Use of Spinal Anesthesia during Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes after spinal anesthesia (SA) versus general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing thoracic endograft placement and to evaluate the adjunctive use of cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) placement. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review of patients that underwent thoracic endograft placement from 2001 to 2019 was performed. Patients were stratified based on the type of anesthesia they received: GA, SA or epidural, GA with CSFD, and SA with CSFD. Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality and length of stay (LOS). Baseline characteristics were analyzed with Student's t-test and Pearson's chi-squared test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for 30-day mortality and longer LOS. RESULTS: A total of 333 patients underwent thoracic endograft placement; 104 patients received SA, 180 patients received GA, 30 patients received GA and CSFD, and 19 patients received SA and CSFD. Of the total patients, 16.2% underwent thoracic endograft placement for type B aortic dissection, 3.3% for type A aortic dissection, and 12.3% for penetrating ulcer. The mean age of the study population was 68.7 years old. Patients undergoing SA were older with a mean age of 73.4 years versus 64.7 years for patients undergoing GA (P < 0.001). Spinal anesthesia (SA) was preferred in patients at high risk for GA (>75 years old: 52.9% vs. 33.3%, P < 0.001; renal comorbidities: 20.6% vs. 10.6%, P = 0.03, and current smokers: 26.7% vs. 9.6%, P < 0.001). Length of stay (LOS) was decreased in the SA group (4.29 days vs. 9.70 days, P < 0.001). There was a lower incidence of spinal cord ischemia in the SA group (1.0% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.44), as well as significantly decreased 30-day mortality (0% vs. 5.6%, P = 0.01), reintervention (19.2% vs. 26.8%, P = 0.02), and return to the operating room (6.8% vs. 12.7%, P = 0.02). Of the 19 patients that had SA + CSFD, there were no signs and symptoms of spinal cord ischemia and decreased incidence of perioperative complications (0% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.01). There was no difference in the risk for intraoperative complications, neurologic complications, or 30-day mortality between GA + CSFD patients versus SA + CSFD patients. Age >75 (P = 0.002), intraoperative complications (P < 0.001), and perioperative complications (P = 0.02) were associated with increased mortality after thoracic endograft placement per multivariate logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anesthesia (SA) in select high-risk patients was associated with reduced 30-day mortality, neurologic complications, and LOS compared to GA. The concurrent use of spinal drainage and SA had satisfactory results compared to spinal drainage and GA.

Body Mass Index Impacts Indication But Not Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

BACKGROUND: There are limited studies looking at thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) outcomes in obese and overweight patients. Our objective was to determine the rate of complications, reintervention, and short-term mortality in normal weight, overweight, and obese patients undergoing TEVAR. METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR at a large tertiary hospital from October 2007 to January 2020 were analyzed. Patients were stratified into 3 cohorts based on body mass index (BMI): normal (18.5-25 kg/m2), overweight (25-30 kg/m2), and obese (>30 kg/m2). Primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year survival. Intraoperative, in-hospital, and postdischarge complications were assessed as secondary outcomes using the Clavian-Dindo classification system. In addition, reinterventions associated with the index TEVAR procedure as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Among 204 patients fitting the study criteria, we identified 65 with normal BMI, 78 overweight, and 61 obese patients. Obese patients were younger than the overweight and normal BMI patients (mean age 62.2 vs. 66.7 vs. 70.7, respectively, P = 0.003). In terms of TEVAR indication, the obese cohort had the highest percentage of patients with type B aortic dissection (36.4%), while the normal BMI cohort had the higher proportion of patients undergoing TEVAR for isolated thoracic aortic aneurysm (63.9%). Intraoperative complications did not significantly differ between cohorts. Postoperatively, in-hospital complications, postdischarge complications and 30-day return to the operative room did not differ significantly between study cohorts. Odds of reintervention did not differ significantly between cohorts, both on univariate and multivariate analysis. Log-rank test of Kaplan Meier analysis revealed no difference in reintervention-free survival (P = 0.22). Thirty-day mortality and 1-year overall survival were similar across cohorts. Both univariate and multivariate logarithmic regression revealed no difference in likelihood of 30-day mortality between the obese and normal cohort. CONCLUSIONS: There were no measurable differences in complications, reinterventions, or mortality, suggesting that vascular surgeons can perform TEVAR across a spectrum of BMI without compromising outcomes.

Technological Advances to Address the Challenging Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Neck.

There have been significant technologic advances in endovascular aortic therapies since the introduction of conventional infrarenal endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). These advances have sought to address the weaknesses of conventional EVAR- particularly the difficult or "hostile" infrarenal aortic aneurysm neck. We review anatomical features that create a hostile neck and the most recent advancements to overcome these limitations. EndoAnchors replicate open suture fixation to seal endograft to aortic tissue and have been shown to be useful as a prophylactic measure in short, angulated necks as well as therapeutic for type Ia endoleaks. Fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) devices such as the Z-fen (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) raises the seal zone to the suprarenal segment while maintaining renal perfusion. Finally, multibranch aortic grafts such as the Thoracoabdominal Branch Endoprosthesis (Tambe; W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, AZ, USA) raise the seal zone above the visceral segment and can be used off the shelf with promising results.

The Venous Thrombectomy Armamentarium: An Expanding World.

Acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a common and important public health problem. It affects more than 350,000 people in the United States annually and has a substantial economic impact. Without adequate treatment, there is significant risk of development of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) resulting in patient morbidity, worse quality of life, and costly long-term medical care. Over the past decade, the treatment algorithm for patients with acute DVT has significantly changed. Prior to 2008, the treatment recommendation for patients with acute DVT was limited to anticoagulation and conservative management. In 2008, national clinical practice guidelines were updated to include interventional strategies such as surgical- and catheter-based techniques for the treatment of acute DVT. Early strategies for debulking of extensive acute DVT primarily consisted of open surgical thrombectomy and administration of thrombolytics. In the intervening period, a plethora of advanced endovascular techniques and technologies have been developed which reduced the morbidity of operative intervention and risks of hemorrhage associated with thrombolysis. This review will focus on the novel technologies commercially available for management of acute DVT, denoting unique features inherent to each device. This expanded armamentarium gives vascular surgeons and proceduralists the opportunity to individualize their treatment approach to the specific patient's anatomy, lesion, and history.

Higher surgeon volume is associated with lower odds of complication following thoracic endovascular aortic repair for aortic dissections.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand the impact of surgeon volume on outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients being treated for aortic dissection. METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR from January 2014 to March 2021 in the Vascular Quality Initiative database were analyzed. Patients with aortic dissection who underwent TEVAR were divided into quartiles based on the annual TEVAR volume of their vascular surgeon. The highest quartile, middle two quartiles, and lowest quartile were deemed high volume (HV), moderate volume (MV), and low volume (LV), respectively. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to compare cohort outcomes in terms any postoperative complication, stroke, spinal cord ischemia, reintervention, and 30-day mortality. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the hazard of overall postoperative mortality. RESULTS: Among 1217 patients undergoing TEVAR, 321, 621, and 275 were performed by HV, MV, and LV surgeons, respectively. HV surgeons performed >19 annual TEVARs, MV surgeons between five and 18, and LV surgeons four or less. Adjusted odds of any postoperative complication revealed that HV and MV surgeons had lower odds of overall postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.85; P = .011 and OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.87; P = .008, respectively) when compared with patients of LV surgeons. Patients of HV surgeons had lower odds of respiratory complications than those of LV surgeons (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.17-0.93; P = .039). Adjusted analysis of outcomes including spinal cord ischemia, stroke, myocardial infarction, 30-day mortality, and overall mortality did not reveal statistically significant differences between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon volume does not to impact 30-day mortality or long-term mortality after TEVAR for aortic dissection, but the odds of overall postoperative complications were lower for HV and MV surgeons when compared with LV surgeons.

The Feasibility and Applicability of Percutaneous Deep Vein Arterialization in Peripheral Artery Disease.

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) can often present with chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI), including ischemic rest pain and severe tissue loss. Progression of PAD can lead to "no option" or end-stage disease in which there are no traditional open or endovascular interventions available for revascularization. This cohort of patients have a poor prognosis, with a major amputation rate of 40% and mortality of up to 20% at six months. For this patient population, surgical deep vein arterialization (DVA) is offered as an attempt to provide blood flow to the distal preserved venous bed and reverse the ischemic process. Surgical DVA has traditionally been offered as an option and was pioneered by Herb Dardik. The evolution of endovascular technology has allowed for percutaneous DVA (pDVA). Using ultrasound and fluoroscopic guidance, an arteriovenous channel is created between a tibial artery and vein and reinforced with covered stent grafts to increase distal limb perfusion with the goals of improving wound healing and amputation-free survival. Lysis of venous valves with a valvulotome also aids with reversal of flow into the distal venous system. Investigations of percutaneous deep vein arterialization are underway with one device, the LimFlow System (LimFlow SA, Paris, France), which is undergoing feasibility trials. Here we present the current clinical indications, feasibility, results, and our institutional experience with the use of percutaneous deep vein arterialization.

Intravascular Lithotripsy in the Treatment of Lower Extremity Peripheral Arterial Disease.

Endovascular intervention has become first-line treatment for the majority of atherosclerotic lesions associated with peripheral artery disease. Traditionally, treatment modalities have included various types of balloon angioplasty and stenting. However, recent technological advancements have introduced the concept of endovascular lithotripsy as a novel alternative to angioplasty and stenting. This new addition to the armamentarium of surgeons and interventionalists has the potential to alter the treatment paradigm for patients with complex peripheral artery disease.

Surgical External Iliac Artery Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Is a Safe, Suitable Alternative to Common Femoral Artery Access.

Background Many patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have peripheral artery disease necessitating surgical access. This study reviews the preoperative risk factors, procedural characteristics, and outcomes in patients undergoing surgical common femoral artery (CFA) and external iliac artery (EIA) access through a retro-inguinal groin incision for TAVR. Methods A single-center TAVR database was retrospectively analyzed for patients undergoing surgical cutdown (January 1, 2016 - December 31, 2020). Access sites were evaluated on preoperative imaging. Data on demographics, imaging, procedural characteristics, and outcomes were collected. The vascular surgeon selected the cutdown site. Results A hundred and thirty TAVR patients had surgical cutdown. The choice of access site was either the common femoral artery (82 patients, 63%) or the iliac artery (48 patients, 37%). There was no difference in age, BMI, or medical risk factors. There was no difference in iliac diameter or circumferential iliac calcium. In the iliac group, there was a smaller mean CFA size and a higher incidence of circumferential CFA calcium. In the femoral group, there was: a lower mean sheath-to-CFA ratio, a trend toward increased unplanned endarterectomy, and a higher incidence of 30-day readmission. There was no difference in adjunct procedure use. Conclusion EIA surgical access had similar complication rates and length of stay with a reduced tendency for unplanned endarterectomy when compared to CFA access. The EIA is a suitable access site for TAVR in select patients.

Collapsed endograft and lower limb ischemia from type B dissection repaired with thoracic endovascular aortic graft and iliac stenting: A case report and review of the literature.

The collapse of an abdominal aortic endograft is a rare event. We present the case of a 60-year-old man with an abdominal endograft who came to the emergency department with chest, back, abdominal, and lower extremity pain in addition to a cool left foot. On imaging, he was found to have a type B aortic dissection and a collapsed abdominal endograft. Subsequently, the patient was taken to the operating room and treated with a thoracic endovascular aortic repair, abdominal aortic cuff, and an iliac stent. Our study details this case and thoroughly reviews similar cases in the literature.

Double-barrel stenting for endovascular repair of a superior mesenteric artery dissecting aneurysm.

The patient was a 58-year-old man with a history of hypertension who had incidentally been found to have a 2.7-cm dissecting fusiform superior mesenteric artery aneurysm involving a long segment of a proximal to distal superior mesenteric artery. Double-lumen anatomy was present, with the true lumen perfusing the proximal and mid-small bowel and the false lumen perfusing the distal small bowel and the ileocolic artery. The patient elected to undergo endovascular repair using double-barrel stenting with self-expanding and balloon-expandable covered stents, as described. Computed tomography angiography after 1 year demonstrated patent stents.

Management of Innominate Artery Occlusion With Severe Left Common Carotid Artery Stenosis.

Innominate artery occlusion is a rare entity, particularly when coupled with severe left common carotid artery stenosis. Innominate artery disease may present with varying degrees of symptomatology and can place patients at risk for both posterior fossa and hemispheric ischemic events. We present a symptomatic case of innominate artery occlusion with severe left common carotid disease. We reviewed the literature and current options for the treatment of innominate artery disease. The patient underwent successful hybrid repair with left carotid artery retrograde stenting and left carotid artery to right carotid artery bypass. She has been symptom and re-intervention free during her one-year follow-up. We describe a successful hybrid repair of symptomatic innominate artery occlusion with concomitant severe left carotid artery stenosis in a patient with a prohibitive open thoracic surgical risk.

Transradial renal salvage after complex endovascular aneurysm repair complicated by left renal artery thrombosis.

Transradial access has been used for percutaneous coronary interventions with success; however, there is limited literature on its use for visceral stenting in the setting of complex endovascular aneurysm repair. We present a case of transradial left renal salvage after renal artery thrombosis in the setting of complex endovascular aneurysm repair.