Hemodynamics and Wall Mechanics of Vascular Graft Failure.

Blood vessels are subjected to complex biomechanical loads, primarily from pressure-driven blood flow. Abnormal loading associated with vascular grafts, arising from altered hemodynamics or wall mechanics, can cause acute and progressive vascular failure and end-organ dysfunction. Perturbations to mechanobiological stimuli experienced by vascular cells contribute to remodeling of the vascular wall via activation of mechanosensitive signaling pathways and subsequent changes in gene expression and associated turnover of cells and extracellular matrix. In this review, we outline experimental and computational tools used to quantify metrics of biomechanical loading in vascular grafts and highlight those that show potential in predicting graft failure for diverse disease contexts. We include metrics derived from both fluid and solid mechanics that drive feedback loops between mechanobiological processes and changes in the biomechanical state that govern the natural history of vascular grafts. As illustrative examples, we consider application-specific coronary artery bypass grafts, peripheral vascular grafts, and tissue-engineered vascular grafts for congenital heart surgery as each of these involves unique circulatory environments, loading magnitudes, and graft materials.

Comparison of Unibody and Non-Unibody Endografts for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Medicare Beneficiaries: The SAFE-AAA Study.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised about the long-term performance of aortic stent grafts for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms, in particular, unibody stent grafts (eg, Endologix AFX AAA stent grafts). Only limited data sets are available to evaluate the long-term risks related to these devices. The SAFE-AAA Study (Comparison of Unibody and Non-Unibody Endografts for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Medicare Beneficiaries Study) was designed with the Food and Drug Administration to provide a longitudinal assessment of the safety of unibody aortic stent grafts among Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: The SAFE-AAA Study was a prespecified, retrospective cohort study evaluating whether unibody aortic stent grafts are noninferior to non-unibody aortic stent grafts with respect to the composite primary outcome of aortic reintervention, rupture, and mortality. Procedures were evaluated from August 1, 2011, through December 31, 2017. The primary end point was evaluated through December 31, 2019. Inverse probability weighting was used to account for imbalances in observed characteristics. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the effect of unmeasured confounding, including assessment of the falsification end points heart failure, stroke, and pneumonia. A prespecified subgroup included patients treated from February 22, 2016, through December 31, 2017, corresponding to the market release of the most contemporary unibody aortic stent grafts (Endologix AFX2 AAA stent graft). RESULTS: Of 87 163 patients who underwent aortic stent grafting at 2146 US hospitals, 11 903 (13.7%) received a unibody device. The average age of the total cohort was 77.0±6.7 years, 21.1% were female, 93.5% were White, 90.8% had hypertension, and 35.8% used tobacco. The primary end point occurred in 73.4% of unibody device-treated patients versus 65.0% of non-unibody device-treated patients (hazard ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.15-1.22]; noninferior P value of 1.00; median follow-up, 3.4 years). Falsification end points were negligibly different between groups. In the subgroup treated with contemporary unibody aortic stent grafts, the cumulative incidence of the primary end point occurred in 37.5% of unibody device-treated patients and 32.7% of non-unibody device-treated patients (hazard ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.98-1.14]). CONCLUSIONS: In the SAFE-AAA Study, unibody aortic stent grafts failed to meet noninferiority compared with non-unibody aortic stent grafts with respect to aortic reintervention, rupture, and mortality. These data support the urgency of instituting a prospective longitudinal surveillance program for monitoring safety events related to aortic stent grafts.

Predicting Outcomes Following Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Using Machine Learning.

OBJECTIVE: To develop machine learning (ML) models that predict outcomes following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). BACKGROUND: EVAR carries non-negligible perioperative risks; however, there are no widely used outcome prediction tools. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted database was used to identify patients who underwent EVAR for infrarenal AAA between 2011 and 2021. Input features included 36 preoperative variables. The primary outcome was 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event (composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death). Data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, 6 ML models were trained using preoperative features. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess model performance based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, and prior AAA repair. RESULTS: Overall, 16,282 patients were included. The primary outcome of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event occurred in 390 (2.4%) patients. Our best-performing prediction model was XGBoost, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) of 0.95 (0.94-0.96) compared with logistic regression [0.72 [0.70-0.74)]. The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.06. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our newer ML models accurately predict 30-day outcomes following EVAR using preoperative data and perform better than logistic regression. Our automated algorithms can guide risk mitigation strategies for patients being considered for EVAR.

Efficacy and Safety of Endovascular Fenestrated and Branched Grafts Versus Open Surgery in Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: An Updated Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an updated systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression of efficacy and safety of fenestrated/branched endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) compared with open repair. BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of TAAAs may be a promising alternative to open surgery by reducing invasiveness and expanding the eligible population, but evidence remains limited. METHODS: We applied "Prepared Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis" guidelines to retrieve, quantitatively pool, and critically evaluate the efficacy and safety (including 30-day mortality, reintervention, spinal cord injury [SCI], and renal injury) of both approaches. Original studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library until April 20, 2022, excluding papers reporting <10 patients. Pooled proportions and means were determined using a random-effect model. Heterogeneity between studies was evaluated with I2 statistics. RESULTS: Sixty-four studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. Endovascular cohort patients were older and had higher rates of comorbidities. Endovascular repair was associated with similar proportions of mortality (0.07, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.06-0.08) compared with open repair (0.09, 95% CI: 0.08-0.12; P = 0.22), higher proportions of reintervention (0.19, 95% CI: 0.13-0.26 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.04-0.10; P < 0.01), similar proportions of transient SCI (0.07, 95% CI: 0.05-0.09 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.05-0.08; P = 0.28), lower proportions of permanent SCI (0.04, 95% CI: 0.03-0.05 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.05-0.07; P < 0.01), and renal injury (0.08, 95% CI: 0.06-0.10 vs 0.13, 95% CI: 0.09-0.17; P = 0.02). Results were affected by high heterogeneity and potential publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Despite these limitations and the lack of randomized trials, this meta-analysis suggests that endovascular TAAA repair could be a safer alternative to the open approach.

Direct oral anticoagulants over warfarin at discharge associated with improved survival and patency in infra-geniculate bypasses with prosthetic conduits.

OBJECTIVE: There is no consensus on the optimal anticoagulant regimen following lower extremity bypass. Historically, warfarin has been utilized for prosthetic or compromised vein bypasses. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly replacing warfarin in this context, but their efficacy in bypass preservation has not been well-studied. Recent studies have shown that DOACs may improve outcomes following bypasses; however, it is unclear if this is dependent upon type of bypass conduit. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether a difference exists between vein and prosthetic infra-geniculate bypasses outcomes based on the anticoagulant utilized on discharge, warfarin or DOAC. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative infra-inguinal bypass database was queried for all patients who underwent an infra-geniculate bypass and were anticoagulation-naive at baseline but were discharged on either warfarin or DOACs. A survival analysis was performed for patients up to 1 year to determine whether the choice of discharge anticoagulation was associated with differences between those with vein vs prosthetic conduits in overall survival, primary patency, risk of amputation, or risk of major adverse limb events (MALE). A multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to control for differences in baseline demographic factors between the groups. RESULTS: During the study period (2003-2020), 57,887 patients underwent infra-geniculate bypass. Of these, 3230 (5.5%) were anticoagulated on discharge. There was a similar distribution of anticoagulation between vein (n = 1659; 51.4%) and prosthetic conduits (n = 1571; 48.6%). Thirty-two percent were discharged on DOACs, and 68.0% were discharged on warfarin. For prosthetic conduits, being discharged on a DOAC was associated with improved outcomes on univariate and multivariable analyses revealing lower risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.93; P = .021), loss of primary patency (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.89; P = .003), risk of amputation (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.93; P = .013), and risk of MALE (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64-1.00; P = .048). Patients with a vein bypass had improved univariate outcomes for survival and primary patency; however, with multivariable analysis, there were no significant differences in outcomes between DOAC and warfarin. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation-naive patients who underwent an infra-geniculate prosthetic bypass had higher rates of overall survival, bypass patency, amputation-free survival, and freedom from MALE when discharged on a DOAC compared with warfarin. Those with vein bypasses had similar outcomes regardless of the choice of anticoagulation.

Cryopreserved arterial allografts vs autologous vein for arterial reconstruction in infected fields.

OBJECTIVE: Peripheral arterial infections are rare and difficult to treat when an in situ reconstruction is required. Autologous vein (AV) is the conduit of choice in many scenarios. However, cryopreserved arterial allografts (CAAs) are an alternative. We aimed to assess our experience with CAAs and AVs for reconstruction in primary and secondary peripheral arterial infections. METHODS: Data from patients with peripheral arterial infections undergoing reconstruction with CAA or AV from January 2002 through August 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with aortic- or iliac-based infections were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients (28 CAA, 14 AV) with a mean age of 65 and 69 years, respectively, were identified. Infections were secondary in 31 patients (74%) and primary in 11 (26%). Secondary infections included 10 femoral-femoral grafts, 10 femoropopliteal or femoral-distal grafts, five femoral patches, four carotid-subclavian grafts, one carotid-carotid graft, and one infected carotid patch. Primary infection locations included six femoral, three popliteal, and two subclavian arteries. In patients with lower extremity infections, associated groin infections were present in 19 (56%). Preoperative blood cultures were positive in 17 patients (41%). AVs included saphenous vein in eight and femoral vein in six. Intraoperative cultures were negative in nine patients (23%), polymicrobial in eight (21%), and monomicrobial in 22 (56%). Thirty-day mortality occurred in four patients (10%), two due to multisystem organ failure, one due to graft rupture causing acute blood loss and myocardial infarction, and one due to an unknown cause post-discharge. Median follow-up was 20 months and 46 months in the CAA and AV group, respectively. Graft-related reintervention was performed in six patients in the CAA group (21%) and one patient in the AV group (7%). Freedom from graft-related reintervention rates at 3 years were 82% and 92% in the CAA and AV group, respectively (P = .12). Survival rates at 1 and 3 years were 85% and 65% in the CAA group and 92% and 84% in the AV group (P = .13). Freedom from loss of primary patency was similar with 3-year rates of 77% and 83% in the CAA and AV group, respectively (P = .25). No patients in either group were diagnosed with reinfection. CONCLUSIONS: CAAs are an alternative conduit for peripheral arterial reconstructions when AV is not available. Although there was a trend towards higher graft-related reintervention rates in the CAA group, patency is similar and reinfection is rare.

Decreasing prevalence of centers meeting the Society for Vascular Surgery abdominal aortic aneurysm guidelines in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Based on data supporting a volume-outcome relationship in elective aortic aneurysm repair, the Society of Vascular Surgery (SVS) guidelines recommend that endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) be localized to centers that perform ≥10 operations annually and have a perioperative mortality and conversion-to-open rate of ≤2% and that open aortic repair (OAR) be localized to centers that perform ≥10 open aortic operations annually and have a perioperative mortality ≤5%. However, the number and distribution of centers meeting the SVS criteria remains unclear. This study aimed to estimate the temporal trends and geographic distribution of Centers Meeting the SVS Aortic Guidelines (CMAG) in the United States. METHODS: The SVS Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for all OAR, aortic bypasses, and EVAR from 2011 to 2019. Annual OAR and EVAR volume, 30-day elective operative mortality for OAR or EVAR, and EVAR conversion-to-open rate for all centers were calculated. The SVS guidelines for OAR and EVAR, individually and combined, were applied to each institution leading to a CMAG designation. The proportion of CMAGs by region (West, Midwest, South, and Northeast) were compared by year using a χ2 test. Temporal trends were estimated using a multivariable logistic regression for CMAG, adjusting by region. RESULTS: Overall, 67,865 patients (49,264 EVAR; 11,010 OAR; 7591 aortic bypasses) at 336 institutions were examined. The proportion of EVAR CMAGs increased nationally by 1.7% annually from 51.6% (n = 33/64) in 2011 to 67.1% (n = 190/283) in 2019 (ß = .05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.09; P = .02). The proportion of EVAR CMAGs across regions ranged from 27.3% to 66.7% in 2011 to 63.9% to 72.9% in 2019. In contrast, the proportion of OAR CMAGs has decreased nationally by 1.8% annually from 32.8% (n = 21/64) in 2011 to 16.3% (n = 46/283) in 2019 (ß = -.14; 95% CI, -0.19 to -0.10; P < .01). Combined EVAR and OAR CMAGs were even less frequent and decreased by 1.5% annually from 26.6% (n = 17/64) in 2011 to 13.1% (n = 37/283) in 2019 (ß = -.12; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.07; P < .01). In 2019, there was no significant difference in regional variation of the proportion of combined EVAR and OAR CMAGs (P = .82). CONCLUSIONS: Although an increasing proportion of institutions nationally meet the SVS guidelines for EVAR, a smaller proportion meet them for OAR, with a concerning downward trend. These data question whether we can safely offer OAR at most institutions, have important implications about sufficient OAR exposure for trainees, and support regionalization of OAR.

Association of polypharmacy scores with the long-term survival of patients with intact aortoiliac aneurysms and indication for repair.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Our study analyzed the relationship between two polypharmacy scores (addition of chronic prescribed drugs [ACPDs] and Rx-Risk Comorbidity Index) and survival in patients with an intact abdominal aortic and/or common iliac aneurysm (AAA). METHODS: Consecutive retrospective, single-center cohort of patients attended for an intact AAA with indication for repair from 2008 to 2021. Demographic data, Charlson Comorbidity Index, AAA treatment, ACPD, and Rx-Risk polypharmacy scores were recorded at baseline. Main outcomes were the 5-year and long-term survival rates. The statistical analysis included Cox regression, area under the curve, and continuous net reclassification index. RESULTS: A total of 424 patients with AAA were evaluated (median age: 76 years; 92.2% male, median Charlson index 2), of whom 314 (74.1%) underwent intervention (80% endovascular and 20% open) and 110 (25.9%) did not. During follow-up (mean 4.6 years), 245 patients (57.8%) died, with 1-month, 1-year, and 5-year survival rates of 98.1%, 86.3%, and 52.7%, respectively. ACPD and Rx-Risk indices (median [interquartile range]: 6 [4-9] and 3 [0-5], respectively) were significantly and linearly associated (P < .001) with survival, with the best cutoff points at 5 and 0, respectively. An ACPD >5 (patients with >5 chronically prescribed drugs at baseline) and an Rx-Risk >0 were associated with a 45.2% (P = .038) and 102% (P = .002) increase in 5-year mortality, respectively, after adjustment for age, sex, Charlson index, and type of AAA treatment. Both polypharmacy indices improved significantly the discriminative power of the Charlson Comorbidity Index in predicting survival. CONCLUSIONS: Both ACPD and Rx-Risk polypharmacy scores are independently related to survival among patients with an intact AAA and indication for repair. Their behavior is similar, so the simple ACPD >5 appears to be sufficient to identify patients with lower survival rates.

Iliac tortuosity increases reinterventions but not adverse outcomes following repair of juxtarenal aneurysms using physician-modified endografts.

OBJECTIVE: Increased angulation of the proximal aortic neck has been associated with complications following endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms, including increased incidence of endoleaks, stent migration, secondary interventions, and conversions. However, knowledge on the impact of aortoiliac tortuosity on outcomes following fenestrated repair remains limited. This study aims to quantify the effect of aortoiliac tortuosity on outcomes following fenestrated repair. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective review of all patients who underwent a physician-modified endovascular repair for the treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms under a single physician-sponsored investigation device exemption study from 2011 to 2021 was performed. Center luminal lines and geometric distances were obtained using TeraRecon software (San Mateo, CA). A tortuosity index was calculated (tortuosity index = centerline distance/geometric line distance) for each iliac vessel as well as for the infrarenal aorta according to Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. Aortic and iliac tortuosity were assessed independently and stratified as low and high. Demographics, comorbidities, anatomic and operative details, and outcomes were compared using univariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 135 patients were identified. Thirty-eight patients (28%) had high aortic tortuosity, and 55 patients (42%) had high iliac tortuosity. Patients with high tortuosity were older (aortic: 78 vs 76 years; P = .04; iliac: 78 vs 75 years; P = .01) and differed by sex. Twenty-two percent of men and 50% of women had high aortic tortuosity (P = .01). Forty-seven percent of men and 20% of women had high iliac tortuosity (P = .01). There were no differences in comorbidities based on aortic tortuosity, but coronary artery disease (high: 58% vs low: 36%; P = .01) and hypertension (high: 69% vs low: 86%; P = .02) differed based on iliac tortuosity. Aneurysm diameter was larger for patients with high iliac tortuosity (72 mm vs 64 mm; P < .01), and fluoroscopy time was longer for patients with high aortic tortuosity (41 vs 31 minutes; P = .02). When outcomes were assessed, high iliac tortuosity was associated with increased rate of reinterventions (hazard ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-6.0) and type 1 or 3 endoleak (hazard ratio, 5.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-16); however, all other outcomes were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with physician-modified endovascular repair for juxtarenal aneurysms, iliac tortuosity but not aortic tortuosity, is associated with increased reinterventions and type 1 or type 3 endoleaks. Long-term follow-up is critical for patients with high iliac tortuosity to ensure that high-risk endoleaks are identified and treated early to avoid the risk of rupture.

Development of a comorbidity index for patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) are two modalities to treat patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Alternative to individual comorbidity adjustment, a summary comorbidity index is a weighted composite score of all comorbidities that can be used as standard metric to control for comorbidity burden in clinical studies. This study aimed to develop summary comorbidity indices for patients who underwent AAA repair. METHODS: Patients who went under EVAR or OSR were identified in National Inpatient Sample (NIS) between the last quarter of 2015 to 2020. In each group, patients were randomly sampled into experimental (2/3) and validation (1/3) groups. The weights of Elixhauser comorbidities were determined from a multivariable logistic regression and single comorbidity indices were developed for EVAR and OAR groups, respectively. RESULTS: There were 34,668 patients underwent EVAR (2.19% mortality) and 4792 underwent OSR (10.98% mortality). Both comorbidity indices had moderate discriminative power (EVAR c-statistic, 0.641; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.616-0.665; OSR c-statistic, 0.600; 95% CI, 0.563-0.630) and good calibration (EVAR Brier score, 0.021; OSR Brier score, 0.096). The indices had significantly better discriminative power (DeLong P <.001) than the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) (EVAR c-statistic, 0.572; 95% CI, 0.546-0.597; OSR c-statistic, 0.502; 95% CI, 0.472-0.533). For internal validation, both indices had similar performance compared with individual comorbidity adjustment (EVAR DeLong P = .650; OSR DeLong P = .431). These indices demonstrated good external validation, exhibiting comparable performance to their respective validation groups (EVAR DeLong P = .891; OSR DeLong P = .757). CONCLUSIONS: ECI, the comorbidity index formulated for the general population, exhibited suboptimal performance in patients who underwent AAA repair. In response, we developed summary comorbidity indices for both EVAR and OSR for AAA repair, which were internally and externally validated. The EVAR and OSR comorbidity indices outperformed the ECI in discriminating in-hospital mortality rates. They can standardize comorbidity measurement for clinical studies in AAA repair, especially for studies with small samples such as single-institute data sources to facilitate replication and comparison of results across studies.

Midterm outcomes of side branch embolization and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of total side branch embolization at endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms on the incidences of persistent type 2 endoleak (pT2EL), changes in sac diameter, and reintervention. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2021, all patients who underwent primary EVAR with a few exceptions were included. Side branch embolization was considered during EVAR for inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) or IMA plus lumbar artery (LA) when feasible for contrast agent use. Outcomes measured were pT2EL, sac diameters, reintervention, ruptures, and aneurysm-related mortality. Radiation exposure and safety outcomes were also reported. RESULTS: Among 732 patients who underwent EVAR, 616 (84.2%) were included. Of the 616 patients, 223 (36.2%) did not undergo side branch embolization (NO-E), whereas 228 (37.0%) underwent IMA only (IMA-E) and 165 (26.8%) underwent IMA+LA including median sacral artery (IMA+LA-E). The technical success rate of IMA and LA embolization was 97.0% and 74.7%, respectively. Crude incidences of pT2EL were significantly different from 6 months through 3 years (NO-E, 27.8%; IMA-E, 31.7%; IMA+LA-E, 9.4% at 3 years; P = .007). In the multivariate analysis adjusted for background differences, the incidences of pT2EL were significantly higher in the NO-E (odds ratio [OR], 3.21; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 1.08-9.57; P = .004) and IMA-E (OR, 4.86; 95% CIs, 1.68-14.11; P = .004) compared with the IMA+LA-E group. Similarly, any reintervention until 3 years was significantly frequent in the NO-E (OR, 5.26; 95% CIs, 1.76-15.70; P = .003) and IMA-E group (OR, 4.19; 95% CIs, 1.38-12.67; P = .01). Surgical conversion and secondary rupture were seen only in 1 patient without any aneurysm-related mortality. Percent sac shrinkage from the baseline was significantly promoted in the IMA+LA group (NO-E, 12.1% ± 16.6%; IMA-E, 11.4% ± 16.7%; IMA+LA-E, 18.0% ± 18.8%; P = .047). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in the IMA+LA-E group (NO-E, 60.2 ± 47.4 minutes; IMA-E, 59.3 ± 39.5 minutes; IMA+LA-E, 75.5 ± 42.8 minutes; P < .0001), and so do the dose-area product (NO-E, 424.6 ± 333.4 Gy cm2; IMA-E, 477.7 ± 342.4 Gy cm2; IMA+LA-E, 631.8 ± 449.1 Gy cm2; P < .0001). No embolization-related complications or radiation-related adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-emptive embolization of IMA, LAs, and median sacral artery at the time of EVAR reduced the incidences of pT2EL and any reintervention and promoted sac shrinkage during the follow-up period of 3 years.

Sex disparities in popliteal artery aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Only 5% of patients with popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) are female. Evidence on PAA treatment and outcomes in women is therefore scarce. The POPART Registry provides one of Europe's largest data collections regarding PAA treatment. Data on clinical presentation, aneurysm morphology, and perioperative outcomes after open surgical PAA repair in women will be presented. METHODS: POPART is a multicenter, noninterventional registry for open and endovascular PAA repair, with 42 participating centers in Germany and Luxembourg. All patients aged >18 years who have been treated for PAA since 2010 are eligible for study inclusion. Data collection is based on an online electronic case report form. RESULTS: Of the 1236 PAAs, 58 (4.8%) were in women. There were no significant differences in age or cardiopulmonary comorbidities. However, female patients had a lower prevalence of contralateral PAAs and abdominal aortic aneurysms (P < .05). PAAs in women were more likely to be symptomatic before surgery (65.5% vs 49.4%; P = .017), with 19% of women presenting with acute limb ischemia (vs 11%; P = .067). Women had smaller aneurysm diameters than men (22.5 mm vs 27 mm; P = .004) and became symptomatic at smaller diameters (20 mm vs 26 mm; P = .002). Only 8.6% of women and 11.6% of men underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (P > .05); therefore, the perioperative outcome analysis focused on open surgical repair. In total, 23.5% of women and 16.9% of men developed perioperative complications (P > .05). There were no differences in major cardiovascular events (P > .05), but women showed a higher incidence of impaired wound healing (15.7% vs 7.2%; P = .05) and major amputation (5.9% vs 1.1%; P = .027). Female sex was significantly associated with the need for nonvascular reinterventions within 30 days after surgery (odds ratio: 2.48, 95% confidence interval: 1.26-4.88), whereas no significant differences in the odds for vascular reinterventions were observed (odds ratio: 1.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.68-5.77). In the multiple logistic regression model, female sex, symptomatic PAAs, poor quality of outflow vessels, and graft material other than vein graft were independently associated with perioperative reinterventions. CONCLUSIONS: Women have smaller PAAs, are more likely to be symptomatic before treatment, and are more often affected by nonvascular reinterventions in the perioperative course. As our understanding of aneurysmatic diseases in women continues to expand, sex-specific treatment strategies and screening options for women in well-selected cohorts with modified screening protocols should be continuously re-evaluated.

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

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

Outcomes of lower extremity arterial bypass using the Human Acellular Vessel in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and no great saphenous vein to use as a conduit for arterial bypass have a high risk for amputation despite advances in medical and endovascular therapies. This report presents findings from a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supported study of the Human Acellular Vessel (HAV) (Humacyte Inc.) used as a conduit for arterial bypass in patients with CLTI and inadequate or absent autologous conduit. METHODS: The HAV is a 6-mm, 40-cm vessel created from human vascular smooth muscle cells seeded onto a polyglycolic acid scaffold pulsed in a bioreactor for 8 weeks as cells proliferate and the scaffold dissolves. The resultant vessel is decellularized, creating a nonimmunogenic conduit composed of collagen, elastin, and extracellular matrix. The FDA issued an Investigational New Drug for an intermediate-sized, single-center study of the HAV under the agency's Expanded Access Program in patients with advanced CLTI and inadequate or absent autologous conduit. Technical results and clinical outcomes were analyzed and reported. RESULTS: Between March 2021 and July 2023, 29 patients (20 males; mean age, 71 ± 11 years) underwent limb salvage operation using the HAV as a bypass conduit. Most patients had advanced CLTI (Rutherford class 5/6 in 72%; wound, ischemia, and foot infection stage 3/4 in 83%), and 97% had previously failed revascularization(s) of the extremity. Two HAVs were sewn together to attain the needed bypass length in 24 patients (83%). Bypasses were to tibial arteries in 23 patients (79%) and to the popliteal artery in 6 (21%). Technical success was 100%, and the 30-day mortality rate was 7% (2 patients). With 100% follow-up (median, 9.3 months), the limb salvage rate was 86% (25/29 patients). There were 16 reinterventions to restore secondary patency, of which 15 (94%) were successful. Primary and secondary patency of the HAV at 9 months were 59% and 71%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The HAV has demonstrated short- to intermediate-term safety and efficacy as an arterial bypass conduit in a complex cohort of patients with limb-threatening ischemia and no autologous options. This experience using the FDA's Expanded Access Program provides real-world data to inform regulatory deliberations and future trials of the HAV, including the study of the vessel as a first-line bypass conduit in less severe cases of chronic limb ischemia.

Prevalence of type II endoleak after elective endovascular aneurysm repair with polytetrafluoroethylene- or polyester-based endografts.

OBJECTIVE: Type II endoleak is the most frequent complication after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair. Polytetrafluoroethylene and polyester (PE) are the two most commonly used graft materials in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) devices. Biological properties of the material might influence the appearance and persistence of type II endoleak (T2EL). Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate potential differences in the prevalence of T2EL after EVAR between polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and PE endografts in patients electively treated for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective, observational study was conducted between January 2011 and January 2022. Preoperative, procedural, and follow-up data were derived from electronic health records. Imaging included computed tomography scans, and/or duplex ultrasound examination. The primary end point was the prevalence of T2EL diagnosed within 1 year after EVAR. Secondary end points included the prevalence of T2EL throughout follow-up, early (≤30 days) and late (>30 days) T2EL, the rate of T2EL disappearance during the follow-up period, the prevalence of type I and III endoleak, and T2EL-related reinterventions. RESULTS: Follow-up was available for 394 patients, 245 in the PE and 149 in the PTFE group. The prevalence of T2EL diagnosed within 1 year after endovascular repair was 11.8% in the PE group and 21.5% in the PTFE group (P = .010). There was no significant difference in early (≤30 days) and late (>30 days) T2EL between groups (P = .270 and P = .311). There was no difference in the freedom from endoleak type II reinterventions between groups (P = .877). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of T2EL after elective EVAR is significantly higher with the use of PTFE-based endografts compared with PE-based endografts. This difference is mostly based on T2EL diagnosed after 30 days of follow-up.

Initial two-day blood pressure management after endovascular aneurysm repair improves midterm outcomes by reducing the incidence of early type II endoleak.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate midterm outcomes of our novel strategy of postoperative initial 2-day blood pressure management (BPM) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for the prevention of subsequent type II endoleak (T2EL) in a single-center series. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2014, 137 patients who underwent EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were reviewed. Starting from 2013, the mean blood pressure was maintained between 75 and 90 mmHg for the initial 24 hours after EVAR followed by systolic pressure controlled below 120 mmHg during the next 24 hours in the treatment group (n = 76). The incidence of T2EL detected at 7 days, reintervention, and AAA sac diameter up to 5 years after EVAR were compared with those of the control group comprising of 60 consecutive patients who underwent standard EVAR without BPM prior to 2013. RESULTS: Between the treatment group and the control group, significant differences were achieved in the incidence of T2EL at 7 days (19.7% vs 40.0%; P = .009), a mean decrease of AAA sac diameter at 1-year (-5.1 ± 4.9 vs -2.2 ± 6.7 mm; P = .013) and 2-year (-5.4 ± 7.7 vs -1.7 ± 10.8 mm; P = .045). In addition, there was a significant decrease in the incidence of T2EL detected at 7 days with the use of the Gore Excluder with 22.7% in the treatment group vs 80.0% in the control group (P < .001), which resulted in a significant decrease in the aneurysm sac diameter up to 4 years after EVAR. Survival rate without AAA sac enlargement at 5 years after EVAR (83.0% vs 70.0%; P = .021) in the treatment group was significantly higher than that of the control group, whereas no significant differences were observed in the freedom rates of reintervention, T2EL-related reintervention, and all-cause mortality between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative initial 2-day BPM had a preventive effect on AAA sac enlargement until midterm periods, by reducing the incidence of T2EL at 7 days after EVAR. The usage of Gore Excluder under BPM was especially associated with sustained positive effects until the midterm follow-up.

The association of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter with mortality in the International Consortium of Vascular Registries.

BACKGROUND: The mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair is high, despite improvements in perioperative care, centralization of emergency vascular surgical services, and the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The diameter of intact AAA has been shown to be a predictor of short- and long-term survival. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of AAA diameter on mortality for rAAA repair using contemporary data collected from the International Consortium of Vascular Registries and compare outcomes by sex and the type of repair patients received. METHODS: Prospective registry data on repair of rAAA from seven countries were collected from 2010 to 2016. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality after EVAR and open surgical repair (OSR). Data were stratified by type of repair and sex. Logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratio (OR) for the association between AAA diameter and perioperative mortality and the association between type of repair and mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for differences in patient characteristics. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 6428 patients with a mean age ranging from 70.2 to 75.4 years; the mean AAA diameter was 7.7 ± 1.8 cm. Females had a significantly smaller AAA diameter at presentation compared with males (6.9 ± 1.6 cm vs 7.9 ± 1.8 cm; P < .001). who underwent OSR had larger AAA diameters compared with those who underwent EVAR (P < .001). Females who underwent repair were significantly older (P < .001). Males were more likely to have cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, and renal impairment. Overall, AAA diameter was a predictor of mortality in univariate and multivariate analysis. When analyzing EVAR and OSR separately, the impact of AAA diameter per cm increase on mortality was apparent in both males and females undergoing EVAR, but not OSR (EVAR: male OR, 1.09 [95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.16] and EVAR: female OR, 1.17 [95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.35]). The early mortality rate for males and females who underwent EVAR was 18.9% and 25.9% (P < .001), respectively. The corresponding mortality for males and females who underwent OSR was 30.2% and 38.6% (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In these real-world international data, there is a significant association between rAAA diameters and early mortality in males and females. This association was more evident in patients undergoing EVAR, but not shown in OSR. Despite improvements in overall AAA repair outcomes, the risk of mortality after rAAA repair is consistently higher for females.

Modified Harborview Risk Score improves ease in predicting mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The Harborview Risk Score (HRS) is a simple, accurate 4-point preoperative risk scoring system used to predict 30-day mortality following ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair. The HRS assigns 1 point for each of the following: age >76 years, pH <7.2, creatinine >2 mg/dL, and any episode of severe hypotension (systolic blood pressure <70 mmHg). One potential limitation of this risk scoring system is that arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis is required to determine arterial pH. Because ABG analysis is not routinely performed prior to patient transfer or rAAA repair, we sought to determine if the HRS could be modified by replacing pH with the international normalized ratio (INR), a factor that has been previously shown to have a strong and independent association with 30-day death after rAAA repair. METHODS: A retrospective review of all rAAA repairs done at a single academic medical center between January 2002 and December 2018 was performed. Our traditional HRS was compared with a modified score, in which pH <7.2 was replaced with INR >1.8. Patients were included if they underwent rAAA repair (open or endovascular), and if they had preoperative laboratory values available to calculate both the traditional and modified HRS. RESULTS: During the 17-year study period, 360 of 391 repairs met inclusion criteria. Observed 30-day mortality using the modified scoring system was 17% (18/106) for a score of 0 points, 43% (53/122) for 1 point, 54% (52/96) for 2 points, 84% (27/32) for 3 points, and 100% (4/4) for 4 points. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed similar ability of the two scoring systems to predict 30-day death: there was no significant difference in the area under the curve (AUC) comparing the traditional (AUC = 0.74) and modified (AUC = 0.72) HRS (P = .3). CONCLUSIONS: Although previously validated among a modern cohort of patients with rAAA, our traditional 4-point risk score is limited in real-world use by the need for an ABG. Substituting INR for pH improves the usefulness of our risk scoring system without compromising accuracy in predicting 30-day mortality after rAAA repair.

Modified Harborview Risk Score accurately predicts mortality for patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: The modified Harborview Risk Score (HRS) is a simple measure initially derived from a single institutional dataset used to predict ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair survival preoperatively using basic labs and vital signs collected upon presentation. However, validation of this widely applicable scoring system has not been performed. This study aims to validate this scoring system using a large multi-institutional database. METHODS: All patients who underwent repair of an rAAA from 2011 to 2018 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and at a single academic medical center were included. The modified HRS was calculated by assigning 1 point for each of the following: age >76 years, creatinine >2 mg/dL, international normalized ratio >1.8, and any systolic blood pressure less than 70 mmHg. Assessment of the prediction model was then completed. Using a primary outcome measure of 30-day mortality, the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve was calculated. The discrimination between datasets was compared using a Delong test. Mortality rates for each score were compared between datasets using the Pearson χ2 test. Comparative analysis for patients with a score of 4 was limited due to a small sample size. RESULTS: A total of 1536 patients were identified using NSQIP, and 163 patients were assessed in the institutional dataset. There were 518 patients with a score of 0 (455 NSQIP, 63 institutional), 676 patients with a score of 1 (617 NSQIP, 59 institutional), 391 patients with a score of 2 (364 NSQIP, 27 institutional), 106 with a score of 3 (93 NSQIP, 13 institutional), and 8 patients with a score of 4 (7 NSQIP, 1 institutional). No difference was found in the receiver operating characteristic area under the curves between datasets (P = .78). Thirty-day mortality was 10% NSQIP vs 22% institutional for a score of 0; 28% NSQIP vs 36% institutional for a score of 1; 41% NSQIP vs 44% institutional for a score of 2; 45% NSQIP vs 69% institutional for a score of 3; and 57% NSQIP vs 100% institutional for a score of 4. Score 0 was the only score with a significant mortality rate difference between datasets (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The modified HRS is confirmed to be broadly applicable as a clinical decision-making tool for patients presenting with rAAAs. Therefore, this easily applicable model should be applied for all patients presenting with rAAAs to assist with provider and patient decision-making prior to proceeding with repair.

Anatomical suitability for branched endovascular aortic arch repair and balloon-expandable bridging stent grafts in a cohort of patients previously treated with a hybrid approach.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the suitability of two triple branch arch devices (aBranch) (Terumo aortic and Cook Medical) and a balloon-expandable covered stent (VBX, W. L. Gore & Associates, Johnson & Johnson) to incorporate the brachiocephalic trunk (BCT) in a cohort previously treated with hybrid thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR). METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective, all-comers, preclinical suitability study. We conducted an analysis of preoperative computed tomography scans in surgical patients between 1999 and 2022 in a single vascular surgery unit. The primary outcome was the aortic suitability of aBranch devices and VBX as mating stent for BCT in previous hybrid TEVAR. Hybrid repair of the aortic arch included TEVAR, fenestrated or branched TEVAR associated with any surgical debranching of the supra-aortic trunks and chimney TEVAR with proximal landing in zones 0 to 2. Secondary outcomes included (i) suitability assessment when excluding minor instruction for use (IFU) criteria, (ii) a comparison of suitable and nonsuitable patients, (iii) risk factors analysis for nonsuitability, and (iv) a description of the exclusion causes. RESULTS: During the study period, 120 patients were treated. Among elective patients (n = 73), the suitability of any aBranch was 82.2% (60/73) and VBX was suitable in 64.4% of BCTs (47/73). The aBranch suitable patients had a significantly longer sinotubular-BCT length (P = .017) and smaller distal ascending aorta (P = .043) as compared with nonsuitable ones. The suitability of Terumo Aortic and Cook Medical devices was 52.1% (38/73) and 46.6% (34/73), respectively. When minor IFU criteria were ignored, suitability increased to 82.2% (60/73) and 63.0% (46/73), respectively. Left common carotid artery diameter and sinotubular-BCT length were significant nonsuitability risk factors for Terumo Aortic aBranch in multivariable analysis. No associations were found for Cook Medical device. The outcomes were tested in the entire cohort demonstrating a global suitability of 82.9%, increasing to 86.3% when ignoring minor IFUs. VBX was anatomically suitable to use in BCT in 73.2% of patient BCTs. CONCLUSIONS: aBranch devices are anatomically suitable in a vast majority of patients (86%) undergoing hybrid TEVAR. The innominate artery seems eligible for incorporation with VBX in almost two-thirds of patients. This mating stent may help to overcome some minor IFU restrictions.