Endovascular repair with a physician-modified fenestrated endograft to treat abdominal aortic pseudoaneurysm with Behcet's disease: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Aortic involvement in patients with Behcet's disease (BD) is rare, but it is one of the most severe manifestations. Open surgical repair of aortic aneurysm is challenging considering the high risk of postoperative recurrent anastomotic pseudoaneurysms and is associated with a much higher mortality rate. Recently, endovascular treatment has proven to be a feasible, less invasive alternative to surgery for these patients. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a total endovascular repair of a paravisceral abdominal aortic pseudoaneurysm in a 25-year-old male patient with BD. The pseudoaneurysm was successfully excluded, and the blood supply of visceral arteries was preserved with a physician-modified three-fenestration endograft under 3D image fusion guidance. Immunosuppressive therapy was continued for 1 year postoperatively. At 18 months, the patient was asymptomatic without abdominal pain. Computed tomography angiography demonstrated the absence of pseudoaneurysm recurrence, good patency of visceral vessels. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair using physician-modified fenestrated endografts is a relatively safe and effective approach for treating paravisceral aortic pseudoaneurysm in BD patients. This technique enables the preservation of the visceral arteries and prevents aneurysm recurrence at the proximal and distal landing zones, which are common complications of open surgical repair in these patients. Furthermore, we emphasize the importance of adequate immunosuppressive therapy before and after surgical repair in BD patients, which is a major risk factor for recurrence and poor prognosis.

Superior mesenteric artery-related outcomes in fenestrated/branched endografting for complex aortic aneurysms.

Aim: Early/follow-up durability of superior mesenteric artery (SMA) stent-grafts is crucial after fenestrated/branched endografting (FB-EVAR) in complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). The study aimed to report early/midterm outcomes of SMA incorporated during FB-EVAR procedures. Methods: FB-EVAR procedures performed between 2016 and 2021 in a single institution were reviewed. Anatomical SMA characteristics were analyzed. The SMA configuration was classified into three types according to the angle between the SMA main trunk and the aorta: (A) perpendicular, (B) downward, and (C) upward. SMA-related technical success (SMA-TS: cannulation and stenting, patency at completion angiography without endoleak, stenosis/kinking, dissection, bleeding, and 24-h mortality) and SMA-adverse events (SMA-AEs: one among bowel ischemia, stenosis, occlusion, endoleak, reinterventions, or SMA-related mortality) were assessed. Results: Two hundred FB-EVAR procedures with SMA as the target artery were performed. The indication for FB-EVAR was CAAAs and TAAAs in 99 (49%) and 101 (51%) cases, respectively. The SMA configuration was A, B, and C in 132 (66%), 63 (31%), and 5 (3%) cases, respectively. SMA was incorporated with fenestrations and branches in 131 (66%) and 69 (34%) cases, respectively. Directional branch (P < .001), aortic diameter ≥35 mm at the SMA level (P < .001), and ≥2 SMA bridging stent-grafts (P = .001) were more frequent in TAAAs. Relining of the SMA stent-graft with a bare metal stent was necessary in 41 (21%) cases to correct an acute angle between the stent-graft and native artery (39), stent-graft stenosis (1), or SMA dissection (1). Relining was associated with type A or C SMA configuration (OR: 17; 95% CI: 1.8-157.3; P = .01). SMA-TS was achieved in all cases. Overall, 15 (7.5%) patients had SMA-AEs [early: 9 (60%), follow-up: 6 (40%)] due to stenosis (2), endoleak (8), and bowel ischemia (5). Aortic diameter ≥35 mm at the SMA level was an independent risk factor for SMA-AEs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.4-13.8; P = .01). Fourteen (7%) patients died during hospitalization with 10 (5%) events within the 30-postoperative day. Emergency cases (OR: 33; 95% CI: 5.7-191.3; P = .001), peripheral arterial occlusive disease (OR: 14; 95% CI: 2.3-88.8; P = .004), and bowel ischemia (OR: 41; 95% CI: 1.9-87.9; P = .01) were risk factors for 30-day/in-hospital mortality. The mean follow-up was 32 ± 24 months; estimated 3-year survival was 81%, with no case of late SMA-related mortality or occlusion. The estimated 3-year freedom from overall and SMA-related reinterventions was 74% and 95%, respectively. Conclusion: SMA orientation determines the necessity of stent-graft relining. Aortic diameter ≥35 mm at the SMA level is a predictor of SMA-AEs. Nevertheless, SMA-related outcomes of FB-EVAR are satisfactory, with excellent technical success and promising clinical outcomes during the follow-up.

Branched and Fenestrated Aortic Endovascular Grafts.

Endovascular repair of abdominal and descending thoracic aortic aneurysms has become the standard of care due to improvements in morbidity and mortality compared to open surgical repair. Late durability, however, remains an issue because persistent endoleaks can lead to continued aneurysm expansion and eventual rupture, sometimes years following the original repair. Branched, fenestrated, and physician-modified endografts in the thoracic arch and thoracoabdominal aorta have extended the seal zone in order to mitigate the risks of proximal and distal endoleaks. This review summarizes the current state of branched, fenestrated, and physician-modified endografts used in complex aortic pathologies.

BCG Aortitis, a Rare Complication of BCG Therapy.

Introduction: Intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) is an effective treatment for in situ bladder carcinomas; however, extravesical BCG infection may occur in remote organs in patients with underlying primary immunodeficiency and is a potentially serious complication in 3-5% of cases. It includes granulomatous pneumonia, hepatitis as well as specific dermatological, ophthalmic, and haematopoietic manifestations. Diagnosis is difficult and often based on high clinical suspicion as in many cases Mycobacterium bovis is not isolated. This report presents a rare case of BCGaortitis treated in a tertiary care centre. Report: A 74 year old man, with a history of bladder cancer treated with BCG therapy over a year ago, presented with malaise, abdominal pain, anorexia, and significant weight loss for several months associated with acute on chronic renal failure and a tender aneurysm. He was diagnosed with hepatic BCGitis and pararenal BCGaortitis. He was considered too high risk for open surgery after a multidisciplinary team meeting and was treated with a four vessel physician modified endograft (PMEG) and antituberculous therapy. At seven month follow up, he was clinically well and control computed tomography showed a patent endograft with complete exclusion of the aortic aneurysm. Discussion: Infectious BCG complications after intravesical BCG administration for in situ bladder carcinomas can lead to severe early and late complications. In the present case, the patient presented with both liver and aortic BCG infection. The lack of positive microbiological data should not discourage clinicians from considering BCG infection even if several months have passed since the last BCG instillation.

Surgeon-modified fenestrated endograft for urgent an aortic arch aneurysm: case report.

We report the case of an endovascular repair of an aortic arch aneurysm by a surgeon-modified fenestrated endograft with a single fenestration in a high-risk patient unfit for open surgery. A patient of 84 years, chronic ischemic cardiopathic, suffering from prostate adenocarcinoma in chemotherapy treatment, came to our hospital for post-traumatic fracture of the right femur. During the hospitalization, the patient exhibited dysphonia and respiratory disorders for several days, therefore, the patient performed Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) that found the presence of voluminous aneurysm of the aortic arch with a maximum diameter of about 74 mm. The patient was treated with a hybrid-staged procedure; in the first instance, with a carotid-carotid-succlavium bypass to preserve the cerebral and upper limb vascularization and then, the procedure was completed by implanting the surgeon-modified fenestrated endograft with stent delivery to the patient with a fenestration on the anonymous trunk. This surgeon-modified fenestrated endograft was created by modifying a standard endograft by a single fenestration following the three-dimensional reconstructions of the CTA images. The procedure was successfully completed and postoperative course was uneventful. Computed Tomography Angiography demonstrated the exclusion of the aneurysm, patency of the implanted endograft modules, and absence of signs of endoleaks and / or cerebral or medullary ischemic complications.

Preliminary results from an Italian National Registry on the outcomes of the Najuta fenestrated aortic arch endograft.

BACKGROUND: Arch pathology represents one of the last frontiers in aortic aneurysm endovascular management. Several companies recently developed dedicated branched and fenestrated endografts specifically designed for the aortic arch, aiming to overcome some of the issues associated with standard thoracic endograft and supra-aortic vessels extra-anatomic debranching. This study aimed to evaluate early outcomes obtained with a custom-made fenestrated endograft approved for thoracic aortic aneurysms exclusion. METHODS: All consecutive patients treated with the Najuta endograft (Kawasumi Laboratories, Inc, Tokyo, Japan) in Italy were enrolled prospectively and included in the study population. Anatomic characteristics and perioperative data were analyzed retrospectively. Study end points were technical success, 30-day clinical success, overall survival, supra-aortic vessel patency, endoleak, and need for reintervention or surgical conversion. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2022, 76 patients received a Najuta endograft in Italy and were enrolled in the study. The median patient age was 72 years (interquartile range, 69-76 years) and 80.3% were male. Most of the patients received treatment for atherosclerotic aneurysms (80.3%); others were treated for postdissection aneurysms (7.9%), penetrating aortic ulcer (9.2%), or type I endoleak correction after previous thoracic endovascular repair (2.6%). Overall, 161 supra-aortic vessels were preserved through a dedicated fenestration. Technical success was achieved in 74 of 76 procedure (97.4%); both failures were associated with endoleak detection at final angiography (one type I and one type III endoleak). Two distal migrations occurred during the implanting procedure. Clinical success at 30 days was 94.7%. Two early reinterventions were needed within 30 days after index procedure: in one case, an aortic false lumen coils embolization was performed, because distal re-entry caused enlargement of the postdissection thoracic aneurysm. The other procedure consisted of a femoral pseudoaneurysm repair. The median follow-up was 7 months (interquartile range, 3-15 months); no supra-aortic vessel occlusions occurred and no patients needed surgical conversion. CONCLUSIONS: Early results suggest that, in selected patients with aortic arch pathology needing a proximal landing, an endovascular approach with the Najuta system is safe and effective, especially for those at high surgical risk. A strict follow-up with high-quality computed tomography angiography images and eventual evaluation for long-term complications is needed to confirm these initial experience findings.

Outcomes of iliofemoral conduits during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the technical pitfalls and outcomes of iliofemoral conduits during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 466 consecutive patients enrolled in a previous prospective nonrandomized study to investigate FB-EVAR for CAAAs/TAAAs (2013-2021). Iliofemoral conduits were performed through open surgical technique (temporary or permanent) in patients with patent internal iliac arteries or endovascular technique among those with occluded internal iliac arteries. End points were assessed in patients who had any iliac conduit or no conduits, and in patients who had conduits performed prior or during the index FB-EVAR, including procedural metrics, technical success, and major adverse events (MAE). RESULTS: There were 138 CAAAs, 141 extent IV, and 187 extent I-III TAAAs treated by FB-EVAR with an average of 3.89 ± 0.52 vessels incorporated per patient. Any iliac conduit was required in 35 patients (7.5%), including 24 patients (10.4%) treated between 2013 and 2017 and 11 (4.7%) who had procedures between 2018 and 2021 (P = .019). Nineteen patients had permanent conduits using iliofemoral bypass, 11 had temporary iliac conduits, and 5 had endoconduits. Iliofemoral conduits were necessary in 12% of patients with extent I to III TAAA, in 6% with extent IV TAAA, and in 3% with CAAA (P = .009). The use of iliofemoral conduit was more frequent among women (74% vs 27%; P < .001) and in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (49% vs 28%; P = .013), peripheral artery disease (31% vs 15%; P = .009), and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of III or higher (74% vs 51%; P = .009). There were no inadvertent iliac artery disruptions in the entire study. The 30-day mortality and MAE were 1% and 19%, respectively, for all patients. An iliofemoral conduit using retroperitoneal exposure during the index FB-EVAR was associated with longer operative time (322 ± 97 minutes vs 323 ± 110 minutes vs 215 ± 90 minutes; P < .001), higher estimated blood loss (425 ± 620 mL vs 580 ± 1050 mL vs 250 ± 400 mL; P < .001), and rate of red blood transfusion (92% vs 78% vs 32%; P < .001) and lower technical success (83% vs 87% vs 98%; P < .001), but no difference in intraoperative access complications and MAEs, compared with iliofemoral conduits without retroperitoneal exposure during the index FB-EVAR and control patients who had FB-EVAR without iliofemoral conduits, respectively. There were no differences in mortality or in other specific MAE among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR with selective use of iliofemoral conduits was safe with low mortality and no occurrence of inadvertent iliac artery disruption or conversion. A staged approach is associated with shorter operating time, less blood loss, and lower transfusion requirements in the index procedure.

Results of the North American Complex Abdominal Aortic Debranching (NACAAD) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid debranching repair of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms was initially designed as a better alternative to standard open repair, addressing the limitations of endovascular repair involving the visceral aorta. We reviewed the collective outcomes of hybrid debranching repairs using extra-anatomic, open surgical debranching of the renal-mesenteric arteries, followed by endovascular aortic stenting. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent hybrid repair in 14 North American institutions during 10 years were retrospectively reviewed. Society of Vascular Surgery scores were used to assess comorbidity risk. Early and late outcomes, including mortality, morbidity, reintervention, and patency were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 208 patients (118 male; mean age, 71±8 years old) were treated by hybrid repair with extraanatomic reconstruction of 657 renal and mesenteric arteries (mean 3.2 vessels/patient). Mean aneurysm diameter was 6.6±1.3 cm. Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms were identified in 163 (78%) patients and pararenal aneurysms in 45 (22%). A single-stage repair was performed in 92 (44%) patients. The iliac arteries were the most common source of inflow (n=132; 63%), and most (n=150; 72%) had 3 or more bypasses. There were 30 (14%) early deaths, ranging widely across sites (0%-21%). A Society of Vascular Surgery comorbidity score >15 was the primary predictor of early mortality (P<0.01), whereas mortality was 3% in a score ≤9. Early complications occurred in 140 (73%) patients and included respiratory complications in 45 patients (22%) and spinal cord ischemia in 22 (11%), of whom 10 (45%) fully recovered. At 5 years, survival was 61±5%, primary graft patency was 90±2%, and secondary patency was 93±2%. The most significant predictor of late mortality was renal insufficiency (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality after hybrid repair and visceral debranching is highly variable by center, but strongly affected by preoperative comorbidities and the centers' experience with the technique. With excellent graft patency at 5 years, the outcomes of hybrid repair done at centers of excellence and in carefully selected patients may be comparable (or better) than traditional open or even totally endovascular approaches. However, in patients already considered as high-risk for surgery, it may not offer better outcomes.

Outcomes of low- and standard-profile fenestrated and branched stent grafts for treatment of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the outcomes of fenestrated-branched (FB) endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) using low-profile (LP) and standard-profile (SP) stent grafts for the treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of 466 consecutive patients (70% male; mean age, 74 ± 8 years) enrolled in a prospective nonrandomized study to investigate FB-EVAR for the treatment of CAAAs and TAAAs (2013-2021). The endpoints compared between the patients treated with LP (18F-20F) and SP (20F-22F) devices included procedural metrics, access-related complications, major adverse events (MAE), patient survival, freedom from secondary intervention, thromboembolic events, stent graft integrity issues, aneurysm sac enlargement, and the rate of sac shrinkage. RESULTS: Of the 466 aneurysms treated by FB-EVAR, 138 were CAAAs and 141 were extent IV and 187 extent I to III TAAAs, with a mean number of 3.9 ± 0.5 vessels stented per patient. LP devices had been used in 239 patients (51%) and SP devices in 227 patients (49%). LP devices had been used more frequently for chronic dissections (12% vs 7%; P = .041) and with preloaded systems (77% vs 65%; P = .005) and bilateral percutaneous femoral access (83% vs 74%; P = .020) and less frequently with upper extremity access (67% vs 88%; P < .001) and iliac conduits (2% vs 6%; P = .020). The patients treated using LP devices had experienced similar technical success (96% vs 97%; P = .527), with a shorter total operating time (225 ± 81 minutes vs 243 ± 78 minutes; P = .018), lower radiation exposure (median, 0.93 Gy; interquartile range [IQR], 0.94; vs median, 1.01 Gy; IQR, 0.91 Gy; P < .001), and less use of contrast (median, 135 mL; IQR, 68 mL; vs median, 144 mL; IQR, 80 mL; P = .008). No differences were found in the rates of iliofemoral access complications between the LP and SP device groups (1.3% vs 3.5%; P = .107). At 30 days, 5 patients had died (1%) and MAEs had occurred in 89 patients (19%), with no differences between the two groups. The mean follow-up was 28 months (95% confidence interval, 25-30 months). At 4 years, the patients treated with LP devices had had similar freedom from all-cause mortality (69% ± 6% vs 68% ± 4%; P = .199), freedom from aortic-related mortality (97% ± 1% vs 98% ± 1%; P = .488), freedom from any secondary intervention (65% ± 6% vs 70% ± 4%; P = .433), freedom from thromboembolic events (98% ± 1% vs 99% ± 1%; P = .364) and aneurysm sac enlargement (93% ± 3% vs 91% ± 3%; P = .293). However, the LP group had had less freedom from any integrity-related issues (92% ± 5% vs 100%; P < .001). The cumulative risk of sac shrinkage was greater for patients treated with LP devices (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.040; 95% confidence interval, 1.516-2.744; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR was performed with low rates of mortality and MAEs, irrespective of the device profile. However, the procedures performed with LP devices had had less need for iliac conduits and had had better procedural metrics. The use of LP devices resulted in higher rates of sac shrinkage. However, the results on stent graft integrity require future investigation.

Listeria monocytogenes endograft infection after fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair-a case report.

An extremely uncommon cause of endograft infections, Listeria monocytogenes graft infections are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Best managed with complete graft resection and long-term antibiotic therapy, we present a rare case of L. monocytogenes aortic graft infection managed successfully with direct sac drainage and lifelong suppressive antibiotic therapy.

Secondary interventions after fenestrated/branched aneurysm repairs are common and nondetrimental to long-term survival.

OBJECTIVE: Secondary interventions are common after endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms. However, the frequency and procedural details of secondary interventions after fenestrated or branched endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) have been less well described, and the effects on long-term survival and aneurysm-related mortality are unknown. METHODS: Consecutive patients enrolled as a part of a multicenter research consortium in nine independent physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2005 to 2020 were evaluated. All secondary interventions performed after the initial procedure were classified as open or percutaneous and as major or minor in accordance with the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. Secondary interventions were further classified as high or low magnitude according to the physiologic effects of the intervention. The demographics, procedural details, and perioperative outcomes were compared between those who had and those who had not undergone secondary interventions. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) analysis were used to evaluate long-term survival. RESULTS: Of 1681 patients who had undergone F/BEVAR, 385 (23%) had required a secondary intervention at any point during follow-up. Freedom from reintervention was 82% at 1 year and 59% at 5 years of follow-up. The mean follow-up period was 23 months. Most secondary interventions were percutaneous (84%), minor (70%), and of low magnitude (81%). Renal stenting (30%) and access-related procedures (24%) were the most frequent percutaneous and open procedures, respectively. High magnitude operations were required for 19% of the patients. Technical success was achieved for 94% of the secondary interventions, and mortality from the secondary interventions was <1%. Secondary interventions as a whole were associated with improved long-term survival (HR, 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-0.7). In the subgroup analysis, major (HR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.8), minor (HR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.8), low magnitude (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7), and percutaneous (HR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7) secondary interventions were associated with improved survival. However, high magnitude (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.7-1.5) and open (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.7-1.5) secondary interventions were not. Similarly, when aneurysm-related survival was specifically assessed, low magnitude secondary interventions were found to improve survival (HR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.7), and high magnitude secondary interventions (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.4-5.8) and open secondary interventions (HR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.5) were associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary interventions after F/BEVAR were frequent and were typically percutaneous, minor, and low magnitude procedures. Although uncommon, high magnitude and open secondary interventions were associated with decreased long-term survival and increased aneurysm-related mortality. These data highlight the importance of close, lifelong surveillance and suggest that a significant rate of secondary intervention should be anticipated but that these will not negatively affect survival.

Mechanical Behaviour of Fenestrations in Current Aortic Endografts.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the mechanical characteristics of current commercially available fenestrated endografts (FE). The performance of the fenestrations according to the design were compared as the relationship between a bridging covered stent graft (CSG) and the fenestration. METHODS: A total of 21 Zenith (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) and 17 Anaconda (Terumo Company, Inchinnan, UK) fenestrations were studied. Radial extension tests were performed, inserting two half cylinders spaced up to 2 mm in a 7 mm diameter fenestration from each device. Branch pull out force was measured to test the stability of the assembly with a calibrated 8 mm branch and two CSGs: Advanta V12 (Atrium Medical; Hudson, NH, USA) and BeGraft Peripheral Stent Graft (Bentley InnoMed GmbH, Hechingen, Germany). A branch was inserted in both the 7 mm diameter fenestrations and in a control 7 mm fenestration. Fatigue tests were performed on the devices to assess long term outcomes of the endograft. RESULTS: Over a 2 mm vertical displacement, the resulting loading curves look similar for both devices. The force value level was 33.4 ± 6.9 N for the Cook fenestration and 54.45 ± 18 N for the Anaconda fenestration (p = .001). With respect to an 8 mm calibrated branch, the required extraction strength from the fenestration was statistically significantly greater with the Anaconda device (9.5 ± 4.7 N vs. 4.49 ± 0.28 N; p = .001). The required strength to extract the V12 CSG from a control cylindered shape was statistically significantly higher than for the BeGraft CSG (6.75 ± 2.86 N vs. 1.83 ± 0.67 N; p = .003). The surface area of the fenestration of the Cook device was increased with cycling (7 200 cycles) compared with the Anaconda device (15.5% vs. 6.5% hole surface area increase). CONCLUSION: The mechanical performance of the fenestration can be fine tuned by considering its design. A CSG optimising the performance of the fenestration and the CGS-fenestration interface could reduce the risk of leakage in clinical practice.

Repair of a late endoleak following complete proximal endograft fixation strut separation.

Introduced as an alternative endograft for those with unfavorable anatomy, bare metal suprarenal fixation barbs have been widely used for endovascular abdominal aortic repair. Type I endoleaks result in continued perfusion of the aneurysm sac and warrant prompt reintervention. We describe an unusual presentation and endovascular management of a late type IA endoleak secondary to complete separation of the suprarenal fixation struts in a Cook endograft after an uncomplicated, emergent infrarenal endovascular abdominal aortic repair 5 years earlier.

Experience With Unfavorable Iliac Access When Performing Fenestrated/Branched Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

PURPOSE: To review a single-center experience with fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (f/bEVAR) in patients with challenging iliac anatomies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of the department's database identified 398 consecutive patients who underwent complex endovascular repair f/bEVAR between January 2010 and June 2018; of these, 67 had challenging accesses. The strategies implemented to overcome access issues were reviewed, using a dedicated scoring system to evaluate the access (integrating diameter, tortuosity, calcification, and previous open or endovascular repair). RESULTS: In this subgroup of patients, the most common graft design was a 4-vessel fenestrated endograft (27, 40.3%). Hostile access was due to small diameter (<7 mm) in 25 patients (37.3%) and/or concentric calcifications in 19 patients (26.9%). Mean iliac diameter was 5.5±2.6 mm on the right side and 6.0±2.5 mm on the left side. Previous open or endovascular aortoiliac repair had been performed in 15 patients (22.4%), and 20 patients (29.9%) had a stent previously implanted in at least 1 iliac artery, resulting in the inability to perform standard fenestrated repair with access from both sides. Five patients (7.5%) had a single patent iliac access. Eight distinctive strategies were identified to overcome these access issues, including the use of preloaded renal catheters in the endograft delivery system, angioplasty, graft modification (branches instead of fenestrations or 4 preloaded fenestrations), a conduit via a retroperitoneal approach, iliac artery recanalization, and/or the multiple puncture technique. Technical success was achieved in 62 cases (92.5%). Four patients had access complications and 1 died in the early postoperative period of multiorgan failure. Median follow-up was 24.6 months (IQR 7.2, 41.3). Clinical success at the end of follow-up was achieved in 57 patients (85.1%). During follow-up, 14 patients died, including 4 from an aorta-related cause. CONCLUSION: Dedicated strategies can be implemented to overcome hostile iliac access in patients with complex aneurysms when f/bEVAR is required. Typically, these maneuvers are associated with favorable outcomes.

Management of Type IA Endoleak After EVAR by Explantation or Custom Made Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Proximal type 1 endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysmal repair (EVAR) remains challenging to solve with no existing consensus. This work aims to compare two different surgical strategies to remedy type IA endoleak: endograft explantation (EXP) and aortic reconstruction or relining by custom made fenestrated EVAR (F-EVAR). METHODS: A retrospective single centre analysis between 2009 and 2018 was conducted including patients treated for type IA endoleak after EVAR with either EXP or F-EVAR. The choice of surgical technique was based on morphological factors (F-EVAR eligibility), sac growth rate, emergency presentation and/or patient symptoms. Technical success, morbidity, secondary interventions, 30 day mortality, and long term survival according to Kaplan-Meier were determined for each group and compared. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (91% male, mean age 79 years) underwent either EXP (n = 26) or F-EVAR (n = 33) during the study period. The two groups were equivalent in terms of comorbidity and age at the time of procedure. The median time from initial EVAR was 60.4 months (34-85 months), with no difference between groups. The maximum aneurysm diameter was greater in the EXP group compared with the F-EVAR group, 86 mm (65-100) and 70 mm (60-80), respectively (p = .008). Thirty day secondary intervention (EXP: 11.5% vs. F-EVAR: 9.1%) and mortality (EXP: 3.8% vs. F-EVAR: 3.3%) rates did not differ between groups, while major adverse events at 30 days, defined by the current SVS guidelines, were lower in the F-EVAR group (2.4% vs. 13.6%; p = .016). One year survival rates were similar between the groups (EXP: 84.0% vs. F-EVAR: 86.6%). CONCLUSION: Open explantation and endovascular management with a fenestrated device for type IA endoleak after EVAR can be achieved in high volume centres with satisfactory results. F-EVAR is associated with decreased early morbidity. Open explantation is a relevant option because of acceptable outcomes and the limited applicability of F-EVAR.

Single-Barrel, Double-Barrel, and Fenestrated Endografts to Facilitate Transcatheter Pulmonary Valve Replacement in Large RVOT.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that narrowing the landing zone using commercially available endografts would enable transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement (TPVR) using commercially available transcatheter heart valves. BACKGROUND: TPVR is challenging in an outsized native or patch-repaired right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT). Downsizing the RVOT for TPVR is currently possible only using investigational devices. In patients ineligible because of excessive RVOT size, TPVR landing zones were created using commercially available endografts. METHODS: Consecutive patients with native or patch-repaired RVOTs and high or prohibitive surgical risk were reviewed, and this report describes the authors' experience with endograft-facilitated TPVR (EF-TPVR) offered to patients ineligible for investigational or commercial devices. All EF-TPVR patients were surgery ineligible, with symptomatic, severe pulmonary insufficiency, enlarged RVOTs, and severe right ventricular (RV) enlargement (>150 ml/m2). TPVR and surgical pulmonary valve replacement (SPVR) were compared in patients with less severe RV enlargement. RESULTS: Fourteen patients had large RVOTs unsuitable for conventional TPVR; 6 patients (1 surgery ineligible) received investigational devices, and 8 otherwise ineligible patients underwent compassionate EF-TPVR (n = 5 with tetralogy of Fallot). Three strategies were applied on the basis of progressively larger RVOT size: single-barrel, in situ fenestrated, and double-barrel endografts as required to anchor 1 (single-barrel and fenestrated) or 2 (double-barrel) transcatheter heart valves. All were technically successful, without procedure-related, 30-day, or in-hospital deaths. Two late complications (stent obstruction and embolization) were treated percutaneously. One patient died of ventricular tachycardia 36 days after EF-TPVR. Compared with 48 SPVRs, RV enlargement was greater, but 30-day and 1-year mortality and readmission were no different. The mean transvalvular pressure gradient was lower after EF-TPVR (3.8 ± 0.8 mm Hg vs. 10.7 ± 4.1 mm Hg; p < 0.001; 30 days). More than mild pulmonary insufficiency was equivalent in both (EF-TPVR 0.0% [n = 0 of 8] vs. SPVR 4.3% [n = 1 of 43]; p = 1.00; 30 days). CONCLUSIONS: EF-TPVR may be an alternative for patients with pulmonic insufficiency and enlarged RVOTs ineligible for other therapies.

Fenestrated and Branched Thoraco-abdominal Endografting after Previous Open Abdominal Aortic Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Proximal para-anastomotic aneurysms, or aneurysmal degeneration of the native aorta above a previous open abdominal aortic repair (Pr-AAAs), are challenging scenarios. The aim of this study was to report the early and mid term outcomes of endovascular repair of Pr-AAAs by fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FB-EVAR). METHODS: From 2006 to 2017, pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative data from patients undergoing FB-EVAR for Pr-AAAs at two European vascular surgery units were prospectively collected and retrospectively analysed. Early results were considered in terms of technical success (target visceral vessel cannulation and stenting, absence of type I - III endoleak, iliac limb occlusion and 24 h mortality); spinal cord ischaemia (SCI) and 30 day and in hospital mortality. Survival, target visceral vessel (TVV) patency, and freedom from re-interventions were also considered at the mid term follow up. RESULTS: Five hundred and forty-four patients underwent FB-EVAR to treat juxta/pararenal or thoraco-abdominal aneurysms. Of these patients, 108 (19.8%) cases were Pr-AAAs (94% male; mean ± standard deviation [SD] age 71 ± 4 years; American Society of Anesthesiologists' grade 3-4 in 74% and 26%, respectively). The previous open aortic repair (OR) was performed 10 ± 2 years before FB-EVAR. It was a tubular aorto-aortic repair in 63 (58.3%) cases, a bifurcated aortobi-iliac repair in 37 (34.2%) cases, and an aortobifemoral bypass repair in eight (7.4%) cases. A previous thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) had been performed in seven patients (6.5%). The aortic lesion at the time of FB-EVAR was, according to the Crawford classification, a type I - III in 69 (63.9%) or a type IV 39 (36.1%) thoraco-abdominal aneurysm. The mean ± SD aneurysm diameter was 64 ± 6 mm. Overall, 390 TVVs (3.6 ± 1 TVV/case) were revascularised by an endograft with fenestrations (n = 63 [58.3%]), with branches (n = 26 [24.1%]), or with both fenestrations and branches (n = 19 [17.6%]). Tubular, trimodular, or aorto-uni-iliac implants were planned in 68 (63.0%), 38 (35.2%), and two (1.8%) patients, respectively. Proximal TEVAR, carotid-subclavian bypass, and iliac branch devices were planned as adjunctive procedures in 41 (38.0%), five (4.6%), and three (2.8%) cases, respectively. Overall technical success was 93%, with technical failures including five TVV losses (coeliac trunk, n = 1; renal arteries, n = 4) and three deaths within 24 h. Post-operative SCI occurred in seven patients (6.5%), four of which (3.7%) were permanent. SCI was more frequent in category I - III TAAAs (p = .042) and in endografts incorporating both fenestrations and branches (p = .023). Cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications (reduction in glomerular filtration rate of ≥30% compared with baseline) occurred in 9%, 10%, and 20%, respectively. Bowel ischaemia was seen in three (2.8%) patients. Thirty day mortality was 4% and was associated with pre-operative chronic renal failure (p = .034), post-operative cardiac morbidity (p = .041), and bowel ischaemia (p = .003). Overall in hospital mortality was 5.5% (n = 6). Mean ± SD follow up was 38 ± 18 months. Survival was 82%, 64%, and 54% at one, three, and five years, respectively, and target visceral vessel patency was 93%, 91%, and 91%, respectively. Permanent haemodialysis was needed in four patients (3.7%). There was no late aneurysm related mortality. Survival during follow up was statistically significantly affected by pre-operative chronic renal failure (p = .022), post-operative cardiac morbidity (p = .042), SCI (p = .044), and bowel ischaemia (p = .003). Freedom from re-intervention at one, three, and five years was 89%, 77%, and 74%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Endovascular treatment of aneurysmal aortic degeneration above a previous open abdominal repair with FB-EVAR is safe and effective. If those promising results are confirmed at later follow up, FB-EVAR should be considered a prominent therapeutic option, especially in high risk patients.

Balloon guidance for superior mesenteric artery scallop alignment during Cook Zenith Fenestrated AAA Endovascular Graft deployment.

To achieve seal, aortic endografts may require coverage of the aorta adjacent to or involving critical branch vessels. One technique for maintaining branch vessel patency at the leading edge of an endograft is use of a scallop. However, it may be difficult to ensure proper scallop alignment both before and after endograft deployment. We describe a technique for improving superior mesenteric artery scallop alignment of the Cook Zenith Fenestrated AAA Endovascular Graft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) using scallop precannulation and ostial superior mesenteric artery balloon inflation during both diameter expansion and top cap release.

The midterm results of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with a precurved fenestrated endograft in zone 0-1.

OBJECTIVES: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for the treatment of aortic arch disease remains challenging due to certain anatomical and haemodynamic features. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the midterm results of TEVAR with a second-generation fenestrated endograft for aortic arch disease. METHODS: This non-randomized, interventional study was part of a multicentre clinical trial conducted between 2010 and 2011 and was designed to assess the effectiveness of a second-generation precurved fenestrated endograft for aortic arch disease. Midterm data collected during the fifth postoperative year from 205 patients treated with this endograft with the proximal landing of zone 0 or 1 were assessed regarding survival, reoperation and complications. RESULTS: The initial and technical success rates were 94% and 91%, respectively. Ninety-seven percent of patients were treated using zone 0. The rate of in-hospital deaths was 3%. Overall survival was 71% at 5 years; thoracic aorta-related death-free survival rates at 1 and 5 years after surgery were 99.5% and 97.8%, respectively. Aneurysm-related event-free survival rates at 1 and 5 years after surgery were 86.8% and 77.1%, respectively. Reoperation-free survival rates at 5 years were 86.6%. The most frequent reason for reoperation was type Ia endoleak (5%), followed by type II endoleak (2%). Incidences of cerebral infarction, device migration, spinal cord ischaemia and supra-aortic branch stenosis were 6%, 1%, 1% and 1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The precurved fenestrated endograft provided appropriate conformability to the aortic arch and made zone 0 landing possible with simplified, less-invasive manipulations. The midterm results of TEVAR with this endograft suggest this method is a valuable endovascular treatment option for aortic arch disease. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000007213.