2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A systematic review and meta-analysis of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with the proximal landing zone 0

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Thoracic endovascular aortic repair, initially intended for thoracic aortic disease treatment, has extended its application to the proximal zone of the aorta. However, the safety and surgical outcomes of extending the proximal landing zone into the ascending aorta (zone 0) in selected cases remain unknown. Thus, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of zone 0 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) to obtain a deeper understanding of its safety, outcomes, and trends over time.

          Methods

          A literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, from January, 1997 to January, 2022. Only studies involving zone 0 TEVAR were included. The retrieved data from the eligible studies included basic study characteristics, 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate, indications, comorbidities, stent grafts, techniques, and complications. Summary effect measures of the primary outcomes were obtained by logarithmically pooling the data with an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects model.

          Results

          Fifty-three studies with 1,013 patients were eligible for analysis. The pooled 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate of zone 0 TEVAR was 7.49%. The rates of post-operative stroke, type Ia endoleak, retrograde type A aortic dissection, and spinal cord ischemia were 8.95, 9.01, 5.72, and 4.12%, respectively.

          Conclusions

          Although many novel stent grafts and techniques targeting zone 0 TEVAR are being investigated, a consensus on technique and device selection in zone 0 TEVAR is yet to be established in current practice. Furthermore, the post-operative stroke rate is relatively high, while other complication rates and perioperative death rate are comparable to those of TEVAR for other aortic zones.

          Related collections

          Most cited references71

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Retrograde Type A Aortic Dissection After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

            Background Retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD) is a potentially lethal complication after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). However, data are limited regarding the development of RTAD post‐TEVAR. This systematic review aims to define the incidence, mortality, and potential risk factors of RTAD post‐TEVAR. Methods and Results Multiple electronic searches were performed. Fifty publications with a total of 8969 patients were analyzed. Pooled estimates for incidence and mortality of RTAD were 2.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0–3.1) and 37.1% (95% CI, 23.7–51.6), respectively. Metaregression analysis evidenced that RTAD rate was associated with hypertension (P=0.043), history of vascular surgery (P=0.042), and American Surgical Association (P=0.044). The relative risk of RTAD was 1.81 (95% CI, 1.04–3.14) for acute dissection (relative to chronic dissection) and 5.33 (95% CI, 2.70–10.51) for aortic dissection (relative to a degenerative aneurysm). Incidence of RTAD was significantly different in patients with proximal bare stent and nonbare stent endografts (relative risk [RR]=2.06; 95% CI, 1.22–3.50). RTAD occurrence rate in zone 0 was higher than other landing zones. Conclusions The pooled RTAD rate after TEVAR was calculated at 2.5% with a high mortality rate (37.1%). Incidence of RTAD is significantly more frequent in patients treated for dissection than those with an aneurysm (especially for acute dissection), and when the proximal bare stent was used. Rate of RTAD after TEVAR varied significantly according to the proximal Ishimaru landing zone. The more‐experienced centers tend to have lower RTAD incidences.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Endovascular stent grafting for ascending aorta repair in high-risk patients.

              Standard treatment of ascending aortic pathology is open repair, but some patients are too high risk. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of the ascending aorta has been used as an alternative. Our objectives were to characterize patients, describe repair methods, and assess outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Cardiovasc Med
                Front Cardiovasc Med
                Front. Cardiovasc. Med.
                Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2297-055X
                24 February 2023
                2023
                : 10
                : 1034354
                Affiliations
                Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of General Surgery, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University , Shanghai, China
                Author notes

                Edited by: Emiliano Chisci, Nuovo Ospedale San Giovanni di Dio, Italy

                Reviewed by: Xinsheng Xie, Fudan University, China; Piero Farina, Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IRCCS), Italy

                *Correspondence: Qingsheng Lu ✉ luqs@ 123456newvascular.cn

                This article was submitted to Heart Surgery, a section of the journal Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine

                †These authors have contributed equally to this work

                Article
                10.3389/fcvm.2023.1034354
                9998709
                36910538
                05658f0c-f162-42fe-8c84-d4fc0026c2f5
                Copyright © 2023 Zhu, Li and Lu.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 01 September 2022
                : 06 February 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 7, Tables: 9, Equations: 0, References: 71, Pages: 15, Words: 8490
                Categories
                Cardiovascular Medicine
                Systematic Review

                zone 0 tevar,fenestrated tevar,chimney tevar,hybrid endovascular aortic repair,endograft,complications after tevar

                Comments

                Comment on this article