Preliminary Dual-Center Experience with the Bolton Treovance Endograft.

PURPOSE: To present the performance and safety of the Treovance stent graft for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in a "real-world" patient cohort. METHODS: Patients from 2 centers, deemed unfit for open repair, were electively treated with the Treovance endograft. Clinical preoperative, operative, and up to 1-year postoperative follow-up data of patients were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: This study included 46 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (44 male), mean age of 78 years ± 8 standard deviation (SD; range: 58-93 years). All met the manufacturer's recommended anatomical requirements: average maximum sac diameter 63 mm ± 10 SD (range: 52-86 mm), proximal neck length 29 mm ± 12 SD (range: 11-60 mm), and neck angulation 30° ± 21 SD (range: 0°-70°). Fourteen had moderate to severe iliac tortuosity. A primary technical success rate of 80% was achieved (100% assisted primary technical success rate): 7 patients required adjunctive procedures intraoperatively and 2 successful treatments for type I endoleaks, which occurred within 24 hours postoperatively. There was 100% survival at 1-year follow-up; however, 4 (8.7%) patients required reintervention: 1 for a type I endoleak, 2 for limb stenosis, and 1 for a type II endoleak with an enlarging sac. No other device-related complications were identified. Reintervention and complication rates in hostile versus nonhostile anatomies were not statistically significant ( P = .28 and P = .42, respectively). CONCLUSION: The Treovance stent graft has a comparable safety profile to other next-generation stent grafts during the first year after endovascular aneurysm repair, which provides a rationale for further interrogation of its outcomes through clinical trials.

Quantification of carotid plaque lipid content with magnetic resonance T2 mapping in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Techniques to stratify subgroups of patients with asymptomatic carotid artery disease are urgently needed to guide decisions on optimal treatment. Reliance on estimates of % luminal stenosis has not been effective, perhaps because that approach entirely disregards potentially important information on the pathological process in the wall of the artery. METHODS: Since plaque lipid is a key determinant of plaque behaviour we used a newly validated, high-sensitivity T2-mapping MR technique for a systematic survey of the quantity and distribution of plaque lipid in patients undergoing endarterectomy. Lipid percentage was quantified in 50 carotid endarterectomy patients. Lipid distribution was tested, using two imaging indices (contribution of the largest lipid deposit towards total lipid (LLD %) and a newly-developed LAI 'lipid aggregation index'). RESULTS: The bifurcation contained maximal lipid volume. Lipid percentage was higher in symptomatic vs. asymptomatic patients with degree of stenosis (DS ≥ 50%) and in the total cohort (P = 0.013 and P = 0.005, respectively). Both LLD % and LAI was higher in symptomatic patients (P = 0.028 and P = 0.018, respectively), suggesting that for a given plaque lipid volume, coalesced deposits were more likely to be associated with symptomatic events. There was no correlation between plaque volume or lipid content and degree of luminal stenosis measured on ultrasound duplex (r = -0.09, P = 0.53 and r = -0.05, P = 0.75), respectively. However, there was a strong correlation in lipid between left and right carotid arteries (r = 0.5, P <0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Plaque lipid content and distribution is associated with symptomatic status of the carotid plaque. Importantly, plaque lipid content was not related to the degree of luminal stenosis assessed by ultrasound. Determination of plaque lipid content may prove useful for stratification of asymptomatic patients, including selection of optimal invasive treatments.

Quantification of Lipid-Rich Core in Carotid Atherosclerosis Using Magnetic Resonance T2 Mapping: Relation to Clinical Presentation.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to: 1) provide tissue validation of quantitative T2 mapping to measure plaque lipid content; and 2) investigate whether this technique could discern differences in plaque characteristics between symptom-related and non-symptom-related carotid plaques. BACKGROUND: Noninvasive plaque lipid quantification is appealing both for stratification in treatment selection and as a possible predictor of future plaque rupture. However, current cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) methods are insensitive, require a coalesced mass of lipid core, and rely on multicontrast acquisition with contrast media and extensive post-processing. METHODS: Patients scheduled for carotid endarterectomy were recruited for 3-T carotid CMR before surgery. Lipid area was derived from segmented T2 maps and compared directly to plaque lipid defined by histology. RESULTS: Lipid area (%) on T2 mapping and histology showed excellent correlation, both by individual slices (R = 0.85, p < 0.001) and plaque average (R = 0.83, p < 0.001). Lipid area (%) on T2 maps was significantly higher in symptomatic compared with asymptomatic plaques (31.5 ± 3.7% vs. 15.8 ± 3.1%; p = 0.005) despite similar degrees of carotid stenosis and only modest difference in plaque volume (128.0 ± 6.0 mm3 symptomatic vs. 105.6 ± 9.4 mm3 asymptomatic; p = 0.04). Receiver-operating characteristic analysis showed that T2 mapping has a good ability to discriminate between symptomatic and asymptomatic plaques with 67% sensitivity and 91% specificity (area under the curve: 0.79; p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: CMR T2 mapping distinguishes different plaque components and accurately quantifies plaque lipid content noninvasively. Compared with asymptomatic plaques, greater lipid content was found in symptomatic plaques despite similar degree of luminal stenosis and only modest difference in plaque volumes. This new technique may find a role in determining optimum treatment (e.g., providing an indication for intensive lipid lowering or by informing decisions of stents vs. surgery).