Midterm Results of Endovascular Treatment for Complete Iliac Axis Occlusions Using Covered Stents.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular treatment of complex aortoiliac disease is seeing a growing popularity despite the Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) II recommendations for open surgery in this cases. However, the available evidence does not focus particularly on patients with complete unilateral iliac axis obstruction (CIAO) (TASC II D4 group). This study reports mid-term results of endovascular therapy with covered stents for CIAO. METHODS: This is single-center retrospective review of patients with CIAO endovascular treatment from January 2015 to December 2017 (3 years). Two types of covered stents were used, alone or combined: the Viabahn self-expandable stent (W. L. Gore, Flagstaff, AZ) and the Advanta V12 balloon-expandable stent (Atrium-Maquet, Hudson, NH). Thirty-day outcomes, long-term patency (assessed with Kaplan-Meier estimates), in-hospital stay, and limb salvage were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with CIAO were treated in the period (87.2% male, mean age 64.3 ± 9 years). A majority presented with critical limb ischemia (56.4%, n = 22). Recanalization could be accomplished from an ipsilateral or contralateral femoral access in 82.1% of patients (1 case needed the use of a re-entry device), and from a left brachial access in 17.9%. Technical success was 100%. About 66.7% of cases received an aortic kissing stent technique. Common femoral artery/profundoplasty with prosthetic or bovine patch was associated with 74.3% of cases. Thirty-day mortality was 2.6% (1/39). Primary, assisted, and secondary patency rates at 24 months were all 96.8%. Mean in-hospital stay was 5 days; no limb loss was registered during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment of complete iliac axis occlusions can offer comparable midterm patency rates to open surgery aortoiliac femoral bypass, when an adequate combination of balloon and self-expandable covered stents is used and an appropriate outflow through the common femoral artery is warranted.

Effect of antiplatelet therapy on aneurysmal sac expansion associated with type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has gained widespread use through a solid reputation of safety and effectiveness. However, some issues, such as endoleaks and sac growth over time, still arise as important concerns. Antiplatelet therapy, mandatory as secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease, may play a role in both phenomena by interfering with blood clotting properties and the inflammatory process associated with AAA. We analyzed whether different antiplatelet therapies were independent risk factors for type II endoleak (T2E) persistence and midterm sac growth after EVAR. METHODS: All patients with T2E detected in the first post-EVAR control were included, except those without at least 1 year of complete follow-up. Data for demographics, clinical comorbidities, EVAR devices, and antiplatelet therapies were recorded. All patients underwent routine follow-up with contrast-enhanced tomography at 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and annually thereafter. A three-dimensional rendering of each endoleak was performed for detailed volumetry. Main outcomes were endoleak persistence at 6 months and sac growth >5 mm at end of follow-up. RESULTS: During a 9-year period, 87 patients with initial T2E were monitored for a mean of 41.5 months. On discharge, salicylates were prescribed to 50, clopidogrel to 16, and multiagent therapy or anticoagulation to 9; no therapy was given to 12. No significant differences in comorbidities or baseline AAA characteristics were found between groups. At 6 months thereafter, 59% (n = 51) of the initial T2Es persisted. At end of follow-up, 32 patients had sac growth >5 mm (37%). Sac growth was significantly less frequent in the group treated with salicylates (26% vs 60%; P = .004). Cox proportional hazards model reinforced the role of salicylates as protectors for sac growth over time (hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.87; P = .024), whereas T2E nidus volume and endoleak complexity behaved like independent risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Antiplatelet therapy with salicylates appears to be linked to a decreased risk of sac growth >5 mm over time in patients with T2Es detected right after EVAR. Population-based cohort studies are mandatory to confirm this finding and to guide a potential recommendation.

"Lower limbs revascularization from supraceliac and thoracic aorta".

Revascularization of femoral arteries from descending thoracic or supraceliac aorta is an uncommon procedure, in part because of the popularization of the technically easier extra-anatomic bypasses. However, using those aortic levels as the source of the bypass inflow is a useful alternative in selected patients with aortoiliac disease, with excellent results. We report long-term results in 4 patients with revascularization from thoracic aorta and another 2 cases from aorta at supraceliac level. This technique should be considered as a good alternative in patients with adverse abdominal conditions or with a severely diseased infrarenal aorta due to heavy calcification.

Use of aortic extension cuffs for preserving hypogastric blood flow in endovascular aneurysm repair with aneurysmal involvement of common iliac arteries.

BACKGROUND: Intentional hypogastric artery covering during endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) can carry a non-negligible rate of complications; to preserve pelvic blood flow, several approaches are in use, such as sandwich techniques, branched iliac devices, or the use of aortic extender cuffs in a bell-bottom configuration. We assess the performance of the latter for treatment of common iliac artery aneurysms during EVAR. METHODS: Prospective gathering of data in 21 dilated common iliac arteries (18-25 mm) with coexisting abdominal aorta aneurysm, which were treated from 2005 to 2010 and received a GORE(®) Excluder endograft and one (n = 14) or several aortic extenders in a bell-bottom configuration. Control group consisted of 136 EVARs performed with the same device in the same time frame. Median follow-up was of 47 months, with contrast-enhanced computed tomography assessment 1 month after the procedure and yearly thereafter. RESULTS: Age and comorbidities were homogeneously distributed among groups, although the aortic aneurysm diameter was lower in the bell-bottom group (50 mm vs. 58.2 mm, P < 0.001). There was no 30-day mortality registered in this group, and only one patient died during follow-up (5.3%), without relation with the aneurysmal disease. No significant differences were found in reintervention (15.8% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.707) or endoleak rates (36.8% vs. 38.9%, Fisher P = 1). There were no type I and four type II endoleaks, two of which precised treatment for sac growth. Endoleak-free survival (P = 0.994) and reintervention-free survival (P = 0.563) did not show differences either. CONCLUSION: Bell-bottom technique is a feasible and safe alternative for preserving hypogastric blood flow, and does not imply a higher risk of reintervention or endoleak at 3-year follow-up.

Debranching aortic surgery.

Conventional open surgery still remains as the gold standard of care for aortic arch and thoracoabdominal pathology. In centers of excellence, open repair of the arch has been performed with 5% immediate mortality and a low rate of complications; however overall mortality rates are around 15%, being up to 40% of all patients rejected for treatment due to their age or comorbidities. For thoracoabdominal aortic pathology, data reported from centers of excellence show immediate mortality rates from 5% to 19%, spinal cord ischemia from 2.7% to 13.2%, and renal failure needing dialysis from 4.6% to 5.6%. For these reasons, different alternatives that use endovascular techniques, including debranching procedures, have been developed. The reported results for hybrid debranching procedures are controversial and difficult to interpret because series are retrospective, heterogenic and including a small number of patients. Clearly, an important selection bias exists: debranching procedures are performed in elderly patients with more comorbidities and with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms that have more complex and extensive disease. Considering this fact, debranching procedures still remain a useful alternative: for aortic arch pathology debranching techniques can avoid or reduce the time of extracorporeal circulation (ECC) or cardiac arrest which may be beneficial in high-risk patients that otherwise would be rejected for treatment. And compared to pure endovascular techniques, they can be used in emergency cases with applicability in a wide range of anatomies. For thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms, they are mainly useful when other lesser invasive endovascular options are not feasible due to anatomical limitations or when they are not available in cases where delaying the intervention is not an option.

Hybrid aortic repair with antegrade supra-aortic and renovisceral debranching from ascending aorta.

Aortic dissection is a life threatening condition. Hybrid repair has been described for the treatment of complex aortic pathology such as thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) and type A and B dissections, although open and total endovascular repair are also possible. Open surgery is still associated with substantial perioperative morbi-mortality rates, thus less invasive techniques such as endovascular repair and hybrid procedures can achieve good results in centers with experience. We present the case of a patient with a chronic type B dissection and TAAA degeneration that was treated in a single stage hybrid procedure with antegrade supra-aortic and renovisceral debranching from the ascending aorta and TEVAR. At three-year follow up, the patient is free of intervention-related complications.