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

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

Branched and fenestrated endovascular aortic arch repair in patients with native proximal aortic landing zone.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated and branched thoracic endovascular repair (f/bTEVAR) have been successfully applied in patients with diverse aortic arch pathologies. The aim of this study is to present the early and mid-term outcomes of patients with native proximal aortic landing (NPAL) managed with f/bTEVAR. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis of patients with NPAL, managed with f/bTEVAR, between September 1, 2011, and June 30, 2022, was conducted. All patients were treated with custom-made devices (Cook Medical) with landing within Ishimaru zones 0 to 2. Primary outcomes were technical success, mortality, stroke, and retrograde type A dissection at 30 days. Follow-up outcomes were considered secondary. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were included (69.8% males; mean age, 70.8 ± 4.2 years; 18.3% urgent). The main indications (60.4%) for repair were aortic arch (29.4%) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (31.0%). Seventy-two patients (57.1%) were managed with fTEVAR. Proximal landing in zone 0 and 1 was chosen in 97.6%. Technical success was 94.4%, and 30-day mortality was 11.9%. Strokes were diagnosed in 13.5% of patients and major strokes were identified in 7.9% cases. Retrograde type A dissection rate was 3.9%. The multivariate analysis confirmed landing in Ishimaru zone 0 as an independently related factor for stroke (P = .005), whereas stroke (P < .001), pericardial effusion (P < .001), and acute kidney injury (P < .001) were independently related to 30-day mortality. Mean follow-up was 17.5 ± 9.3 months. The estimated survival rate and the freedom from reintervention rate were 72.6% (standard error, 4.4%) and 46.4% (standard error, 6.0%) at 24-month follow-up, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke rate after endovascular arch repair was alarming among patients with NPAL. Proximal landing to zone 0 was related to higher risk of stroke. Reinterventions were common within the 24-month follow-up.

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

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

Initial Experience of the Covered Endovascular Reconstruction of Iliac Bifurcation Technique.

INTRODUCTION: The distal landing zone in iliac arteries represents an important issue during endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR). The aim of this study is to present a case series for landing in the external iliac artery (EIA) during EVAR while preserving blood flow in the internal iliac artery (IIA) with the covered endovascular reconstruction of the iliac bifurcation (CERIB) technique. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients that underwent EVAR either for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) or previous failed EVAR from December 2022 up to September 2023. Indications for treatment were presence of common iliac artery aneurysm (CIAA), short CIA, or endoleak type Ib (ETIb). For the distal sealing zone, we used balloon-expandable covered stent (BXCS). Primary outcomes were technical success and first-month patency rate. Secondary outcomes were endoleak and re-intervention rate. RESULTS: Sixteen patients being treated with 20 CERIBs were included in the study. Four patients had a previous failed EVAR, while 3 patients were treated urgently for a symptomatic para-renal aneurysm. The indications for treatment were EIb (n=2), short CIA (n=4), CIAA with narrow lumen (n=3), and CIA aneurysm (n=11). Platforms that were used were the Cook Zenith Alpha (n=5), Gore C3 (n=2 and 3 limbs), Endurant IIs (n=2, and 3 limbs), and a t-branch device (n=3). Technical success rate was 100% with no adjunctive procedure. No death or re-intervention was recorded for all patients at postoperative 30-day period and at 6 months for 2 patients. At first-month CTA, patency rate was 100% (20/20), while in 2 patients that had 6-month CTA, the patency was also 100% (2/2). No kinking or stenosis was also noted. Two patients had ETIII after branched EVAR (BEVAR), 2 patients had ETII, and 1 patient had gutter ET in the area of the CERIB. CONCLUSION: The CERIB technique seems to be effective and safe in the early period. It is suitable with a variety of commercial endograft platforms. It may be a valuable alternative to iliac branch devices when there are anatomical considerations. Longer follow-up is needed to conclude for long-term patency and durability. CLINICAL IMPACT: The distal landing zone in iliac arteries represents an important issue during EVAR while it is important to preserve blood flow in the internal iliac artery. The covered endovascular reconstruction of the iliac bifurcation (CERIB) technique is a technique for the preservation of internal iliac arteries during EVAR, while it is suitable with a variety of commercial endograft platforms. The CERIB technique seems to be effective and safe in the early period. It may be valuable alternative to iliac branch devices when there are anatomical considerations.

Target Vessel-Related Outcomes in Patients Managed With Branch Thoracic Aortic Endovascular Repair.

INTRODUCTION: Data on target vessel (TV)-related outcomes in patients managed with branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (BTEVAR) are limited. This study aimed to present the TV-related outcomes of BTEVAR in patients managed for aortic arch pathologies at 30 days and during follow-up. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients, managed between September 1, 2011, and June 30, 2022, with custom-made aortic arch endografts (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA), presenting at least one branch configuration, were eligible. Primary outcomes were technical success, TV-related patency, and reinterventions at 30 days. RESULTS: In total, 255 TVs were revascularized using branches: 107 innominate arteries (IAs), 108 left common carotid arteries (LCCAs), and 40 left subclavian arteries (LSAs). Covered stents were used as bridging stents of which 10.2% were balloon expandable. Relining, using bare-metal stents (BMS), was performed in 14.0% of IAs, 35.2% of LCCAs, and 22.5% of LSAs. Technical success on case basis was 99.2%; no failure was related to unsuccessful TV bridging. At 30 day follow-up, no TV occlusion was detected. In 5.6% of cases, a type Ic or III endoleak, attributed to TVs, was recorded. Two patients needed early branch-related reintervention. The mean follow-up was 18.3±9.2 months. Freedom from TV instability was 94.6% (standard error [SE] 2.5%] at 12 months. No TV stenosis or occlusion was detected up to 48 months of follow-up. Freedom from TV-related reinterventions was 95.4% [SE 2.4%] at 12 months. CONCLUSION: TV stenosis or occlusion in BTEVAR cases is rare and TV-related reinterventions and instability events are mainly attributed to type Ic and III endoleak formation. CLINICAL IMPACT: Previous studies focusing on target vessel (TV) outcomes after endovascular aortic arch repair are limited. In this study, including 255 TVs revascularized using branched arch devices, bridging was performed with covered stents, of which 90% were self-expanding. Relining was at the discretion of the operator and was 14% for the innominate, 35.2% for the left common carotid and 22.5% for the left subclavian artery branches. No 30-day occlusion was detected. The freedom from TV instability was almost 95% at 12 months. TV instability and reintervention were mainly attributed to endoleaks type Ic and IIIc.

Sex Comparative Analysis of Branched and Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Female sex is a risk factor for adverse events after endovascular aortic repair. Sex comparative early and midterm outcomes of fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic arch repair (F/B-Arch) are presented. METHODS: A single centre retrospective sex comparative analysis of consecutive patients managed with F/B-Arch was conducted according to STROBE. Primary outcomes were sex comparative technical success, death, and cerebrovascular morbidity at 30 days. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for follow up outcomes. RESULTS: Among 209 patients, 38.3% were women. Coronary artery disease (p < .001) and previous myocardial infarction (p = .001) were more common in women. Non-native proximal aortic landing was higher in women (women: 51.3%; men: 31.8%, p = .005) and the aortic dissection rate was lower (28.8% vs. 48.1%, p = .005). Proximal landing to Ishimaru zones showed no difference (zone 0: p = .18; zone 1: p = .47; zone 2: p = .39). Graft configurations were equally distributed. In total, 416 supra-aortic trunks were bridged. The median number of revascularisations per patient was two (interquartile range 1, 3), with no difference between sexes (p = .54). Technical success (women: 97.5%; men: 96.9%, p = .80), 30 day mortality rate (women: 10%; men: 9.3%, p = .86), and cerebrovascular morbidity (women: 11.3%; men: 17.1%, p = .25) were similar. Women presented more access related complications (women: 32.5%; men: 16.3%, p = .006), without affecting access related re-interventions (p = .55). Survival (women: 81.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 76.3 - 85.9%; men: 79.8%, 95% CI 76.0 - 83.6%) and freedom from re-intervention (women: 56.6%, 95% CI 50.4 - 62.8%; men: 55.3%, 95% CI 50.1 - 60.5%) at 12 months were similar (log rank, p = .40 and p = .41, respectively). CONCLUSION: Both sexes presented similar outcomes after F/B-Arch. Appropriate patient selection may decrease the effect of sex in F/B-Arch outcomes.

New Ischemic Cerebral Lesions in Postprocedural Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Carotid Endarterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated similar outcomes in terms of ischemic stroke incidence after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) in asymptomatic carotid disease, while CEA seems to be the first option for symptomatic carotid disease. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the incidence of silent cerebral microembolization detected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) following these procedures. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, including comparative studies involving symptomatic or asymptomatic patients undergoing either CEA or CAS and reporting on new cerebral ischemic lesions in postoperative MRI. The primary outcome was the newly detected cerebral ischemic lesions. Pooled effect estimates for all outcomes were calculated using the random-effects model. Prespecified random effects metaregression and subgroup analysis were conducted to examine the impact of moderator variables on the presence of new cerebral ischemic lesions. RESULTS: 25 studies reporting on a total of 1827 CEA and 1500 CAS interventions fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The incidence of new cerebral ischemic lesions was significantly lower after CEA compared to CAS, regardless of the time of MRI assessment (first 24 hours; OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.17-0.64, P < 0.001), (the first 72 hours, OR: 0.25, 95% CI 0.18-0.36, P < 0.001), (generally within a week after the operation; OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.17-0.34, P < 0.001). Also, the rate of stroke (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.23-0.63, P < 0.001) and the presence of contralateral new cerebral ischemic lesions (OR: 0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.32, P < 0.001) were less frequent after CEA. Subgroup analysis based on the study design and the use of embolic protection device during CAS showed consistently lower rates of new lesions after CEA. CONCLUSIONS: CEA demonstrates significant lower rates of new silent cerebral microembolization, as detected by MRI in postoperative period compared with CAS.

Transition from Open Repair to Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Rupture Aortic Aneurysms throughout a 16-Year Period of Time in a Single Tertiary Center.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is recommended as the first option for both elective and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) with suitable anatomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the gradual adoption of ruptured EVAR (rEVAR) as first option in the management of rAAAs in a reference tertiary center over a 16 year-period. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data was undertaken, including all patients that were treated for rAAA infrarenal or juxtarenal either with open surgical repair (OSR) or EVAR from 2006-2023. Three periods were identified and analyzed: Initial (2006-2011); intermediate (2012-2017); and current (2018-2023). The primary outcomes were the 30-day mortality rate in relation to the changing pattern of treatment. Secondary outcomes were re-intervention and mortality during the follow up period. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were treated for rAAA; 52% by endovascular means [EVAR (94), Ch-EVAR (9), and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (1)] and 48% by OSR (96). In the initial period, 61 patients were treated for rAAA (21% EVAR vs. 79% OSR), 68 in intermediate patients (47% EVAR vs. 53% OSR), and 71 in current period (83% EVAR vs. 17% OSR). Only in the current period juxta -renal rAAAs were treated by endovascular means (14%). The 30-day mortality rate was 46% in initial period (31% for EVAR vs. 50% for OSR), 64% in second period (46% in EVAR vs. 80% for OSR), and 35% in third period (25% for EVAR vs. 83% for OSR). The mean follow up did not differ between the groups, (EVAR 28.3 ± 2 months, vs. OSR 33.1 ± 3 months, P = 0.56). The survival rate did not differ between the groups; in rEVAR was 82% (SE 5%), 74% (SE 6%), 68% (SE 6.5%), and 63% (SE 7.7%) at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months, respectively, and in OSR was 76% (SE 7%), 66% (SE 8%), and 56% (SE 9.5%) at 6, 24, and 48 months, respectively (P = 0.544). CONCLUSIONS: Through a 16-year period, the implementation of EVAR as treatment of choice for rAAAs over OSR resulted in a noticeable reduction in the 30-day mortality. rEVAR was feasible in over 80% of rAAA patients.

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

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

Systematic Review on Early and Follow-up Mortality Rate in Octogenarians Treated With a Fenestrated and/or Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair.

PURPOSE: Advanced age has been related to conflicting outcomes after fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare 30-day mortality, technical success, and 1-year and 5-year survival in octogenarians and non-octogenarians who underwent F/BEVAR for complex aortic aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This meta-analysis was pre-registered to PROSPERO (CRD42022348659). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement was followed. A search of the English literature, via Ovid, using MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases, until August 30, 2022, was executed. Randomized Control Trials and observational studies (2000-2022), with ≥5 patients, reporting on 30-day mortality and 1-year and 5-year survival rates among octogenarians and non-octogenarians after F/BEVAR were eligible. The Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was applied to assess the risk of bias. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality and secondary was 1-year and 5-year survival in octogenarians and non-octogenarians. The outcomes were summarized as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A narrative presentation was selected in case of missing outcomes. RESULTS: The initial research isolated 3263 articles; 6 retrospective studies were finally included. A total of 7410 patients were managed with F/BEVAR; 1499 patients (20.2%) were ≥80 years old (75.5% males, 259/343). The estimated 30-day mortality was 6% among octogenarians vs 2% in younger patients, with a significantly higher 30-day mortality for patients ≥80 years old (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.61-1.81; p=0.0.11; Ι2=36.01%). Technical success was similar between the groups (OR -0.83; 95% CI -1.74-0.07, p<0.0.001; Ι2=95.8%). Regarding survival, a narrative approach was decided due to missing data. Two studies reported a statistically significant difference in 1-year survival between groups, with higher mortality in octogenarians (82.5%-90% vs 89.5%-93%), while 3 reported a similar 1-year survival rate in both groups (87.1%-95% vs 88%-89.5%). At 5 years, 3 studies reported a statistically significant lower survival for octogenarians (26.9%-42% vs 61%-71%). CONCLUSIONS: Octogenarians treated with F/BEVAR presented higher 30-day mortality while a lower survival rate at 1 and 5 years was reported in the literature. Patient selection is thus mandatory among older patients. Further studies, especially on patient risk stratification, are needed to estimate the F/BEVAR outcomes on elder patients. CLINICAL IMPACT: Age may be a factor of increased early and long-term mortality within patients managed for aortic aneurysms. In this analysis, patients over 80 years old were compared to their younger counterparts when managed with fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) . The analysis showed that early mortality was acceptable for octogenrains but significantly higher when compared to patients younger than 80 years. One-year survival rates are controversial. At 5-year follow-up, octogenarians present lower survival but data to provide metanalysis are lacking. Patient selection and risk stratification are mandatory in older candidates for F/BEVAR.

Endovascular Recanalization of Aortic Isthmus Atresia with an "Electrified Wire Technique".

PURPOSE: For aortic coarctation in adults endovascular repair is the treatment of choice with an acceptable safety profile. Aortic isthmus atresia is a related condition with a complete occlusion of the aorta not allowing catheterization across the isthmus. This technical note describes a recanalization of an aortic isthmus atresia using radiofrequency with an "electrified wire technique." TECHNIQUE: A guidewire was selectively denuded of PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene) at the distal end and was placed through a catheter distal to the aortic isthmus atresia. The denuded end of the wire was clamped to an electrosurgery pencil. By pushing the wire toward a tulip-snare, which was placed as a target proximal of the occlusion via left trans-brachial access, and shortly activating of the electrosurgery pencil the electrified wire recanalized the occlusion and was snared and used to guide implantation of a balloon-expandable covered stent. CONCLUSION: The electrified wire puncture technique can be used to recanalize adult aortic isthmus atresia after failed conventional attempts. CLINICAL IMPACT: The electrified wire technique offers an off-the shelf option to modify standard guidewires for the use with radiofrequency to cross a complete aortic isthmus occlusion after failed conventional attempts. This new technique may be applied also in other situations like dissection flap fenestration, transcaval access and similar.

Meta-analysis of Comparative Studies Between Self- and Balloon-Expandable Bridging Stent Grafts in Branched Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

PURPOSE: Currently there is no robust evidence which type of bridging stent graft provides better outcomes after branched endovascular aortic repair (BEVAR). Self-expanding (SESG) and balloon-expandable (BESG) stent grafts are both commonly used to connect branches to their respective target vessels (TV). The aim of the current review was to evaluate the impact of the type of bridging stent grafts on TV outcomes during the mid-term follow-up after BEVAR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study protocol was registered to the PROSPERO (CRD42021274766). A search of the English literature was conducted, using PubMed and EMBASE databases via Ovid and Cochrane database via CENTRAL, from inception to June 30, 2021, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Only comparative studies on BEVAR reporting TV outcomes related to BESG vs SESG were considered eligible. Individual studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. The primary outcomes were primary patency, freedom from endoleak, TV instability, and re-intervention between BESG and SESG, used as bridging stents in branches. The outcomes were summarized as odds ratio along with their 95% confidence intervals (CI), through a paired meta-analysis. RESULTS: Five out of 609 articles published from 2016 to 2020 were included in the analysis. In total, 1406 TV were revascularized, 547 (38.9 %) with BESGs and 859 with SESGs. The overall pooled primary patency (odds ratio [OR], 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-1.09; p=.256, I2=4.24%) and freedom from branch-related endoleak (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.17-1.48; p<.122, I2=0.18%) did not differ between the stent types during the available follow-up (17 months, range = 12-35 months). In 4 studies (619 TV), SESG required fewer secondary interventions (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.23-1.83; p=.009, I2=0%) and TV instability rate was lower (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.33-1.65; p=.003, I2=0%) compared with BESG during the available follow-up. CONCLUSION: BESG and SESG seem to perform similarly in terms of primary patency and branch-related endoleak during the mid-term follow-up. Current data from retrospective studies suggest that overall TV instability and re-intervention rates are favorable for SESG as bridging stent grafts in BEVAR.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Stenting for Aortic Coarctation Management in Adults.

PURPOSE: Endovascular treatment of aortic coarctation (CoA) constitutes a valuable alternative with low morbidity and mortality. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the technical success, re-intervention, and mortality after stenting for CoA in adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement and PICO (patient, intervention, comparison, outcome) model were followed. An English literature data search was conducted, using PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL, until December 30, 2021. Only studies reporting on stenting, for native or recurrent CoA, in adults were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A proportional meta-analysis was performed to assess the outcomes. Primary outcomes were technical success, intra-operative pressure gradient and complications, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Twenty-seven articles (705 patients) were included (64.0% males, 34.0±13.6 years). Native CoA was present in 65.7%. Technical success was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96%-0.99%; p<0.001, I2=9.49%). Six (odds ratio [OR]: 1%; 95% CI, 0.00%-0.02%; p=0.002, I2=0%) ruptures and 10 dissections (OR: 2%; 95% CI, 0.001%-0.02%; p<0.001, I2=0%) were reported. The intra-operative and 30-day mortality were 1% (95% CI, 0.00%-0.02%; p=0.003, I2=0%) and 1% (95% CI, 0.00%-0.02%; p=0.004, I2=0%), respectively. The median follow-up was 29 months. Sixty-eight re-interventions (OR: 8%; 95% CI, 0.05%-0.10%; p<0.001, I2=35.99%) were performed; 95.5% were endovascular. Seven deaths were reported (OR: 2%; 95% CI, 0.00%-0.03%; p=0.008, I2=0%). CONCLUSION: Stenting for CoA in adults presents high technical success and the intra-operative and 30-day mortality rates were acceptable. During the midterm follow-up, the re-intervention rate was acceptable, and mortality was low. CLINICAL IMPACT: Aortic coarctation is a quite common heart defect that may be diagnosed in adult patients, as a first diagnosis in native cases or as a recurrent after previous repair. Endovascular management using plain angioplasty has been associated to a high intra-operative complication and re-intervention rate. Stenting in this analysis seems to be safe and effective as is related a high technical success rate, exceeding 95%, with a low intra-operative complication and death rate. During the mid-term follow-up, the re-interventions rate is estimated at less than 10% while most cases are managed using endovascular means. Further analyses are needed on the impact of stent type on endovascular repair outcomes.

The Association of Sarcopenia and ASA Score to Spinal Cord Ischemia in Patients Treated With the t-Branch Device.

PURPOSE: Sarcopenia has been identified as an independent predictor of mortality in patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm and may also affect outcomes in patients with complex aortic pathologies. The aim of this study was to assess sarcopenia, combined with the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, as predictors for spinal cord ischemia (SCI) in patients treated with the t-Branch off-the-shelf device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective observational study was conducted including elective and urgent patients managed with the t-Branch device (Cook Medical, Bjaeverskov, Denmark) between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2020. Data were collected according to the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The psoas muscle area (cm2) and attenuation (Hounsfield units, HU) were measured in the arterial phase of the pre-operative computed tomography angiography for each patient. The lean psoas muscle area (LPMA) was used to stratify patients into 3 groups, and further stratification was performed with a combination of the ASA score and LPMA. RESULTS: Eighty patients were included (mean age at 71±9 years; 62.5% males). Thoracoabdominal aneurysms were managed in 72.5% of cases (42.5% for type I-III). Thirty-seven (46%) were treated urgently. Eleven patients died within 30 days (14%). Twelve patients (15%) presented SCI of any severity. Among the LPMA groups, the only statistically significant difference was recorded in age; group 3 was older compared with groups 1 and 2 (67.1 years vs 72.1 years vs 73.5 years, p=0.004). After ASA combined LPMA categorization, 28 patients were considered as low risk, 16 as moderate risk, and 36 as high risk. A statistically significant difference was recorded in terms of SCI (3.5% [1/28] in low risk vs 12.5% [2/16] in moderate risk vs 25% [9/36] in high risk, p=0.049). Multivariate analysis showed that moderate-risk patients were at risk to evolve to SCI (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Low-risk patients, with ASA score I-II or LPMA>350cm2HU, are at lower risk for developing SCI after BEVAR using the t-Branch device. Patients' stratification according to the combination of ASA score and psoas muscle area and attenuation may identify a group at higher risk of SCI after branched endovascular aneurysm repair. CLINICAL IMPACT: Sarcopenia has been identified as a factor of increased mortality in patients managed for aortic aneurysm repair. However, significant heterogeneity has been recorded in the tools assessing its presence. In this analysis, an already used method, combining the ASA score and psoas muscle area and attenuation, has been used to assess the impact of sarcopenia in patients managed with the t-branch device. This analysis showed that patients at low risk, with an ASA score I-II or LPMA>350cm2HU were at lower risk to evolve spinal cord ischemia. Along this line, sarcopenia may be a valuable marker for the prediction of perioperative adverse events , other than mortality, in patients managed using complex endovascular repair.

Effect of Sarcopenia on Mortality and Spinal Cord Ischaemia After Complex Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Sarcopenia has been related to higher mortality rates after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. This analysis aimed to assess sarcopenia related mortality and spinal cord ischaemia (SCI) at 30 days, and mortality during the available follow up, in patients with complex aortic aneurysms, managed with open or endovascular interventions. DATA SOURCES: A search of the English literature, via Ovid, using Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL up to 15 June 2022 was done. REVIEW METHODS: This meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines and preregistered in PROSPERO (CRD42022338079). Observational studies (2000 - 2022), with five or more patients, reporting on sarcopenia related mortality and SCI at 30 days, and midterm mortality after thoraco-abdominal aneurysm repair (open or endovascular), were eligible. The ROBINS-I tool (Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions) was used for risk of bias, and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) for the assessment of evidence quality. The primary outcome was 30 day and midterm mortality, and the secondary outcome was SCI at 30 days, in sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients. The outcomes were summarised as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Four retrospective studies (1 092 patients; 40.0% sarcopenic) were included. Thirty day mortality was similar, with low certainty between groups (6% [95% CI 1 - 11] in sarcopenic vs. 5% [95% CI 1 - 9] non-sarcopenic patients [OR 0.30, 95% CI -0.21 - 0.81; p = .94, Ι2 = 0%). The estimated midterm mortality was statistically significantly higher (very low certainty) in sarcopenic patients (25% [95% CI 0.19 - 0.31] vs. 13% [95% CI -0.03 - 0.29] in non-sarcopenic patients (1.11 OR 0.95, 95% CI -0.21 - 2.44; p < .001, Ι2 = 88.32%). SCI was significantly higher (very low certainty) in sarcopenic patients (19%, 95% CI 4 - 34) vs. 7% (95% CI 5 - 20) in non-sarcopenic patients (OR 1.80, 95% CI -0.17 - 3.78; Ι2 = 82.4%), despite an equal distribution of aneurysm type between the groups. CONCLUSION: Early mortality does not appear to be affected by sarcopenia in patients treated for thoraco-abdominal aneurysms. However, sarcopenia may be associated with higher peri-operative SCI and midterm mortality rates.

A Systematic Review of Endovascular Repair Outcomes in Atherosclerotic Chronic Mesenteric Ischaemia.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic mesenteric ischaemia (CMI) treatment focuses on symptom relief and prevention of disease progression. Endovascular repair represents the main treatment modality, while data on the associated antiplatelet regimen are scarce. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the early and midterm outcomes of endovascular repair in patients with CMI. DATA SOURCES: Randomised controlled trials and observational studies (1990 - 2022) reporting on early and midterm endovascular repair outcomes in patients with atherosclerotic CMI. REVIEW METHODS: The PRISMA guidelines and PICO model were followed. The protocol was registered to PROSPERO (CRD42023401685). Medline, Embase (via Ovid), and Cochrane databases were searched (end date 21 February 2023). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used for risk of bias assessment, and GRADE for evidence quality assessment. Primary outcomes were technical success, 30 day mortality, and symptom relief, assessed using prevalence meta-analysis. The role of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was investigated using meta-regression analysis. RESULTS: Sixteen retrospective studies (1 224 patients; mean age 69.8 ± 10.6 years; 60.3% female) reporting on 1 368 target vessels (57.8% superior mesenteric arteries) were included. Technical success was 95.0% (95% CI 93 - 97%, p = .28, I2 19%, low certainty), the 30 day mortality rate was 2.0% (95% CI 2 - 4%, p = .93, I2 36%, low certainty), and immediate symptom relief was 87.0% (95% CI 80 - 92%, p < .010, I2 85%, very low certainty). At mean follow up of 28 months, the mortality rate was 15.0% (95% CI 9 - 25%, p = .010, I2 86%, very low certainty), symptom recurrence 25.0% (95% CI 21 - 31%, p < .010, I2 68%, very low certainty) and re-intervention rate 26.0% (95% CI 17 - 37%, p < .010, I2 92%, very low certainty). Single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) and DAPT performed similarly in the investigated outcomes. CONCLUSION: Endovascular repair for CMI appears to be safe as first line treatment, with a low peri-operative mortality rate and acceptable immediate symptom relief. During midterm follow up, symptom recurrence and need for re-intervention are not uncommon. SAPT appears to be equal to DAPT in post-operative outcomes.

Midterm Outcomes of Endoleak Type 2 Embolization after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Using a Neurointerventional Approach.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) have been considered a benign condition and intervention is recommended when they are associated to sac expansion. The aim of this study was to report on T2EL embolization midterm outcomes, using neurointerventional material. METHODS: A single-center retrospective analysis of consecutive patients treated with transarterial embolization, using neurointerventional material, for T2EL after standard endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) between January 01, 2017 and July 30, 2022, was undertaken. Primary outcome was technical success and secondary outcome was T2EL recurrence during follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty six patients [92.3% males, mean age 73.9 ± 7.7 years] were included. The median time between EVAR and T2EL diagnosis was 12 months (range: 1-84 months). In 38.5% of patients, T2EL was detected at first month after EVAR. The time to embolization was 18 months (range: 1-96 months). In 42.3% of cases, a patent inferior mesenteric artery was suspected to relate to T2EL formation while in 42.3% of cases, a lumbar artery. Twelve procedures (38.4%) were performed using coils and Onyx and 13 (50%), using only Onyx. Technical success was 84.6%. The mean follow-up was 24 months (range: 1-60 months), including 20 patients. In 30% of cases, an T2EL recurrence was detected. Three patients (11.5%) underwent secondary embolization. CONCLUSIONS: Transarterial embolization for T2EL, using neurointerventional material, provided acceptable technical success and T2EL recurrence rates at 2 years of follow-up. Longer follow-up data would further estimate the durability of the technique.

Conical Aortic Neck as a Predictor of Outcome after Endovascular Aneurysm Exclusion: Midterm Results.

BACKGROUND: Conical neck may affect endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) outcomes. The aim of this study was to present EVAR neck adverse events [endoleak type Ia (ET Ia) and graft migration], in patients with conical neck morphology compared to patients with non-conical necks. An additional analysis of the factors that may affect neck adverse events in patients with conical necks, during the first postoperative year, was executed. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospective data was conducted, including patients that underwent elective EVAR, between 2017 and 2019. All patients completed the clinical and imaging follow-up of the initial 12 months. Regarding imaging, all cases underwent computed tomography angiography (CTA), preoperatively, at the 1st and 12th month of follow-up. Preoperative and postoperative aneurysm anatomic characteristics (supra-renal and infra-renal aortic diameters, aneurysm diameter, neck angle, thrombus, and calcification) were recorded. Proximal neck was defined as the infrarenal aortic segment, with a diameter less than 30 mm. Conical neck was any neck with a diameter increase ≥2 mm per cm of length (from outer-to-outer aortic wall). The proximal 15 mm of the neck length were considered the zone of endograft sealing. Migration was any ≥10 mm caudal movement of the endograft, relative to its position detected at the CTA of the first month. Neck adverse events were defined as the composite event of ET Ia and migration. RESULTS: The cohort included 150 patients; 66 (44%) presented conical neck morphology. No significant difference was detected regarding the preoperative anatomic characteristics between the conical and non-conical groups. Only distal (15 mm) neck diameter was wider in the conical group (P < 0.001). Supra-renal active fixation was used in 63.3% of the total cohort; 59.5% in patients with non-conical necks and 68.2% in patients with conical morphology (P = 0.275). Graft oversizing was 18.2% and 18.7% in the non-conical and conical group, respectively (P = 0.248). Oversizing >20% was equal between groups [37.8% vs. 33.3%% (P = 0.608) while oversizing ≥30% was more common among patients with conical necks (3.5% vs. 10.6%, P < 0.001, 3.2 odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.79, 12.91). Regarding ET Ia and migration, no difference was recorded between the groups. In a subanalysis among patients with conical necks, a lower graft migration rate was detected among patients with higher oversizing rate (P = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: EVAR may offer similarly good midterm outcomes in patients with conical and non-conical neck anatomy. An oversizing to the higher suggested rate may be preventive of graft migration during the first postoperative year in necks with conical morphology. Aggressive oversizing (>20%) do not offer any benefit regarding the prevention of adverse events among patients with conical necks.

The Impact of Iliac Artery Anatomy on Distal Landing Zone After EVAR During the 12-Month Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Proximal sealing zone has been the main interest in endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), although the distal landing zone remodeling may also affect EVAR durability. The aim of this study was to assess iliac anatomy and its potential impact on distal landing zone adverse events after EVAR during the 12-month follow-up. METHODS: A prospective data collection of patients treated with standard bifurcated EVAR devices for abdominal aortic aneurysm was undertaken between 2017 and 2019. Patients that received extension to the external iliac artery were excluded. Follow-up included computed tomography angiography (CTA) at the 1st and 12th month postoperatively. The common iliac artery (CIA) diameter was assessed in three levels: origin (just below the aortic bifurcation), distally (just above the iliac bifurcation) and the middle of the distance between these two landmarks. Iliac angle, tortuosity indexes, relining and oversizing were also analyzed. Distal landing zone-related adverse events were any limb related re-intervention, endoleak type Ib, graft migration, limb stenosis, or occlusion. RESULTS: In total, 268 iliac limbs (134 patients) were included. In all three levels, the mean iliac artery diameters increased at 12-month follow-up. At the origin of the CIA, the diameter increased from 18.7 ± 10.5 mm to 19.9 ± 9.4 mm (P = 0.04), at the middle portion of the CIA, the diameter changed significantly from 15.5 ± 5.1 mm to 17.4 ± 5.4 mm (P < 0.001) and at the distal CIA, from 14.6 ± 3.3 mm to 15.1 ± 3.9 mm (P = 0.03). The iliac angle remained stable (P = 0.14) while the CIA index decreased significantly from 1.17 ± 0.13 to 1.11 ± 0.09 (P < 0.001). The mean value of oversizing was 21.5 ± 14.5% and affected distal iliac diameter increase (P < 0.001). The composite outcome of distal landing zone adverse events was not associated to diameter changes at any level. In 57 cases, a distal iliac diameter ≥18 mm was recorded. The estimated oversizing was lower (16.3 ± 11.8%) compared to <18 mm arteries (22.5 ± 14.9%, P = 0.01). At 12-month follow-up, iliac diameters remained stable in the ≥18 mm group. Endoleak type Ib was more common in iliac arteries ≥18 mm [3 (5.3%) vs. 1 (0.5%) (P = 0.04)] at 12-months. CONCLUSIONS: Post-EVAR iliac artery dilation does not seem to have an impact on distal landing zone adverse events during the 12-month follow-up. Aggressive oversizing may be related to iliac dilation. EVAR patients with iliac arteries ≥18 mm are at higher risk for ET Ib.

Treatment of Aortocaval Fistula Secondary to Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Aortocaval fistula (ACF) secondary to an abdominal aortic aneurysm is a rare complication, inadvertently caused by a rupture into the inferior vena cava. Different treatment modalities have been applied toward the repair of such lesions, including open surgical and endovascular repair. The aim of this study was to report on ACF treatment and to analyze its early and mid-term outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search of the English medical literature published between 2000 and 2022 was undertaken, using PubMed, SCOPUS, and CENTRAL databases as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis 2020 guidelines. A study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022329058). Studies reporting on primary ACF outcomes following open surgical or endovascular repair were included. The ROBINS-I tool was applied for risk of bias assessment. Outcomes included technical success, 30-day and mid-term survival, endoleak following endovascular repair, and reintervention rates. RESULTS: In total, 110 case studies, incorporating 196 patients (mean age; 66.2 years, males 96%) were included. Open surgical repair was applied in 78% (153/196). From the available data, technical success rate for each modality was 99% (152/153) and 100% (43/43), respectively. Open and endovascular repair demonstrated 87.5% (126/144) and 97.6% (42/43) 30-day survival, respectively, while mid-term survival was 86% (74/86) and 95.2% (20/21), respectively (medial follow-up: 14 months [1-54 months]). Endoleaks were reported in 19 endovascular cases (39.5%). Type II endoleak was the most frequent with a rate at 32.5% (14/43). Reintervention rates were 2.5% (4/151) and 35.7% (15/42) for open and endovascular repair, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Only few case studies were published on the treatment of this rare condition, while almost all invasive procedures were performed in males. Management of ACF repair with both open and endovascular approach was associated with excellent technical success rate and acceptable early and mid-term survival outcomes. Reintervention remained an issue for patients who were managed endovascularly.