Favorable Remodeling After TEVAR in Uncomplicated Acute and Subacute Type B Aortic Dissection in Comparison to Conservative Treatment: A Midterm Analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the midterm and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) procedure to treat an uncomplicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection (uATBAD) with high risk for subsequent aortic complications compared with the group of patients who received a conservative treatment protocol during the same period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2008 and 2019, 35 patients who had TEVAR due to uATBAD and those with conservative procedure (n=18) were included in a retrospective analysis and follow-up study. The primary endpoints were false lumen thrombosis/perfusion, true lumen diameter, and aortic dilatation. The aortic-related mortality, reintervention, and long-term survival were the secondary endpoints. RESULTS: In the study period, 53 patients (22 females) with a mean age of 61.1±13 years were included. No 30-day and in-hospital mortality was recorded. Permanent neurological deficits occurred in 2 patients (5.7%). In the TEVAR group (n=35) and in a median follow-up period of 34 months, a significant reduction of maximum aortic and false lumen diameter as well as a significant increase of true lumen diameter were detected (p<0.001 each). Complete false lumen thrombosis increased from 6% preoperatively to 60% at follow-up. The median difference in aortic, false lumen, and true lumen diameter was -5 mm (interquartile range [IQR]=-28 to 8 mm), -11 mm (IQR=-53 to 10 mm), and 7 mm (IQR=-13 to 17 mm), respectively. In 3 patients (8.6%), a reintervention was needed. Two patients (1 aortic-related) died during follow-up. The estimated survival according to Kaplan-Meyer analysis was 94.1% after 3 years and 87.5% after 5 years. Similar to the TEVAR group, no 30-day or in-hospital mortality was recorded in the conservative group. During follow-up, 2 patients died and 5 patients underwent conversion-TEVAR (28%). In a median follow-up period of 26 months (range=150), a significant increase of maximum aortic diameter (p=0.006) and a tendency to augmentation of the false lumen (p=0.06) were noted. No significant reduction of the true lumen was seen. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients at high risk of subsequent aortic complications in uncomplicated acute and subacute type B aortic dissection is safe and is associated with favorable midterm outcomes regarding aortic remodeling. CLINICAL IMPACT: In a retrospective, single center analysis of prospectively collected data with follow-up, we compared 35 patients with high-risk features who recieved TEVAR in acute and sub-acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection to a control-group (n=18). The TEVAR group showed a significant positive remoduling (reduction of max. aortic and false lumen diameter and increase of true lumen diameter (p<0.001 each)) during follow-up with an estimated survival of 94.1% after 3 years and 87.5% after 5 years.

Long-Term Outcomes after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Using Chimney Grafts for Aortic Arch Pathologies: 10 Years of Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: This study reports the early- and long-term outcomes of the thoracic endovascular aortic repair using the Chimney-Graft technique (ChTEVAR) for the treatment of aortic arch pathologies. METHODS: From January 2010 to December 2019, patients who underwent aortic ChTEVAR technique in our institution were included. Early, mid, and long-term outcomes in this group of patients were evaluated. Patient follow-up data were obtained by imaging follow-up that are routinely performed after 3-6 months following initial surgery and then at yearly intervals. RESULTS: Aortic arch repair with a ChTEVAR was performed in 54 patients. The 30-day mortality was 18.5% (n = 10). All-cause 30-day mortality was higher in the subgroup of patients operated urgently (33% vs. 14%) without a significant difference (P = 0.141). Permanent neurological deficit (PND) was observed in 15% (8/54 patients); stroke in 11% (6/54), and paraplegia 4% (2/54). During follow-up the primary and primary-assisted chimney-graft patency was 96.8% and 97.8%, respectively. The multivariate analysis identified the age >70 years and the aortic diameter as independent risk factors for elevated mortality during the follow-up (P = 0.015 and 0.001, respectively). The PND was an independent predictor for 30-day mortality (P = 0.014, hazard ratio 13.5, 95% confidence interval 1.7-106.6). CONCLUSIONS: The ChTEVAR has noninferior results to other open and endovascular aortic arch repair methods with an acceptable long-term survival especially in elective procedures.

Comparison of Two Iliac Branch Devices and Their Midterm Performance in Maintaining Blood Flow to the Internal Iliac Artery.

Purpose: To compare and contrast the midterm outcomes of the E-liac and Zenith (ZBIS) iliac branch devices (IBDs) for the preservation of the internal iliac artery (IIA) in aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation. Materials and Methods: Between January 2014 and December 2018, 84 consecutive patients (median age 74 years; 76 men) were electively treated with the E-liac (n=44) or ZBIS (n=40) IBDs and were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the technical success, patency, need for reintervention, and mortality associated with these devices. Results: Technical success was achieved in 95 of 99 implantations (95.9%) without any statistically significant difference between the groups (93.7% vs 98.0%, p=0.114). During the first 30 days, 3 occlusions in the ZBIS group and 1 in the E-liac group were identified. There was 1 perioperative death in the ZBIS group. The median follow-up was 37 months for the ZBIS group and 28 months for the E-liac group (p=0.657). Six patients from the ZBIS group and 7 from the E-liac group were lost to follow-up. Among the remaining, there were 2 further deaths recorded, 1 in each group. Four further reinterventions in the E-liac group and 2 in the ZBIS group were performed during follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from reintervention were 87.2% (95% CI 82.6% to 90.2%) for the ZBIS group and at 86.0% (95% CI 83.7% to 89.1%) for the E-liac group (p=0.563); the freedom from occlusion estimates were 89.7% (95% CI 85.8% to 94.5%) and 95.3% (95% CI 92% to 98.7%; p=0.317), respectively. Conclusion: The E-liac and the ZBIS IBDs showed equally high technical success, midterm patency, and low reintervention rates.

Interventional recanalisation of long segment aortic atresia.

We report the case of a long-segment aortic atresia as the cause for therapy resistant arterial hypertension in a young adult. Recanalization was achieved interventionally by wire-crossing and stent implantation with subsequent normalization of blood pressure.

Long-term outcomes of open and endovascular treatment of recurrent carotid artery stenosis - a 16-year retrospective single centre case series.

Background: The aim of this study is to evaluate perioperative as well as long-term outcomes in patients operated with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or stenting (CAS) due to symptomatic or asymptomatic high-grade restenosis of the internal carotid artery (ICA). Patients and methods: In a retrospective analysis of our electronic database including 2980 patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy or stenting due to a symptomatic or asymptomatic high-grade stenosis of the ICA, between 2000 and 2016, we enrolled 111 patients with recurrent ICA stenosis. Results: An ipsilateral 2nd time restenosis (> 80 % in the asymptomatic and > 50 % in the symptomatic patients according to NASCET criteria) of ICA was detected in 13 patients (12 %); 3 of them were symptomatic. These patients were managed with either CEA (n = 5/38 %) or CAS (n = 8/62 %) with no perioperative stroke or death. The stroke-free survival rates at 2 and 8 years for CEA were 98 % and 98 % versus 100 % and 100 % for CAS respectively (P = .271). The type of the initial procedure (patch, CAS or interposition) did not play any significant role for the development of a 2nd time restenosis (P = .841). Conclusions: Redo-CEA/CAS seem to have similar results as primary procedures (as reported in the literature) with favorable periprocedural and long-term outcomes.

Image fusion using the two-dimensional-three-dimensional registration method helps reduce contrast medium volume, fluoroscopy time, and procedure time in hybrid thoracic endovascular aortic repairs.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of image fusion (IF) technology in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) on reducing radiation exposure (dose and time), amount of injected iodinated contrast medium needed, and procedure time. METHODS: We performed a review of our institutional endovascular aortic database of patients who had undergone TEVAR between 2008 and 2016 before and after the installation of a three-dimensional (3D) IF computed tomography system in our hybrid operating room. All patients were operated on using the same radiologic equipment with or without IF. RESULTS: The 146 patients who had undergone elective or emergent TEVAR with preoperative computed tomography angiography done in 1-mm-thick slices were divided into two groups: the IF group (98 patients), in which TEVAR was performed using intraoperative IF with the two-dimensional-3D registration method; and 48 controls without the use of IF. The IF group received a significantly reduced dose of contrast material, with a median of 70 mL (interquartile range [IQR], 50-101 mL) compared with controls receiving 104 mL (IQR, 69-168 mL; P < .001).Patients who underwent hybrid TEVAR had a significantly reduced procedure time under IF guidance (n = 25) compared with controls (n = 11; median, 162 minutes [IQR, 139-199 minutes] vs 213 minutes [IQR, 189-298 minutes]; P = .015). In addition, the intraoperative fluoroscopy time was reduced to 9 minutes (IQR, 6-13 minutes) vs 23 minutes (IQR, 12-45 minutes; P < .005). However, the radiation dose (dose-area product) was similar for the two groups (P = .37).In patients who underwent plain TEVAR (n = 74) without a carotid-subclavian bypass, the IF group needed significantly less contrast material (median, 64 mL [IQR, 43-81 mL]) compared with the control group (median, 98 mL [IQR, 60-180 mL]; P = .003), whereas intraoperative radiation exposition, procedure time, and fluoroscopy time did not statistically significantly differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The IF technology using the two-dimensional-3D registration method was associated with reduced intraoperative contrast material volume in performing TEVAR. IF seemed to shorten the operation and radiation times in the more complicated (hybrid) TEVAR cases. However, a prospective study is needed to look at the dose-area product, fluoroscopy time, and procedure time in a larger cohort of patients.

Prospective Study of the Iliac Branch Device E-liac in Patients with Common Iliac Artery Aneurysms: 12 Month Results.

OBJECTIVES: At 12 months follow up of the PLIANT study, clinical success and efficacy of the E-liac Stent Graft System (JOTEC GmbH, Hechingen, Germany) were evaluated. Clinical success was defined as aneurysm exclusion (no type I, III, IV endoleak) with primary patency of the internal iliac artery (IIA) and external iliac artery (EIA) on the E-liac implantation side. METHODS: In this prospective multicentre European observational study, clinical and morphological data of 45 patients (93% male, mean age 72 y) were prospectively collected in 11 European centres between July 2014 and June 2016. Forty patients underwent an aorto-iliac (three patients bilaterally) treatment and five an isolated iliac treatment. RESULTS: At 12 months follow up, data were available for 42 patients. Overall clinical success at 12 months was 90%, with a survival rate of 100%. Four patients (10%) did not achieve clinical success, one with an internal iliac artery (IIA) occlusion on the E-liac implantation side, one with an infrarenal type Ia endoleak, and two with type Ib endoleaks in IIA. At 12 months the primary patency rate in the internal iliac artery on the iliac side branch implantation side was 98%. Two patients (5%) received E-liac related re-interventions: one caused by an edge stenosis at the distal end of the graft limb in the external iliac artery (EIA) and one caused by thrombo-embolism in the external iliac artery. Thus, for the EIA, primary and secondary patency rates were 98% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The low device related re-intervention rate of 5%, the high survival rate of 100%, and the high primary patency rates of 98% for the IIA and EIA at 12 month follow up demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the E-liac Stent Graft System. Long term 36 month results are awaited to confirm the efficacy and durability.

A Cost Calculation of EVAR and FEVAR Procedures at an European Academic Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to calculate the costs of EVAR and FEVAR procedures in a European academic hospital by cost retrieval based on a subcohort with known detailed costs through application of the individually detailed calculated costs to the total study population and to correlate these with corresponding reimbursements. METHODS: A cost analysis was performed on 25 FEVAR and 100 EVAR cases based on the detailed cost analysis of a group of patients treated in 2012 and 2013 by applying the costs based on costs per time unit within 4 subgroups: (1) uncomplicated EVAR, (2) complicated EVAR, (3) uncomplicated FEVAR, and (4) complicated FEVAR. RESULTS: Thirty cases (19 EVAR and 11 FEVAR) treated in 2012 and 2013 were used to determine the individual detailed costs for the entire study group consisting of 100 EVAR and 25 FEVAR cases. There were 14 repeat operations within the 100 EVAR cases and 3 repeat operations within the 25 FEVAR cases. A total of 14 EVAR-treated patients were readmitted, as was one FEVAR patient. The costs of the endografts were the largest contributor to the overall costs, followed by the costs of the surgery itself and the stay in the ward. The costs of an uncomplicated EVAR procedure summed up at €12,090; a complicated EVAR procedure costs €13,956. An uncomplicated FEVAR procedure costs €34,807, and a complicated FEVAR procedure costs €36,695. The difference between median reimbursements received for the uncomplicated EVAR and FEVAR procedures was significant with €13,374 for uncomplicated FEVAR and €11,486 for complicated FEVAR in favor of the FEVAR group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: No financial loss was calculated in any of the subgroups. The costs of the endografts were the largest contributor to the overall costs, followed by the costs of the surgery itself and the stay in the ward.

A Shorter Aortic Arch Sealing Ring (< 10 mm) Distal to the Most Distal Chimney Seems to Be an Additional Important Factor Contributing to a Gutter Endoleak in Aortic Arch TEVAR.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to define the possible anatomical and technical parameter that might predict the occurrence of gutter endoleak or type Ia endoleak (EL Ia) in patients treated with the chimney graft (CG) technique for the brachiocephalic trunk (BCT) and left common carotid artery (LCCA) due to aortic arch pathologies. METHODS: We reviewed our institutional endovascular aortic database of patients, who between 2010 and 2018 had undergone thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with chimney graft technique (ChTEVAR) as a debranching method of the supraaortic arteries. RESULTS: ChTEVAR was performed in 45 patients of whom a chimney in both the LCCA and the BCT was used in 32 patients, only in the LCCA in twelve patients, and only in the BCT in one patient. Eight patients (17.8%) had an EL Ia (based on postoperative computed tomography angiography). No late EL Ia was detected during the follow-up period. All patients with a postoperative EL Ia received 2 CGs with one each for the BCT, and LCCA had either no or a sealing ring distal to the most distal chimney of less than 10 mm versus patients with a longer sealing zone (P = 0.043). Patients with an endoleak did not differ from those without endoleak with respect to stent-graft oversizing, the diameter of the proximal and distal landing zones, or the aortic diameter directly proximal to the pathology. CONCLUSIONS: A sealing ring distal to the most distal chimney of more than 10 mm seems to be associated with a reduced risk of an EL Ia. The relatively few patients and the single-center nature require larger studies to verify the present results.

Prescription rate of anti-atherosclerotic drugs in German nursing homes and its impact on outcome.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is one of the major manifestations of general atherosclerosis and strongly associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Because only few epidemiologic studies are available concerning the prevalence of PAD in inhabitants ≥ 80 years of age, we screened inhabitants of nursing care homes in Germany for PAD and cardiovascular diseases and to assess the one year mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study, screening inhabitants of 42 nursing homes for PAD. Demographic data, comorbidities, cardiovascular risk factors and daily medication were collected. PAD was defined as ankle-brachial index < 0.9. During a follow up period of one year, cardio- and cerebrovascular events and mortality were recorded, as well as the rate of falls and major amputation. RESULTS: 1,329 probands (391 men, 938 women) > 60 years were eligible for further analysis. The mean age was 84.1 years (range 61-107 years) and the prevalence of PAD was 31.5 % . Media sclerosis was found in up to 17 %, and an existing diagnosis of PAD (in case of pathological ABI) and undertreatment was common. Probands with PAD were less likely to be treated according to guideline recommendations (antiplatelet therapy, beta blockers, statins) than probands with coronary artery disease (CAD). The overall one-year mortality was 19.8 % (n = 236), significantly higher than for a gender and age matched German population (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows a high prevalence of PAD in German nursing care homes. The one year mortality was not significantly different between probands with PAD and those with severe PAD (defined as an ABI of ≤ 0.5), whereas a media sclerosis was associated with an increased risk in probands with CAD in comparison to those without. Use of anti-diabetic agents and aspirin in monotherapy was associated with a reduced one-year mortality risk.

Patients Older Than 80 Years Can Reach Their Normal Life Expectancy After Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Comparison Between Endovascular Aneurysm Repair and Open Surgery.

PURPOSE: To investigate the long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm in octogenarian patients and to compare them with the overall expected survival based on a sex- and age-matched German population. METHODS: A total of 177 patients (median age 82 years; 149 men) ≥80 years old (range 80-92) who underwent primary elective repair of an infrarenal aortic aneurysm (≥5 cm) between 1998 and 2015 were identified in a database search. Two groups of patients were formed based on the type of procedure: 131 EVAR patients (median age 83 years; 114 men) and 46 OSR patients (median age 82 years; 35 men). RESULTS: The median follow-up was 5 years for the OSR group and 4.5 years for the EVAR group. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in survival between the EVAR and OSR groups at 78 months. The observed survival of all study patients was not statistically different from the expected survival of a sex- and age-matched German population, which was true separately for women and men. CONCLUSION: The patients in this study seemed to reach normal life expectancy in comparison to the age- and sex-matched general population with a similar cumulative survival in both study groups over 5 years of follow-up.

Prevalence of Bovine Aortic Arch Variant in Patients with Aortic Dissection and its Implications in the Outcome of Patients with Acute Type B Aortic Dissection.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: To investigate the prevalence of bovine arch (BA) among patients with type A and B aortic dissection, and to provide insight into the implication of this variation on the outcome of patients with acute or subacute type B aortic dissection (a/sTBAD). METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis includes patients with a/sTBAD admitted between January 2006 and December 2016. Computed tomographic angiograms (CTAs) of patients referred because of type A aortic dissection were also re-evaluated with regard to the presence of BA. As a control group, 110 oncological patients who had undergone a chest CTA for disease staging during the study period were enrolled. A total of 154 patients with a/sTBAD and 168 with type A aortic dissection were identified during the study period. RESULTS: An overall prevalence of 17.6% for BA variants was revealed. The comparison between patients with aortic dissection and the control group showed no statistically significant difference in BA prevalence (17.7% vs. 17.3%; p = 1.0). No statistically significant difference in BA prevalence was observed when comparing patients with type A aortic dissection with those with type B aortic dissection (16.6% vs. 18.8%; p = .66). During a median follow-up period of 27.8 months, 30 patients died. The mortality rate among patients presenting a BA variant was 34.5%, whereas among patients without, it was 16.0% (p = .04). Multivariate analysis revealed the presence of a BA as an independent predictor of mortality (adjusted odds ratio 3.4, 95% confidence interval 1.2-9.8). CONCLUSION: The BA should be considered as a predictor of the outcome for patients with type B aortic dissection.

Prevalence of the Computed Tomographic Morphological DISSECT Predictors in Uncomplicated Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: The aim was to analyse the prevalence of computed tomographic (CT) morphological predictors and their influence on early chronic phase aortic diameter expansion in patients with uncomplicated acute Stanford type B aortic dissection (ATBAD). METHODS: This retrospective analysis reviewed the CT imaging of 140 patients admitted with uncomplicated ATBAD to two tertiary centres between March 2003 and April 2016. The prevalence of the following CT-morphological predictors was determined at baseline: primary entry tear (PET) diameter ≥ 10 mm, its location at the concavity of the aortic arch; maximum descending aortic diameter ≥ 40 mm; false lumen (FL) diameter ≥ 22 mm; partial FL thrombosis and a fusiform index (FI) of ≥0.64. Thoracic aortic diameter expansion (ADE) was evaluated in 65 patients treated by best medical therapy (BMT) (median CT follow up 11.6 months). Study end points were predictor prevalence and ADE. RESULTS: A mean ± SD of 2.45 ± 1.35 predictors were registered among all 140 patients; 75.0% of patients showed at least two predictors. In 7.9% of patients, no predictor was found. The prevalence of PET at the arch concavity was 18.6%, PET diameter ≥10 mm in 60.0%, maximal descending aortic diameter ≥40 mm in 51.4%, FL diameter ≥22 mm in 47.9%, partial FL thrombosis in 47.9%, and FI ≥ 0.64 in 20.7%. An ADE ≥5 mm was observed in 38 of 65 patients. Median observed ADE was 5.1 mm (median follow up (FU) 11.6 months, range -3.2-27.4 mm). Regression analysis for multiple predictors showed a basic ADE of 2.5 mm plus 1.9 mm per predictor at the median FU of 11.6 months (2.5 mm ± 1.9; 95% confidence interval CI -0.2-5.2 mm ± 0.7-3.0 mm; p = .003). CONCLUSION: In the majority of patients, at least one of the investigated morphological predictors of disease progression in uncomplicated ATBAD was detected. An ADE ≥5 mm affected 38 of 65 BMT patients. CT based predictors help to define TBAD patients at risk of progression.

The 2D-3D Registration Method in Image Fusion Is Accurate and Helps to Reduce the Used Contrast Medium, Radiation, and Procedural Time in Standard EVAR Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and the effectiveness of 2D-3D registration method of image fusion (IF) technology in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: We performed a review of our institutional endovascular aortic database of patients who had undergone EVAR between 2011 and 2015 before and after the installation of a 3D IF computed tomography system in our hybrid operating room. RESULTS: The accuracy was assessed in 14 endovascular procedures and showed a median registration error of 1.8 mm at the origin of the right renal artery and 1.0 mm at the origin of the left renal artery and a complete visual accuracy in 42% of the cases. EVAR was performed using the intraoperative IF technique with a 2D-3D registration method in 105 patients (group IF), whereas 47 patients done without served as controls. The IF group had a significantly reduced amount of used contrast compared with controls with a median of 58 mL and P < 0.0001. The intraoperative exposition to radiation was similar between the 2 groups with a median dose area product of 2,343.7 cGy cm2 in the IF group and 3,219 cGy cm2 among the controls (P = 0.457). The radiation dose in the sub group IF (including patients operated by the 2 most experienced surgeons) was lower than that in sub controls (median, 1,087 cG cm2 vs. 2,705.3 cG cm2, P = 0.012). The procedure time and the time of intraoperative radiation did not differ between the study groups (P = 0.117 and 0.106, respectively), as did not fluoroscopy time in the sub group IF (median, 6.3 min, vs. 9.5 min, P = 0.067), but for the 2 most experienced surgeons, the procedural time was shortened when using IF (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The 2D-3D registration method of IF guidance is accurate to delineate the vessels of interest and could help the execution of the EVAR procedures with a significantly reduced amount of contrast medium and also with reduced radiation and shorter procedural duration when surgeons are more familiar with EVAR and IF.

Single-center mid-term experience with chimney-graft technique for the preservation of flow to the supra-aortic branches.

Objectives To investigate the feasibility and the mid-term outcomes of the chimney-graft technique for the revascularization of supra-aortic branches in patients with thoracic aortic pathologies involving the aortic arch. Methods A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database between January 2010 and July 2016 was performed. Primary endpoints were 30-day and overall mortality. Secondary endpoints were technical success, target vessel patency, stroke/transitory ischemic attack and type I/III endoleak rate. Results A total of 30 patients (80% male, median age 70.0 years) were treated using the chimney-graft technique for the supra-aortic branches. The indication was a degenerative aneurysm in nine patients (32%) and a type B Stanford aortic dissection and a penetrating aortic ulcer in the descending aorta in seven patients (23%), respectively. In six patients (20.0%), the indication was an type Ia endoleak after previous endovascular thoracic repair, whereas a pseudoaneurysm after previous open repair of the descending aorta was the indication in one patient (3%). Twenty-three patients (77%) were treated electively, five (17%) emergently and two (7%) urgently because of free rupture. Technical success was achieved in 90% of patients. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality was 17% (5/30). A retrograde dissection was presented in five patients. Four patients experienced a cerebrovascular event. Eight patients had type Ia endoleak and 10 had type II. During the median follow-up of 16 months (range: 0-56), four further patients died: one in respiratory insufficiency, one due to a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, one in meningitis and the last one for unknown reason. The chimney-graft patency was 100%. According to the Kaplan-Meier curve, the estimated survival at one year was 66 ± 9%. Conclusions The chimney-graft technique, despite a technically demanding strategy, is a useful tool as bailout procedure in our armamentarium for high-risk patients, unsuitable for open or hybrid repair.

Prospective study of the E-liac Stent Graft System in patients with common iliac artery aneurysms: 30-Day results.

OBJECTIVES: To study the safety and feasibility of the E-liac Stent Graft System® in patients with aorto/iliac aneurysms. METHODS: A prospective multicentric European registry of patients receiving the E-liac Stent Graft System® was conducted. Endpoints of the study included the technical success as well as periprocedural events and 30-day endoleaks, reinterventions, internal and external iliac artery patency and mortality. RESULTS: Between July 2014 and June 2016, a total of 45 patients (93% men, mean age 72 years, range 53-90 years) were enrolled at 11 sites in four European countries. Five patients received an isolated iliac treatment. Thirty-seven patients were treated with a combination of an abdominal stent graft and a unilateral E-liac and three in combination with bilateral E-liac. All E-liac Stent Grafts (48) were implanted in the intended position and the internal iliac arteries were successfully bridged. Two patients did not receive clinical success, due to endoleak type Ia of the aortic stent graft. At 30-day follow-up, clinical success rate was 96%. Three successful endovascular reinterventions were performed within the 30-day follow-up: one due to a type Ia endoleak in the common iliac artery, one due to type Ia endoleak of the aortic stent graft, and one due to bilateral lower limb claudication provoked by stent graft limb stenosis. At 30-day, a 100% survival rate and complete absence of pelvic or buttock ischemia/claudication were reported. Primary patency at 30 days was 100% for the internal iliac artery and 98% for the external iliac artery with an assisted patency of 100% in the latter. CONCLUSIONS: The high clinical success rate, low rates of device-related reinterventions (2%), and excellent patency rate demonstrate the safety and feasibility of the E-liac Stent Graft System. Long-term results are awaited to state efficacy and durability. Clinical Trials.gov. Identifier no. NCT02209194.

A current systematic evaluation and meta-analysis of chimney graft technology in aortic arch diseases.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide a review of the literature on the use of chimney graft (CG) technique in treating arterial diseases of the aortic arch and to extrapolate conclusions by summarizing the reported outcomes in a meta-analysis. METHODS: An extensive electronic search was made using PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Direct Databases, and the Cochrane Library. Included in this meta-analysis were all papers published up to February 2016 on endovascular chimney technique in the arch vessels with or without adjunct extra-anatomic debranching, in any language, providing data about at least one of the essential outcomes: early and late type I endoleak, 30-day mortality rate, development of perioperative stroke, patency, and retrograde aortic dissection. RESULTS: Of the 478 reports yielded by the electronic search, a total of 11 publications (on 373 patients and 387 CGs) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in this study. The overall estimated proportion of technical success was 91.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.4%-94.0%). Of the 373 patients, 26 (7%) experienced a type Ia endoleak in the perioperative period. The overall estimated proportion of early type Ia endoleak was 9.4% (95% CI, 6.5%-13.4%). Among the 10 studies that provided data, a retrograde type A dissection was observed in 2 of 351 patients, resulting in an overall estimated proportion of 1.8% (95% CI, 0.8%-4.0%). The pooled 30-day mortality rate was 7.9% (95% CI, 4.6%-13.2%). The pooled estimation for reintervention was 10.6% (95% CI, 5%-21%); for major stroke, 2.6% (95% CI, 1.3%-5.0%); for early patency, 97.9% (95% CI, 95.8%-99%); and for late patency, 92.9% (95% CI, 87.3%-96%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of aortic diseases involving the aortic arch poses a great challenge. The CG technique has been applied as an alternative treatment option. This meta-analysis shows that endovascular repair of aortic arch disease using a CG technique in the aortic arch vessels is technically feasible and effective but not without major risk of complications.

Predictors of aortic growth in uncomplicated type B aortic dissection from the Acute Dissection Stent Grafting or Best Medical Treatment (ADSORB) database.

BACKGROUND: The high-risk patient cohort of uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (uTBADs) needs to be clarified. We compared uTBAD patients treated with best medical treatment (BMT), with and without aortic growth, from the Acute Dissection Stent Grafting or Best Medical Treatment (ADSORB) trial database. Furthermore, we looked for trends in outcome for aortic growth and remodeling after BMT and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and BMT (TEVAR+BMT). METHODS: BMT patients with available baseline and a 1-year follow-up arterial computed tomography scan were identified. True lumen and false lumen diameter was assessed at baseline and at follow-up. Patients with false lumen growth (group I) and without false lumen growth (group II) were compared. Predictors of false lumen and total lumen (aortic) growth were identified. Lastly, BMT outcomes were compared with BMT+TEVAR for false lumen thrombosis and change in false lumen and total aortic diameter in four sections: 0 to 10 cm (A), 10 to 20 cm (B), 20 to 30 cm (C), and 30 to 40 cm (D) from the left subclavian artery. RESULTS: The dissection was significantly longer in group I than in group II (43.2 ± 4.9 cm vs 30.4 ± 8.8 cm; P = .002). The number of vessels originating from the false lumen at baseline was identified as an independent predictor of false lumen growth (odds ratio, 22.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-481.5; P = .049). Increasing age was a negative predictor of total aortic diameter growth (odds ratio, 0.902; 95% confidence interval, 0.813-1.00; P = .0502). The proximal sections A and B showed complete thrombosis in 80.6% in the BMT+TEVAR group compared with 9.5% in the BMT group. In these sections, changes from patent to partial or partial to complete thrombosis were observed in 90.3% of the TEVAR+BMT group vs 31.0% in the BMT group. In sections C and D, the change in thrombosis was 74.1% for the TEVAR+BMT group vs 20.6% for the BMT group. The false lumen diameter increase at section C was larger in the BMT group. Total lumen diameter decreased in sections A and B in the TEVAR+BMT group compared with an increase in the BMT group (-4.8 mm vs +2.9 mm, and -1.5 mm vs +3.8 mm, respectively). Sections C and D showed minimal and comparable expansion in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: The new imaging analysis of the ADSORB trial patients identified the number of vessels originating from the false lumen as an independent predictor of false lumen growth in uTBAD patients. Increasing age was a negative predictor of aortic growth. Our analysis may help to identify which uTBAD patients are at higher risk and should receive TEVAR or be monitored closely during follow-up.

Repeated contrast medium application after endovascular aneurysm repair and not the type of endograft fixation seems to have deleterious effect on the renal function.

OBJECTIVE: The influence of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) on renal function is of high concern. The question whether stent graft fixation type plays a significant role in renal outcome after EVAR is still debated. However, other factors, such as repeated contrast medium exposure, should also be considered. METHODS: We performed a two-center, stratified-cohort case control study to evaluate the influence of last-generation abdominal endografts with suprarenal (SR) vs infrarenal (IR) fixation on renal function. RESULTS: From a total of 276 patients, 134 were treated with IR fixation (group A) and 142 with SR fixation (group B) stent grafts. There was no significant difference in intraoperative contrast medium use (mean 120.0 mL group A vs 104.8 mL; P = .087) between the two cohorts. Overall, 11.2% of the patients (31/276) showed a relevant decline (≥20%) of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) postoperative and 11.5% (31/269) after 12 months. Furthermore, 19/134 (14.2%) patients in group A and 12/142 (8.5%) patients in group B showed a postoperative decrease of eGFR ≥20% (P = .132). Comparing the 12-month follow up, there was also no significant difference between the two groups (group A, n = 18/134; group B, n = 13/135; P = .329). Patients with only one contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan postoperatively (4/102; 3.9%) showed significant less renal deterioration after 12 months compared with the rest of the study collectively (27/166; 16.9%; P = .002). Comparing IR vs SR fixation in these patients, there was no significant difference between the two groups. One patient (1/35; 2.9%) with IR fixation (group A) and 3/67 (4.5%) with SR fixation (group B) showed a decline in eGFR values of ≥20% after 12 months (P = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed no significant difference in renal impairment between SR and IR fixation in EVAR for IR abdominal aortic aneurysm. However, significantly more renal deterioration was observed in patients with increased postoperative contrast medium expose. Therefore, alternatives such as contrast- enhanced duplex ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging for EVAR surveillance should be considered.

Ten-Year Single-Center Results of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Treatment: Endovascular versus Open Repair.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to compare the long-term survival in matched cohorts of patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) undergoing an elective open repair (OR) or an endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: Patients with a primary elective repair of an infrarenal aortic aneurysm between 1998 and 2006 were identified in a retrospective review of our single-center database. EVAR and OR patients were matched with respect to age, gender, renal disease, tobacco use, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and coronary artery disease. The primary end points were the early mortality and all-cause mortality during follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 465 patients with elective infrarenal aortic aneurysm repair were identified in the database. The EVAR and OR patients were matched according to the above-mentioned characteristics, and finally, 108 patients were included in each group. The early mortality encountered was only one death in the open group (P = 0.316). The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis by the log-rank test showed no difference in cumulative survival between OR group and EVAR group (P = 0.458). Seventeen reinterventions (16.7%) in the EVAR group vs. 7 (6.5%) in the OR group (P = 0.018) were necessary during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: OR and EVAR can be performed safely for elective treatment of AAA. The reintervention rate is, as expected, significantly higher in the EVAR group, but the long-term survival remains equal in both groups.