2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.05.116
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of operative indication and surgical complexity on outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair at National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Centers

Abstract: The operative indication for a TEVAR procedure was not found to be a predictor of poor patient outcome. Surgical complexity, specifically the need for brachiocephalic aortic debranching and aortoiliac conduit, was shown to influence the occurrence of SAEs in a multivariate model. Comparative data, such as these, illustrate real-world outcomes of patients undergoing TEVAR outside of the original FDA-approved indications. This information is of paramount importance to various stakeholders, including third-party … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
19
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
(38 reference statements)
2
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…All groups studied exhibited higher adverse outcome rates when treated in the nonelective setting, which is intuitive and has been reported previously. 20 The overall rate of neurological complications (stroke and spinal cord injury) in patients with nonelective TAA in the present study appears similar to that described elsewhere and is clearly a source of major morbidity in this group of patients, [21][22][23][24] although not in the patients with acute or chronic dissection. There is no proven explanation for the lower incidence of spinal cord injury in patients with type B aortic dissection, although the lower incidence of comorbidities and continued perfusion of the false lumen after TEVAR may play a role.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…All groups studied exhibited higher adverse outcome rates when treated in the nonelective setting, which is intuitive and has been reported previously. 20 The overall rate of neurological complications (stroke and spinal cord injury) in patients with nonelective TAA in the present study appears similar to that described elsewhere and is clearly a source of major morbidity in this group of patients, [21][22][23][24] although not in the patients with acute or chronic dissection. There is no proven explanation for the lower incidence of spinal cord injury in patients with type B aortic dissection, although the lower incidence of comorbidities and continued perfusion of the false lumen after TEVAR may play a role.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…The most serious complications of TEVAR are neurologic resulting from ischemia or embolization. Perioperative acute ischemic stroke associated with TEVAR has a reported incidence of 3.5% to 5.5% (22,23) and is more common if the TEVAR involves more proximal aorta (landing zones 0-2) (24). Excessive wire and catheter manipulation in a diseased aortic arch with risks of air embolism from deployment systems and inadvertent coverage of arch branches, increases the risk of stroke.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We utilized a NSQIP version of the CCI to stratify patients' 10-year risk of mortality [17]. Previous studies have verified that the CCI adapted to large administrative databases has similar sensitivity in stratifying mortality [18], and this strategy has been used in NSQIP in previous studies [19,20].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%