Early and Late Aortic-Related Mortality and Rupture After Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) has been used as a minimally invasive alternative to open surgical repair to treat patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). The aim of this study was to evaluate aortic-related mortality (ARM) and aortic aneurysm rupture after FB-EVAR of TAAAs. METHODS: Patients enrolled in 8 prospective, nonrandomized, physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies between 2005 and 2020 who underwent elective FB-EVAR of asymptomatic intact TAAAs were analyzed. Primary end points were ARM, defined as any early mortality (30 days or in hospital) or late mortality from aortic rupture, dissection, organ or limb malperfusion attributable to aortic disease, complications of reinterventions, or aortic rupture. Secondary end points were early major adverse events, TAAA life-altering events (defined as death, permanent spinal cord injury, permanent dialysis, or stroke), all-cause mortality, and secondary interventions. RESULTS: A total of 1109 patients were analyzed; 589 (53.1%) had extent I-III and 520 (46.9%) had extent IV TAAAs. Median age was 73.4 years (interquartile range, 68.1-78.3 years); 368 (33.2%) were women. Early mortality was 2.7% (n=30); congestive heart failure was associated with early mortality (odds ratio, 3.30 [95% CI, 1.22-8.02]; P=0.01). Incidence of early aortic rupture was 0.4% (n=4). Incidence of early major adverse events and TAAA life-altering events was 20.4% (n=226) and 7.7% (n=85), respectively. There were 30 late ARMs; 5-year cumulative incidence was 3.8% (95% CI, 2.6%-5.4%); older age and extent I-III TAAAs were independently associated with late ARM (each P<0.05). Fourteen late aortic ruptures occurred; 5-year cumulative incidence was 2.7% (95% CI, 1.2%-4.3%); extent I-III TAAAs were associated with late aortic rupture (hazard ratio, 5.85 [95% CI, 1.31-26.2]; P=0.02). Five-year all-cause mortality was 45.7% (95% CI, 41.7%-49.4%). Five-year cumulative incidence of secondary intervention was 40.3% (95% CI, 35.8%-44.5%). CONCLUSIONS: ARM and aortic rupture are uncommon after elective FB-EVAR of asymptomatic intact TAAAs. Half of the ARMs occurred early, and most of the late deaths were not aortic related. Late all-cause mortality rate and the need for secondary interventions were 46% and 40%, respectively, 5 years after FB-EVAR. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT02089607, NCT02050113, NCT02266719, NCT02323581, NCT00583817, NCT01654133, NCT00483249, NCT02043691, and NCT01874197.

Impact of routine surveillance duplex ultrasound and subsequent reintervention after superficial femoral artery stenting.

OBJECTIVE: Superficial femoral artery (SFA) stenting is a common treatment for peripheral artery disease. It is effective in the short term; however, in-stent restenosis (ISR) limits long-term success. Surveillance with duplex ultrasound (DUS) can identify patients who develop ISR leading to early reintervention, but data to support this practice is sparce. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether surveillance and subsequent reintervention improves outcomes in patients with SFA stents. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective study was performed with patients undergoing SFA stenting between 2005 and 2020 who had a follow-up with DUS. Five groups were identified based on the presence of ISR on DUS (ISR vs no ISR [NISR]), recurrence of symptoms (symptomatic [SX] vs asymptomatic [ASX]), and if any reintervention was performed (reintervention [R] vs no reintervention [NR]): (1) ISR+SX+R; (2) ISR+SX+NR; (3) ISR+ASX+R; (4) ISR+ASX+NR; and (5) NISR+NR. The primary endpoint was amputation-free survival, and the secondary endpoint was patency. Predictors of mortality and surveillance were identified by multivariable logistic regressions and Cox multivariate regression models. Survival curves were presented as Kaplan-Meier plots using log-rank test for subgroup comparison. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-seven patients were included in the analysis. The indication for intervention was claudication in 28% and chronic limb-threatening ischemia in 72%. A total of 161 patients (63%) underwent reintervention for ISR. Of patients who had restenosis on DUS, those who were symptomatic and did not undergo reintervention (ISR+SX+NR) did the worst, with 50% amputation rate. In contrast, those who were asymptomatic but did undergo reintervention (ISR+ASX+R) had the lowest amputation rate of 13%. Active smoking was a predictor of both loss of patency and amputation (1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-2.98; P = .050; 3.55; 95% CI, 1.53-8.25; P = .003). Post procedure dual antiplatelet therapy had a positive association with limb salvage (hazard ratio [HR], 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.58; P = .001), whereas diabetes (HR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.21-6.01; P = .019), stent occlusion (HR, 17.0; 95% CI, 5.93-63.1; P < .001), and chronic limb-threatening ischemia presentations (HR, 4.31; 95% CI, 1.86-11.7; P=.002) were negatively associated with limb salvage. CONCLUSIONS: Routine surveillance DUS and subsequent reintervention on ISR after SFA stenting is associated with improved patency and amputation-free survival. Surveillance DUS should be routine for patients after stenting, with reintervention strongly considered if ISR is identified for both symptomatic and asymptomatic.

The addition of a leaded arm sleeve to leaded aprons further decreases operator upper outer quadrant chest wall radiation dose during fluoroscopically guided interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer most commonly occurs in the upper outer quadrant (UOQ) chest wall (CW). The effectiveness of routine leaded aprons to protect this region of the body in interventionalists during fluoroscopically guided interventions (FGIs) is unknown. Given the high lifetime attributable risks of prolonged occupational exposure to ionizing radiation and the increasing number of practicing female vascular surgeons and interventionalists, we sought to determine if the use of a leaded arm shield would offer additional protection to the lateral CW and axilla in operators compared with routine leaded aprons. METHODS: Effectiveness of leaded sleeves in attenuating radiation dose to the axilla and UOQ was evaluated in clinical practice and simulated scenarios. In the clinical setting, optically stimulated luminescence nanoDot detectors were placed at the UOQ lateral CW position, both over and under a standard leaded apron vest with and without the addition of an antimony/bismuth Enviro-Lite sleeve on two vascular surgeons performing FGIs. In the simulation, nanoDots were similarly placed on an anthropomorphic phantom positioned to represent a primary operator performing right femoral access. Fluorography was performed on 12-inch-thick acrylic scatter phantom at 80 kVp for an exposure of 3 Gy reference air kerma. Experiments were done with and without the sleeve. Paired Wilcoxon and χ2 tests were performed to identify the statistical significance of radiation attenuation. RESULTS: Operator UOQ CW dose was measured during 61 FGIs: 33 cases (54%) with and 28 cases (46%) without the sleeve. Median procedure reference air kerma and fluoroscopy time was 180 mGy (interquartile range [IQR], 85-447 mGy) and 21 minutes (IQR, 11-39 minutes) when the sleeve was worn vs 100 mGy (IQR, 67-270 mGy) and 11 minutes (IQR, 6.3-25 minutes) without the sleeve. Radiation dose to the operator's UOQ was reduced by 96% (IQR, 85%-96%) when the sleeve was present and by 62% (IQR, 44%-82%; P < .001) without the sleeve. In the simulated setting, the sleeve reduced the radiation dose to the UOQ compared with the apron alone (96% vs 67%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Routine leaded aprons do attenuate the majority of UOQ chest wall radiation dose; however, the addition of a lead-equivalent sleeve further significantly reduces this dose. Because this area of the body has a high incidence of cancer formation, additional protection, especially to female interventionalists, seems prudent. Vascular surgeons should consider using a protective sleeve with their personal protective equipment when performing complex fluoroscopically guided procedures.

Midterm outcomes of the Viabahn VBX balloon-expandable covered stent for fenestrations during complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVES: The optimal bridging stent for fenestrations during complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has not been defined. At our institution, the Viabahn VBX is frequently used given its availability and mechanical and heparin-bonding characteristics. This study aimed to assess the performance of the Viabahn VBX vs the iCast balloon-expandable covered stents as bridging stents for fenestrations during complex EVAR. METHODS: A retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing complex EVAR between 2015 and 2021 was performed. Celiac arteries (CAs), superior mesenteric arteries (SMAs), left renal arteries, and right renal arteries stented with fenestrations were grouped according to the type of bridging stent, VBX vs iCast. Target vessels (TV) stented with a branch or scallop were excluded. The primary end points included primary patency and freedom from TV instability. RESULTS: A total of 292 patients undergoing complex EVAR were treated using VBX or iCast with a mean follow-up of 190 days (interquartile range, 36-384 days) for the VBX cohort and 804 days (interquartile range, 384-1507 days) for the iCast cohort. A total of 677 TVs were stented, including 134 CAs (20%), 175 SMAs (26%), 182 left RAs (27%), 186 right RAs (27%), and 12 additional vessels (2%). Proximal reinforcement was more frequent with VBX than with iCast stent (23% vs 2.4%; P < .0001). There was no difference in primary patency rates at 2 years between VBX and iCast stent for CA (100% vs 96.4%; P = .32), SMA (97.8% vs 100%; P = .14), and the RAs (96.7% vs 99.4%; P = .11). There was no difference between VBX and iCast in the cumulative incidence of type Ic and type IIIc endoleaks (3.2% vs 5.6%; P = .69) or freedom from TV instability at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Viabahn VBX stents are a safe and effective option as bridging stents in fenestrations during complex EVAR with comparable midterm outcomes to iCast stents. However, proximal stent reinforcement may be required with VBX stent to ensure adequate sealing at the fenestrations. Longer follow-ups and larger series are required to assess long-term outcomes and durability.

Long-term outcomes of staged iliofemoral endoconduits prior to complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Adverse iliofemoral anatomy may preclude complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). In our practice, staged iliofemoral endoconduits (ECs) are planned prior to complex EVAR to improve vascular access and decrease operative time while allowing the stented vessel to heal. This study describes the long-term results of iliofemoral ECs prior to complex EVAR. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2023, 59 patients (44% male; median age, 75 ± 6 years) underwent ECs before complex EVAR using self-expanding covered stents (Viabahn). For common femoral artery (CFA) disease, ECs were delivered percutaneously from contralateral femoral access and extended into the CFA to preserve the future access site for stent graft delivery. Internal iliac artery patency was maintained when feasible. During complex EVAR, the EC extended into the CFA was directly accessed and sequentially dilated until it could accommodate the endograft. Technical success was defined as successful access, closure, and delivery of the endograft during complex EVAR. Endpoints were vascular injury or EC disruption, secondary interventions, and EC patency. RESULTS: Unilateral EC was performed in 45 patients (76%). ECs were extended into the CFA in 21 patients (35%). Median diameters of the native common iliac, external iliac, and CFA were 7 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 6-8 mm), 6 mm (IQR, 5-7 mm), and 6 mm (IQR, 6-7 mm), respectively. Internal iliac artery was inadvertently excluded in 10 patients (17%). Six patients (10%) had an intraoperative vascular injury during the EC procedure, and six patients (10%) had EC disruption during complex EVAR, including five EC collapses requiring re-stenting and one EC fracture requiring open cut-down and reconstruction with patch angioplasty. In 23 patients (39%), 22 Fr OD devices were used; 20 Fr were used in 22 patients (37%), and 18 Fr in 14 patients (24%). Technical success for accessing EC was 89%. There was no difference in major adverse events at 30 days between the iliac ECs and iliofemoral ECs. Primary patency by Kaplan-Meier estimates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 97.5%, 89%, and 82%, respectively. There was no difference in primary patency between iliac and iliofemoral ECs. Six secondary interventions (10%) were required. The mean follow-up was 34 ± 27 months; no limb loss or amputations occurred during the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: ECs improve vascular access, and their use prior to complex EVAR is associated with low rates of vascular injury, high technical success, and optimal long-term patency. Complex EVAR procedures can be performed percutaneously by accessing the EC directly under ultrasound guidance and using sequential dilation to avoid EC disruption.

Early outcomes from the pivotal trial of a four-branch off-the shelf solution to treat complex abdominal and type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: This study reports the 30-day outcomes of the primary arm of the GORE EXCLUDER Thoracoabdominal Branch Endoprosthesis (TAMBE) pivotal trial for complex abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. METHODS: This multicenter, nonrandomized, prospective study of the TAMBE device included patients enrolled in the primary study arm of extent IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and pararenal aneurysms. Technical success and major adverse events were analyzed per the Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines. RESULTS: The 102 patients of the primary arm who underwent endovascular repair using the TAMBE device were a mean age of 73 ± 6.4 years (range, 58-82 years) and 84 (84.2%) were male. The mean body mass index was 28.3 ± 5.0 kg/m2. Fifty-nine patients (57.8%) were treated for extent IV and 43 (42.2%) pararenal aneurysms; the mean maximum diameter of the aneurysms was 59.4 ± 7.8 mm. A prophylactic cerebral spinal fluid drain was used in 10 patients (9.8%). Technical success was achieved in 99% of patients, with the single failure owing to unsuccessful cannulation of the left renal artery. Mean procedure time was 315 ± 103 minutes (range, 163-944 minutes), estimated blood loss was 300 ± 296 mL (range, 10-2000 mL), and contrast administration was 153.6 ± 73.5 mL (range, 16-420 mL). The intensive care unit length of stay was 58.7 ± 52.7 hours (range, 1-288 mL). In 28 patients (27.5%), a total of 32 additional endovascular components were deployed to manage procedural complications including aortic and target vessel dissections and injuries not related to access. Bridging stent grafts were deployed to incorporate 407 target vessels (mean 1.6/per vessel; range, 1-4). Postoperative transfusion was required in 14 patients (13.7%). Major adverse events occurred in seven patients (6.9%) through 30 days. Events included respiratory failure (n = 2), disabling stroke (n = 1), new-onset renal failure requiring dialysis (n = 2), and paraplegia (n = 2). At 30 days, there was one patient with intraoperative rupture; no severe bowel ischemia or lesion-related/all-cause mortality were reported. The Core lab-reported patency was 100% in the aortic component, superior mesenteric artery, and celiac artery, and 95.9% in the left renal and 99.0% in the right renal branch components through 30 days of follow-up. Reinterventions through 30 days were performed in 9 of 96 patients (9.4%) and were all minor. CONCLUSIONS: Early TAMBE device outcomes demonstrate a high technical success rate, no 30-day lesion-related mortality, and a low rate of safety events within 30 days of the index procedure.

Impact of head and neck radiation on long-term outcomes after carotid revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Radiation-induced carotid artery stenosis (RICS) is a well-described phenomenon seen after head and neck cancer radiation. Previously published literature suggests that, compared with atherosclerotic disease, RICS may result in worse long-term outcomes and early restenosis. This study aims to evaluate the effect of radiation on long-term outcomes after various carotid revascularization techniques using a multi-center registry database. METHODS: Patients in the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry for carotid artery intervention (carotid endarterectomy [CEA]; transfemoral carotid artery stenting [CAS]; transcarotid artery revascularization [TCAR]), who are 65 years or older were included in the study. VQI Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VISION) Medicare-linked database was used to obtain long-term procedure-specific outcomes. Primary endpoints were 3-year death, stroke, and reintervention. We performed propensity matching between patients with prior radiation and those without. Kaplan-Meier analysis and a multivariate logistic regression model were used to analyze the outcome variables. RESULTS: A total of 56,472 patients had undergone carotid revascularization (CEA, n = 48,307; TCAR, n = 4593; CAS, n = 3572), 1244 patients with prior radiation and 54,925 patients without prior radiation. The prior radiation group was more likely to be male (71.9% vs 60.3%; P < .01), to receive a stent (47.5% vs 13.5%; P < .01), and to be on P2Y12 inhibitor (55.2% vs 38.3%; P < .01). Propensity matching was performed on 1223 patients (CEA, n = 655; TCAR, n = 292; CAS, n = 287). There were no significant differences in 30-day outcomes for death, stroke, or major adverse cardiovascular events for all three procedures. The prior radiation group had higher rates of cranial nerve injury (3.7% vs 1.8%; P = .04) and 90-day readmission (23.5% vs 18.3%; P = .01) after CEA. For long-term outcomes, prior radiation significantly increased mortality risk for CEA and CAS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-2.27 and HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.02-2.36, respectively). The 3-year risk of stroke for CEA in radiated patients was also significantly higher (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.03-2.09) compared with non-radiated patients. Prior radiation did not significantly affect death and stroke in patients undergoing TCAR. Prior radiation also did not impact the rates of short and long-term reintervention after CEA, CAS, or TCAR. CONCLUSIONS: Prior head and neck radiation significantly increases the risk for mortality and stroke for CEA and the risk for mortality after CAS. Long-term outcomes for TCAR are not significantly affected by prior radiation. TCAR may be the preferred treatment modality for patients with radiation-induced carotid stenosis.

Impact of chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease on outcomes after complex endovascular and open aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease are traditionally associated with worse outcomes after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and open aneurysm repair (OAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). However, there needs to be more data on complex AAA repair involving the aorta's visceral segment. This study stratifies complex AAA repair outcomes by CKD severity and dialysis dependence. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective OAR and fenestrated/branched EVAR (F-BEVAR) for complex AAA with preoperative renal function data captured by the Vascular Quality Initiative between January 2003 and September 2020 were analyzed. Patients were stratified by CKD class as follows: normal/mild (CKD 1 and 2), moderate (CKD class 3a), moderate to severe (CKD 3b), severe (CKD class 4 and 5), and dialysis. Only patients with clamp sites above one of the renal arteries were included for complex OAR. For F-BEVAR, patients with proximal landing zones below zone 5 (above celiac artery) were included, and distal landing zones between zones 1 and 5 were excluded. Primary outcomes were perioperative and 1-year mortality. Predictors of mortality were identified by Cox multivariate regression models. RESULTS: We identified 7849 elective complex AAA repairs: 4230 (54%) complex OARs and 3619 (46%) F-BEVARs. Most patients were White (89%) and male (74%), with an average age of 72 ± 8 years. The patients who underwent F-BEVAR were older and had more comorbidities. Elective F-BEVAR for complex AAA started in 2012 and increased from 1.4% in 2012 to 58% in 2020 (P < .001). The OAR cohort had more perioperative complications, but less 1-year mortality. The normal/mild CKD cohort had the highest 1-year survival compared with other groups after both complex OAR and F-BEVAR. On Cox regression analysis, when compared with CKD 1-2, worsening CKD stage (CKD 3b: hazard ratio [HR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.82-3.40; P < .001; CKD 4-5: HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.16-3.26; P = .011; and dialysis: HR, 4.4; 95% CI, 2.53-7.72; P < .001) were independently associated with 1-year survival after F-BEVAR. After complex OAR, worsening CKD stage but not dialysis was associated with 1-year mortality compared with CKD 1-2 (CKD 3b: HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.13-2.35; P = .009; CKD 4-5: HR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.03-5.79; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: CKD severity is an essential predictor of perioperative and 1-year mortality after complex AAA repair, irrespective of the treatment modality, which may reflect the natural history of CKD. Consideration should be given to raising the threshold for elective AAA repair in patients with moderate to severe CKD and end-stage renal disease, given the high 1-year mortality rate.

Outcomes using inverted iliac limb bifurcate components in fenestrated/branched endografting.

BACKGROUND: The use of standard bifurcate pieces in fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) requires adequate length from the lowest branch or fenestration to the aortic bifurcation. In patients with prior aortic surgery, the aortic bifurcation is often artificially established in a more proximal position, compromising the infrarenal length, which hinders the placement of a standard bifurcate component below the fenestrated/branched component. Short bifurcate bodies using an inverted contralateral limb have been purpose-built to address this challenge. However, reported outcomes for this device remain limited, with specific concerns about the durability of the inverted iliac limb sealing region. We sought to evaluate outcomes of F/BEVAR using an investigational inverted iliac limb bifurcate, manufactured by Cook Medical. METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of prospectively maintained data from the US-Aortic Research Consortium from 2005 to 2022. Patients were included if they underwent F/BEVAR for thoracoabdominal or complex abdominal aortic aneurysms. Patients were excluded if they did not have a bifurcate device placed. Patients were then compared based on the use of an inverted iliac limb or standard bifurcate component. The primary outcome for this study was technical success. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, freedom from ischemic leg complications, freedom from type I endoleaks (TIELs), freedom from type II endoleaks (TIIELs), freedom from type III endoleaks (TIIIELs), and graft component separations. RESULTS: A total of 1944 patients met study criteria with 442 (22.8%) inverted iliac limb bifurcates and 1502 (77.2%) standard bifurcates. Patients who received inverted iliac limbs were more likely to have had prior aortic surgery (63.8% vs 28.5%; P < .001). Patients receiving inverted iliac limbs had longer procedure times (265 minutes; interquartile range [IQR], 201-342 minutes vs 241 minutes; IQR, 186-313 minutes; P < .001), more contrast use (89 mL [IQR, 55-135 mL] vs 109 mL [IQR, 75-156 mL]; P < .001), and higher estimated blood loss (250 mL [IQR, 150-500 mL] vs 250 mL [IQR, 110-400 mL]; P = .042). There were no differences in rates of technical success (97.3% vs 96.1%; P = .310), rates of endoleaks upon completion of the case (18.0% vs 21.4%; P = .123), or 30-day mortality rates (1.8% vs 2.5%; P = .466) between patients receiving inverted iliac limb and standard bifurcated components. There were no differences in cumulative survival, freedom from limb ischemia, freedom from aneurysm rupture, and freedom from TIIIELs over the course of 5 years between patients receiving inverted bifurcates and standard bifurcated components. Patients with inverted iliac limb bifurcate components had decreased freedom from reinterventions, TIELs, and TIIELs. After adjustment for potential confounders, the use of an inverted iliac limb was not associated with reinterventions (hazard ratio,1.044; 95% confidence interval, 0.849-1.285; P = .682). There was a total of 2 component separations (0.1%) of the bifurcate component from the fenestrated/branched component over the study period, both of which occurred in the standard bifurcate components. CONCLUSIONS: The use of investigational inverted iliac limb bifurcate components is a safe option with favorable mid-term outcomes in patients who are not anatomical candidates for standard bifurcate components. Patients undergoing investigational inverted iliac limb bifurcate component implantation had decreased freedom from reinterventions, which likely corresponds with the complexity of repair associated with them.

Indications, safety, and effectiveness of transcatheter electrosurgical septotomy during endovascular repair of aortic dissections.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular repair of aortic dissections may be complicated by inadequate sealing zones, persistent false lumen perfusion, and limited space for catheter manipulation and target artery incorporation. The aim of this study was to describe the indications, technical success, and early outcomes of transcatheter electrosurgical septotomy (TES) during endovascular repair of aortic dissections. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of consecutive patients treated by endovascular repair of aortic dissections with adjunctive TES in two centers between 2021 and 2023. End points were technical success, defined by successful septotomy without dislodgment of the lamella or target artery occlusion, and 30-day rates of major adverse events (MAEs). RESULTS: Among 197 patients treated by endovascular repair for aortic dissections, 36 patients (18%) (median age, 61.5 years (interquartile range, 55.0-72.5 years; 83% male) underwent adjunctive TES for acute (n = 3 [8%]), subacute (n = 1 [3%]), or chronic postdissection aneurysms (n = 32 [89%]). Indications for TES were severe true lumen (TL) compression (≤16 mm) in 28 patients (78%), target vessel origin from false lumen in 19 (53%), creation of suitable landing zone in 12 (33%), and organ/limb malperfusion in four (11%). Endovascular repair included fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in 18 patients (50%), thoracic EVAR/EVAR/PETTICOAT in 11 (31%), and arch branch repair in 7 (19%). All patients had dissections extending through zones 5 to 7, and 28 patients (78%) underwent TES across the renal-mesenteric segment. Technical success of TES was 92% (33/36) for all patients and 97% (32/33) among those with subacute or chronic postdissection aneurysms. There were three technical failures, including two patients with acute dissections with inadvertent superior mesenteric artery dissection in one patient and distal dislodgement of the dissection lamella in two patients. There were no arterial disruptions. The mean postseptotomy aortic lumen increased from 13.2 ± 4.8 mm to 28.4 ± 6.8 mm (P < .001). All 18 patients treated by fenestrated-branched EVAR had successful incorporation of 78 target arteries. There was one early death (3%) from stroke, and three patients (8%) had major adverse events. After a median follow-up of 8 months (interquartile range, 4.5-13.5 months), 13 patients (36%) had secondary interventions, and two (6%) died from non-aortic-related events. There were no other complications associated with TES. CONCLUSIONS: TES is an adjunctive technique that may optimize sealing zones and luminal aortic diameter during endovascular repair of subacute and chronic postdissection. Although no arterial disruptions or target vessel loss occurred, patients with acute dissections are prone to technical failures related to dislodgement of the lamella.

Prospective randomized pilot trial comparing prophylactic and therapeutic cerebrospinal fluid drainage during complex endovascular thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular techniques have transformed the management of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). However, spinal cord ischemia (SCI) remains a prevalent and devastating complication. Prophylactic drainage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is among the proposed strategies for prevention of SCI. Although prophylactic CSF drainage is widely used and conceptually attractive, prophylactic CSF drains have not been demonstrated to definitively prevent the occurrence nor mitigate the severity of SCI in endovascular TAAA repair. Whether or not outcomes of prophylactic drains are superior to therapeutic drains remains unknown. This pilot study was performed to determine the feasibility of a randomized clinical trial designed to investigate the role of prophylactic vs therapeutic CSF drains in the prevention of SCI in patients undergoing endovascular TAAA repair using branched and fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FBEVAR). METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter randomized pilot clinical trial conducted at The University of Alabama at Birmingham and The University of Massachusetts. Twenty patients were enrolled and randomized to either the prophylactic drainage or therapeutic drainage groups, prior to undergoing FBEVAR for extensive TAAAs and arch aortic aneurysms. This was a pilot feasibility study that was not powered to detect statistical differences in clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was feasibility of randomization and compliance with a shared lumbar drain protocol. Secondary outcomes included rate of drain complications and SCI. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled and successfully randomized, without any crossovers, to either the control cohort (n = 10), without prophylactic drains, or the experimental cohort (n = 10), with prophylactic drains. There were no differences in age, comorbidities, or history of prior aortic surgery across the cohorts. All patients were treated with FBEVAR. Aneurysm classifications were as follows: Extent I (10%), Extent II (50%), Extent III (35%), and Extent IV (5%). The average length of aortic coverage was 207 ± 21.6 mm. The length of aortic coverage did not vary across cohorts, nor did procedural times or blood loss volume. Compliance with the SCI prevention protocol was 100% across both groups. Within the prophylactic drain cohort, one patient experienced an adverse event related to lumbar drain placement, manifested as an epidural hematoma requiring laminectomy, without neurologic deficit (n = 1/10; 10%). There was one SCI event (n = 1/20; 5%), which occurred in the prophylactic drain cohort on postoperative day 9 following an episode of hypotension related to a gastrointestinal bleed. CONCLUSIONS: The role of prophylactic CSF drains for the prevention of SCI following endovascular TAAA repair is a topic of ongoing research, with many current practices based on expert opinion and experience, rather than rigorous scientific data. This study demonstrates the feasibility of a multicenter randomized clinical trial to evaluate the role of prophylactic vs therapeutic CSF drains in the prevention of SCI in patients undergoing endovascular TAAA repair.

Early experience with patient-specific unibody bifurcated fenestrated-branched devices for complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Short distances between the lowest visceral/renal artery and the aortic bifurcation are technically challenging during complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), particularly after previous infrarenal repair. Traditionally, inverted limb bifurcated devices have been used in addition to fenestrated-branched (FB) endografts, but short overlap, difficult cannulation, and potential crushing of bridging stents are limitations for their use. This study reviews the early experience of patient-specific company manufactured devices (PS-CMDs) with a unibody bifurcated FB design for complex EVAR. METHODS: Consecutive complex EVAR procedures over a 34-month period with unibody bifurcated FB-devices as part of physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies at two institutions were reviewed. Unibody bifurcated FB designs included FB bifurcated or fenestrated inverted limb devices. End points included technical success, survival, frequency of type I or III endoleaks, limb occlusion, and secondary interventions. RESULTS: Among 168 patients undergoing complex EVAR, 33 patients (19.6%; 78.7% male; mean age, 77 years) received unibody bifurcated FB PS-CMDs. FB bifurcated and fenestrated inverted limb devices were used in 31 (93.9%) and 2 (6.06%) patients, respectively. The median maximum aneurysm diameter was 61 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 55-69 mm). Prior EVAR was reported by 29 patients (87.9%), of whom 2 (6.06%) had suprarenal stents. A short distance between the lowest renal artery and aortic bifurcation was demonstrated in 30 patients (90.9%), with median distance of 47 mm (IQR, 38-54 mm). Preloaded devices were used in 23 patients (69.7%). A total of 128 fenestrations were planned; 22 (17.2%) were preloaded with guidewires and 5 (3.9%) with catheters. The median operative time was 238 minutes (226-300 minutes), with a median fluoroscopy time of 65.5 minutes (IQR, 56.0-77.7 minutes) and a median dose area product of 147 mGy∗cm2 (IQR, 105-194 mGy∗cm2). Exclusive femoral access was used in 14 procedures (42.4%). Technical success was 100%. Target vessel primary patency was 100% at a median follow-up time of 11.7 months (IQR, 3.5-18.6 months). Two patients (6.06%) required reintervention for iliac occlusion; one patient required stenting and the other a femoral-femoral bypass. No aortic-related deaths occurred after the procedure. During follow-up, 11 type II endoleaks (33.3%) and 1 type Ib endoleak (3.03%) were detected; the latter was treated with leg extension. No type Ia or III endoleaks occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Complex EVAR using unibody bifurcated FB-PS-CMDs is a simple, safe, and cost-effective alternative for the treatment of patients with short distances between the renal arteries and the aortic bifurcation. Further studies are required to assess benefits and durability of unibody bifurcated FB devices.

Preoperative risk factors for 1-year mortality in patients undergoing fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in the US Aortic Research Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Early survival (1-year) after elective repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) can be used as an indicator of successful repair and provides a reasonable countermeasure to the annual rupture risk based on diameter. We aimed to identify preoperative factors associated with 1-year mortality after fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) and develop a predictive model for 1-year mortality based on patient-specific risk profiles. METHODS: The US-Aortic Research Consortium database was queried for all patients undergoing elective F/BEVAR for complex AAA (cAAA) or TAAA from 2005 to 2022. The primary outcome was 1-year survival based on preoperative risk profile. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine preoperative variables associated with 1-year mortality overall and by extent of aortic pathology. Logistic regression was performed to build a predictive model for 1-year mortality based on number of risk factors present. RESULTS: A total of 2099 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study (cAAA: n = 709 [34.3%]; type 1-3 TAAA: n = 777 [37.6%]; type 4-5 TAAA: n = 580 [28.1%]). Multivariable Cox regression identified the following significant risk factors associated with 1-year mortality: current smoker, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure (CHF), aortic diameter >7 cm, age >75 years, extent 1-3, creatinine >1.7 mg/dL, and hematocrit <36%. When stratified by extent of aortic involvement, multivariable Cox regression revealed risk factors for 1-year mortality in cAAA (CHF maximum aortic diameter >7 cm, hematocrit <36 mg/dL, and current smoking status), type 1-3 TAAA (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, CHF, and age >75 years), and type 4-5 TAAA (age >75 years, creatinine >1.7 mg/dL, and hematocrit <36 mg/dL). Logistic regression was then used to develop a predictive model for 1-year mortality based on patient risk profile. Appraisal of the model revealed an area under the curve of 0.64 (P < .001), and an observed to expected ratio of 0.85. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes multiple risk factors associated with an increase in 1-year mortality after F/BEVAR. Given that elective repair of cAAA or TAAA is offered to some patients in whom future rupture risk outweighs operative risk, these findings suggest that highly comorbid patients with smaller aneurysms may not benefit from repair. Descriptive and predictive models for 1-year mortality based on patient risk profiles can serve as an adjunct in clinical decision-making when considering elective F/BEVAR.

Practice patterns of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy after fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy are commonly prescribed after fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR). However, the optimal regimen remains unknown. We sought to characterize practice patterns and outcomes of antiplatelet and anticoagulant use in patients who underwent F/BEVAR. METHODS: Consecutive patients enrolled (2012-2023) as part of the United States Aortic Research Consortium (US-ARC) from 10 independent physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies were evaluated. The cohort was characterized by medication regimen on discharge from index F/BEVAR: (1) Aspirin alone OR P2Y12 alone (single-antiplatelet therapy [SAPT]); (2) Anticoagulant alone; (3) Aspirin + P2Y12 (dual-antiplatelet therapy [DAPT]); (4) Aspirin + anticoagulant OR P2Y12 + anticoagulant (SAPT + anticoagulant); (5) Aspirin + P2Y12 + anticoagulant (triple therapy [TT]); and (6) No therapy. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to compare 1-year outcomes including survival, target artery patency, freedom from bleeding complication, freedom from all reinterventions, and freedom from stent-specific reintervention. RESULTS: Of the 1525 patients with complete exposure and outcome data, 49.6% were discharged on DAPT, 28.8% on SAPT, 13.6% on SAPT + anticoagulant, 3.2% on TT, 2.6% on anticoagulant alone, and 2.2% on no therapy. Discharge medication regimen was not associated with differences in 1-year survival, bleeding complications, composite reintervention rate, or stent-specific reintervention rate. However, there was a significant difference in 1-year target artery patency. On multivariable analysis comparing with SAPT, DAPT conferred a lower hazard of loss of target artery patency (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.84; P = .01). On sub-analyses of renal stents alone or visceral stents alone, DAPT no longer had a significantly lower hazard of loss of target artery patency (renal: HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.35-1.27; P = .22; visceral: HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.05-1.9; P = .21). Lastly, duration of DAPT therapy (1 month, 6 months, or 1 year) did not significantly affect target artery patency. CONCLUSIONS: Practice patterns for antiplatelet and anticoagulant regimens after F/BEVAR vary widely across the US-ARC. There were no differences in bleeding complications, survival or reintervention rates among different regimens, but higher branch vessel patency was noted in the DAPT cohort. These data suggest there is a benefit in DAPT therapy. However, the generalizability of this finding is limited by the retrospective nature of this data, and the clinical significance of this finding is unclear, as there is no difference in survival, bleeding, or reintervention rates amongst the different regimens. Hence, an "optimal" regimen, including the duration of such regimen, could not be clearly discerned. This suggests equipoise for a randomized trial, nested within this cohort, to identify the most effective antiplatelet/anticoagulant regimen for the growing number of patients being treated globally with F/BEVAR.

Postdissection aortic aneurysm sac enlargement after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVES: Aneurysm sac changes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FBEVAR) for postdissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (PD-TAAs) are poorly understood. Partial thrombosis of the false lumen and endoleaks may impair sac regression. To characterize sac changes after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs, this study examined midterm results and predictors for sac enlargement. METHODS: FBEVARs performed for PD-TAAs in 10 physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2008 to 2023 were analyzed. The maximum aortic aneurysm diameter was compared between the 30-day computed tomography angiogram and follow-up imaging studies. Aneurysm sac enlargement was defined as an increase in diameter of ≥5 mm. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were used to evaluate sac enlargement and midterm FBEVAR outcomes. RESULTS: Among 3296 FBEVARs, 290 patients (72.4% male; median age, 68.4 years) were treated for PD-TAAs. Most aneurysms treated were extent II (72%) and III (12%). Mean aneurysm diameter was 66.5 ± 11.2 mm. Mortality at 30 days was 1.4%. At a mean follow-up of 2.9 ± 1.9 years, at least one follow-up imaging study revealed sac enlargement in 43 patients (15%), sac regression in 115 patients (40%), and neither enlargement nor regression in 137 (47%); 5 (2%) demonstrated both expansion and regression during follow-up. Freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement was 93%, 82%, and 80% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Overall, endoleaks were detected in 27 patients (63%) with sac enlargement and 143 patients (58%) without enlargement (P = .54). Sac enlargement was significantly more frequent among older patients (mean age at the index procedure, 70.2 ± 8.9 years vs 66.5 ± 11 years; P = .04) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year (74% vs 52%; P = .031). Cox regression revealed age >70 years at baseline (hazard ratio [HR], 2.146; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.167-3.944; P = .010) and presence of type II endoleak at 1 year (HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.07-4.79; P = .032) were independent predictors of sac enlargement. Patient survival was 92%, 81%, and 68% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Cumulative target vessel instability was 7%, and aneurysm-related mortality was 2% at 5 years. At least 42% of patients required secondary interventions. Sac enlargement did not affect patient survival. CONCLUSIONS: Aneurysm sac enlargement occurs in 15% of patients after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs. Elderly patients (>70 years at baseline) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year may need closer monitoring and secondary interventions to prevent sac enlargement. Despite sac enlargement in some patients, aneurysm-related mortality at 5 years remains low and overall survival was not associated with sac enlargement.

Effect of Family History of Aortic Disease on Outcomes of Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aneurysm Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The clinical significance of family history (FH) of aortic disease on the outcomes of fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FB-EVAR) has not been well described. This study aimed to assess how FH of aortic disease affects outcomes following FB-EVAR for complex aortic aneurysms (CAAs). METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of consecutive patients enrolled in 10 ongoing, prospective, non-randomised, physician sponsored, investigational device exemption studies to evaluate FB-EVAR (2005 - 2022) in the United States Aortic Research Consortium database. Patients were stratified by presence or absence of FH of any aortic disease in any relative. Patients with confirmed genetically triggered aortic diseases were excluded. Primary outcomes were 30 day major adverse events (MAEs) and late survival. Secondary outcomes included late secondary interventions and aneurysm sac enlargement. RESULTS: During the study period, 2 901 patients underwent FB-EVAR. A total of 2 355 patients (81.2%) were included in the final analysis: 427 (18.1%) with and 1 928 (81.9%) without a FH of aortic disease. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and aneurysm extent were similar between the groups. Patients with a FH of aortic disease more frequently had prior open abdominal aortic repair, but less frequently had prior endovascular aneurysm repair (p < .050). There were no statistically significant differences in 30 day mortality (4% vs. 2%; p = .12) and MAEs (12% vs. 12%; p = .89) for patients with or without a FH of aortic disease. Three year survival estimates were 71% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67 - 78%) and 71% (95% CI 68 - 74%), respectively (p = .74). Freedom from secondary intervention and aneurysm sac enlargement were also not statistically significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: A FH of aortic disease had no impact on 30 day or midterm outcomes of FB-EVAR of CAAs. In the absence of an identified genetically triggered aortic disease, treatment selection for CAAs should be based on clinical risk and patient anatomy rather than FH of aortic disease.

Mid-term Renal and Mesenteric Artery Outcomes During Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair for Complex Abdominal and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms in the United States Aortic Research Consortium.

OBJECTIVE: To report mid-term outcomes of renal-mesenteric target arteries (TAs) after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm. BACKGROUND: TA instability (TAI) is the most frequent indication for reintervention after FB-EVAR. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients enrolled in 9 prospective nonrandomized physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies between 2005 and 2020 were reviewed. TA outcomes through 5 years of follow-up were analyzed for vessels incorporated by fenestrations or directional branches (DBs), including TA patency, endoleak, integrity failure, reintervention, and instability. RESULTS: A total of 1681 patients had 6349 renal-mesenteric arteries were targeted using 3720 fenestrations (59%), 2435 DBs (38%), and 194 scallops (3%). Mean follow was 23 ± 21 months. At 5 years, TAs incorporated by fenestrations had higher primary (95 ± 1% vs 91 ± 1%, P < 0.001) and secondary patency (98 ± 1% vs 94 ± 1%, P < 0.001), and higher freedom from TAI (87 ± 2% vs 84 ± 2%, P = 0.002) compared with TAs incorporated by DBs, with no differences in other TA events. DBs targeted by balloon-expandable stent-grafts had significantly lower freedom from TAI (78 ± 4% vs 88 ± 1%, P = 0.006), TA endoleak (87 ± 3% vs 97 ± 1%, P < 0.001), and TA reintervention (83 ± 4% vs 95 ± 1%, P < 0.001) compared with those targeted by self-expandable stent-grafts. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of renal and mesenteric TA during FB-EVAR is safe and durable with high 5-year patency rates and low freedom from TAI. DBs have lower patency rates and lower freedom from TAI than fenestrations, with better performance for self-expandable stent grafts as compared with balloon-expandable stent grafts.

Selection criterion for endovascular aortic repair in those with chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is the preferred method of repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). However, patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) are a high-risk group, and it is unknown which patients with CKD benefit from EVAR vs continued surveillance. The purpose of this study was to identify which patients with advanced CKD may benefit from EVAR. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative Database was utilized to identify elective EVARs for AAAs. Patients were excluded if they underwent urgent or emergent repairs. CKD stages were categorized based on preoperative estimated glomular filtration rate (eGFR) and dialysis status. Predicted 1-year mortality of untreated AAAs was calculated by modifying a validated comorbidity score that predicts 1-year mortality (Gagne Index) without repair. The primary outcome was actual 1-year mortality, which was compared with the predicted 1-year mortality without repair. RESULTS: A total of 34,926 patient met study criteria. There were differences in Gagne Indices among the varying classes of CKD. Patients with CKD 4 and CKD 5 had the highest 1-year mortality rates, followed by CKD 3b, which was significantly higher than those with CKD 1 and CKD 2. Patients with CKD 4 had no differences between actual 1-year mortality with EVAR and predicted 1-year survival without EVAR across all AAA sizes. Those with CKD 5 had worse actual 1-year survival with EVAR than predicted 1-year survival without EVAR for AAAs <5.5 cm. Patients with CKD 5 only experienced an actual mortality benefit with EVAR compared with predicted 1-year mortality without EVAR for AAAs ≥7.0 cm. CONCLUSIONS: The current data suggest that patients with CKD 3b, 4, and 5 represent a high-risk group who may not benefit from elective EVAR utilizing traditional size criteria. Patients with CKD 4 and 5 with AAAs <5.5 cm do not benefit from elective EVAR. In patients with CKD 5, elective EVAR may need to be reserved for AAAs ≥7.0 cm unless there are other concerning anatomic characteristics.

Outcomes of carotid stenting in patients with fibromuscular dysplasia.

OBJECTIVE: Fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) is a noninflammatory arterial disease that affects the extracranial carotid arteries in young patients. The ideal treatment of FMD has continued to be debated, and the role of carotid artery stenting (CAS) is controversial. The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility and outcomes of CAS for patients with FMD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients who had undergone CAS was performed using the Vascular Quality Initiative database from December 2012 to May 2021. Patients who had undergone CAS for atherosclerosis and FMD were included and matched 1:1 by age, gender, and clinical presentation. The demographics, clinical parameters, and procedural data were analyzed. The end points included postoperative stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA), and adverse events (perioperative and 1-year mortality, neurologic changes, access site complications, hematoma or bleeding, infection, congestive heart failure, arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, reperfusion symptoms), and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: After matching, 55 patients had undergone CAS for FMD (mean age, 58.7 ± 14 years; 62% women; 69% White; mean body mass index, 28 ± 6 kg/m2). Most of these procedures (69%) were elective. The FMD group had had a lower rate of hypertension (55% vs 82%; P = .002), smoking (35% vs 80%; P < .001), diabetes (13% vs 45%; P < .001), and coronary artery disease (9% vs 45%; P < .001) compared with the non-FMD group. In the FMD group, prior TIA and stroke was identified in 39 (71%) and 31 (57%) patients, respectively. The mean interval from a prior stroke or TIA to the index surgery was 160 days. Additionally, 23 patients (42%) had had anatomically high lesions above the level of the second cervical vertebra. In the FMD group, the transfemoral approach was used for 43 patients (78%), with distal embolic protection used for 40 patients (93%). Flow reversal was used for nine patients (23%). Most cases were performed with local anesthesia (58%). Three patients (6%) in the FMD group had had access site complications that were managed nonoperatively. No differences were found between the FMD and non-FMD groups in perioperative stroke, TIA, or 30-day mortality. The length of stay was similar between the two groups, and the 1-year survival was 100% for both groups. All the patients in the FMD group were discharged without neurologic complications, and 50 patients (91%) were receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. The median follow-up was 328 days (interquartile range, 1-732 days) with no mortality or reinterventions during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CAS for FMD is a feasible and safe procedure with favorable technical success, a low incidence of neurologic complications, and good clinical outcomes at 1 year of follow-up.

Aneurysm extent-based mortality differences in complex endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms in the Vascular Quality Initiative and the United States Aortic Research Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular management of thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAA) is becoming more common. Technological advances including custom devices under the Physician-Sponsored Investigational Device Exemption (PS-IDE), physician-modified endografts (PMEG), and parallel stenting techniques have expanded the extent of disease that is amenable to endovascular treatment. Patients within the PS-IDE studies are a highly selected group of patients, whereas patients treated with PMEG as captured within the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (SVS VQI) represent a real-world experience. Research within both the SVS VQI on PMEG and the US Aortic Research Consortium (US-ARC) has demonstrated a relationship between extent of aneurysmal disease and mortality after complex endovascular TAAA repair, but no direct comparison of these cohorts has been conducted. In this study, we sought to compare outcomes of custom PS-IDE devices with off-label uses of commercially available devices for the endovascular management of TAAAs. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients presenting for elective endovascular TAAA repair for asymptomatic disease between 2011 and 2019 was conducted within both the SVS VQI registry and the US-ARC. Patients within the SVS VQI registry were treated with either PMEG or with parallel stenting techniques. Patients within the US-ARC were treated with PS-IDE custom devices. The extent of aneurysm disease was defined by the deployment zones documented for the devices entered in the registry using Crawford extents I to V. Primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year mortality rates. RESULTS: A total of 3212 patients were included in the study: 1571 PMEG/parallel stenting within the VQI registry and 1641 with PS-IDE within the US-ARC database. The majority of patients presented with extent IV aneurysms (n = 1827 [57%]), with extent IV aneurysms being slightly more prevalent within the US-ARC cohort. Maximal aneurysm diameter within each extent did not vary between the US-ARC and VQI cohorts. Across all patients, the 30-day mortality was 4.4% and the 1-year mortality was 12.2%. Unadjusted mortality at 30-days was 6.7% within the VQI, and 2.2% in the US-ARC (P < .001). The unadjusted 1-year mortality was 14.3% within the VQI and 10.2% within the US-ARC (P < .001). When adjusted for aneurysm extent, similar differences in 30-day and 1-year survivals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated in PS-IDE studies had better 30-day and 1-year survival rates compared with those treated with a similar extent of disease using off-label approaches in a real-world registry. These differences are complex and likely associated with a number of factors, including arterial anatomy, patient comorbidities, device construct, and volume outcomes, as well as complex and unmeasurable surgeon- and patient-specific factors.