The Outcomes of Distal Aortic Reinterventions After Zone 2 Arch Replacement

Background: Zone 2 aortic arch replacement (Z2R) is an effective strategy for treating aortic pathology. However, the frequency and consequences of distal reinterventions (DRs) remain unknown. We evaluated the outcomes associated with planned distal reinterventions (PDRs) and unplanned distal reinterventions (UDRs) after Z2R. Methods: Patients requiring PDRs or UDRs after Z2R between 2007 and 2024 were reviewed. CTA/MRA scans were analyzed for aortic remodeling. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative mortality, dialysis, paralysis and stroke (thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm life-altering event; TALE) after DR. Secondary outcomes included cumulative reintervention burden, progression of false lumen thrombosis, and survival. Results: Among 111 Z2R patients followed for a median of 3.5 (1.5, 6.6) years, 55 (49.5%) required a total of 82 DRs: 25 with ≥1 UDR and 30 with only PDRs. PDRs were more often endovascular (93% vs. 72%, p = 0.02). TALE rates were similar between PDRs and UDRs (PDR: 9.3% vs. UDR: 12.8%, p = 0.88). Patients with UDRs had a greater cumulative reintervention burden (MCF 3, 95% CI 2–5 vs. MCF 1, 95% CI 1–1; p = 0.005). Neither PDRs nor UDRs were associated with differences in risk-adjusted mortality compared with no DR. Among dissection patients, PDR (63%) and UDR (100%) were associated with greater progression of false lumen thrombosis in the distal descending aorta compared to no DR (47%) (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Distal reinterventions after Zone 2 arch replacement are common and represent an important component of longitudinal aortic management. Patients undergoing exclusively planned distal reinterventions demonstrated a lower observed cumulative procedural burden than patients who experienced unplanned interventions. However, differences in baseline pathology, treatment pathways, and selection bias limit causal interpretation. Larger studies are needed to determine whether deliberate staging improves long-term outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Biomedicines
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines14112477
Primary Topic
Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Outcomes of Distal Aortic Reinterventions After Zone 2 Arch Replacement

Paul A. Kurlansky, Megan Chung, Thomas F.X. O’Donnell, Hiroo Takayama et al.
3 links
Biomedicines
Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
article

The Outcomes of Distal Aortic Reinterventions After Zone 2 Arch Replacement

Paul A. Kurlansky, Megan Chung, Thomas F.X. O’Donnell, Hiroo Takayama, Alice Vinogradsky, Adham Elmously, Virendra I. Patel, Yuichiro Kitada, Ali Fatehi Hassanabad, Yanling Zhao, Valeria Jimenez, Samuel C. Russo
article en

Abstract

Background: Zone 2 aortic arch replacement (Z2R) is an effective strategy for treating aortic pathology. However, the frequency and consequences of distal reinterventions (DRs) remain unknown. We evaluated the outcomes associated with planned distal reinterventions (PDRs) and unplanned distal reinterventions (UDRs) after Z2R. Methods: Patients requiring PDRs or UDRs after Z2R between 2007 and 2024 were reviewed. CTA/MRA scans were analyzed for aortic remodeling. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative mortality, dialysis, paralysis and stroke (thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm life-altering event; TALE) after DR. Secondary outcomes included cumulative reintervention burden, progression of false lumen thrombosis, and survival. Results: Among 111 Z2R patients followed for a median of 3.5 (1.5, 6.6) years, 55 (49.5%) required a total of 82 DRs: 25 with ≥1 UDR and 30 with only PDRs. PDRs were more often endovascular (93% vs. 72%, p = 0.02). TALE rates were similar between PDRs and UDRs (PDR: 9.3% vs. UDR: 12.8%, p = 0.88). Patients with UDRs had a greater cumulative reintervention burden (MCF 3, 95% CI 2–5 vs. MCF 1, 95% CI 1–1; p = 0.005). Neither PDRs nor UDRs were associated with differences in risk-adjusted mortality compared with no DR. Among dissection patients, PDR (63%) and UDR (100%) were associated with greater progression of false lumen thrombosis in the distal descending aorta compared to no DR (47%) (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Distal reinterventions after Zone 2 arch replacement are common and represent an important component of longitudinal aortic management. Patients undergoing exclusively planned distal reinterventions demonstrated a lower observed cumulative procedural burden than patients who experienced unplanned interventions. However, differences in baseline pathology, treatment pathways, and selection bias limit causal interpretation. Larger studies are needed to determine whether deliberate staging improves long-term outcomes.

BiomedicinesVol. 14(11)
NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital (US), Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon