Target Artery Outcomes Following Endovascular versus Open Surgical Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms - A Single Center Comparative Study

Ying Huang; Jill Colglazier; Bernardo C Mendes; Alberto Pochettino; Manju Kalra; Kevin L Greason; Emanuel R Tenorio; William S Harmsen; Gustavo S Oderich

doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000006594

Target Artery Outcomes Following Endovascular versus Open Surgical Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms - A Single Center Comparative Study

Ann Surg. 2024 Nov 25. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006594. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Ying Huang¹, Jill Colglazier², Bernardo C Mendes², Alberto Pochettino³, Manju Kalra², Kevin L Greason³, Emanuel R Tenorio¹, William S Harmsen⁴, Gustavo S Oderich¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, Advanced Aortic Research Program at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX.
² Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
³ Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN.
⁴ Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN.

PMID: 39584778
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006594

Abstract

Objective: To compare target artery (TA) outcomes after fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs).

Background: Few studies have compared TA outcomes after endovascular incorporation and open reconstruction.

Methods: Among consecutive patients who underwent elective OSR or FB-EVAR of TAAAs (2008-2020), we reviewed those who had postoperative imaging studies evaluating TA. Data of FB-EVAR patients were obtained from a prospectively maintained institutional database. TAs included celiac, superior mesenteric, right and left renal arteries treated during TAAA repairs. Primary endpoint was TA patency (primary and secondary).

Results: There were 131 patients (487 TAs) treated by OSR and 350 (1,300 TAs) by FB-EVAR. In the OSR group, 440 TAs (90.3%) were reconstructed by bypasses, and 47 (9.7%) by reimplantation. In the FB-EVAR group, 841 TAs (64.7%) were incorporated by fenestrations, and 459 (35.3%) by DBs. Thirty-day TA primary patency rates were not significantly different between FB-EVAR and OSR (99.4%% vs. 99.0%, P =0.36), but secondary patency rate was higher after FB-EVAR (99.8% vs. 99.0%, P =0.02). Three-year primary patency rates were 95.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.7-97.2%) and 94.7% (95% CI, 92.2-97.2%), respectively; secondary patency rates were 98.5% (95% CI, 97.7-99.2%) and 94.7% (95% CI, 95.7-99.2%), respectively. There were no significant differences in late primary patency and secondary patency between groups (each P <0.05).

Conclusion: Target artery primary and secondary patency rates following elective OSR or FB-EVAR were high. Endovascular repair was not associated with loss of primary patency and late secondary patency.