Aortobifemoral bypass vs covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation.

BACKGROUND: Covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation (CERAB) is increasingly used as a first line-treatment in patients with aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). We sought to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent CERAB compared with the gold standard of aortobifemoral bypass (ABF). METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for patients who underwent ABF or CERAB from 2009 to 2021. Propensity scores were generated using demographics, comorbidities, Rutherford class, and urgency. The two groups were matched using 5-to-1 nearest-neighbor match. Our primary outcomes were 1-year estimates of primary patency, major adverse limb events (MALEs), MALE-free survival, reintervention-free survival, and amputation-free survival. Standard statistical methods were used. RESULTS: A total of 3944 ABF and 281 CERAB cases were identified. Of all patients with AIOD, the proportion of CERAB increased from 0% to 17.9% between 2009 and 2021. Compared with ABF, patients who underwent CERAB were more likely to be older (64.7 vs 60.2; P < .001) and more often had diabetes (40.9% vs 24.1%; P < .001) and end-stage renal disease (1.1% vs 0.3%; P = .03). In the matched analysis (229 CERAB vs 929 ABF), ABF patients had improved MALE-free survival (93.2% [±0.9%] vs 83.2% [±3%]; P < .001) and lower rates of MALE (5.2% [±0.9%] vs 14.1% [±3%]; P < .001), with comparable primary patency rates (98.3% [±0.3%] vs 96.6% [±1%]; P = .6) and amputation-free survival (99.3% [±0.3%] vs 99.4% [±0.6%]; P = .9). Patients in the CERAB group had significantly lower reintervention-free survival (62.5% [±6%] vs 92.9% [±0.9%]; P < .001). Matched analysis also revealed shorter length of stay (1 vs 7 days; P < .001), as well as lower pulmonary (1.2% vs 6.6%; P = .01), renal (1.8% vs 10%; P < .001), and cardiac (1.8% vs 12.8%; P < .001) complications among CERAB patients. CONCLUSIONS: CERAB had lower perioperative morbidity compared with ABF with a similar primary patency 1-year estimates. However, patients who underwent CERAB experienced more major adverse limb events and reinterventions. Although CERAB is an effective treatment for patients with AIOD, further studies are needed to determine the long-term outcomes of CERAB compared with the established durability of ABF and further define the role of CEARB in the treatment of AIOD.

Coronary stent migration to aorta with successful recovery during aortobifemoral bypass.

We present with full and proper consent of the patient, the case of a 64-year-old man with severe peripheral arterial disease and a known chronic infrarenal aortic occlusion causing severe short-distance claudication. Preoperative computed tomography angiography was significant for a new "cylindrical" calcified lesion. During the elective surgery, the lesion was confirmed to be a coronary stent. The coronary stent was confirmed to be from the patient's prior percutaneous coronary intervention to the left anterior descending artery 1 year prior. The stent was removed without complications by the surgical team. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first such case to be described in current literature. This patient is currently alive, and a revision of his left anterior descending artery intervention was found to be unwarranted on repeat coronary angiography.

Digestive hemorrhage and fever as a result of a double secondary aortoenteric fistula following the repair of a juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm and an infection of the aortobifemoral bypass graft: a case report.

A double secondary aortoenteric fistula (AEF) occurs in a patient who has had significant aortic surgery and is characterized by a direct connection between the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and the aorta at two separate sites. Importance: During aortoc reconstructive surgery, the patient may present with a variety of unusual complaints, including fever and GI bleeding. These symptoms are indicative of problems, including the development of an aortoentric fistula, particularly when there is a double secondary fistula. Case presentation: The patient was admitted to the hospital due to hematemesis, melena, and high-grade fever after undergoing synthetic grafting aortobifemoral bypass (anatomical reconstruction) and partial resection of the juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. Pus discharge and a double aortoenteric fistula in unusual sites such as the second-third portion of the duodenum and caecum are visible in upper GI endoscopy and computed tomography angiography. The patient underwent a two-stage open surgery, the first stage involving aortic limb graft exclusion and extra anatomical reconstruction, and the second stage involving graft removal, fistula management, and bowel repair. Then the patient spent a few days in the surgical intensive care unit before being discharged. Clinical discussion: Primary and secondary AEF are the two categories of AEF. In patients who underwent aortic reconstruction surgery, the frequency of secondary AEF ranges from 0.36 to 1.6%. Due to the 8:1 injury ratio in the secondery AEF, men suffer more injuries than women.There are two types of fistula depending on whether or not the suture line is involved. The first form is graft enteric erosion, which excludes the suture line, while the second type is entric graft fistula, where the suture line is included. Most common site fistula is third and fourth part of duodenum and least common site is fistula formation in large bowel. Conclusions: An uncommon complication is double secondary AEF following aortic reconstruction surgery. Since one of the most significant presentations an AEF patient can present with is major GI bleeding and sepsis, A delay in seeking immediate medical treatment could result in the patient's death. It should be emphasized that one of the mechanisms for AEF formation and a frequent cause of sepsis in patients is recurrent aortic graft infection following aortic reconstruction surgery.

Aortobifemoral reconstruction in open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE: Much attention has been given to the influence of anatomic and technical factors, such as maximum abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter and proximal clamp position, in open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OSR). However, no studies have rigorously examined the correlation between site of distal anastomosis and OSR outcomes despite conventional wisdom that more proximal sites of anastomosis are preferrable when technically feasible. This study aimed to test the association between sites of distal anastomosis and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing primary elective OSR. METHODS: Our study included 5683 patients undergoing primary elective OSR at 233 centers from 2014 to 2020. Using a variety of statistical methods to account for potential confounders, including multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling, as well as subgroup analysis, we examined the association between site of distal anastomosis and clinical outcomes in elective OSR. Primary outcomes were major in-hospital complication rate, 30-day mortality, and long-term survival. RESULTS: Patients undergoing elective aortobifemoral reconstruction (n = 672) exhibited significantly increased rates of smoking, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and peripheral artery disease in comparison to patients undergoing elective OSR with distal anastomosis to the aorta (n = 2298), common iliac artery (n = 2163), or external iliac artery (n = 550). Patients undergoing aorto-aortic tube grafting were significantly less likely to exhibit iliac aneurysmal disease and significantly more likely to be undergoing elective OSR with a suprarenal or supraceliac proximal clamp position. Using multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards analysis to control for important confounders, such as age, smoking status, and medical history, we found that distal anastomosis to the common femoral artery was associated with increased odds of major in-hospital complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.46-2.18; P < .001) and reduced long-term survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.89; P = .010). We observed no significant differences in 30-day mortality across sites of distal anastomosis in our study population. CONCLUSIONS: It is generally accepted that more proximal sites of distal anastomosis should be selected in OSR when technically feasible. Our findings support this hypothesis by demonstrating that distal anastomosis to the common femoral artery is associated with increased perioperative morbidity and reduced long-term survival. Careful diligence regarding optimization of preoperative health status, perioperative care, and long-term follow-up should be applied to mitigate major complications in this patient population.

The implications of surgeon case volume and hospital volume on outcomes of aortobifemoral bypasses in obese patients.

BACKGROUND: Aortobifemoral (ABF) bypass is the gold standard for treating symptomatic aortoiliac occlusive disease. In the era of heightened interest in the length of stay (LOS) for surgical patients, this study aims to investigate the association of obesity with postoperative outcomes at the patient, hospital, and at surgeon levels. METHODS: This study used the Society of Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative suprainguinal bypass database from 2003 to 2021. The selected study cohort was divided into obese patients (body mass index ≥30) (group I) and nonobese patients (body mass index <30) (group II). Primary outcomes of the study included mortality, operative time, and postoperative LOS. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to study the outcomes of ABF bypass in group I. Operative time and postoperative LOS were transformed into binary values by median split for regression analysis. A P value of .05 or less was deemed statistically significant in all the analyses of this study. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 5392 patients. In this population, 1093 were obese (group I) and 4299 were nonobese (group II). Group I was found to have more females with higher rates of comorbid conditions, including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. Patients in group I had increased odds of prolonged operative time (≥250 minutes) and an increased LOS (≥6 days). Patients in this group also had a higher chance of intraoperative blood loss, prolonged intubation, and required vasopressors postoperatively. There was also an increased odds of postoperative decline in renal function in the obese population. Patients with prior history of coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and urgent or emergent procedures were found to be risk factors for a LOS of more than 6 days in obese patients. An increase in the surgeons' case volume was associated with lesser odds of an operative time of 250 minutes or more; however, no significant impact was found on postoperative LOS. Hospitals where 25% or more of ABF bypasses were performed on obese patients were also more likely to have LOS of less than 6 days after ABF operations, compared with hospitals where less than 25% of ABF bypasses were performed on obese patients. Patients undergoing ABF for chronic limb-threatening ischemia or acute limb ischemia had a longer LOS and increased operative times. CONCLUSIONS: ABF bypass in obese patients is associated with prolonged operative times and a longer LOS than in nonobese patients. Obese patients operated by surgeons with more cases of ABF bypasses have shorter operative times. A hospital's increasing proportion of obese patients was related to a decreased LOS. These findings support the known volume-outcome relationship that, with a higher surgeon case volume and increased proportion of obese patients in a hospital, there is an improvement in outcomes of obese patients undergoing ABF bypass.

Comparison of Aortobifemoral Bypass and Endovascular Treatment for Chronic Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Occlusion From the CHAOS (CHronic Abdominal Aortic Occlusion, ASian Multicenter) Registry.

PURPOSE: To directly compare the clinical outcomes of aortobifemoral bypass surgery (ABF) and endovascular treatment (EVT) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) of the infrarenal abdominal aorta (IAA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, multicenter study, we used an international database of 436 patients who underwent revascularization for CTO of the IAA between 2007 and 2017 at 30 Asian cardiovascular centers. After excluding 52 patients who underwent axillobifemoral bypass surgery, 384 patients (139 ABFs and 245 EVTs) were included in the analysis. Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to compare clinical results in the periprocedural period and the long-term. RESULTS: Propensity score matching extracted 88 pairs. Procedure time (ABF; 288 [240-345] minutes vs EVT; 159 [100-205] minutes, p<0.001) and length of hospital stay (17 [12-23] days vs 5 [4-13] days, p<0.001) were significantly shorter in the EVT group than in the ABF group, while the proportions of procedural success (98.9% versus 96.6%, p=0.620), complications (9.1% versus 12.3%, p=0.550), and mortality (2.3% versus 3.8%, p=1.000) were not different between the groups. At 1 months, ABI significantly increased more in the ABF group for both in a limb with the lower (0.56 versus 0.50, p=0.018) and the higher (0.49 versus 0.34, p=0.001) baseline ABI, while the change of the Rutherford category was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.590). At 5 years, compared with the EVT group, the ABF group had significantly better primary patency (89.4±4.3% versus 74.8±4.3%, p=0.035) and survival rates (86.9±4.5% versus 66.2±7.5%, p=0.007). However, there was no significant difference between the groups for secondary patency (100.0%±0.0% versus 93.5%±3.9%, p=0.160) and freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) (89.3±4.3% vs 77.3±7.3%, p=0.096). CONCLUSION: Even with recent advancements in EVT, primary patency was still significantly better for ABF in CTO of the IAA. However, there was no difference between the groups in terms of secondary patency and freedom from TLR at 5 years. Furthermore, there was no difference in procedural success, complications, mortality, and improvement in the Rutherford classification during the periprocedural period, with significantly shorter procedure time and hospital stay in the EVT group.

Endovascular Aorto-Iliac Reconstruction vs. Aortobifemoral Bypass as First Choice for a Durable Revascularization for Aorto-Iliac Occlusive Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) is defined as atherosclerotic obstruction of the distal abdominal aorta and iliac arteries. Multiple options exist for management of AIOD including endovascular aortoiliac reconstruction and aortobifemoral bypass. As new technologies are developed, the best approach to manage this condition is evolving. METHODS: We performed a literature review to assess the current state of endovascular aortoiliac reconstruction and aortobifemoral bypass as options for revascularization of aortoiliac occlusive disease. CONCLUSION: Endovascular aortoiliac reconstruction and aortobifemoral bypass are both feasible and clinically effective options for management of aortoiliac occlusive disease. No randomized controlled trial has been performed to show one option to be more effective than the other. Recent literature demonstrates comparable long-term patency, limb salvage and survival among endovascular approaches to the treatment of AIOD with quicker recovery, lower costs and improved quality of life when compared to open aortobifemoral bypass (ABF) surgery. Selection of procedure should be tailored to the individual patient in order to develop an effective long-term successful strategy for management of aortoiliac occlusive disease. Further study is warranted to define durability of these endovascular approaches as well as patient specific characteristics that influence outcomes.

Quality of Life (QoL) Assessment in the Patients Operated with Either Laparoscopic or an Open Aortobifemoral Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease (AIOD): 2 Years Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: QoL assessment within surgical treatment is seldom investigated and sparsely reported in the medical literature. This study aimed to compare QoL in a randomized fashion in the patients treated with either a laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABFB) or an open aortobifemoral bypass (OABFB) for the treatment of AIOD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-one consecutive patients with AIOD, Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II Type D lesions (TASC II, Type D) were randomized to LABFB or OABFB. Thirty-five patients in the LABFB and thirty-six in the OABFB groups were compared for the changes in the QoL, with the short-form health survey (SF-36), EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D), and EQ-5D visual analog scale (VAS) preoperatively, and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. Mann-Whitney U-Test and Wilcoxon sign-rank test were used for group comparison. Mixed model analysis was performed to examine the effect of different variables on the QoL. RESULTS: In the patients treated with LABFB, physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) in SF-36 were significantly higher than OABFB, at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. PCS was also significantly higher in the LABFB group than OABFB at 24 months postoperatively. The preoperative QoL scores for both the laparoscopy and the open group were significantly lower than the age-matched general Norwegian population. EQ-5D median scores were significantly higher in the LABFB at all postoperative follow-up time points up to 12 months. The patients in the LABFB group also had a statistically significant increase in EQ-5D VAS compared to OABFB, at 1 and 12 months postoperatively (p = 0.005, and p = 0.037, respectively). CONCLUSION: QoL seems better in patients treated with LABFB than OABFB, particularly during the early months after surgery.

Open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in patients with horseshoe kidney / Nyitott hasi aortaaneurysma-mutétek patkóvese fennállása esetén.

Összefoglaló. A patkóvese a vese leggyakrabban eloforduló fejlodési rendellenességeinek egyike. Hasi aortaaneurysmával való együttes elofordulása kifejezetten ritka (a hasi aortaaneurysmás esetek 0,12%-a). Az elso esetben egy 64 éves férfi akut alsó végtagi panaszokkal került felvételre. A CT-angiográfia patkóvesét és thrombotizált infrarenalis aortaaneurysmát igazolt. Az akut mutét során a hasi aortaaneurysma resectióját és aortobifemoralis bypassmutétet végeztünk a patkóvese ishmusának megtartásával. A második esetben hasi panaszokat okozó, mindkét arteria iliaca communisra ráterjedo infrarenalis aortaaneurysma esetén végeztünk aortobiiliacalis rekonstrukciót. Az aneurysma elott elhelyezkedo isthmus tervezetten szétválasztásra került, a poláris veseartériát visszaültettük. A tünetes hasi aortaaneurysma abszolút mutéti indikációt képez. A preoperatív CT- vagy MR-angiográfia kulcsfontosságú mind a mutéti indikáció felállítása, mind pedig a mutét megtervezése szempontjából. A beavatkozás elott pontos képet kell kapnia az érsebésznek az aorta anatómiája mellett a patkóvese vérellátásáról és a húgyúti rendszerrol. Az érsebészeti rekonstrukció esetén a transperitonealis feltárás - foleg akut mutét esetén - több elonnyel rendelkezik, mint a retroperitonealis feltárás. Orv Hetil. 2020; 161(46): 1966-1971. Summary. Horseshoe kidney is one of the most common congenital disorders of the kidney. The simultaneous incidence of horseshoe kidney and abdominal aneurysm is very low (0.12% of all cases of abdominal aortic aneurysm). In the first case, a 64-year-old male patient was admitted with acute lower limb ischaemia. CT-angiography revealed an occluded aortic aneurysm. During the emergency operation, the abdominal aneurysm was resected and an aortobifemoral bypass procedure was performed sparing the kidney's isthmus. In the second case, the abdominal complaints were caused by an infrarenal abdominal aneurysm that involved both common iliac arteries. Aortobiiliac reconstruction was performed with planned separation of the kidney isthmus and reimplantation of the accessory renal artery. Symptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm is an urgent indication for reconstruction. The preoperative CT- or MR-angiography play a key role in the indication and planning of the reconstruction. It is highly important for the vascular surgeon to have a clear picture of the blood supply of the horseshoe kidney and the urinary tract along with the anatomy of the aorta before the operation. The transperitoneal approach has several advantages over the retroperitoneal approach during vascular reconstruction surgery. Orv Hetil. 2020; 161(46): 1966-1971.

Aortobifemoral Bypass Grafting with Reversed L-Shaped Technique for Endograft Infection.

Endograft infection after abdominal endovascular aortic repair is a rare but catastrophic complication associated with high perioperative mortality and postoperative recurrent infection. The optimal surgical treatment is still controversial, particularly regarding in situ or extra-anatomical revascularization. Herein, we describe a successful surgically treated case of a patient with an endograft infection complicated with abscess formation in the retroperitoneal space around the right common iliac artery. We performed an aortobifemoral bypass grafting using the reversed L-shaped technique by rerouting the right leg of the new prosthesis to avoid the infected area. The patient is doing well 1 year after surgery without recurrent infection. This technique was considered to be advantageous because revascularization could be performed remotely from the infected area.

A case report: An aortobifemoral bypass implant found during cadaver dissection promotes inquiry-based learning.

INTRODUCTION: An unusual vascular implant found during routine cadaver dissection influenced instructors and students to learn more about the underlying disease and the surgical technique used to treat this disorder triggering an inquiry-based learning. PRESENTATION OF CASE: This report describes a case of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) with an aortobifemoral arterial bypass implant that was never found before in any of the previously dissected cadavers at Gannon University. DISCUSSION: PAD develops due to impaired blood flow to the lower extremities that causes numbness, weakness, and lower leg pain. The treatments can aim to improve the long-term cardiovascular outcomes. If therapeutic medications do not improve outcomes of PAD, revascularization by endovascular repair or aortofemoral bypass grafting is considered. CONCLUSION: We would like to note that accidental discoveries of pathologies or surgical procedures during routine cadaveric dissections present a unique possibility for inquiry-based learning among future healthcare providers.

Ipsilateral foot drop after aortobifemoral bypass.

Peripheral nerves can be injured by a direct result of the anesthetic technique of regional anesthesia or it can be contributed/compounded by poor perioperative positioning and padding, tourniquets, and the nature of surgery and diseases affecting the microvasculature of nerves. We present a case of perioperative peripheral nerve injuries which could not be explained by anesthesia technique nor surgery per se.

Mortality in open abdominal aortic surgery in patients with morbid obesity.

BACKGROUND: Open abdominal aortic surgery is among procedures with high morbidity and mortality. Adverse postoperative complications may be more common in morbidly obese patients. OBJECTIVES: This study compared the outcomes of open abdominal aortic surgeries in patients with and without morbid obesity. SETTING: A retrospective analysis of 2007-2014 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-Nationwide Inpatient Sample. METHODS: We included patients who underwent open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair or open aorta-iliac-femoral (AIF) bypass. Demographic factors, morbid obesity, co-morbidities, and emergent versus elective surgery were considered for univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 29,340 patients (13,443 AAA repair and 15,897 AIF bypass) were included (age 66.3 ± 10.8 years, 65.7% male). The mortality was 9.1% in 536 patients with morbid obesity compared with 7.1% in patients without morbid obesity. Based on multivariate analysis, age, existing co-morbidities, emergent versus elective setting, and morbid obesity were found to be independent predictors of mortality. Patients with morbid obesity had an odds ratio of 3.61 (95% CI, 1.50-8.68; P = .004) for mortality, longer mean length of stay (11.2 versus 9.3 days, P < .001), and higher total hospital charges ($99,500 versus $73,700, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Morbid obesity is an independent risk factor of mortality in patients undergoing open AAA repair and AIF bypass. Weight loss strategies should be considered for morbidly obese patients with an anticipation of open abdominal aortic procedures.

Hybrid surgery for bilateral lower extremity inflow revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Aortobifemoral (ABF) bypass is the preferred method of bilateral inflow revascularization, with axillobifemoral (AXBF) bypass reserved for high-risk patients. Hybrid (HYB) surgery in the form of femorofemoral bypass and retrograde endovascular aortoiliac intervention is increasingly being used to achieve the same goal. This study compared the perioperative outcomes of HYB surgery with traditional surgery for bilateral inflow revascularization. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program files for the years 2012 to 2015 were reviewed, and all patients undergoing ABF bypass, AXBF bypass, and HYB surgery (femoral-femoral bypass and retrograde endovascular intervention) were included. Patients' demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes were compared between the three groups. A propensity-matched analysis was subsequently performed to compare HYB surgery with ABF bypass only. The χ2 test and analysis of variance with post hoc analysis were conducted to evaluate between-group differences in risk factors and outcomes. SPSS statistical software (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY) was used. RESULTS: There were 1426 patients (ABF bypass, 976; AXBF bypass, 257; HYB surgery, 193). There were significant differences in the three populations of patients, with ABF bypass patients significantly more likely to have age <70 years (ABF bypass, 84.2%; AXBF bypass, 49.8%; HYB surgery, 58%; P < .001) and more likely to be independent (ABF bypass, 98%; AXBF bypass, 89.1%; HYB surgery, 93.2%; P < .001). Patients undergoing AXBF bypass were significantly more likely to be treated for critical limb ischemia (ABF bypass, 46.5%; AXBF bypass, 72.4%; HYB surgery, 51.8%; P < .001) under emergent conditions (ABF bypass, 0.9%; AXBF bypass, 5.1%; HYB surgery, 3.6%; P < .001). There was no difference in mortality between the three groups (P = .178). After propensity matching, a total of 571 patients with ABF bypass were compared with HYB surgery patients. HYB surgery patients had significantly less pneumonia (ABF bypass, 8.7%; HYB surgery, 1.6%; P < .001), unplanned intubation (ABF bypass, 7.7%; HYB surgery, 3.1%; P = .032), cardiac arrest (ABF bypass, 3.7%; HYB surgery, 0.5%; P = .025), transfusion (ABF bypass, 44.4%; HYB surgery, 18.1%; P < .001), and composite morbidity (ABF bypass, 55%; HYB surgery, 32.6%; P < .001). Patients undergoing ABF bypass had significantly higher mortality (ABF bypass, 4.2%; HYB surgery, 1%; P = .043) and 30-day reoperation (ABF bypass, 17.5%; HYB surgery, 9.3%; P = .009) and longer total hospital length of stay (ABF bypass, 9.79 ± 10.69 days; HYB surgery, 5.79 ± 9.72 days; P < .001). There was no difference in major amputation (P = .607) and readmission (P = .495) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: ABF bypass is the most common surgery for bilateral lower extremity revascularization in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database and continues to have good outcomes. In selected patients, HYB surgery was associated with improved perioperative, 30-day outcomes compared with ABF bypass.

Association between statin use and perioperative mortality after aortobifemoral bypass in patients with aortoiliac occlusive disease.

OBJECTIVE: The benefit of statins in reducing perioperative cardiovascular events in patients undergoing suprainguinal bypass is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between statin use and perioperative mortality in patients undergoing aortobifemoral bypass (ABFB) for aortoiliac occlusive disease. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all patients who had ABFB in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set from 2011 to 2016. Univariable (t-test, χ2 test, or Fisher exact test) and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to compare patients' characteristics and the primary outcome (30-day mortality) between statin users and nonstatin users. Propensity score matching between statin users and nonusers was also performed on the basis of variables that were different between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 4445 patients underwent ABFB. Of those, 3032 (68.2%) were taking statins. Compared with nonstatin users, statins users were older (median [interquartile range], 67 years [59-74 years] vs 63 years [56-72 years]; P < .01) and more likely to be diabetic (31% vs 16%) and hypertensive (84% vs 63%) and to have a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (20% vs 17%; all P < .05). Statin users had lower rates of 30-day mortality (3.4% vs 4.7%; P = .03) and renal complications (2.5% vs 3.7%; P = .04) compared with nonstatin users. After adjustment for patients' demographics (age, sex, race), comorbidities (diabetes, hypertension, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, dialysis, bleeding disorder), smoking, clinical presentation (claudication vs critical limb ischemia), and elective surgery status, statin use was associated with 32% reduction in 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.96; P = .03). Propensity score matching showed similar results (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.95; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to date demonstrating an association between preoperative statin use and lower 30-day mortality after ABFB for aortoiliac occlusive disease. This study highlights an area of potential quality improvement as one-third of the patients undergoing this procedure are not receiving statins.

Acute aortic thrombosis in long-term after endovascular aneurysm repair: A case report.

Acute aortic thrombosis which develops in the longterm following an endovascular aneurysm repair is rare. A 78-year-old male patient presented with rest pain and sudden-onset coldness at lower limbs for four hours. His medical history revealed an endovascular aneurysm repair for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm two years ago. He was diagnosed with acute ischemia at lower limbs due to acute thrombosis of the infrarenal aorta. We first performed an axillobifemoral bypass surgery for limb salvage. Due to recurrent thromboses of the left limb of the graft during longterm follow-up, we applied aortobifemoral bypass procedure to provide adequate lower limb flow.

Thirty-year trends in aortofemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular intervention has supplanted open bypass as the most frequently used approach in patients with aortoiliac segment atherosclerosis. We sought to determine whether this trend together with changing demographic and clinical characteristics of patients undergoing aortobifemoral bypass (ABFB) for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AOD) have an association with postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Using a prospectively maintained institutional database, we identified patients who underwent ABFB for AOD from 1985 to 2015. Patients were divided into two cohorts: the historical cohort (HC) included patients who underwent ABFB for AOD from 1985 to 1999 and the contemporary cohort (CC) who underwent ABFB for AOD from 2000 to 2015. Medical and demographic data, procedural information, postoperative complications, and follow-up data were extracted. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate associations with the end point of primary patency. A similar analysis was performed for major adverse limb events (MALEs; the composite of above-ankle amputation, major reintervention, graft revision, or new bypass graft of the index limb) in the subset of patients with critical limb ischemia. RESULTS: There were a total of 359 cases: 226 in the HC and 133 in the CC. The CC had more women (56.4% vs 43.8%; P = .02), smokers (87.2% vs 67.7%; P = .001), and patients who failed prior aortoiliac endovascular intervention (17.3% vs 4.8%; P = .0001), but fewer patients with coronary artery disease (32.3% vs 47.3%; P = .005). Thirty-day mortality was less than 1% in both cohorts, but 10-year survival was higher in the CC (67.7% vs 52.6%; P = .02). Five-year primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency were higher in the HC (93.3% vs 82.2%; P = .005; 93.8% vs 85.7%; P = .02; 97.5% vs 90.4%; P = .02, respectively). CC membership, decreasing age, prior aortic surgery, and decreasing graft diameter were significant independent predictors of loss of primary patency after adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 7.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.80-17.63; P < .0001; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.96; P < .0001; HR, 18.80; 95% CI, 5.94-59.58; P < .0001; and HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55-0.95; P = .02, respectively). Similarly, CC membership, prior aortic surgery, and decreasing graft diameter were significant independent predictors of MALE in the critical limb ischemia cohort after adjustment (HR, 21.13; 95% CI, 4.20-106.40; P = .0002; HR, 40.40; 95% CI, 3.23-505.61; P = .004; and HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30-0.86; P = .01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the pre-endovascular era, demographic and clinical characteristics of patients undergoing ABFB for AOD in the CC have changed. Although long-term patency is slightly lower among patients in the CC during which a substantial subset of AOD patients are being treated primarily via the endovascular approach, durability remains excellent and limb salvage unchanged. After adjustment, the time period of index ABFB independently predicted primary patency and MALE, as did graft diameter and prior aortic surgery. These changing characteristics should be considered when counseling patients and benchmarking for reintervention rates and other outcomes.

Risk factors for perioperative mortality after revascularization for acute aortic occlusion.

OBJECTIVE: Acute aortic occlusion (AAO) is a life-threatening event necessitating prompt revascularization to the pelvis and lower extremities. Because of its uncommon nature, outcomes after revascularization for AAO are not well characterized. Our aim was to describe the perioperative morbidity and mortality associated with revascularization and to identify the patients at highest risk. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of patients who presented to our institution from 2006 to 2017 with acute distal aortic occlusion. Patients with a prior aortofemoral bypass were excluded, but those with aortoiliac stents were included. Baseline demographics and comorbidities, preoperative clinical presentation and imaging, procedural details, and postoperative hospital course were reviewed. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality, and major complications were evaluated as secondary outcomes. Logistic regression models were constructed to identify factors associated with 30-day mortality. RESULTS: We identified 65 patients who underwent revascularization for AAO. Median age was 63 years (range, 35-89 years), and 64.6% were male; 56.4% of patients presented within 24 hours of symptom onset, and 43.8% were treated within 6 hours of presentation. There were particularly high rates of prior coronary artery disease (62.3%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (41.0%); 18.5% had prior iliac stents. Preoperative imaging in 44 patients showed occlusion of the inferior mesenteric artery in 36.0% and both internal iliac arteries in 34.7%. Treatments for revascularization included axillobifemoral bypass (55.4%), aortoiliac thromboembolectomy (15.4%), aortobifemoral bypass (13.9%), and aortoiliac stenting (15.4%). Overall 30-day mortality was 27.7% and was not affected by treatment modality. Mortality was highest in patients older than 60 years (40.5% vs 10.7%; P = .01) and those presenting with lactate elevation (45.5% vs 5.9%; P = .004) or motor deficit in at least one extremity (36.6% vs 9.5%; P = .03). Univariate predictors of 30-day mortality were age ≥60 years (odds ratio [OR], 5.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-22.26; P = .01), presentation with motor deficit (OR, 5.48; 95% CI, 1.12-26.86; P = .04), presentation with elevated lactate level (OR, 13.33; 95% CI, 1.58-11.57; P = .02), history of prior stroke (OR, 4.80; 95% CI, 1.21-18.97; P = .03), and bilateral internal iliac artery occlusion (OR, 7.11; 95% CI, 1.54-32.91; P = .01). At least one postoperative complication was observed in 78.5% of patients, including acute kidney injury (56.9%, with 21.5% requiring hemodialysis), respiratory complications (46.2%), cardiovascular complications (33.9%), major amputation (15.4%, bilateral in 7.7%), and bowel ischemia (10.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Even with prompt revascularization and despite the chosen treatment modality, AAO carries high risk of mortality and numerous life-threatening complications. Older patients presenting with elevated lactate levels, motor deficit, and bilateral internal iliac artery occlusions are at the highest risk of perioperative mortality. These factors may aid in risk stratification and managing expectations in this critically ill population.

Cost-utility analysis comparing laparoscopic vs open aortobifemoral bypass surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass has become an established treatment option for symptomatic aortoiliac obstructive disease at dedicated centers. Minimally invasive surgical techniques like laparoscopic surgery have often been shown to reduce expenses and increase patients' health-related quality of life. The main objective of our study was to measure quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs after totally laparoscopic and open aortobifemoral bypass. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a within trial analysis in a larger ongoing randomized controlled prospective multicenter trial, Norwegian Laparoscopic Aortic Surgery Trial. Fifty consecutive patients suffering from symptomatic aortoiliac occlusive disease suitable for aortobifemoral bypass surgery were randomized to either totally laparoscopic (n=25) or open surgical procedure (n=25). One patient dropped out of the study before surgery. We measured health-related quality of life using the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire at 4 different time points, before surgery and for 6 months during follow-up. We calculated the QALYs gained by using the area under the curve for both groups. Costs were calculated based on prices for surgical equipment, vascular prosthesis and hospital stay. RESULTS: We found a significantly higher increase in QALYs after laparoscopic vs open aortobifemoral bypass surgery, with a difference of 0.07 QALYs, (p=0.001) in favor of laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass. The total cost of surgery, equipment and hospital stay after laparoscopic surgery (9,953 €) was less than open surgery (17,260 €), (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass seems to be cost-effective compared with open surgery, due to an increase in QALYs and lower procedure-related costs.