Effects of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease on the Outcomes of Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

PURPOSE: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is common in patients with aortic aneurysms. Severe COPD is associated with an increased risk of aneurysm rupture and perioperative complications. This study assesses the outcomes of COPD and non-COPD patients after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (FBEVAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single institution, retrospective study of FBEVAR patients between 2011 and 2020 compared outcomes between COPD and non-COPD patients. COPD patients were stratified by Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease criteria and oxygen dependence. Outcome measures included 30-day mortality, pulmonary complications, major adverse events (MAE), and mid-term survival. RESULTS: 387 patients (71% male, age 72 years, interquartile range [68-79]) underwent FBEVAR. 181 patients (47%) had COPD. Smoking history was more frequent in COPD patients (P = .022). Among COPD patients, 20.4% were oxygen-dependent. Technical success, defined as successful delivery of the main aortic endograft and all intended side branches, was 98.4%. 30-day mortality (P = .83) and MAE rates (P = .87) were similar between groups. While not statistically significant, COPD patients had more frequent pulmonary complications (6.1% vs. 2.4%, P = .13) and were more frequently discharged on oxygen (P = .002). There were no differences in intensive care unit or hospital length of stay between groups (P = .29; P = .85, respectively). 5-year survival was similar between groups (P = .10). Oxygen-dependent COPD and severe-very severe COPD were associated with decreased mid-term survival (Hazard Ratio 2.39, P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: FBEVAR is safe and effective for treating complex aortic pathology in COPD patients, including oxygen-dependent patients. Patients with more severe COPD were more frequently discharged on oxygen. Mid-term survival was slightly reduced in patients with oxygen-dependent and severe-very severe COPD. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, non-randomized controlled cohort/follow-up study.

Impact of chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease on outcomes after complex endovascular and open aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease are traditionally associated with worse outcomes after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and open aneurysm repair (OAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). However, there needs to be more data on complex AAA repair involving the aorta's visceral segment. This study stratifies complex AAA repair outcomes by CKD severity and dialysis dependence. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective OAR and fenestrated/branched EVAR (F-BEVAR) for complex AAA with preoperative renal function data captured by the Vascular Quality Initiative between January 2003 and September 2020 were analyzed. Patients were stratified by CKD class as follows: normal/mild (CKD 1 and 2), moderate (CKD class 3a), moderate to severe (CKD 3b), severe (CKD class 4 and 5), and dialysis. Only patients with clamp sites above one of the renal arteries were included for complex OAR. For F-BEVAR, patients with proximal landing zones below zone 5 (above celiac artery) were included, and distal landing zones between zones 1 and 5 were excluded. Primary outcomes were perioperative and 1-year mortality. Predictors of mortality were identified by Cox multivariate regression models. RESULTS: We identified 7849 elective complex AAA repairs: 4230 (54%) complex OARs and 3619 (46%) F-BEVARs. Most patients were White (89%) and male (74%), with an average age of 72 ± 8 years. The patients who underwent F-BEVAR were older and had more comorbidities. Elective F-BEVAR for complex AAA started in 2012 and increased from 1.4% in 2012 to 58% in 2020 (P < .001). The OAR cohort had more perioperative complications, but less 1-year mortality. The normal/mild CKD cohort had the highest 1-year survival compared with other groups after both complex OAR and F-BEVAR. On Cox regression analysis, when compared with CKD 1-2, worsening CKD stage (CKD 3b: hazard ratio [HR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.82-3.40; P < .001; CKD 4-5: HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.16-3.26; P = .011; and dialysis: HR, 4.4; 95% CI, 2.53-7.72; P < .001) were independently associated with 1-year survival after F-BEVAR. After complex OAR, worsening CKD stage but not dialysis was associated with 1-year mortality compared with CKD 1-2 (CKD 3b: HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.13-2.35; P = .009; CKD 4-5: HR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.03-5.79; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: CKD severity is an essential predictor of perioperative and 1-year mortality after complex AAA repair, irrespective of the treatment modality, which may reflect the natural history of CKD. Consideration should be given to raising the threshold for elective AAA repair in patients with moderate to severe CKD and end-stage renal disease, given the high 1-year mortality rate.

Outcomes of carotid stenting in patients with fibromuscular dysplasia.

OBJECTIVE: Fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) is a noninflammatory arterial disease that affects the extracranial carotid arteries in young patients. The ideal treatment of FMD has continued to be debated, and the role of carotid artery stenting (CAS) is controversial. The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility and outcomes of CAS for patients with FMD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients who had undergone CAS was performed using the Vascular Quality Initiative database from December 2012 to May 2021. Patients who had undergone CAS for atherosclerosis and FMD were included and matched 1:1 by age, gender, and clinical presentation. The demographics, clinical parameters, and procedural data were analyzed. The end points included postoperative stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA), and adverse events (perioperative and 1-year mortality, neurologic changes, access site complications, hematoma or bleeding, infection, congestive heart failure, arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, reperfusion symptoms), and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: After matching, 55 patients had undergone CAS for FMD (mean age, 58.7 ± 14 years; 62% women; 69% White; mean body mass index, 28 ± 6 kg/m2). Most of these procedures (69%) were elective. The FMD group had had a lower rate of hypertension (55% vs 82%; P = .002), smoking (35% vs 80%; P < .001), diabetes (13% vs 45%; P < .001), and coronary artery disease (9% vs 45%; P < .001) compared with the non-FMD group. In the FMD group, prior TIA and stroke was identified in 39 (71%) and 31 (57%) patients, respectively. The mean interval from a prior stroke or TIA to the index surgery was 160 days. Additionally, 23 patients (42%) had had anatomically high lesions above the level of the second cervical vertebra. In the FMD group, the transfemoral approach was used for 43 patients (78%), with distal embolic protection used for 40 patients (93%). Flow reversal was used for nine patients (23%). Most cases were performed with local anesthesia (58%). Three patients (6%) in the FMD group had had access site complications that were managed nonoperatively. No differences were found between the FMD and non-FMD groups in perioperative stroke, TIA, or 30-day mortality. The length of stay was similar between the two groups, and the 1-year survival was 100% for both groups. All the patients in the FMD group were discharged without neurologic complications, and 50 patients (91%) were receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. The median follow-up was 328 days (interquartile range, 1-732 days) with no mortality or reinterventions during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CAS for FMD is a feasible and safe procedure with favorable technical success, a low incidence of neurologic complications, and good clinical outcomes at 1 year of follow-up.

Chronic kidney disease impacts outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease are traditionally associated with worse outcomes after endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). This study stratifies outcomes of AAA repair by approach, CKD severity, and dialysis dependence. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective infrarenal open aneurysm repair (OAR) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with preoperative renal function data captured by the Vascular Quality Initiative between January 2003 and September 2020 were analyzed. Patients were stratified by CKD class as follows: CKD stages 1 and 2, CKD stage 3a, CKD stage 3b, CKD stages 4 and 5, and dialysis. Primary outcomes were perioperative and 1-year mortality. Predictors of survival were identified by Cox multivariate regression models. RESULTS: In total, 53,867 elective AAA repairs were identified: 5396 (10%) OARs and 48,471 (90%) EVARs. Most patients were White (90%) and male (81%), with a mean age of 73 ± 9 years. Patients who underwent EVAR were older and had more comorbidities. The use of elective EVAR for AAA increased from 52% in 2003 to 91% in 2020 (P < .001). The OAR cohort had more perioperative complications and short-term mortality. The CKD 1 and 2 group had the highest 1-year survival compared with the other groups after both OAR and EVAR. On Cox regression analysis, after EVAR, compared with CKD 1 and 2, worsening CKD stage (CKD 3a: hazard ratio [HR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.68; P = .13; CKD 3b: HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.23-2.45; P < .050; CKD 4-5: HR, 3.23; 95% CI, 2.13-4.88; P < .001), and dialysis (HR, 4.48; 95% CI, 1.90-10.6; P < .001) were independently associated with worse 1-year survival rates. After OAR, compared with CKD 1 and 2, worsening CKD stage (CKD 3a: HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96-1.20; P = .20; CKD 3b: HR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.41-1.81; P < .001; CKD 4-5: HR, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.39-3.41; P < .001), and dialysis (HR, 3.79; 95% CI, 3.01-4.76; P < .001) were independently associated with worse 1-year survival rates. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of the treatment approach, CKD severity is an important predictor of perioperative and 1-year mortality rates after infrarenal AAA repair and may reflect the natural history of CKD. Open repair is associated with high perioperative mortality risk in patients with CKD stages 4 and 5, as well as end-stage renal disease. Individualization of patient decision-making is especially important in patients with a glomerular filtration rate of less than 45 and perhaps consideration should be given to raising the threshold for elective AAA repair in these patients. Further studies focusing on appropriate size threshold for repair in these patients may be warranted.

Redo Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair (F-BEVAR) for Failed F-BEVAR.

Failed fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) requiring a redo F-BEVAR is a rare event. In this study, we report 2 cases of a failed F-BEVAR secondary to a type IIIb endoleak from tears on the fabric graft successfully treated with redo F-BEVAR. This is a technically challenging procedure that requires meticulous planning, advanced imaging technologies and experienced operators. Redo F-BEVAR appears to be a feasible and safe treatment option. However, larger series and long-term follow-up are needed to confirm effectiveness and durability.

Perioperative neurologic outcomes of right versus left upper extremity access for fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Upper extremity (UE) access is frequently used for fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR), particularly for complex repairs. Traditionally, left-side UE access has been used to avoid crossing the arch and the origin of the supra-aortic vessels, which could potentially result in cerebral embolization and an increased risk of perioperative cerebrovascular events. More recently, right UE has been more frequently used as it is more convenient and ergonomic. The purpose of this study was to assess the outcomes and cerebrovascular events after F-BEVAR with the use of right- vs left-side UE access. METHODS: During an 8-year period, 453 patients (71% male) underwent F-BEVAR at a single institution. UE access was used in more complex repairs. Left UE access was favored in the past, whereas right UE access is currently the preferred UE access side. Brachial artery cutdown was used in all patients for the placement of a 12F sheath. Outcomes were compared between patients undergoing right vs left UE access. End points included cerebrovascular events, perioperative mortality, technical success, and local access-related complications. RESULTS: UE access was used in 361 (80%) patients. The right side was used in 232 (64%) and the left side in 129 (36%) patients for the treatment of 88 (25%) juxtarenal, 135 (38%) suprarenal, and 137 (38%) thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Most procedures were elective (94%). Technical success was achieved in 354 patients (98%). In-patient or 30-day mortality was 3.3%. Five (1%) perioperative strokes occurred in patients undergoing right UE access, of which three were ischemic and two were hemorrhagic. No transient ischemic attacks occurred perioperatively. Two hemorrhagic strokes were associated with permissive hypertension to prevent spinal cord ischemia. No perioperative strokes occurred in patients undergoing left UE access (P = .16). Overall, perioperative strokes occurred with similar frequency in patients undergoing UE (5, 1%) and femoral access only (1, 1%) (P = .99). Arm access-related complications occurred in 15 (5%) patients, 11 (4.8%) on the right side and 4 (6%) on the left side (P = .74). CONCLUSIONS: Right UE access can be used for F-BEVAR with low morbidity and minimal risk of perioperative ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attacks. In general, UE access is not associated with an increased risk of perioperative stroke compared with femoral access only. Tight blood pressure control is, however, critical to avoid intracranial bleeding related to uncontrolled hypertension.

Epidemiological profile of work-related accidents with biological exposure among medical students in a surgical emergency room.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accidents with biological material among medical students interning in a trauma emergency room and identify key related situations, attributed causes and prevention. METHODS: we conducted a study with a quantitative approach. Data were collected through a questionnaire applied via internet, with closed, multiple-choice questions regarding accidents with biological material. The sample comprised 100 students. RESULTS: thirty-two had accidents with biological material. Higher-risk activities were local anesthesia (39.47%), suture (18.42%) and needle recapping (15.79%). The main routes of exposure to biological material were the eyes or mucosa, with 34%, and syringe needle puncture, with 45%. After contamination, only 52% reported the accident to the responsible department. CONCLUSION: The main causes of accidents and routes of exposure found may be attributed to several factors, such as lack of training and failure to use personal protective equipment. Educational and preventive actions are extremely important to reduce the incidence of accidents with biological materials and improve the conduct of post-exposure. It is important to understand the main causes attributed and situations related, so as general and effective measures can be applied.

Perfil epidemiológico de acidentes com material biológico entre estudantes de medicina em um pronto-socorro cirúrgico / Epidemiological profile of work-related accidents with biological exposure among medical students in a surgical emergency room

OBJETIVO: avaliar os acidentes com material biológico entre estudantes de medicina estagiando em um pronto-socorro de trauma e identificar as principais situações relacionadas, causas atribuídas e prevenção. MÉTODOS: estudo com abordagem quantitativa. Os dados foram coletados através de um questionário, aplicado via internet, contendo perguntas fechadas de escolha múltipla, referentes a acidentes com material biológico. A amostra obtida foi 100 estudantes. RESULTADOS: trinta e dois se acidentaram com materiais biológicos. As atividades de maior risco foram anestesia local (39,47%), sutura (18,42%) e recapeamento de agulha (15,79%). As principais vias de exposição ao material biológico foram contato com olho ou mucosa, com 34%, através de seringa com agulha com 45%. Após a contaminação, apenas 52% notificaram o acidente ao setor responsável. CONCLUSÃO: as principais causas de acidente encontradas e vias de exposição podem ser atribuídas a diversos fatores, como falta de treinamento e ao não uso de equipamentos de proteção individual. Ações preventivas e educativas são de extrema importância para diminuir a incidência dos acidentes com materiais biológicos e melhorar a conduta pós-exposição. É preciso entender as principais causas atribuídas e situações relacionadas a fim de implantar medidas gerais e eficazes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accidents with biological material among medical students interning in a trauma emergency room and identify key related situations, attributed causes and prevention. METHODS: we conducted a study with a quantitative approach. Data were collected through a questionnaire applied via internet, with closed, multiple-choice questions regarding accidents with biological material. The sample comprised 100 students. RESULTS: thirty-two had accidents with biological material. Higher-risk activities were local anesthesia (39.47%), suture (18.42%) and needle recapping (15.79%). The main routes of exposure to biological material were the eyes or mucosa, with 34%, and syringe needle puncture, with 45%. After contamination, only 52% reported the accident to the responsible department. CONCLUSION: The main causes of accidents and routes of exposure found may be attributed to several factors, such as lack of training and failure to use personal protective equipment. Educational and preventive actions are extremely important to reduce the incidence of accidents with biological materials and improve the conduct of post-exposure. It is important to understand the main causes attributed and situations related, so as general and effective measures can be applied.