Assessment of the Effectiveness of Zone 1-Landing Hybrid TEVAR by Comparing Its Outcomes with Those of Zone 2-Landing Hybrid TEVAR.

Hybrid thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) without median sternotomy is increasingly being performed in high-risk patients with aortic arch disease. The outcomes of hybrid TEVAR were reported to be worse with a more proximal landing zone. This study aims to clarify the effectiveness of zone 1-landing hybrid TEVAR by comparing the outcomes of zone 2-landing hybrid TEVAR. From April 2008 to October 2020, 213 patients (zone 1: zone 1-landing hybrid TEVAR, = 82, 38.5%; zone 2: zone 2-landing hybrid TEVAR, = 131, 61.5%) were enrolled (median age, 72 years; interquartile range [IQR], 65-78 years), with a median follow-up period of 6.0 years (IQR, 2.8-9.7 years). The mean logistic EuroSCORE was 20.9 ± 14.8%: the logistic EuroSCORE of the zone 1 group (23.3 ± 16.1) was significantly higher than that of the zone 2 group (19.3 ± 12.4%, = 0.045). The operative time and hospital stay of the zone 1 group were significantly longer than those of the zone 2 group. On the other hand, the in-hospital and late outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. There were no significant differences in cumulative survival (66.8% vs. 78.0% at 10 years, Log-rank = 0.074), aorta-related death-free rates (97.6% vs. 99.2% at 10 years, Log-rank = 0.312), and aortic event-free rates (81.4% vs. 87.9% at 10 years, Log-rank = 0.257). Zone 1- and 2-landing hybrid TEVAR outcomes were satisfactory. Despite the high procedural difficulty and surgical risk, the outcomes of zone 1-landing hybrid TEVAR were equal to those of zone 2-landing hybrid TEVAR. If the surgical risk is high, zone 1-landing hybrid TEVAR should not be avoided.