Comparison of branched, fenestrated, and parallel strategies for endovascular treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic pathologies involving visceral regions.

Purpose: To compare the long-term efficacy of the parallel stent graft (PSG), fenestrated stent graft (FSG), and branched stent graft (BSG) techniques to treat thoracoabdominal aortic pathologies. Materials and methods: In total, 291 patients with thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) and dissection (TAD) involving visceral arteries who underwent PSG (n = 85; 15 TAA and 70 TAD), FSG (n = 107; 47 TAD and 60 TAA), or BSG (n = 99; 37 TAD and 62 TAA) were included from multiple centers from January 2015 to December 2022, and a total of 1,108 visceral aortic branches were reconstructed. Results: The average reconstruction time of each visceral aortic branch for FSG, BSG, and PSG is 27.5 ± 12.1, 23.2 ± 11.9, and 18.8 ± 11.8 min, respectively (P < 0.01). The free-from-endoleak rate at the last follow-up for FSG, BSG, and PSG was 86.9%, 91.9%, and 60.0%, respectively. The last follow-up patency rate for FSG, BSG, and PSG was 85.0%, 91.9%, and 94.1%, respectively. The average reconstruction price of each visceral aortic branch for FSG, BSG, and PSG was 41.40 ± 3.22 thousand RMB, 41.84 ± 3.86 thousand RMB, and 42.35 ± 4.52 thousand RMB, respectively (P = 0.24). Conclusion: To treat the aortic pathologies involving the visceral segment, BSG had a lower endoleak rate and higher branch patency rate when compared with the FSG and PSG techniques. The expense of BSG was comparable to the other two techniques.

Interesting Case of Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysm Turns Out to Be a Ruptured Fenestrated A1 Segment Aneurysm With Concomitant Multiple Aneurysms: A Case Report and Literature Review.

The luminal separation of the vessel into two distinct, parallel channels that reunite distantly is known as fenestration. There is a correlation between the development of an aneurysm and the proximal portion of fenestration, although fenestrations are typically regarded as a variant of normal anatomy. We report an interesting case of an anterior communicating artery (a-comm) aneurysm, which turns out to be a ruptured fenestrated A1 segment aneurysm after digital subtraction angiography with concomitant multiple aneurysms treated by clipping along with case report and literature review.

iCover as Bridging Stent Graft in Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

BACKGROUND: Complex endovascular repair with fenestrated or branched stent grafts is a common approach for treating various types of aortic aneurysms. Bridging stent grafts (BSs) are crucial in connecting aortic endoprosthesis to target vessels, yet current options have demonstrated significant complications. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective single-center study evaluates the initial outcomes and durability of the iCover stent graft (iCover-SG) when used as a BS in fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR). METHODS: Retrospective analysis screened procedures for complex aortic aneurysms between August 2021 and January 2024. Patients who underwent FEVAR with iCover-SG as BS were included. Primary and secondary endpoints focused on freedom from iCover-SG-related target vessel instability, technical success, and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Within the cohort of 28 patients, 94 iCover-SGs were used as BS, supplying 87 target vessels. The freedom from iCover-SG-related target vessel instability throughout the study reached 94% (82/87). Technical success rates were notably high, with primary success achieved in 94% of cases and secondary success in 99%. Over the follow-up duration, there were instances necessitating reintervention related to iCover-SG, including 4 cases of endoleak, 2 cases of T1cEL, and 2 cases of T3cEL. In-hospital mortality was 7% (n=4), with 2 cases attributed to intraoperative complications. Importantly, no deaths were directly attributed to iCover-SG-related issues. CONCLUSION: The iCover-SG demonstrates promising initial outcomes as a BS in FEVAR, with high technical success rates and satisfactory rates of target vessel instability. Continued monitoring and further studies are warranted to assess long-term durability and outcomes. CLINICAL IMPACT: This study shows that the iCover stent graft achieves satisfactory technical success and target vessel stability in the short- and mid-term when used as a bridging stent graft in FEVAR procedures. Its successful integration into clinical practice broadens the range of available options, providing clinicians with more versatile tools for managing complex endovascular aortic aneurysms. This expanded selection of bridging stent grafts allows for more personalised treatment strategies, improving procedural precision and patient outcomes. The iCover stent graft's reliable performance highlights its potential as a valuable addition to current endovascular techniques, ultimately enhancing patient care in challenging cases.

Complex abdominal aortic aneurysms: a review of radiological and clinical assessment, endovascular interventions, and current evidence of management outcomes.

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is an established approach to treating abdominal aortic aneurysms, however, challenges arise when the aneurysm involves visceral branches with insufficient normal segment of the aorta to provide aneurysm seal without excluding those vessels. To overcome this, a range of technological developments and solutions have been proposed including fenestrated, branched, physician-modified stents, and chimney techniques. Understanding the currently available evidence for each option is essential to select the most suitable procedure for each patient. Overall, the evidence for fenestrated endovascular repair is the most comprehensive of these techniques and shows an early post-operative advantage over open surgical repair (OSR) but with a catch-up mortality in the mid-term period. In this review, we will describe these endovascular options, pre- and post-procedure radiological assessment and current evidence of outcomes.

Outcomes of fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair with an inverted contralateral limb.

OBJECTIVE: To report technical success and evaluate clinical outcomes of fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) incorporating a contralateral inverted limb. METHODS: Patients who underwent F/B-EVAR with a custom-made bifurcated device containing an inverted limb between January 2010 and September 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Time-to-event data were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients (26 men; mean age 77±6.2 years) were included in the analysis. Technical success was achieved in 28 patients (87.5%). Two technical failures resulted from misplaced contralateral limbs in patients with previous endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), necessitating one open conversion due to a type 3b endoleak, and one femoro-femoral crossover bypass after occlusion of a misplaced contralateral limb. Additionally, two technical failures were attributed to a type 3c endoleak and a type 1c endoleak, originating from a fenestrated device at the level of the left and right renal artery, respectively. One patient (3.1%) died <30 days post-operatively due to a subdural hemorrhage. Estimated patient survival after 1 and 2 years was 92.7%±5.1%, and 74.3%±10.1%, respectively. No aneurysm-related deaths were observed. During the median follow-up of 13 months, one (3.1%) inverted limb occluded, in addition to the occlusion resulting from a misplaced contralateral limb, and was treated with a femoro-femoral crossover bypass. One target vessel (right renal artery) occluded (0.9%), resulting in a permanent, significantly reduced renal function. Freedom from overall reintervention after 1 and 2 years was 73.5%±8.0% and 68.3%±9.0%, respectively. An additional four patients (12.5%) presented with a type 3c endoleak during follow-up scans, three of which originated from fenestrations at the level of the renal stents. There were no junctional problems between the inverted limb device and the main endograft, and no significant correlation was found between the one-sealing-stent inverted limb device design and the onset of type 3 endoleak (log-rank p=.064). CONCLUSION: F/B-EVAR incorporating an inverted limb can be a viable endovascular option to manage complex aneurysms with a short renal artery to bifurcation distance. However, using the inverted limb presents a notable technical challenge and could be associated with a higher need for reintervention. Carefully confirming correct cannulation of the inverted limb is warranted.

Successful mechanical thrombectomy with an aspiration catheter for fenestrated basilar artery occlusion guided by preoperative basi-parallel anatomical scanning.

Basilar artery (BA) fenestration and its occlusion are relatively rare conditions. Mechanical thrombectomy for fenestrated BA occlusion has a high risk of complications. One limb occlusion or partial occlusion of fenestration mimics arterial stenosis or dissection. We present the case of a 75-year-old woman who presented with slight dysarthria, which subsequently worsened. Magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance angiography, and basi-parallel anatomical scanning (BPAS) revealed BA fenestration and occlusion of the larger limb of the fenestrated BA, for which we performed thrombectomy with aspiration and achieved Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction Grade 3 flow restoration without procedure-related complications. If BA occlusion occurs at a site where a thrombus does not normally occur, confirming the anatomy of the BA before thrombectomy is desirable. As we obtained information on BA fenestration and occluded limb diameter using preoperative BPAS, we were able to safely achieve effective recanalization by guiding a relatively large-diameter aspiration catheter to the thrombus coaxially with a micro-guidewire and microcatheter.

A prevention protocol reduces spinal cord ischemia in patients undergoing branched/fenestrated endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a devastating complication that is associated with thoracoabdominal aortic repair, with higher risk associated with increased aortic coverage length, making patients undergoing branched/fenestrated endovascular repair (B/FEVAR) particularly vulnerable. A bundled SCI prevention protocol was previously reported to reduce SCI rates when compared to a historic cohort in a single-center study. Therefore, this analysis aims to further validate and update outcomes associated with the protocol given the routine implementation of this strategy at two institutions (University of Florida and the University of Alabama at Birmingham) since inception. METHODS: Components of the SCI prevention protocol include selective cerebrospinal fluid drainage, specified blood pressure parameters, transfusion goals, and selective pharmacologic adjuncts (naloxone, steroids). This protocol was routinely implemented in May 2015. Patients undergoing B/FEVAR from May 2015 to December 2022 constituted the post-protocol cohort (n = 402) and were compared with the pre-protocol cohort (n = 160; January 2010-April 2015). The primary outcome was SCI incidence, and subgroup analysis was conducted among patients deemed to be high-risk (Crawford extent I-III thoracoabdominal aneurysm dissection-related disease, prior aortic repair, coverage proximal to zone 5). Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier methodology. RESULTS: The pre- and post-protocol cohorts were demographically similar, although more post-protocol patients were American Society of Anesthesiology class IV (86.1% vs 55.0%; P < .001). Thoracoabdominal aneurysm was the most common indication in both groups. Cerebrospinal fluid drain placement was more common in the post-protocol group, particularly among high-risk patients. SCI occurred in 15.9% of pre-protocol patients vs 3.0% of post-protocol patients (P < .001). In high-risk patients, the pre- and post-protocol cohort SCI incidence was 23.2% vs 5.0%, respectively (P < .001). Thirty-day mortality was decreased in the post-protocol cohort (6.3% vs 2.2%; P = .02). Although the post-protocol group had a trend toward improved 1-year survival, this was not statistically significant (84.4% vs 88.3%; log-rank P = .35). Among patients with SCI, 1-year mortality was 28% and 33.3% in the pre- and post-protocol groups, respectively (P = .46). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a bundled SCI prevention protocol significantly reduces SCI rates in patients undergoing B/FEVAR, which has now been validated at two institutions, with the most significant reductions occurring among high-risk patients. Although the overall 1-year mortality difference was not significantly different between the cohorts, the high mortality rates among patients with SCI highlights the importance of preventative measures.

Midterm Outcomes of Patients With Complex Aortic Aneurysms Treated Using Mixed and Matched Endoprosthesis From Different Manufacturers.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes of patients with complex aortic aneurysms (cAAs) undergoing fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (f/b-EVAR) using a combination of endoprostheses from different manufacturers. METHODS: The study is a 2-center retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained databases of patients with cAAs undergoing f/b-EVAR using a combination of endoprostheses from different manufacturers from 2013 to 2023. Primary endpoints included technical success, major adverse events and reintervention rates. Technical success was defined as implantation of the device without type I or type III endoleak or conversion to open repair. Secondary endpoints included mortality and mid-term device performance. RESULTS: During this time, 353 patients with cAAs underwent f/b-EVARs at both centers. Of these, 80 (22.7%) required use of a combination of devices from 4 different manufacturers for repair. Fifty-one (64%) were treated for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and 29 (36%) for pararenal aneurysms. Majority (74%) were male with a median age of 75 (69, 81) years and aneurysm size of 65 (59, 72) mm. Thirty-five (44%) patients required a proximal thoracic stent graft-W.L. Gore (17), Cook, Medtronic, and Terumo (6), respectively. Seventy-seven (96%) patients required a bifurcated device, including Cook Flex (34), Gore (40), and Medtronic (3). Twelve patients underwent common iliac artery aneurysm repair with a Gore iliac branched endoprosthesis. One hundred fifty-four limbs were implanted: Gore: 68, Cook: 82 and Medtronic: 4. Three hundred fourteen target vessels were incorporated. Median operating room time, estimated blood loss, fluoroscopy time and dose were 209 (186, 278) minutes, 100 (50, 663) mL, 77 (59, 100) minutes, 2385 (1415, 3885) mGy, respectively. Three endoleaks were observed on completion angiography-2 type Ic and 1 type IIIa-all of which resolved at 1 month. Fifteen MAEs were observed in 11 patients at 30 days, including 3 (3.9%) deaths, 7 renal insufficiency, 1 renal failure requiring dialysis, 2 MI and paraplegia, respectively. At a median follow-up of 400 (85, 1132) days, there were 8 reinterventions for endoleaks in 7 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The use of mixed devices proximal and distal to f/b-devices built to treat patients with cAAs is safe and has good mid-term results. CLINICAL IMPACT: While not yet formally assessed in randomized clinical trials or endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the practice of utilizing devices from various manufacturers to address complex aortic anatomy is widespread in everyday clinical settings, yet outcomes remain insufficiently documented. To our knowledge, ours is the first manuscript demonstrating that the use of endoprostheses from different manufacturers for treating patients with complex aortic aneurysms is both safe and yields favorable mid-term results. This frequently employed strategy warrants further exploration through meticulously designed clinical trials, aiming to furnish vascular specialists with a well-founded guideline based on robust clinical evidence.

Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair of Complex Aneurysm Using the Anaconda Fenestrated Device: 1-Year Results From the French Multicenter Registry.

PURPOSE: This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of the fenestrated Anaconda device for the treatment of complex aortic aneurysms over 1 year in daily clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who received the graft between October 2019 and October 2020 were prospectively enrolled in an observational, multicenter national registry. The primary endpoint was the aneurysm-related 1-year mortality rate. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, technical success, device-related adverse events (AEs) and major complications, secondary reinterventions, endoleaks, target vessel (TV) outcomes, and a center-volume analysis comparing mortality and secondary reintervention rate between expert centers (>15 F/BEVAR per year) and nonexpert centers (≤15 F/BEVAR per year). RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients from 28 centers were treated. Aneurysms types included juxta-renal and short neck (84.6%), pararenal (5.2%), paravisceral (3.1%), and type IV thoracoabdominal (2.5%). Configurations with 1, 2, 3, and 4 fenestrations were used in 2, 12, 18, and 65 cases, respectively, totaling 350 TVs. Technical success was 98.0%, with 1 type Ic and 1 type IIIc endoleak. Mean follow-up was 468 days. Ten patients died, with 8 deaths (8.2%) due to non-aortic causes and 2 deaths (2.1%) from unknown causes. The estimated 1-year survival rate was 92.7% (95% CI: 87.8-98.1%). The reintervention rate at 30 days was 11.3% and the estimated reintervention rate at 1 year was 21.6% (95% CI: 12.7-29.6%). No type Ia endoleak occurred during follow-up. Three type III endoleaks occurred and required reintervention. Three TV occlusion occurred, yielding a 1-year TVI-free rate of 92.4% (95% CI: 89.4-99.3). No device-related major complication was recorded, and 3 device-related AEs occurred: 1 limb migration, 1 limb kinking and 1 limb thrombosis. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality and survival without reintervention between expert and nonexpert centers (Log rank p=0.52 and p=0.16, respectively). CONCLUSION: The fenestrated Anaconda device demonstrated acceptable early and at 1-year safety and efficacy for treating primarily juxta-renal and short-neck aortic aneurysms, in centers with varying levels of experience. CLINICAL IMPACT: The Anaconda Fenestrated, as the second commercially available custom-made device for complex endovascular aortic surgery, might adress some anatomical challenges. Following market authorization, this registry presents the 1-year outcomes of real-world device usage in a large number of centers, including small clinics. The results indicate that the device provided adequate efficacy and safety for treating mostly juxta-renal and short neck aneurysms, with notable improvement in technical success rate compared to older reports.

Fenestrated over-the-needle catheter fracture during thoracocentesis in a cat.

Case summary: A 6-year-old castrated male domestic shorthair cat was evaluated for recurrent pleural effusion, atrial fibrillation and suspected congestive heart failure. During thoracocentesis, the fenestrated over-the-needle catheter became fractured and a catheter fragment remained in the patient's left pleural space. Later in the course of treatment, the patient acutely decompensated and was euthanized. There were no immediately observed complications associated with the retained catheter fragment. Relevance and novel information: To the authors' knowledge, there are no reports of over-the-needle catheter fractures with retained pleural catheter fragments in veterinary medicine. Similar cases in humans have been successfully managed with and without removal of catheter fragments. In veterinary medicine, the decision to attempt removal of a catheter fragment must consider both the likelihood of related morbidity and the patient's ability to tolerate an invasive procedure.

Endovascular rescue of failed physician-modified multibranched endografts with fabric tear, using Gore thoracoabdominal multibranched endoprosthesis.

The thoracoabdominal multibranch endoprosthesis is a commercially available off-the-shelf four-vessel inner branched endograft for complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Type IIIb endoleak owing to fabric tear of fenestrated branched endovascular repair (FBEVAR) can be challenging, often requiring relining FBEVAR. Here, we present a case where thoracoabdominal multibranch endoprosthesis was used to reline the previous physician modified FBEVAR in a patient with a 10-cm extent IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm distal to the previous open extent I thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Role of Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Managed for Complex Aortic Aneurysms using Fenestrated or Branched Endovascular Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the increasing number of fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (f/bEVAR) procedures, evidence on post-operative antiplatelet therapy is lacking. This study aimed to investigate the role of single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) vs. double antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after f/bEVAR on 30 day and follow up outcomes. METHODS: A multicentre retrospective analysis was conducted, including f/bEVAR patients managed from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2022. Comparative outcomes were assessed according to post-operative antiplatelet therapy. The cohort was divided into the SAPT group (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA] or clopidogrel) and DAPT group (ASA and clopidogrel). The duration of SAPT or DAPT was one to six months. Primary outcomes were 30 day death, and cardiovascular ischaemic and major haemorrhagic events. Secondary outcomes were survival and target vessel (TV) patency during follow up. RESULTS: A total of 1 430 patients were included: 955 under SAPT and 475 under DAPT. The 30 day mortality was similar (SAPT 2.1% vs. DAPT 1.5%; p = .42). Cardiovascular ischaemic events were lower in the DAPT group (SAPT 11.9% vs. DAPT 8.2%; p = .040), with DAPT being an independent protector for acute mesenteric (p = .009) and lower limb ischaemia (p = .020). No difference was found in 30 day major haemorrhagic events (SAPT 7.5% vs. DAPT 6.3%; p = .40). The mean follow up was 21.8 ± 2.9 months. Cox regression showed no cofounders on survival, with similar rates between groups (log rank p = .71). DAPT patients presented higher TV patency (SAPT 93.4%, standard error [SE] 0.7% vs. DAPT 96.6%, SE 0.7%; log rank p = .007) at thirty six months. Cox regression revealed bEVAR as a predictor of worse TV patency (hazard ratio 2.03, 95% confidence interval 1.36 - 3.03; p < .001). DAPT was related to higher patency within bEVAR patients (SAPT 87.2%, SE 2.1% vs. DAPT 94.9%, SE 1.9%; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: DAPT after f/bEVAR was associated with lower risk of cardiovascular ischaemic events and higher TV patency, especially in bEVAR cases. No difference in major haemorrhagic events was observed at 30 days.

Three-year outcomes of off-the-shelf Gore thoracoabdominal multibranch endoprosthesis and physician-modified endografts for complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) has shown favorable outcomes for repair of complex aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Physician-modified endografting (PMEG) and the Gore thoracoabdominal multibranch endoprosthesis (TAMBE) provide custom and off-the-shelf devices for FB-EVAR, respectively. This study compares the outcomes of TAMBE and PMEG at a single institution. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent TAMBE as part of the multicenter pivotal trial or PMEG as part of a prospective physician-sponsored investigational device exemption at a single institution between 2020 and 2022 were completed. Patient demographics, characteristics, and perioperative and midterm outcomes were compared. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients were included, with 12 in the TAMBE group and 56 in the PMEG group. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Aneurysm type was most often thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm in both groups (58% TAMBE and 52% PMEG). TAMBE had a higher rate of upper extremity access (100% vs 63%; P = .013) and longer mean procedure time (247 ± 36 minutes vs 189 ± 49 minutes; P < .001). Other intraoperative metrics were similar between groups. Technical success was 100% in TAMBE and 95% in PMEG (P = .412). There was no 30-day mortality in either group. No major adverse events occurred with TAMBE, whereas in PMEG cases, 2% had respiratory failure, 2% required dialysis, and 4% experienced spinal cord ischemia. Although the overall endoleak rates were similar (50% of TAMBE vs 41% of PMEG; P = .57), type II endoleaks accounted for all of the endoleaks in the TAMBE group, whereas type I or III endoleaks were seen in 11% of PMEG patients. At a median follow-up of 26.7 months for the TAMBE group and 21.2 months for the PMEG group, target vessel instability was seen in 10.4% of TAMBE, and 6.9% of PMEG targeted branches (P = .401). Reintervention was required in 33% of TAMBE patients and 27% of PMEG patients (P = .646). Estimated freedom from reintervention rates at 3 years were similar (56% TAMBE vs 62% PMEG, log-rank P = .910). Freedom from visceral renal target vessel instability at 3 years was 89% for both groups (log-rank P = .459). The Kaplan-Meier 3-year estimated survival was 100% for patients in the TAMBE group and 77% for patients in the PMEG group (log-rank P = .157). CONCLUSIONS: At experienced centers, FB-EVAR can be completed with PMEG or TAMBE with comparable, excellent perioperative and midterm outcomes. Reinterventions are frequently needed for both TAMBE and PMEG.

Clinical efficacy of TEVAR utilizing fenestrated stent-grafts for zone 0 in an elderly frail patient with giant aortic arch aneurysm.

Introduction and importance: Elderly and frail patients with thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) near to origins of cervical arteries present facing challenges with aortic arch replacement with cardiopulmonary bypass, and traditional tube-type stent-grafts are also inadequate for transcatheter endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Thus, necessitating precise treatment with fenestrated stent-grafts from zone 0. This approach is crucial for achieving favorable postoperative outcomes without compromising activities of daily living (ADL). Case presentations: An 85-year-old-man admitted to the hospital for treatment of a large TAA. While arch replacement is a definitive procedure, it is highly invasive, and the postoperative ADL are expected to be significantly lower than preoperative levels. Therefore, we performed a debranching TEVAR from Zone 0 with fenestrated stent-graft. The patient was discharged from the hospital on the 11th postoperative day. Clinical discussion: In frail and elderly patients for whom conventional surgery may not be viable, TEVAR emerges as a preferred alternative. However, TEVAR of TAA proximal to the aortic arch continues to pose challenges, necessitating meticulous attention to the cervical branches in the intervention strategy. While surgical intervention in these patients necessitates careful consideration of its suitability, including the potential for postoperative enhancement in ADL, the use of fenestrated stent-grafts from Zone 0 emerges as one of the treatment modalities. Conclusion: The authors present a very elderly case in which fenestrated stent-grafts were used to avoid aortic arch replacement for a large aortic arch aneurysm, resulting in a good postoperative course with no decline in ADL.

Appropriateness of care in complex fenestrated-branched aortic endografting.

Fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms is increasingly replacing open repair as the primary modality of treatment. Mid- and long-term results are encouraging and support its use in the correct settings. Nevertheless, appropriateness of indication for treatment, patient selection, and surgeon and hospital performance has not been clearly evaluated and reviewed. The objective of this review article was to identify areas in which appropriateness of care is relevant and can be optimized when considering treatment of patients with fenestrated and branched endovascular repair for complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

Modified Ex Vivo Renal Reconstruction to Facilitate Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Repair of a Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

PURPOSE: To report the use of modified ex vivo renal artery (RA) reconstruction in a patient with 2 small right RAs (RRAs) in anticipation of planned fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA). CASE REPORT: A staged hybrid repair was utilized in a patient with Extent II TAAA involving celiac axis (CA), superior mesenteric artery (SMA), single left RA (LRA), and 2 small (<3 mm) RRAs. The first-stage operation consisted of hepato-renal bypass using modified ex vivo renal reconstruction with single end-to-end anastomosis to both RAs using a saphenous vein graft. A second stage FB-EVAR was performed using patient-specific manufactured stent-graft with 3 fenestrations for the CA, SMA, and LRA 6 weeks later. The patient recovered with no complications. At 4 years, the patient had widely patent hepato-renal bypass and target vessels with normal renal function. CONCLUSION: The use of adjunctive hybrid procedures may optimize or facilitate FB-EVAR. In this patient, salvage of 2 small RAs was not ideally suited for branch stenting but was possible using modified ex vivo RA reconstruction with preservation of kidney parenchyma and function. CLINICAL IMPACT: This case report illustrates a hybrid approach to overcome one of the most frequent limitations to total endovascular incorporation of renal arteries, eg small diameter, early bifurcation and multiple vessels. The modified ex vivo technique allows meticulous renal artery reconstruction without the deleterious effect of warm ischemia and without the cumbersome reconstruction of ureter and vein that is needed with traditional on table ex vivo auto transplantation. The technique is used in a minority of cases and adds the morbidity of open approach. Case selection is of paramount importance.

Factors Affecting Compression of the Left Subclavian Artery Bridging Stent In Zone 2 Fenestrated Endovascular Arch Repair.

INTRODUCTION: Left subclavian artery (LSA) preservation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been related to low morbidity. This study investigated the incidence of LSA stent compression in patients managed with fenestrated endovascular arch repair (f-Arch) and evaluated the impact of anatomic and technical factors on LSA stent outcomes. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis of patients managed with single-fenestration devices (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) for LSA preservation, between January 1, 2012 and November 30, 2023, was conducted. Anatomic (arch type, bovine arch, distance between the LSA and most proximal bone structure, left common carotid artery and aortic lesion, take-off angle, diameter, thrombus, calcification, dissection, tortuosity) and technical parameters (stent type, diameter, length, relining, post-dilation) were evaluated. Stent compression was any ≥50% stenosis (using center luminal line) of the stent compared with its initial diameter. Clinical outcomes included stroke and upper limb ischemia at 30 days and follow-up. Technical outcomes included stent compression and need for reintervention. RESULTS: Fifty-four cases were included. Only balloon-expandable covered stents were used, and relining during the index procedure was performed in 18%. No stroke or arm ischemia was recorded. One stent compression was detected at 30 days. During follow-up, no stroke or arm ischemia was diagnosed. Nine cases (18%) presented stent compression, with a mean time of stent-compression diagnosis at 18 months (interquartile range [IQR]=37, range=1-58 months) after the index procedure. Five (56%) underwent secondary relining. Follow-up after reintervention was uneventful. Lower distance to the nearest bone structure (compression group [CG]: 11.7±8.9 mm vs non-compression group [NCG]: 23.0±7.8 mm, p=0.003) and higher tortuosity index (CG: 1.3±0.4 vs NCG: 1.2±0.1, p=0.03) were associated with LSA stent compression. CONCLUSION: LSA stent compression in patients managed with f-Arch affected 1 in 5 cases, without clinical consequences. Distance to the nearest bone structure and higher tortuosity were associated with LSA stent compression. CLINICAL IMPACT: Fenestrated endovascular arch repair for the preservation of the left subclavian artery (LSA) in patients needing landing within the aortic arch has been performed with encouraging outcomes. This analysis showed that LSA stent compression is met in 18% of patients, without though any clinical consequence. Pre-operative anatomic parameters, as lower distance to the nearest bone structure and higher tortuosity index affect negatively LSA stent performance while stent parameters seem to have no impact.

A Scoping Review of Definitions of Success in Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair.

INTRODUCTION: The present standard of care to treat aortic arch pathologies is open surgical repair with cardiopulmonary bypass and deep hypothermic arrest. With approaches for total endovascular and extra-anatomic cervical debranching hybrid arch repair becoming more diverse, understanding what is considered a successful operation is prerequisite for a rigorous comparison of techniques. This review describes the specific outcomes reported, the rates of success, and the definitions of technical and clinical success in total endovascular and extra-anatomic cervical debranching hybrid aortic arch repair. METHODS: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed. Studies with patients undergoing total endovascular or hybrid extra-anatomic cervical debranching repair of the aortic arch were included. Any publications including only patients with Ishimaru zone 2 or distal repairs were excluded from this review. Studies with less than 5 patients were excluded. Data extraction was performed by one author. Data items included were study design, procedure type, procedural details, underlying pathology, type of cervical debranching, type of endograft repair, surgical outcomes, definition of cerebrovascular events, technical success, and the definition of technical success. RESULTS: Of 1754 studies screened for review, 85 studies with 5521 patients were included. By frequency, the included studies examined the following interventions: fenestrated devices, branched devices, parallel grafting. Most studies were retrospective single-institution studies. There were no randomized controlled trials. Short-term mortality and cerebrovascular events were nearly universally reported, present in 99% and 95% of studies reviewed, respectively. Only 27% of studies provided an explicit definition for cerebrovascular events. While 75% of studies reported a technical success rate, only 45% of those studies provided explicit criteria. Clinical success rates were infrequently reported, present in only 5.9% of studies reviewed. CONCLUSION: The definitions of technical success that were provided fell short of analogous defined reporting standards in nearly all studies, inflating technical success rates. Definitions of cerebrovascular events and technical success require stringent criteria to uniformly compare various methods of endovascular aortic arch repair. A societal consensus document for reporting standards of endovascular aortic arch repair would allow for higher-quality outcomes research. CLINICAL IMPACT: Total endovascular and extra-anatomic cervical debranching hybrid operations are being increasingly utilized for complex aortic arch repair. These techniques, however, can be associated with serious complications. Currently, there is no accepted metric to define technical or report clinical outcomes. Due to the paucity of high-quality data, use of these approaches may be limited in clinical practice. This study emphasizes the need for the development of standards for reporting outcomes in endovascular aortic arch repair. Future studies can then utilize these benchmarks, whcih will allow for improved efficacy and safety in these techniques.

Comparative Evaluation of the Short-Term Outcome of Different Endovascular Aortic Arch Procedures.

Objectives: There are several endovascular treatment options to treat aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts. This study seeks to assess endovascular treatment methods for aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), comparing different treatment methods and evaluating technical success, intraoperative parameters and short-term outcomes. Methods: All patients undergoing elective or emergency endovascular treatment of aortic arch and thoracic aortic pathologies, with no acceptable landing zone for standard TEVAR, between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2024, at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany were included. An acceptable landing zone was defined as a minimum of 2 cm for sufficient sealing. All patients were not suitable for open surgery. Patients were categorized by an endovascular treatment method for a comprehensive comparison of pre-, intra- and postoperative variables. IBM SPSS29 was used for data analysis. Results: The patient cohort comprised 21 patients, predominantly males (81%), with an average age of 70.9 ± 9 years with no acceptable proximal landing zone for standard TEVAR procedure. The most treated aortic pathologies were penetrating aortic ulcers and chronic post-dissection aneurysms. Patients were sub-grouped according to the applied procedure as follows: five patients with chimney thoracic endovascular aortic repair (chTEVAR), seven patients with in situ fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (isfTEVAR), six patients with custom-made fenestrated thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmfTEVAR) and three patients with custom-made branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (cmbTEVAR). Emergency procedures involved two patients. There were significant differences in the total procedure and fluoroscopy time, as well as in contrast agent usage among the treatment groups. cmfTEVAR had the shortest total procedure time, while chTEVAR exhibited the highest contrast agent usage. The overall mortality rate among all procedures was 9.5% (two patients) and 4.7% for elective procedures, respectively. Deaths were associated with either retrograde type A dissection or stent graft infection. Both patients were treated with chTEVAR. There was one minor and one major stroke; these patients were treated with isfTEVAR. No endoleak occurred during any procedure. The reintervention rate for chTEVAR was 20% and 0% for all other procedures during the in-hospital stay. The patients who were treated with cmfTEVAR had no complications, the shortest operating and fluoroscopy time, and less contrast agent was needed in comparison with other treatment methods. Conclusions: Complex endovascular procedures of the aortic arch with custom-made or surgeon-modified aortic stent grafts offer a safe solution, with acceptable complication rates for patients who are not suitable for open aortic arch repair. In terms of procedure-related parameters and complication rates, a custom-made fenestrated TEVAR is potentially advantageous compared to the other endovascular techniques.

CO2 Angiography in the Standard and Complex Endovascular Repair of the Abdominal Aorta-A Narrative Review of the Literature.

Background/Objectives: Carbon dioxide digital-subtraction angiography (CO2-DSA) is an increasingly adopted technique in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and fenestrated/branched EVAR (F/B-EVAR); it is used to reduce the amount of iodinate contrast medium (ICM) and prevent postoperative renal function worsening (PO-RFW). Our aim is to report results from the literature on EVAR and F/B-EVAR procedures using CO2-DSA, together with wider applications in aortic endovascular treatment. Methods: We performed a literature review by searching electronic databases for published data on CO2-DSA during EVAR and F/B-EVAR procedures. The endpoints were postoperative renal function worsening (PO-RFW) and efficacy of intraoperative arterial visualization. Further, applications of CO2 for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) were described. Results: Seventeen studies reporting results on CO2-DSA in EVAR (644 patients) were retrieved. Overall, 372 (58%) procedures were performed with CO2 alone, and 272 (42%) were performed with CO2+ICM. Eight studies analyzed the effect of CO2-DSA angiography on PO-RFW; four studies showed a significantly lower rate of PO-RFW compared to ICM. Five studies (153 patients) analyzed intraoperative arterial visualization with CO2-DSA; renal and hypogastric arteries were effectively visualized in 69% and 99% of cases, respectively. The use of CO2-DSA in F/B-EVAR has not been widely investigated. The largest series reported that PO-RFW was lower in the CO2 vs. ICM group. Conclusions: Carbon dioxide is widely applied in modern aortic endovascular treatment. CO2-DSA for EVAR and F/B-EVAR is an efficient technique for reducing PO-RFW while allowing acceptable arterial intraoperative visualization.