Burden of Stroke in Europe: An Analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study Findings From 2010 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: While most European Regions perform well in global comparisons, large discrepancies within stroke epidemiological parameters exist across Europe. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the stroke burden across European regions and countries in 2019 and its difference to 2010. METHODS: The GBD 2019 analytical tools were used to evaluate regional and country-specific estimates of incidence, prevalence, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years of stroke for the European Region as defined by the World Health Organization, with its 53 member countries (EU-53) and for European Union as defined in 2019, with its 28 member countries (EU-28), between 2010 and 2019. Results were analyzed at a regional, subregional, and country level. RESULTS: In EU-53, the absolute number of incident and prevalent strokes increased by 2% (uncertainty interval [UI], 0%-4%), from 1 767 280 to 1 802 559 new cases, and by 4% (UI, 3%-5%) between 2010 and 2019, respectively. In EU-28, the absolute number of prevalent strokes and stroke-related deaths increased by 4% (UI, 2%-5%) and by 6% (UI, 1%-10%), respectively. All-stroke age-standardized mortality rates, however, decreased by 18% (UI, -22% to -14%), from 82 to 67 per 100 000 people in the EU-53, and by 15% (UI, -18% to -11%), from 49.3 to 42.0 per 100 000 people in EU-28. Despite most countries presenting reductions in age-adjusted incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life year rates, these rates remained 1.4×, 1.2×, 1.6×, and 1.7× higher in EU-53 in comparison to the EU-28. CONCLUSIONS: EU-53 showed a 2% increase in incident strokes, while they remained stable in EU-28. Age-standardized rates were consistently lower for all-stroke burden parameters in EU-28 in comparison to EU-53, and huge discrepancies in incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-year rates were observed between individual countries.

The "Bundle Wire" Technique: A Novel Approach to Cannulating Challenging Target Vessels Using Multiple Fine Atraumatic Guidewires That Together Serve as a Stiff Guidewire.

PURPOSE: To present a novel technique that enables safe and effective cannulation of target vessels with challenging anatomy during fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR). TECHNIQUE: Following deployment of the F/B-EVAR endograft, the target vessels (TVs) are cannulated. The bundle wire technique provides a solution to challenging TVs and uses multiple fine atraumatic guidewires that together serve as a stiff guidewire. The technique can be executed in 2 ways using: (1) one 0.018 inch and one 0.014 inch guidewire or (2) three 0.014 inch guidewires. We demonstrate the technique in a case of a complex abdominal aortic aneurysm treated using branched EVAR in which the left renal artery with severe ostial stenosis was catheterized using the bundle wire technique. CONCLUSIONS: The bundle wire technique offers a technically feasible and economically viable solution for facilitating catheter and bridging stent delivery in anatomically challenging TVs during F/B-EVAR. It is a useful addition to the therapeutic armamentarium available to physicians for accessing demanding TVs.

Outcome of the Be Graft Bridging Stent in Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair in a High-Volume Single Center and an Overview of Current Evidence.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) has become one of the standard treatment options for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (cAAAs) and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Despite technological advances in the main endograft design, the lack of dedicated bridging stent-grafts (BSGs) is still the Achilles heel of the procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the mid-term outcomes of the BeGraft stent-graft as a dedicated bridging stent for FEVAR and to review the current evidence in literature. METHODS: Retrospective single center study, including all consecutive FEVARs performed between September 2018 and December 2022 for the treatment of cAAAs and TAAAs with implantation of at least one BeGraft peripheral as the main BSG in one of the target vessels (TVs). Primary endpoints were technical success and TV instability of TV bridged with a BeGraft stent, as well as 30-day mortality and re-intervention rates. Secondary endpoints were follow-up TV instability, re-interventions, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 113 patients (93 male, mean age 71.1±9.7) and 440 TV (14 scallops and 426 fenestrations) were included. Of the 440 TV, 406 received primary stenting. Be Grafts were used in 88.9% of these (n=361; celiac trunk [CT]=67, superior mesenteric artery [SMA]=98, right renal artery [RRA]=97, and left renal artery [LRA]=99). The technical success rate was 99.4% (359/361). The 30-day TV instability rate was 0.27% (1/361) with one early renal artery occlusion. During a median follow-up of 20 months (6-32), TV instability rate was 0.8% (3/361). Freedom from TV instability was 99.3%, 98.8%, and 98.8% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: Early-term and mid-term results regarding TV instability are satisfactory and support the use of BeGraft as BSG in FEVAR for cAAAs and TAAAs. CLINICAL IMPACT: The findings of the current study show that the use of the BeGraft stent graft as bridging stent in FEVAR is associated with a high technical success and low early and mid-term instability rate and support the standard use as a bridging stent in fenestrated aneurysm repair.

The Impact of Target Vessel Anatomy and Bridging Stent Geometry on Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of target vessel anatomy and bridging stent geometry on target vessel instability in branched endovascular aortic repair (B-EVAR). METHODS: This retrospective, single centre cohort study included all consecutive B-EVARs performed between September 2018 and December 2022 for thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) or complex abdominal aortic aneurysm (CAAA). The primary endpoints were target vessel instability and related re-interventions at 12 months. Secondary endpoints were 30 day results, including target vessel instability and re-interventions. Target vessel instability analysis consisted of assessment of target vessel anatomy, including diameter, aortic trunk to branch angle, and tortuosity. Post-operative parameters included change of clock position/horizontal misalignment, bridging length (gap), sealing length, tortuosity, post-stenting angle, and oversizing ratio. RESULTS: A total of 69 patients (TAAA: n = 56, 81%; CAAA: n = 13, 19%) and 271 (133 visceral and 138 renal) target vessels were included. The cumulative incidence of target vessel instability was 4.8%, 6.4%, and 7.9% at one, two, and three years, respectively. In the renal target vessel group, vessel diameter ≤ 4 mm (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.116 - 2.54; p = .022) and a bridging length ≥ 25 mm (HR 1.320, 95% CI 1.066 - 1.636; p = .011) were associated with increased target vessel instability. In visceral vessels, a change in clock position/horizontal misalignment ≥ 70 minutes (HR 1.072, 95% CI 1.026 - 1.121; p = .002) showed a significant association with target vessel instability. CONCLUSION: Target vessel diameter, bridging length (gap), and horizontal misalignment seemed to be associated with adverse target vessel outcomes. This may be solved with more customised endograft solutions to reduce the negative impact of the latter parameter.

Sex Related Anatomical Differences in Patients With Aortic Arch Pathology and Their Impact on the Feasibility of Double and Triple Branched Endografts.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sex based differences in ascending aorta and arch anatomy in patients with underlying proximal aortic disease and to evaluate their impact on feasibility for total endovascular repair with custom made, arch branched devices. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional review of all patients undergoing open and or total endovascular arch repair due to distal ascending aorta and or aortic arch pathologies in a single high volume aortic centre between 2012 and 2022. Anatomical ascending aorta and aortic arch parameters were analysed on a centreline of flow on a dedicated 3D workstation. Sex related differences of the ascending aorta, aortic arch, and supra-aortic vessels were evaluated. Subsequently, four endovascular devices were assessed for feasibility: double and triple branched devices both for the Zenith (Cook Medical) and Relay (Terumo Aortic) platforms, first in accordance with the instructions for use and then considering the possibility of adjunctive cervical debranching. The primary endpoints were sex specific differences in aortic anatomy, while secondary endpoints included sex based feasibility of branched endograft devices. RESULTS: During the study period, 395 patients underwent total aortic arch repair, of whom 152 (51 female, 33.5%) had high quality available computed tomography angiographies and were included in the study. Female patients had a shorter proximal landing zone than male patients (22 mm vs. 47 mm; p < .001). Left subclavian artery dissection was more frequent in men (24.8% vs. 3.9%; p < .001). Other anatomical parameters showed a similar distribution between sexes. Female patients presented a lower feasibility for double branched devices (35.3% vs. 58.4%; p = .015) as well as a tendency for lower feasibility rates for triple branched devices (31.4% vs. 47.5%; p = .081). CONCLUSION: Although most ascending aortic and arch parameters showed similar trends in both sexes, the availability of a suitable proximal landing zone was lower in female patients. Consequently, female patients had lower feasibility rates for double arch branched endografts and, to lesser extent, for triple arch branched endografts.

Impact of Previous Open Abdominal Surgery on Open Abdominal Aortic Repair: A Study from the NSQIP Database.

BACKGROUND: While endovascular aneurysm repair has become a first-line strategy in many centers, open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is still the best option for certain patients. A significant number of patients who are offered OSR for AAA have been previously submitted to other open abdominal surgeries (PAS). It is unclear, however, how this may impact their outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is an association between PAS and outcomes of OSR of AAA. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study based on clinical data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, including all patients undergoing elective OSR for AAA between 2011 and 2017. Excluded were patients with missing data on prior abdominal surgery, supramesenteric clamping, or urgent repairs. Patients with prior abdominal surgery (PAS) and patients without prior abdominal surgeries (nonPAS) were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes were operating time, ischemic colitis, postoperative complications, and lengths of hospital stay. RESULTS: Of the 2034 patients included, 27% had previous open abdominal surgery and 73% did not. Overall, the median age was 71(interquartile range 65-76), 72% of patients were male, 44% were smokers, and the average body mass index was 27 kg/m2. Univariate analysis showed no difference in postoperative 30-day mortality (4.0% PAS vs. 4.1% nonPAS, P = 0.91) or overall postoperative complication rates (33% PAS vs. 29% nonPAS, P = 0.07). Previous open abdominal surgery was significantly associated with longer operating times (P = 0.032) and an almost doubled rate of ischemic colitis (4.7% PAS vs. 2.6% nonPAS, P = 0.02). Postoperative intensive care unit and hospitalization were also significantly longer in patients with prior abdominal surgery (P = 0.005 and P = 0.014, respectively). Finally, there were significantly less patients discharged home, as opposed to institutionalized care (75.7% PAS down from 82.4% nonPAS, P = 0.001). Despite these initial univariate analysis results, on multivariate analysis, PAS actually did not prove to be a statistically significant independent risk factor for 30-day mortality, ischemic colitis, or longer operating times. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that patients who have undergone PAS may have some disadvantages in OSR of AAA. However, these negative trends do not go so far as to statistically significantly identify PAS as an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality, ischemic colitis, or longer operating times. As such, we suggest that a history of previous open abdominal surgery, in and of its own, should not exclude patients from consideration for open aortic abdominal aneurysm repair.

A Single-Center Experience With Total Percutaneous Implantation of a Low-Profile Thoracic Aortic Stent-Graft.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of total percutaneous implantation of the Zenith Alpha Thoracic (ZTA) endograft in the treatment of diseases of the descending thoracic aorta. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 56 consecutive patients undergoing total percutaneous ZTA implantation between 2018 and 2020 was performed in a single center. Patients' demographics, clinical characteristics, anatomical parameters, operative details, device features, and postoperative outcomes were assessed. The primary endpoint was ongoing clinical success. A Cox regression model was used to determine the predictive factors of worse postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-three ZTA endografts were implanted in 35 men and 21 women with a mean age of 69±11 years for the treatment of 26 degenerative aneurysms, 15 type B dissections, and 8 penetrating ulcers, among others. Primary technical success was 100%, with a 30-day ongoing clinical success rate of 94.6%. The 1-year ongoing clinical success rate was 91.1% (51 patients), and freedoms from all-cause mortality, type 1 and 3 endoleaks, and any unplanned reintervention were, respectively, 95.3%, 91.4%, and 88.2% at 1 year. During follow-up, there was one case of surgical conversion for an aorto-esophageal fistula. On the contrary, neither aneurysmal rupture nor significant aneurysmal expansion was recorded. Repair of ruptured thoracic aorta and a high ratio of sheath outer diameter to external iliac artery diameter were found to be independently associated with worse outcomes, with adjusted odds ratios of 4.4 [1.5-15.3] and 4.9 [1.1-23.9], respectively. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of total percutaneous implantation of ZTA endograft show excellent primary technical success and favorable midterm ongoing clinical success. Factors associated with worse outcomes include the repair of ruptured aorta and a high sheath to access vessel ratio.

Salvage of an Incomplete Sandwich With a Covered Celiac Trunk and a "Floating" Superior Mesenteric Artery Stent in a Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

PURPOSE: To report a case of a patient with a large thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) extent V treated with a custom-made fenestrated and branched endovascular repair (F/B-EVAR) after a failed and incomplete attempt of a Sandwich repair technique. REPORT: An 83-year-old patient was referred to our department after a failed attempt at endovascular repair of type V TAAA with a sandwich technique. The celiac trunk was inadvertently covered with the first endograft and a covered long superior mesenteric artery stent was placed and left facing upward inside the aorta. We performed a staged repair, by first catheterizing and stenting the celiac trunk and bringing it under and inside the main aortic endograft. In interval, a F/B-EVAR was performed using a bimodular custom-made device (CMD) with a proximal 2 branch module for the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery and distal module with fenestrations for both renal arteries. The intervention was successful, and the follow-up was uneventful at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Re-intervention after failed endovascular attempts of TAAA repair are technically challenging and require advanced endovascular techniques. The ability to construct CMDs allowed to extend repair to our patient which had severe anatomical constraints for other techniques.

Transaxillary Branch-to-Branch-to-Branch Carotid Catheterization Technique for Triple-Branch Arch Repair.

PURPOSE: To describe the transaxillary branch-to-branch-to-branch carotid catheterization technique (tranaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT) for cannulation of all supra-aortic vessels using only 1 femoral and 1 axillary access during triple-branch arch repair. TECHNIQUE: After deployment of the triple-branch arch device, catheterization and bridging of the innominate artery (IA) should be performed through a right axillary access (cutdown or percutaneous). Then, the retrograde left subclavian (LSA) branch should be catheterized (if not preloaded) from a percutaneous femoral access, and a 12×90Fr sheath should be advanced to the outside of the endograft. Subsequently, catheterization of the left common carotid artery (LCCA) antegrade branch should be performed, followed by snaring of a wire in the ascending aorta which was inserted through the axillary access, creating a branch-to-branch-to-branch through-and-through guidewire. Over the axillary access, a 12×45Fr sheath should be inserted into the IA branch and looped in the ascending aorta using a push-and-pull technique so that it faces the LCCA branch, allowing for stable catheterization of the LCCA. The retrograde LSA branch should then be bridged following the standard fashion. CONCLUSIONS: This series of 5 patients demonstrates that triple-branch arch repair can be performed with the transaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT, allowing catheterization of the supra-aortic vessels without manipulation of the carotid arteries. CLINICAL IMPACT: The transaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT allows catheterization and bridging of all supra-aortic vessels in triple-branch arch repair through only 2 vascular access points, the femoral artery and the right axillary artery. This technique avoids carotid surgical cutdown and manipulation during these procedures, reducing the risk of access site complications, including bleeding and reintervention, reintubation, cranial nerve lesions, increased operating time, and so on, and has the potential to change the current vascular access standard used during triple-branch arch repair.

Acute Kidney Injury Following Revascularization in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia and Non-Dialysis-Dependent Chronic Kidney Disease: Insights From the NSQIP Database at 30-Day Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at risk of developing renal injury following revascularization. We aimed to compare the risk of adverse renal events following endovascular revascularization (ER) or open surgery (OS) in patients with CLTI and CKD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) databases (2011-2017) was performed including patients with CLTI and non-dialysis-dependent CKD, comparing ER to OS. The primary outcome was a composite of postprocedural kidney injury or failure within 30 days. Thirty-day mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), amputation, readmission or target lesion revascularization (TLR) were compared using multivariate logistic regression and propensity-score matched analysis. RESULTS: A total of 5009 patients were included (ER: 2361; OS: 3409). The risk for the composite primary outcome was comparable between groups (odds ratio [OR]: 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53-1.17) as for kidney injury (n=54, OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.39-1.19) or failure (n=55, OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.39-1.19). In the adjusted regression, a significant benefit was observed with ER for the primary outcome (OR: 0.60, p=0.018) and renal failure (OR: 0.50, p=0.025), but not for renal injury (OR: 0.76, p=0.34). Lower rates of MACCE, TLR, and readmissions were observed after ER. Thirty-day mortality and major amputation rates did not differ. In the propensity score analysis, revascularization strategy was not associated with renal injury or failure. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, the incidence of renal events within 30 days of revascularization in CLTI was low and comparable between ER and OR. CLINICAL IMPACT: In a cohort of 5009 patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia and non-end-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD), postprocedural kidney injury or failure within 30 days was comparable between patients submitted to open or endovascular revascularization (ER). Lower rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, target lesion revascularization, and readmissions were observed after endovascular revascularization. Based on these findings, ER should not be avoided due to fear of worsening renal function in CKD patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia. In fact, these patients benefit more from ER regarding cardiovascular outcomes with no increased risk of kidney injury.

Additional Aortic Coverage With an Off The Shelf, Multibranched Endograft Compared With Custom Made Devices For Endovascular Repair of Pararenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (p-AAA) require complex endovascular aortic repair or open surgical repair with suprarenal clamping. Custom made devices (CMD), including fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) or off the shelf (OTS) multibranched devices, are available treatment options. The aim of this study was to determine the additional healthy aortic coverage using an OTS multibranched endograft vs. a CMD for the treatment of p-AAAs. METHODS: This was a retrospective single centre analysis of prospectively collected data. Consecutive patients with p-AAAs requiring a proximal landing zone above the coeliac artery (CA), planned and treated with CMDs (Zenith Fenestrated) between January 2017 and December 2021 were included in this study. Treatment with supracoeliac coverage using available OTS multibranched devices was simulated using available pre-operative images: T-Branch; E-nside; and TAMBE. Study endpoints included the need for additional proximal aortic coverage, and the number of the segmental arteries additionally covered proximally from the CA for OTS devices compared with CMDs. RESULTS: Eighty three patients with p-AAAs were treated with CMDs (all FEVAR), including juxtarenal AAAs (n = 46; 56%), suprarenal AAAs (n = 20; 24%), and short neck AAAs (n = 17; 20%). In this study, treatment with 249 (3 × 83) OTS endografts was simulated. When compared with CMDs, OTS devices required a mean of 74 ± 19 mm of additional proximal healthy aortic coverage from the CA (CMD: 33 ± 19 mm vs. OTS: 108 ± 6 mm; p ≤ .001), as well as an average sacrifice of 2.5 additional segmental arteries (CMD: 1.3 ± 0.8 vs. OTS: 3.8 ± 0.9; p ≤ .001). In 94% of patients, at least one of the available multibranched endografts could have been implanted in accordance with instructions for use. CONCLUSION: Despite not requiring customisation time, OTS endografts for the treatment of p-AAA lead to more extensive healthy aortic coverage, as well as an average sacrifice of 2.5 additional segmental arteries, compared with CMDs. When compared with OTS devices, CMDs appear to limit the extent of unnecessary aortic coverage and the theoretical subsequent risk of spinal cord ischaemia.

Use of Secondary Iliac Branch Devices after Previous Endovascular Abdominal and Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of iliac branch devices (IBDs), as secondary procedure, for the treatment of type Ib endoleak or evolution of iliac artery disease after prior endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for thoraco-abdominal (TAAAs) or abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). METHODS: A multicentre observational study of three European centres. The study included 75 patients (age 71 ± 9 years, 96% men) with previous EVAR (n = 64, 85%) or fenestrated or branched (FB) EVAR (n = 11, 15%). Overall, 88 IBDs were implanted to treat aneurysmal iliac artery evolution in 40 (53%) and type Ib endoleak in 35 (47%) cases, respectively. Thirteen (17%) patients received bilateral IBDs. Internal iliac artery (IIA) catheterisation was done through a transaxillary access (n = 82, 93%) or up and over (n = 6, 7%) technique. The primary endpoint was technical success. Secondary endpoints were 30 day major adverse event, early and long term freedom from re-intervention and target vessel instability. RESULTS: All procedures were technically successful (100%). During hospitalisation, there were four (5%) major adverse events and three (4%) early re-interventions, but no death, stroke, or damage to previous endografts. The median follow up was 47 (interquartile range 42) months, and the five year survival rate was 78 ± 6% with no aortic related death. Cox's regression analysis showed pre-operative renal function impairment (hazard ratio [HR] 3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 10.1; p = .033), and primary TAAA repair (HR 6.1; 95% CI 1.6-22.3; p = .006) as independent factors for long term mortality. Freedom from re-interventions was 85 ± 4% at five years with 11 (12%) cases (five endoleaks, four IBD thromboses, two stenoses). IIA instability was reported in three (3%) limbs and freedom from IIA instability was 95 ± 3% after 60 months. CONCLUSION: Secondary IBD after EVAR is a safe and effective procedure with high technical success and low complication rates. The technique of choice to revascularise the IIA seems not to affect early and follow up results. Long term durability of IBD repair is acceptable with low rates of IIA re-intervention.

Cervical Debranching: Regional versus General Anesthesia for Carotid-Subclavian Bypass. A Single Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: We report here the first cohort study comparing regional and general anaesthesia for left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective cohort study was performed, including all consecutive patients who underwent cervical debranching with carotid-subclavian bypass before aortic repair from February 2018 to May 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the type of anesthesia: Regional anesthesia (RA) versus general anesthesia (GA). Primary endpoints included the following: 1) technical success of RA and 2) neurological complications (NCs) (stroke and peripheral neurological lesions). Secondary endpoints included postoperative bleeding, wound complications, 30-day reintervention rate, and midterm events. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were included in the study. The mean age was 64 years (interquartile range [IQR]:13.5) and 69% were male. Thirty-seven patients (44.5%) were performed under RA. Technical success of RA was 89.2%. Two minor strokes (2.4%) were observed in the GA group (P = 0.199). Peripheral neurological disorders occurred in 4 patients (4.8%) (RA group n = 1 (2.7%), GA group n = 3 (6.5%), P = 0.491). 30-day complication rate was 27.7% (n = 23, GA: n = 15 (32.6%), RA: n = 8 (21.6%), P = 0.266). 30-day reintervention rate was 14.5% (n = 12) ten bleeding complications (12%) (RA group n = 3 (8.1%), GA group n = 7 (15.2%), P = 0.323), and 2 seroma evacuations (2.4%) in the RA group. The incidence of superficial wound infections was n = 6 (7.2%) (RA group n = 2 (5.4%), GA group n = 4 (8.7%), P = 0.565). Median follow-up time was 22 months (IQR 22 min/max 1-44). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, RA for carotid subclavian bypass surgery proved to be a feasible and effective anesthetic procedure compared with GA.

[Malperfusion after Aortic Dissection - Management and Techniques]. / Malperfusion nach Aortendissektion - Management und Techniken.

Malperfusion is a common complication of aortic dissection and further increases this deadly disease's mortality. An effective treatment strategy requires a timely diagnosis based on the clinical findings and the available instruments, understanding the disease's pathomechanism, recognising the therapy options recommended by the guidelines, and the diagnostic and therapeutic innovations of the area of research. The final treatment decision should be patient- and case-specific. In this work, we have considered malperfusion after aortic dissection, not only as a complication of aortic dissection but as a separate disease and summarise important information that can contribute to efficient therapy decisions in everyday clinical practice.

Effect of iliac tortuosity on outcomes after iliac branch procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To report a two-centers evaluation of the effects of iliac axis tortuosity on iliac branch device (IBD) results. METHODS: From 2015 to 2021, all IBD procedures performed at two European centers were analyzed retrospectively. The preoperative pelvic tortuosity index (PTI), external tortuosity index (ETI), and double iliac sign (DIS) were assessed for each iliac axis submitted to IBD. The primary endpoints were technical success, early and mid-term IBD complications (occlusion, stenosis, endoleaks [ELs]) and reinterventions, and the association with the PTI, ETI, and DIS. The 30-day mortality, survival, freedom from complications and freedom from reinterventions (FFR) were the secondary endpoints. RESULTS: During the study period, 224 patients had undergone 256 IBD procedures for 165 (64.5%) aortoiliac aneurysms, 44 (17.2%) isolated iliac aneurysms, 11 (4.3%) abdominal aortic aneurysms with a short iliac landing zone, and 36 (14.1%) type Ib ELs. IBD was planned with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for 158 (61.7%), fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for 45 (7.6%), and isolated for 53 (20.7%) cases. Technical success and 30-day mortality were 99.2% (254 of 256) and 0.9% (2 of 224), respectively. A PTI >1.4, an ETI >1.7, and the DIS were tested to identify the risk factors for the endpoints. No ELs and 9 (3.5%) IBD occlusions, requiring five reinterventions (2%), had occurred within 30 days. No association with the PTI, ETI, or DIS was identified; IBD oversizing of ≥25% on the external iliac artery was independently related to occlusion (odds ratio, 4.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-18.1; P = .045). The mean follow-up was 31 ± 27 months, with 11 IBD occlusions, 14 ELs, and 21 reinterventions. At 1, 3, and 5 years of follow-up survival, IBD patency, and FFR were 95%, 89%, and 80%; 93%, 91%, and 90%; and 93%, 89%, and 83%, respectively. The risk factors for overall complications (n = 34; 13.3%) and reinterventions (n = 26; 10.2%) were an ETI >1.7 (P = .037 and P = .019), a PTI >1.4 (P = .016 and P = .012), and a type Ib EL as the indication (P = .025 and P = .001), respectively. Cox regression confirmed PTI >1.4 as an independent predictor of overall complications and reinterventions (hazard ratio [HR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-4.4; P = .018; and HR, 3 95% CI, 1.3-6.8; P = .018, respectively) and ETI >1.7 as an independent risk factor for ELs (HR 6; 95% CI, 2.1-17.5; P = .001). The freedom from complications and FFR were significantly lower with a PTI >1.4 at 3 years (73% vs 92% [log-rank P = .01] and 77% vs 93% [log-rank P = .001], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found IBDs to be safe and effective in the treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms. Early complications are uncommon and related to endograft oversizing rather than anatomic characteristics in the present study. Iliac tortuosity is a risk factor for overall complications and reinterventions, in particular for IBD-related ELs.

A cross-sectional study on the anatomic feasibility of iliac side branch grafts in a real-world setting.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this cross-sectional, single-center study was to analyze the feasibility of different commercially available iliac branch devices in Europe in a cohort of patients with aorto-iliac aneurysms. METHODS: All patients with aorto-iliac or iliac aneurysms that required iliac aneurysm repair, between 2017 and 2021, were included. Morphologic data was analyzed using computed tomography angiograms. The main outcome was the feasibility of each endoprosthesis (Cook ZBIS, Gore Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis [IBE], and JOTEC E-Iliac) according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. Secondary outcomes were feasibility in all three devices, in any device, and with adjunctive procedures (liberal criteria). Additionally, a comparative analysis of all three grafts was performed to analyze differences in feasibility. RESULTS: Overall, 119 iliac aneurysms in 101 patients were included. The mean age was 71 ± 11 years, and 91.6% were male. Feasibility was 52.9% for Cook ZBIS, 33.6% for Gore IBE, and 26.9% for the JOTEC E-Iliac device. A total of 65.5% of patients were feasible with at least one device, whereas only 10.1% complied with all three devices. The main reasons for lack of feasibility were a short common iliac artery length (Cook ZBIS), a narrow common iliac artery diameter (Gore IBE), and a >50° angulation between the external and internal iliac arteries (JOTEC E-Iliac). There was a significant difference between the feasibility of the three devices (P < .001). Cook ZBIS was the graft with the higher feasibility, with 3.3 and 4.4 higher odds when compared with Gore IBE and JOTEC E-Iliac devices, respectively. There was no significant difference between the Gore IBE and the JOTEC E-Iliac. By using liberal criteria, the overall feasibility increased to 95.8%. CONCLUSIONS: We found that only 65.5% of patients were feasible with one of the available devices according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. The Cook ZBIS was the device with the overall highest feasibility. Extending the use of these devices with adjunctive measures and a more liberal approach increased feasibility to 95.8%.

Use of Shockwave Intravascular Lithotripsy in Recanalization of Calcified Visceral and Renal Arteries: A Case Report and Update of the Literature.

PURPOSE: Calcifications of the visceral and renal arteries lead to chronic mesenteric ischemia and renal artery stenosis, and both open and endovascular treatments can be proposed. Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) has emerged as a novel technique used in peripheral and coronary interventions. CASE REPORT: A 73-year-old man presented with chronic postprandial abdominal pain and weight loss. Computed-tomography-angiography (CTA) showed 93% calcified stenosis of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA). The plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) was affected by immediate recoiling. The patient underwent ShockwaveTM IVL of the SMA via brachial access and stent-graft implantation. At 3-months follow-up, the patient showed symptoms resolution. CONCLUSIONS: The use of Shockwave IVL can be an effective treatment for severely calcified SMA stenosis. A similar approach can be employed in both celiac and renal arteries as reported in 11 cases in literature and herein summarized. Intravascular lithotripsy resulted in high technical success and uneventful follow-up. However, given the small number of patients reported, larger studies are needed to confirm these findings. CLINICAL IMPACT: This article reports a case of recanalization of superior mesenteric artery with heavily calcified lesion treated with intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) with Shockwave™ Intravascular Lithotripsy Balloon (Shockwave Medical Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA). Beside, for the first time, we summarize the Literature on the use of IVL in the renal and visceral arteries district, providing indications, applications and useful hints for the endovascular treatment of chronic mesenteric ischemia and renal artery stenosis. This preliminary data show straightforward applicability, high technical success, and uneventful follow-up and IVL can be proposed as an useful tool for challenging revascularization of heavily calcified reno-visceral arteries.

Early and Mid-Term Outcomes of the Inverted Limb Configuration Below Fenestrated and Branched Endografts: Experience from Two European Centers.

PURPOSE: To report a European experience on the use of the Inverted Limb (IL) below fenestrated and branched endografts (FB-EVAR) for the treatment of juxta/pararenal (JP-AAAs), thoracoabdominal (TAAAs), and para-anastomotic aortic aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2016 and 2020, all FB-EVAR with distal IL due to previous open (OSR) or endovascular repair (EVAR) or infrarenal aortic length <76 mm at two European university centers were retrospectively analyzed. Technical success, early and mid-term iliac complications (occlusion; type Ib endoleak [EL]), IL-related complications (type III EL), and reinterventions were assessed as primary endpoints; 30-day mortality, survival and freedom from (FF) overall complications/reinterventions were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-one high-risk patients (male 30%-73%; mean age 71±10 years; ASA 3-4, 41%-100%) underwent FB-EVAR with distal IL for 8 (19.5%) J/P-AAAs and 33 (80.5%) TAAAs. Sixteen (39%) patients with previous aortic treatment (8 OR, 8 EVAR) were included. Preoperative computed tomographic angiography showed infrarenal aortic length <76 mm in all cases. Custom-made endografts were configured as 31 (75.6%) fenestrated-only, 6 (14.6%) branched-only, and 4 (9.8%) fenestrated+branched for an overall of 158 target visceral vessels (TVVs; 3.8±0.7 TVVs/case). The IL main body was planned with 1-stent, 2-stents, and 3-stents in 6 (14.6%), 23 (56.1%), and 12 (29.3%) cases, respectively. Technical success and 30-day mortality were 97.6% (40/41) and 0%. Thirty-day complications occurred in 2 (4.9%) patients: 1 limb occlusion, requiring reintervention, 1 type III EL, spontaneously resolved. Mean follow-up was 21±16 months. Three After 30-day, 3 (7.3%) iliac complications (2 occlusions; 1 type Ib EL) were successfully managed by endovascular reinterventions; no IL-related complications were observed. The patency of TVVs was 96.8%. No correlation between anatomical characteristics, endograft configuration, and primary outcomes was observed, except for 1-stent IL and type III EL (log rank p=0.01). At 1- and 2-year follow-up survival, FF overall iliac/IL-related complications and FF reinterventions were 90% and 80%, 90% and 84%, and 92% and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The IL configuration allows a safe endovascular treatment of challenging aortic lesions in high-risk patients although needing a number of adjunctive procedures. A short main body of IL could be associated with intraoperative and perioperative type III EL. CLINICAL IMPACT: Bifurcated endograft with inverted limb configuration increases the feasibility of a total endovascular approach in patients with challenging anatomy. The use of inverted limb overcomes the anatomical limitations of short-body initial grafts and short distance between lowest target artery and the aortic bifurcation, leading the fixation inside the endograft. Although technically demanding, this advanced technology could avoid surgical reinterventions in previous open or endovascular repair that are burdened with higher rates of morbidities and complications.

Endovascular Repair With Triple Inner-Branch Endograft for Aberrant Subclavian Artery Aneurysm: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) is the preferred option for the treatment of the distal arch and descending thoracic aorta. Fenestrated and branched TEVAR have become an option to treat pathologies of the aortic arch, avoiding sternotomy and cardiopulmonary arrest as well as total surgical debranching. We describe here the case of a symptomatic patient with an arteria lusoria aneurysm associated with Kommerel diverticulum who underwent total endovascular repair with a triple-branched TEVAR. CASE REPORT: A 66-year-old male patient was treated for a symptomatic arteria lusoria artery associated with a Kommerel diverticulum, resulting in difficulty swallowing and choking. We used a custom-made triple inner-branch endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana) following implantation of a right-sided carotid-subclavian (C-S) bypass. The C-S bypass occluded in the interval time between the 2 procedures and required recanalization and stent-graft placement during the aortic arch procedure. The arteria lusoria was embolized with a vascular plug. No complications occurred and postoperative tomography showed exclusion and thrombosis of the Kommerel diverticulum and perfusion of the supra-aortic vessels. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of arteria lusoria aneurysms can be performed with total endovascular arch inner-branch repair, avoiding increased risk of morbidity and mortality caused by open or hybrid procedures.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes After Operative Treatment of Aberrant Subclavian Artery Pathologies and Suggested Reporting Items.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesise and present all available evidence regarding the surgical treatment of patients with aberrant subclavian artery (aSA) pathologies during the last 30 years. The study also aimed to create a checklist of suggested reporting items to help increase reporting homogeneity. METHODS: A systematic search of medical databases was performed to identify all studies published between 1990 and 2020 reporting on the outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for an aSA pathology. Patients were divided into two groups; Group A included patients undergoing open or hybrid surgery through sternotomy/thoracotomy and Group B included patients undergoing endovascular or hybrid treatment without chest access. The % crude rates (CR) of all variables of interest were calculated. A proportion meta-analysis was performed reporting pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Three hundred and fourteen studies were identified reporting on the surgical outcomes of 732 patients (60.1% males; 440/732). The quality of evidence was generally low, with 286 studies including fewer than four patients and 28 studies with five or more cases. Aberrant right subclavian artery (aRSA) in a left sided aortic arch was present in 71.4% of the patients and a Kommerell's diverticulum was present in 50.1% of the cases. A total of 68% of the patients were symptomatic on presentation, with the majority complaining of dysphagia (49.6%). Group A included 453 and Group B 279 patients. Studies reporting on five or more patients were included in the main meta-analysis. The pooled early mortality rate was 1.62% (95% CI 0.05% - 4.53%) in Group A and 1.96% (95% CI 0 - 6.34%) in Group B. Pooled rates of symptom relief were 99.52% (95% CI 92.05% - 100.00%) in Group A and 95.79% (95% CI 83.96% - 100.00%) in Group B. CONCLUSION: The surgical techniques used to treat aSA and aortic pathologies involving an aSA had remarkably low mortality rates and high clinical success, regardless of the technique used.