Left Subclavian Artery Management Strategies During TEVAR for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury: Do Branched Endografts Offer a Clinical Advantage?
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42716262.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.jvs.2026.07.084.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To compare outcomes of left subclavian artery (LSA) management strategies during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) using a national registry. The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR registry was queried for patients undergoing zone 2 TEVAR for BTAI from 2013 through April 2026. Patients were stratified into LSA coverage without revascularization, TEVAR with branched endograft (TBE), or staged carotid-subclavian bypass with TEVAR (CSB+TEVAR). Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and arm ischemia. Secondary outcomes included stroke, spinal cord ischemia (SCI), and reintervention. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and adjusted TBE-versus-coverage sensitivity analyses were performed. A total of 416 patients were included (LSA coverage n=327, TBE n=74, CSB+TEVAR n=15). Patients undergoing LSA coverage were younger and more frequently presented with rupture. Thirty-day mortality was 11.6%, 5.4%, and 0%, respectively (P=.113). Stroke (5.2% vs 5.4% vs 6.7%) and arm ischemia (2.4% vs 1.4% vs 6.7%) were not significantly different across groups. SCI was rare (1.8%, 0%, and 6.7%). Aortic- or arm ischemia-related reintervention was more frequent after CSB+TEVAR (13.3% vs 2.7% vs 1.5%; P=.044). Overall reintervention and survival did not differ significantly among groups. In patients undergoing zone 2 TEVAR for BTAI, no statistically significant differences were detected in major neurologic or ischemic complications among LSA management strategies. These findings suggest a pragmatic, damage-control approach favoring rapid TEVAR with selective delayed revascularization rather than routine prophylactic LSA intervention.