European Multicentric Experience With Fenestrated-branched ENDOvascular Stent Grafting After Previous FAILed Infrarenal Aortic Repair: The EU-FBENDO-FAIL Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To report the mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) following a failed previous endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) or previous open aneurysm repair (pOAR). METHODS: Data from consecutive patients who underwent F-BEVAR for pEVAR or pOAR from 2006 to 2021 from 17 European vascular centers were analyzed. Endpoints included technical success, major adverse events, 30-day mortality, and 5-year estimates of survival, target vessel primary patency, freedom from reinterventions, type I/III endoleaks, and sac growth >5 mm. BACKGROUND: Treatment of a failed previous abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is a complex undertaking. F-BEVAR is becoming an increasingly attractive option, although comparative data are limited regarding associated risk factors, indications for treatment, and various outcomes. RESULTS: There were 526 patients included, 268 pOAR and 258 pEVAR. The median time from previous repair to F-BEVAR was 7 (interquartile range, 4-12) years, 5 (3-8) for pEVAR, and 10 (6-14) for pOAR, P <0.001. Predominant indication for treatment was type Ia endoleak for pEVAR and progression of the disease for pOAR. Technical success was 92.8%, pOAR (92.2%), and pEVAR (93.4%), P =0.58. The 30-day mortality was 6.5% overall, 6.7% for pOAR, and 6.2% for pEVAR, P =0.81. There were 1853 treated target vessels with 5-year estimates of primary patency of 94.4%, pEVAR (95.2%), and pOAR (94.4%), P =0.03. Five-year estimates for freedom from type I/III endoleaks were similar between groups; freedom from reintervention was lower for pEVAR (38.3%) than for pOAR (56.0%), P =0.004. The most common indication for reinterventions was for type I/III endoleaks (37.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Repair of a failed pEVAR or pOARis safe and feasible with comparable technical success and survival rates. While successful treatment can be achieved, significant rates of reintervention should be anticipated, particularly for issues related to instability of target vessels/bridging stents.

Outcomes of descending and thoracoabdominal aortic repair in connective tissue disorder patients.

OBJECTIVES: Open surgical repair (OSR) of descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms carries risks of mortality and major complications. Patients with connective tissue disorders (CTD) are younger and require safe, efficient treatment with long-term durability. This study provides current outcome data to help inform treatment decisions. METHODS: All OSRs of descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (DTAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) from January 2011 to July 2021 were included in a retrospective cohort study. Primary outcome measures were early and follow-up mortality and reintervention. Secondary outcome measures were major complications. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate reintervention-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 26 OSRs (7 DTAA, 19 TAAA) were performed in 23 patients: 20 (77%) Marfan and 6 (23%) Loeys-Dietz syndrome; median age 43 years. Aortic dissection was present in 100% and 3/26 (12%) were urgent. Early mortality was 1/26 (3.8%). No patient suffered spinal cord ischemia, stroke, vocal cord paralysis, or re-exploration for bleeding. The transient respiratory failure occurred in 19% (5/26) and transient renal replacement therapy in 15% (4/26). Renal function normalized in all patients within 3 months. During follow-up (median 4.6, range 0-11 years) there were no deaths and only one re-intervention on a previously operated aortic segment, resulting in 92% reintervention-free survival at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: In dedicated units, open surgical DTAA and TAAA repair in patients with CTD can be performed with a very low risk of death, severe complications and, late re-intervention. For CTD patients with reasonable risk, OSR should remain the first line of treatment.

Comparison of Early and Mid-Term Outcomes After Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair in Patients With or Without Prior Infrarenal Repair.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare short- and mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (F-BEVAR) of pararenal (PRAA)/thoracoabdominal (TAAA) aortic aneurysms in patients with or without prior endovascular/open (EVAR/OAR) infrarenal aortic repair. METHODS: Data from consecutive F-BEVAR (2010-2019) at two high-volume aortic centers were retrospectively reviewed. Primary endpoints were technical success, 30-day mortality, and overall survival. Secondary endpoints included 30-day major adverse events (MAE), freedom from type I/III endoleaks, reinterventions, sac expansion, and target vessel (TV) primary patency. RESULTS: A total of 222 consecutive patients were included for analysis; of these 58 (26.1%) had prior infrarenal repair (EVAR=33, OAR=25) and 164 (73.9%) had native PRAA/TAAA. At baseline, patients with prior infrarenal repair were older (mean age=75.1 vs 71.6 years, p=.005) and the proportion of females was lower (8.6% vs 29.3%, p=.002). Technical success was 97.8% (n=217) in the entire cohort, without any significant differences between study groups (94.8% vs 98.8%, p=.08). At 30 days, there were no significant differences between patients with prior infrarenal repair as compared with those without in rate of MAE (44.8% vs 54.9%, p=.59). The 5-year estimate of survival for those who underwent native aortic repair was 61.6%, versus 61.3% for those who had a previous repair (p=.67). The 5-year freedom from endoleaks I/III estimates were significantly lower in patients who had prior infrarenal repair as compared with patients undergoing treatment of native aneurysms (57.1% vs 66.1%, p=.03), mainly owing to TV-related endoleaks (ie, type IC and/or IIIC endoleaks). No significant differences were found between study groups in rates of reinterventions and TV primary patency. Five-year estimates of freedom from sac increase >5mm were significantly lower in patients who received F-BEVAR after previous infrarenal repair as compared with those who underwent treatment of native aneurysms (48.6% vs 77.5%, p=.002). CONCLUSIONS: F-BEVAR is equally safe and feasible for treatment of patients with prior infrarenal repair as compared with those undergoing treatment for native aneurysms. Increased rates of TV-related endoleaks were observed which could lead to lower freedom from aneurysm sac shrinkage during follow-up. Nevertheless, the 5-year rates of reinterventions and TV patency were similar, thereby indicating that overall effectiveness of treatment remained satisfactory at mid-term.

Bridging stent grafts in fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair: current practice and possible complications.

Fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) is associated with a high degree of technical and clinical success. Despite this, studies have also reported high reintervention rates, and these are often related to the bridging stent grafts. Often new devices appear on the market before they have been tested in the bridging stent graft position. This review aims to assess the current literature on bridging stent grafts and discuss complications, illustrated by case reports. Complications reported with bridging stent grafts include; endoleak, kink, fracture, migration, occlusion, stenosis and perforation. Some known risk factors for bridging stent occlusions are renal artery stent grafts vs. SMA and celiac artery stent grafts. Some device specific complications have also been reported such as type IIIc endoleak with the Lifestream stent graft (Bard Peripheral Vascular, Tempe, AZ, USA) fractures and type IIId endoleaks with the 1st generation of Begraft (BentleyInnoMed, Hechingen, Germany). In addition, this review also discusses some newer devices with possible relation to complications such as stenosis and target vessel perforation. In conclusion, bridging stent grafts in fenestrated and branched aortic repair have a good midterm patency. Despite this, remaining issues are often related to the bridging stent grafts. Thorough follow-up and attention are needed, especially when new devices are introduced. The endovascular community should work towards a common global feedback system.

Vascular growth factor expression in a rat model of severe limb ischemia.

BACKGROUND: In ischemic tissue hypoxia induces production of vascular growth factors, especially VEGF, which initiate local angiogenesis. Collateralization-or arteriogenesis-occurs at a distance from the ischemic tissue and depends on different growth factors such as FGF-2. A spatial discrepancy in endogenous growth factor production in limb ischemia may have implications for therapeutic angiogenesis. The present study elucidates if such spatial and temporal variation occurs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A two-staged procedure was performed to generate severe long-lasting limb ischemia in 60 rats. At 1, 7, 28, and 56 days, subgroups were subjected to perfusion assessment with laser Doppler imaging and angiography. Muscle samples and foot skin were gathered to measure growth factor expression and signs of angiogenesis using immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: There was an early twofold increase (P < 0.05) in both VEGF and FGF-2 levels in distal muscle from the ischemic leg, but no significant rise in the thigh. The concentrations decreased over time with an exception for VEGF in soleus and FGF-2 in anterior tibial muscle, which remained high. An increased capillarity was noted (P < 0.05) in soleus after 28 days, and the number of BrdU-positive ECs was elevated in all ischemic samples at 56 days. Collateral arteries were observed on the angiograms after 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that in limb ischemia any major increase in vascular growth factor production is limited to ischemic tissue. The spatial and temporal distribution patterns of growth factor production are complex and to a great extent influenced by inflammation.