ABSTRACT
Objective: To assess the feasibility of collecting, examining and reporting observational, real-world evidence regarding the novel use of the GORE EXCLUDER Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE) in conjunction with the GORE VIABAHN VBX Balloon Expandable Endoprosthesis (IBE+VBX stent graft). Design: Multicentre retrospective cohort study. Setting: Four real-world data sources were used: a national quality improvement registry, a statewide clinical research network, a regional quaternary health system and two tertiary academic medical centres. Participants: In total, 30 patients with 37 IBE+VBX stent graft were identified. Of those, the mean age was 72±10.2 years and 90% were male. The cohort was 77% white, 10% black, 3% Hispanic and 10% other. Main outcome measures: Outcome measures included: proportion of percutaneous vs open surgical access, intensive care admission, intensive care unit (ICU) length-of-stay (LOS), total LOS, postoperative complications, discharge disposition and 30-day mortality. Results: The majority (89%) of cases were performed percutaneously, 5% required surgical exposure following failed percutaneous access and 6% required open surgical exposure outright. Nearly half (43%) required intensive care admission with a median ICU LOS of 1 day (range: 1-2). Median total LOS was 1 day (IQR: 1-2). There were zero postoperative myocardial infarctions, zero reported leg embolisations and no reported reinterventions. Access site complications were described in 1 of 28 patients, manifesting as a haematoma or pseudoaneurysm. Ultimately, 97% were discharged to home and one patient was discharged to a nursing home or rehabilitation facility. There were no 30-day perioperative deaths. Conclusions: This project demonstrates the feasibility of identifying and integrating real-world evidence, as it pertains to an unapproved combination of endovascular devices (IBE+VBX stent graft), for short-term outcomes analysis. This new paradigm of evidence has potential to be used for device monitoring, submission to regulatory agencies, or consideration in indication expansions and approvals with further efforts to systematise data collection and transmission mechanisms.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord injury (SCI) is one of the most devastating complications of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair. Cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) is routinely used to prevent and to treat SCI during open TAAA repair. However, the risks and benefits of CSFD during fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/B-EVAR) are unclear. This study aimed to determine the risk of SCI after F/B-EVAR and to assess the risks and benefits of CSFD. METHODS: We analyzed 106 consecutive patients with TAAAs treated with F/B-EVAR from 2014 to 2019 in a prospective physician-sponsored investigational device exemption study (G130193). Data were collected prospectively and audited by an independent external monitor. All patients were treated with Cook manufactured patient-specific F/B-EVAR devices or the Cook t-Branch devices (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). CSFD was used at the discretion of the principal investigator. Risk factors for SCI were identified, and CSFD complications were assessed. RESULTS: Prophylactic CSFD was used in 78 patients (73.6%), and 28 patients (26.4%) underwent F/B-EVAR without CSFD. Four patients (3.8%) with prophylactic CSFD developed SCI, including two patients (1.9%) with permanent paraplegia (Tarlov grade 1-2) and two patients (1.9%) with paraparesis (Tarlov grade 3). Multivariate analysis revealed that greater extent of thoracic aortic coverage (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.11; P = .02) and intraoperative blood loss (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.002; P = .04) were the significant risk factors for SCI. Six patients (7.6% [6/78]) experienced major CSFD-related complications, including subarachnoid hemorrhage in 2.6% (2), spinal hematoma in 2.6% (2), cerebellar hemorrhage in 1.3% (1), and spinal drain fracture requiring surgical laminectomy in 1.3% (1). Minor CSFD-related complications occurred in 20 patients (25.6% [20/78]), including paresthesia during CSFD insertion (10), minimal bloody cerebrospinal fluid (7), drain malfunction (2), and reflex hypotension (1). Technical difficulties during CSFD catheter placement were noted in seven patients (9.0%). Excluding four patients with SCI, intensive care unit stay was 3.3 ± 4.0 days in the CSFD group vs 1.2 ± 0.9 days in the no-CSFD group (P = .007). Total hospital length of stay was 6.0 ± 4.9 days in the CSFD group vs 3.5 ± 1.9 days in the no-CSFD group (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of SCI after F/B-EVAR with selective CSFD was low, and risk factors for SCI were greater with extent of thoracic aortic coverage and intraoperative blood loss. However, the incidence of major CSFD-related complications exceeded the incidence of SCI, and CSFD significantly increased both intensive care unit and total hospital length of stay. Therefore, routine prophylactic CSFD may not be justified, and a prospective randomized trial of CSFD in patients undergoing F/B-EVAR seems appropriate.
