Treatment of Femoropopliteal Artery Disease with Polymer-Coated Drug-Eluting Stent: 5-Year Results of a Prospective, Non-Randomized Study Including the Halo Phenomenon.

PURPOSE: To investigate the long-term results of the Eluvia drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for femoropopliteal arterial disease, including the 'halo' phenomenon. Long-term data of DES is scarce. A focal reaction ('halo') following Eluvia DES deployment has been described. However, the long-term clinical impact of this phenomenon remains unclear. METHODS: This prospective, non-randomized, single-arm study included 130 consecutive patients treated with an Eluvia DES for symptomatic femoropopliteal disease between March 2016 and December 2018. Clinical outcomes and imaging were assessed after 6 months and annually thereafter for up to 5 years. The primary outcome measure was primary patency. Secondary outcomes were freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR), freedom from major amputation, overall survival and amputation-free survival rates. RESULTS: The primary patency was 65% at 5 years. The freedom from CD-TLR and from major amputation at 5 years was 79 and 96%, respectively. The overall survival and amputation-free survival rates were 88 and 83% at 60 months, respectively. Out of the 27 patients with a halo sign, two showed an increased (7.4%) and 6 (22.2%) a decreased diameter. In 19 cases (70.4%), the diameter remained unchanged at the latest follow-up. The presence of the 'halo' sign was associated with increased primary patency (87% versus 59%, HR: 2.48, 95%CI 1.19-5.16, P = .015). CONCLUSIONS: The presented patient cohort treated with the Eluvia DES for femoropopliteal artery lesions indicates durable efficacy and a good safety profile regardless of the halo phenomenon. The results need to be confirmed in a larger patient cohort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: Non-randomized controlled cohort/follow-up study.

Long-term Results of Angulated Versus Hyperangulated Neck in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair With Endurant Endoprosthesis.

PURPOSE: Patients with a hyperangulated (>60°) proximal aortic neck and at high risk of open surgery have been treated with endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). However, long-term outcomes are not well reported. The aim of this study is to compare the technical and clinical success of EVAR in angulated (45°-60°) and hyperangulated (>60°) proximal neck angulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of all consecutive patients undergoing EVAR treated between November 2007 and February 2020 were collected. A retrospective analysis of this prospective database was performed. The primary measure outcome was technical and clinical success. In addition, we evaluated sack evolution, type IA endoleak, secondary procedures, aneurysm rupture, mortality, aneurysm-related mortality, and migration. RESULTS: In all, 246 of 1353 EVAR patients presented with an angulation of the proximal neck >45°, 130 patients presented with an infrarenal angulation >60°, while 116 patients had an angulation between 45° and 60°. Patients with a hyperangulated infrarenal aortic neck were significantly more often women (8.6% vs 26.9%), older (73.9 vs 76.7 years), and had less often diabetes mellitus (20.7% vs 10.8%). Suprarenal neck angulation and reversed tapered neck were significantly more frequent in the hyperangulated group so that propensity scores were generated using these anatomical parameters to create a matched cohort group. No significant differences in technical (87.9% vs 94.8%) and clinical success (66.4% vs 69.8%) were observed. After a mean clinical follow-up of 58.9 months significantly more secondary procedures were performed in the hyperangulated group (23.3% vs 12.9% p=0.04); however, neck-related secondary procedures were comparable (1.7% vs 6.0%; p=0.09). Also, all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality, sack evolution, type IA endoleak, aneurysm rupture, and migration were comparable for both groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with less angulated proximal aortic neck, hyperangulated neck anatomy did not reduce the technical and clinical success of EVAR but increased the risk of secondary procedures. In patients who are not good candidates for open surgery, EVAR is a reasonable alternative.

A meta-analysis of safety and efficacy of endovascular aneurysm repair in aneurysm patients with severe angulated infrarenal neck.

OBJECTIVES: A growing number of abdominal aortic aneurysms with severe angulated neck anatomy is treated by endovascular means. However, contradictory early and late outcomes have been reported. Our review and outcome analysis attempted to evaluate the available literature and provide clinicians with a base for clinical implementation and future research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify the outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with severe infrarenal neck angulation (SNA ≥ 60°) vs non-severe neck angulation (NSNA). Outcome measures included perioperative complications, type 1a endoleak, neck-related secondary procedures, stent graft migration, aneurysm rupture, increase (>5mm) in sac diameter, all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality (PROSPERO Nr.: CRD42021233253). RESULTS: Six observational studies reporting on 5981 patients (1457 with SNA and 4524 with NSNA) with a weighted mean follow-up period of 1.8 years were included. EVAR in SNA compared with NSNA was associated with a higher rate of type 1a endoleak at 30 days (4.0% vs 1.8%; p< 0.00001), at 1 year (2.8% vs 1.9%; p<0.03), at 2 years (4.9% vs 2.1%; p< 0.0002), at 3 years (5.6% vs 2.6%; p< 0.0001). The rate of neck-related secondary procedures was significantly higher at 1 year (6.6% vs 3.9%; p<0.05) and at 3 years (13.1% vs 9%; p<0.05). Graft migration, aneurysm sack increase, aneurysm rupture and all-cause mortality were not statistically different at mid-term. CONCLUSIONS: The use of EVAR in severely angulated infrarenal aortic necks is associated with a high rate of early and mid-term complications. However, aortic related and all-causes mortality are not higher compared to patients with NSNA. Therefore, EVAR should be cautiously used in patients with SNA.

Use of Chimney Technique Does Not Improve the Outcome of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Patients With a Hyperangulated and Short Proximal Aortic Neck.

PURPOSE: We hypothesized that extending the proximal landing zone with the chimney technique could be beneficial in patients with a hyperangulated proximal aortic neck, defined as more > 60 degrees. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the outcome of prospectively collected data of patients treated by endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal aortic aneurysm with a hyperangulated proximal aortic neck. In all, 104 out of 130 patients were treated without (Group A) and 24 with the chimney endovascular aortic repair (ChEVAR, Group B). Primary outcome was technical and clinical success according to the reporting standards of the Society of Vascular Surgery. RESULTS: The use of the chimney technique was associated with a significantly longer operation duration (167 vs. 93 min, p < .001), longer fluoroscopy time (44 vs.30 min, p = < .001), and larger amount of contrast medium used (149 vs. 127 ml, p = .03) but did not significantly improve technical (79.2% vs. 87.7%) and clinical success (54.2% vs. 68.9%). Aneurysm-related mortality was higher in group B (8.3% vs. = 0%, p < .001). Type IA endoleak was high in both groups at completion angiography (11.3% in Group A vs. 12.5% in Group B) and at follow-up (10.4% in Group A vs. 4.5% in Group B) without significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our data did not show a benefit of the primary use of the chimney technique in patients with a hyperangulated and short neck, although more studies are required to support this conclusion. Other strategies or new technologies are required for improving EVAR results in aneurysm patients with severe angulated proximal and short neck.