Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 26, 2026

Novel and Innovative Hybrid Technique for Type A Aortic Dissection
Published on: March 28, 2025
Debranching versus Fenestrated Repair for Left Subclavian Artery Revascularisation during Thoracic Endovascular
Ahmed Azhar Ali1, Tilo Kölbel2, Luca Bertoglio3
1Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/AhmedAzharMD.
Insights
Fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (fTEVAR) offers a durable, low re-intervention alternative compared to carotid subclavian bypass with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (CSB-TEVAR). CSB-TEVAR is a practical option for urgent cases, but requires careful patient selection and follow-up due to higher re-intervention risks.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Surgery
- Endovascular Repair
- Aortic Pathology Management
Background:
- Left subclavian artery revascularization is crucial for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) when proximal landing zones 1 or 2 are required.
- Open debranching techniques like carotid subclavian bypass (CSB) and transposition are alternatives to fenestrated TEVAR (fTEVAR).
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare early and midterm outcomes of CSB-TEVAR versus fTEVAR for left subclavian artery revascularization.
- To evaluate technical success, re-intervention rates, mortality, and complications in patients undergoing these procedures.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective, international multicentre observational study (DEFENCE) from January 2019 to July 2023.
- Propensity score matching (PSM) of 68 pairs to adjust for baseline differences between CSB-TEVAR and fTEVAR groups.
- Analysis of technical success, 30-day outcomes, and long-term (12-36 months) re-intervention, mortality, and aortic-related complications.
Main Results:
- In the matched cohort, CSB-TEVAR showed significantly higher overall and aortic-related re-intervention rates (14.7% vs. 3%, p = .031) compared to fTEVAR.
- No significant differences in overall or aortic-related mortality were observed between the groups.
- Cox regression identified CSB as an independent risk factor for increased re-interventions (HR 5.185, p = .035).
Conclusions:
- Both CSB-TEVAR and fTEVAR achieve high technical success and similar long-term mortality.
- fTEVAR is a durable option with lower re-intervention rates.
- CSB-TEVAR is a viable option for urgent situations but necessitates individualized selection and close monitoring due to higher morbidity and re-intervention risks.
Objective:
To compare the early and midterm outcomes of left subclavian artery revascularization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) following carotid subclavian bypass/transposition (CSB) vs. fenestrated repair when landing in zone 1/2. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to adjust for baseline differences.
Methods:
DEbranching versus FENestrated Repair for Left SubClavian Artery REvascularisation (DEFENCE) was a retrospective, international multicentre observational study conducted between January 2019 and July 2023 on consecutive patients who underwent open debranching or fenestration of the left subclavian artery before TEVAR for various aortic arch and descending aortic pathologies. PSM (68 pairs) was performed using logistic regression. Primary endpoints included technical success and 30-day outcomes. Secondary endpoints included re-intervention, death, and aortic related complications at 12, 24, and 36 months.
Results:
275 patients were included (198 CSB-TEVAR and 77 FTEVAR). Before PSM, statistically significant differences existed in patient demographics and the distribution of aortic pathology. In the matched cohort, CSB-TEVAR demonstrated higher overall re-intervention rates (15% vs. 3%, p = .031) and aortic related re-intervention rates (15% vs. 3%, p = .031) compared with FTEVAR. No statistically significant differences were observed in overall mortality rates (7% vs. 13%, p = .40) or aortic related mortality rate (3% vs. 3%, p = 1.0). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a statistically significant trend towards increased late re-intervention in the CSB-TEVAR group (log rank p = .019). Cox regression revealed that carotid subclavian bypass was associated with a fivefold increased independent risk of overall and aortic related re-interventions (hazard ratio 5.185, 95% confidence interval 1.13 - 23.86, p = .035).
Conclusion:
CSB-TEVAR and FTEVAR achieved high technical success, long term durability, and similar mortality rates. FTEVAR is a durable, low re-intervention alternative, while CSB-TEVAR remains a practical option in urgent cases despite its higher incidence of peri-operative and access related morbidity.
Related Concept Videos
Vascular Spasm
Development of Blood Vessels
The initial formation of this system is facilitated by the small amount of yolk present in the ovum and yolk sac. Blood vessels originate from...
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
