Long-term Follow-up of Aortic Intramural Hematomas and Penetrating Ulcers

Similar documents
IMH/Penetrating Aortic Ulcers/ Saccular Aneurysms: How to manage and when to intervene

Clinical management and treatment of thoracic aortic diseases. Evolution of IMH. Luigi Lovato

Asymptomatic Radiology / Clinical data Report / Cohort bias Referral bias. UCSF Vascular Symposium April 7-9, Acute Aortic Dissection

Management of Acute Aortic Syndromes. M. Grabenwoger, MD Dept. of Cardiovascular Surgery Hospital Hietzing, Vienna, Austria

Animesh Rathore, MD 4/21/17. Penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers of aorta

ACUTE AORTIC SYNDROMES

Aortic CT: Intramural Hematoma. Leslie E. Quint, M.D.

Disclosures: Acute Aortic Syndrome. A. Michael Borkon, M.D. Director of CV Surgery Mid America Heart Institute Saint Luke s Hospital Kansas City, MO

The natural history of uncomplicated type B dissection, PAU and IMH: the IRAD knowledge. Santi Trimarchi, MD, PhD

Update on Acute Aortic Syndrome

Acute Aortic Syndromes

Follow-up of Aortic Dissection: How, How Often, Which Consequences Euro Echo 2011

2 nd International Meeting on Aortic Diseases Liege, Belgium September, 2010

Multimodality Imaging of the Thoracic Aorta

Acute Aortic Syndromes

UC SF. Disclosures. Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair 4/24/2009. Management of Acute Dissections: Is There Still a Role for Open Surgery?

High Risk Uncomplicated Type B Dissection

Diseases of the Aorta

Case Acute ascending thoracic aortic rupture due to penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer

Penetrating Atherosclerotic Ulcer

Complex Thoracic and Abdominal Aortic Repair Using Hybrid Techniques

Diseases of Aorta: Marfan, Dissection, Atheroma

Prognosis of Aortic Intramural Hematoma With and Without Penetrating Atherosclerotic Ulcer. A Clinical and Radiological Analysis

Importance of false lumen thrombosis in type B aortic dissection prognosis

Antegrade Thoracic Stent Grafting during Repair of Acute Debakey I Dissection: Promotes Distal Aortic Remodeling and Reduces Late Open Re-operation

Current Trends in. Torin P. Fitton, MD Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery Lahey Clinic NO DISCLOSURES. Aortic Syndromes

La sindrome aortica acuta oggi

New ASE Guidelines: What you must know

Endovascular therapy for Ischemic versus Nonischemic complicated acute type B aortic dissection (catbad).

Echocardiographic Evaluation of the Aorta

Global Evidence for the Treatment of Type B Aortic Dissection

Management of intramural hematoma and penetrating ulcers - what is different? D.Böckler University Hospital Heidelberg, Germany

Santi Trimarchi, MD, PhD Vascular Surgeon Thoracic Aortic Research Center, Director IRCCS Policlinico San Donato University of Milan

Operate NOT every BAV aorta at 5 cm. Markus Schwerzmann, MD

Is there a way to predict the risk in uncomplicated Type B aortic dissections? FRANS MOLL University Medical Centre Utrecht - Netherlands

Vascular Intervention

Experience of endovascular procedures on abdominal and thoracic aorta in CA region

Acute Aortic Dissection: Decision and Outcome

Total Endovascular Repair Type A Dissection. Eric Herget Interventional Radiology

New Insights on Genetic Aspects of Thoracic Aortic Disease

Midterm follow-up of penetrating ulcer and intramural hematoma of the aorta

Dissection de type B: l étude Instead et corollaire stratégique

Role of Gender in TEVAR and EVAR results from the GREAT registry

EVAR and TEVAR: Extending Their Use for Rupture and Traumatic Injury. Conflict of Interest. Hypotensive shock 5/5/2014. none

No Disclosure. Aortic Dissection in Japan. This. The Challenge of Acute and Chronic Type B Aortic Dissections with Endovascular Aortic Repair

Multimodality Imaging in Aortic Diseases:

CT of Acute Thoracic Aortic Syndromes Stuart S. Sagel, M.D.

Stent-Graft Repair of Penetrating Atherosclerotic Ulcers in the Descending Thoracic Aorta: Mid-Term Results

Mohit Bhasin MD. Aortic Imaging and Follow-up

What Are the Current Guidelines for Treating Thoracic Aortic Disease?

Case 8036 Multiple penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers

Combined Endovascular and Surgical Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Pathology: Hybrid TEVAR

Surgical indications in ascending aorta aneurysms: What do we know? Jean-Luc MONIN, MD, PhD. Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, FRANCE

Peter I. Kalmar, 1 Peter Oberwalder, 2 Peter Schedlbauer, 1 Jürgen Steiner, 1 and Rupert H. Portugaller Introduction. 2.

STS/EACTS LatAm CV Conference 2017

I have the following financial relationships to disclose:

RETROGRADE BRANCH. Gustavo S. Oderich MD Professor of Surgery Director of Endovascular Therapy Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

Performance of the conformable GORE TAG device in Type B aortic dissection from the GORE GREAT real world registry

IMAGING the AORTA. Mirvat Alasnag FACP, FSCAI, FSCCT, FASE June 1 st, 2011

AORTIC DISSECTIONS Current Management. TOMAS D. MARTIN, MD, LAT Professor, TCV Surgery Director UF Health Aortic Disease Center University of Florida

Aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) has been increasingly

The Petticoat Technique Managing Type B Dissection with both Early and Long Term Considerations

Acute aortic syndrome

What Determines Aortic False Lumen Growth Post Dissection?

Remarkable progress has been made in recent years

Development of a Branched LSA Endograft & Ascending Aorta Endograft

Type B Dissection Sub-Categories

Χρόνιος διαχωρισμός. υπερηχοκαρδιογραφική. αορτής. παρακολούθηση ή άλλη; Α. Παπασπυρόπουλος ΕΠΙΜΕΛΗΤΗΣ ΓΝ.ΝΙΚΑΙΑΣ ΠΕΜΠΤΗ

Importance of changes in thoracic and abdominal aortic stiffness following stent graft implantation

Frozen Elephant Trunk procedure in patients with aortic dissection type B and concomitant aortic arch or ascending aortic pathology

Technique and Outcome of Laser Fenestration For Arch Vessels

Research Article Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Open Surgical and Endovascular Repair for Type B Aortic Dissection

Advances in Treatment of Traumatic Aortic Transection

Percutaneous Axillary Artery Access For Branch Grafting for complex TAAAs and pararenal AAAs: How to do it safely

Acute Type B dissection. Closure of the infra diaphragmatic tear: how and when?

Martin Czerny & Jürg Schmidli on behalf of the writing committee

Detection of Intimal Defect by 64-Row Multidetector Computed Tomography in Patients With Acute Aortic Intramural Hematoma

UC SF Early Intervention in Type B Dissection: Results From the INSTEAD XL Trial. Acute Type B Dissection. Outline. Disclosures.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Neurological Complications of TEVAR. Frank J Criado, MD. Union Memorial-MedStar Health Baltimore, MD USA

Endovascular stent-graft repair for penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer in the infrarenal abdominal aorta

Introducing the GORE TAG Conformable Thoracic Stent Graft with ACTIVE CONTROL System

Treatment of acute type B aortic dissection: Current status

Clinical experience with a new thoracic stent graft system (Ankura TM ). Procedural analysis, 30 days and 6-month results in a single center study

UC SF An Algorithm to Choose Which Uncomplicated (Asymptomatic) Acute Type B Dissection Patients Should Undergo TEVAR. Disclosures.

Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm: Reading the Enemy s Playbook

Aortic Center of Excellence at Sentara

NON-ATHEROSCLEROTIC PATHOLOGY OF THE CAROTID ARTERIES

2014 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis & Treatment of AORTIC DISEASES

Re-interventions after TEVAR:

I-Hui Wu, M.D. Ph.D. Clinical Assistant Professor Cardiovascular Surgical Department National Taiwan University Hospital

The role of false lumen intervention to promote remodelling via induced thrombosis the FLIRT concept

Atypical aortic arch branching variants: A novel marker for thoracic aortic disease

Early outcomes of acute retrograde dissection in the aortic arch and the ascending aorta data from IRAD

EVAR follow up: answers to uncertainties Moderators F. Moll, Y. Alimi, M. Bjorck. Inflammatory response after EVAR: causes and clinical implication

Endovascular Treatment of Malperfusion Syndrome

Do the Data Support Endovascular Therapy for Descending Thoracic AD? Woong Chol Kang, M.D.

The conundrum about complicated and uncomplicated type B dissection New concepts?

Animesh Rathore, MD 4/22/17. The Great Debate 45yo Man With Uncomplicated Acute TBAD: The Case For Medical Management

Transcription:

Long-term Follow-up of Aortic Intramural Hematomas and Penetrating Ulcers Alan S. Chou, BA, Bulat A. Ziganshin, MD, Paris Charilaou, MD, Maryann Tranquilli, RN, John A. Rizzo, PhD, John A. Elefteriades, MD Aortic Institute at Yale-New Haven Hospital, Yale University School of Medicine New Haven, Connecticut, USA Presented at the 95 th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Thoracic Surgery April 28 th, 2015 1

Disclosures Alan S. Chou, BA: Nothing to disclose. Bulat A. Ziganshin, MD: Nothing to disclose. Paris Charilaou, MD: Nothing to disclose. Maryann Tranquilli, RN: Nothing to disclose. John A. Rizzo, PhD: Nothing to disclose. John A. Elefteriades, MD: DSMB for Jarvik Heart, Solus Valve; Research Grant Vascutek; Medical Director for CoolSpine. 2

Acute Aortic Syndromes Elefteriades JA. Thoracic aortic aneurysm: reading the enemy s playbook. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2008;33:203 77. 3

Current literature/evidence Author Institution and Date Lesion Treatment Recommendation Tittle et al. Yale University, 2002 IMH, Type A and B Expanded surgical treatment Moizumi et al. Tohuku University, 2003 IMH, Type A and B Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Kaji et al. Kobe City General Hospital, 2003 IMH, Type B Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Evangelista et al. IRAD, 2005 IMH, Type A Initial surgical treatment Evangelista et al. IRAD, 2005 IMH, Type B Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Kitai et al. Kobe City General Hospital, 2008 IMH, Type A Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Shimokawa et al Sakakibara Heart Institute, 2008 IMH, Type A Initial surgical treatment Song et al. Asan Medical Center, 2009 IMH, Type A Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Sawaki et al. Nagoya Ekisaikai Hospital, 2010 IMH, Type A Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Tolenaar et al. IRAD, 2013 IMH, Type B Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Tittle et al. Yale University, 2002 PAU Expanded surgical treatment Cho et al. Mayo Clinic, 2003 PAU Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Nathan et al University of Pennsylvania, 2012 PAU Radiologic follow-up of symptomatic patients 4

Current literature/evidence Author Institution and Date Lesion Treatment Recommendation Tittle et al. Yale University, 2002 IMH, Type A and B Expanded surgical treatment Moizumi et al. Tohuku University, 2003 IMH, Type A and B Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Kaji et al. Kobe City General Hospital, 2003 IMH, Type B Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Evangelista et al. IRAD, 2005 IMH, Type A Initial surgical treatment Evangelista et al. IRAD, 2005 IMH, Type B Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Kitai et al. Kobe City General Hospital, 2008 IMH, Type A Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Shimokawa et al Sakakibara Heart Institute, 2008 IMH, Type A Initial surgical treatment Song et al. Asan Medical Center, 2009 IMH, Type A Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Sawaki et al. Nagoya Ekisaikai Hospital, 2010 IMH, Type A Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Tolenaar et al. IRAD, 2013 IMH, Type B Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Tittle et al. Yale University, 2002 PAU Expanded surgical treatment Cho et al. Mayo Clinic, 2003 PAU Initial medical treatment with expectant surgery Nathan et al University of Pennsylvania, 2012 PAU Radiologic follow-up of symptomatic patients 5

US and European Guidelines 6

Aim of the study To evaluate the long-term natural history and progression of intramural hematomas and penetrating aortic ulcers including clinical and radiological follow-up and survival analysis. 7

Progression of Lesions 8

Progression of Lesions Resolution 9

Progression of Lesions Resolution No Change (Stable) 10

Progression of Lesions Resolution No Change (Stable) Worsening 11

Patient profile 108 consecutive patients (1995-2014) 12

Patient profile 108 consecutive patients (1995-2014) 55 IMH patients (51%) 53 PAU patients (49%) 13

Patient profile 108 consecutive patients (1995-2014) 55 IMH patients (51%) 53 PAU patients (49%) 56% Female 57% Female 14

Patient profile 108 consecutive patients (1995-2014) 55 IMH patients (51%) 56% Female All patients were symptomatic at presentation 53 PAU patients (49%) 57% Female 15

Number of Patients Age of IMH and PAU Patients 16 12 Mean age IMH 70.3±10 yrs Mean age PAU 71.4±10 yrs IMH PAU 8 4 0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ages 16

Location Distribution 17

Intramural Hematoma 18

Hospital Course of IMH 55 Patients with IMH 19

Hospital Course of IMH 55 Patients with IMH 82% Non-Rupture State (n = 45) 18% Rupture State (n = 10) 20

Hospital Course of IMH 55 Patients with IMH 82% Non-Rupture State (n = 45) 18% Rupture State (n = 10) High incidence of rupture at presentation compared with 8% and 4% for classic Type A and B dissection previously observed (p<0.05) Coady MA, Rizzo JA, Elefteriades JA. Pathologic variants of thoracic aortic dissections. Penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers and intramural hematomas. Cardiol Clin 1999;17:637-57. 21

Hospital Course of IMH 55 Patients with IMH 82% Non-Rupture State (n = 45) 18% Rupture State (n = 10) 56% Initial Medical Tx (n = 25) 44% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 20) 30% Initial Medical Tx (n = 3) 70% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 7) 22

Hospital Course of IMH 55 Patients with IMH 82% Non-Rupture State (n = 45) 18% Rupture State (n = 10) 56% Initial Medical Tx (n = 25) 44% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 20) 30% Initial Medical Tx (n = 3) 70% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 7) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 25) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 20) 23

Hospital Course of IMH 55 Patients with IMH 82% Non-Rupture State (n = 45) 18% Rupture State (n = 10) 56% Initial Medical Tx (n = 25) 44% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 20) 30% Initial Medical Tx (n = 3) 70% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 7) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 25) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 20) 0% Survived to Discharge (n = 0) 43% Survived to Discharge (n = 3) 24

IMH does not occlude branch vessels No branch occlusion among any IMH patients Contrast with classic flap dissection 25

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed IMH 56% follow-up imaging available (n = 14, mean 9.4 months) 26

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed IMH 56% follow-up imaging available (n = 14, mean 9.4 months) 29% Resolution (n = 4) 27

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed IMH 56% follow-up imaging available (n = 14, mean 9.4 months) 29% Resolution (n = 4) 14% Stable (n = 2) 28

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed IMH 56% follow-up imaging available (n = 14, mean 9.4 months) 29% Resolution (n = 4) 14% Stable (n = 2) 57% Worsening (n = 8) Mean time 1.3 mo. 29

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed IMH 56% follow-up imaging available (n = 14, mean 9.4 months) 29% Resolution (n = 4) 14% Stable (n = 2) 57% Worsening (n = 8) Mean time 1.3 mo. 75% Underwent late surgery (n = 6) 30

Surgical Treatment of IMH Surgical Procedures Ascending Descending Value % Value % Total number of Interventions: 16 48% 17 52% Open aortic graft replacement 16 100% 10 59% Thromboexclusion procedure - - 3 18% Endovascular procedure - - 4 23% Mean Post-Surgical Follow-up 39.6 months (range 2-140) 31

Penetrating Aortic Ulcer 32

Hospital Course of PAU 53 Patients with PAU 33

Hospital Course of PAU 53 Patients with PAU 68% Non-Rupture State (n = 36) 32% Rupture State (n = 17) 34

Hospital Course of PAU 53 Patients with PAU 68% Non-Rupture State (n = 36) 32% Rupture State (n = 17) High incidence of rupture at presentation compared with 8% and 4% for classic Type A and B dissection previously observed (p<0.001) Coady MA, Rizzo JA, Elefteriades JA. Pathologic variants of thoracic aortic dissections. Penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers and intramural hematomas. Cardiol Clin 1999;17:637-57. 35

Hospital Course of PAU 53 Patients with PAU 68% Non-Rupture State (n = 36) 32% Rupture State (n = 17) 69% Initial Medical Tx (n = 25) 31% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 11) 29% Initial Medical Tx (n = 5) 71% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 12) 36

Hospital Course of PAU 53 Patients with PAU 68% Non-Rupture State (n = 36) 32% Rupture State (n = 17) 69% Initial Medical Tx (n = 25) 31% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 11) 29% Initial Medical Tx (n = 5) 71% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 12) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 25) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 11) 37

Hospital Course of PAU 53 Patients with PAU 68% Non-Rupture State (n = 36) 32% Rupture State (n = 17) 69% Initial Medical Tx (n = 25) 31% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 11) 29% Initial Medical Tx (n = 5) 71% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 12) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 25) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 11) 0% Survived to Discharge (n = 0) 87% Survived to Discharge (n = 10) 38

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed PAU 80% follow-up imaging available (n = 20, mean 34.3 months) 39

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed PAU 80% follow-up imaging available (n = 20, mean 34.3 months) 15% Resolution (n = 3) 40

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed PAU 80% follow-up imaging available (n = 20, mean 34.3 months) 15% Resolution (n = 3) 55% Stable (n = 11) 41

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed PAU 80% follow-up imaging available (n = 20, mean 34.3 months) 15% Resolution (n = 3) 55% Stable (n = 11) 30% Worsening (n = 6) Mean time 18 mo. 42

Radiologic Follow-up of Medically managed PAU 80% follow-up imaging available (n = 20, mean 34.3 months) 15% Resolution (n = 3) 55% Stable (n = 11) 30% Worsening (n = 6) Mean time 18 mo. 100% Underwent late surgery (n = 6) 43

Surgical Treatment of PAU Surgical Procedures Ascending Descending Value % Value % Total number of Interventions: 2 7% 27 93% Open aortic graft replacement 2 100% 22 81% Thromboexclusion procedure - - 1 4% Endovascular procedure - - 4 15% Mean Post-Surgical Follow-up 42.9 months (range 1-150) 44

Long Term Survival of IMH and PAU 45

Comparison of IMH vs PAU Survival p = 0.26 46

Comparison of IMH vs PAU Survival p = 0.26 47

Medical vs Surgical Treatment of IMH 48

Medical vs Surgical Treatment of IMH p = 0.10 (log-rank) 49

Medical vs Surgical Treatment of IMH p = 0.028 (Gehan-Breslow-Wilcoxon test) 50

Medical vs Surgical Treatment of PAU 51

Medical vs Surgical Treatment of PAU p = 0.037 52

Important points IMH and PAU 1. Disease of the elderly population. 2. Female gender predominates. 3. High rupture rates upon initial presentation. 4. No branch occlusion. 5. True healing does occur, but worsening is more common. 6. Surgical approach is safe and yields improved survival. 7. Results of this study support an expectant, but aggressive approach towards IMH and PAU. 53

Worsening No Change Resolution Intramural Hematoma Penetrating Aortic Ulcer Initial Image Follow-up Image Initial Image Follow-up Image 56

Worsening No Change Resolution Intramural Hematoma Penetrating Aortic Ulcer Initial Image Follow-up Image Initial Image Follow-up Image 57

Worsening Refers to deterioration in aortic condition, including significant increases in the thickness or depth of the lesion, progression of PAU to IMH (or vice versa), progression to classic dissection, or rupture. Intramural Hematoma 57% (n=8) of patients worsened: 38% conversion to flap dissection, 38% appearance of a concurrent penetrating ulcer, 25% rapid expansion of the IMH The mean time to detection of worsening was 1.3 months (range 0.4-2.5) Penetrating Aortic Ulcers 30% (n=6) of patients worsened: 33% conversion to flap dissection, 66% expansion of the ulcer and appearance of associated intramural hematoma. The mean time to worsening was 18.0 months (range 1-92) 58

Causes of Death Early Deaths Cause of Death IMH (n = 31) PAU (n = 34) Rupture 3 5 Post-operative complication 4 2 CV-related, non-rupture 1 - Late Deaths Aorta-related 4 4 Possible aorta-related 3 5 Non-aortic causes 10 7 Unknown 6 11 59

Total Cohort Survival (IMH+PAU) 1-year 77% 3-year 70% 5-year 58% 10-year 33% 60

Rupture/Impending Rupture Rupture Defined as the presence of extra-aortic blood confirmed by: Radiology, Surgical examination, Post-mortem examination. Impending Rupture Confirmed by an experienced aortic surgeon or radiologist, given the presence of the following: Bloody effusion, Rapid radiologic worsening, Increase in effusion amount, Persistent pain, Intraoperative findings. 61

General Management Strategy Operate on all rupture state patients and all ascending lesions when clinically possible. For descending IMH and PAU, we provided standard initial non-surgical anti-impulse therapy, yet maintained a low threshold for surgical intervention in case of severe, recurrent symptoms or radiographic worsening upon follow-up. Our policy originated in the pre-endovascular era, and the majority of our operatively treated patients underwent open repair rather than endovascular treatment. 62

Surgical Treatment by Location (IMH) Initial Management Late Management 63

Thromboexclusion procedure 64

65

Hospital Course of IMH 55 Patients with IMH 82% Non-Rupture State (n = 45) 18% Rupture State (n = 10) 56% Initial Medical Tx (n = 25) 44% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 20) 30% Initial Medical Tx (n = 3) 70% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 7) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 25) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 20) 0% Survived to Discharge (n = 0) 43% Survived to Discharge (n = 3) 66

Hospital Course of PAU 53 Patients with PAU 68% Non-Rupture State (n = 36) 32% Rupture State (n = 17) 69% Initial Medical Tx (n = 25) 31% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 11) 29% Initial Medical Tx (n = 5) 71% Initial Surgical Tx (n = 12) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 25) 100% Survived to Discharge (n = 11) 0% Survived to Discharge (n = 0) 87% Survived to Discharge (n = 10) 67

Comorbidities of IMH and PAU patients Total Cohort IMH PAU All IMH Ascending Descending All PAU Ascending Descending Number of patients 108 55 (51%) 18 (33%) 37 (67%) 53 (49%) 4 (8%) 49 (92%) Mean age at diagnosis (yrs) 70.8±10 70.3±10 70.4±10 70.2±12 71.4±10 70.3±14 70.3±15 Female (%) 61 (56%) 31 (56%) 10 (56%) 21 (57%) 30 (57%) 1 (25%) 29 (59%) Hypertension 99 (92%) 51 (93%) 15 (83%) 36 (97%) 48 (91%) 4 (100%) 44 (90%) Dyslipidemia 48 (44%) 21 (38%) 7 (39%) 14 (38%) 27 (51%) 2 (50%) 25 (51%) Tobacco 35 (32%) 16 (29%) 6 (33%) 10 27%) 19 (36%) 2 (50%) 17 (35%) CAD 31 (29%) 13 (26%) 3 (17%) 10 27%) 18 (34%) 2 (50%) 16 (33%) Pulmonary Disease 35 (32%) 14 (25%) 4 (22%) 10 27%) 21 (40%) 3 (75%) 18 (37%) Renal Dysfunction 13 (12%) 7 (13%) 2 (11%) 5 (14%) 6 (11%) 1 (25%) 5 (10%) Atypical aortic branching variant 29 (27%) 17 (31%) 4 (22%) 13 (35%) 12 (23%) 1 (25%) 11 (22%) Isolated left vertebral artery 13 (12%) 9 (16%) 1 (6%) 8 (22%) 4 (8%) 1 (25%) 3 (6%) 68