Medical Management of Traumatic Vertebral Artery Injury Is Safe Regardless of the Severity of Injury.

BACKGROUND: Management of traumatic vertebral artery injury (VAI) remains under debate. Current consensus reserves surgical or endovascular management for high-grade injury in order to prevent stroke. We sought to evaluate the factors that influence posterior fossa stroke outcomes following traumatic VAI. METHODS: A search of the prospectively maintained PROOVIT trauma registry of patients older than 18 years of age with a diagnosis of VAI was performed at a level 1 trauma center from 2013 to 2019. Patient demographics, type of injury, the timing of presentation, Biffl Classification of Cerebrovascular Injury Grade score, medical management, procedural interventions, and stroke outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: VAIs were identified in 66 trauma patients were identified out of 14,323 patients entered into the PROOVIT registry. The dominant mechanism was blunt injury (91.5% vs. 8.5%, blunt versus penetrating). Nine patients presented with symptomatic ipsilateral posterior circulation strokes visible on imaging. The average Biffl classification grade was similar between the stroke and nonstroke groups (2.0 vs. 1.5; P = 0.39). The average injury severity score (ISS) between stroke and nonstroke groups was also similar (9.0 vs. 14.0; P = 0.35). All 9 patients in the stroke group had magnetic resonance imaging verification of their infarct within an average of 21.2 hr from presentation. In the stroke group, 1 patient underwent diagnostic angiography but had no intervention. In the nonstroke group, all were treated with medical management alone and none underwent vertebral artery intervention. During a mean follow-up of 14.5 months, no patients experienced a new neurological deficit. CONCLUSIONS: The severity of VAI by Biffl grading and ISS are not associated with ischemic stroke at presentation following VAI. Medical management of VAI appears safe regardless of Biffl and ISS staging in this trauma population. Neurological changes related to embolic stroke were generally appreciated on presentation. Conservative medical management was sufficient to protect from secondary neurological deficit regardless of index vertebral injury.

Pediatric Renal Artery Stenosis: A 19-Year Experience in Management and Outcomes at a Tertiary Pediatric Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Renal artery stenosis (RAS) is an uncommon cause of pediatric hypertension. Guidelines for workup and management have not been established. The most widely reported etiology of the pediatric renovascular disease has been fibromuscular dysplasia; however, other etiologies including middle aortic syndrome (MAS) and vasculitides have been described. We reviewed cases of radiologically identified pediatric RAS and describe etiologies, management, and long-term clinical outcomes in our patients. METHODS: Reports for duplex ultrasound, computed tomography angiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and conventional angiography from an academic children's hospital between 2000 and 2019 were evaluated. Positive reports for RAS were confirmed by a vascular surgeon and a radiologist. Demographics, indications for evaluation, management, and long-term clinical outcomes were documented. Data are summarized as count (n), geometric mean, median, or standard deviation as appropriate. Univariate differences between treatment cohorts were analyzed using Chi-squared tests for categorical variables. Nonparametric paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for the analysis of paired ordinal or continuous data. A statistical analysis was performed with SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) with significance defined at a P < 0.05 level. RESULTS: Imaging for suspected RAS was performed on 984 children. Of the 38 patients with positive imaging for RAS, 60.5% were idiopathic, 31.5% (n = 12) had concomitant congenital/systemic comorbidity, and 21.0% (n = 8) had RAS and concomitant aortic pathology. Fibromuscular dysplasia only accounted for 13.2% (n = 5) of patients. Regarding management, 34.2% (n = 13) underwent invasive intervention, 23.7% (n = 9) underwent endovascular intervention alone, and 10.5% (n = 4) underwent endovascular plus surgical intervention. Conservative management was performed for 65.8% (n = 25) of patients at a long-term follow-up (33.8 months), 34.2% (n = 13) requiring only lifestyle changes, and 31.6% (n = 12) requiring only medical management. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric RAS is a low-frequency disease and long-term outcomes have been under-reported. The incidence of associated aortic pathology in our intervention cohort appears higher than that was previously reported. A long-term follow-up demonstrated that up to 65.8% of patients could be managed successfully with conservative therapy.

Analysis of Traumatic Axillo-Subclavian Vessel Injuries: Endovascular Management is a Viable Option to Open Surgical Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: In traumatic axillo-subclavian vessel injuries, endovascular repair has been increasingly described, despite ongoing questions regarding infection risk and long-term durability. We sought to compare the clinical and safety outcomes between endovascular and surgical treatment of traumatic axillo-subclavian vessel injuries. METHOD: A search query of the prospectively maintained PROOVIT registry for patients older than 18 years of age with a diagnosis of axillary or subclavian vessel injury between 2014-2019 was performed at a Level 1 Trauma Center. Patient demographics, severity of injury, Mangled Extremity Severity Score (MESS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), procedural interventions, complications, and patency outcomes were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients with traumatic axillo-subclavian vessel injuries were included. There were similar rates of penetrating and blunt injuries (48% vs. 52%, respectively). Eighteen patients (78%) underwent intervention: 11 underwent endovascular stenting or diagnostic angiography; 7 underwent open surgical repair. There was similar severity of arterial injuries between the endovascular and open surgical groups: transection (30% vs. 40%, respectively), occlusion (30% vs. 40%, respectively). The open surgical group had worse initial clinical comorbidities: higher ISS scores (17.0 vs 13.5, p = 0.034), higher median MESS scores (6 vs. 3.5, P = 0.001). The technical success for the endovascular group was 100%. The endovascular group had a lower estimated procedural blood loss (27.5 mL vs. 624 mL, P = 0.03). The endovascular arterial group trended toward a shorter length of hospital stay (5.6 days vs. 27.6 days, P = 0.09) and slightly reduced procedural time (191.0 min vs. 223.5 min, P = 0.165). Regarding imaging follow up (average of 60 days post-discharge), 7 patients (54%) underwent surveillance imaging (5 with duplex ultrasound, 2 with computed tomography angiography CTA) that demonstrated 100% patency. Regardless of ISS or MESS scores, at long term clinical follow up (average of 214 days), there were no limb losses, graft infections or vascular complications in either the endovascular or open surgical group. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment is a viable option for axillo-subclavian vessel injuries. Preliminary results demonstrate that endovascular treatment, when compared to open surgical repair, can have similar rates of technical success and long-term outcomes in patency, infection and vascular complications.