Uso de conductos iliofemorales como medida para reducir la morbimortalidad neurológica y vascular en EVAR complejo / Use of iliofemoral conduits to reduce neurological and vascular morbimortality associated with complex EVAR

Introducción y objetivo: la enfermedad oclusiva de las arterias ilíacas puede ser causa de complicaciones en EVAR. Su frecuencia no es muy alta, pero su mortalidad sí y hay evidencia escasa en cuanto a su repercusión en EVAR complejo. el uso de conductos iliofemorales es una herramienta que existe para combatir este problema. el objetivo de este trabajo es analizar el impacto del uso de conductos iliofemorales en la morbimortalidad neurológica y vascular en FeVaR y BeVaR. Materiales y métodos: recolección retrospectiva de pacientes con aneurismas yuxtarrenales, abdominotorácicos o endoleak ia tratados mediante FEVAR o BEVAR de forma electiva entre 2014 y 2020 en una sola institución (la Clínica La Sagrada Familia, Buenos aires, argentina). Se dividieron en dos grupos: uno, con conductos (grupo a), y otros, sin (grupo B). el grupo a se subdividió entre aquellos con conductos temporales y aquellos con permanentes. Resultados: analizamos 45 pacientes. 23 recibieron conductos (grupo a) y 22, no (grupo B). La edad media fue de 73 años y el diámetro promedio del saco fue de 69,89 mm. La estancia hospitalaria media fue de 4,7 días. el grupo a presentó más pacientes con enfermedad vascular periférica (56,5 % frente a 22,7 %, p = 0,045) y diámetros menores de arterias ilíacas externas. Hubo 8 complicaciones en el perioperatorio (17,8 %; grupo a, n = 1, 4,3 %, frente al grupo B, n = 7, 31,8 %; p = 0,043). Fallecieron 2 pacientes, lo que dejó una mortalidad perioperatoria del 4,4 % (grupo a, 0 %, frente al grupo B, 9,1 %; p = 0,45). Las complicaciones incluyeron isquemia medular, ruptura de la arteria ilíaca e isquemia de miembros inferiores. dentro del grupo a, 12 pacientes (52,2 %) recibieron conductos permanentes y otros 11 (47,8 %), temporales. Conclusiones: los conductos iliofemorales en FEVAR y BEVAR son seguros cuando forman parte de la planificación preoperatoria. Las complicaciones neurológicas y vasculares no son infrecuentes y conllevan una alta mortalidad...(AU)

Introduction and objective: occlusive arterial disease involving the iliac arteries can be cause of complicationsin eVaR. its frequency is not high, but its mortality is and there is scant evidence regarding its repercussion incomplex eVaR. the use of iliofemoral conduits is a tool to overcome this problem. our objective is to analyzethe impact of the use of iliofemoral conduits in the neurological and vascular morbimortality associated withFeVaR and BeVaR. Materials and methods: retrospective recollection of patients who underwent elective FeVaR or BeVaR for jux-tarrenal, thoracoabdominal aneurysms or type ia endoleak between 2014 and 2020 in one institution (Clínica LaSagrada Familia, Buenos aires, argentina). Patients were divided in two groups, one with conduits (group a) andone without (group B). Group a was subdivided between those who received temporary conduits and those withpermanent conduits. Results: we analyzed 45 patients. 23 received conduits (group a) whereas 22 did not (group B). mean age was 73years and mean sac diameter was 69.89 mm. mean hospital stay was 4.7 days. Group a presented more patientswith peripheral vascular disease (56.5 % vs. 22.7 %, p = 0.045) and smaller iliac arteries. there were 8 complicationsin the perioperative period (17.8 %; group a, n = 1, 4.3 %; group B, n = 7, 31.8 %. p = 0.043). 2 patients died, leavinga perioperative mortality of 4.4 % (group a 0 % vs. group B 9.1 %, p = 0.45). Complications included spinal cordischemia, iliac artery rupture and lower limb ischemia. in group a, 12 (52.2 %) patients received permanent conduitsand 11 (47.8 %) temporary conduits. Conclusions: the use of iliofemoral conduits in FeVaR and BeVaR is safe when they are part of the preoperativeplanning. neurological and vascular complications are not infrequent and carry a high mortality. the use of conduitsis effective to reduce its incidence and associated mortality.(AU)

Patients' health and quality of life after complex endovascular aortic repair: A prospective cohort study.

RATIONALE: Complex endovascular aortic repair often involves multiple major procedures over time with a high risk of complications and little time for recovery. This exposes patients to great stress, both physically and mentally, with potentially long-lasting effects. There is limited knowledge about these effects and who is most at risk - information on this could help vascular nurses and other healthcare professionals anticipate and meet care needs. AIM: To investigate the health and quality of life effects of complex endovascular aortic repair, in relation to patients' demographic and health characteristics. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective complex endovascular aortic repair were consecutively recruited from one university hospital during one year (n=25). Self-report questionnaires on health disability (WHODAS 2.0), quality of life (WHOQoL-BREF) and symptoms of anxiety and depression (HADS) were filled out preoperatively and repeated one and six months postoperatively. Prospective changes in health and quality of life, and associations with patient demographics and preoperative health characteristics, were assessed. Ethical approval was obtained prior to study performance. RESULTS: Overall, patients had significantly greater health disability at one month (WHODAS 2.0 score median 31.5, range 1.1-63.0) than preoperatively (median 13.6, range 0.0-41.3) (n=22, p=.017); the majority had recovered at six months (median 11.4, range 3.3-58.7) (n=18, p=.042). No significant effects were seen in quality of life and symptoms of anxiety and depression (p>.05). However, the participants showed heterogeneity, with certain individuals not recovered at six months (n=8). Factors associated with worse six-month outcomes were being female, age < 70 years, postoperative complications, and history of anxiety or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Complex endovascular aortic repair have limited long-term negative effects on patients' health and quality of life. However, some patients are not recovered at six months postoperatively, which could be explained by individual characteristics. To improve recovery outcomes, vascular nurses and other health care professionals should be aware of the possible recovery trajectories and factors associated with impaired recovery, and use them to anticipate and meet the patients' individual care needs.

Comparative early results of in situ fenestrated endovascular aortic repair and other emergent complex endovascular aortic repair techniques for ruptured suprarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms at a regional aortic center.

INTRODUCTION: Emergent endovascular repair of suprarenal (SRAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) poses a significant challenge due to the need for branch vessel incorporation, time constraints, and lack of dedicated devices. Techniques to incorporate branch vessels have included parallel grafting, physician-modified endografts, double-barrel/reversed iliac branch device, and in situ fenestration (ISF). This study describes a single-center experience and the associated outcomes when using these techniques for ruptured SRAAAs and TAAAs. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent endovascular repair of ruptured SRAAAs and TAAAs from July 2014 to March 2021 with branch vessel incorporation was performed. Clinical presentation, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes of those who underwent ISF were compared with those who underwent repair using non-ISF techniques. The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were major adverse events including myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, renal dysfunction, new onset dialysis, bowel ischemia, stroke, and spinal cord ischemia. RESULTS: Forty-two patients underwent endovascular repair for ruptured SRAAAs and TAAAs, 18 of whom underwent ISF repair. Seventy-two percent of ISF patients were hypotensive before surgery, compared with 46% of the patients who underwent repair using non-ISF techniques (physician-modified endografts, parallel grafting, or double-barrel/reversed iliac branch device). The total procedural and fluoroscopy times were similar between the two groups despite a greater mean number of branch vessels incorporated with the ISF technique (3.1 vs 2.2 per patient, P = .015). In-hospital mortality was 19% for all ruptures and 25% for ruptures with hypotension. Compared with the non-ISF group, in-hospital mortality trended lower in the ISF group (11% vs 25%, P = .233), reaching statistical significance when comparing patients who presented with hypotension (8% vs 45%, P = .048). The rate of major adverse events was 57% across all techniques and did not significantly differ between the ISF and non-ISF groups, with postoperative renal dysfunction being the most frequent complication (48%). Overall, ISF became the most commonly used technique later in the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Although emergent endovascular repair of ruptured SRAAAs/TAAAs remains a challenge, a number of techniques are available for expeditious treatment. In this series, ISF was associated improve survival, including a fivefold reduction in mortality in patients presenting with hypotension, and has now become the dominant technique at our center. Despite these advantages, postoperative complications and reinterventions are common. Further experience and longer-term follow-up are needed to validate these initial results and assess durability.

Type III endoleaks in complex endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair within the Vascular Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Type III endoleaks (T3ELs) following complex endovascular aneurysm repair (c-EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm have been historically difficult to study due to their relative rarity. Previous studies within standard infrarenal EVAR have found an association between T3ELs and decreased survival. This study aims to evaluate the occurrence of T3ELs in a national multicenter cohort, identify potential procedural characteristics associated with T3EL development, and determine their impact on clinical outcomes in c-EVAR. METHODS: A retrospective cohort review was conducted of elective c-EVAR for nonruptured aneurysms within the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) between January 2010 and March 2020. The VQI standards define c-EVAR as suprarenal or pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms repaired with any thoracoabdominal repairs, fenestrated/branched repairs, parallel stent repairs, custom manufactured devices, and physician-modified endografts. End points assessed were rates of T3ELs within c-EVAR, and impact of T3ELs on reintervention and survival. Index endoleaks were defined as endoleaks discovered during index hospitalization. Incident endoleaks were defined as new endoleaks, which were not present at index hospitalization, discovered at follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 4070 c-EVAR cases were identified between January 2010 and March 2020, of which 2656 (65.2%) had appropriate follow-up data. One-half of the cohort had a modified or custom graft (n = 2055/4070; 50.5%). Branches were employed in 3687 patients (90.5%), whereas fenestrations and chimney techniques were documented in 13% (n = 533) and 15.1% (n = 613), respectively. The rate of index T3ELs was 4.1% (n = 167), and the rate of incident T3ELs at follow-up was 0.04% (n = 1). Devices categorized as either custom or physician-modified were utilized more frequently in patients with index T3ELs (78.4%; n = 131/167) compared with patients without index T3ELs (49.2%; n = 1924/3903) (P < .001). Compared with those without T3ELs, the presence of index T3ELs was not statistically associated with increased aortic reinterventions or increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: T3ELs in c-EVAR remain relatively uncommon and are identified predominately at index hospitalization. Development of T3EL was associated with higher device modularity and modification, which suggests that as device technologies continue to advance and become more intricate, the occurrence of T3ELs may persist and continue to require evaluation. In this study, the presence of T3ELs did not appear to have a statistically significant relationship with aortic reinterventions or survival; however, these findings are not definitive due to low event rate numbers and high potential for type II errors. Amid the theoretical risk of device fatigue and degeneration, continued evaluations of large cohorts at extended follow-up intervals and diligent reporting remain paramount.

Respiratory-induced changes in renovisceral branch vessel morphology after fenestrated thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair with the BeGraft balloon-expandable covered stent.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the respiratory-induced changes in branch vessel geometry after thoracoabdominal fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (fEVAR) with the Bentley BeGraft graft (Innomed GmbH, Hechingen, Germany) as the covered bridging stent. METHODS: Patients treated with fEVAR for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms with a custom-made Zenith fenestrated endograft (Cook Medical Europe Ltd, Limerick, Ireland) and Bentley BeGraft peripheral stents were prospectively recruited. Using SimVascular software (Open-Source Medical Software Corp, San Diego, CA), the pre- and postoperative aortic and branch contours were segmented from computed tomography angiograms performed during inspiratory and expiratory breath-holds. The centerlines were extracted from the lumen contours, from which the branch take-off angles, distal stent angles, and peak branch curvature changes were computed. Paired, two-tailed t tests were performed to compare the pre- and postoperative deformations. RESULTS: Renovisceral vessel geometry was evaluated in 12 patients undergoing fEVAR with a total of 46 target vessels (10 celiac arteries, 12 superior mesenteric arteries [SMAs], 24 renal arteries). Implantation of BeGraft bridging stents was associated with a significant reduction in respiration-induced changes in vessel branch angulation (Δ5.3° ± 3.9° vs Δ12.0° ± 8.3° [postoperative vs preoperative]; P = .001) and mean curvature (0.72 ± 0.22 cm-1 vs 0.53 ± 0.18 cm-1) in the renal arteries, without significant changes in the celiac arteries or SMAs. No significant difference was found in end-stent angle motion in the renal arteries (P = .77), celiac arteries (P = .34), or SMAs (P = .55). The maximum local vessel curvature change decreased after fEVAR in the SMAs (Δ0.28 cm-1 vs Δ0.47 cm-1; P = .04) but was unchanged in the celiac (P = .61) and renal (P = .51) arteries. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of the BeGraft as a bridging stent in fEVAR was associated with decreased respiratory-induced deformation in the renal branch take-off angulation and mean renal artery curvature, with reduced maximum curvature bending in the SMA compared with the preoperative anatomy. However, the BeGraft allowed for celiac and renal artery bending similar to that in the native preoperative state. These findings suggest that the use of BeGraft peripheral stents with fEVAR will closely mimic the native arterial branch geometry and vessel conformability caused by relatively aggressive respiratory motion.

Duplex Ultrasound Can Successfully Identify Endoleaks and Renovisceral Stent Patency in Patients Undergoing Complex Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

Efficacy of duplex ultrasound (DU) surveillance of complex EVAR such as FEVAR and ChEVAR has not been studied. All patients undergoing FEVAR or ChEVAR at a single multihospital institution were retrospectively reviewed. Postoperative surveillance included DU at 1 month and CTA at 3 months. 82 patients met inclusion criteria including 39 (47.6%) ChEVAR and 43 (52.4%) FEVAR cases. DU identified endoleak with aneurysm sac enlargement in 3 cases requiring reintervention. CTA at 3 months detected 2 new endoleaks without growth and 1 renal artery stent occlusion. Replacement of initial postoperative imaging with DU did not result in any missed endoleaks, deaths, ruptures, or branch occlusions.

Association of upper extremity and neck access with stroke in endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Upper extremity and neck access is commonly used for complex endovascular aortic repairs. We sought to compare perioperative stroke and other complications of (1) arm/neck (AN) and femoral or iliac access versus femoral/iliac (FI) access alone, (2) right- versus left-sided AN, and (3) specific arm versus neck access sites. METHODS: Patients entered in the thoracic endovascular aortic repair/complex endovascular aortic repair registry in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2009 to 2018 were analyzed. Patients with a missing access variable and aortic arch proximal landing zone were excluded. The primary outcome was perioperative in-hospital stroke. Secondary outcomes were other postoperative complications and 1-year survival. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test were used for survival analysis. RESULTS: Of 11,621 patients with 11,774 recorded operations, 6691 operations in 6602 patients met criteria for analysis (1418 AN, 5273 FI). AN patients had a higher rate of smoking history (83.6% vs 76.1%; P < .0001), and prior stroke (12.6% vs 10.1%; P = .01). Operative time (280 ± 124 minutes vs 157 ± 102 minutes; P < .0001), contrast load (141 ± 82 mL vs 103 ± 67 mL; P < .0001), and estimated blood loss (300 mL vs 100 mL; P < .0001) were larger in the AN group, indicative of greater complexity cases. Overall, AN had a higher rate of stroke (3.1% vs 1.8%; P = .003) compared with FI and on multivariable analysis AN access was found to be an independent risk factor for stroke (odds ratio, 1.97; P = .0003). There was no difference in stroke when comparing right- and left-sided AN access (2.8% vs 3.2%; P = .71). Stroke rates were similar between arm, axillary, and multiple access sites, but were significantly higher in patients with carotid access (2.6% vs 3.5% vs 13% vs 3.7%; P = .04). AN also had higher rates of puncture site hematoma, access site occlusion, arm ischemia, and in-hospital mortality (7.1% vs 4.2%; P < .0001). At 1 year, AN had a lower survival rate (85.1% vs 88.1%; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Upper extremity and neck access for complex aortic repairs has a higher risk of stroke compared with femoral and iliac access alone. Right-sided access does not have a higher stroke rate than left-sided access. Carotid access has a higher stroke rate than axillary, arm, and multiple arm/neck access sites.

Cerebrovascular Complications After Upper Extremity Access for Complex Aortic Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review the risk of developing cerebrovascular complications from upper extremity access during endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysms. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. An electronic search of the public domains Medline (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), Web of Science and Cochrane Library was performed to identify studies related to the treatment of aortic aneurysms involving upper extremity access. Meta-analysis was used to compare the rate of cerebrovascular event after left, right and bilateral upper extremity access. Results are presented as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Thirteen studies including 1276 patients with complex endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysms using upper extremity access were included in the systematic review. Left upper extremity access (UEA) was used in 1028 procedures, right access in 148 and bilateral access in 100 procedures. The rate of cerebrovascular complications for patients treated through left UEA was 1.7%, through right UEA 4% and through bilateral UEA 5%. In the meta-analysis, we included seven studies involving 645 patients treated with a left upper extremity access, 87 patients through a right and 100 patients through a bilateral upper extremity access. Patients, who underwent right-sided (RR 5.01, 95% CI 1.51-16.58, P = 0.008) or bilateral UEA (RR 4.57, 95% CI 1.23-17.04, P = 0.02), had a significantly increased risk of cerebrovascular events compared to those who had a left-sided approach. CONCLUSION: Left upper extremity access is associated with a significantly lower rate of cerebrovascular complications as compared to right or bilateral upper extremity access.

Image Fusion Guidance for In Situ Laser Fenestration of Aortic Stent graft for Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysm: Feasibility, Efficacy and Overall Functional Success.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate feasibility, efficacy and overall functional success of image fusion guidance during laser-assisted in situ fenestration of aortic stent graft (LISFAS) for endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysm (complex-EVAR) in a prospective study. METHODS: Between September 2016 and July 2018, 20 patients were included and treated with LISFAS for complex-EVAR. Aortic aneurysms were either para-renal (n = 15) or thoraco-abdominal (n = 5) with 57 mm [first quartile: 54; third quartile: 68] median aneurysm diameter in 69 years [68;78] patients. All interventions were performed using the same angiographic system and 3D image fusion software for overlying pre-intervention CTA on per-intervention 2D fluoroscopy with cone-beam CT images to display target vessels ostia. RESULTS: LISFAS for complex-EVAR with image fusion was performed in all patients, and no endovascular intervention required conversion to an open aortic repair. LISFAS of all target vessels was feasible in 18 patients (90%); 48 fenestrations out of 50 were performed successfully. Two fenestrations failed for renal arteries in two patients. Median ischemic times were as follows: 34 min [25;43] for superior mesenteric artery; 69 min [56;83] for left renal artery; 73 min [36;102] for right renal artery; and 93 min [89;96] for the celiac trunk. Median intervention and fluoroscopy times, iodinated contrast volume and X-ray exposure were 180 min [150;180], 74 min [64;87], 80 mL [59;113] and 338 Gy.cm2 [259;495], respectively. Efficacy was found in 17 patients (85%) on one-week follow-up CTA: Two patients had type 1 and 3 endoleaks, respectively, that were successfully embolized. Overall functional success was 90%. Median hospitalization stay was 9 days [8, 17]. The 30-day safety analysis was 90% (n = 2 deaths) owing to an undetermined cause and to bowel ischemia after low flow in intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: LISFAS using image fusion was feasible, efficient and overall functionally successful for complex-EVAR in this preliminary study.