Anatomical Feasibility of Endobentall Strategies for Management of Acute type A Aortic Dissection.

OBJECTIVES: This study assesses the feasibility of acute type A dissections treatment with a dedicated aortic root endograft concept and introduces a new aortic classification. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) remains a catastrophic aortic condition with perioperative mortality ranging from 12% and 20%. Total Aortic root endovascular repair, "Endobentall concept", has been explored as an alternative but only documented on case report. METHODS: Imaging study of all consecutive patients treated in three French centers were achieved. The study introduces an adapted aortic classification to report entry tear locations. Measurements included aortic annulus mensuration, coronary height, and several aortic lengths. Two treatment concepts were described "fenestrated Endobentall" and "branched Endobentall". Patients were eligible to the "fenestrated endobentall" design if their aortic root dimensions fitted the Edwards Sapien® and Corevalve Medtronic® instruction for use. Eligibility for the "branched Endobentall" required meeting the criteria for a "fenestrated Endobentall" and having a left coronary main stem length exceeding 5 mm. "Branched Endobentall" was mandatory when the entry was located in the aortic root. RESULTS: A total of 250 CT scans for acute type A aortic dissection were reviewed, 116 were finally included for analysis. The primary entry tear was found in the aortic root in 9% of patients, and in 31% of cases, it was located within the first centimeter distal to the sinotubular junction (STJ). 63.7% of the patients were eligible for an Endobentall procedure, even 73.3% when considering extended criterion. Fenestrated Endobentall accounted for 2/3 of cases. CONCLUSION: In our study, 63.7% of patients with aortic type A dissections are deemed eligible to an "Endobentall repair", increasing to 73.3% when considering extended anatomical criteria.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of fenestrated or branched devices after previous open surgical aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Despite open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms being considered as a durable solution, disease progression and para-anastomotic aneurysms may require further repair, and fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) may be applied to address these pathologies. The aim of this systematic review was to assess technical success, mortality, and morbidity (acute kidney injury, spinal cord ischemia) at 30 days, and mortality and reintervention rates during the available follow-up, in patients managed with F/BEVAR after previous OSR. METHODS: The PRISMA statement was followed, and the study was pre-registered to the PROSPERO (CRD42022363214). The English literature was searched, via Ovid, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, through November 30, 2022. Observational studies and case series with ≥5 patients (2000-2022), reporting on F/BEVAR outcomes after OSR, were considered eligible. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and GRADE were used to assess the risk of bias and quality of evidence. The primary outcome was technical success, mortality, and morbidity at 30 days. Data on the outcomes of interest were synthesized using proportional meta-analysis. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 1694 articles. Eight retrospective studies (476 patients) were considered eligible. In 78.3% of cases, disease progression set the indication for reintervention. Technical success was estimated at 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89%-98%; I2 = 0%; 95% prediction interval [PI], 79%-99%). Thirty-day mortality was 2% (95% CI, 1%-9%; I2 = 0%; 95% PI, 0%-28%). The estimated spinal cord ischemia and acute kidney injury rates were 3% (95% CI, 1%-9%; I2 = 0%; 95% PI, 0%-30%) and 6% (95% CI, 2%-15%; I2 = 0%; 95% PI, 1%-40%), respectively. During follow-up, overall mortality was 5% (95% CI, 2%-12%; I2 = 34%; 95% PI, 0%-45%) and aorta-related mortality was 1% (95% CI, 0%-2%; I2 = 0%; 95% PI, 0%-3%). The rate of reinterventions was 16% (95% CI, 9%-26%; I2 = 22%; 95% PI, 3%-50%). CONCLUSIONS: According to the available literature, F/BEVAR after OSR may be performed with high technical success and low mortality and morbidity during the perioperative period. Follow-up aortic-related mortality was 1%, whereas the reintervention rates were within the standard range following F/BEVAR.

A procedural step analysis of radiation exposure in fenestrated endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Radiation exposure during complex endovascular aortic repair may be associated with tangible adverse effects in patients and operators. This study aimed to identify the steps of highest radiation exposure during fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) and to investigate potential intraoperative factors affecting radiation exposure. METHODS: Prospective data of 31 consecutive patients managed exclusively with four-fenestration endografts between March 1, 2020, and July 1, 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Leveraging the conformity of the applied technique, every FEVAR operation was considered a combination of six overall stages composed of 28 standardized steps. Intraoperative parameters, including air kerma, dose area product, fluoroscopy time, and number of digital subtraction angiographies (DSAs) and average angulations were collected and analyzed for each step. RESULTS: The mean procedure duration and fluoroscopy time was 140 minutes (standard deviation [SD], 32 minutes), and 40 minutes (SD, 9.1 minutes), respectively. The mean air kerma was 814 mGy (SD, 498 mGy), and the mean dose area product was 66.8 Gy cm2 (SD, 33 Gy cm2). The percentage of air kerma of the entire procedure was distributed throughout the following procedure stages: preparation (13.9%), main body (9.6%), target vessel cannulation (27.8%), stent deployment (29.1%), distal aortoiliac grafting (14.3%), and completion (5.3%). DSAs represented 23.0% of the total air kerma. Target vessel cannulation and stent deployment presented the highest mean lateral angulation (67 and 63 degrees, respectively). Using linear regression, each minute of continuous fluoroscopy added 18.9 mGy of air kerma (95% confidence interval, 17.6-20.2 mGy), and each DSA series added 21.1 mGy of air kerma (95% confidence interval, 17.9-24.3 mGy). Body mass index and lateral angulation were significantly associated with increased air kerma (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Cannulation of target vessels and bridging stent deployment are the steps requiring the highest radiation exposure during FEVAR cases. Optimized operator protection during these steps is mandatory.

Urgent Candy-Plug technique for distal false lumen occlusion in chronic aortic dissection.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the impact of urgency on early and midterm outcomes of the Candy-Plug (CP) technique for distal false lumen (FL) occlusion in thoracic endovascular aortic repair for aortic dissection. METHODS: The CP registry was reviewed, and patients were categorized into elective and urgent/emergent groups for analysis. End points included technical success, clinical success, early (30-day) computed tomography angiography findings, early (30-day) mortality, adverse events, and aortic remodeling in patients with available computed tomography angiography follow-up and reintervention. RESULTS: A total of 155 patients received a custom-made CP, of whom 32 patients (44% male, mean age 61 ± 9 years) were treated urgently and 123 patients (63% male, mean age 62 ± 11 years) electively. The primary CP rate was higher in the urgent group (28/32, 88%, in the urgent group vs 96/123, 78%, in the elective group, P = .051). The mean contrast volume was higher in the urgent group (157 ± 56 mL in the urgent group vs 130 ± 71 mL in the elective group, P = .017). Technical success was achieved in all patients in both groups. Clinical success was achieved in 25 of 32 (78%) patients in the urgent group vs 113 and 123 (92%) in the elective group (P = .159). The early mortality rate was 13% (4 of 32 patients) in the urgent group vs 1% (1 of 123 patients) in the elective group (P = .120). There was no statistically significant difference regarding the early adverse events between the urgent and elective CP groups. Early aortic-related reinterventions were required in 6 of 32 (19%) patients in the urgent group vs 6 of 123 (5%) in the elective group (P = .094). Thoracic aortic aneurysm sac regression was lower in the urgent group (5/28, 18%, in the urgent group vs 63/114, 55%, in the elective group, P = .001). Stable thoracic aortic aneurysm sac was higher in the urgent group (22/28, 79%, in the urgent group vs 47/114, 41%, in the elective group, P = .000). An increase in thoracic aortic aneurysm sac occurred in 1 of 28 (4%) patients in the urgent group vs 4 of 114 (4%) patients in the elective group (P = .096). CONCLUSIONS: The urgent use of the CP technique for distal FL occlusion in aortic dissection was feasible and effective. The decrease in aortic FL sac diameter may be affected by the urgent use of CP due to limited sizing availability. However, it achieved a high rate of aortic remodeling.

Multicentric clinical evaluation of a computed tomography-based fully automated deep neural network for aortic maximum diameter and volumetric measurements.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate a fully automatic deep learning-based method (augmented radiology for vascular aneurysm [ARVA]) for aortic segmentation and simultaneous diameter and volume measurements. METHODS: A clinical validation dataset was constructed from preoperative and postoperative aortic computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans for assessing these functions. The dataset totaled 350 computed tomography angiography scans from 216 patients treated at two different hospitals. ARVA's ability to segment the aorta into seven morphologically based aortic segments and measure maximum outer-to-outer wall transverse diameters and compute volumes for each was compared with the measurements of six experts (ground truth) and thirteen clinicians. RESULTS: Ground truth (experts') measurements of diameters and volumes were manually performed for all aortic segments. The median absolute diameter difference between ground truth and ARVA was 1.6 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-1.7; and 1.6 mm [95% CI, 1.6-1.7]) between ground truth and clinicians. ARVA produced measurements within the clinical acceptable range with a proportion of 85.5% (95% CI, 83.5-86.3) compared with the clinicians' 86.0% (95% CI, 83.9-86.0). The median volume similarity error ranged from 0.93 to 0.95 in the main trunk and achieved 0.88 in the iliac arteries. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the reliability of a fully automated artificial intelligence-driven solution capable of quick aortic segmentation and analysis of both diameter and volume for each segment.

The sac evolution imaging follow-up after endovascular aortic repair: An international expert opinion-based Delphi consensus study.

OBJECTIVE: Management of follow-up protocols after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) varies significantly between centers and is not standardized according to sac regression. By designing an international expert-based Delphi consensus, the study aimed to create recommendations on follow-up after EVAR according to sac evolution. METHODS: Eight facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study topic that were voted, using a 4-point Likert scale, by a selected panel of international experts using a three-round modified Delphi consensus process. Based on the experts' responses, only those statements reaching a grade A (full agreement ≥75%) or B (overall agreement ≥80% and full disagreement <5%) were included in the final document. RESULTS: One-hundred and seventy-four participants were included in the final analysis, and each voted the initial 29 statements related to the definition of sac regression (Q1-Q9), EVAR follow-up (Q10-Q14), and the assessment and role of sac regression during follow-up (Q15-Q29). At the end of the process, 2 statements (6.9%) were rejected, 9 statements (31%) received a grade B consensus strength, and 18 (62.1%) reached a grade A consensus strength. Of 27 final statements, 15 (55.6%) were classified as grade I, whereas 12 (44.4%) were classified as grade II. Experts agreed that sac regression should be considered an important indicator of EVAR success and always be assessed during follow-up after EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the elevated strength and high consistency of this international expert-based Delphi consensus, most of the statements might guide the current clinical management of follow-up after EVAR according to the sac regression. Future studies are needed to clarify debated issues.

Urgent endovascular repair of juxtarenal/pararenal aneurysm by off-the-shelf multibranched endograft.

OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes of urgent juxtarenal/pararenal aneurysms (J/P-AAAs) managed by off-the-shelf multibranched thoracoabdominal endografts (Cook, T-branch). METHODS: In this observational, multicenter, retrospective study, patients with J/P-AAAs treated by urgent endovascular repair by T-branch in 23 European aortic centers, from 2013 to 2023, were analyzed. Contained J/P-AAAs rupture, presence of related symptoms, and aneurysm diameter of >70 mm were considered as indication for urgent repair. Technical success (TS), spinal cord ischemia (SCI), and 30-day/hospital mortality were assessed as early outcomes. Survival, freedom from reinterventions, and target artery instability (TAI) were evaluated during follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, 197 patients (J-AAAs, n = 64 [33%]; P-AAAs, n = 95 [48%]; previous failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), n = 38 [19%]) were analyzed. The mean age and aneurysm diameter was 75 ± 8 years and 76 ± 4 mm, respectively. The American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 3 and 4 in 118 (60%) and 79 (40%) patients. Rupture, symptoms, and diameter of >70 mm were present in 51 (26%), 110 (56%), and 53 (27%) patients, respectively. An adjunctive proximal thoracic endograft was used in 28 cases (14%). The mean aortic coverage between the upper portion of the endograft and the lowest renal artery was 154 ± 49 mm. Single-stage repair and cerebrospinal fluid drainage were reported in 144 (73%) and 53 (27%) cases, respectively. TS was achieved in 182 (92%) cases (rupture, 84% vs no rupture, 95%; P = .02). Failures consist of TA loss (11 [6%]: renal artery, 9; celiac trunk, 2), type I to III endoleaks (2 [1%]), and 24-h mortality (2 [1%]). Rupture was a risk factor for technical failure (P = .02; odds ratio [OR], 3.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-12.1). Overall, 15 patients (8%) had persistent SCI (rupture, 14% vs no rupture, 5%) with 11 (6%) , of paraplegia (rupture, 10% vs no rupture, 5%; P = .001). Rupture (P = .04; OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1-8.9) and adjunctive proximal thoracic endograft (P = .01; OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.3-12.9) were risk-factors for SCI. Twenty-two patients (11%) died within 30 days or during a prolonged hospitalization. Previous failed EVAR (P = .04; OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.1-12.3), paraplegia (P < .001; OR, 9.9; 95% CI, 1.6-62.2) and postoperative mesenteric complications (P = .03; OR, 10.4; 95% CI, 1.2-93.3), as well as cardiac (P = .03; OR, 8.2; 95% CI, 2.0-33.0) and respiratory (P < .001; OR, 10.1; 95% CI, 2.9-35.2) morbidities were associated with 30-day/hospital mortality. The mean follow-up was 19 ± 5 months. The estimated 3-year survival and freedom from reinterventions was 58% and 77%, respectively. TAI occurred in 27 patients (14%) (occlusion, 15; endoleak, 14) with an estimated 3-year freedom from TAI of 72%. CONCLUSIONS: Urgent repair of J/P-AAAs by T-branch is feasible and effective with satisfactory TS and 30-day/hospital mortality in high-risk patients. However, extensive aortic coverage is necessary, leading to a non-negligible SCI rate, especially in case of aortic rupture or when adjunctive thoracic endografts are necessary. Previous failed EVAR and postoperative mesenteric complications, as well as cardiac and respiratory morbidities were associated with 30-day/hospital mortality and should be subjected to more research for the purposes of improving outcomes.

An international, expert-based, Delphi consensus document on controversial issues in the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: As a result of conflicting, inadequate or controversial data in the literature, several issues concerning the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remain unanswered. The aim of this international, expert-based Delphi consensus document was to provide some guidance for clinicians on these controversial topics. METHODS: A three-round Delphi consensus document was produced with 44 experts on 6 prespecified topics regarding the management of AAAs. All answers were provided anonymously. The response rate for each round was 100%. RESULTS: Most participants (42 of 44 [95.4%]) agreed that a minimum case volume per year is essential (or probably essential) for a center to offer open or endovascular AAA repair (EVAR). Furthermore, 33 of 44 (75.0%) believed that AAA screening programs are (probably) still clinically effective and cost effective. Additionally, most panelists (36 of 44 [81.9%]) voted that surveillance after EVAR should be (or should probably be) lifelong. Finally, 35 of 44 participants (79.7%) thought that women smokers should (or should probably/possibly) be considered for screening at 65 years of age, similar to men. No consensus was achieved regarding lowering the threshold for AAA repair and the need for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in patients undergoing EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: This expert-based Delphi consensus document provides guidance for clinicians regarding specific unresolved issues. Consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting the need for further research in those areas.

A Systematic Review on Thoracic Endovascular Repair Outcomes in Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injuries.

PURPOSE: Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) represents a potentially life-threatening condition and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is recommended as the first-line treatment (Class I level of evidence C) by the current guidelines. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the perioperative and mid-term follow-up outcomes of patients with BTAI treated with TEVAR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the English literature published between 2000 and 2022, via Ovid, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, until July 30, 2022. Observational studies and case series, with ≥5 patients, reporting on the perioperative and follow-up outcomes of patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. Primary outcomes were technical success and 30-day mortality, cerebrovascular morbidity. Secondary outcomes were mortality and re-interventions during the mid-term follow-up. RESULTS: From 5201 articles identified by the literature search, 35 eligible studies were included in this review. All studies had a retrospective study design. In total, 991 patients were included. The mean age was 34.5±16.5 years (range=16-89 years). Technical success was 98.0% (odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.98, 0.99, p<0.001, I2=0%). Mortality at 30 days was 5.0% (OR, 95% CI=0.03, 0.06, p<0.001, I2=5.56%). Spinal cord ischemia occurred in 1.0% (OR, 95% CI=0.01, 0.02, p<0.001, I2=0%) and stroke rate was 2.0% (OR, 95% CI=0.01, 0.02, p<0.001, I2=0%). The available follow-up was estimated at 29 months (range=3-119 months) with mortality rate at 2.0% (OR, 95% CI=0.01, 0.02, p<0.001, I2=0%) and re-intervention rate at 1.0% (OR, 95% CI=0.01, 0.02, p<0.001, I2=10.5%). CONCLUSION: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair showed high technical success and low early cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality rates. In the mid-term follow-up, the estimated mortality and re-intervention rates were also low. Furthermore, higher quality prospective studies are needed. CLINICAL IMPACT: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is recommended as the first line treatement in patients with blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAI). This systematic review of 35 retrospective studies and 991 patients showed high technical success (98.0%) with an associated 30-day mortality at 5.0% and low spinal cord ischemia (1%) and stroke rates (2.0%). Mid-term mortality and re-intervention rates reassure the effectiveness of TEVAR in BTAI cases.

Endovascular Management of a Chronic Type A Aortic Dissection: Case Report.

CLINICAL IMPACT: Branched endograft exclusion of chronic type A dissections resulting from a TEVAR complication is a minimally-invasive approach to consider in very fragile patients to mitigate the potential risks associated with conventional open surgical repair.

Early and Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair Using In Situ Laser Fenestration.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to present single-center outcomes in patients treated with in situ laser fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair (LFTEVAR) for various aortic arch pathologies and assess the impact of increasing experience. METHODS: The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was followed. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected single aortic center data was conducted, including baseline information and peri- and post-operative outcomes of consecutive patients managed with LFTEVAR for aortic arch pathologies. Patients were enrolled from April 1, 2017 to January 31, 2023. The cohort was dichotomized to compare early (2017-2019) and late experience (2020-2023). Primary outcomes were peri-operative mortality and cerebrovascular morbidity. RESULTS: Thirty patients were included (63.3% males, mean age 69.8±9.6 years); 21.4% presented with aortic ruptures. Aortic aneurysm involving the aortic arch was the most frequent pathology (53.3%). Forty target vessels (TVs) were revascularized, including 19 left subclavian arteries (47.5%) and 17 left common carotid arteries (42.5%). Double fenestrations were performed in 10 patients. The proximal landing zone was Ishimaru zone 0 in 5 patients (16.7%) and zone 1 in 13 patients (43.3%). Technical success was 93%. No spinal cord ischemia was recorded, and 3 patients (10%) suffered a post-operative stroke, of which 1 was major (3.3%). The median follow-up was 12 months (range=1-48 months). Thirty-day and follow-up mortality rates were 13.5% and 15.3%, respectively. Target vessel instability was 10%, of which 3.8% required reintervention. There was no statistically significant difference in outcomes between the early and late experience groups. CONCLUSIONS: Laser fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair of the aortic arch performed in experienced aortic centers is associated with low early mortality and stroke rates. It is a safe and effective therapeutic option in patients considered unfit for open repair. CLINICAL IMPACT: Custom-made devices for arch pathologies requiring urgent repair are not an option because of manufacturing delays. Off-the-shelf devices with single branch arch prostheses, and outside IFU techniques such as parallel-grafts and surgeon-modified endografts have been proposed in this setting. Another off-the-shelf alternative is in situ laser fenestration thoracic endovascular repair (LFTEVAR), which addresses many limitations of the other off-the-shelf options. Our study reports the outcomes of 30 patients treated with LFTEVAR, showing that it is a viable therapeutic option in patients considered unfit for open repair acknowledging that sufficient experience with complex endovascular aortic repair is mandatory to achieve acceptable outcomes in these high-risk patients with challenging aortic anatomies.

Outcomes after Endovascular Arch Repair in Patients with a Mechanical Aortic Valve: Results from a Multicentre Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate outcomes after endovascular aortic arch repair in patients with a mechanical aortic valve where the valve needs to be crossed. METHODS: An international, multicentre, retrospective observational study was undertaken including all consecutive patients who underwent endovascular arch repair with mechanical aortic valve crossing. RESULTS: From March 2020 to August 2023, 12 patients were included in the study (median age 55 years, interquartile range 45, 67 years; 58% male). Five patients (42%) had a genetically confirmed connective tissue disorder (CTD) and three more had a high clinical suspicion of CTD. Most patients had a bileaflet valve (11/12; 92%) and one patient had a monoleaflet one. All patients had previously undergone surgical ascending aortic repair. Technical success was 100% with successful completion of the procedure with no valve damage. Two deaths (17%) were observed in the first 30 days post-operatively with no signs of valve malfunction: one patient died of major stroke due to excessive wire and sheath manipulation in the arch; and another due to cardiac arrest of unknown cause, with no valve damage being detected in the autopsy. No intra-operative technical difficulties regarding valve cannulation were observed. During a median follow up of eight months, one patient died fifteen months after the procedure owing to non-aortic related causes, and four endoleaks were present on the latest computed tomography angiography, none type I or III. CONCLUSION: Endovascular aortic arch repair in a selected group of patients with a mechanical aortic valve treated in experienced, high volume aortic centres seems technically feasible and reasonably safe. These preliminary results underline the complexity of the procedure and should be validated by larger cohort studies. With careful patient selection and adequate physician experience, the presence of a mechanical aortic valve could potentially no longer pose a major contraindication for endovascular arch repair in the future.

Role of Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Managed for Complex Aortic Aneurysms using Fenestrated or Branched Endovascular Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the increasing number of fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (f/bEVAR) procedures, evidence on post-operative antiplatelet therapy is lacking. This study aimed to investigate the role of single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) vs. double antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after f/bEVAR on 30 day and follow up outcomes. METHODS: A multicentre retrospective analysis was conducted, including f/bEVAR patients managed from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2022. Comparative outcomes were assessed according to post-operative antiplatelet therapy. The cohort was divided into the SAPT group (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA] or clopidogrel) and DAPT group (ASA and clopidogrel). The duration of SAPT or DAPT was one to six months. Primary outcomes were 30 day death, and cardiovascular ischaemic and major haemorrhagic events. Secondary outcomes were survival and target vessel (TV) patency during follow up. RESULTS: A total of 1 430 patients were included: 955 under SAPT and 475 under DAPT. The 30 day mortality was similar (SAPT 2.1% vs. DAPT 1.5%; p = .42). Cardiovascular ischaemic events were lower in the DAPT group (SAPT 11.9% vs. DAPT 8.2%; p = .040), with DAPT being an independent protector for acute mesenteric (p = .009) and lower limb ischaemia (p = .020). No difference was found in 30 day major haemorrhagic events (SAPT 7.5% vs. DAPT 6.3%; p = .40). The mean follow up was 21.8 ± 2.9 months. Cox regression showed no cofounders on survival, with similar rates between groups (log rank p = .71). DAPT patients presented higher TV patency (SAPT 93.4%, standard error [SE] 0.7% vs. DAPT 96.6%, SE 0.7%; log rank p = .007) at thirty six months. Cox regression revealed bEVAR as a predictor of worse TV patency (hazard ratio 2.03, 95% confidence interval 1.36 - 3.03; p < .001). DAPT was related to higher patency within bEVAR patients (SAPT 87.2%, SE 2.1% vs. DAPT 94.9%, SE 1.9%; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: DAPT after f/bEVAR was associated with lower risk of cardiovascular ischaemic events and higher TV patency, especially in bEVAR cases. No difference in major haemorrhagic events was observed at 30 days.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy. METHODS: The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed. CONCLUSION: The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Five-Year Outcomes of Coarctoplasty with Stents in the Pediatric Population: Results from a Retrospective Single-Center Cohort with Centrally Adjudicated Outcomes.

Transcatheter stent implantation is a widely performed procedure for treating native coarctation of the aorta (CoA) in pediatric patients. However, data on mid- to long-term outcomes are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the mid-term safety and efficacy of transcatheter CoA stenting based on centrally adjudicated outcomes. This retrospective cohort study included patients aged 15 years or younger undergoing de novo stenting for CoA or recoarctation (reCoA) between 2006 and 2017. Immediate and 5-year outcomes were assessed. Immediate outcomes (procedural and in-hospital) were retrieved from electronic records. Rates of 5-year reCoA, stent fractures, aneurysmal/pseudoaneurysmal formation, and all-cause mortality were mid-term outcomes. The study included 274 patients (64% male and 36% female) with a median (interquartile range) age of 9 (6-12) years. Procedural success was achieved in 251 patients (91.6%). Procedural complications occurred in 4 patients (1.4%), consisting of stent migration in 1 (0.3%) and small non-expanding non-flow-limiting aortic wall injuries in 3 (1.1%). Major vascular access complications were observed in 18 patients (6.6%), acute limb ischemia in 8 (2.9%). In-hospital mortality occurred in 4 patients (1.4%). Five-year cumulative incidence rates of stent fractures, reCoA, and aortic aneurysmal/pseudoaneurysmal formation were 17/100 (17%), 73/154 (48%), and 8/101 (7.92%), respectively. Of 73 reCoAs, 47 were treated with balloon angioplasty, and 15 underwent a second stent implantation. Five-year all-cause mortality occurred in 4/251 (1.6%) patients. Coarctoplasty with stents was safe and effective in our pediatric population during a 5-year follow-up despite a high rate of reCoA.

Outcomes of Elective and Non-elective Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Aortic Repair for Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes after elective and non-elective fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). BACKGROUND: FB-EVAR has been increasingly utilized to treat TAAAs; however, outcomes after non-elective versus elective repair are not well described. METHODS: Clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing FB-EVAR for TAAAs at 24 centers (2006-2021) were reviewed. Endpoints including early mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), all-cause mortality, and aortic-related mortality (ARM), were analyzed and compared in patients who had non-elective versus elective repair. RESULTS: A total of 2603 patients (69% males; mean age 72±10 year old) underwent FB-EVAR for TAAAs. Elective repair was performed in 2187 patients (84%) and non-elective repair in 416 patients [16%; 268 (64%) symptomatic, 148 (36%) ruptured]. Non-elective FB-EVAR was associated with higher early mortality (17% vs 5%, P <0.001) and rates of MAEs (34% vs 20%, P <0.001). Median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range, 7-37 months). Survival and cumulative incidence of ARM at 3 years were both lower for non-elective versus elective patients (50±4% vs 70±1% and 21±3% vs 7±1%, P <0.001). On multivariable analysis, non-elective repair was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.92; 95% CI] 1.50-2.44; P <0.001) and ARM (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.63-3.62; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-elective FB-EVAR of symptomatic or ruptured TAAAs is feasible, but carries higher incidence of early MAEs and increased all-cause mortality and ARM than elective repair. Long-term follow-up is warranted to justify the treatment.

Renovisceral artery alterations due to branched endovascular aortic repair and respiratory-induced deformations.

OBJECTIVE: This study quantified respiratory-induced dynamics of branch vessels before and after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) branched endovascular aneurysm repair (bEVAR). METHODS: Patients with TAAA were recruited prospectively and treated with bEVAR, predominantly with Zenith t-Branch and BeGraft Peripheral PLUS bridging stents. Using SimVascular software, three-dimensional geometric models of the vessels and implants were constructed from computed tomography angiograms during both inspiratory and expiratory breath-holds, preoperatively and postoperatively. From these models, branch take-off angles, end-stent angles (transition from distal end of stent to native artery), and curvatures were computed. Paired, two-tailed t tests were performed to compare inspiratory vs expiratory geometry and pre- vs postoperative deformations. RESULTS: We evaluated 52 (12 celiac arteries [CA], 15 superior mesenteric arteries [SMA], and 25 renal arteries [RA]) branched renovisceral vessels with bridging stents in 15 patients. Implantation of bridging stents caused branch take-off angle to shift inferiorly in the SMA (P = .015) and RA (P = .014) and decreased the respiratory-induced branch angle motion in the CA and SMA by approximately 50%. End-stent angle increased from before to after bEVAR for the CA (P = .005), SMA (P = .020), and RA (P < .001); however, respiratory-induced deformation was unchanged. Bridging stents did not experience significant bending owing to respiration. CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in respiratory-induced deformation of branch take-off angle from before to after bEVAR should decrease the risk of device disengagement and endoleak. The unchanging respiratory-induced end-stent bending, from before to after bEVAR, means that bEVAR maintains native vessel dynamics distal to the bridging stents. This factor minimizes the risk of tissue irritation owing to respiratory cycles, boding well for branch vessel patency. The longer bridging stent paths associated with bEVAR may enable smoother paths subject to less dynamic bending, and potentially lower fatigue risk, compared with fenestrated EVAR.

Evaluation of false lumen occluders implanted in the abdominal aorta false lumen.

OBJECTIVE: Management of postdissection thoracoabdominal aneurysms with a fenestrated and/or branched endograft (F/BEVAR) is associated with favorable outcomes. Treatment should include both true lumen endografting and false lumen occlusion (FLO). Favorable results have recently been reported for FLO in the false lumen of the thoracic aorta. The purpose of this study is to analyze the results of FLO of the abdominal aorta in patients treated for post dissection thoracoabdominal aneurysm. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective analysis of prospective data of consecutive patients managed for post dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm from April 2019 to December 2022 with F/BEVAR associated with FLO in the abdominal false lumen was conducted. The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) was followed. Baseline demographics, operative details, and early outcomes (mortality, length of stay) were recorded. Primary endpoints were technical and clinical success. FLO technical success was defined as complete occlusion of false lumen backflow above the FLO on completion angiogram. RESULTS: During the 3-year study, 23 patients were treated for post dissection thoracoabdominal aneurysm with F/BEVAR and the use of abdominal FLO. Twenty-one patients (91.3%) had received prior endovascular treatment. The technical and clinical success was 95.7%. The abdominal FLO had a technical success rate of 78.3%. The median diameter of the FLO was 34 mm. No patient died during the perioperative period, and one patient had spinal cord ischemia (4.3%) with partial recovery. Six patients (26.1%) required early reintervention. The median duration of hospitalization in the intensive care unit and overall was 1 day (interquartile range, 0-3 days) and 7.5 days (interquartile range, 2-22 days), respectively. During the mean follow-up of 9.9 ± 9.0 months, no patient died. False lumen occlusion was complete or partial in nine (39.1%) and nine (39.1%) patients, respectively. No aortic rupture occurred during follow-up. Maximum aortic diameter decreased in 48% and remained stable in 39% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal aorta FLO during endovascular treatment of post dissection thoracic abdominal aortic aneurysm is associated with favorable outcomes. It offers an additional staging therapeutic option before extensive aorto-bi-iliac coverage, associated with low spinal cord ischemia rates. FLO also provides high rates of false lumen occlusion and false lumen remodeling during follow-up. Longer follow-up and larger cohorts are required to confirm these very promising early findings.

Systematic review of reintervention with fenestrated or branched devices after failed previous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: A proximal seal extension, after previously failed standard endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), has been described using various endovascular techniques. The aim of the present systematic review was to assess the technical success, 30-day mortality, and mortality and reintervention rates during the available follow-up for patients managed with endovascular methods after failed endovascular repair. METHODS: The present systematic review followed the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) statement and was preregistered at PROSPERO (no. CRD42022350436). A search of the English literature, via Ovid, using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, until June 15, 2022, was performed. Observational studies (2000-2022) and case series with at least five patients who had undergone fenestrated/branched EVAR (F/BEVAR) after failed EVAR were considered eligible. Technical success and mortality at 30 days and the mortality and reintervention rates during available follow-up had to have been reported. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the risk of bias. The primary outcome was technical success and mortality at 30 days. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 2558 reports. Ten studies were considered eligible, two of which were prospective. A total of 423 patients had undergone F/BEVAR after failed EVAR. The indication for reintervention was the presence of a type Ia endoleak in 44.9%. Technical success was reported in seven studies, and 319 of 336 interventions were considered successful (94.9%), according to each study's criteria. Of the 423 patients, 10 had died within 30 days (2.4%). Seven patients had presented with spinal cord ischemia (2.4%). Twenty-three acute kidney injury events were reported (6.8%). The mean follow-up was 18 months (range, 1-77 months). During follow-up, 47 deaths were reported (14.8%). Finally, 50 reinterventions of 303 procedures (16.5%) had been performed. CONCLUSIONS: According to the available literature, F/BEVAR after failed EVAR can be performed with high technical success and low mortality during the perioperative period. The midterm mortality and reintervention rates were acceptable. However, further data are needed to provide firm conclusions regarding the safety and durability of F/BEVAR after failed EVAR.

Spinal cord ischemia rates and prophylactic spinal drainage in patients treated with fenestrated/branched endovascular repair for thoracoabdominal aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a devastating complication after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair. The benefit of prophylactic cerebrospinal fluid drainage (pCSFD) to prevent SCI is still under investigation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the SCI rate and the impact of pCSFD following complex endovascular repair (fenestrated or branched endovascular repair [F/BEVAR]) for type I to IV TAAA. METHODS: The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was followed. A single-center retrospective study was conducted, including all consecutive patients, managed for TAAA type I to IV using F/BEVAR, between January 1, 2018, and November 1, 2022, for degenerative and post-dissection aneurysms. Patients with juxta- or pararenal aneurysms were excluded, as well as cases managed urgently for aortic rupture or acute dissection. After 2020, pCSFD in type I to III TAAAs was abandoned and replaced by therapeutic CSFD (tCSFD), performed only in patients presenting SCI. The primary outcome was the perioperative SCI rate for the entire cohort and the role of pCSFD for type I to III TAAAs. RESULTS: In total, 198 patients were included (mean age, 71.1±3.4 years; 81.8% males), including 50.5% with type I to III TAAA. The primary technical success was 94.9%. The perioperative mortality was 2.5%. and the major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) rate was 10.6%; 4.5% presented SCI of any type (2.5% paraplegia). When comparing the SCI group with the remaining cohort, patients with SCI presented higher MACE (66.7% vs 7.9%; P < .001) rate and longer intensive care unit stay (3.5 vs 1 day; P = .002). Following type I to III repair, similar SCI, paraplegia, and paraplegia with no recovery rates were reported in the pCSFD and tCSFD groups (7.3% vs 5.1%; P = .66; 4.8% vs 3.3%; P = .72; and 2% vs 0%; P = .37). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of SCI after TAAA I to IV endovascular repair was low. SCI was associated with significantly increased MACE and intensive care unit stay. The prophylactic use of CSFD in type I to III TAAAs was not associated with lower SCI rates and may not be justified routinely.