Lesson Learned with the Use of Iliac Branch Devices: Single Centre 10 Year Experience in 157 Consecutive Procedures.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Absence of an adequate iliac seal rarely represents an absolute contraindication to endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Iliac branch devices (IBD) are increasingly used in patients with extensive aorto-iliac aneurysmal disease, but few data are available on the long-term results of these procedures. METHODS: Between 2006 and 2016, 157 consecutive IBD procedures performed at a single centre were entered into a prospective database. Indications included unilateral or bilateral common iliac artery aneurysms combined or not with abdominal aortic aneurysms. Long-term results were reported according to the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: During the study period 149 patients were treated with an iliac branched endograft. Isolated IBD was implanted in 17.8% of the cases; technical success rate was 97.5%. Peri-operative procedure failure occurred in seven patients, four during surgery and three within 30 days of the procedure. Presence of ipsilateral hypogastric aneurysm (p = .031; Exp [B] = 6.72) and intervention performed during the initial study period (p = .006; Exp [B] = 10.40) were predictive of early failure on multivariate analysis. After a mean follow-up of 44.2 months actuarial freedom from IBD related re-intervention was 97.4%, 95.6%, 94.0%, and 91.8% at 1, 3, 5, and 9 years, respectively. Hypogastric artery patency was 94.7%, 92.6%, and 90.4% at 1, 3, and 10 years, respectively. Presence of a hypogastric aneurysm was an independent predictor of target artery occlusion during follow-up on multivariate analysis (p = .007; Exp [B] = 5.93). CONCLUSION: Iliac branched endografting can now be performed with a high technical success rate; long-term freedom from re-intervention is comparable with patients treated with standard aortic endografting. IBD should be considered a first-option treatment in patients with adequate vascular anatomy unsuitable for standard endovascular aortic repair.

Arbitrary Palliation of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in the Elderly is no Longer Warranted.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: A consistent number of elderly patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) are deemed unfit for repair and excluded from any treatment. The objective of this study was to examine the impact on survival of endovascular repair and open surgery with restricted turndown in acute AAA repair. METHODS: A prospective database for patients treated for rAAA was established. None of the patients admitted alive with rAAA were denied treatment. Multivariate regression models, the predictive risk assessment Glasgow Aneurysm Score (GAS), and subgroup analyses in older patients were applied to identify indicators of excessive 30 day mortality risk that could affect the decision for turndown. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2015, 113 consecutive patients (93 males; mean age 77.2 years) with rAAAs were treated (69 open surgery; 44 EVAR). Overall peri-operative (30 day) mortality was 38.9% (44/113): 40.6% (28/69), and 36.4% (16/44) after open surgery and EVAR, respectively (p = .70). Multivariate logistic regression identified old age as an indicator of increased peri-operative mortality (odd ratio [OR] 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-1.3; p = .001), as well as free aneurysm rupture (OR 5.0, 95% CI 1.3-19.9; p = .02). GAS was higher in patients who died (97.75 vs. 86.62), but the score failed to identify increased peri-operative mortality risk in adjusted analyses (OR 1.0; p = .06). Almost two thirds of the patients (n = 71) were older than 75 at the time of aneurysm rupture (48.6% octogenarians) and EVAR was more commonly applied than open surgery (86.4% vs. 47.8%; p < .0001). Peri-operative mortality in > 75 year old patients was 46.5% compared with 26.2% in younger patients (p = .05), with rates increased after open surgery (54.5% vs. 27.8%, p = .03) but not after EVAR (39.5% vs. 16.7%; p = .39). According to Kaplan-Meier estimates, mean survival was 39.7 ± 4.8 months. Patients older than 75 years of age survived for a mean of 23.0 ± 4.47 months after rupture. CONCLUSION: In this study aggressive treatment with a very restricted or no turndown strategy for any rAAA, also applied to older patients, allowed for an additional mean 40 months of survival after aneurysm rupture. In the contemporary endovascular era the decision to deny repair arbitrarily to older patients with rAAAs must be revisited.

Safety of chronic anticoagulation therapy after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR).

OBJECTIVE: Current data supporting the effect of anticoagulation drug use on aneurysm sealing and the durability of endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR) are conflicting. This study assessed the safety of chronic anticoagulation therapy after EVAR. METHODS: Records of 1409 consecutive patients having elective EVAR during 1997-2011 who were prospectively followed were reviewed. Survival, reintervention, conversion, and endoleak rates were analyzed in patients with and without chronic anticoagulants. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of anticoagulation therapy on outcomes. RESULTS: One-hundred and three (7.3%) patients were on chronic anticoagulation drugs (80 on vitamin K antagonists) at the time of EVAR. An additional 46 patients started on anticoagulants after repair were identified. Patients on chronic anticoagulation therapy at repair (mean age 73.6 years; 91 males) had more frequent cardiac disease (74.8% vs. 44.2%; p < 00001), but no other differences in demographic and major baseline comorbidities with respect to the others. At baseline, mean abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) diameter was 56.43 mm vs. 54.65 mm (p = .076) and aortic neck length 26.54 mm vs. 25.21 mm (p = .26) in patients with and without anticoagulants, respectively. At 5 years, freedom from endoleak rates were 55.5% vs. 69.9% (p < .0001), and freedom from reintervention/conversion rates were 69.4% vs. 82.4% (p < .0001) in patients with (including those with delayed drug use) and without chronic anticoagulants, respectively. Controlling for covariates with the Cox regression method, at a mean follow-up of 64.3 ± 45.2 months after EVAR, use of anticoagulation drugs was independently associated with an increased risk of endoleak (odds ratio, OR 1.6; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.23-2.07; p < .0001) and reintervention or late conversion rates (OR 1.8; 95% CI: 1.31-2.48; p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The safety of anticoagulation therapy after EVAR is debatable. Chronic anticoagulation drug use risks exposure to a poor long-term outcome. A critical and balanced decision-making approach should be applied to patients with AAA and cardiac disease who may require prolonged anticoagulation treatment.

Diabetes and abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Epidemiologic evidence suggests that patients with diabetes may have a lower incidence of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA); however, the link between diabetes and AAA development and expansion is unclear. The aim of this review is to analyze updated evidence to better understand the impact of diabetes on prevalence, incidence, clinical outcome, and expansion rate of AAA. A systematic review of literature published in the last 20 years using the PubMed and Cochrane databases was undertaken. Studies reporting appropriate data were identified and a meta-analysis performed using the generic inverse variance method. Sixty-four studies were identified. Methodological quality was "fair" in 16 and "good" in 44 studies according to a formal assessment checklist (Newcastle-Ottawa). In 17 large population prevalence studies there was a significant inverse association between diabetes and AAA: pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.80; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.70-0.90 (p = .0009). An inverse association was also confirmed by pooled analysis of data from smaller prevalence studies on selected populations (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.35-0.99; p = .05), while no significant results were provided by case-control studies. A significant lower pooled incidence of new AAA in diabetics was found over six prospective studies: OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.31-0.91; p = .03. Diabetic patients showed increased operative (30-day/in-hospital) mortality after AAA repair: pooled OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.10-1.44; p = .0008. The increased operative risk was more evident in studies with 30-day assessment. In the long-term, diabetics showed lower survival rates at 2-5 years, while there was general evidence of lower growth rates of small AAA in patients with diabetes compared to non-diabetics. There is currently evidence to support an inverse relationship between diabetes and AAA development and enlargement, even though fair methodological quality or unclear risk of bias in many available studies decreases the strength of the finding. At the same time, operative and long-term survival is lower in diabetic patients, suggesting increased cardiovascular burden. The higher mortality in diabetics raises the question as to whether AAA repair should be individualized in selected diabetic populations at higher AAA rupture risk.

Results of the "endovascular treatment first" policy for infrapopliteal disease.

Even though differences between first-bypass vs. first-endovascular approach in below the knee (BTK) lesions have never been adequately compared, endovascular strategy first approach can be currently successfully used to treat BTK lesions in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI). Success however is strongly associated with risk groups, severity of disease and degree of clinical presentation beside the method of revascularization. From available data, the best results of endovascular first approach for BTK lesions can be achieved with multivessel and tibial (more than peroneal alone) recanalization and Rutherford 4 or 5 ischemia changes, especially if the correct angiosome can be revascularized (direct flow to the feeding artery of the foot) and there is no renal failure. For patients in Rutherford class 6 and extensive gangrene/tissue loss, BTK endovascular strategy alone does not seem to provide ideal results. Outcomes of interventional therapy for BTK lesions are consistently better when applied in experienced centers with the use of more advanced technology and use of eluting materials. According to limited but randomized evidence, drug-eluting stent (DES) placement might be recommended in BTK lesions under 40 mm long since yields significantly better results than angioplasty alone or implantation of bare metal stents in this lesion subset. Nevertheless, this policy raises doubts on the efficacy of treatment due to limitations in generalizability of outcomes in common hospital settings and related costs. Furthermore, there are still no consistent numbers to provide the efficacy of this approach and long-term data are lacking. Waiting for the long-term results of ongoing trials and new researches, a more comprehensive analysis of outcomes with BTK endovascular first strategy can be provided in the next future.