Outcomes of endovascular repair for patients with blunt traumatic aortic injury.

BACKGROUND

Traumatic aortic injury (TAI) remains a leading cause of death after blunt force. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been widely adopted as an alternative to open repair for the treatment of TAI. Although significant short-term benefits have been demonstrated for patients undergoing TEVAR, longer-term follow-up data are lacking.

METHODS

Trauma registry data were analyzed. Follow-up data were gathered from a combination of medical records, imaging, telephone interviews, and Social Security Death Index. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, stroke, and paraplegia. Secondary outcomes included device-related adverse events (rupture, migration, or endoleak), secondary procedures, open conversion, and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Between September 2005 and July 2012, 82 consecutive patients (57 males, mean [SD] age, 39.5 [20] years; mean [SD] Injury Severity Score [ISS], 34 [9.5]) underwent TEVAR for TAI. A total of 87 devices were implanted: TAG (n = 36), CTAG (n = 12) (WL Gore, Flagstaff, AZ); Talent (n = 29), Valiant (n = 5) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA); TX2 (n = 2) (Cook, Bloomington, IN); and other (n = 3). Left subclavian artery coverage was required in 32 patients (39%). Technical success rate was 100%. Rates of in-hospital mortality, stroke, and paraplegia were 5.0%, 2.4%, and 0%, respectively.Median follow-up time was 2.3 years (range, 0-7 years). The availability of follow-up data was as follows: Social Security Death Index (100%), telephone interview (68%), clinic visit (61%), and imaging (82%). The incidence of device-related adverse events was 2.4%. There were four secondary procedures: two patients underwent a carotid-subclavian bypass, and two had an open conversion for device-related complications. Survival was 95% at 30 days, 88% at 1 year, 87% at 2 years, and 82% at 5 years.

CONCLUSION

At midterm follow-up, TEVAR is an effective and durable option for the treatment of TAI in properly selected patients. Device-related adverse events, secondary procedures, and open conversion are rare. Follow-up remains a challenge.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level V.