Open repair versus thoracic endovascular aortic repair for treating traumatic aortic injury

Background/objective: Blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI) is rare and fatal. Treatment has evolved with advances in imaging and the emergence of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). This study re-ports a single-center, 5-year experience of TEVAR and open repair for BTAI. Methods: Patients with BTAI treated at a level I trauma center from 2014 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed with patient charts and successive computed tomography angiography images. Patients were grouped according to treatment modality: open repair, TEVAR, or medical management, chosen based on patients' characteristics and injury severity. Groups were compared in terms of preoperative de-mographics, injury characteristics, operative variables, short-term, and long-term outcomes. Results: Forty-two patients were included in the study: 16 (38%) underwent open repair, 17 (40.4%) underwent TEVAR, seven (16.6%) were managed medically, and two (4.7%) died during triage. The me-dian age was 49 years (interquartile range [IQR], 38-57.5 years), and 92.5% were male; the median Injury Severity Score was 33 (IQR, 29-41). Overall mortality was 7.5%. The median hospital stay was 33 days (IQR, 19.5-58.5). Patients undergoing open repair were significantly younger (43 vs. 55 years; p = 0.002) and had a smaller aortic diameter (22.3 vs. 24.0 mm; p=<0.001) than those undergoing TEVAR. No BTAI-related late mortality or reintervention was observed during follow-ups. Conclusion: This study demonstrated excellent outcomes with multidisciplinary team efforts and appropriate application of treatment modality. TEVAR is ideal for older or severely injured patients; open repair is an important alternative for young patients or patients with unsuitable aortic anatomy. (c) 2021 Asian Surgical Association and Taiwan Robotic Surgery Association. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Automated summary

This study compared the outcomes of TEVAR and open repair for blunt traumatic aortic injury over a 5-year period. The study demonstrated that TEVAR is ideal for older or severely injured patients, while open repair is a better alternative for young patients or patients with unsuitable aortic anatomy.