Acute aortic catastrophe caused by cardiovascular oncological manipulation by tyrosine kinase inhibitors with immune checkpoint blockades: a case report and literature review.

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor pathway with immune checkpoint blockade have shown promising outcomes in managing metastatic renal cancer. However, they increase the risk of a person developing high blood pressure and cardiovascular complications. Case summary: In this study, we report the case of a 73-year-old woman on axitinib and pembrolizumab for her Stage 4 renal cell carcinoma. She presented with intractable chest pain and high systolic blood pressure, not responding to opiates. Her computed tomography angiography results showed an acute intra-mural haematoma with a rupture in the descending thoracic aorta. She underwent emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Post-operatively, she recovered fully without any neurological or cardiovascular issues. Discussion: The severity of cardiovascular haemodynamic complications arising from the consumption of VEGF inhibitors and from immunotherapy and the lack of anti-hypertensive strategies to adequately manage such events require an unequivocal and urgent assessment of their cardiovascular safety. This case highlights the crucial role of cardiovascular oncology in managing such acute aortic catastrophes.

Redefining postoperative hypertension management in carotid surgery: a comprehensive analysis of blood pressure homeostasis and hyperperfusion syndrome in unilateral vs. bilateral carotid surgeries and implications for clinical practice.

Background: This study evaluates the implications of blood pressure homeostasis in bilateral vs. unilateral carotid surgeries, focusing on the incidence of postoperative hypertension, hyperperfusion syndrome, and stroke as primary outcomes. It further delves into the secondary outcomes encompassing major adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. Methods: Spanning two decades (2002-2023), this comprehensive retrospective research encompasses 15,369 carotid referrals, out of which 1,230 underwent carotid interventions. A subset of 690 patients received open carotid procedures, with a 10-year follow-up, comprising 599 unilateral and 91 bilateral surgeries. The Society for Vascular Surgery Carotid Reporting Standards underpin our methodological approach for data collection. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were utilized to identify factors associated with postoperative hypertension using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 22 (SPSS®, IBM® Corp., Armonk, N.Y., USA). Results: A marked acute elevation in blood pressure was observed in patients undergoing both unilateral and bilateral carotid surgeries (p < 0.001). Smoking (OR: 1.183, p = 0.007), hyperfibrinogenemia (OR: 0.834, p = 0.004), emergency admission (OR: 1.192, p = 0.005), severe ipsilateral carotid stenosis (OR: 1.501, p = 0.022), and prior ipsilateral interventions (OR: 1.722, p = 0.003) emerged as significant factors that correlates with postoperative hypertension in unilateral surgeries. Conversely, in bilateral procedures, gender, emergency admissions (p = 0.012), and plaque morphology (p = 0.035) significantly influenced postoperative hypertension. Notably, 2.2% of bilateral surgery patients developed hyperperfusion syndrome, culminating in hemorrhagic stroke within 30 days. Intriguingly, postoperative stage II hypertension was identified as an independent predictor of neurological deficits post-secondary procedure in bilateral CEA cases (p = 0.004), attributable to hyperperfusion syndrome. However, it did not independently predict myocardial infarction or mortality outcomes. The overall 30-day stroke rate stood at 0.90%. Lowest incidence of post operative hypertension or any complications were observed in eversion carotid endartrertomy. Conclusion: The study identifies postoperative hypertension as a crucial independent predictor of perioperative stroke following bilateral carotid surgery. Moreover, the study elucidates the significant impact of bilateral CEA on the development of post-operative hyperperfusion syndrome or stroke, as compared to unilateral CEA. Currently almost 90% of our carotid practice is eversion carotid endartrerectomy.

An Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness and Clinical Outcomes of a Comprehensive Aortic Service in a Tertiary Center over One Year.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is an established and attractive alternative to open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) due to its superior short-term safety profile. However, opinions are divided regarding its long-term cost-effectiveness. We compared the total yearly cost of running endovascular and OSR services in a single tertiary center to determine whether fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) represents a clinically efficacious, affordable treatment option. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review was performed on 109 patients undergoing a procedure related to index or previous abdominal aortic repair, with 1 year follow-up. Data was collected from the National Vascular Registry and hospital records. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality and morbidity, reintervention rates, length of hospital stay, aneurysm, and all-cause mortality at 1 year for elective index procedures. RESULTS: The average cost per patient of all FEVAR was £16,041.53 (±8,857.54), £13,893.51 (±£21,425.25) for standard EVAR, and £15,357.22 (±£15,904.49) for OSR (FEVAR versus EVAR P = 0.55, FEVAR versus OSR P = 0.83, OSR versus EVAR P = 0.76). Of the secondary outcomes, significant findings included increased length of stay and respiratory morbidity for patients undergoing open versus endovascular repair. There was no significant difference in 30-day or 1-year mortality between groups. CONCLUSIONS: FEVAR, EVAR, and OSR all represent cost-effective options for aortic repair with similar outcomes. Our data highlights the potential for FEVAR to present a viable alternative to open repair, particularly in higher-risk groups, when performed in specialist centers.

Management of acute aortic syndrome with evolving individualized precision medicine solutions: Lessons learned over two decades and literature review.

Background: Thoracoabdominal acute aortic syndrome is associated with high morbidity and mortality. We aim to scrutinize our evolving strategies for acute aortic syndrome (AAS) management using minimally invasive and adaptive surgical techniques over two decades. Methods: This is a longitudinal observational study at our tertiary vascular centre from 2002 to 2021. Out of 22,349 aortic referrals, we performed 1,555 aortic interventions over twenty years. Amongst 96 presented with symptomatic aortic thoracic pathology, 71 patients had AAS. Our primary endpoint is combined aneurysm-related and cardiovascular-related mortality. Results: There were 43 males and 28 females (5 Traumatic Aortic Transection (TAT), 8 Acute Aortic Intramural Hematoma (IMH), 27 Symptomatic Aortic Dissection (SAD) and 31 Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm (TAA) post-SAD) with a mean age of 69. All the patients with AAS received optimal medical therapy (OMT), but TAT patients underwent emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Fifty-eight patients had an aortic dissection, of which 31 developed TAA. These 31 patients with SAD and TAA received OMT initially and interval surgical intervention with TEVAR or sTaged hybrId sinGle lumEn Reconstruction (TIGER). To increase our landing area, we performed a left subclavian chimney graft with TEVAR in twelve patients. The average follow-up duration was 78.2 months, and eleven patients (15.5%) had combined aneurysm and cardiovascular-related mortality. Twenty-six percentage of the patients developed endoleaks (EL), of which 15% required re-intervention for type II and III. Four patients who had paraplegia (5.7%) and developed renal failure died. None of our patients had a stroke or bowel ischaemia. Twenty patients had OMT, eight of these were patients with acute aortic hematoma, and all eight died within 30 days of presentation. Conclusion: Acute aortic hematoma is a sinister finding, which must be closely monitored, and consideration is given to early intervention. Paraplegia and renal failure result in an increased mortality rate. TIGER technique with interval TEVAR has salvaged complex situations in young patients. Left subclavian chimney increases our landing area and abolishes SINE. Our experience shows that minimally invasive techniques could be a viable option for AAS.

Two decades of experience in explantation and graft preserving strategies following primary endovascular aneurysm repair and lessons learned.

Objectives: We aim to scrutinize our evolving re-intervention strategies following primary endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) - EVAR GORE SalvAge Fabric Technique (ARAFAT), aortic sac double breasting with endograft preservation, and stent-graft explantation. Methods: We performed 1,555 aortic interventions over the study period, including 910 EVARs. Factors associated with the need for reintervention and the likelihood of chronic fabric fatigue failure (CFFF) were investigated. Using conventional and innovative diagnostic modalities with Prone contrASt enHanced computed tomography Angiography (PASHA), 136 endoleaks (ELs) were identified (15 type I, 98 type II; 18 type III; 5 type IV). Results: Forty-four (4.84%) patients underwent re-intervention post-primary EVAR; 18 ARAFATs, 12 double breastings, and 14 explantations. Choice of re-intervention was based on patient fitness and mode of failure. Mean EL detection duration following primary EVAR was 53.3 ± 6.82 months, while mean time to re-intervention was 70.20 ± 6.98 months. The mean sac size before the primary EVAR and re-intervention was 6.00 ± 1.75 cm and 7.51 ± 1.94 cm, respectively. Polyester (61.40%) was the most commonly employed stent-graft material. Use of more than three modular stent-graft components (3.42 ± 1.31, p = 0.846); with the proximal stent-graft diameter of 31.6 ± 3.80 cm (p = 0.651) and the use of iliac limbs more than 17 mm (p = 0.364), all added together are contributing factors. We had one peri-operative mortality following explantation due to sepsis-induced multiorgan failure. Conclusions: Our re-intervention strategies matured from stent graft explantation to graft preservation with endovascular relining of the stent-graft. Graft preservation with aortic sacotomy and double breasting were used to manage concealed ELs due to aortic hygroma.

TEVAR and EVAR, the unknown knowns of the cardiovascular hemodynamics; and the immediate and long-term consequences of fabric material on major adverse clinical outcome.

This review discusses the impact of endovascular aneurysm repair on cardiovascular (CV) hemodynamics and the role of stent-graft material, i.e., polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) vs. polyester in post-procedural outcomes. Endovascular aneurysm repair has been widely employed in the last decades for thoracic and abdominal aneurysm repair. However, aortic endografts are stiff and alter the native flow hemodynamics. This failure to simulate the native aorta could lead to added strain on the heart, manifesting as increased left ventricular strain, higher pulse pressure, and congestive heart failure later. This could result in adverse CV outcomes. Also, evidence is mounting to support the implication of stent-graft materials, i.e., PTFE vs. polyester, in adverse post-procedural outcomes. However, there is an absence of level one evidence. Therefore, the only way forward is to plan and perform a randomised controlled trial to demonstrate the alterations in the CV hemodynamics in the short and long run and compare the available stent-graft materials regarding procedural and clinical outcomes. We believe the best solution, for now, would be to reduce the stented length of the aorta. At the same time, in the longer term, encourage continuous improvement in stent-graft materials and design.

The contemporary design of endovascular aneurysm stent-graft materials: PTFE versus polyester.

Endovascular aneurysm repair of the abdominal aorta (EVAR) and of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) have revolutionised therapeutic strategies in the management of aortic pathology, and endovascular repair is now an established and attractive alternative to open surgical repair (OSR) due to its superior short-term safety profile. However, opinions are divided regarding its long-term cost-effectiveness, which is reflected in the controversial NICE guidelines on abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair published in 2018, which advised against EVAR for elective aortic repair due to high secondary intervention rates and resultant associated costs. There is no doubt that OSR continues to have a valuable role to play in aortic repair, but it is not universally applicable, especially in older and sicker patients. Therefore, we should not dismiss EVAR and TEVAR without examining the reasons for long-term failure, and the most obvious starting point is stent graft material properties. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and polyester are the two most common stent-graft materials; however, there has been no objective comparison of PTFE and polyester stent-graft post-procedural outcomes in EVAR and TEVAR, or even OSR. This lack of definitive data on different stent-graft materials and their configuration necessitates a comprehensive review to elucidate the post-procedural outcome in terms of endograft failure, cardiovascular events, and aortic-related mortality and morbidity.

Management of retroperitoneal fibrosis with endovascular aneurysm repair in patients refractory to medical management.

Background: Early diagnosis and treatment of under-recognized retroperitoneal fibrosis (RPF) are essential before reaching the poorly responsive fibrotic stage. Although most patients respond to medical therapy, relapses and unresponsiveness are common. However, open surgery in medically resistant patients is associated with major adverse clinical events. Methods: This is a single-centre longitudinal study of optimal medical therapy (OMT) vs. endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients presenting with RPF to our tertiary referral vascular centre. Out of 22,349 aortic referrals, we performed 1,555 aortic interventions over twenty years. Amongst them, 1,006 were EVAR, TEVAR and BEVAR. Seventeen patients (1.09%) had documented peri-aortic RPF. Results: Out of the 17 RPF patients, 11 received OMT only, while 6 underwent EVAR after the failure of OMT. 82% (n = 14) were male, and the median follow-up was 62.7 months (IQR: 28.2-106). Nine (52%) had immunoglobulin G4-related disease (4 OMT vs. 5 EVAR). EVAR patients had 100% technical success without perioperative mortality. Furthermore, all the EVAR patients were symptom-free following the intervention. Pre-operative aortic RPF index (maximum peri-aortic soft tissue diameter/maximum aortic diameter) was higher in the EVAR than in OMT. However, there was a significant decrement in the aortic RPF index following EVAR (P = 0.04). Conclusion: We believe that when optimal medical therapy fails in RPF, EVAR provides a promising outcome. Further studies are recommended to establish the role of endovascular repair.

Stylohyoid Eagle syndrome and EXTracranial INternal Carotid arTery pseudoaneurysms (EXTINCT) with internal jugular vein nutcracker syndrome: a challenging clinical scenario.

We report a 4-year delay in diagnosing a combined carotid arterial and jugular venous styloid compression. The symptoms, which included dull neck pain, dizziness, intermittent diplopia, tinnitus, severe incapacitating right side headache and eye bloating, were challenging and wrongly attributed initially to various facial neuralgias. The patient presented during COVID-19 pandemic and was labelled as 'carotidynia' first and later as a transient perivascular inflammation of carotid artery syndrome. Combined targeted duplex ultrasonography and CT angiography with 3D reconstruction revealed a long styloid process and its tendinous-ligamentous attachments, injuring the internal carotid artery. Moreover, there was substantial internal jugular vein compression on a long C1 transverse process with a nutcracker syndrome. Release of the tendinous portion of the long styloid process and repair of the carotid artery pseudoaneurysm ended the patient's complaints and allowed him to have a better quality of life.

Hybrid Deep Venous ARterialisation (DVAR) for No-Option Chronic Limb Threatening Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid Deep Venous ARterialisation (DVAR) is offered as a last-ditch attempt for limb salvage in patients with chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI). It provides non-selective arterialisation independent of the angiosome, which harnesses the complex venous capillary network bed developed in the leg and foot. METHODS: We present two elderly men who underwent DVAR to salvage limb with CLTI. DVAR was performed by creating an arteriovenous connection by anastomosis of the great saphenous vein (GSV) at the level of the distal popliteal and proximal tibio-peroneal trunk. Fasciotomy was performed over the length of the GSV. Subsequently, proximal in-situ catheter valvotomies of the GSV valves were undergone with the adjuvant on-table balloon maturation. The distal tarsal veins underwent balloon valvotomy under direct vision with subsequent proximal and distal tarsal veins valvuloplasties. Completion angiogram demonstrated restoration of the flow in the foot and both the patients were relieved of rest pain. CONCLUSION: We successfully performed DVAR in 2 elderly patients. Our experience shows that DVAR is a simple and safe option that is easily reproducible without the need for complex endovascular hardware, only if a suitable GSV to the foot is available with no history of deep vein thrombosis.

Endovascular versus open surgical repair for complicated chronic Type B aortic dissection.

BACKGROUND: Type B aortic dissection can lead to serious and life-threatening complications such as aortic rupture, stroke, renal failure, and paraplegia, all of which require intervention. Traditionally, these complications have been treated with open surgery. Recently however, endovascular repair has been proposed as an alternative. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of thoracic aortic endovascular repair versus open surgical repair for treatment of complicated chronic Type B aortic dissection (CBAD). SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and AMED databases, as well as the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers, to 2 August 2021. We searched references of relevant articles retrieved through the electronic search for additional citations. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) assessing the effects of thoracic aortic endovascular repair (TEVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) for treatment of complicated chronic Type B aortic dissection (CBAD). Outcomes of interest were mortality (all-cause, dissection-related), neurological sequelae (stroke, spinal cord ischaemia/paresis-paralysis, vertebral insufficiency), morphological outcomes (false lumen thrombosis, progression of dissection, aortic diameters), acute renal failure, ischaemic symptoms (visceral ischaemia, limb ischaemia), re-intervention, and health-related quality of life. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts identified by the searches to identify those that met the inclusion criteria. From title and abstract screening, we did not identify any trials (RCTs or CCTs) that required full-text assessment. We planned to undertake data collection and analysis in accordance with recommendations described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We planned to assess the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any trials (RCTs or CCTs) that met the inclusion criteria for this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to lack of RCTs or CCTs investigating the effectiveness and safety of TEVAR compared to OSR for patients with complicated CBAD, we are unable to provide any evidence to inform decision-making on the optimal intervention for these patients. High-quality RCTs or CCTs addressing this objective are necessary. However, conducting such studies will be challenging for this life-threatening disease.

Surgical and radiological interventions for treating symptomatic extracranial cervical artery dissection.

BACKGROUND: Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) is a pathological bleed or tear, or both, in the wall of the carotid or vertebral arteries as they course through the neck, and is a leading cause of stroke in young people. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of surgical and radiological interventions versus best medical treatment alone for treating symptomatic cervical artery dissection. SEARCH METHODS: We performed comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched March 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2020, Issue 4, in the Cochrane Library (searched March 2020), MEDLINE (1946 to March 2020) and Embase (1974 to March 2020). We searched relevant ongoing trials and research registers (searched March 2020), checked references in all relevant papers for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors and researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of either surgical or endovascular intervention for the management of symptomatic CeAD were eligible for inclusion. Only studies with anticoagulants or antiplatelet treatment as the control group were included. Two review authors planned to independently extract data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcomes were ipsilateral stroke and disability. Secondary outcomes were death, any stroke, or transient ischaemic attack, residual stenosis (> 50%), recurrence of cervical dissection, expanding pseudoaneurysm, or major bleeding. We analysed the studies according to the first choice of treatment. We planned to assess for risk of bias and apply GRADE criteria for any included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We did not find any completed RCTs or CCTs undertaken in this area of research. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No RCTs or CCTs compared either surgery or endovascular therapy with control. Thus, there is no available evidence to support their use for the treatment of extracranial cervical artery dissection in addition to antithrombotic therapy in people who continue to have neurological symptoms when treated with antithrombotic therapy alone.

Systematic review of the effectiveness of carotid surgery and endovascular carotid stenting versus best medical treatment in managing symptomatic acute carotid artery dissection.

Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) with an intramural haematoma can lead to stroke risk, especially in young patients. We performed comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, the CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE to review the effectiveness of surgical and endovascular interventions versus best medical treatment alone for symptomatic CeAD. Furthermore, we aim to elaborate on the phenotypic individual disease manifestations of spontaneous Cervical Artery Dissection (sCAD) and how they translate into stroke and risk of dissection recurrence. Primary outcomes were ipsilateral stroke and disability. Secondary outcomes were death, any stroke, or transient ischaemic attack, residual stenosis >50%, recurrence of CeAD, expanding pseudo-aneurysm or major bleeding. Our search yielded no randomised controlled trials and/or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing either carotid surgery or endovascular therapy with optimal medical management; thus there was no evidence to support the use of any specific method for management of extracranial CeAD in patients who fail antithrombotic therapy. However, despite the absence of controlled studies to compare surgery or endovascular therapy in patients who fail antithrombotic therapy, carotid surgery in young patients can be justified as a personalized precision approach given the high morbidity and mortality in this age group.

Staged hybrid single lumen reconstruction (TIGER) with bilateral subclavian transposition coupled with thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair in the management of acute symptomatic complex type B aortic dissection in a patient with arteria lusoria.

We present a 54-year-old Caucasian woman, who presented with acute symptomatic type B aortic dissection with deteriorating renal function. She was a known smoker with a 2-year history of dysphagia. CT angiography documented the artery of lusoria arising from the mid-thoracic aorta, aneurysmal dilation of her descending aorta, and kinetic and static flaps around her visceral ostia. The patient was managed by staged hybrid single lumen reconstruction and bilateral subclavian to carotid transpositions. During follow-up, there was no aortic rupture or retrograde type A dissection. There were no renal, visceral, cardiac, pulmonary or spinal complications. The patient went off her antihypertensive medication with a normal estimated glomerular filtration rate and accelerated aortic modulation.

Hybrid repair versus conventional open repair for aortic arch dissection.

BACKGROUND: A dissection of the aorta is a separation or tear of the intima from the media. This tear allows blood to flow not only through the original aortic flow channel (known as the true lumen), but also through a second channel between the intima and media (known as the false lumen). Aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition which can be rapidly fatal. There is debate on the optimal surgical approach for aortic arch dissection. People with ascending aortic dissection have poor rates of survival. Currently open surgical repair is regarded as the standard treatment for aortic arch dissection. We intend to review the role of hybrid and open repair in aortic arch dissection. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of a hybrid technique of treatment over conventional open repair in the management of aortic arch dissection. 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 8 February 2021. We also undertook reference checking for additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical controlled trials (CCTs), which compared the effects of hybrid repair techniques versus open surgical repair of aortic arch dissection. Outcomes of interest were dissection-related mortality and all-cause mortality, neurological deficit, cardiac injury, respiratory compromise, renal ischaemia, false lumen thrombosis (defined by partial or complete thrombosis) and mesenteric ischaemia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened all records identified by the literature searches to identify those that met our inclusion criteria. We planned to undertake data collection and analysis in accordance with recommendations described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We planned to assess the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We identified one ongoing study and two unpublished studies that met the inclusion criteria for the review. Due to a lack of study data, we could not compare the outcomes of hybrid repair to conventional open repair for aortic arch dissection. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review revealed one ongoing RCT and two unpublished RCTs evaluating hybrid versus conventional open repair for aortic arch surgery. Observational data suggest that hybrid repair for aortic arch dissection could potentially be favourable, but conclusions can not be drawn from these studies, which are highly selective, and are based on the clinical status of the patient, the presence of comorbidities and the skills of the operators. However, a conclusion about its definitive benefit over conventional open surgical repair cannot be made from this review without published RCTs or CCTs. Future RCTs or CCTs need to have adequate sample sizes and follow-up, and assess clinically-relevant outcomes, in order to determine the optimal treatment for people with aortic arch dissection. It must be noted that this may not be feasible, due to the reasons mentioned.

Hybrid repair versus conventional open repair for thoracic aortic arch aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic aortic arch aneurysms (TAAs) can be a life-threatening condition due to the potential risk of rupture. Treatment is recommended when the risk of rupture is greater than the risk of surgical complications. Depending on the cause, size and growth rate of the TAA, treatment may vary from close observation to emergency surgery. Aneurysms of the thoracic aorta can be managed by a number of surgical techniques. Open surgical repair (OSR) of aneurysms involves either partial or total replacement of the aorta, which is dependent on the extent of the diseased segment of the aorta. During OSR, the aneurysm is replaced with a synthetic graft. Hybrid repair (HR) involves a combination of open surgery with endovascular aortic stent graft placement. Hybrid repair requires varying degrees of invasiveness, depending on the number of supra-aortic branches that require debranching. The hybrid technique that combines supra-aortic vascular debranching with stent grafting of the aortic arch has been introduced as a therapeutic alternative. However, the short- and long-term outcomes of HR remain unclear, due to technical difficulties and complications as a result of the angulation of the aortic arch as well as handling of the arch during surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of HR versus conventional OSR for the treatment of TAAs. 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 22 March 2021. We also searched references of relevant articles retrieved from the electronic search for additional citations. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered for inclusion in the review all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing HR to OSR for TAAs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts obtained from the literature search to identify those that met the inclusion criteria. We retrieved the full text of studies deemed as potentially relevant by at least one review author. The same review authors screened the full-text articles independently for inclusion or exclusion. MAIN RESULTS: No RCTs or CCTs met the inclusion criteria for this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to the lack of RCTs or CCTs, we were unable to determine the safety and effectiveness of HR compared to OSR in people with TAAs, and we are unable to provide high-certainty evidence on the optimal surgical intervention for this cohort of patients. High-quality RCTs or CCTs are necessary, addressing the objective of this review.

Management of Concealed Type IV Endoleak and Aortic Sac Hygroma by Prone ContrASt EnHancement Computed Tomography Angiography.

BACKGROUND: Aortic sac hygroma and concealed endoleaks (EL) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm needs particular attention with aggressive management as they are associated with rapid sac expansion and rupture risk. However, they can be erroneously reported as type IV or V EL with supine computed tomography (CT) scans, leading to delay in management. Therefore, we describe a novel diagnostic technique, 'Prone contrASt enHanced computed tomography Angiography' (PASHA), to document concealed EL METHODS: We present eight case descriptions with continuous sac expansion after primary EVAR. Management began with diagnosis using the PASHA imaging technique. PASHA is a multiphase CTA positional technique for increasing the accuracy of detecting EL after EVAR. Furthermore, the PASHA imaging technique also guides whether the open or endovascular intervention could be used effectively to manage the sac expansion. In synchrony with the PASHA technique, "EVAR GORE SalvAge FAbric Technique" (ARAFAT) was to salvage previous EVAR. RESULTS: The PASHA technique diagnosed all cases of type IIIb EL, as it enhanced the degree of contrast infiltration into the aortic sac when microleaks were present. ARAFAT was effectively used in five elderly patients. Another three had an open conversion; two with double breasting of the aortic sac and one EVAR explantation. CONCLUSIONS: The PASHA protocol helped classify and localize the concealed EL (type IV, V), which were not appropriately diagnosed by supine CT protocols. PASHA and ARAFAT were used as a fully functioning protocol to overcome apparent challenges in accurate diagnosis and subsequent concealed EL management in high-risk patients.

Two Decades of Experience With Chronic Mesenteric Ischaemia and Median Arcuate Ligament Syndrome in a Tertiary Referral Centre: A Parallel Longitudinal Comparative Study.

Background Chronic mesenteric ischaemia (CMI) and median arcuate ligament syndrome (MALS) have similar clinical presentations with surgical intervention as the mainstay of treatment. However, surgical response varies and is unpredictable. Therefore, we aim to evaluate the technical and clinical success rates of selective revascularisation in older patients with CMI and younger patients with MALS undergoing arcuate ligament decompression with celiac sympathectomy. Methods We conducted a retrospective single-centre longitudinal comparative study of all the patients who underwent surgery for symptoms of CMI and MALS from December 2002 to 2020 at our tertiary referral vascular centre. Our primary outcome was symptom-free survival post-intervention. The secondary outcomes were perioperative mortality, technical success, and all-cause mortality at 17 years. Results We operated on 28 patients; 17 patients with CMI (revascularisations with bypass) and 11 with MALS (decompression and celiac sympathectomy). All (100%) patients had technical success. There was no perioperative mortality. All the MALS patients had symptom-free survival following the procedure throughout follow-up. In contrast, three patients with CMI complained of recurring abdominal pain even after one year of the surgery. However, there was no further weight loss and none of them required any intervention. Conclusion Stratified management of CMI with revascularisation and open surgical decompression with celiac sympathectomy in MALS are effective treatments with favourable long-term outcomes.

Outcomes of Unibody Bifurcated Endograft and Aortobifemoral Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease.

PURPOSE: We compared the outcomes between the total endovascular approach using a unibody bifurcated aortoiliac endograft and the gold standard aortobifemoral bypass (ABF) surgery for the management of extensive aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective observational study compared the outcomes of endovascular technique with unibody bifurcated endograft (UBE) using the Endologix AFX unibody stent-graft and a standard surgical approach (ABF) in the management of AIOD based on patient records in Western Vascular Institute, Galway University Hospital, National University of Ireland. Procedural details and outcomes were documented to compare both groups. RESULTS: From January 2002 to December 2018, 67 patients underwent AIOD (20 UBE and 47 ABF). Both the ABF and UBE groups showed 100% immediate clinical and technical successes without 30-day mortality. There were no statistical differences in the overall survival and sustained clinical improvement between the bypass and the UBE groups; however, statistically significant differences were observed in 3-year freedom from re-intervention and amputation-free survival. Furthermore, the mean length of the intensive care unit (ICU) stay was significantly lower in the UBE group than that in the ABF group (0.75 days vs. 3.1 days, P=0.001). CONCLUSION: Total endovascular reconstruction of AIOD is an alternative to invasive bypass procedures, with a shorter ICU stay.