RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Studies have suggested that aortic thrombus may be associated with adverse outcomes following endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms, while other reports have suggested higher rates of sac regression and reduced risk of endoleak. However, the effect of thrombus burden on outcomes following physician modified endografts (PMEGs) remains unknown. This study aimed to assess the volume and morphology of thrombus burden and the effect on outcomes following PMEG for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent PMEG from 2009 to 2021 in a single centre, investigational device exemption trial. Thrombus burden was measured as a percentage of luminal volume using pre-operative computed tomography scans from the lowest renal artery to the level of the aortic bifurcation using centreline reconstructive software. Morphology was documented by the presence of finger like projections. Univariate and multivariate analyses evaluated the impact on peri-operative and long term outcomes. RESULTS: Volumetrical and morphological measures of thrombus burden were assessed in 142 patients; 40.1% of the cohort were classified as having a high thrombus burden (≥ 50% luminal volume) on volumetrical assessment and 22.5% had finger like projections on morphological assessment. Type II endoleak was more frequently observed in those with low thrombus burden (60.0% vs. 33.3%; p = .008) and persisted after multivariate analysis (odds ratio 2.5, 95% confidence interval 1.1 - 5.8), but there were no other significant differences in peri-operative adverse events or late outcomes-including sac behaviour, freedom from re-intervention, and overall survival-when stratifying thrombus burden by quantitative or qualitative measures. There were no observed differences in operative characteristics or anatomical characteristics, including landing zone characteristics and rates of inferior mesenteric artery patency. CONCLUSION: While thrombus burden and morphology were not associated with adverse peri-operative events or survival, low thrombus burden was associated with an increase in type II endoleak. These findings suggest that thrombus burden should not deter treatment for patients requiring PMEG.
RESUMO
Objectives: Balloon dilation followed by balloon-expandable stent implantation is an effective treatment for improving hemodynamic status in patients with coarctation of the aorta (CoA). However, limited evidence exists regarding the safety and efficacy of covered balloon-expandable stents (CBSs) in a large cohort. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the overall success rates, hemodynamic and anatomical benefits, complications, and mid-term results of CBSs in treating CoA. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systemically searched for studies reporting outcomes of CBSs in treating CoA. Single-group rate meta-analyses were performed to calculate estimated pooled procedural success rates, the incidence of complications, and re-coarctation rates. A meta-analysis using standardized mean differences was conducted to compare pre- and postoperative trans-coarctation pressure gradients (PGs), coarctation diameter, and overall changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP). Subgroup analyses were performed to identify potential sources of heterogeneity. Results: The final analysis included 12 studies with a total of 411 patients. The estimated pooled procedural success rate was 100% [95% confidence interval (CI): 98%-100%, I2 = 0, P = 0.78]. Significant decreases in trans-coarctation PGs and SBP were observed. The pooled incidences of stent-related, aortic, and access site complications were 2% (95% CI: 0%-5%, I 2 = 30.4%, P = 0.15), 2% (95% CI: 0%-4%, I 2 = 0%, P = 0.76), and 3% (95% CI: 1%-7%, I 2 = 52.9%, P = 0.02), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that implantation of BeGraft stents was related to a significantly higher incidence of access site complications. Conclusion: Covered balloon-expandable stent implantation in treating CoA is safe and effective with high procedural success rates, an acceptable incidence of complications, and a low incidence of re-coarctation. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, PROSPERO (CRD42023430356).
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to report long-term results of an ongoing physician-sponsored, investigational device exemption (IDE) pivotal clinical trial using physician-modified endovascular grafts (PMEGs) for the treatment of patients with juxtarenal aortic aneurysms. METHODS: Data from a nonrandomized, prospective, consecutively enrolling IDE clinical trial were used. Data collection began on April 1, 2011, and data lock occurred on January 2, 2024, with outcomes analysis through December 31, 2023. Primary safety and effectiveness end points were used to measure treatment success. The safety end point was defined as the proportion of subjects who experienced a major adverse event within 30 days of the procedure. The effectiveness end point was the proportion of subjects who achieved treatment success. Treatment success required the following at 12 months: technical success, defined as successful delivery and deployment of a PMEG with preservation of intended branch vessels; and freedom from: type I and III endoleak, stent graft migration >10 mm, aortic aneurysm sack enlargement >5 mm, and aortic aneurysm rupture or open conversion. RESULTS: Over the 12-year study period, 228 patients were enrolled; 205 began the implant procedure, and 203 received PMEG. Thirteen patients withdrew prior to PMEG. Two withdrew (<1.0%) after failure to deploy due to tortuous iliac anatomy and are tracked as intent to treat, and a total of 24 withdrew after receiving the PMEG implant. Forty-four patients died during the study period. A total of 14 were deemed lost to follow-up. Fifty-nine completed the 5-year follow-up period, and 62 remain active in follow-up visits.Aneurysm anatomy, operative details, and lengths of stay were recorded and included: aneurysm diameter (mean, 67.5 mm; range, 49-124 mm), proximal seal zone length (mean, 41.6 mm; range, 18.9-92.9 mm), graft modification time (mean, 48.7 min), procedure time (mean, 137.7 min), fluoroscopy time (mean, 33.8 min), contrast material use (mean, 93.0 mL), estimated blood loss (mean, 118.8 mL), length of hospital stay (mean, 3.7 d), and intensive care unit length of stay (mean, 1.6 d).A total of 575 fenestrations were created for 387 renal arteries, 181 superior mesenteric arteries (SMAs), and 7 celiac arteries. Renal arteries were in 96% of patients and included 410 renal artery stents in 203 patients. The SMA was stented as needed and included one patient with an SMA stent placed before the procedure, 19 during the procedure, and 2 patients who underwent stent placement after the procedure. There were no open conversions or device migrations and 1 partial explant due to late distal graft occlusion. Three ruptures (1.4%) were recorded on days 830, 1346, and 1460. There was 1 presumed graft infection at 750 days (<0.5%) treated with? Thirty-day all-cause mortality was 2.9% (6/204). One type Ia, 1 type Ib, and 7 type III endoleaks were identified during follow-up and treated with successful reintervention at the 1-year period. The overall rate of major adverse events at 30 days was 15% (29/194). Technical success was 93.7%, and overall treatment success was 82.6%. CONCLUSIONS: PMEG can be performed with low rates of long-term morbidity and mortality, confirming our early and midterm reports that endovascular repair with PMEG is safe, durable, and effective for managing patients with juxtarenal aortic aneurysms. While historically considered experimental, these results suggest that PMEG is a safe and durable option and should be considered for patients where off-the-shelf devices are not available.
Assuntos
Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal , Ruptura Aórtica , Prótese Vascular , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Desenho de Prótese , Humanos , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/cirurgia , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Procedimentos Endovasculares/métodos , Estudos Prospectivos , Ruptura Aórtica/cirurgia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/métodos , Resultado do Tratamento , Implante de Prótese Vascular/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Stents , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Seguimentos , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Isolated abdominal aortic dissection (IAAD) is a rare entity with poorly defined risk factors and wide variation in management. We set forth to compare patient characteristics, management, and outcomes of uncomplicated isolated abdominal aortic dissection (uIAAD) versus high risk and complicated isolated abdominal aortic dissection (hrcIAAD) to investigate whether these categories can be utilized to guide IAAD management and provide risk stratification for intervention. METHODS: Retrospective chart review was performed to identify all patients with spontaneous IAAD at a tertiary health care system between 1996 and 2022. Demographics, comorbidities, factors relating to initial presentation including imaging findings, and dissection outcomes including long-term all-cause mortality and aortic-related mortality from time of dissection to final available record were abstracted. IAAD demonstrating rupture or malperfusion were designated as complicated, those with aortic diameter greater than 4 cm on presentation or refractory pain were designated as high risk, and the remainder was designated as uIAAD. All variables were compared between hrcIAAD and uIAAD using Fisher's exact test, unpaired t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test as appropriate. RESULTS: Over the study period, 74 patients presented with spontaneous IAAD (mean age 60 ± 16 years, 61% male) with postdissection follow-up records to an average of 6.8 ± 5.8 years. Of these, 76% presented with uIAAD versus 24% with hrcIAAD. hrcIAAD was diagnosed at a significantly younger age on average than uIAAD (52 ± 14 vs. 62 ± 16 years, P = 0.02), was less likely to present with concomitant hyperlipidemia (0% vs. 41%, P < 0.01), coronary artery disease (6% vs. 47%, P < 0.01), and prior smoking history (39% vs. 72%). hrcIAAD was more likely to present in patients with a genetic aortopathy (27% vs. 7%, P = 0.03). Hypertension was not significantly different between groups. Patients with hrcIAAD were significantly more likely to present with extension into iliac arteries compared to uIAAD (61% vs. 18%, P < 0.01). A much higher proportion of hrcIAAD required hospitalization compared to uIAAD (83% vs. 30%, P < 0.01) and operative intervention (67% vs. 7%, P < 0.01). While there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between groups, there was a significant difference between aortic-related mortality which only occurred in those with hrcIAAD (28% vs. 0%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of long-term outcomes suggests that hrcIAAD is associated with increased hospitalization and need for operative intervention compared to uIAAD. Significant differences in atherosclerotic risk factors and proportions of connective tissue disease history between patients who present with hrcIAAD and uIAAD suggest that differences in underlying etiology are largely responsible for whether IAAD progresses towards rupture or has a more benign course and should be considered in risk stratification to guide more specific and targeted management of IAAD.
Assuntos
Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal , Dissecção da Aorta Abdominal , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagem , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/cirurgia , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/mortalidade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a low-profile thoracic endograft (19-23 French) in subjects with blunt traumatic aortic injury. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter study assessed the RelayPro thoracic endograft for the treatment of traumatic aortic injury. Fifty patients were enrolled at 16 centers in the United States between 2017 and 2021. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The cohort was mostly male (74%), with a mean age of 42.4 ± 17.2 years, and treated for traumatic injuries (4% Grade 1, 8% Grade 2, 76% Grade 3, and 12% Grade 4) due to motor vehicle collision (80%). The proximal landing zone was proximal to the left subclavian artery in 42%, and access was primarily percutaneous (80%). Most (71%) were treated with a non-bare stent endograft. Technical success was 98% (one early type Ia endoleak). All-cause 30-day mortality was 2% (compared with an expected rate of 8%), with an exact two-sided 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.1%, 10.6% below the performance goal upper limit of 25%. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated freedom from all-cause mortality to be 98% at 30 days through 4 years (95% CI, 86.6%-99.7%). Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from major adverse events, all-cause mortality, paralysis, and stroke, was 98.0% at 30 days and 95.8% from 6 months to 4 years (95% CI, 84.3%-98.9%). There were no strokes and one case of paraplegia (2%) during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: RelayPro was safe and effective and may provide an early survival benefit in the treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injury.
Assuntos
Implante de Prótese Vascular , Prótese Vascular , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Desenho de Prótese , Lesões do Sistema Vascular , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Humanos , Masculino , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/cirurgia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/mortalidade , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/diagnóstico por imagem , Feminino , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Procedimentos Endovasculares/instrumentação , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Endovasculares/mortalidade , Implante de Prótese Vascular/instrumentação , Implante de Prótese Vascular/mortalidade , Implante de Prótese Vascular/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/cirurgia , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/mortalidade , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/diagnóstico por imagem , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos , Aorta Torácica/cirurgia , Aorta Torácica/lesões , Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagem , Stents , Fatores de Risco , Idoso , Adulto Jovem , Medição de Risco , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) at high-volume hospitals has previously been associated with lower perioperative mortality, but the impact of annual surgeon volume on outcomes following TEVAR for BTAI remains unknown. METHODS: We analyzed Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) data from patients with BTAI that underwent TEVAR between 2013 and 2023. Annual surgeon volumes were computed as the number of TEVARs (for any pathology) performed over a 1-year period preceding each procedure and were further categorized into quintiles. Surgeons in the first volume quintile were categorized as low volume (LV), the highest quintile as high volume (HV), and the middle three quintiles as medium volume (MV). TEVAR procedures performed by surgeons with less than 1-year enrollment in the VQI were excluded. Using multilevel logistic regression models, we evaluated associations between surgeon volume and perioperative outcomes, accounting for annual center volumes and adjusting for potential confounders, including aortic injury grade and severity of coexisting injuries. Multilevel models accounted for the nested clustering of patients and surgeons within the same center. Sensitivity analysis excluding patients with grade IV BTAI was performed. RESULTS: We studied 1321 patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI (28% by LV surgeons [0-1 procedures per year], 52% by MV surgeons [2-8 procedures per year], 20% by HV surgeons [≥9 procedures per year]). With higher surgeon volume, TEVAR was delayed more (in <4 hours: LV: 68%, MV: 54%, HV: 46%; P < .001; elective (>24 hours): LV: 5.1%; MV: 8.9%: HV: 14%), heparin administered more (LV: 80%, MV: 81%, HV: 87%; P = .007), perioperative mortality appears lower (LV: 11%, MV: 7.3%, HV: 6.5%; P = .095), and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke was lower (LV: 6.5%, MV: 3.6%, HV: 1.5%; P = .006). After adjustment, compared with LV surgeons, higher volume surgeons had lower odds of perioperative mortality (MV: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.97; P = .039; HV: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.16-1.22; P = .12; MV/HV: 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.96; P = .038) and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke (MV: 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.81; P = .011; HV: 0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.61; P = .008). Sensitivity analysis found lower adjusted odds for perioperative mortality (although not significant) and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke for higher volume surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI, higher surgeon volume is independently associated with lower perioperative mortality and postoperative stroke, regardless of hospital volume. Future studies could elucidate if TEVAR for non-ruptured BTAI might be delayed and allow stabilization, heparinization, and involvement of a higher TEVAR volume surgeon.
Assuntos
Aorta Torácica , Competência Clínica , Correção Endovascular de Aneurisma , Hospitais com Alto Volume de Atendimentos , Cirurgiões , Lesões do Sistema Vascular , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Aorta Torácica/cirurgia , Aorta Torácica/lesões , Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagem , Bases de Dados Factuais , Correção Endovascular de Aneurisma/efeitos adversos , Correção Endovascular de Aneurisma/mortalidade , Hospitais com Baixo Volume de Atendimentos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Traumatismos Torácicos/cirurgia , Traumatismos Torácicos/mortalidade , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/cirurgia , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/mortalidade , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/diagnóstico por imagem , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/cirurgia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/mortalidadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The optimal management of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) remains controversial, with experienced centers offering therapy ranging from medical management to TEVAR. We investigated the utility of a machine learning (ML) algorithm to develop a prognostic model of risk factors on mortality in patients with BTAI. METHODS: The Aortic Trauma Foundation registry was utilized to examine demographics, injury characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with BTAI. A STREAMLINE (A Simple, Transparent, End-To-End Automated Machine Learning Pipeline Facilitating Data Analysis and Algorithm Comparison) model as well as logistic regression (LR) analysis with imputation using chained equations was developed and compared. RESULTS: From a total of 1018 patients in the registry, 702 patients were included in the final analysis. Of the 258 (37%) patients who were medically managed, 44 (17%) died during admission, 14 (5.4%) of which were aortic related deaths. Four hundred forty-four (63%) patients underwent TEVAR and 343 of which underwent TEVAR within 24 hours of admission. Among TEVAR patients, 39 (8.8%) patients died and 7 (1.6%) had aortic related deaths ( Table 1 ). Comparison of the STREAMLINE and LR model showed no significant difference in ROC curves and high AUCs of 0.869 (95% confidence interval, 0.813-0.925) and 0.840 (95% confidence interval, 0.779-0.900) respectively in predicting in-hospital mortality. Unexpectedly, however, the variables prioritized in each model differed between models. The top 3 variables identified from the LR model were similar to that from existing literature. The STREAMLINE model, however, prioritized location of the injury along the lesser curve, age and aortic injury grade. CONCLUSION: Machine learning provides insight on prioritization of variables not typically identified in standard multivariable logistic regression. Further investigation and validation in other aortic injury cohorts are needed to delineate the utility of ML models. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.
Assuntos
Aorta Torácica , Aprendizado de Máquina , Sistema de Registros , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Humanos , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/mortalidade , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/terapia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/diagnóstico , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/cirurgia , Masculino , Feminino , Aorta Torácica/lesões , Aorta Torácica/cirurgia , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prognóstico , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Fatores de Risco , Estudos Retrospectivos , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/mortalidade , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/cirurgia , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/diagnóstico , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/terapia , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Modelos Logísticos , Algoritmos , Traumatismos Torácicos/mortalidade , Traumatismos Torácicos/terapia , Traumatismos Torácicos/diagnóstico , Traumatismos Torácicos/cirurgiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The Harborview Risk Score (HRS) is a simple, accurate 4-point preoperative risk scoring system used to predict 30-day mortality following ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair. The HRS assigns 1 point for each of the following: age >76 years, pH <7.2, creatinine >2 mg/dL, and any episode of severe hypotension (systolic blood pressure <70 mmHg). One potential limitation of this risk scoring system is that arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis is required to determine arterial pH. Because ABG analysis is not routinely performed prior to patient transfer or rAAA repair, we sought to determine if the HRS could be modified by replacing pH with the international normalized ratio (INR), a factor that has been previously shown to have a strong and independent association with 30-day death after rAAA repair. METHODS: A retrospective review of all rAAA repairs done at a single academic medical center between January 2002 and December 2018 was performed. Our traditional HRS was compared with a modified score, in which pH <7.2 was replaced with INR >1.8. Patients were included if they underwent rAAA repair (open or endovascular), and if they had preoperative laboratory values available to calculate both the traditional and modified HRS. RESULTS: During the 17-year study period, 360 of 391 repairs met inclusion criteria. Observed 30-day mortality using the modified scoring system was 17% (18/106) for a score of 0 points, 43% (53/122) for 1 point, 54% (52/96) for 2 points, 84% (27/32) for 3 points, and 100% (4/4) for 4 points. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed similar ability of the two scoring systems to predict 30-day death: there was no significant difference in the area under the curve (AUC) comparing the traditional (AUC = 0.74) and modified (AUC = 0.72) HRS (P = .3). CONCLUSIONS: Although previously validated among a modern cohort of patients with rAAA, our traditional 4-point risk score is limited in real-world use by the need for an ABG. Substituting INR for pH improves the usefulness of our risk scoring system without compromising accuracy in predicting 30-day mortality after rAAA repair.
Assuntos
Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal , Ruptura Aórtica , Implante de Prótese Vascular , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Humanos , Idoso , Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Fatores de Tempo , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagem , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Fatores de Risco , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Ruptura Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Ruptura Aórtica/cirurgia , Implante de Prótese Vascular/efeitos adversos , Medição de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The objective of our present effort was to use an international blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) registry to create a prediction model identifying important preoperative and intraoperative factors associated with postoperative mortality, and to develop and validate a simple risk prediction tool that could assist with patient selection and risk stratification in this patient population. METHODS: For the purpose of the present study, all patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for BTAI and registered in the Aortic Trauma Foundation (ATF) database from January 2016 as of June 2022 were identified. Patients undergoing medical management or open repair were excluded. The primary outcome was binary in-hospital all-cause mortality. Two predictive models were generated: a preoperative model (i.e. only including variables before TEVAR or intention-to-treat) and a full model (i.e. also including variables after TEVAR or per-protocol). RESULTS: Out of a total of 944 cases included in the ATF registry until June 2022, 448 underwent TEVAR and were included in the study population. TEVAR for BTAI was associated with an 8.5% in-hospital all-cause mortality in the ATF dataset. These study subjects were subsequently divided using 3:1 random sampling in a derivation cohort (336; 75.0%) and a validation cohort (112; 25.0%). The median age was 38 years, and the majority of patients were male (350; 78%). A total of 38 variables were included in the final analysis. Of these, 17 variables were considered in the preoperative model, 9 variables were integrated in the full model, and 12 variables were excluded owing to either extremely low variance or strong correlation with other variables. The calibration graphs showed how both models from the ATF dataset tended to underestimate risk, mainly in intermediate-risk cases. The discriminative capacity was moderate in all models; the best performing model was the full model from the ATF dataset, as evident from both the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (Area Under the Curve 0.84; 95% CI 0.74-0.91) and from the density graph. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we developed and validated a contemporary risk prediction model, which incorporates several preoperative and postoperative variables and is strongly predictive of early mortality. While this model can reasonably predict in-hospital all-cause mortality, thereby assisting physicians with risk-stratification as well as inform patients and their caregivers, its intrinsic limitations must be taken into account and it should only be considered an adjunctive tool that may complement clinical judgment and shared decision-making.
Assuntos
Doenças da Aorta , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Traumatismos Torácicos , Lesões do Sistema Vascular , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Correção Endovascular de Aneurisma , Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagem , Aorta Torácica/cirurgia , Aorta Torácica/lesões , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento , Fatores de Tempo , Doenças da Aorta/cirurgia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/diagnóstico por imagem , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/cirurgia , Traumatismos Torácicos/cirurgia , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/diagnóstico por imagem , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/cirurgia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Increased angulation of the proximal aortic neck has been associated with complications following endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms, including increased incidence of endoleaks, stent migration, secondary interventions, and conversions. However, knowledge on the impact of aortoiliac tortuosity on outcomes following fenestrated repair remains limited. This study aims to quantify the effect of aortoiliac tortuosity on outcomes following fenestrated repair. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective review of all patients who underwent a physician-modified endovascular repair for the treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms under a single physician-sponsored investigation device exemption study from 2011 to 2021 was performed. Center luminal lines and geometric distances were obtained using TeraRecon software (San Mateo, CA). A tortuosity index was calculated (tortuosity index = centerline distance/geometric line distance) for each iliac vessel as well as for the infrarenal aorta according to Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. Aortic and iliac tortuosity were assessed independently and stratified as low and high. Demographics, comorbidities, anatomic and operative details, and outcomes were compared using univariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 135 patients were identified. Thirty-eight patients (28%) had high aortic tortuosity, and 55 patients (42%) had high iliac tortuosity. Patients with high tortuosity were older (aortic: 78 vs 76 years; P = .04; iliac: 78 vs 75 years; P = .01) and differed by sex. Twenty-two percent of men and 50% of women had high aortic tortuosity (P = .01). Forty-seven percent of men and 20% of women had high iliac tortuosity (P = .01). There were no differences in comorbidities based on aortic tortuosity, but coronary artery disease (high: 58% vs low: 36%; P = .01) and hypertension (high: 69% vs low: 86%; P = .02) differed based on iliac tortuosity. Aneurysm diameter was larger for patients with high iliac tortuosity (72 mm vs 64 mm; P < .01), and fluoroscopy time was longer for patients with high aortic tortuosity (41 vs 31 minutes; P = .02). When outcomes were assessed, high iliac tortuosity was associated with increased rate of reinterventions (hazard ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-6.0) and type 1 or 3 endoleak (hazard ratio, 5.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-16); however, all other outcomes were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with physician-modified endovascular repair for juxtarenal aneurysms, iliac tortuosity but not aortic tortuosity, is associated with increased reinterventions and type 1 or type 3 endoleaks. Long-term follow-up is critical for patients with high iliac tortuosity to ensure that high-risk endoleaks are identified and treated early to avoid the risk of rupture.
Assuntos
Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal , Implante de Prótese Vascular , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Masculino , Humanos , Feminino , Prótese Vascular , Implante de Prótese Vascular/efeitos adversos , Endoleak/etiologia , Endoleak/complicações , Resultado do Tratamento , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Stents , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagem , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/cirurgia , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/complicações , Estudos Retrospectivos , Desenho de PróteseRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The modified Harborview Risk Score (HRS) is a simple measure initially derived from a single institutional dataset used to predict ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair survival preoperatively using basic labs and vital signs collected upon presentation. However, validation of this widely applicable scoring system has not been performed. This study aims to validate this scoring system using a large multi-institutional database. METHODS: All patients who underwent repair of an rAAA from 2011 to 2018 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and at a single academic medical center were included. The modified HRS was calculated by assigning 1 point for each of the following: age >76 years, creatinine >2 mg/dL, international normalized ratio >1.8, and any systolic blood pressure less than 70 mmHg. Assessment of the prediction model was then completed. Using a primary outcome measure of 30-day mortality, the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve was calculated. The discrimination between datasets was compared using a Delong test. Mortality rates for each score were compared between datasets using the Pearson χ2 test. Comparative analysis for patients with a score of 4 was limited due to a small sample size. RESULTS: A total of 1536 patients were identified using NSQIP, and 163 patients were assessed in the institutional dataset. There were 518 patients with a score of 0 (455 NSQIP, 63 institutional), 676 patients with a score of 1 (617 NSQIP, 59 institutional), 391 patients with a score of 2 (364 NSQIP, 27 institutional), 106 with a score of 3 (93 NSQIP, 13 institutional), and 8 patients with a score of 4 (7 NSQIP, 1 institutional). No difference was found in the receiver operating characteristic area under the curves between datasets (P = .78). Thirty-day mortality was 10% NSQIP vs 22% institutional for a score of 0; 28% NSQIP vs 36% institutional for a score of 1; 41% NSQIP vs 44% institutional for a score of 2; 45% NSQIP vs 69% institutional for a score of 3; and 57% NSQIP vs 100% institutional for a score of 4. Score 0 was the only score with a significant mortality rate difference between datasets (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The modified HRS is confirmed to be broadly applicable as a clinical decision-making tool for patients presenting with rAAAs. Therefore, this easily applicable model should be applied for all patients presenting with rAAAs to assist with provider and patient decision-making prior to proceeding with repair.
Assuntos
Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal , Ruptura Aórtica , Implante de Prótese Vascular , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Humanos , Idoso , Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagem , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/cirurgia , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Ruptura Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Ruptura Aórtica/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Medição de Risco , Implante de Prótese Vascular/efeitos adversosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Current societal recommendations regarding the timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) vary. Prior studies have shown that elective repair was associated with lower mortality after TEVAR for BTAI. However, these studies lacked data such as Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) aortic injury grades and TEVAR-related postoperative outcomes. Therefore, we used the Vascular Quality Initiative registry, which includes relevant anatomic and outcome data, to examine the outcomes following urgent/emergent (≤ 24 hours) vs elective TEVAR for BTAI. METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI between 2013 and 2022 were included, excluding those with SVS grade 4 aortic injuries. We included covariates such as age, sex, race, transfer status, body mass index, preoperative hemoglobin, comorbidities, medication use, SVS aortic injury grade, coexisting injuries, Glasgow Coma Scale, and prior aortic surgery in a regression model to compute propensity scores for assignment to urgent/emergent or elective TEVAR. Perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality were evaluated using inverse probability-weighted logistic regression and Cox regression, also adjusting for left subclavian artery revascularization/occlusion and annual center and physician volumes. RESULTS: Of 1016 patients, 102 (10%) underwent elective TEVAR. Patients who underwent elective repair were more likely to undergo revascularization of the left subclavian artery (31% vs 7.5%; P < .001) and receive intraoperative heparin (94% vs 82%; P = .002). After inverse probability weighting, there was no association between TEVAR timing and perioperative mortality (elective vs urgent/emergent: 3.9% vs 6.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-4.7; P = .90) and 5-year mortality (5.8% vs 12%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.21-4.3; P > .9).Compared with urgent/emergent TEVAR, elective repair was associated with lower postoperative stroke (1.0% vs 2.1%; adjusted OR [aOR], 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.94; P = .044), even after adjusting for intraoperative heparin use (aOR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.92; P = .042). Elective TEVAR was also associated with lower odds of failure of extubation immediately after surgery (39% vs 65%; aOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.35; P < .001) and postoperative pneumonia (4.9% vs 11%; aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13-0.91; P = .031), but comparable odds of any postoperative complication as a composite outcome and reintervention during index admission. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BTAI who underwent elective TEVAR were more likely to receive intraoperative heparin. Perioperative mortality and 5-year mortality rates were similar between the elective and emergent/urgent TEVAR groups. Postoperatively, elective TEVAR was associated with lower ischemic stroke, pulmonary complications, and prolonged hospitalization. Future modifications in society guidelines should incorporate the current evidence supporting the use of elective TEVAR for BTAI. The optimal timing of TEVAR in patients with BTAI and the factors determining it should be the subject of future study to facilitate personalized decision-making.
Assuntos
Implante de Prótese Vascular , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Traumatismos Torácicos , Lesões do Sistema Vascular , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Humanos , Correção Endovascular de Aneurisma , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco , Aorta/cirurgia , Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagem , Aorta Torácica/cirurgia , Aorta Torácica/lesões , Heparina , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/diagnóstico por imagem , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/cirurgia , Traumatismos Torácicos/cirurgia , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/diagnóstico por imagem , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento , Estudos Retrospectivos , Implante de Prótese Vascular/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Giant carotid body tumors, defined as those >8 cm in size, are extremely rare. Definitive surgical management is a complex undertaking because these large tumors tend to have grown to envelop cranial nerves and the carotid artery, and few data exist regarding the long-term outcomes for these patients. We present the case of a patient with bilateral giant carotid body tumors who underwent staged embolization and excision of a >10-cm carotid body tumor. After 5 years of follow-up, we demonstrated that elective open repair can provide long-term symptomatic relief. We describe and illustrate the crucial steps and considerations regarding the excision of complex Shamblin type III carotid body tumors.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Popliteal Artery Entrapment Syndrome (PAES) is a rare vascular condition with significant equipoise on how to properly diagnose and evaluate relevant imaging. This can lead to misdiagnosis and delay in surgical management. The objective of this study is to describe and compare distinct imaging features of dynamic versus static images to help determine the ideal imaging modality for diagnosis of PAES. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients referred for PAES at a single institution. We reviewed noninvasive imaging studies, diagnostic arteriograms, and cross-sectional images which include computed tomography angiography (CTA) or magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). For each affected and unaffected extremity, the characteristic collaterals for PAES were named and measured on arteriogram using Picture Archiving and Communication Software. Available cross-sectional images were also analyzed and compared with arteriogram and intraoperative findings during surgical exploration. RESULTS: There were 23 patients referred for PAES who underwent diagnostic evaluation and surgical management between 2013 and 2022. All patients had a duplex ultrasound that revealed a mean popliteal peak systolic velocity of 78 cm/sec at rest. With forced plantar flexion, the peak systolic velocity increased to a mean 175 cm/sec. A total of 12 extremities had complete loss of flow with provocation during duplex ultrasound. All patients underwent diagnostic angiography of 46 extremities. All limbs with PAES (n = 35) exhibited complete popliteal artery occlusion during angiography with forced plantar flexion. Distinct angiographic findings on resting images included a well-developed medial sural artery in 100% of limbs with PAES with a mean diameter of 2.7 mm. In limbs without PAES, only 80% had a visualized medial sural artery on arteriogram with a mean diameter of 2.0 mm (P = 0.1). A lateral sural artery was seen in 85% of affected extremities (mean diameter of 1.8 mm), while an anterior tibial recurrent artery was seen in 59% of affected extremities (mean diameter of 1.3 mm). In unaffected limbs, there were no visible lateral sural or anterior tibial recurrent arteries. The mean contrast used with diagnostic arteriograms was 58 milliliters (range 10-100 milliliters). Axial imaging was available for 9 affected extremities. Five had a previous MRA with only 1 being truly positive for arterial compression. Four extremities had previous CTA with 3 being falsely negative despite having type 3 PAES discovered during surgical exploration. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic imaging with angiography provides immediate surgeon feedback by visualizing popliteal artery compression and enlarged sural collaterals during resting arteriography. The medial sural collateral is enlarged in patients with PAES and often the lateral sural and anterior tibial recurrent arteries can be visualized as well. CTA and MRA are associated with high false-negative rates, and therefore cause delays in diagnosis and surgical management of PAES. Dynamic imaging should, therefore, be the gold standard for the diagnosis of PAES.
Assuntos
Arteriopatias Oclusivas , Síndrome do Aprisionamento da Artéria Poplítea , Humanos , Arteriopatias Oclusivas/cirurgia , Angiografia por Ressonância Magnética , Artéria Poplítea/diagnóstico por imagem , Artéria Poplítea/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (VEDS) is rare, affecting an estimated 1 per 50,000 individuals, and is associated with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), among other arteriopathies. We present three patients with genetically confirmed VEDS who underwent successful open AAA surgical repair and demonstrate that elective open AAA repair with careful tissue manipulation is safe and feasible for patients with VEDS. These cases also demonstrate that the VEDS genotype is associated with the aortic tissue quality (genotype-surgical phenotype correlation), with the most friable tissue encountered in the patient with a large amino acid substitution and the least friable tissue in the patient with a null (haploinsufficiency) variant.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Although the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) aortic injury grading system is used to depict the severity of injury in patients with blunt thoracic aortic injury, prior literature on its association with outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is limited. METHODS: We identified patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI within the VQI between 2013 and 2022. We stratified patients based on their SVS aortic injury grade (grade 1, intimal tear; grade 2, intramural hematoma; grade 3, pseudoaneurysm; and grade 4, transection or extravasation). We assessed perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality using multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses. Secondarily, we assessed the proportional trends in patients undergoing TEVAR based on SVS aortic injury grade over time. RESULTS: Overall, 1311 patients were included (grade1, 8%; grade 2, 19%; grade 3, 57%; grade 4, 17%). Baseline characteristics were similar, except for a higher prevalence of renal dysfunction, severe chest injury (Abbreviated Injury Score >3), and lower Glasgow Coma Scale with increasing aortic injury grade (Ptrend < .05). Rates of perioperative mortality by aortic injury grade were as follows: grade 1, 6.6%; grade 2, 4.9%; grade 3, 7.2%; and grade 4, 14% (Ptrend = .003) and 5-year mortality rates were 11% for grade 1, 10% for grade 2, 11% for grade 3, and 19% for grade 4 (P = .004). Patients with grade 1 injury had a high rate of spinal cord ischemia (2.8% vs grade 2, 0.40% vs grade 3, 0.40% vs grade 4, 2.7%; P = .008). After risk adjustment, there was no association between aortic injury grade and perioperative mortality (grade 4 vs grade 1, odds ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-3.5; P = .65), or 5-year mortality (grade 4 vs grade 1, hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-2.30; P = .82). Although there was a trend for decrease in the proportion of patients undergoing TEVAR with a grade 2 BTAI (22% to 14%; Ptrend = .084), the proportion for grade 1 injury remained unchanged over time (6.0% to 5.1%; Ptrend = .69). CONCLUSIONS: After TEVAR for BTAI, there was higher perioperative and 5-year mortality in patients with grade 4 BTAI. However, after risk adjustment, there was no association between SVS aortic injury grade and perioperative and 5-year mortality in patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI. More than 5% of patients with BTAI who underwent TEVAR had a grade 1 injury, with a concerning rate of spinal cord ischemia potentially attributable to TEVAR, and this proportion did not decrease over time. Further efforts should focus on enabling careful selection of patients with BTAI who will experience more benefit than harm from operative repair and preventing the inadvertent use of TEVAR in low-grade injuries.
Assuntos
Doenças da Aorta , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Isquemia do Cordão Espinal , Traumatismos Torácicos , Lesões do Sistema Vascular , Ferimentos não Penetrantes , Humanos , Correção Endovascular de Aneurisma , Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagem , Aorta Torácica/cirurgia , Aorta Torácica/lesões , Resultado do Tratamento , Fatores de Tempo , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/diagnóstico por imagem , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/cirurgia , Traumatismos Torácicos/cirurgia , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/diagnóstico por imagem , Lesões do Sistema Vascular/cirurgia , Doenças da Aorta/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
Precise preoperative planning for fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms is essential for safe and successful surgery. Planning should begin with a high-quality computed tomography angiography of the chest abdomen and pelvis, which is input into post-processing software to create centerline formatting of the aorta, iliac, and target vessels. The aorta and its branches should then be assessed for aberrant anatomy, dissection, and extent of disease. In any patient with evidence of dissection, a plan should be established for intravascular ultrasound assessment of wire location to confirm the appropriately selected lumen. The proximal and distal seal zones should be selected in areas of a healthy, nonangulated, and parallel vessel free from degeneration calcification and atheroma. The proximal and distal devices can then be selected with 10% to 20% oversizing. Target vessels are evaluated for incorporation and assessed for vessel size, stenosis, dissection, and distance to branching vessels, all of which guide suitability for fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms and sizing for bridging stents. The celiac and superior mesenteric arteries should be incorporated for repair, even if evidence of proximal stenosis is identified, as should accessory renal arteries >4 mm. Although total femoral access is now widely used, all access options should be carefully evaluated for size, calcification, and dissection, including bilateral femoral, iliac, subclavian, and brachial vessels. Finally, optimal C-Arm gantry angles should be planned to clearly identify the orifice and first branch of target vessels, as well as proximal and distal sealing zones.
Assuntos
Aneurisma da Aorta Torácica , Aneurisma Aórtico , Implante de Prótese Vascular , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Aneurisma Aórtico/cirurgia , Aneurisma da Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagem , Aneurisma da Aorta Torácica/cirurgia , Prótese Vascular , Constrição Patológica/cirurgia , Humanos , Desenho de Prótese , Estudos Retrospectivos , Stents , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To provide the 5-year outcomes of the use of a composite device (proximal covered stent graft + distal bare stent) for endovascular repair of patients with acute, type B aortic dissection complicated by aortic rupture and/or malperfusion. METHODS: Study of Thoracic Aortic Type B Dissection Using Endoluminal Repair (STABLE) II was a prospective, multicenter study of the Zenith Dissection Endovascular System (William Cook Europe). Patients were enrolled between August 2012 and January 2015 at sites in the United States and Japan. Five-year follow-up was completed by January 2020. RESULTS: In total, 73 patients (mean age: 60.7 ± 10.9 years; 65.8% male) with acute type B dissection complicated by malperfusion (72.6%), rupture (21.9%), or both (5.5%) were enrolled. Patients were treated with either a composite device (79.5%) or the proximal stent graft alone (no distal bare stent, 20.5%). Dissections were more extensive in patients who received the composite device (408.9 ± 121.3 mm) than in patients who did not receive a bare stent (315.9 ± 100.1 mm). The mean follow-up was 1209.4 ± 754.6 days. Freedom from all-cause mortality was 80.3% ± 4.7% at 1 year and 68.9% ± 7.3% at 5 years. Freedom from dissection-related mortality remained at 97.1% ± 2.1% from 1-year through 5-year follow-up. Within the stent-graft region, the rate of either complete thrombosis or elimination of the false lumen increased over time (82.1% of all patients at 5 years vs 55.7% at first postprocedure computed tomography), with a higher rate at 5 years in patients who received the composite device (90.5%) compared with patients without the bare stent (57.1%). Throughout the follow-up, overall true lumen diameter increased within the stent-graft region, and overall false lumen diameter decreased. At 5 years, 20.7% of patients experienced a decrease in maximum transaortic diameter within the stent-graft region, 17.2% experienced an increase, and 62.1% experienced no change. Distal to the treated segment (but within the dissected aorta), 23.1% of patients experience no change in transaortic diameter at 5 years; a bare stent was deployed in all these patients at the procedure. Five-year freedom from all secondary intervention was 70.7% ± 7.2%. CONCLUSIONS: These 5-year outcomes indicate a low rate of dissection-related mortality for the Zenith Dissection Endovascular System in the treatment of patients with acute, complicated type B aortic dissection. Further, these data suggest a positive influence of composite device use on false lumen thrombosis. Continuous monitoring for distal aortic growth is necessary in all patients.