Anthony L. Estrera

Blunt traumatic aortic injury: initial experience with endovascular repair.

OBJECTIVESnEndovascular treatment of traumatic aortic injury (TAI) is an alternative to open repair (OR) in patients with blunt trauma. We report our initial experience after integration of endovascular repair using thoracic devices.nnnMETHODSnA retrospective review of a prospectively collected institutional trauma registry was performed. Between September 2005 and November 2008, 71 patients with TAI presented to our institution. Based on imaging, TAIs were classified into grade 1-4 in severity. These included: grade 1, intimal tear; grade 2, intramural hematoma; grade 3, aortic pseudoaneurysm; and grade 4, free rupture. Initial management included resuscitation, blood pressure control, and treatment of associated injuries. After stabilization, all patients were considered for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using a thoracic device. If contraindicated, candidates underwent OR. Outcome measures were mortality, stroke, paraplegia, intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital stay.nnnRESULTSnThe mean age was 39.8 years, with 50 males. The mean injury severity score (ISS) was 42.6. Nineteen (27%) patients with a mean ISS of 60 died shortly after arrival prior to any vascular intervention. Ten (14%) patients with grade 1 injuries were managed medically. The remaining 42 (59%) patients with grade 2 and 3 injuries underwent repair. Median interval between admission and repair was 4.3 days (range, 0-109 days). Fifteen (21%) patients with a mean ISS of 34.4 underwent OR with no mortality, stroke, or paraplegia. Twenty-seven (38%) patients with a mean ISS of 36.7 underwent TEVAR with no mortality or paraplegia. One TEVAR patient suffered a perioperative stroke. Twenty-two patients had a TAG (W.L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) device. Four patients had a Talent Thoracic (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, Calif), and 1 patient had an Excluder (W.L. Gore) device. The left subclavian artery was covered in 13 (48%) patients. Patients who underwent TEVAR were older than those who had OR (47.8 vs 31.1 years, P < .006). The aortic diameter proximal to the injury was larger in the TEVAR group (24.4 vs 19.6 mm, P < .0001). There was no difference in the mean ICU or hospital length of stay between the two groups. Mortality correlated with the ISS score (P < .0001). Median follow-up time was 19.4 months (range, 0-27). Only 56% of the TEVAR patients were fully compliant with their surveillance imaging protocol.nnnCONCLUSIONnIn this initial experience, the results of TEVAR did not differ from OR. Long-term follow-up is required to determine the effectiveness of this treatment strategy. Adherence to follow-up imaging protocols is challenging in this patient population. Next generation devices will make TEVAR applicable to a wider range of patients.

An outcome analysis of endovascular versus open repair of blunt traumatic aortic injuries

BACKGROUNDnAortic injury is the second most common cause of death after blunt trauma. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been rapidly adopted as an alternative to the traditional open repair (OR) for treatment of traumatic aortic injury (TAI). This paradigm shift has improved the outcomes in these patients. This study evaluated the outcomes of TEVAR compared with OR for patients with TAI.nnnMETHODSnWe analyzed prospectively collected data from the institutional trauma registry between April 2002 and June 2010. These data were supplemented with a retrospective review of hospital financial accounts. The primary outcome was the presence or absence of any complication, including in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes included fixed, variable, and total hospital costs and intensive care unit (ICU), preoperative, postoperative and total hospital length of stay (LOS).nnnRESULTSnAmongst 106 consecutive patients (74 men; mean age, 36.4 years), 56 underwent OR and 50 underwent TEVAR for treatment of TAI. The proportion of patients who underwent TEVAR compared with OR increased from 0% to 100% during the study period. The TEVAR patients were significantly older than the OR patients (41.1 vs 32.2 years, P=.012). For patients who underwent TEVAR, the estimated odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of complications, including in-hospital mortality was 0.33 (0.11-0.97; P=.045) compared with the OR group. The average number of complications, including in-hospital death, was higher in the OR group than in the TEVAR group (adjusted means, 1.29 vs 0.94). The OR group had a higher proportion of patients with complications, including in-hospital death, compared with the TEVAR group (69.6% vs 48%). Although, the mean adjusted variable costs were higher for TEVAR than for OR (P=.017), the mean adjusted fixed and total costs were not significantly different. Owing to a policy of delayed selective management, the adjusted preoperative LOS was significantly higher for TEVAR (9.8 vs 3.0 days, P=.022). The difference in the ICU or total hospital LOS was not significant. Although the proportion of uninsured patients was similar in both groups, the cohort (n=106) had a significantly higher proportion of uninsured patients (29% vs 5%) compared with the general vascular surgical population at our institution (0.29 vs 0.051, 95% confidence interval for difference in proportions, 0.22-0.40; P<.0001).nnnCONCLUSIONSnCompared with TEVAR, patients who underwent OR had three times higher odds to face a complication or in-hospital death. The mean total cost of TEVAR was not significantly different than OR. The findings support the use of TEVAR over OR for patients with TAI.

Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Systematic Literature Review:

Endovascular repair is increasingly used for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs). This study estimated the mortality rate for this approach. A review of 307 publications in English was performed. Thirty-four publications representing 1,200 patients with RAAA were deemed appropriate for analysis by weighted least squares regression. Of the 1,200 patients, 531 (44.3%) underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The average age was 74 years, and 13% were female. Aortouni-iliac grafts were used in 49.4% of patients, and 50.6% received bifurcated grafts. The technical success rate was 94.9%, with a mortality rate of 30.2%. The ratio of endovascular cases to the total number of cases strongly predicted the mortality rate (weighted coefficient −0.378, p < .0003). The mortality rate following EVAR of RAAA is 30%. A 3.8% reduction in mortality was found for each 10% increase in the percentage of ruptures repaired endovascularly at each center. These results are suggestive of a learning curve.

Effect of Patient Transfer on Outcomes after Open Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs) benefit from treatment in high-volume facilities. This study explored the effect of patient transfer on outcomes and the relationship between hemodynamic status and mortality. We performed a retrospective review of 83 consecutive patients who had open repair for RAAA at a single tertiary facility. The patients were divided into two groups based on arrival in the local emergency department, “local” (n = 44) versus “transfer” (n = 39) from an outside institution, and into three categories of hemodynamic status: (a) no obtainable blood pressure, “pulseless”; (b) requiring vasopressor support, “pressors”; and (c) no vasopressor support, “no pressors.” Thirty-day mortality was 21.4%. There was no difference in mortality between the local (18.2%) and transfer (25.6%) patients (p = .41). There were no deaths during transfer. There was no difference in the hemodynamic status of the transfer versus the local group (p = .34). The mortality by category was pulseless, 100% (3 of 3); pressors, 71.4% (10 of 14); and no pressors, 7.6% (5 of 66) (p < .0001). Actuarial survival was 66%, 64%, and 62% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Patient transfer does not adversely affect mortality after RAAA repair. Patients without a palpable pulse and those requiring hemodynamic support have a significantly higher mortality.

Repair of a traumatic sternal deformity

Acquired deformities of the anterior chest wall have been classified into groups. There are reports in the literature on the treatment of sternal dehiscence and nonunion after median sternotomy. A review of the English-language literature, however, found little about the treatment of sternal fractures after blunt trauma, because most such fractures are managed nonoperatively with low morbidity and mortality. We report a case of a chronic sternal fracture that healed in a severely angulated fashion, was associated with pain, and was treated with open reduction and fixation.