Endovascular Treatment of Descending Thoracic Aortic Pathology: Results of the Regis-TEVAR Study.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular techniques have become an essential tool for treatment of thoracic aortic pathology. The objective of this study was to analyze indications and results of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in vascular surgery units, through a retrospective and multicentric national registry called Regis-TEVAR. METHODS: From 2012 to 2016, a total of 287 patients from 11 vascular surgery units, treated urgently and electively, were recruited consecutively. The primary variables analyzed are mortality, survival, and reintervention rate. The following indications for TEVAR were also analyzed: aortic dissections, thoracic aneurysms, traumatisms, and intramural hematomas or penetrating ulcers, as well as results and postoperative complications in accordance with each indication. RESULTS: Of the 287 TEVAR performed (239 men, mean age 64.1 ± 14.1 years), 155 were because of aortic aneurysm (54%), 90 because of type B aortic dissection (31.4%), 36 because of traumatic aortic rupture (12.5%), and 6 because of penetrating ulcers or intramural hematomas (2.1%). Overall mortality at 30 days was 11.5% (18.5% in urgent and 5.3% in elective), being higher in dissections (13.3%). The median actuarial survival was 73% at 4 years. The stroke rate was 3.1%, and the rate of spinal cord ischemia was 4.9%. Aortic reoperations were necessary in 23 patients (8.1%). CONCLUSIONS: This registry provides complete and reliable information on real clinical practice of TEVAR in Spain, with results similar to international series of open surgery. In accordance with these data, TEVAR can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality and with low rates of postoperative complications.

Could Preoperative Neck Anatomy Influence Follow-up of EVAR?

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to assess the clinical utility of strict CT scan surveillance after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR) and evaluate whether the anatomy of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) neck (favorable/hostile) influences regular imaging control. METHODS: A retrospective study of AAA patients who underwent EVAR with aortobi-iliac endoprostheses during 2006-2013 was conducted. Exclusion criteria included other types of devices. Variables analyzed were technical and clinical success, morbimortality, complications (such as endoleaks, sac enlargement), reinterventions, reintervention-free survival, and survival rate. Preoperative CT scans were performed and repeated at 1, 6 (in selective cases), 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Patients were divided into two groups according to preoperative anatomic characteristics: group I (favorable neck) and group II (hostile neck: angle > 60°, length < 15 mm, diameter > 28 mm, and calcification or circumference thrombus ≥50%). RESULTS: A total of 127 patients with AAA (96.8% male) were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 75.9 years (range: 51-90 years). The mean AAA diameter was 62.1 mm. Hostile neck was found in 52 patients (40.9%). The technical and clinical success rate was 100% and 30-day mortality was 0.8%. The reintervention-free survival rate was 97.6%, 96.1%, and 93.7% and the survival rate was 97.6%, 96.9%, and 91.3%, during follow-up at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Accumulated complications in proximal sealing occurred in 0%, 0%, and 1.6% in group I and 1.9%, 6.1%, and 7.7% in group II at 1, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Type II endoleaks occurred in 24.3%, 14.3%, and 11.4% in group I and 9.8%, 6.3%, and 6.8% in group II at 1, 12, and 24 months, respectively. No increased diameter was detected at 6 and 12 months. No differences were observed in reinterventions and mortality rate depending on anatomy. CONCLUSIONS: CT scans performed at 6 and 12 months postoperatively did not detect complications or need for reintervention in patients with favorable necks, even in the presence of endoleaks type II, and could therefore be omitted. Hostile necks may compromise proximal sealing and require regular imaging follow-ups.

Manejo de la enfermedad tromboembólica venosa en la era COVID-19. Recomendaciones del capítulo español de Flebología y Linfología de la SEACV / Management of venous thromboembolic disease in the era COVID-19. Recommendations of the Spanish phlebology and lymphology chapter of the SEACV

Los pacientes infectados por el nuevo coronavirus COVID-19 presentan un riesgo incrementado de enfermedad tromboembólica venosa (ETEV). La presente guía de práctica clínica del Capítulo Español de Flebología y Linfología y la Sociedad Española de Angiología y Cirugía Vascular pretende dar una serie de recomendaciones sobre profilaxis y tratamiento de la ETEV en los pacientes infectados por COVID-19, tanto a nivel hospitalario como ambulatorio, y consejos sobre su seguimiento clínico y ecográfico. Se recomienda que todos los pacientes con infección por COVID-19 hospitalizados, tengan o no factores de riesgo protrombótico asociados, reciban profilaxis antitrombótica, si no existe contraindicación. En caso de pacientes ambulatorios, según perfil clínico e historial médico, se recomienda valorar tromboprofilaxis con heparina de bajo peso molecular (HBPM), en ausencia de contraindicación. Ante el diagnóstico de TVP en paciente con COVID-19, tanto hospitalizado o ambulatorio, debe iniciarse el tratamiento anticoagulante con HBPM a dosis terapéuticas. No existen interacciones farmacológicas descritas de las HPBM con los fármacos empleados contra el COVID-19. Los niveles elevados de dímero-D son un hallazgo común en pacientes con COVID-19, por lo que este parámetro, de forma aislada, no es indicativo para realizar una ecografía Doppler de rutina. Se aconseja la realización de ecografía Doppler a un paciente COVID-19 positivo (con las medidas de protección necesarias) para descartar TVP solo en pacientes con alta sospecha clínica de TVP y cuando se dé una de las dos situaciones clínicas: alto riesgo de sangrado, o que exista un incremento brusco e inesperado de los niveles de dímero-D

Patients infected with the new coronavirus COVID-19 have an increased risk of venous thromboembolic disease (VTEV). The present clinical practice guide of the Spanish Chapter of Phlebology and Lymphology and the Spanish Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, aims to give a series of recommendations on prophylaxis and treatment of VTE in patients infected with COVID-19, both at the hospital and outpatient, and advice on their clinical and ultrasound monitoring. It is recommended that all hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection, whether or not they have associated prothrombotic risk factors, should receive antithrombotic prophylaxis, if there is no contraindication. In the case of outpatients, according to clinical profile and medical history, it is recommended to evaluate thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), in the absence of contraindication. Given the diagnosis of DVT in a patient with COVID19, both hospitalized and outpatient, anticoagulant treatment with LMWH should be started at therapeutic doses. There are no described pharmacological interactions of HPBMs with the drugs used against COVID19. High levels of D-dimer are a common finding in patients with COVID-19, so this parameter, in isolation, is not indicative for routine Doppler ultrasound. Doppler ultrasound is recommended for a COVID-19 positive patient (with the necessary protective measures), to rule out DVT, only in patients with high clinical suspicion of DVT, and when one of the two clinical situations occurs: high risk of bleeding, or a sudden and unexpected increase in D-dimer levels

Estudio de calidad de vida en pacientes afectos de isquemia crítica a medio plazo / Study of the medium term quality of life in patients with critical ischaemia

Introducción. El tratamiento de la isquemia crítica de extremidades inferiores tiene por finalidad el salvamento de la extremidad, la resolución de los síntomas y la mejora en la calidad de vida. Objetivo. Determinar diferencias en términos de calidad de vida en pacientes con isquemia crítica y que se revascularizan con éxito (grupo I), y aquellos sin posibilidad revascularizadora, amputados o con trombosis del bypass durante el seguimiento (grupo II). Pacientes y métodos. Seleccionamos una muestra aleatoria de 48 pacientes con isquemia crítica. Aplicamos el test SF-36 al primer y segundo año y evaluamos la permeabilidad, salvamento de la extremidad y la mortalidad. Resultados. La supervivencia global al primer y segundo año fue del 79% y 56%, respectivamente, con una permeabilidad para la cirugía del 94% y 86% y un salvamento de extremidad del 100%, excluidas las amputaciones primarias. No encontramos diferencias en ninguno dominio del SF-36 entre ambos grupos al primer y segundo año. La media de supervivencia global fue de 26 meses. Conclusiones. La calidad de vida a medio plazo en los pacientes revascularizados no difiere de los no revascularizados, amputados o con trombosis del bypass. El dolor y la limitación física así como los múltiples factores de comorbilidad presentes en estos pacientes implican un pronóstico pobre en términos de calidad de vida a pesar de los tratamientos realizados

Introduction. The purpose of treatment of critical ischaemia of the lower extremities is to salvage the limb, resolve the symptoms and improve the patient’s quality of life. Aim. To determine the differences, as far as quality of life is concerned, between patients with critical ischaemia who undergo successful revascularisation (group I) and those who cannot be revascularised, have suffered amputation or in whom a thrombosis was observed in the bypass during follow-up (group II). Patients and methods. We selected a random sample of 48 patients with critical ischaemia. The SF-36 test was applied at one and two years and patency, limb salvage and mortality rates were evaluated. Results. Overall survival at one and two years was 79% and 56%, respectively, with 94% and 86% patency for surgery, and a limb salvage rate of 100%, excluding primary amputations. No differences were found between the two groups at one and two years in any of the areas of the SF-36. Overall mean survival time was 26 months. Conclusions. There is no difference between the medium term quality of life in revascularised patients and those who have not undergone revascularisation, have suffered amputation or who have a thrombosed bypass. The pain and physical limitations, as well as the multiple comorbidity factors that these patients have, imply a poor prognosis in terms of quality of life despite the treatments that are carried out

Tumor renal con trombosis de vena cava inferior intra-suprahepática / Renal tumour with thrombosis of the intra-suprahepatic inferior vena cava

Introducción. Se realiza la descripción de dos casos de tumor renal con trombosis de vena cava inferior (VCI) intra-suprahepática tratados de forma radical. Casos clínicos. El primer caso comenzó con dolor abdominal y edema en extremidades inferiores, el segundo caso con cuadro de microhematuria. En ambos casos se realizaron: ecografía abdominal, TC toracoabdominal y cavografía que revelaron tumor renal con trombosis de vena renal que se extiende a cava inferior hasta la zona intrahepática. Se descarta la presencia de metástasis y se realizó cirugía radical con la finalidad de mejorar el pronóstico mediante la resección del tumor más trombectomía de vena cava inferior con control proximal de vena cava intrapericárdica (AU)