Surgical versus endovascular treatment of acute thoracic aortic rupture: a single-center experience

Background Surgical management of acute thoracic aortic ruptures is controversial, especially in patients with preexisting comorbidities; associated mortality and paraplegia rates remain high. It was our objective to evaluate whether treating these patients acutely with endovascular stent grafts would improve their outcome. Methods From November 1999 to February 2002 a total of 54 patients, age 28 to 83 years, were admitted to our institution with an acute rupture of the thoracic aorta (24 ruptured aneurysms, 14 perforated type B dissections, 16 traumatic ruptures). Twenty-eight patients were managed surgically using cardiopulmonary bypass (group 1), and 26 patients were treated acutely with an endovascular stent graft (group 2). The resuscitation protocol and interval from onset of symptoms to treatment was comparable in both groups. Medical records were reviewed for prehospitalization and emergency department data, operative findings, and outcomes. Results There were 5 of 28 deaths (17.8%) in the surgical group and 1 of 26 deaths (3.8%) in the endovascular group. In the surgical group 1 of 28 patients (3.6%) exhibited paraplegia; there were no cases of paraplegia in the endovascular group. There were 4 of 28 cases (14.3%) of renal failure in group 1 and 1 of 26 (3.8%) in group 2. In group 1, 8 patients (28.6%) required mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours; there were 2 of 26 patients (7.7%) in group 2 with this ventilatory requirement. Three patients required a repeat thoracotomy for hemorrhage in the surgical group. There were two access failures in the endovascular group. Conclusions In the treatment of acute ruptures of the thoracic aorta, the immediate outcome of patients treated with endovascular stent grafts appears to be better than with management by conventional surgical repair.