复杂胸主动脉夹层钬激光原位三开窗腔内修复术患者的护理

目的总结复杂胸主动脉夹层钬激光原位三开窗腔内修复术患者的护理要点,为临床工作提供参考。方法对5例累及头向血流的胸主动脉夹层患者采用钬激光原位三开窗技术保留主动脉弓上分支血管,使患者获得腔内修复。结果5例患者手术时间265~410(304.0±52.0)min,术后住院5~12(7.2±1.8)d,4例患者康复出院,1例患者发生脑中动脉栓塞导致右侧偏瘫转入康复医院继续康复治疗。结论术前做好心理护理,熟悉手术过程,充分准备物品,合理布置导管室格局;术中默契配合是复杂胸主动脉夹层钬激光原位三开窗腔内修复术患者围术期护理的关键。     

主动脉腔内支架隔绝术治疗降主动脉瘤

目的探讨主动脉腔内支架隔绝术治疗降主动脉瘤的适应证和疗效。方法2005年3月-2008年10月,对21例典型B型（Stanford分型）主动脉夹层、5例假性动脉瘤、2例主动脉壁内血肿合并主动脉壁溃疡,在局麻（26例）或全麻（2例）下行主动脉腔内支架隔绝术。采用Medtronic Talent支架10例,Medtronic Valiant支架12例,微创直管型支架6例。结果28例手术均获成功,术后即刻造影示破口封闭,无内漏。术后无胸痛,无神经系统并发症,无内漏,术后住院时间（4.5±1.1）d,3-7 d。5例术后发热,吲哚美辛治疗1个月,体温正常。21例主动脉夹层术后1周CT扫描显示真腔扩大,血供明显改善,胸主动脉假腔内血栓形成,腹主动脉假腔存在,开口于假腔的分支靠远端破口供血;5例假性动脉瘤CT扫描显示破口封闭,假腔内血栓形成;2例壁内血肿CT扫描显示溃疡被支架覆盖。23例随访（21.3±10.2）月（1-40个月）,无并发症发生。结论主动脉腔内支架隔绝术疗效可靠,操作简单,创伤小,患者恢复快,并发症少,住院时间短。B型主动脉夹层、降主动脉假性动脉瘤和降主动脉壁内血肿均可采用腔内支架隔绝术治疗。     

胸主动脉腔内修复应用原位开窗保留弓上分支动脉技术

目的:回顾性分析胸主动脉腔内修复使用原位开窗保留弓上分支动脉技术的初步经验。方法 :分析我院从2016年7月至2017年2月行胸主动脉腔内修复术中原位开窗15例病人的临床资料。弓部假动脉瘤3例,主动脉夹层12例。结果:病人均成功实施胸主动脉腔内修复术。23支目标血管中21支成功开窗(91.3%)。3例病人同时进行头臂干、左颈总动脉及左锁骨下动脉三开窗,平均手术时间为(550.0±155.6)min。2例行左颈总动脉及左锁骨下动脉双开窗,平均手术时间为(405.0±275.8)min。10例行左锁骨下动脉单开窗,平均手术时间为(175.0±43.5)min。术中发生穿刺侧髂外动脉损伤1例,术后发生脑梗死1例。围手术期无死亡病例。平均住院(15.3±4.3)(8~26)d。平均随访(3.1±2.0)(1~7)个月。随访病人均无不适症状。13例病人(86.7%)复查CTA,均未发现夹层进展。开窗支架通畅在位,无内漏及其他支架并发症发生。结论:原位开窗技术有效扩大胸主动脉腔内修复治疗主动脉病变适应证,安全可行,有微创优势。     

开窗/分支支架技术腔内治疗巨大胸腹主动脉夹层动脉瘤及内漏处理1例

患者,女性,53岁,有高血压和脑出血病史,2010年因Stanford B型主动脉夹层行胸主动脉覆膜支架腔内隔绝术,术中完全覆盖左锁骨下动脉,术后未规律随访。2019年2月25日因复查发现腹主动脉夹层假腔增大而入院。CTA示胸腹主动脉巨大夹层动脉瘤,延续至双侧髂动脉(图1A)。综合评估患者的病史及一般情况,手术风险高、无法耐受开放手术,遂选择分2期行全腔内修复术。     

������֧������˨�����������������Զ�����2������

胸 (腹 )主动脉假性动脉瘤是血管外科较为常见的疾病 ,手术治疗需要开胸甚至作胸膜联合切口 ,手术创伤及风险很大 ,有较高的手术死亡率和并发症发生率。随着 2 0世纪 90年代以来人造血管支架技术的发展 ,腔内人造血管移植术以其微创的特点已广泛用于胸 (腹 )主动脉瘤的临床治疗 ,减少输血量及其相应的并发症 ,使病人术后及总的住院时间明显缩短。本文介绍用微创腔内人造血管植入术和裸支架放置加瘤腔不锈钢圈栓塞 (双介入 )治疗胸 (腹 )主动脉假性动脉瘤 2例 (6个动脉瘤 )的经验。1　病例介绍例 1 男 ,5 4岁。以间歇性咯血 5个月伴胸背部痛 …     

术中支架象鼻技术治疗Stanford B型主动脉夹层

目的 总结术中支架象鼻技术治疗Stanford B型主动脉夹层的临床效果和经验.方法 2009年3月至2011年12月,24例锚定区不足或左锁骨下动脉受累及合并升主动脉或心脏病变的Stanford B型主动脉夹层的患者在北京安贞医院接受手术.其中男20例,女4例,年龄(50.6±9.8)岁.合并高血压20例,主动脉瓣关闭不全2例,主动脉根部瘤1例,二尖瓣关闭不全1例,主动脉缩窄1例.14例有吸烟史.4例为胸降主动脉覆膜支架术后内漏.结果 24例患者均行直视下支架象鼻术,同期左锁骨下动脉左颈总动脉转流5例,主动脉瓣替换+升主动脉成形3例,左锁骨下动脉重建2例,二尖瓣和主动脉瓣置换1例,升主动脉降主动脉人工血管转流1例.体外循环(163.1±48.6) min,低流量选择性脑灌时间(29.1 ±12.4) min.无围手术期死亡.二次开胸止血1例;呼吸功能不全气管切开1例;无截瘫及卒中发生.无住院死亡,并发症发生率8.3％(2/24例).1例失访;随访23例,随防率95.8％(23/24),平均随访24个月,随访期间2例因Ⅰ型内漏行修补术,1例因支架远端假性动脉瘤行主动脉覆膜支架修复.20例(86.4％)患者支架附近可见血栓形成.结论 对锚定区不足或左锁骨下动脉受累及合并升主动脉或心脏病变的Stanford B型主动脉夹层患者行直视下支架象鼻手术是一种有效的外科治疗手段,可以获得满意的临床效果.远期结果需进一步随访.     

主动脉扩张性疾病血管腔内治疗后脑卒中的原因分析

目的探讨主动脉夹层、主动脉瘤等主动脉扩张性疾病患者血管腔内治疗后脑卒中的发生原因及预防方法。方法对8例主动脉夹层、主动脉瘤患者血管腔内治疗后脑卒中患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析,其中1例为Stanford A型主动脉夹层,2例为Stanford B型主动脉夹层,2例为胸腹主动脉瘤,1例为胸主动脉瘤,1例为胸主动脉假性动脉瘤,1例为腹主动脉瘤。结果 8例患者均成功植入支架,其中5例在植入主动脉支架的同时封堵了左锁骨下动脉(LSA)开口。脑血管意外发生的平均时间为术后(2.50±2.00)天,6例发生脑梗死,2例脑出血,1例死亡。患者术前、术后的血压水平比较,差异具有统计学意义[收缩压:(132.80±10.99)mmHg vs(110.09±23.18)mmHg,P0.05;舒张压:(74.21±3.86)mmHg vs(60.17±12.93)mmHg,P0.05]。2例脑出血的患者术中均使用超过6000 U肝素。结论术前、术后血压水平差异过大、对LSA盲目进行封堵、肝素用量过大、腔内操作不熟练等是导致主动脉疾病血管腔内治疗术后脑卒中的主要因素。     

Stanford A型主动脉夹层的腔内修复术后并发症分析

目的总结Stanford A型主动脉夹层(TAAD)腔内修复术后常见并发症的诊治经验。方法对2001年1月至2012年5月接受腔内治疗的58例TAAD患者资料进行回顾性分析。平均年龄54.3(41～79)岁。35例单纯接受腔内治疗,23例接受杂交手术:升主动脉-左颈总动脉-左锁骨下动脉旁路3例,左颈总动脉-左锁骨下动脉旁路3例,右颈总动脉-左颈总动脉旁路15例,左锁骨下动脉-左颈总动脉-右颈总动脉旁路2例。结果总技术成功率为98.3%(57/58)。并发症包括内漏14例,脑卒中5例,支架源性新破口1例,血管旁路术后吻合口假性动脉瘤2例。术后30天内死亡7例。随访(35.5±5.4)个月,随访期间死亡2例,其余患者均健康生存。结论 TAAD腔内治疗后并发症较累及降主动脉疾病的腔内修复术更为常见,脑卒中是重要的致死性并发症,应引起足够重视。     

腔内修复术治疗主动脉夹层的体会（附15例报道）

目的总结腔内修复术治疗主动脉夹层的经验。方法选择2011年7月至2013年1月期间我院住院的胸主动脉夹层患者15例,术前均采用CTA评估,全部行腔内修复术。结果15例患者采用腔内修复手术全部成功,手术时间95～165min,（120＋26）min;失血量30～160mL,（68±34）mL。10例采用经股动脉入路,5例采用经股动脉及肱动脉入路。13例单一破口者各植入支架1枚,手术全部成功。15例患者未发生截瘫,无一椎基底动脉缺血症状,无下肢缺血改变,无伤口感染及腹股沟区淋巴瘘。2例存在Ⅱ型内漏,未经处理自行闭合。随访胸腹主动脉CTA扫描显示覆膜支架均未移位,未发现植入支架后并发近端夹层者。结论腔内修复术治疗主动脉夹层是一种有效的治疗方法,具有安全性高、术后并发症少、治疗效果好等优点。     

主动脉病变的手术治疗与腔内血管外科治疗

目的 探讨主动脉病变的手术治疗和腔内血管外科治疗方法。方法 回顾性分析45例胸腹主动脉病变外科治疗的临床资料。结果 男37例，女8例。年龄2l～85(平均年龄64、7)岁。其中胸主动脉夹层ll例；降主动脉夹层破裂并假性动脉瘤形成伴椎骨破损2例；肾上，下型腹主动脉瘤各为3，23例；腹主动脉瘤破裂2例；腹主动脉瘤空肠瘘l例；腹主动脉外伤性破裂3例。45例患者中腔内治疗者l8例，25例行人工血管置换治疗，3例行腹主动脉修补。围手术期死亡率为6．7％(3／45)。随访36例，随访时间2个月～4年，均生存良好。结论 腔内血管外科治疗有着创伤小，术后恢复快，并发症少等优点，有条件行支架型人工血管腔内治疗的可优先考虑腔内治疗。传统手术方法在技巧等方面的改进有利于提高手术的成功率，并能为不具备腔内治疗条件的患者解除疾苦。     

Endovascular repair for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm and traumatic aortic injury

In contrast to high mortality of open surgery for thoracic aortic catastrophes including ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm (RTAA) and traumatic aortic injury (TAI), excellent short-term outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) have recently been reported. We report our single-center experiences with TEVAR for aortic catastrophes. Thirteen patients with thoracic aortic catastrophes (RTAA in 7 patients, TAI in 6 patients) have received TEVAR from February 2004 to June 2010. In cases of RTAA, 5 descending aortic aneurysm ruptures and 2 aortic arch aneurysm ruptures were included. In patients with arch aneurysm ruptures, fenestrated stent grafting (SG) and SG combined with arch debranching were performed. In all cases of TAI, aortic injuries occurred near the isthmus and 5 patients received fenestrated SG. The initial success rate was 100% and there was no perioperative death. Mean duration of observation was 24 months, which revealed 4 late deaths. The causes of late death were liver failure, cerebral contusion, senility and unknown. A patient with RTAA experienced a type III endoleak as an aorta-related event 24 months after operation. There was no enlargement of aneurysm in any patient. TEVAR for aortic catastrophes seems to be performed safely with acceptable outcomes. Although morphological incompatibility, unstable preoperative haemodynamics and longer time for preparation may become impediments to perform TEVAR, we believe that TEVAR should be the 1st choice for life-threatening aortic catastrophes. However, a careful follow-up is necessary because TEVAR has several unique late complications.     

累及弓部主动脉夹层手术方式选择及疗效

目的:探讨累及主动脉弓部主动脉夹层手术方式选择及疗效。方法:收集2010年2月—2015年5月因主动脉弓部夹层在广州军区武汉总医院心胸外科接受手术治疗病例资料,分析其手术方式选择及理由,不同术式并发症发生率等。结果:检索出符合条件的病例92例,其中仅行胸主动脉腔内修复术(TEVAR)36例,预开窗血管支架的TEVAR 2例,封闭左锁骨下动脉的TEVAR 31例,不开胸主动脉弓分支血管旁路术+TEVAR17例(左颈总动脉-左锁骨下动脉旁路术4例,右颈总动脉-左颈总动脉-左锁骨下动脉旁路术3例,右颈总动脉-左颈总动脉术、封闭左锁骨下动脉10例),开胸主动脉弓置换术6例。2例开胸主动脉弓置换术患者术后死亡,其余术后无严重并发症发生。结论:对于累及主动脉弓部夹层,开胸主动脉弓置换术是一种成熟的治疗方式;TEVAR是的一种快速、有效、经济、术后并发症少的手术方式,并可以通过开窗、分支血管旁路术等方式扩大其应用范围。     

亚急性期Stanford B型主动脉夹层腔内隔绝术后主动脉重塑的特点及影响因素

目的:探讨亚急性期Stanford B型主动脉夹层胸主动脉腔内修复术(TEVAR)后的血管重塑特点及影响因素。方法:回顾性分析2008年1月—2016年6月于安徽省立医院血管外科行TEVAR的50例亚急性期Stanford B型主动脉夹层患者术前及术后临床及影像学资料,分析术后3、6、12个月主动脉各平面段真假腔直径及假腔血栓化情况及术后主动脉重塑的影响因素。结果:TEVAR手术技术成功率为100%。术后8例失访。其余42例患者的影像学资料分析结果显示,TEVAR术后各时间点胸主动脉段真腔直径较术前明显扩大、假腔直径较术前明显缩小(均P0.05),而腹主动脉段真腔和假腔变化与术前均无统计学差异(均P0.05);胸主动脉段术后假腔血栓化比率高于腹主动脉。多因素分析显示,假腔内存在分支血管灌注(OR=27.45,P0.05)、存在多破口(OR=19.02,P0.05)是TEVAR术后主动脉重塑不良的独立危险因素。结论:亚急性期Stanford B型主动脉夹层行TEVAR后胸主动脉段重塑优于腹主动脉段;假腔内存在分支血管灌注、存在多破口是TEVAR术后主动脉重塑不良的独立危险因素。     

慢性B型主动脉夹层腔内修复术84例

目的 总结主动脉腔内修复术(TEVAR)治疗慢性B型主动脉夹层的临床经验.方法 2001年6月至2007年9月,84例慢性B型主动脉夹层病人接受了 TEVAR.从起病至实施TEVAR为1～120个月,平均(13.9±22.0)个月.随访6～86个月,平均(33.2±19.2)个月.结果 腔内修复术中,破口被完全封闭77例,内漏发生率为8.3%.1个月的病死率为1.2%.1例在术后1个月发生逆行A型主动脉夹层,行急诊升主动脉和主动脉弓置换术.4例实施了第2次TEVAR,其中3例为封堵内漏,另1例是覆膜支架远端出现新的内膜撕裂.7例在随访期内死亡(8.4%),其中3例死于内漏引起的胸主动脉破裂,1例腹主动脉持续性扩张导致降主动脉破裂死亡,另2例死因与主动脉夹层无关,还有1例死因不详.K-M生存曲线分析显示7年生存率为84.4%.结论 早期和中期随访结果显示,TEVAR治疗慢性B型主动脉夹层是有效的.内漏是随访期的主要死因.随着外科医师经验的积累以及覆膜支架的改进,TEVAR会有更好的疗效.     

Endovascular repair of traumatic thoracic aortic tears

BackgroundPatients with thoracic aorta injuries (TAI) present a unique challenge. The purpose of this study was to review the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with TAI.MethodsA retrospective chart review of all patients admitted for TEVAR for trauma was performed.ResultsIn a 5-year period, 19 patients (6 women and 13 men; average age, 42 y) were admitted to our trauma center with TAI. Mechanism of injury was a motor vehicle crash in 12 patients, motorcycle crash in 2 patients, automobile-pedestrian accident in 2 patients, 1 fall, 1 crush injury, and 1 stab wound to the back. A thoracic endograft was used in 6 patients and proximal aortic cuffs were used in 13 patients (68%). One patient (5%) died. There were no strokes, myocardial infarctions, paraplegia, or renal failure.ConclusionsTEVAR for TAI appears to be a safe option for patients with multiple injuries. TEVAR in young patients is still controversial because long-term endograft behavior is unknown.     

Early and mid-term results of endovascular treatment of thoracic aorta diseases: a single-center experience

We conducted an analysis to assess early and mid-term outcomes of patients after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B thoracic aorta dissection, descending thoracic aneurysm, or traumatic aortic transection. From January 2016 through December 2018, twenty-seven patients (23 male, 4 female, mean age of 57 years) affected by type B dissection (n = 13 [48.2%]), thoracic aneurysm (n = 9 [33.3%]), and post-traumatic aortic isthmus rupture (n = 5 [18.5%]) were treated using TEVAR with and without left subclavian artery revascularization. All procedures were performed in a hybrid operating room using general (n = 12) or regional (n = 15) anesthesia. A combined brachial artery and bilateral femoral artery access was used in all patients. To achieve adequate proximal thoracic aorta landing zone length, coverage of the left subclavian artery with proximal endovascular plug occlusion was performed in 17 patients (62.9%); including 4 patients undergoing carotid–subclavian artery bypass before TEVAR stent-graft deployment. Primary procedural success rate was 96.3%; 1 patient had a Type Ib endoleak that was treated by distal stent graft extension. Four adverse outcomes occurred in the immediate postoperative period, including 2 cases of left upper arm acute ischemia (7.4%), ischemic stroke (3.7%), and asymptomatic iliac artery dissection (3.7%). During a mean follow-up of 18 months, no graft-related deaths or endoleak occurred. One patient developed symptomatic subclavian steal syndrome 1 month after operation and underwent a left carotid–subclavian artery bypass with symptom resolution. One patient died 6 months after TEVAR due to neoplasm. Our experience indicates TEVAR is a safe and less invasive alternative to open surgery for a spectrum of thoracic aorta diseases, especially for urgent conditions and in patients with high-risk surgical comorbidities.     

选择性覆盖左锁骨下动脉在胸主动脉腔内修复术中的应用

目的:探讨胸主动脉腔内修复术中一期覆盖左锁骨下动脉(LSA)对预后的影响。方法:回顾分析2007年6月—2012年1月76例胸主动脉病变行胸主动脉腔内修复术患者的临床资料,包括主动脉夹层56例,壁间血肿6例,胸主动脉瘤5例,外伤性胸主动脉破裂9例。腔内修复术中一期覆盖LSA 32例,部分覆盖9例,保留35例。观察疗效和并发症发生情况。结果:围手术期死亡1例(1.3%),死于急性脑梗死。32例覆盖LSA的患者中,发生脑血管意外3例(9.4%),左锁骨下动脉窃血1例(3.1%),左上肢乏力4例(12.5%),并发症发生率为25.0%(8/32);9例部分覆盖LSA患者和35例LSA未覆盖患者中,发生脑血管意外各1例。随访3~40个月,死亡1例,I型内漏2例,均再次手术干预获得成功。结论:胸主动脉腔内修复术有选择性地一期覆盖左锁骨下动脉是可行的。     

Perioperative differences between endovascular repair of thoracic and abdominal aortic diseases

BACKGROUND: With the US Food and Drug Administration approval of the TAG thoracic device, more thoracic pathologies are being treated using endovascular techniques. Although endovascular abdominal and thoracic aortic repairs have some apparent similarities, there are substantive anatomic, pathologic, and technical differences that could impact perioperative outcomes. The purpose of this study is to identify these differences. METHODS: During a 5-year period, 121 endovascular thoracic aortic repairs (TEVAR) and 450 abdominal aortic repairs (EVAR) were performed at a single institution. Preoperative, intraoperative, and early postoperative data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed. Aggregate outcome measures were compared between the two cohorts, with statistical significance achieved at P < .05. RESULTS: The mean age of patients undergoing EVAR was 72.8 +/- 8.3 compared with 68.3 +/- 13.9 for TEVAR (P = .02). More women underwent TEVAR (30.6% vs 11.1%, P < .001). Aneurysms undergoing TEVAR were larger than those for EVAR (62.0 mm vs 58.3 mm, P = .01). Intraoperatively, EVAR required 26.2 minutes of fluoroscopy compared with 22.1 minutes for TEVAR (P < .001). The amount of contrast used was higher in TEVAR (133.6 mL vs 93.6 mL, P < .001). The mean procedure times were 164 minutes for EVAR and 115 minutes for TEVAR (P < .001). Iliac conduits were required in 46 patients (10.2%) undergoing EVAR, and in 24 (19.8%) undergoing TEVAR (P = .007). The 30-day or in-hospital mortality was 2.0% for EVAR and 5.0% for TEVAR (P = NS). The median length of stay was longer for TEVAR (3 days vs 2 days, P =.034). There were 54 postoperative complications in 36 TEVAR patients (29.8%), including 13 neurologic (10.7%), 8 renal (6.6%), 7 pulmonary (5.8%), 6 ischemic (5.0), and 5 (4.1%) hemorrhagic events. Among the EVAR group, 136 (30.2%) patients had postoperative complications, which included 45 ischemic (10.0%), 34 wound (7.6%), 22 renal (4.9%), 12 cardiac (2.7%), 8 pulmonary (1.8%), 5 gastrointestinal (1.1%), and 4 neurologic (0.9%) events. CONCLUSIONS: A relatively higher proportion of women underwent TEVAR than EVAR, and this was reflected in the greater need for iliac conduits to accommodate the larger delivery catheters of the thoracic devices. Intraoperative imaging techniques were also different, and TEVAR required higher contrast volumes despite shorter overall procedure times. The incidence of strokes and spinal cord ischemia was also higher during TEVAR. Despite apparent similarities of devices and techniques, EVAR and TEVAR are fundamentally different procedures with different perioperative outcomes.     

腔内修复术治疗多破口Stanford B型胸主动脉夹层的临床研究

目的 分析多破口Stanford B型胸主动脉夹层的临床特征,探讨胸主动脉腔内修复术处理该病的临床方式.方法 回顾性分析2011年2月-2015年5月因多破口(≥2个破口)Stanford B型胸主动脉夹层在广州军区武汉总医院心胸外科接收TEVAR治疗患者的病例资料,除近心端第一破口外,使用外科方式处理远端夹层破口为处理组,否则为非处理组.比较两组术后6个月内胸背疼痛发病率、远端夹层进展情况、假腔变化情况、远端破口获益情况.结果 检索出符合条件的病例67例,所有腔内修复术均获成功,无严重并发症发生病例,术后6个月内无死亡病例.处理组7例,非处理组60例.TEVAR后两组胸背疼痛发病率、远端夹层进展发病率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),处理组夹层假腔较非处理组明显变小(差异有统计学意义,P＜0.05),非处理组19例患者通过夹层远端破口的血流供应腹腔内脏动脉.结论 TEVAR是治疗多破口Stanford B型胸主动脉夹层有效的手术方式,远端破口应根据Stanford B型胸主动脉夹层特点进行个性化处理或尽量不处理.     

Risk factors for distal stent graft-induced new entry tear after endovascular repair of thoracic aortic dissection

ObjectiveA review of the literature was conducted for incidence, outcomes, and risk factors for distal stent graft-induced new entry (SINE) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of aortic dissection.MethodsThe review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.ResultsSeven articles reporting on 1415 patients with thoracic aortic dissection undergoing TEVAR without supplemental distal bare stenting were included. In this cohort, 86 patients were treated for a residual type A aortic dissection and 1329 for a complicated type B aortic dissection. Distal SINE occurred in 112 patients (7.9%). The mean time to identification of distal SINE was 19 ± 7 months. The incidence of distal SINE after TEVAR for type B aortic dissection differed on the basis of whether it was a chronic or acute dissection repair and was, respectively, 12.9% (43/331) and 4.3% (12/273). Successful secondary interventions were performed in 54% of the patients. All the studies analyzing the relationship between distal stent graft oversizing and incidence of distal SINE reported a significantly higher rate of SINE with oversizing.ConclusionsThe successful management of complicated descending thoracic aortic dissections by TEVAR is well established. Whereas distal SINE is relatively frequent, if it does occur, the complication can generally be treated with additional TEVAR without a poor outcome. The main determinant of SINE seems to be excessive distal oversizing.