Introduction Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) became the standard of care for treating type B aortic dissections and descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. We aimed to describe the racial/ethnic differences in TEVAR utilization and outcomes. Methods The National Inpatient Sample was reviewed for all TEVARs performed between 2010 and 2017 for Type B aortic dissection and descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (DTAA). We compared groups stratifying by their racial/ethnicity background in whites, black, Hispanic, and others. A mixed-effects logistic regression was performed to assess the relationship between race/ethnicity and the primary outcome, in-hospital mortality. Results A total of 25,260 admissions for TEVAR during 2010–2017 were identified. Of those, 52.74% (n= 13,322) were performed for aneurysm and 47.2% (n= 11,938) were performed for type B dissection. 68.1% were white, 19.6% were black, 5.7% Hispanic, and 6.5% were classified as others. White patients were the oldest (median age 71 years; <0.001), with TEVAR being performed electively more often for aortic aneurysm (58.8% vs. 34% vs. 48.3% vs. 48.2%; p<0.001). In contrast, TEVAR was more likely urgent or emergent for type B dissection in black patients (65.6% vs 41.1% vs 51.6% vs 51.7%; p<0.001). Finally, the black population showed a relative increase in the incidence rate of TEVAR over time. The adjusted multivariable model showed that race/ethnicity was not associated with in-hospital mortality. Conclusion Although there is a differential distribution of thoracic indication and comorbidities between race/ethnicity in TEVAR, racial disparities do not appear to be associated with in-hospital mortality after adjusting for covariates.

Objectives: Though guidelines are set by the American Board of Thoracic Surgery for the operative cases that cardiothoracic surgery residents must perform to be board-eligible, no such recommendations exist to assess competency for the wide range of high-risk bedside procedures. Our department created and implemented a multi-disciplinary developed course designed to standardize common high-risk bedside procedures and credential our residents. The aim of this study was to survey the attitudes of residents to and query the efficacy of such a course. Methods: The course was designed with the goal of standardizing endotracheal intubation, arterial line insertion (radial and femoral), central venous line insertion, pigtail tube thoracostomy and nasogastric tube placement. The course consisted of an online module followed by a 4-hour hands on simulation session. Knowledge based pre and post evaluations were administered as well as Likert based survey regarding multiple aspects of the residents’ perceptions of the course and the procedures. Results: Twenty-three (7 traditional and 16 integrated) cardiothoracic surgical residents participated in the course. Residents reported that 48% of the time, bedside procedures were historically taught by other trainees rather than faculty. All residents endorsed increased standardization of all procedures after the course. Likewise, residents showed increased confidence in all procedures except for pigtail and thoracentesis as well as nasogastric tube placement. 43.5% of the participants demonstrated improvement in the pre and post-test knowledge-based evaluations. ConclusionCardiothoracic residents have favorable attitudes towards standardization and credentialing for high risk bedside procedures and utilizing such courses may help standardize procedural techniques.