Revascularization with BYCROSS atherectomy device- protocol of a prospective multicenter observational study.

BACKGROUND: The BYCROSS™ device is a novel device intended for use in atherectomy of the peripheral arterial disease (PAD). With the BYCROSS™ atherectomy system, also prolonged calcifying lesions can be treated in a minimally invasive manner, which was previously reserved for bypass surgery. The aim of this study is to collect additional clinical data on safety and performance of the BYCROSS™ from patients undergoing revascularization of severely stenotic or occluded peripheral arterial vessels with the BYCROSS™. METHODS AND DESIGN: This is an investigator-initiated national prospective multicenter observational study in patients with PAD. Sixty patients (20 per center) with PAD with stenosis higher than 80% or complete occlusion (de novo or recurrent stenosis) of vessels below the aortic bifurcation (min 3 mm vessel diameter) will be recruited. Three vascular surgery centers are participating in the study. The primary efficacy endpoint is procedural success, defined as passage of the occlusion through the BYCROSS device, and safety outcomes, explicated as freedom from device-related serious adverse events (SADEs). Secondary endpoints include primary and secondary patency rates, change in Rutherford classification, and freedom from amputation at 3 and 12 months. DISCUSSION: The BYCROSS atherectomy system may be a novel device for the minimally invasive treatment of prolonged calcified lesions previously reserved for bypass surgery. This national prospective multicenter observational study could represent another step in demonstrating the efficancy and safety of this device for treatment of PAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: #DRKS00029947 (who.int). PROTOCOL APPROVAL ID: #22-0047(Ethics Committee at Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich).

Early and midterm outcome of Multilayer Flow Modulator stent for complex aortic aneurysm treatment in Germany.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the early and midterm outcomes of endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysm cases using the Multilayer Flow Modulator (MFM; Cardiatis, Isnes, Belgium) endograft in Germany. METHODS: A retrospective study including patients presenting with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), thoracic aortic aneurysm, or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm treated with the MFM was conducted in Germany. Mortality and morbidity (in terms of spinal cord ischemia, visceral ischemia, and stroke) at 30 days postoperatively were evaluated. In addition, during follow-up, freedom from reintervention, rupture, and failure mode were also assessed. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2014, a total of 61 patients with AAA, thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, or thoracic aortic aneurysm were treated with the MFM endograft in 29 hospitals around Germany. However, data of 40 patients with a mean age of 73.4 ± 11.2 years (72.5% male; 29/40) and mean aortic aneurysm diameter of 60.3 ± 16.6 mm from 14 hospitals were available for this retrospective study. Thirty-seven (93%) patients were treated urgently. In 12 cases (12/40 [30%]), patients were treated outside instructions for use because of aortic aneurysm diameter >65 mm. A total of 69 MFM stents were used (1.7/patient). The technical success rate was 95% (38/40). Postoperatively, no patient presented with spinal cord ischemia, renal function deterioration, stroke, or intestinal ischemia, except for one patient who developed multiorgan failure because of early stent migration. The intraoperative and 30-day mortality rate was 0% and 2.5%, respectively. The mean follow-up was 12.9 months (±14.9 months), with a survival rate at 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months of 97%, 78%, and 70%, respectively. Freedom from failure mode (type I or II) at 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months was 97.5%, 88%, and 86%, respectively, and visceral vessel patency was 99.3% (155/156 available). During follow-up, 4 patients (4/39 [10%]) had an aneurysm sac rupture and 10 (10/39 [25%]) underwent a reintervention. Freedom from rupture and freedom from reintervention at 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months were 97.5% and 100%, 96% and 84%, and 86% and 75%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the MFM for endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysm in urgent cases appears to be technically feasible in terms of mortality and morbidity, with moderate 30-day and acceptable midterm outcomes. Reinterventions may be needed to expand the utility of outcomes.

Pancreatectomy for metastasis to the pancreas from colorectal cancer and reconstruction of superior mesenteric vein: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Tumors of the pancreatic head can infiltrate the superior mesenteric vein. In such cases, the deep veins of the lower limbs can serve as suitable autologous conduits for superior mesenteric vein reconstruction after its resection. Few data exist, however, describing the technique and the immediate patency of such reconstruction. CASE REPORT: We present the case of a 70-year-old Caucasian man with a metachronous metastasis of colon cancer and infiltration of the uncinate pancreatic process, on the anterior surface of which the tumor was located. En bloc resection of the tumor was performed with resection of the superior mesenteric vein and reconstruction. A 10 cm segment of the superficial femoral vein was harvested for the reconstruction. The superficial femoral vein segment was inter-positioned in an end-to-end fashion. The post-operative conduit patency was documented ultrasonographically immediately post-operatively and after a six-month period. The vein donor limb presented subtle signs of post-operative venous hypertension with edema, which was managed with compression stockings and led to significant improvement after six months. CONCLUSION: In cases of exploratory laparotomies with high clinical suspicion of pancreatic involvement, the potential need for vascular reconstruction dictates the preparation for leg vein harvest in advance. The superficial femoral vein provides a suitable conduit for the reconstruction of the superior mesenteric vein. This report supports the uncomplicated nature of this technique, since few data exist about this type of reconstruction.

Percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: a prospective evaluation of safety, efficiency, and risk factors.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficiency of totally percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in a large cohort of patients and to define risk factors for failure with a 10-F vascular closure system. METHODS: A prospective study examined the feasibility and safety of percutaneous femoral artery closure with a single Prostar XL 10-F vascular closure device applied in conjunction with the preclose technique. Between January 2004 and December 2005, 535 consecutive patients were treated for aortic aneurysmal disease. Thirty-five patients were excluded, leaving 500 patients (417 men; mean age 72+/-6.6 years) treated for aortic aneurysms using the Talent or Zenith stent-graft delivered through sheaths measuring 14-F (191, 21.2%), 16-F (33, 3.7%), 18-F (179, 19.8%), 20-F (2, 0.2%), 22-F (228, 25.2%), and 24-F (271, 29.9%). Primary clinical success was defined as the freedom from additional early or late procedures to treat any complication at the access site. Data were analyzed to reveal any correlation of access site complications or early/late repairs to operator experience or risk factors (obesity, extensive femoral artery calcification, and previous interventions/scars in the groin). RESULTS: Primary success was achieved in 96.1% of all percutaneous approaches. Twenty-three patients developed early (n = 16) or late (n = 7) complications at the access vessel; in 12 cases, hemostasis was achieved using pledgets with the Prostar sutures. No wound complications were recorded. The need for early conversion to an open access correlated with CFA calcification (OR 74.5, 95% CI 17.8 to 310.7; p<0.001) and operator experience (OR 43.2, 95% CI 9.8 to 189.0; p<0.001). The risk of late access site repairs was significantly higher in the presence of a groin scar (OR 48.8, 95% CI 9.2 to 259.0; p<0.001). Correlation of sheath size with early conversion to open access was weaker compared to all the other factors (OR 1.2, CI 95% 1.0 to 1.4; p<0.05). Obesity was not a risk factor for any complication. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous EVAR using the Prostar XL is safe, with minimal early and late complications. Operator experience is one of the most significant predictors of success. Anterior wall calcification and severe fibrosis of the access vessel are also predictors of primary failure, whereas obesity and sheath size are not.