Results of Transarterial Embolization for Treating Type 2 Endoleaks: A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 endoleaks (T2Es) are the main cause of reintervention after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR). The objective of this study is to quantify success rates of T2E treatment. METHODS: This study involves a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database containing data on all consecutive patients treated for a T2E between 2003 and 2017 in a single center. Technical success was defined as absence of endoleak in the final angiographic control after treatment. Clinical success was defined as absence of sac growth over 5 mm in the contrast-enhanced computed tomography performed a year thereafter. Statistics included Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS: A total of 528 elective EVARs were performed in the period. Thirty-six of these (6.8%) developed a T2E requiring reintervention, a median of 37.9 months after EVAR. Twenty-five percent of the treatments were performed more than 5 years after intervention. Twenty-eight of the 36 treatments were performed via transarterial embolization. For this technique, technical success was 71.4% and clinical success was 62.5%. A subsequent reintervention was required in 35.7% of patients. In this cohort, the rate of aneurysm rupture was 10.7% (n = 3/28), open surgical conversion was needed in 2 of 28 cases (7.1%), and rate of aneurysm-related death was 14.3% (n = 4/28) over follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A high percentage of patients are at risk of adverse outcomes after T2E treatment. Strict imaging follow-up is still needed in this population.

COVID-19 and aortic disease: a practical systematic review of the literature on management and outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Since the outbreak of the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19), vascular specialists have faced dramatic changes in clinical and surgical practice. Although COVID-19 pulmonary signs and symptoms were the most pertinent problems initially, in the long term, cardiovascular complications became the most fearsome, with poor outcomes in terms of morbidity and mortality. Algorithms and decision-making procedures have been modified, not only to treat new clinical findings in COVID-19 positive patients, but also to avoid complications related to pulmonary and systemic infections. Additionally, COVID-19-negative patients experienced challenging management, due to hospital crowding, the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 transmission, and pandemic emergencies. In this context, aortic interventions were subject to several difficulties. First, in COVID-19-positive patients, there was the onset of new pathological scenarios including thrombotic manifestations and the subsequent complications. Second, in both COVID-19-negative and positive patients, there was a need to deliver optimal treatment with acceptable perioperative risks, forcing a rethinking of decision-making especially in terms of indications for treatments. The aim of this systematic review is to present evidence published on COVID-19 and aortic-related issues, highlighting some challenging aspects regarding management, treatment and outcomes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Data search was performed on PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, using as time range "January 1st, 2000 - May 1st, 2021." Only articles in English language were included. Key words used for the query were "Aorta" AND "COVID-19" OR "SARS-CoV-2." Furthermore, the NCBI database of "SARS-CoV-2 Resources" was interrogated to find further relevant studies. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The search retrieved 416 papers; among these, 46 studies were eligible and reviewed in depth. The published literature suggests the existence of a hypercoagulable state in patients with COVID-19 disease occurring via direct and indirect mechanisms. COVID-19 infection seems to promote a prothrombotic status that aggravates vascular disease. Regardless of clinical laboratory or status, active COVID-19 infection is considered a risk factor for poor vascular surgery outcomes. Specifically, it is associated with a fourfold increased risk of death and a threefold increased risk of major adverse events. Prognosis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 disease is often determined by the extent of pulmonary disease, although vascular complications also greatly affect outcomes. Nevertheless, although COVID­19 is highly morbid, in high­risk operations good outcomes can still be achieved even in elderly patients with COVID­19. CONCLUSIONS: In the case of aortic disease during active COVID-19 infection, poor outcomes are associated with COVID-19 vascular and non-vascular complications, while for COVID-19-negative patients not much changed in terms of outcomes, despite the difficulties in management. Endovascular repair, when possible, minimized the impact of treatment, reducing the risk of COVID-related postoperative complications or acquired infection in negative patients.

Outcomes of Vascular and Endovascular Interventions Performed During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the COVER Study is to identify global outcomes and decision making for vascular procedures during the pandemic. BACKGROUND DATA: During its initial peak, there were many reports of delays to vital surgery and the release of several guidelines advising later thresholds for vascular surgical intervention for key conditions. METHODS: An international multi-center observational study of outcomes after open and endovascular interventions. RESULTS: In an analysis of 1103 vascular intervention (57 centers in 19 countries), 71.6% were elective or scheduled procedures. Mean age was 67 ±â€Š14 years (75.6% male). Suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection was documented in 4.0%. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 11.0% [aortic interventions mortality 15.2% (23/151), amputations 12.1% (28/232), carotid interventions 10.7% (11/103), lower limb revascularisations 9.8% (51/521)]. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-3.15] and active lower respiratory tract infection due to any cause (OR 24.94, 95% CI 12.57-241.70) ware associated with mortality, whereas elective or scheduled cases were lower risk (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.22-0.73 and 0.60, 95% CI 0.45-0.98, respectively. After adjustment, antiplatelet (OR 0.503, 95% CI: 0.273-0.928) and oral anticoagulation (OR 0.411, 95% CI: 0.205-0.824) were linked to reduced risk of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality after vascular interventions during this period was unexpectedly high. Suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases were uncommon. Therefore an alternative cause, for example, recommendations for delayed surgery, should be considered. The vascular community must anticipate longer term implications for survival.

COVID-19 Lockdown Effects on Acute Stroke Care in Latin America.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 pandemic has forced important changes in health care worldwide. Stroke care networks have been affected, especially during peak periods. We assessed the impact of the pandemic and lockdowns in stroke admissions and care in Latin America. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multinational study (7 countries, 18 centers) of patients admitted during the pandemic outbreak (March-June 2020). Comparisons were made with the same period in 2019. Numbers of cases, stroke etiology and severity, acute care and hospitalization outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Most countries reported mild decreases in stroke admissions compared to the same period of 2019 (1187 vs. 1166, p = 0.03). Among stroke subtypes, there was a reduction in ischemic strokes (IS) admissions (78.3% vs. 73.9%, p = 0.01) compared with 2019, especially in IS with NIHSS 0-5 (50.1% vs. 44.9%, p = 0.03). A substantial increase in the proportion of stroke admissions beyond 48 h from symptoms onset was observed (13.8% vs. 20.5%, p < 0.001). Nevertheless, no differences in total reperfusion treatment rates were observed, with similar door-to-needle, door-to-CT, and door-to-groin times in both periods. Other stroke outcomes, as all-type mortality during hospitalization (4.9% vs. 9.7%, p < 0.001), length of stay (IQR 1-5 days vs. 0-9 days, p < 0.001), and likelihood to be discharged home (91.6% vs. 83.0%, p < 0.001), were compromised during COVID-19 lockdown period. CONCLUSIONS: In this Latin America survey, there was a mild decrease in admissions of IS during the COVID-19 lockdown period, with a significant delay in time to consultations and worse hospitalization outcomes.

European Multicenter Study of ET-COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Acute ischemic stroke and large vessel occlusion can be concurrent with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Outcomes after mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for large vessel occlusion in patients with COVID-19 are substantially unknown. Our aim was to study early outcomes after MT in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Multicenter, European, cohort study involving 34 stroke centers in France, Italy, Spain, and Belgium. Data were collected between March 1, 2020 and May 5, 2020. Consecutive laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases with large vessel occlusion, who were treated with MT, were included. Primary investigated outcome: 30-day mortality. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: early neurological improvement (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale improvement ≥8 points or 24 hours National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale 0-1), successful reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction grade ≥2b), and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: We evaluated 93 patients with COVID-19 with large vessel occlusion who underwent MT (median age, 71 years [interquartile range, 59-79]; 63 men [67.7%]). Median pretreatment National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score were 17 (interquartile range, 11-21) and 8 (interquartile range, 7-9), respectively. Anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke represented 93.5% of cases. The rate modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction 2b to 3 was 79.6% (74 patients [95% CI, 71.3-87.8]). Thirty-day mortality was 29% (27 patients [95% CI, 20-39.4]). Early neurological improvement was 19.5% (17 patients [95% CI, 11.8-29.5]), and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was 5.4% (5 patients [95% CI, 1.7-12.1]). Patients who died at 30 days exhibited significantly lower lymphocyte count, higher levels of aspartate, and LDH (lactate dehydrogenase). After adjustment for age, initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score, and successful reperfusion, these biological markers remained associated with increased odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio of 2.70 [95% CI, 1.21-5.98] per SD-log decrease in lymphocyte count, 2.66 [95% CI, 1.22-5.77] per SD-log increase in aspartate, and 4.30 [95% CI, 1.43-12.91] per SD-log increase in LDH). CONCLUSIONS: The 29% rate of 30-day mortality after MT among patients with COVID-19 is not negligible. Abnormalities of lymphocyte count, LDH and aspartate may depict a patient's profiles with poorer outcomes after MT. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT04406090.