Impact of iliac access in elective and non-elective endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is nowadays the establishment treatment for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) both in elective and urgent setting. Despite the large applicability and satisfactory results, the presence of hostile iliac anatomy affects both technical and clinical success. This narrative review aimed to report the impact of iliac access and related adjunctive procedures in patients undergoing EVAR in elective and non-elective setting. Hostile iliac access can be defined in presence of narrowed, tortuous, calcified, or occluded iliac arteries. These iliac characteristics can be graded by the anatomic severity grade score to quantitatively assess anatomic complexity before undergoing treatment. Literature shows that iliac hostility has an impact on device navigability, insertion and perioperative and postoperative results. Overall, it has been correlated to higher rate of access issues, representing up to 30% of the first published EVAR experience. Recent innovations with low-profile endografts have reduced large-bore sheaths related issues. However, iliac-related complications still represent an issue, and several adjunctive endovascular and surgical strategies are nowadays available to overcome these complications during EVAR. In urgent settings iliac hostility can significantly impact on particular time sensitive procedures. Moreover, in case of severe hostility patients might be written off for EVAR repair might be inapplicable, exposing to higher mortality/morbidity risk in this urgent/emergent setting. In conclusion, an accurate anatomical evaluation of iliac arteries during preoperative planning, materials availability, and skilled preparation to face iliac-related issues are crucial to address these challenges.

International Collaborative Study Comparing Outcomes of Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair in OCtogenarian vs Non-Octogenarian Patients: The FEVOC study.

OBJECTIVE: With an increasing life expectancy, more octogenarian patients are referred with complex aortic aneurysms (cAAA). The aim of this study was to evaluate short and mid-term outcomes following fenestrated aortic repair (FEVAR) in octogenarians. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Few studies looking at octogenarian-specific outcomes with diverging results. METHODS: Retrospective, multicentre cohort study including consecutive patients undergoing elective FEVAR for cAAAs or type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms between 2007-2022 in eight high-volume centres. Octogenarians vs. non-octogenarians were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included 1, 2 and 5-year survival and reintervention rates. RESULTS: A total of 729 patients (median age of 74.8 years [IQR 69.2 - 79.14]) were included, 169 (23%) of which were octogenarians, with 316 (43.3%) patients undergoing juxta/pararenal aneurysm repair. Although octogenarians presented less complex but larger (61 mm vs. 58 mm) aneurysms, the number of fenestrations was similar across groups. No differences in in-hospital mortality (4.1 vs. 3.0%), MAE (16.6% vs 12.2%) or reintervention rates (11.2 vs. 10%) were found. Multivariable logistic regression of in-hospital mortality identified BMI (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51-0.95, P=0.003), chronic heart failure (OR 7.70, 95% CI 1.36-36.15, P=0.003) and GFR<45 ml/min/1.73 m2 (OR 5.25, 95% CI 1.20-22.86, P=0.027) as independent predictors. Median follow-up was 41 months. The 1, 2 and 5-year survival rates were 91.3%, 81.8% and 49.5% in octogenarians vs 90.6%, 86.5% and 68.8% in non-octogenarian patients (Log-rank: =0.001). Freedom from aortic-related death and freedom from reintervention at five-years were similar across groups (log-rank=0.94 and .76, respectively). Age>80 was not an independent predictor of 30-day or long-term mortality on multivariable and Cox regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Elective FEVAR in octogenarians appears to be safe, with similar outcomes as in younger patients. Future studies looking at improved patient selection methods to ensure long-term survival benefits in both octogenarians and younger patients are warranted.

Endovascular Repair of One-hundred Urgent and Emergent free or Contained Thoraco-abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Ruptures. An International Multi-Center Trans-Atlantic experience.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the outcomes of urgent/emergent endovascular aortic repair of patients with free/contained ruptured thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (rTAAA). BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of rTAAA has been scarcely described in emergent setting. METHODS: An international multicenter retrospective observational study (ClinicalTrials.govID:NCT05956873) from January-2015 to January-2023 in 6 European and 1 United States Vascular Surgery Centers. Primary end-points were technical success, 30-day and/or in-hospital mortality and follow-up survival. RESULTS: A total of 100 rTAAA patients were included (75 male; mean age 73 y). All patients (86 contained and 14 free ruptures) were symptomatic and treated within 24-hours from diagnosis: multi-branched off-the-shelf devices (Zenith t-branch,Cook Medical Inc.Bjaeverskov,Denmark) in 88 patients, physician-modified endografts in 8, patient-specific device or parallel grafts in two patients each. Primary technical success was achieved in 89 patients and 30-day and/or in-hospital mortality was 24%. Major adverse events (MAEs) occurred in 34% of patients (permanent dialysis and paraplegia in 4 and 8 patients, respectively). No statistical differences were detected in mortality rates between free and contained ruptured patients (43%vs.21%; P =0.075). Multivariate analysis revealed contained rupture favoring technical success (Odd-Ratio10.1;95%Confidence-Interval:3.0-33.6; P =<0.001). MAEs (OR9.4;95%C-I:2.8-30.5; P =<0.001) and pulmonary complications (OR11.3;95%CI:3.0-41.5; P =<0.001) were independent risk factors for 30-day and/or in-hospital mortality. Median follow-up time was 13 months (interquartile range 5-24); 1-year survival rate was 65%. Aneurysm diameter>80 mm (Hazard-Ratio:2.0;95%CI:1.0-30.5; P =0.037), technical failure (HR:2.6;95%CI:1.1-6.5; P =0.045) and pulmonary complications (HR:3.0;95%CI:1.2-7.9; P =0.021) were independent risk factors for follow-up mortality. CONCLUSION: Endovascular repair of rTAAA shows high technical success; the presence of free rupture alone appear not to correlate with early mortality. Effective prevention/management of post-operative complications is crucial for survival.

Outcomes of Fenestrated and Branched Endografts for Partial and Total Endovascular Repair of the Aortic Arch - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated and branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (F/B-TEVAR) of the aortic arch is a viable approach in patients unsuitable for open repair. The aim was to summarise the published results of manufactured F/B-TEVAR devices for partial and total repair of the aortic arch, and to compare fenestrated with branched configurations. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus and The Cochrane Library were searched for articles (2018 - 2021) about patients with elective, urgent, or emergency aortic requiring a proximal landing zone in the aortic arch (zone 0 - 1 - 2) and treated by F/B-TEVAR. REVIEW METHODS: The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Open repair, supra-aortic trunk (SAT) debranching + standard TEVAR, and in situ physician modified and parallel grafts were excluded. Primary outcomes were technical success and 30 day mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were 30 day major adverse events, and overall survival and procedure related endpoints during follow up. RESULTS: Of 458 articles screened, 18 articles involving 571 patients were selected. Indications for intervention were chronic dissections (50.1%), degenerative aneurysms (39.6%), penetrating aortic ulcers (7.4%), and pseudoaneurysms (2%). F-TEVAR, B-TEVAR, and F+B-TEVAR were used in 38.4%, 54.1%, and 7.5% of patients, respectively. Overall, technical success was 95.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93 - 0.97; I2 = 0%; p for heterogeneity (Het) = .77) and the 30 day mortality rate was 6.7% (95% CI 0.05 - 0.09; I2 = 0%; p Het = .66). No statistical differences were found comparing fenestrated with branched endografts, except for a higher rate of type I - III endoleaks in F-TEVAR (9.8% vs. 2.6%; p = .034). The overall survival rate and freedom from aortic related death at the one year follow up ranged between 82 - 96.4% and 94 - 94.7%, respectively. Thirteen and five studies were considered at moderate and high risk of bias, respectively. CONCLUSION: F/B-TEVAR for the treatment of the aortic arch, according to experience in dedicated centres, now enjoys a satisfactory level of technical success together with a progressively reduced early mortality rate. There are several limitations, and further studies are needed to reach clearer conclusions.

Transatlantic multicenter study on the use of a modified preloaded delivery system for fenestrated endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Analyze the outcomes of endovascular complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair using the Cook fenestrated device with the modified preloaded delivery system (MPDS) with a biport handle and preloaded catheters. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective single arm cohort study was performed, including all consecutive patients with complex abdominal aortic aneurysm repair and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms treated with the MPDS fenestrated device (Cook Medical). Patient clinical characteristics, anatomy, and indications for device use were collected. Outcomes, classified according to the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards, were collected at discharge, 30 days, 6 months, and annually thereafter. RESULTS: Overall, 712 patients (median age, 73 years; interquartile range [IQR], 68-78 years; 83% male) from 16 centers in Europe and the United States treated electively were included: 35.4% (n = 252) presented with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and 64.6% (n = 460) with complex abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Overall, 2755 target vessels were included (mean ,3.9 per patient). Of these, 1628 were incorporated via ipsilateral preloads using the MPDS (1440 accessed from the biport handle and 188 from above). The mean size of the contralateral femoral sheath during target vessel catheterization was 15F ± 4, and in 41 patients (6.7%) the sheath size was ≤8F. Technical success was 96.1%. Median procedural time was 209 minutes (IQR, 161-270 minutes), contrast volume was 100 mL (IQR, 70-150mL), fluoroscopy time was 63.9 minutes (IQR, 49.7-80.4 minutes) and median cumulative air kerma radiation dose was 2630 mGy (IQR, 838-5251 mGy). Thirty-day mortality was 4.8% (n = 34). Access complications occurred in 6.8% (n = 48) and 30-day reintervention in 7% (n = 50; 18 branch related). Follow-up of >30 days was available for 628 patients (88%), with a median follow-up of 19 months (IQR, 8-39 months). Branch-related endoleaks (type Ic/IIIc) were observed in 15 patients (2.6%) and aneurysm growth of >5 mm was observed in 54 (9.5%). Freedom from reintervention at 12 and 24 months was 87.1% (standard error [SE],1.5%) and 79.2% (SE, 2.0%), respectively. Overall target vessel patency at 12 and 24 months was 98.6% (SE, 0.3%) and 96.8% (SE, 0.4%), respectively, and was 97.9% (SE, 0.4%) and 95.3% (SE, 0.8%) for arteries stented from below using the MPDS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The MPDS is safe and effective. Overall benefits include a decrease in contralateral sheath size in the treatment of complex anatomies with favorable results.

Multicenter trans-Atlantic experience with fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of chronic post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: This multicenter international study aimed to describe outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repairs (FB-EVAR) in a cohort of patients treated for chronic post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (PD-TAAAs). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of all consecutive patients treated by FB-EVAR for repair of extent I to III PD-TAAAs in 16 centers from the United States and Europe (2008-2021). Data were extracted from institutional prospectively maintained databases and electronic patient records. All patients received off-the-shelf or patient-specific manufactured fenestrated-branched stent grafts. Endpoints were any cause mortality and major adverse events at 30 days, technical success, target artery (TA) patency, freedom from TA instability, minor (endovascular with <12 Fr sheath) and major (open or ≥12 Fr sheath) secondary interventions, patient survival, and freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM). RESULTS: A total of 246 patients (76% male; median age, 67 years [interquartile range, 61-73 years]) were treated for extent I (7%), extent II (55%), and extent III (35%) PD-TAAAs by FB-EVAR. The median aneurysm diameter was 65 mm (interquartile range, 59-73 mm). Eighteen patients (7%) were octogenarians, 212 (86%) were American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥3, and 21 (9%) presented with contained ruptured or symptomatic aneurysms. There were 917 renal-mesenteric vessels targeted by 581 fenestrations (63%) and 336 directional branches (37%), with a mean of 3.7 vessels per patient. Technical success was 96%. Mortality and rate of major adverse events at 30 days was 3% and 28%, including disabling complications such as new onset dialysis in 1%, major stroke in 1%, and permanent paraplegia in 2%. Mean follow-up was 24 months. Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimated patient survival at 3 and 5 years was 79% ± 6% and 65% ± 10%. KM estimated freedom from ARM was 95% ± 3% and 93% ± 5% at the same intervals. Unplanned secondary interventions were needed in 94 patients (38%), including minor procedures in 64 (25%) and major procedures in 30 (12%). There was one conversion to open surgical repair (<1%). KM estimated freedom from any secondary intervention was 44% ± 9% at 5 years. KM estimated primary and secondary TA patency were 93% ± 2% and 96% ± 1% at 5 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR for chronic PD-TAAAs was associated with high technical success and a low rate of mortality (3%) and disabling complications at 30 days. Although the procedure is effective in the prevention of ARM, patient survival was low at 5 years (65%), likely due to the significant comorbidities in this cohort of patients. Freedom from secondary interventions at 5 years was 44%, although most procedures were minor. The significant rate of reinterventions highlights the need for continued patient surveillance.

Penumbra Indigo Percutaneous Aspiration Thrombectomy System in the treatment of Aortic Endograft Iliac Limb Occlusion: Results from an Italian Multicentre Registry.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Penumbra Indigo percutaneous aspiration thrombectomy (PAT) system in the clinical presentation of iliac limb occlusion (ILO) after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). METHODS: A retrospective, observational, multicentre study conducted in eight Italian vascular centres. Consecutive patients presenting with ILO after EVAR were eligible. To assess vessel revascularisation, Thrombo-aspiration In Peripheral Ischaemia (TIPI) classification (score 0-3) was used at presentation (t1), after PAT (t2), and after adjunctive procedures (t3). Successful revascularisation was considered TIPI 2-3 (near complete or complete). Primary intra-operative outcomes were technical success (TS) of Indigo PAT and combined TS of PAT associated with adjunctive procedures when needed. Primary follow up outcomes were safety and effectiveness at one, six, and 12 months. RESULTS: From September 2019 to December 2021, there were 48 ILO and 17 patients (35%) [median age 75 years, IQR 71, 83 years; male, 14 (82%); urgent, 8 (47%)] were treated and enrolled. The median time after primary EVAR was 24 months (IQR 0, 42 months). The median clot age from ILO diagnosis to PAT was three days (IQR 1, 12 days). Ten patients (59%) presented with limb threatening ischaemia. At t1, TIPI 0 and 1 was present in 13 (76%) and four (24%) cases, respectively. At t2, primary TS (TIPI 2-3) was achieved in 14 cases (82%) after Indigo PAT (p < .001). Fifteen patients (88%) required adjunctive procedures (14 re-linings, one surgical patch angioplasty). At t3, combined TS was achieved in 16 cases (94%). Intra-operative complication included one (6%) distal embolisation, treated successfully. The 30 day mortality was one case (6%) due to pneumonia. At one, six, and 12 months, clinical success was 100% without ILO recurrence. The median follow up was 23 months (IQR 11, 41 months): at 18 months, survival and freedom from re-intervention were 91 ± 8% and 90 ± 9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study reports for the first time the efficacy and safety of Penumbra Indigo PAT for ILO after EVAR, with promising technical and clinical success up to one year.

Revascularisation of Chronic Limb Threatening Ischaemia in Patients with no Pedal Arteries Leads to Lower Midterm Limb Salvage.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI) involving the infragenicular arteries is treated by distal angioplasty or pedal bypass; however, this is not always possible, due to chronically occluded pedal arteries (no patent pedal artery, N-PPA). This pattern represents a hurdle to successful revascularisation, which must be limited to the proximal arteries. The aim of the study was to analyse the outcome of patients with CLTI and N-PPA after a proximal revascularisation. METHODS: All patients with CLTI submitted to revascularisation in a single centre (2019 - 2020) were analysed. All angiograms were reviewed to identify N-PPA, defined as total obstruction of all pedal arteries. Revascularisation was performed with proximal surgical, endovascular, and hybrid procedures. Early and midterm survival, wound healing, limb salvage, and patency rates were compared between N-PPA and patients with one or more patent pedal artery (PPA). RESULTS: Two hundred and eighteen procedures were performed. One hundred and forty of 218 (64.2%) patients were male, mean age 73.2 ± 10.6 years. The procedure was surgical in 64/218 (29.4%) cases, endovascular in 138/218 (63.3%), and hybrid in 16/218 (7.3%). N-PPA was present in 60/218 (27.5%) cases. Eleven of 60 (18.3%) cases were treated surgically, 43/60 (71.7%) by endovascular and 6/60 (10%) by hybrid procedures. Technical success was similar in the two groups (N-PPA 85% vs. PPA 82.3%, p = .42). At a mean follow up of 24.5 ± 10.2 months, survival (N-PPA 93.7 ± 3.5% vs. PPA 95.3 ± 2.1%, p = .22) and primary patency (N-PPA 53.1 ± 8.1% vs. PPA 55.2 ± 5%, p = .56) were similar. Limb salvage was significantly lower in N-PPA patients (N-PPA 71.4 ± 6.6% vs. PPA 81.5 ± 3.4%, p = .042); N-PPA was an independent predictor of major amputation (hazard ratio [HR] 2.02, 1.07 - 3.82, p = .038) together with age > 73 years (HR 2.32, 1.17 - 4.57, p = .012) and haemodialysis (2.84, 1.48 - 5.43, p = .002). CONCLUSION: N-PPA is not uncommon in patients with CLTI. This condition does not hamper technical success, primary patency, and midterm survival; however, midterm limb salvage is significantly lower than in patients with PPA. This should be considered in the decision making process.

Determination of the gained proximal sealing zone length after debranching of the left subclavian artery in thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

BACKGROUND: For descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAA) in proximity of the aortic arch, debranching of the left subclavian artery (LSA) may be necessary to extend proximal sealing in zone 2. The aim of this study was to determine the added proximal apposition length gained from LSA debranching during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study (2010-2020) included patients who underwent elective TEVAR in zone 2 for a degenerative TAA where the LSA was surgically debranched. The endograft position on the first postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) scan was assessed using post-processing software. The analysis included the shortest apposition length (SAL), the tilt of the proximal edge of the endograft, and the distance between the endograft and the left common carotid artery. Clinical endpoints (neurological complications and endoleaks) at 30 days were also reported. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included. The median interval between TEVAR and the first postoperative CTA was 3 days (2-10 days). Median SAL was 9.2 mm (1.3-26.4 mm), of which 8.6 mm (1.3-16.2 mm) was gained proximal of the LSA, including the LSA orifice. In 12 patients (55.5%) the SAL was <10 mm. The median tilt was 18.3° (13.9°-22.2°). Seven endoleaks were reported on the first CTA: 1 type Ia, 2 type Ib, 3 type II, and 1 type III. CONCLUSIONS: Debranching the LSA adds valuable sealing length in zone 2, but the SAL was still relatively short in many patients, putting these patients at risk for a future type Ia endoleak. Accurate assessment of the circumferential apposition on postoperative CTA follow-up in these high-risk patients with short, complex landing zones seems mandatory. Evaluation of apposition in a larger population with longer follow-up is advised.

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

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

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

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

Emergent physician modified carotid fenestrated TEVAR for the treatment of a complicated acute type nonA-nonB aortic dissection with undetected multiorgan malperfusion.

Complicated acute nonA-nonB dissection with malperfusion is associated with a high in-hospital mortality up to 67%. Therefore, rapid identification and treatment are critical for clinical outcomes. We report the urgent treatment of a complicated subacute aortic dissection treated with a physician-modified-endograft (PMEG) fenestrated-TEVAR (f-TEVAR) for the left common carotid artery (LCCA). A 49-year-old male patient with acute non-A non-B aortic dissection with complete true lumen collapse and associated mesenteric and renal ischemia, was referred to another vascular center for abdominal pain and received exclusively medical treatment. After 15 days of persistent pain, the patient self-referred to our center and was treated with endovascular repair. The proximal entry tear was located at the level of the left subclavian artery: a PMEG f-TEVAR was performed with fenestration for LCCA in conjunction with carotid-subclavian bypass. In addition, spot stenting of the left renal artery was performed to resolve renal malperfusion. The final angiography showed satisfactory result. The patient soon reported significant pain relief. Follow-up at 30-days was satisfactory, with no need for further intervention. A physician-modified fenestrated-TEVAR can be used in emergency setting to treat acute non-A-non-B aortic dissection in conjunction with multiorgan malperfusion, with satisfactory results even after initial delayed treatment.

European Multicentric Experience With Fenestrated-branched ENDOvascular Stent Grafting After Previous FAILed Infrarenal Aortic Repair: The EU-FBENDO-FAIL Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To report the mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) following a failed previous endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) or previous open aneurysm repair (pOAR). METHODS: Data from consecutive patients who underwent F-BEVAR for pEVAR or pOAR from 2006 to 2021 from 17 European vascular centers were analyzed. Endpoints included technical success, major adverse events, 30-day mortality, and 5-year estimates of survival, target vessel primary patency, freedom from reinterventions, type I/III endoleaks, and sac growth >5 mm. BACKGROUND: Treatment of a failed previous abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is a complex undertaking. F-BEVAR is becoming an increasingly attractive option, although comparative data are limited regarding associated risk factors, indications for treatment, and various outcomes. RESULTS: There were 526 patients included, 268 pOAR and 258 pEVAR. The median time from previous repair to F-BEVAR was 7 (interquartile range, 4-12) years, 5 (3-8) for pEVAR, and 10 (6-14) for pOAR, P <0.001. Predominant indication for treatment was type Ia endoleak for pEVAR and progression of the disease for pOAR. Technical success was 92.8%, pOAR (92.2%), and pEVAR (93.4%), P =0.58. The 30-day mortality was 6.5% overall, 6.7% for pOAR, and 6.2% for pEVAR, P =0.81. There were 1853 treated target vessels with 5-year estimates of primary patency of 94.4%, pEVAR (95.2%), and pOAR (94.4%), P =0.03. Five-year estimates for freedom from type I/III endoleaks were similar between groups; freedom from reintervention was lower for pEVAR (38.3%) than for pOAR (56.0%), P =0.004. The most common indication for reinterventions was for type I/III endoleaks (37.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Repair of a failed pEVAR or pOARis safe and feasible with comparable technical success and survival rates. While successful treatment can be achieved, significant rates of reintervention should be anticipated, particularly for issues related to instability of target vessels/bridging stents.