An international, multispecialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document on controversial issues in the management of patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the publication of various national/international guidelines, several questions concerning the management of patients with asymptomatic (AsxCS) and symptomatic (SxCS) carotid stenosis remain unanswered. The aim of this international, multi-specialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to address these issues to help clinicians make decisions when guidelines are unclear. METHODS: Fourteen controversial topics were identified. A three-round Delphi Consensus process was performed including 61 experts. The aim of Round 1 was to investigate the differing views and opinions regarding these unresolved topics. In Round 2, clarifications were asked from each participant. In Round 3, the questionnaire was resent to all participants for their final vote. Consensus was reached when ≥75% of experts agreed on a specific response. RESULTS: Most experts agreed that: (1) the current periprocedural/in-hospital stroke/death thresholds for performing a carotid intervention should be lowered from 6% to 4% in patients with SxCS and from 3% to 2% in patients with AsxCS; (2) the time threshold for a patient being considered "recently symptomatic" should be reduced from the current definition of "6 months" to 3 months or less; (3) 80% to 99% AsxCS carries a higher risk of stroke compared with 60% to 79% AsxCS; (4) factors beyond the grade of stenosis and symptoms should be added to the indications for revascularization in AsxCS patients (eg, plaque features of vulnerability and silent infarctions on brain computed tomography scans); and (5) shunting should be used selectively, rather than always or never. Consensus could not be reached on the remaining topics due to conflicting, inadequate, or controversial evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The present international, multi-specialty expert-based Delphi Consensus document attempted to provide responses to several unanswered/unresolved issues. However, consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting areas requiring future research.

Remote Expert DVT Triaging of Novice-User Compression Sonography with AI-Guidance.

BACKGROUND: Compression ultrasonography of the leg is established for triaging proximal lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). AutoDVT, a machine-learning software, provides a tool for nonspecialists in acquiring compression sequences to be reviewed by an expert for patient triage. The purpose of this study was to test image acquisition and remote triaging in a clinical setting. METHODS: Patients with a suspected DVT were recruited at 2 centers in Germany and Greece. Enrolled patients underwent an artificial intelligence-guided two-point compression examination by a nonspecialist using a handheld ultrasound device prior to a standard scan. Images collected by the software were uploaded for blind review by 5 qualified physicians. All reviewers rated the quality of all sequences on the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) image quality scale (score 1-5, ≥ 3 defined as adequate imaging quality) and for an ACEP score ≥3, chose "Compressible", "Incompressible", or "Other". Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for adequate quality scans with an assessment as "Compressible" or "Incompressible". We define this group as diagnostic quality. To simulate a triaging clinical algorithm, a post hoc analysis was performed merging the "incomplete", the "low quality", and the "Incompressible" into a high-risk group for proximal DVT. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients (average age 64.2 years, 44% females) were eligible for inclusion and scanned by 3 nonultrasound-qualified healthcare professionals. Three patients were excluded from further analysis due to incomplete scans. Sixty two of 70 (88.57%) of the completed scans were judged to be of adequate image quality with an average ACEP score of 3.35. Forty seven of 62 adequate AutoDVT scans were assessed as diagnostic quality, of which 8 were interpreted as positive for proximal DVT by the reviewers resulting in a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 95.12%. When simulating a triaging algorithm, 34/73 (46.58%) of patients would be triaged as high risk and 8 would be confirmed as positive for proximal DVT (6 in the diagnostic and 2 in the low-quality cohort). Of 39/73 patients triaged as low risk, all were negative for proximal DVT in standard duplex; thus, this triaging algorithm could potentially save 53.42% of standard duplex scans. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning software was able to aid nonexperts in acquiring valid ultrasound images of venous compressions and allowed remote triaging. This strategy allows faster diagnosis and treatment of high-risk patients and can spare the need for multiple unnecessary duplex scans, the vast majority being negative.

A Greek Multicentre Study Assessing the Outcome of Late Rupture After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Late rupture after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) for an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is an increasing complication associated with a high mortality rate. This study aimed to analyse the causes and outcomes in patients with AAA rupture after EVAR. METHODS: A multi-institutional Greek study of late ruptures after EVAR between 2008 - 2022 was performed. Primary outcomes were intra-operative and in hospital death. RESULTS: A total of 70 patients presented with late rupture after EVAR (proportion of ruptured EVARs among all EVARs, 0.6%; 69 males; mean age 77.2 ± 6.7 years). The mean time interval between EVAR and late rupture was 72.3 months (range 6 - 180 months). In all cases the cause of rupture was the presence of an endoleak (type I, 73%) with sac enlargement. Moreover, 34% of subjects with rupture after EVAR had been lost to follow up and 32% underwent a secondary intervention. Additionally, 57 patients (81%) were treated by conversion to open surgical repair (COSR) and the remainder by endovascular correction of endoleak (ECE). Eleven intra-operative deaths (16%) were recorded. The overall in hospital mortality rate was 41% (23% ECE vs. 46% COSR; p = .21). Of the patients who presented as initially haemodynamically stable, 23% died during hospitalisation, while the respective mortality rate for patients who presented as unstable was 78% (odds ratio [OR] 11.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6 - 39.1; p < .001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that severity of haemodynamic shock was the most significant risk factor for intra-operative (OR 7.15, 95% CI 1.58 - 32.40; p = .010) and in hospital death (OR 9.53, 95% CI 2.79 - 32.58; p < .001). CONCLUSION: These data underline the devastating prognosis of late rupture after EVAR. Haemodynamic status at presentation was an important predictive factor for death both in the ECE and COSR groups. Rigorous follow up and prompt evaluation of an unstable patient in case of rupture after EVAR is recommended.

Pre-Emptive Embolization of the Aneurysm Sac or Aortic Side Branches in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: To investigate outcomes of pre-emptive embolization of the aneurysm sac or aortic side branches in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: The review was reported as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 with a preregistered protocol. Bibliographic sources (MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL) were searched using subject headings and free text terms. Randomized controlled trials comparing EVAR with versus without embolization were included. Pooled estimates of dichotomous outcomes were calculated using odds ratio (OR) or risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) applying the Mantel-Haenszel method. Continuous outcomes were summarized using mean difference (MD) and 95% CI applying the inverse variance method. The certainty of evidence was appraised with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. Version 2 of the Cochrane tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Trial sequential analysis assumed alpha = 5% and power = 80%. RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials were included. No significant difference was found in aneurysm-related mortality (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), overall mortality (OR 1.85, 95% CI 0.42-8.13), aneurysm rupture (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), type II endoleak-related reintervention (RD -0.07, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.06), procedure time (MD 20.12, 95% CI -11.54 to 51.77), or fluoroscopy time (MD 11.17, 95% CI -11.22 to 33.56). Patients with pre-emptive embolization had significantly lower odds of type II endoleak (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26-0.78) and sac expansion (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07-0.52). The risk of bias was high for all outcomes. The certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes, except for type II endoleak, for which it was low. Trial sequential analysis showed an inconclusive result for overall mortality and type II endoleak-related reintervention but confirmed the advantage of embolization in reducing type II endoleak and sac expansion. CONCLUSIONS: Limited, low certainty data suggest pre-emptive embolization confers no clinical benefits in EVAR.

Echocardiographic Changes in Cardiac Function After Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests thoracic stent grafts increase the aortic stiffness postimplantation. Our objective was to examine the effect of thoracic aortic stenting on heart function, as demonstrated with echocardiography. METHODS: We considered nonrandomized studies examining echocardiographic parameters (left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricle end-diastolic (LVED) and end-systolic diameter (LVESD), posterior wall thickness (LVPWT), interventricular septal thickness (IVST), mass, and mass index) pre and poststent graft implantation in patients with thoracic aortic diseases (aneurysm, dissection, and blunt injury). MEDLINE and CENTRAL were searched (up to March 2021) for eligible studies. The National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool was used for risk of bias assessment. Echocardiographic data pre and postimplantation were compared using the pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Four studies were included in the meta-analysis. Three of the studies were judged to be "good" quality and one "fair". Nonsignificant differences pre and postimplantation were found for ejection fraction (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI = -1.8 to 0.728, P = 0.406), IVST (SMD = -0.79, 95%, CI = -3.25 to 1.66, P = 0.52), EDD (SMD = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.48 to 0.28, P = 0.60), ESD (SMD = -0.66, 95% CI = -2.35 to 1.02, P = 0.44), and PWT (SMD = -2.20, 95% CI = -5.89 to 1.47, P = 0.24). A trend toward an increase in mass postimplantation was found (SMD = 0.28, 95%, CI = -0.03 to 0.60, P = 0.08), but there was no significant difference in mass index (SMD = 0, 95%, CI = -0.195 to 0.195, P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic aortic stenting does not appear to significantly impact cardiac physiology as indicated by echocardiographic parameters.

Why do guidelines recommend screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms, but not for asymptomatic carotid stenosis? A plea for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines do not recommend screening for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (AsxCS). The rationale behind this recommendation is that detection of AsxCS may lead to an unnecessary carotid intervention. In contrast, screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms is strongly recommended. METHODS: A critical analysis of the literature was performed to evaluate the implications of detecting AsxCS. RESULTS: Patients with AsxCS are at high risk for future stroke, myocardial infarction and vascular death. Population-wide screening for AsxCS should not be recommended. Additionally, screening of high-risk individuals for AsxCS with the purpose of identifying candidates for a carotid intervention is inappropriate. Instead, selective screening for AsxCS should be considered and should be viewed as an opportunity to identify individuals at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and future cardiovascular events for the timely initiation of intensive medical therapy and risk factor modification. CONCLUSIONS: Although mass screening should not be recommended, there are several arguments suggesting that selective screening for AsxCS should be considered. The rationale supporting such selective screening is to optimize risk factor control and to initiate intensive medical therapy for prevention of future cardiovascular events, rather than to identify candidates for an intervention.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Stenting for Aortic Coarctation.

BACKGROUND: Coarctation of the aorta (CoA) is a congenital cardiovascular malformation involving narrowing of the thoracic aorta just distal to the left subclavian artery. The aim of our study was to evaluate the hemodynamic effects of endovascular treatment for CoA by using invasive aortic catheterization. METHODS: All patients with CoA who underwent treatment by aortic stent implantation between September 1, 2003, and February 1, 2019, at the "Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center," in Athens, Greece, were evaluated. Patients were treated with either bare (uncovered) Cheatham-Platinum (bCP) or covered Cheatham-Platinum (cCP) stent implantations. Invasive aortic pressure measurements were recorded before and after the endovascular intervention. RESULTS: A total of 48, eight zig CP stents, comprising 24 bCP and 24 cCP stents were implanted in 47 patients. The mean aortic diameter (mm) at the CoA lesion increased from 9.7 ± 3.3 to 19.2 ± 2.9 mm (p <0.01) after the endovascular procedure. The invasive mean blood pressure (BP; mm Hg) from catheterization in the descending aorta increased (before = 114.2 ± 12.8 vs. after = 135.5 ± 28.1; p <0.01), while the invasive mean BP (mm Hg) from catheterization in the ascending aorta was decreased (before = 156.8 ± 25.0 vs. after = 138.4 ± 27.5; p <0.01) after the intervention. The mean aortic BP gradient decreased in both types of stents after intervention (BP gradient among patients with cCP stents = 30.9 +/- 23.6 mmHg and BP gradient among patients with bCP stents = 38.0 +/-23.1 mmHg). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two types of stents; p = 0.36. CONCLUSIONS: Invasive aortic catheterization provided evidence that endovascular stenting with either bare or covered stents is efficient in treating patients with CoA.

Comparison of Recent Practice Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Despite the publication of several national/international guidelines, the optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS) remains controversial. This article compares 3 recently released guidelines (the 2020 German-Austrian, the 2021 European Stroke Organization [ESO], and the 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery [SVS] guidelines) vs the 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) guidelines regarding the optimal management of AsxCS patients.The 2017 ESVS guidelines defined specific imaging/clinical parameters that may identify patient subgroups at high future stroke risk and recommended that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should or carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be considered for these individuals. The 2020 German-Austrian guidelines provided similar recommendations with the 2017 ESVS Guidelines. The 2021 ESO Guidelines also recommended CEA for AsxCS patients at high risk for stroke on best medical treatment (BMT), but recommended against routine use of CAS in these patients. Finally, the SVS guidelines provided a strong recommendation for CEA+BMT vs BMT alone for low-surgical risk patients with >70% AsxCS. Thus, the ESVS, German-Austrian, and ESO guidelines concurred that all AsxCS patients should receive risk factor modification and BMT, but CEA should or CAS may also be considered for certain AsxCS patient subgroups at high risk for future ipsilateral ischemic stroke.

Combined intermittent pneumatic leg compression and pharmacological prophylaxis for prevention of venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: It is generally assumed by practitioners and guideline authors that combined modalities (methods of treatment) are more effective than single modalities in preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE), defined as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), or both. This is the second update of the review first published in 2008. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to assess the efficacy of combined intermittent pneumatic leg compression (IPC) and pharmacological prophylaxis compared to single modalities in preventing VTE. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and AMED databases, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 18 January 2021. We searched the reference lists of relevant articles for additional studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of combined IPC and pharmacological interventions used to prevent VTE compared to either intervention individually. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently selected studies, applied Cochrane's risk of bias tool, and extracted data. We resolved disagreements by discussion. We performed fixed-effect model meta-analyses with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a random-effects model when there was heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. The outcomes of interest were PE, DVT, bleeding and major bleeding. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 34 studies involving 14,931 participants, mainly undergoing surgery or admitted with trauma. Twenty-five studies were RCTs (12,672 participants) and nine were CCTs (2259 participants). Overall, the risk of bias was mostly unclear or high. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence and this was downgraded due to the risk of bias, imprecision or indirectness. The addition of pharmacological prophylaxis to IPC compared with IPC alone reduced the incidence of symptomatic PE from 1.34% (34/2530) in the IPC group to 0.65% (19/2932) in the combined group (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.91; 19 studies, 5462 participants, low-certainty evidence). The incidence of DVT was 3.81% in the IPC group and 2.03% in the combined group showing a reduced incidence of DVT in favour of the combined group (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.72; 18 studies, 5394 participants, low-certainty evidence). The addition of pharmacological prophylaxis to IPC, however, increased the risk of any bleeding compared to IPC alone: 0.95% (22/2304) in the IPC group and 5.88% (137/2330) in the combined group (OR 6.02, 95% CI 3.88 to 9.35; 13 studies, 4634 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Major bleeding followed a similar pattern: 0.34% (7/2054) in the IPC group compared to 2.21% (46/2079) in the combined group (OR 5.77, 95% CI 2.81 to 11.83; 12 studies, 4133 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Tests for subgroup differences between orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic surgery participants were not possible for PE incidence as no PE events were reported in the orthopaedic subgroup. No difference was detected between orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic surgery participants for DVT incidence (test for subgroup difference P = 0.19).  The use of combined IPC and pharmacological prophylaxis modalities compared with pharmacological prophylaxis alone reduced the incidence of PE from 1.84% (61/3318) in the pharmacological prophylaxis group to 0.91% (31/3419) in the combined group (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.71; 15 studies, 6737 participants, low-certainty evidence). The incidence of DVT was 9.28% (288/3105) in the pharmacological prophylaxis group and 5.48% (167/3046) in the combined group (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.70; 17 studies; 6151 participants, high-certainty evidence). Increased bleeding side effects were not observed for IPC when it was added to anticoagulation (any bleeding: OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.35, 6 studies, 1314 participants, very low-certainty evidence; major bleeding: OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.18, 5 studies, 908 participants, very low-certainty evidence). No difference was detected between the orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic surgery participants for PE incidence (test for subgroup difference P = 0.82) or for DVT incidence (test for subgroup difference P = 0.69). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that combining IPC with pharmacological prophylaxis, compared to IPC alone reduces the incidence of both PE and DVT (low-certainty evidence). Combining IPC with pharmacological prophylaxis, compared to pharmacological prophylaxis alone, reduces the incidence of both PE (low-certainty evidence) and DVT (high-certainty evidence). We downgraded due to risk of bias in study methodology and imprecision. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that the addition of pharmacological prophylaxis to IPC increased the risk of bleeding compared to IPC alone, a side effect not observed when IPC is added to pharmacological prophylaxis (very low-certainty evidence), as expected for a physical method of thromboprophylaxis. The certainty of the evidence for bleeding was downgraded to very low due to risk of bias in study methodology, imprecision and indirectness. The results of this update agree with current guideline recommendations, which support the use of combined modalities in hospitalised people (limited to those with trauma or undergoing surgery) at risk of developing VTE. More studies on the role of combined modalities in VTE prevention are needed to provide evidence for specific patient groups and to increase our certainty in the evidence.

A systematic review of therapies for aortobronchial fistulae.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to summarize epidemiologic data about aortobronchial fistulae and compare outcomes (mortality, recurrence, reoperation) of open, staged, and endovascular repair of aortobronchial fistula. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify eligible studies published between January 1999 and December 2019. The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Scopus databases were used as search engines. Eligible studies included articles reporting postoperative outcomes (death/follow-up). Literature review revealed only case reports and small case series, and thus, only descriptive data with data heterogeneity were available. The corresponding authors were contacted to provide additional information or outcome updates (recurrence/reoperation/death). RESULTS: Overall, 214 patients (90 studies) underwent 271 procedures (including redo procedures and staged procedures). Most of the patients were treated by endovascular means (72.42%). Open surgical repair was performed in 21.96% and staged procedures in 5.6%. Aortobronchial fistulae were located most often in the descending thoracic aorta (zone 3 or 4) (64.6%) and in zone 2 (23.8%). Fourteen percent of aortobronchial fistulae developed after thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair. Recurrence or infection occurred in 20% (43) patients. Recurrences were, to some extent, associated with the presence of endoleak. Long-term antibiotic administration (>1 month) was instituted in 63 patients (29.4%), whereas 90 patients (42%) did not receive antibiotics beyond hospitalization. From the remaining 61 patients, 3 received lifelong antibiotics and for 58 patients data were not available. Considering outcomes, the mean follow-up was 25.1 months (0-188 months) and not significantly different among treatments. LIMITATIONS: Literature review has revealed only case reports and small case series, and thus, only descriptive data were available. Randomized controlled trials are not available due to the rarity of the disease, which significantly decreases the power of the present study. Also, this study reflects significant data heterogeneity due to the nature of the analyzed manuscripts and would benefit from large patient cohort studies that have not been conducted till today. CONCLUSIONS: Aortobronchial fistula is a complex disease. Endoleaks may be involved in the development and the recurrence process, and they should not be disregarded. Considering major outcomes (length of follow-up), the available treating strategies are equal, and thus, surgeons should feel confident to apply the treatment of their choice, keeping in mind their experience, patient's age, and clinical condition.

Contemporary Outcomes After Partial Resection of Infected Aortic Grafts.

INTRODUCTION: Aortic graft infection remains a considerable clinical challenge, and it is unclear which variables are associated with adverse outcomes among patients undergoing partial resection. METHODS: A retrospective, multi-institutional study of patients who underwent partial resection of infected aortic grafts from 2002 to 2014 was performed using a standard database. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, operative, and postoperative variables were recorded. The primary outcome was mortality. Descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis, and Cox regression analysis were performed. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen patients at 22 medical centers in 6 countries underwent partial resection of an infected aortic graft. Seventy percent were men with median age 70 years. Ninety-seven percent had a history of open aortic bypass graft: 88 (77%) patients had infected aortobifemoral bypass, 18 (16%) had infected aortobiiliac bypass, and 1 (0.8%) had an infected thoracic graft. Infection was diagnosed at a median 4.3 years post-implant. All patients underwent partial resection followed by either extra-anatomic (47%) or in situ (53%) vascular reconstruction. Median follow-up period was 17 months (IQR 1, 50 months). Thirty-day mortality was 17.5%. The KM-estimated median survival from time of partial resection was 3.6 years. There was no significant survival difference between those undergoing in situ reconstruction or extra-anatomic bypass (P = 0.6). During follow up, 72% of repairs remained patent and 11% of patients underwent major amputation. On univariate Cox regression analysis, Candida infection was associated with increased risk of mortality (HR 2.4; P = 0.01) as well as aortoenteric fistula (HR 1.9, P = 0.03). Resection of a single graft limb only to resection of abdominal (graft main body) infection was associated with decreased risk of mortality (HR 0.57, P = 0.04), as well as those with American Society of Anesthesiologists classification less than 3 (HR 0.35, P = 0.04). Multivariate analysis did not reveal any factors significantly associated with mortality. Persistent early infection was noted in 26% of patients within 30 days postoperatively, and 39% of patients were found to have any post-repair infection during the follow-up period. Two patients (1.8%) were found to have a late reinfection without early persistent postoperative infection. Patients with any post-repair infection were older (67 vs. 60 years, P = 0.01) and less likely to have patent repairs during follow up (59% vs. 32%, P = 0.01). Patients with aortoenteric fistula had a higher rate of any post-repair infection (63% vs. 29%, P < 0.01) CONCLUSION: This large multi-center study suggests that patients who have undergone partial resection of infected aortic grafts may be at high risk of death or post-repair infection, especially older patients with abdominal infection not isolated to a single graft limb, or with Candida infection or aortoenteric fistula. Late reinfection correlated strongly with early persistent postoperative infection, raising concern for occult retained infected graft material.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the streamliner multilayer flow modulator stent for treatment of complex aortic lesions.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of multilayer flow modulator (MFM) stents (Cardiatis, Isnes, Belgium) for the treatment of complex aortic lesions. METHODS: A systematic electronic research was conducted for studies reported from December 2008 to May 2020. Data extracted from 15 eligible case series (CS) were appropriately pooled and analyzed in a meta-analysis. The patient baseline characteristics were recorded, and 16 outcomes of interest were studied. The primary end points included 30-day all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality, aneurysm-related mortality at 1 year, vessel patency, and any endoleaks, ruptures, reinterventions, and aneurysm exclusion at the end of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 39 studies (15 CS and 24 case reports), involving 429 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 436 lesions were treated, and 1521 aortic branches were covered by the multilayer stent. The mean follow-up for the 15 CS with 404 patients was 14.6 months. Compliance with the instructions for use was reported by eight CS, with 75% of the procedures performed within the instructions for use. However, 41% of the patients reported by 12 CS had undergone a previous aortic intervention. The pooled 30-day all-cause and 30-day aneurysm-related mortality rates were 0.56% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00%-2.54%) and 0.00% (95% CI, 0.00%-0.80%), respectively. The pooled aneurysm-related mortality at 1 year of follow-up was 5.25% (95% CI, 0.07%-14.91%). The pooled vessel patency at the end of follow-up was 99.12% (95% CI, 97.73%-99.93%). The pooled reintervention and endoleak rates at the end of follow-up were 10.94% (95% CI, 3.64%-20.67%) and 10.70% (95% CI, 4.45%-18.66%), respectively. The crude spinal cord ischemia and renal failure rates were 0.69% and 1.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present review and meta-analysis have indicated the safety and efficacy of MFM stents for treating challenging aortic pathologic lesions when used as first-line treatment and within the instructions for use. The almost zero pooled 30-day all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality rates combined with the low crude spinal cord ischemia and renal failure rates indicate the use of MFM stents is a good treatment option for complex aortic lesions in the short- and mid-term periods. The lack of long-term follow-up warrants further research concerning the efficacy of the device in the long term.

A systematic review and meta-analysis for the management of Paget-Schroetter syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: There is currently no general agreement on the optimal treatment of Paget-Schroetter syndrome. Most centers have advocated an interventional approach that is based on the results of small institutional series. The purpose of our meta-analysis was to focus on the safety and efficacy of thrombolysis or anticoagulation with decompression therapy. A detailed description of the epidemiologic, etiologic, and clinical characteristics, along with radiologic findings and treatment option details, was also performed. METHODS: The current meta-analysis was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting on spontaneous thrombosis or thrombosis after strenuous activities of axillary-subclavian vein were considered eligible. Analyses of all retrospective studies were conducted, and pooled proportions with 95% confidence intervals of outcome rates were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies with 1511 patients were identified. Among these patients, 1177 (77.9%) had thrombolysis, 658 (43.5%) had anticoagulation, and 1293 (85.6%) patients had decompression therapy of the thoracic outlet. Complete thrombus resolution was estimated at 78.11% of the patients after thrombolysis, and the respective pooled proportion for partial resolution of thrombus was 23.72%. Despite thrombolytic therapy, 212 patients underwent additional balloon angioplasty for residual stenosis, although only 36 stents were implanted. After anticoagulation, a total of 40.70% of the patients had complete thrombus resolution, whereas partial resolution was occurred in 29.13% of the patients. During follow-up, a total of 51.75% of the patients with any initial treatment modality had no remaining thrombus, and 84.87% of these patients were free of symptoms. We also estimated that 76.88% of the patients had a Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score of <20, indicating no or mild symptoms after treatment. A subgroup meta-analysis with 20 studies and 1309 patients, showed significantly improved vein patency and symptom resolution in patients who had first rib resection with or without venoplasty, compared with those who had only thrombolysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although no randomized controlled data are available, our analysis strongly suggested higher rates of thrombus and symptoms resolution with thrombolysis, followed by first rib resection. A prospective randomized trial comparing anticoagulants with thrombolysis and decompression of thoracic outlet is required.

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair with Bifurcated Stent Grafts in Patients with Narrow Versus Regular Aortic Bifurcation: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparative Studies.

BACKGROUND: Narrow aortic bifurcation (NAB) is considered as a risk factor for endograft limb thrombosis. The purpose of the study was to investigate the effect of narrow aortic bifurcation on outcomes of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: A systematic review that conformed to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed. We searched electronic bibliographic databases using a combination of controlled vocabulary (thesaurus) and free-text terms to identify relevant studies comparing outcomes of EVAR in patients with NAB versus those with regular aortic bifurcation. Pooled estimates of dichotomous outcomes were calculated using odds ratio (OR) and those of continuous outcomes using mean difference and 95% confidence interval (CI). To account for expected heterogeneity, the random-effects model was applied for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Six observational studies were included, reporting a total of 2,673 patients (412 with NAR and 2,261 with friendly anatomy). Perioperative mortality was similar between the groups (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.30-4.34, P = 0.85, I2 = 0%). Limb stenosis and kinking requiring additional intraoperative procedures was significantly more common among patients with NAB (OR 3.02, 95% CI 2.16-4.22, P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%). Nevertheless, 30-day reintervention rate was similar between the groups, as was the rate of limb occlusion during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence suggests that at the expense of significantly more intraoperative additional procedures, EVAR with bifurcated devices can be safely performed in patients with NAB.

In situ bypass and extra-anatomic bypass procedures result in similar survival in patients with secondary aortoenteric fistulas.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal revascularization modality in secondary aortoenteric fistula (SAEF) remains unclear in the literature. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the revascularization approach associated with the lowest morbidity and mortality using real-world data in patients with SAEF. METHODS: A retrospective, multi-institutional study of SAEF from 2002 to 2014 was performed using a standardized database. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and operative and postoperative variables were recorded. The primary outcome was long-term mortality. Descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: During the study period, 182 patients at 34 institutions from 11 countries presented with SAEF (median age, 72 years; 79% male). The initial aortic procedures that resulted in SAEF were 138 surgical grafts (76%) and 42 endografts (23%), with 2 unknown; 102 of the SAEFs (56%) underwent complete excision of infected aortic graft material, followed by in situ (in-line) bypass (ISB), including antibiotic-soaked prosthetic graft (53), autogenous femoral vein (neoaortoiliac surgery; 17), cryopreserved allograft (28), and untreated prosthetic grafts (4). There were 80 patients (44%) who underwent extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) with infected graft excision. Overall median Kaplan-Meier estimated survival was 319 days (interquartile range, 20-2410 days). Stratified by EAB vs ISB, there was no significant difference in Kaplan-Meier estimated survival (P = .82). In comparing EAB vs ISB, EAB patients were older (74 vs 70 years; P = .01), had less operative hemorrhage (1200 mL vs 2000 mL; P = .04), were more likely to initiate dialysis within 30 days postoperatively (15% vs 5%; P = .02), and were less likely to experience aorta-related hemorrhage within 30 days postoperatively (3% aortic stump dehiscence vs 11% anastomotic rupture; P = .03). There were otherwise no significant differences in presentation, comorbidities, and intraoperative or postoperative variables. Multivariable Cox regression showed that the duration of antibiotic use (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.98; P = .01) and rifampin use at time of discharge (hazard ratio, 0.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.86; P = .03) independently decreased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that ISB does not offer a survival advantage compared with EAB and does not decrease the risk of postoperative aorta-related hemorrhage. After repair, <50% of SAEF patients survive 10 months. Each week of antibiotic use decreases mortality by 8%. Further study with risk modeling is imperative for this population.

Dynamic carotid plaque imaging using ultrasonography.

OBJECTIVE: Dynamic image analysis of carotid plaques has demonstrated that during systole and early diastole, all plaque components will move in the same direction (concordant motion) in some plaques. However, in others, different parts of the plaque will move in different directions (discordant motion). The aim of our study was (1) to determine the prevalence of discordant motion in symptomatic and asymptomatic plaques, (2) to develop a measurement of the severity of discordant motion, and (3) to determine the correlation between the severity of discordant motion and symptom prevalence. METHODS: A total of 200 patients with 204 plaques resulting in 50% to 99% stenosis (112 asymptomatic and 92 symptomatic plaques) had video recordings available of the plaque motion during 10 cardiac cycles. Video tracking was performed using Farneback's method, which relies on frame comparisons. In our study, these were performed at 0.1-second intervals. The maximum angular spread (MAS) of the motion vectors at 10-pixel intervals in the plaque area was measured in degrees. Plaques were classified as concordant (MAS, <70°), moderately discordant (MAS, 70°-120°), and discordant (MAS, >120°). RESULTS: Motion was discordant in 89.1% of the symptomatic plaques but only in 17.9% of asymptomatic plaques (P < .001). The prevalence of symptoms increased with increasing MAS. For a MAS >120°, the hazard ratio for the presence of symptoms was 47.7 (95% confidence interval, 18.1-125.6) compared with the rest of the plaques after adjustment for the degree of stenosis and mean pixel motion. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the prediction of the presence of symptoms using the MAS was 0.876 (95% confidence interval, 0.823-0.929). The use of the median MAS (120°) as a cutoff point classified 86% of the plaques correctly (sensitivity, 81.4%; specificity, 91.2%; positive predictive value, 90.2%; and negative predictive value, 83.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the MAS value to identify asymptomatic plaques at increased risk of developing symptoms and, in particular, stroke should be tested in prospective studies.