clinical presentation, treatment, and outcome of iatrogenic rupture in the device landing zone in a series of 618 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI at our institution between April 2008 and October 2011. The incidence of rupture was 1% (6 patients). The correct diagnosis was established during TAVI procedures in 4 and postmortem in 2 patients. The major sign of the aortic rupture was apparent bleeding in 4 patients and failure of myocardial recovery after valve implantation in 1; it was asymptomatic in 1 patient. The iatrogenic rupture in the region of the device landing zone was treated surgically in 5 patients and only conservatively in the patient without symptoms. When the diagnosis was established correctly during TAVI, only 1 of 4 patients died (25%). The overall mortality rate was 50% (3 of 6 patients died). Conclusions— Rupture of different structures in the device landing zone during TAVI is a life-threatening complication that can be treated successfully if it is immediately recognized and adequately managed.