Indications, Safety and Effectiveness of Transcatheter Electrosurgical Septotomy During Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissections.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular repair of aortic dissections may be complicated by inadequate sealing zones, persistent false lumen (FL) perfusion, and limited space for catheter manipulation and target artery incorporation. The aim of this study was to describe the indications, technical success, and early outcomes of transcatheter electrosurgical septotomy (TES) during endovascular repair of aortic dissections. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of consecutive patients treated by endovascular repair of aortic dissections with adjunctive TES in two centers between 2021-2023. Endpoints were technical success, defined by successful septotomy without dislodgment of the lamella or target artery occlusion, and 30-day rates of major adverse events (MAEs). RESULTS: Among 197 patients treated by endovascular repair for aortic dissections, 36 (18%) patients (median age, 61.5 years (IQR 55-72.5); 83% males) underwent adjunctive TES for acute (n = 3, 8%), subacute (n = 1, 3%), or chronic post-dissection aneurysms (n = 32, 89%). Indications for TES were severe true lumen (TL) compression (≤ 16mm) in 28 patients (78%), target vessel origin from FL in 19 (53%), creation of suitable landing zone in 12 (33%), and organ/limb malperfusion in four (11%). Endovascular repair included fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) in 18 patients (50%), thoracic EVAR (TEVAR)/ EVAR/PETTICOAT in 11 (31%), and arch branch repair in 7 (19%). All patients had dissections extending through Zones 5 to 7, and 28 patients (78%) underwent TES across the renal-mesenteric segment. Technical success of TES was 92% (33/36) for all patients and 97% (32/33) among those with subacute or chronic post-dissection aneurysms. There were three technical failures, including two patients with acute dissections with inadvertent SMA dissection in one patient and distal dislodgement of the dissection lamella in two patients. There were no arterial disruptions. Mean post-septotomy aortic lumen increased from 13.2±4.8mm to 28.4±6.8mm (P<.001). All 18 patients treated by FB-EVAR had successful incorporation of 78 target arteries. There was one (3%) early death from stroke, and three (8%) patients had MAEs. After a median follow-up of 8 months (IQR, 4.5-13.5 months), 13 (36%) patients had secondary interventions, and two (6%) died from non-aortic-related events. There were no other complications associated with TES. CONCLUSION: TES is an adjunctive technique that may optimize sealing zones and luminal aortic diameter during endovascular repair of subacute and chronic post-dissection. Although no arterial disruptions or target vessel loss occurred, but patients with acute dissections are prone to technical failures related to dislodgement of the lamella.

Technical pitfalls and proposed modifications of instructions for use for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair using the Gore Excluder conformable device in angulated and short landing zones.

We describe a case of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and angulated proximal neck treated with a Gore Excluder conformable endoprosthesis and show relevant technical pitfalls in the deployment of the graft main body. An 82-year-old man presented with a 71-mm asymptomatic AAA with an angulated infrarenal proximal neck (75°) and was referred to our unit. The patient was treated with a 26-mm Gore Excluder conformable device, which was deployed slightly above the renal arteries after precatheterization of the lowest renal artery. The graft was then repositioned with support of the introducer sheath and a stiff guide wire. The proximal sealing zone was ballooned before the endograft delivery system was retrieved to avoid distal migration. Technical success was achieved. The patient was discharged with no complications. No type Ia endoleak was present on the 6-month computed tomography scan. Endovascular treatment of an AAA with a severe angulated proximal neck can be effective with a conformable stent graft if technical measures are used during deployment of the main body to optimize the seal.

Changes in renal-mesenteric duplex ultrasound velocities after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Stenting of renal and mesenteric vessels may result in changes in velocity measurements due to arterial compliance, potentially giving rise to confusion about the presence of stenosis during follow-up. The aim of our study was to compare preoperative and postoperative changes in peak systolic velocity (PSV, cm/s) after placement of the celiac axis (CA), superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and renal artery (RAs) bridging stent grafts during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized single-center study to evaluate FB-EVAR for treatment of complex AAA and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms between 2013 and 2020. Duplex ultrasound examination of renal-mesenteric vessels were obtained prospectively preoperatively and at 6 to 8 weeks after the procedure. Duplex ultrasound examination was performed by a single vascular laboratory team using a predefined protocol including PSV measurements obtained with <60° angles. All renal-mesenteric vessels incorporated by bridging stent grafts using fenestrations or directional branches were analyzed. Target vessels with significant stenosis in the preoperative exam were excluded from the analysis. The end point was variations in PSV poststent placement at the origin, proximal, and mid segments of the target vessels for fenestrations and branches. RESULTS: There were 419 patients (292 male; mean age, 74 ± 8 years) treated by FB-EVAR with 1411 renal-mesenteric targeted vessels, including 260 CAs, 409 SMAs, and 742 RAs. No significant variances in the mean PSVs of all segments of the CA, SMA, and RAs at 6 to 8 weeks after surgery were found as compared with the preoperative values (CA, 135 cm/s vs 141 cm/s [P = .06]; SMA, 128 cm/s vs 125 cm/s [P = .62]; RAs, 90 cm/s vs 83 cm/s [P = .65]). Compared with baseline preoperative values, the PSV of the targeted vessels showed no significant differences in the origin and proximal segment of all vessels. However, the PSV increased significantly in the mid segment of all target vessels after stent placement. CONCLUSIONS: Stent placement in nonstenotic renal and mesenteric vessels during FB-EVAR is not associated with a significant increase in PSVs at the origin and proximal segments of the target vessels. Although there is a modest but significant increase in velocity measurements in the mid segment of the stented vessel, this difference is not clinically significant. Furthermore, PSVs in stented renal and mesenteric arteries were well below the threshold for significant stenosis in native vessels. These values provide a baseline or benchmark for expected PSVs after renal-mesenteric stenting during FB-EVAR.

Characterization of Secondary Interventions After Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms and Its Effect on Quality of Life and Patient Survival.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of secondary intervention (SI) on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. BACKGROUND: The effect of SI after FB-EVAR on physical and mental HR-QOL has not been described. METHODS: A cohort of 430 consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR (2013-2020) was assessed with 1325 short-form 36 HR-QOL questionnaires preoperatively and during follow-up visits. SIs were classified as major or minor procedures. Endpoints included patient survival, freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), freedom from SIs, and changes in HR-QOL physical component score (PCS) and mental component score. RESULTS: There were 302 male with mean age 74±8 years treated by FB-EVAR for 133 complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and 297 thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. After a mean follow up of 26±20 months, 97 patients (23%) required 137 SIs. At 5 years, freedom from any SI was 64%±4%, including freedom from minor SIs of 77%±4% and major SIs of 87%±3%. There was no difference in patient survival and freedom from ARM at same interval. On adjusted analysis, minor SIs correlated with improved survival. SIs had a negative correlation with PCS ( r =-0.8). There were no significant changes in mental component score with SIs. Predictors for SIs were fluoroscopy time, graft design, and aneurysm sac change. CONCLUSION: SIs were needed in nearly 1 out of 4 patients treated by FB-EVAR with no effect on patient survival or ARM. SI resulted in decline in PCS.

Early Feasibility of Endovascular Repair of Distal Aortic Arch Aneurysms Using Patient-Specific Single Retrograde Left Subclavian Artery Branch Stent Graft.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the feasibility and outcomes of endovascular repair of distal aortic arch aneurysms using a patient-specific stent graft with a pre-loaded single retrograde left subclavian artery (LSA) branch stent graft. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data and outcomes of consecutive patients enrolled in an ongoing prospective, non-randomized physician-sponsored investigational device exemption study to evaluate the outcomes of endovascular aortic arch repair using patient-specific arch branch stent grafts (William Cook Europe, Bjaeverskov, Denmark) between 2019 and 2022. All patients received a design with triple-wide scallop and a single retrograde LSA branch with a pre-loaded catheter. RESULTS: There were five male patients with median age of 77 years old (72-80) treated using the single LSA branch stent graft. Technical success was achieved in all patients. Median operating time, fluoroscopy time, and total radiation dose area product were 103 (78-134) minutes, 26 (19-39) minutes, and 123 (71-270) mGy.cm2, respectively. There were no 30-day or in-hospital mortality, neurological or other major adverse events (MAEs). During median follow-up of 21 (20-27) months, all patients were alive with patent LSA branches, except for one who died of COVID-19 complications. There was no branch instability or secondary interventions. CONCLUSION: This early feasibility study demonstrates successful endovascular repair of distal aortic arch aneurysms using a patient-specific stent graft with single retrograde LSA branch without technical failures, mortality or neurological events. Larger clinical experience and longer follow-up are needed to determined effectiveness of this approach in patients who need endovascular repair with proximal extension into Zone 2.

Single-Center Experience with the Femoral-to-Brachial Preloaded Delivery System for Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms.

PURPOSE: To assess technical aspects and outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) using a femoral-to-brachial (FTB) preloaded delivery system (PDS) with two separate configurations. METHODS: Clinical data of all consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective study to evaluate FB-EVAR for complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs & TAAA) between 2013 and 2020 were reviewed. Patients treated with FTB-PDS were included. The two configurations included 4 trans-brachial preloaded wires (4BR) or 2 trans-brachial and 2 transfemoral preloaded wires (2BR-2FE). Outcome measures included technical success, procedural metrics, 30-day or in-hospital mortality, major adverse events (MAEs), and target-vessel outcomes. RESULTS: There were 115 patients with a mean age of 73.8 ± 8 years, treated with FTB-PDS. Of these, 62 patients (54%) had 4BR and 53 patients (46%) had 2BR-2FE FTB-PDS. There were 106 TAAA (92%) and 9 CAAAs (8%). Technical success, defined as successful implantation of the stent-graft and all intended target-vessel stents without type I or III endoleak, was 97%, with no differences in total operating time, endovascular time, and radiation dose between groups. There were 3 deaths (3%) at 30 days. MAEs were noticed in 21 patients (18%) with no difference between groups, including new-onset dialysis (2% vs. 4%, P = 0.59), and paraplegia (7% vs. 11%, P = 0.51), for 4BR and 2BR-2FE, respectively. Patient survival and freedom from aortic-related mortality at 2-years were 79 ± 5% and 97 ± 1.7%, respectively, with no difference between groups. CONCLUSION: The use of FTB-PDS for FB-EVAR is safe with high technical success and a reasonable rate of MAEs. Each configuration provides specific benefits based on patient anatomy, while having similar procedural metrics and clinical outcomes.

Impact of gap distance between fenestration and aortic wall on target artery instability following fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Target artery (TA) instability has been the most frequent indication for secondary intervention after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of the gap distance between the endograft reinforced fenestration and TA origin at the aortic wall (fenestration gap [FG]) on target-related outcomes after FB-EVAR. METHODS: The clinical data and imaging studies of 430 patients enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR using manufactured stent grafts were reviewed. Of the 430 patients, 340 (79%) had had more than one vessel incorporated by fenestration. The FG was retrospectively measured on postoperative imaging studies and classified into three groups: no gap (FG, 0 mm), FG 1 to 4 mm, and FG ≥5 mm. The primary outcome was freedom from TA instability. The secondary end points included TA-related endoleak, TA secondary intervention, and TA patency. RESULTS: A total of 1558 renal-mesenteric TAs were incorporated by 1104 reinforced fenestrations and 454 directional branches (DBs), with a mean of 3.9 ± 0.5 vessels per patient. The mean FG was 2.8 ± 4.5 mm, with an FG of 0 mm for 646 TAs, 1 to 4 mm for 209 TAs, and ≥5 mm for 249 TAs. An FG of ≥5 mm was associated with significantly lower (P < .001) freedom from TA instability, type Ic or IIIc endoleak, and secondary interventions at 5 years. Compared with DBs, fenestrations with an FG of ≥5 mm had similar primary patency and freedom from TA instability but significantly lower freedom from type Ic or IIIc endoleak (91% ± 2% vs 95% ± 1%; log rank, P = .02) and secondary interventions (87% ± 3% vs 93% ± 2%; log-rank, P = .02) at 5 years. The independent predictors of TA instability included postdissection TAAAs (hazard ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-5.4) and FG ≥5 mm (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.8). TAs incorporated by reinforced fenestrations had higher primary (99% ± 0.8% vs 97% ± 1.0%; P = .039) and secondary (100% vs 98% ± 1.0%; P = .012) patency rates at 5 years compared with DBs, with the lowest primary patency observed for renal DBs (80% ± 6% vs 92% ± 2%; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: An FG of ≥5 mm was independently associated with an increased risk of TA instability, type Ic or IIIc endoleaks, and secondary interventions for patients treated by FB-EVAR using fenestrated designs. TAs incorporated by DBs had lower 5-year primary and secondary patency compared with those with reinforced fenestrations, with the lowest 5-year patency of 80% for renal branches. Compared with DBs, fenestrations with an FG of ≥5 mm carried a greater risk of type Ic or IIIc endoleak and secondary interventions. Independent predictors of TA instability included postdissection TAAAs and a greater FG. In contrast, dual antiplatelet therapy and larger TA diameters were protective.

Incidence, predictive factors, and outcomes of intraprocedure adverse events during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of intraoperative adverse events (IAEs) and their impact on outcomes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAAs). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical and imaging data of 600 consecutive patients (445 males; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) who underwent FB-EVAR between 2007 and 2019 in a single institution. IAE was defined as any intraoperative complication or technical problem requiring additional and unplanned procedures, and was classified as access-related, target artery (TA)-related, or graft-related. End points included rates of IAEs, 30-day or in-hospital mortality, major adverse events, patient survival, freedom from secondary intervention, and TA instability. RESULTS: A total of 122 IAEs were identified in 105 patients (18%). IAEs were TA-related in 55 patients (9%), access-related in 46 patients (8%), and graft-related in seven patients (1%). Female sex was more frequent among patients with IAEs (44% vs 22%; P < .001). Patients with IAEs had smaller renal artery diameter (-0.4 mm, 5.4 ± 0.8 mm vs 5.8 ± 0.9 mm; P < .001), and were treated more often for TAAAs (72% vs 54%; P < .03). Technical success was achieved in 96.5% of patients and was lower for patients with IAEs (82% vs 99%; P < .001). Major adverse events were significantly more frequent among patients who had IAEs (odds ratio [OR], 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-3.25), most due to acute kidney injury (27% vs 11%; P < .001) including new-onset dialysis (5% vs 1%; P = .01). On multivariate logistic regression model, female sex (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.0), TA stenosis >50% (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-3.3), and Crawford Extent II TAAA (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.3) were predictive of IAEs, whereas preloaded design (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9) and TA diameter (+1 mm; OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9) were protective of IAEs. IAEs negatively affected secondary intervention (hazard ratio [HR], 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3) and TA instability (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-5.4); however, IAEs did not affect patient survival (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.7-1.4). CONCLUSIONS: IAEs are common, occurring in nearly one of five patients treated with FB-EVAR for complex aortic aneurysms, and have a negative impact on clinical outcomes. IAEs were associated with female sex, TA diameter, and more extensive aortic disease.

Midterm Outcomes of a Prospective, Nonrandomized Study to Evaluate Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms Using Fenestrated-Branched Endografts.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the midterm outcomes of fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of pararenal (PRA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: FB-EVAR has been associated with decreased morbidity compared to open repair, but there is limited midterm data. METHODS: A total of 430 patients (302 males, mean age 74 ±â€Š8 years) treated by FB-EVAR were enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized investigational device exemption study. Endpoints included 30-day mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), freedom from all cause and aortic-related mortality, target vessel patency, and freedom from secondary intervention and target vessel instability. RESULTS: There were 133 PRAs and 297 TAAAs with 1673 renal-mesenteric arteries incorporated by fenestrations or directional branches (3.9 ±â€Š0.5 vessels/patient). At 30 days or within the hospital stay if longer than 30 days, there were 4 (0.9%) deaths. MAEs included new-onset dialysis in 8 patients (2%), permanent paraplegia or stroke in 10 patients each (2%), and respiratory failure requiring tracheostomy in 2 patients (0.5%). After a mean follow-up of 26 ±â€Š20 months, there were 3 (0.7%) aortic-related deaths from SMA stent occlusion, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or complications of open arch repair. At 5 years, freedom from all-cause and aortic-related mortality were 57% ±â€Š5% and 98% ±â€Š1%, respectively. Freedom from secondary intervention was 64% ±â€Š4%, primary target vessel patency was 94% ±â€Š1%, and freedom from target vessel instability was 89% ±â€Š2% at same interval. One patient (0.2%) had nonfatal aneurysm treated using endovascular repair. CONCLUSION: FB-EVAR is safe and effective for treatment of PRA and TAAAs with low rate of aortic-related mortality and aneurysm rupture on midterm follow-up.

Comparison of Cerebral Embolic Events Between Right and Left Upper Extremity Access During Fenestrated/Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence and outcomes of cerebral embolic events when using right (RUE) vs left upper extremity (LUE) access for fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (f/bEVAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 290 consecutive patients enrolled in a physician-sponsored Investigational Device Exemption study to evaluate f/bEVAR between 2013 and 2018. Of these, 270 patients (93%) had an upper extremity access with 12-F sheaths, including 205 patients (mean age 75±8 years; 147 men) with LUE and 65 patients (mean age 73±8 years; 42 men) with RUE access. Outcome measures were technical success, procedural metrics, major adverse events (MAEs), any stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), and mortality. RESULTS: Technical success was higher (p=0.04) for LUE (99.6%) vs RUE access (98.4%). Patients treated via RUE access more often had extent I-III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (57% vs 39%, p=0.03). Procedural metrics were similar for LUE vs RUE sides, including endovascular time (255±80 vs 246±83 minutes, respectively; p=0.23), fluoroscopy time (84±32 vs 90±35 minutes, respectively; p=0.80), and contrast volume (156±57 vs 153±56 mL, respectively; p=0.82). Total radiation exposure was significantly higher for LUE vs RUE access (2463±1912 vs 1757±1494 mGy, respectively; p=0.02). There were 2 deaths (1%) at 30 days or during hospital admission, both unrelated to access site complications. MAEs occurred in 32% of patients who had LUE and 26% of those who had RUE access (p=0.44). Five patients (2%) had embolic stroke and none had TIA. Embolic strokes were ipsilateral to the access side in 4 patients and affected the posterior circulation in 3. Two patients (1%) had hemorrhagic strokes. The incidence of stroke was 3% for LUE and 2% for RUE access (p>0.99). CONCLUSION: Fenestrated/branched stent-graft repair was associated with low rates of cerebral embolic events and no significant difference between the right vs left upper extremity approach.

Impact of intentional accessory renal artery coverage on renal outcomes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of intentional coverage of accessory renal arteries (ARAs) on renal outcomes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for pararenal aortic aneurysms or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical data of 296 patients enrolled in a prospective nonrandomized study to evaluate outcomes of FB-EVAR between 2013 and 2018. Patients with solitary kidneys, intraoperative loss of main renal arteries, or pre-existing stage V chronic kidney disease were excluded. Two groups were analyzed: patients with intentional ARA coverage; and controls, who had complete preservation. End points included 30-day mortality; major adverse events; acute kidney injury (AKI), defined by RIFLE criteria (Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage renal disease); renal function deterioration (RFD), defined by >30% decline in baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate; and presence of renal infarcts. RESULTS: There were 254 patients (184 male; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) included in the study, 56 (22%) with intentional ARA coverage and 198 controls, of whom 16 had ARA preservation. ARA diameter was smaller in patients who had intentional coverage vs preservation (2.7 ± 0.9 mm vs 3.4 ± 0.2 mm; P < .001). There was no difference in demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, and aneurysm extent. All ARAs intended to be incorporated were successfully stented. Patients with ARA coverage had a higher frequency of kidney infarction (75% vs 25%; P < .001). There were two (1%) deaths within 30 days, both among controls. Patients with ARA coverage had more major adverse events (32% vs 19%; P = .04) because of higher incidence of AKI (21% vs 9%; P = .02). None of the 16 patients who had ARA preservation developed AKI. At 3 years, freedom from RFD was lower for patients who had ARA coverage compared with controls (55% ± 9% vs 76% ± 5%; log-rank, P = .02). By multivariate analysis, predictors of AKI were ARA coverage (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-6.2; P = .01) and estimated blood loss >1 L (odds ratio, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.2-12.3; P = .03). Postoperative AKI (hazard ratio [HR], 4.4; 95% CI, 2.4-8.1; P < .001), renal reintervention for stenosis (HR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.6-6.7; P = .002), aneurysm diameter (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06; P < .001), and ARA coverage (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 2.4-8.1; P = .02) were predictors of RFD. CONCLUSIONS: Intentional ARA coverage during FB-EVAR was associated with a threefold increase in AKI and with lower freedom from RFD. Factors associated with RFD included postoperative AKI, renal reinterventions for stenosis, and ARA coverage. Incorporation of ARAs during FB-EVAR, when it is technically feasible, helps decrease risk of AKI and RFD.

Psoas muscle area and attenuation are highly predictive of complications and mortality after complex endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: The present study evaluated the psoas muscle area and attenuation (radiodensity), quantified by computed tomography, together with clinical risk assessment, as predictors of outcomes after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (FBEVAR). METHODS: The present single-center study included 504 patients who had undergone elective FBEVAR for pararenal or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. The clinical risk assessment included age, sex, comorbidities, body mass index, glomerular filtration rate, aneurysm size and extent, cardiac stress test results, ejection fraction, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score. Preoperative computed tomography was used to measure the psoas muscle area and attenuation at the L3 level. The lean psoas muscle area (LPMA; area in cm2 multiplied by attenuation in Hounsfield units [HU]) was calculated by multiplying the area by the attenuation. The risk factors for 90-day mortality, major adverse events (MAEs), and long-term mortality were determined using multivariable analysis. MAEs included 30-day or in-hospital death, acute kidney injury, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, paraplegia, stroke, and bowel ischemia. A novel risk stratification method was proposed according to the strongest predictors of mortality and MAEs on multivariable analysis. RESULTS: The 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and MAE rates were 2.0%, 5.6%, and 20%, respectively. The independent predictors of 90-day mortality were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, ASA score, and LPMA. The independent predictors of MAEs were aneurysm diameter, glomerular filtration rate, and LPMA. For long-term mortality, the independent predictors were chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, extent I-III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms, ASA score, and LPMA. The patients were stratified into three groups according to the ASA score and LPMA: low risk, ASA score II or LPMA >350 cm2HU (n = 290); medium risk, ASA score III and LPMA ≤350 cm2HU (n = 181); and high risk, ASA score IV and LPMA ≤350 cm2HU (n = 33). The 90-day mortality and MAE rates were 1.7% and 16% in the low-, 7.2% and 24% in the medium-, and 30% and 33% in the high-risk patients, respectively (P < .001 and P = .02, respectively). Patients with ASA score IV and LPMA <200 cm2HU, indicating sarcopenia (n = 14) had a 43% risk of death within 90 days. The 3-year survival estimates were 80% ± 3% for the low-, 70% ± 4% for the medium-, and 35% ± 9% for the high-risk patients (P < .001). The mean follow-up time was 3.1 ± 2.3 years. CONCLUSIONS: LPMA was a strong predictor of outcomes and the only independent predictor of both mortality and MAEs after FBEVAR. A high muscle mass was protective against complications, regardless of the ASA score. Risk stratification based on the ASA score and LPMA can be used to identify patients at excessively high operative risk.

Paraspinal muscle claudication after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

Fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms carries a risk of spinal cord ischemia owing to extensive coverage of intercostal arteries, but other consequences of decreased flow to the paraspinal muscles have not been delineated. We describe a 54-year-old woman treated by multibranched thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair who developed severe disabling exertional thoracic and lumbar back pain after the operation. Despite physical therapy, the patient remains with disabling symptoms at 2 years of follow-up. Transcutaneous oxygen pressures confirmed exercise-induced decrease in oxygen pressure, consistent with decreased muscle perfusion. We propose the term paraspinal muscle claudication to describe these symptoms.

Total realignment of multibranch stent graft using redo branch-in-branch endovascular repair for occult endoleak with rapid aneurysm sac expansion.

Occult endoleaks can pose a diagnostic and treatment challenge. These endoleaks are not effectively identified by multiphase computed tomography angiography, magnetic resonance angiography, or contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Possible causes are small fabric tears and slow-flow, dynamic, or positional endoleaks. We describe a patient with rapid aneurysm sac expansion and disseminated intravascular coagulopathy 46 months after four-vessel branched physician-modified endograft repair of a ruptured extent III thoracoabdominal aneurysm. Imaging failed to demonstrate an endoleak but identified fresh blood products within the sac. The patient underwent total realignment using branch-in-branch repair with a physician-modified endograft. Repeated imaging 25 days postoperatively revealed decrease in aneurysm diameter by 10 mm.

Outcomes of Small Renal Artery Targets in Patients Treated by Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate renal related outcomes in patients who had incorporation of a small (<4.0 mm) renal artery (RA) during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR). METHODS: A total of 215 consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective F-BEVAR trial were reviewed. Computed tomography angiography centreline of flow reconstruction was used to measure mean RA diameter. Patients who had at least one <4.0 mm main or accessory RA incorporated by fenestration or directional branch (study group) were compared with patients who had incorporation of two ≥5.0 mm RAs (control group). Endpoints were technical success of RA incorporation, RA rupture and kidney loss, primary and secondary RA patency, RA branch instability and re-interventions, and renal function deterioration. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients with 28 <4.0 mm RAs (16 accessory and 12 main RAs) were compared with 144 patients with 288 ≥5.0 mm incorporated RAs. Study group patients were significantly younger than controls (72 ± 8 vs. 75 ± 8 years, p = .04) and more often females (46% vs. 21%, p = .018); there were no differences in cardiovascular risk factors and aneurysm extent. Technical success was 92% for <4.0 mm and 99% for ≥5.0 mm RA incorporation (p = .05). Inadvertent RA rupture occurred in three patients in the study group (13%) and in one (1%) in the control group (p = .009) resulting in kidney loss in two study group patients (8%) and one (1%) control group patient (p = .05). At one year, primary patency was 79 ± 9% vs. 94 ± 1% (p < .001) and secondary patency was 84 ± 8% vs. 97 ± 1% (p < .001) for study vs. control group; freedom from branch instability was 79 ± 9% vs. 93 ± 2% (p = .005), respectively. There were no differences in re-intervention rates and renal function deterioration between the groups. The mean follow up time was 21 ± 14 months. CONCLUSION: Incorporation of <4.0 mm RAs during F-BEVAR is associated with lower technical success, higher risk of arterial disruption and kidney loss, and lower patency rates at one year.

Outcomes of target vessel endoleaks after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the incidence rate, outcomes, and risk factors of target vessel-related endoleaks after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) for pararenal aneurysms or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). METHODS: We reviewed consecutive patients treated by F-BEVAR between 2007 and 2017. Target vessel endoleaks were identified by computed tomography angiography (CTA). Follow-up included CTA and duplex ultrasound before discharge, at 2 months, at 6 months, and annually thereafter. Primary endoleaks were detected by predismissal CTA; secondary endoleaks were absent on the first CTA and were identified during follow-up. End points were spontaneous resolution of primary endoleaks, secondary interventions, and aneurysm rupture. Multivariable analyses were performed for risk factors of target vessel endoleaks and predictors of spontaneous resolution. RESULTS: A total of 382 patients (mean age, 75 ± 8 years; 75% male) underwent F-BEVAR for 195 pararenal aneurysms and 187 TAAAs with 1204 renal-mesenteric arteries targeted by 981 fenestrations and 223 directional branches. Fifty-two target vessel endoleaks were identified in 41 patients; 41 were type IIIC (interattachment), 10 were type IC (distal bridging stent sealing zone), and 1 was type IIIB (bridging stent fabric tear). Thirty-three patients (9%) had primary target vessel endoleaks in 41 target vessels (3%). Eight patients (2%) developed 11 secondary target vessel endoleaks. Directional branches were more prone to primary endoleaks (13/223 [6%]) in comparison to fenestrations (28/981 [3%]; P = .03). However, branch endoleaks resolved more often spontaneously (11/14 [79%]) compared with fenestration endoleaks (14/38 [37%]; P = .008). Other risk factors for target vessel endoleaks included inner aortic diameter ≥30 mm at the target vessel origin, four or more targeted vessels, TAAA (for primary endoleaks), and physician-modified endograft (for secondary endoleaks). Four patients with primary endoleaks underwent successful reintervention before discharge, and 29 were observed with a mean follow-up of 24 ± 21 months. Of the 41 primary endoleaks, 25 resolved spontaneously in 20 patients (61%) at first follow-up with no recurrences. Of the observed endoleaks, 11 persisted in 9 patients, and 8 of those endoleaks were treated in 7 patients. All secondary target vessel endoleaks required reintervention. There was one possible aneurysm rupture attributed to persistent secondary target vessel endoleak. CONCLUSIONS: Target vessel endoleak on CTA at discharge occurs in 1 of 10 patients treated by F-BEVAR. Of these, two-thirds resolve spontaneously, especially those affecting directional branches. Among patients with a persistent endoleak, endovascular reintervention is usually successful and aneurysm rupture is rare.