Predictors of outcome and different management of aortobronchial and aortoesophageal fistulas
Objective Aortoesophageal and aortobronchial fistulas are uncommon but life-threatening conditions. The present study aimed to identify potential differences in outcomes, depending on the etiology, type, and management of the fistulas, and to determine mortality predictors. Methods We retrospectivel...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery 2014-12, Vol.148 (6), p.3020-3026.e2 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective Aortoesophageal and aortobronchial fistulas are uncommon but life-threatening conditions. The present study aimed to identify potential differences in outcomes, depending on the etiology, type, and management of the fistulas, and to determine mortality predictors. Methods We retrospectively reviewed a series of 26 consecutive patients with thoracic aorta fistulas admitted to our institution from 1998 to 2013 (18 aortobronchial, 7 aortoesophageal, and 1 combined fistula). Results The mean age was 61.5 ± 13.4 years, with 22 men. Management was thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in 8, open repair in 7, and conservative in 11. The TEVAR and nonoperative patients were significantly older and presented with more comorbidities. Shock developed in 15 patients and sepsis in 9. The most common radiologic findings were intramural hematoma (65.4%), pseudoaneurysm (53.8%), and bronchial compression (46.20%). Active contrast extravasation (23.1%) and ectopic gas (19.2%) were associated with a worse prognosis. In-hospital mortality was 100% in the conservative group, 37.5% in the TEVAR group, and 14.3% in the open repair group ( P = .04). Septic shock was the most common cause of death. The risk factors for in-hospital mortality were hemodynamic instability on admission ( P = .02), sepsis ( P = .04), and conservative management ( P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0022-5223 1097-685X |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.05.038 |