Burden of Stroke in Europe: An Analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study Findings From 2010 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: While most European Regions perform well in global comparisons, large discrepancies within stroke epidemiological parameters exist across Europe. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the stroke burden across European regions and countries in 2019 and its difference to 2010. METHODS: The GBD 2019 analytical tools were used to evaluate regional and country-specific estimates of incidence, prevalence, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years of stroke for the European Region as defined by the World Health Organization, with its 53 member countries (EU-53) and for European Union as defined in 2019, with its 28 member countries (EU-28), between 2010 and 2019. Results were analyzed at a regional, subregional, and country level. RESULTS: In EU-53, the absolute number of incident and prevalent strokes increased by 2% (uncertainty interval [UI], 0%-4%), from 1 767 280 to 1 802 559 new cases, and by 4% (UI, 3%-5%) between 2010 and 2019, respectively. In EU-28, the absolute number of prevalent strokes and stroke-related deaths increased by 4% (UI, 2%-5%) and by 6% (UI, 1%-10%), respectively. All-stroke age-standardized mortality rates, however, decreased by 18% (UI, -22% to -14%), from 82 to 67 per 100 000 people in the EU-53, and by 15% (UI, -18% to -11%), from 49.3 to 42.0 per 100 000 people in EU-28. Despite most countries presenting reductions in age-adjusted incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life year rates, these rates remained 1.4×, 1.2×, 1.6×, and 1.7× higher in EU-53 in comparison to the EU-28. CONCLUSIONS: EU-53 showed a 2% increase in incident strokes, while they remained stable in EU-28. Age-standardized rates were consistently lower for all-stroke burden parameters in EU-28 in comparison to EU-53, and huge discrepancies in incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-year rates were observed between individual countries.

Outcome of the Be Graft Bridging Stent in Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair in a High-Volume Single Center and an Overview of Current Evidence.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) has become one of the standard treatment options for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (cAAAs) and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Despite technological advances in the main endograft design, the lack of dedicated bridging stent-grafts (BSGs) is still the Achilles heel of the procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the mid-term outcomes of the BeGraft stent-graft as a dedicated bridging stent for FEVAR and to review the current evidence in literature. METHODS: Retrospective single center study, including all consecutive FEVARs performed between September 2018 and December 2022 for the treatment of cAAAs and TAAAs with implantation of at least one BeGraft peripheral as the main BSG in one of the target vessels (TVs). Primary endpoints were technical success and TV instability of TV bridged with a BeGraft stent, as well as 30-day mortality and re-intervention rates. Secondary endpoints were follow-up TV instability, re-interventions, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 113 patients (93 male, mean age 71.1±9.7) and 440 TV (14 scallops and 426 fenestrations) were included. Of the 440 TV, 406 received primary stenting. Be Grafts were used in 88.9% of these (n=361; celiac trunk [CT]=67, superior mesenteric artery [SMA]=98, right renal artery [RRA]=97, and left renal artery [LRA]=99). The technical success rate was 99.4% (359/361). The 30-day TV instability rate was 0.27% (1/361) with one early renal artery occlusion. During a median follow-up of 20 months (6-32), TV instability rate was 0.8% (3/361). Freedom from TV instability was 99.3%, 98.8%, and 98.8% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: Early-term and mid-term results regarding TV instability are satisfactory and support the use of BeGraft as BSG in FEVAR for cAAAs and TAAAs. CLINICAL IMPACT: The findings of the current study show that the use of the BeGraft stent graft as bridging stent in FEVAR is associated with a high technical success and low early and mid-term instability rate and support the standard use as a bridging stent in fenestrated aneurysm repair.

Impact of Previous Open Abdominal Surgery on Open Abdominal Aortic Repair: A Study from the NSQIP Database.

BACKGROUND: While endovascular aneurysm repair has become a first-line strategy in many centers, open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is still the best option for certain patients. A significant number of patients who are offered OSR for AAA have been previously submitted to other open abdominal surgeries (PAS). It is unclear, however, how this may impact their outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is an association between PAS and outcomes of OSR of AAA. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study based on clinical data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, including all patients undergoing elective OSR for AAA between 2011 and 2017. Excluded were patients with missing data on prior abdominal surgery, supramesenteric clamping, or urgent repairs. Patients with prior abdominal surgery (PAS) and patients without prior abdominal surgeries (nonPAS) were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes were operating time, ischemic colitis, postoperative complications, and lengths of hospital stay. RESULTS: Of the 2034 patients included, 27% had previous open abdominal surgery and 73% did not. Overall, the median age was 71(interquartile range 65-76), 72% of patients were male, 44% were smokers, and the average body mass index was 27 kg/m2. Univariate analysis showed no difference in postoperative 30-day mortality (4.0% PAS vs. 4.1% nonPAS, P = 0.91) or overall postoperative complication rates (33% PAS vs. 29% nonPAS, P = 0.07). Previous open abdominal surgery was significantly associated with longer operating times (P = 0.032) and an almost doubled rate of ischemic colitis (4.7% PAS vs. 2.6% nonPAS, P = 0.02). Postoperative intensive care unit and hospitalization were also significantly longer in patients with prior abdominal surgery (P = 0.005 and P = 0.014, respectively). Finally, there were significantly less patients discharged home, as opposed to institutionalized care (75.7% PAS down from 82.4% nonPAS, P = 0.001). Despite these initial univariate analysis results, on multivariate analysis, PAS actually did not prove to be a statistically significant independent risk factor for 30-day mortality, ischemic colitis, or longer operating times. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that patients who have undergone PAS may have some disadvantages in OSR of AAA. However, these negative trends do not go so far as to statistically significantly identify PAS as an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality, ischemic colitis, or longer operating times. As such, we suggest that a history of previous open abdominal surgery, in and of its own, should not exclude patients from consideration for open aortic abdominal aneurysm repair.

A Single-Center Experience With Total Percutaneous Implantation of a Low-Profile Thoracic Aortic Stent-Graft.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of total percutaneous implantation of the Zenith Alpha Thoracic (ZTA) endograft in the treatment of diseases of the descending thoracic aorta. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 56 consecutive patients undergoing total percutaneous ZTA implantation between 2018 and 2020 was performed in a single center. Patients' demographics, clinical characteristics, anatomical parameters, operative details, device features, and postoperative outcomes were assessed. The primary endpoint was ongoing clinical success. A Cox regression model was used to determine the predictive factors of worse postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-three ZTA endografts were implanted in 35 men and 21 women with a mean age of 69±11 years for the treatment of 26 degenerative aneurysms, 15 type B dissections, and 8 penetrating ulcers, among others. Primary technical success was 100%, with a 30-day ongoing clinical success rate of 94.6%. The 1-year ongoing clinical success rate was 91.1% (51 patients), and freedoms from all-cause mortality, type 1 and 3 endoleaks, and any unplanned reintervention were, respectively, 95.3%, 91.4%, and 88.2% at 1 year. During follow-up, there was one case of surgical conversion for an aorto-esophageal fistula. On the contrary, neither aneurysmal rupture nor significant aneurysmal expansion was recorded. Repair of ruptured thoracic aorta and a high ratio of sheath outer diameter to external iliac artery diameter were found to be independently associated with worse outcomes, with adjusted odds ratios of 4.4 [1.5-15.3] and 4.9 [1.1-23.9], respectively. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of total percutaneous implantation of ZTA endograft show excellent primary technical success and favorable midterm ongoing clinical success. Factors associated with worse outcomes include the repair of ruptured aorta and a high sheath to access vessel ratio.

Salvage of an Incomplete Sandwich With a Covered Celiac Trunk and a "Floating" Superior Mesenteric Artery Stent in a Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

PURPOSE: To report a case of a patient with a large thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) extent V treated with a custom-made fenestrated and branched endovascular repair (F/B-EVAR) after a failed and incomplete attempt of a Sandwich repair technique. REPORT: An 83-year-old patient was referred to our department after a failed attempt at endovascular repair of type V TAAA with a sandwich technique. The celiac trunk was inadvertently covered with the first endograft and a covered long superior mesenteric artery stent was placed and left facing upward inside the aorta. We performed a staged repair, by first catheterizing and stenting the celiac trunk and bringing it under and inside the main aortic endograft. In interval, a F/B-EVAR was performed using a bimodular custom-made device (CMD) with a proximal 2 branch module for the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery and distal module with fenestrations for both renal arteries. The intervention was successful, and the follow-up was uneventful at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Re-intervention after failed endovascular attempts of TAAA repair are technically challenging and require advanced endovascular techniques. The ability to construct CMDs allowed to extend repair to our patient which had severe anatomical constraints for other techniques.

Acute Kidney Injury Following Revascularization in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia and Non-Dialysis-Dependent Chronic Kidney Disease: Insights From the NSQIP Database at 30-Day Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at risk of developing renal injury following revascularization. We aimed to compare the risk of adverse renal events following endovascular revascularization (ER) or open surgery (OS) in patients with CLTI and CKD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) databases (2011-2017) was performed including patients with CLTI and non-dialysis-dependent CKD, comparing ER to OS. The primary outcome was a composite of postprocedural kidney injury or failure within 30 days. Thirty-day mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), amputation, readmission or target lesion revascularization (TLR) were compared using multivariate logistic regression and propensity-score matched analysis. RESULTS: A total of 5009 patients were included (ER: 2361; OS: 3409). The risk for the composite primary outcome was comparable between groups (odds ratio [OR]: 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53-1.17) as for kidney injury (n=54, OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.39-1.19) or failure (n=55, OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.39-1.19). In the adjusted regression, a significant benefit was observed with ER for the primary outcome (OR: 0.60, p=0.018) and renal failure (OR: 0.50, p=0.025), but not for renal injury (OR: 0.76, p=0.34). Lower rates of MACCE, TLR, and readmissions were observed after ER. Thirty-day mortality and major amputation rates did not differ. In the propensity score analysis, revascularization strategy was not associated with renal injury or failure. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, the incidence of renal events within 30 days of revascularization in CLTI was low and comparable between ER and OR. CLINICAL IMPACT: In a cohort of 5009 patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia and non-end-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD), postprocedural kidney injury or failure within 30 days was comparable between patients submitted to open or endovascular revascularization (ER). Lower rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, target lesion revascularization, and readmissions were observed after endovascular revascularization. Based on these findings, ER should not be avoided due to fear of worsening renal function in CKD patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia. In fact, these patients benefit more from ER regarding cardiovascular outcomes with no increased risk of kidney injury.

Cervical Debranching: Regional versus General Anesthesia for Carotid-Subclavian Bypass. A Single Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: We report here the first cohort study comparing regional and general anaesthesia for left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective cohort study was performed, including all consecutive patients who underwent cervical debranching with carotid-subclavian bypass before aortic repair from February 2018 to May 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the type of anesthesia: Regional anesthesia (RA) versus general anesthesia (GA). Primary endpoints included the following: 1) technical success of RA and 2) neurological complications (NCs) (stroke and peripheral neurological lesions). Secondary endpoints included postoperative bleeding, wound complications, 30-day reintervention rate, and midterm events. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were included in the study. The mean age was 64 years (interquartile range [IQR]:13.5) and 69% were male. Thirty-seven patients (44.5%) were performed under RA. Technical success of RA was 89.2%. Two minor strokes (2.4%) were observed in the GA group (P = 0.199). Peripheral neurological disorders occurred in 4 patients (4.8%) (RA group n = 1 (2.7%), GA group n = 3 (6.5%), P = 0.491). 30-day complication rate was 27.7% (n = 23, GA: n = 15 (32.6%), RA: n = 8 (21.6%), P = 0.266). 30-day reintervention rate was 14.5% (n = 12) ten bleeding complications (12%) (RA group n = 3 (8.1%), GA group n = 7 (15.2%), P = 0.323), and 2 seroma evacuations (2.4%) in the RA group. The incidence of superficial wound infections was n = 6 (7.2%) (RA group n = 2 (5.4%), GA group n = 4 (8.7%), P = 0.565). Median follow-up time was 22 months (IQR 22 min/max 1-44). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, RA for carotid subclavian bypass surgery proved to be a feasible and effective anesthetic procedure compared with GA.

[Malperfusion after Aortic Dissection - Management and Techniques]. / Malperfusion nach Aortendissektion - Management und Techniken.

Malperfusion is a common complication of aortic dissection and further increases this deadly disease's mortality. An effective treatment strategy requires a timely diagnosis based on the clinical findings and the available instruments, understanding the disease's pathomechanism, recognising the therapy options recommended by the guidelines, and the diagnostic and therapeutic innovations of the area of research. The final treatment decision should be patient- and case-specific. In this work, we have considered malperfusion after aortic dissection, not only as a complication of aortic dissection but as a separate disease and summarise important information that can contribute to efficient therapy decisions in everyday clinical practice.

Effect of iliac tortuosity on outcomes after iliac branch procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To report a two-centers evaluation of the effects of iliac axis tortuosity on iliac branch device (IBD) results. METHODS: From 2015 to 2021, all IBD procedures performed at two European centers were analyzed retrospectively. The preoperative pelvic tortuosity index (PTI), external tortuosity index (ETI), and double iliac sign (DIS) were assessed for each iliac axis submitted to IBD. The primary endpoints were technical success, early and mid-term IBD complications (occlusion, stenosis, endoleaks [ELs]) and reinterventions, and the association with the PTI, ETI, and DIS. The 30-day mortality, survival, freedom from complications and freedom from reinterventions (FFR) were the secondary endpoints. RESULTS: During the study period, 224 patients had undergone 256 IBD procedures for 165 (64.5%) aortoiliac aneurysms, 44 (17.2%) isolated iliac aneurysms, 11 (4.3%) abdominal aortic aneurysms with a short iliac landing zone, and 36 (14.1%) type Ib ELs. IBD was planned with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for 158 (61.7%), fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for 45 (7.6%), and isolated for 53 (20.7%) cases. Technical success and 30-day mortality were 99.2% (254 of 256) and 0.9% (2 of 224), respectively. A PTI >1.4, an ETI >1.7, and the DIS were tested to identify the risk factors for the endpoints. No ELs and 9 (3.5%) IBD occlusions, requiring five reinterventions (2%), had occurred within 30 days. No association with the PTI, ETI, or DIS was identified; IBD oversizing of ≥25% on the external iliac artery was independently related to occlusion (odds ratio, 4.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-18.1; P = .045). The mean follow-up was 31 ± 27 months, with 11 IBD occlusions, 14 ELs, and 21 reinterventions. At 1, 3, and 5 years of follow-up survival, IBD patency, and FFR were 95%, 89%, and 80%; 93%, 91%, and 90%; and 93%, 89%, and 83%, respectively. The risk factors for overall complications (n = 34; 13.3%) and reinterventions (n = 26; 10.2%) were an ETI >1.7 (P = .037 and P = .019), a PTI >1.4 (P = .016 and P = .012), and a type Ib EL as the indication (P = .025 and P = .001), respectively. Cox regression confirmed PTI >1.4 as an independent predictor of overall complications and reinterventions (hazard ratio [HR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-4.4; P = .018; and HR, 3 95% CI, 1.3-6.8; P = .018, respectively) and ETI >1.7 as an independent risk factor for ELs (HR 6; 95% CI, 2.1-17.5; P = .001). The freedom from complications and FFR were significantly lower with a PTI >1.4 at 3 years (73% vs 92% [log-rank P = .01] and 77% vs 93% [log-rank P = .001], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found IBDs to be safe and effective in the treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms. Early complications are uncommon and related to endograft oversizing rather than anatomic characteristics in the present study. Iliac tortuosity is a risk factor for overall complications and reinterventions, in particular for IBD-related ELs.

A cross-sectional study on the anatomic feasibility of iliac side branch grafts in a real-world setting.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this cross-sectional, single-center study was to analyze the feasibility of different commercially available iliac branch devices in Europe in a cohort of patients with aorto-iliac aneurysms. METHODS: All patients with aorto-iliac or iliac aneurysms that required iliac aneurysm repair, between 2017 and 2021, were included. Morphologic data was analyzed using computed tomography angiograms. The main outcome was the feasibility of each endoprosthesis (Cook ZBIS, Gore Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis [IBE], and JOTEC E-Iliac) according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. Secondary outcomes were feasibility in all three devices, in any device, and with adjunctive procedures (liberal criteria). Additionally, a comparative analysis of all three grafts was performed to analyze differences in feasibility. RESULTS: Overall, 119 iliac aneurysms in 101 patients were included. The mean age was 71 ± 11 years, and 91.6% were male. Feasibility was 52.9% for Cook ZBIS, 33.6% for Gore IBE, and 26.9% for the JOTEC E-Iliac device. A total of 65.5% of patients were feasible with at least one device, whereas only 10.1% complied with all three devices. The main reasons for lack of feasibility were a short common iliac artery length (Cook ZBIS), a narrow common iliac artery diameter (Gore IBE), and a >50° angulation between the external and internal iliac arteries (JOTEC E-Iliac). There was a significant difference between the feasibility of the three devices (P < .001). Cook ZBIS was the graft with the higher feasibility, with 3.3 and 4.4 higher odds when compared with Gore IBE and JOTEC E-Iliac devices, respectively. There was no significant difference between the Gore IBE and the JOTEC E-Iliac. By using liberal criteria, the overall feasibility increased to 95.8%. CONCLUSIONS: We found that only 65.5% of patients were feasible with one of the available devices according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. The Cook ZBIS was the device with the overall highest feasibility. Extending the use of these devices with adjunctive measures and a more liberal approach increased feasibility to 95.8%.

Endovascular Repair With Triple Inner-Branch Endograft for Aberrant Subclavian Artery Aneurysm: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) is the preferred option for the treatment of the distal arch and descending thoracic aorta. Fenestrated and branched TEVAR have become an option to treat pathologies of the aortic arch, avoiding sternotomy and cardiopulmonary arrest as well as total surgical debranching. We describe here the case of a symptomatic patient with an arteria lusoria aneurysm associated with Kommerel diverticulum who underwent total endovascular repair with a triple-branched TEVAR. CASE REPORT: A 66-year-old male patient was treated for a symptomatic arteria lusoria artery associated with a Kommerel diverticulum, resulting in difficulty swallowing and choking. We used a custom-made triple inner-branch endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana) following implantation of a right-sided carotid-subclavian (C-S) bypass. The C-S bypass occluded in the interval time between the 2 procedures and required recanalization and stent-graft placement during the aortic arch procedure. The arteria lusoria was embolized with a vascular plug. No complications occurred and postoperative tomography showed exclusion and thrombosis of the Kommerel diverticulum and perfusion of the supra-aortic vessels. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of arteria lusoria aneurysms can be performed with total endovascular arch inner-branch repair, avoiding increased risk of morbidity and mortality caused by open or hybrid procedures.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Physician Modified Endografts for Treatment of Thoraco-Abdominal and Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the outcomes of physician modified endografts (PMEG) for the treatment of thoraco-abdominal (TAAA) and complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (C-AAA). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science Core Collection, Scielo, and Open Grey. REVIEW METHODS: The databases were searched from inception to July 2021 for studies reporting on outcomes of PMEGs for TAAA or C-AAA repair. A systematic review was conducted (protocol CRD42021267856) and data were pooled using a random effects model of proportions. The outcomes analysed were major adverse events at 30 days (30 day mortality, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure requiring prolonged ventilation [> 24 hours or re-intubation], renal failure requiring dialysis, bowel ischaemia requiring surgery, major stroke, or definitive paraplegia); technical success; 30 day mortality; ruptures; spinal cord ischaemia; endoleaks; re-interventions; and target vessel patency. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included. Overall study quality assessment was found to be low. Overall, 909 PMEGs were reported and analysed. Regarding aneurysm location (n = 867), 222 patients had extent I - III TAAAs and 645 had C-AAA or extent IV TAAA. Regarding presentation, 14 studies reported whether the patients were treated in an elective or urgent setting (n = 782). Overall, 500 (63.9%) patients were treated in an elective setting and 282 (36.1%) in an urgent setting. Major adverse events (at 30 days) occurred in 15.5% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.8 - 20.8; I2 = 63%, 135/832 cases): 11.6% (95% CI 8.1 - 15.7; I2 = 0%, 23/280 cases) for elective patients and 24.6% for urgent (95% CI 14.1 - 36.6; I2 = 65%, 50/192 cases). Overall technical success was 97.2% (95% CI 95.4 - 98.7; I2 = 0%, 587/611 cases): 98.0% (95% CI 92.1 - 100; I2 = 0%, 106/113cases) for extent I - III TAAAs and 99.4% (95% CI 97.5 - 100; I2 = 0%, 317/324 cases) for C-AAA and extent IV TAAAs. Regarding technique, technical success was 96.1% for fenestrated endovascular repair (FEVAR; 95% CI 93.2 - 98.4; I2 = 0%, 313/329 cases) and 99.8% for FEVAR/branched endovascular repair (95% CI 99.8 - 100; I2 = 0%, 17/18 cases). CONCLUSION: Physician modified fenestrated or branched grafts for endovascular aortic repair seem feasible and safe in the short term. However, the quality of the available data is low, which highlights the need for better and more accurate data regarding this technique.

Emergent Triple-Branched TEVAR and Redistribution of the Branches to the Supra-Aortic Target Vessels for Treatment of a Contained Ruptured Descending Aortic Aneurysm Associated With a Chronic Type A Aortic Dissection.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility of urgent endovascular treatment of a chronic type A dissection and contained rupture of the false lumen using a noncustomized triple-branched arch endograft, which necessitated reassignment of the branches to the supra-aortic vessels. CASE REPORT:: A 57-year-old patient with a contained rupture of the descending thoracic aorta, in the setting of a chronic type A dissection and a maximum aortic diameter of 85 mm, was converted to endovascular repair after failure of an open surgical approach. A custom-made triple-branched arch endograft designed for another patient was employed, with concomitant occlusion of the false lumen using a Candy Plug occluder. To adjust the graft's configuration to the patient's anatomy, the supra-aortic vessels were not assigned to the originally planned branches. The 12-month follow-up angiography demonstrated a satisfactory result. CONCLUSION: A noncustomized triple-branched arch endograft can be used in an emergency setting to treat chronic type A dissection, reassigning the branches to the supra-aortic vessels as needed.

Passing a Mechanical Aortic Valve With a Short Tip Dilator to Facilitate Aortic Arch Endovascular Branched Repair.

PURPOSE: To present a novel technique to successfully cross a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis. TECHNIQUE: A 55-year-old female patient with genetically verified Marfan syndrome presented with a 5-cm anastomotic aneurysm of the proximal aortic arch after previous ascending aortic replacement due to a type A aortic dissection in 2007. The patient also underwent mechanical aortic valve replacement in 1991. A 3-stage hybrid repair was planned. The first 2 steps included debranching of the supra-aortic vessels. In the third procedure, a custom-made double branched endovascular stent-graft with a short 35-mm introducer tip was implanted. The mechanical valve was passed with the tip of the dilator on the lateral site of the leaflet, without destructing the valve and with only mild symptoms of aortic insufficiency, as one leaflet continued to work. This allowed the implantation of the stent-graft directly distally of the coronary arteries. Postoperative computed tomography angiography showed no endoleaks and patent coronary and supra-aortic vessels. CONCLUSION: Passing a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis at the proper position is feasible and allows adequate endovascular treatment in complex arch anatomy. However, caution should be taken during positioning of the endovascular graft as the tip may potentially damage the valve prosthesis.

The Munich Valsalva Implantation Technique (MuVIT) for Cardiac Output Reduction During TEVAR: Vena Cava Occlusion With the Valsalva Maneuver.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate a physiologically induced alternative to the typical methods of reducing cardiac output during deployment of stent-grafts in the aortic arch and proximal aorta. TECHNIQUE: A modified Valsalva maneuver, the Munich Valsalva implantation technique (MuVIT), to raise the intrathoracic pressure, minimize backflow, and reduce the cardiac output is illustrated in a patient undergoing a triple-branch thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). During manual mechanical ventilation, the adjustable pressure-limiting valve is carefully closed to 25 mm Hg, creating "manual bloating" of the lungs and sustained apnea. The increased intrathoracic pressure causes compression of the vena cava and pulmonary veins, reducing the venous backflow and gradually decreasing the arterial pressure. Once the desired pressure is obtained, the stent-graft is accurately deployed. The airway pressure is thereupon slowly reduced, and the patient is taken back to normal ventilation. The procedure is then finished following standard practice. CONCLUSION: The MuVIT is a simple, noninvasive technique for cardiac output reduction during aortic arch TEVAR, eliminating the need for other invasive techniques.

Balloon-Assisted True Lumen Expansion and Fenestration of a Symptomatic, Triple-Barrel, Postdissection Thoracoabdominal Aneurysm with Collapsed True Lumen to Facilitate Endovascular Treatment with a t-Branch.

BACKGROUND: To present the challenging endovascular treatment of a symptomatic triple-barrel (3 lumens; 1 true and 2 false lumens) aortic dissection case. METHODS: A 43-year-old male was introduced with a symptomatic, 9 cm postchronic dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm with accompanying triple-barrel formation and true lumen collapse at the height of the distal thoracic aorta. The celiac axis and right renal artery were perfused from the true lumen, the left renal artery from the false lumen and the superior mesenteric artery from both lumens. Endovascular approach was decided due to the patient co-morbidities. Because of the collapsed true lumen, the aorta had to be preconditioned in order to facilitate the endovascular repair with a multibranched thoracoabdominal stent-graft. This was achieved through the dilation of the aortic true lumen with a 32 mm Coda balloon (COOK Medical, Bloomington, IN), then puncturing of the intimal flap in several places to create re-entries that were also dilated (first with a 12-mm noncompliant balloon and then with a compliant 32 mm Coda balloon), creating a single aortic lumen that could facilitate an endovascular repair with thoracic stent-grafts and an off-the-shelf multibranched endograft (t-Branch; COOK Medical). The patient was promptly discharged, and the 3-month follow-up CT-angiogram showed a satisfactory result with patent target vessels and only a small Type-IIb endoleak. CONCLUSIONS: Preconditioning of the aorta using this technique is a feasible and safe approach for the treatment of complex thoracoabdominal postdissection aortic aneurysms presenting with a true lumen collapse.

[Ascending Aorta and Aortic Arch - Endovascular Therapy Today and in the Future]. / Aorta ascendens und Arcus aortae ­ endovaskuläre Therapie heute und in der Zukunft.

Pathologies in the region of the aortic arch may occur in isolation, but adjacent segments of the thoracic aorta - the ascending or descending aorta - are much more commonly affected. The first surgical procedures to treat the aortic arch were performed nearly six decades ago. Despite numerous improvements and innovations in the 20th and early 21st centuries, these procedures are still associated with relevant operative mortality and neurological complication rates. Endovascular techniques and modern hybrid procedures are increasingly expanding the therapeutic spectrum in the aortic arch, although the open surgical approach is currently still the gold standard. Endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysm was first performed in the early 1990s in the infrarenal abdominal aorta. It was not long before the first attempts at endovascular therapy were made for the treatment of the aortic arch. In 1996, Inoue et al. reported the use of the first commonly used endoprosthesis to treat aneurysms in the aortic arch. Continuous improvements and refinements in implantation techniques and also implanted material have resulted in endovascular therapy now being an increasingly important option compared to open surgical procedures in the descending thoracic and abdominal aorta and has partially replaced them as the gold standard. This review article aims to provide an overview of the prerequisites, results, but also limitations of endovascular surgery of the aortic arch.

[Acute Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair - Off-the-shelf vs. Surgeon-modified Stent Grafts]. / Akute komplexe endovaskuläre Aortenchirurgie ­ Off-the-Shelf vs. Surgeon-modified Stentgrafts.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms is challenging. Open surgical repair is a high-risk operation, especially in emergency cases. Endovascular aneurysm repair with a patient-specific custom-made stent graft in patients with symptomatic or ruptured complex aortic aneurysms is not possible, due to the manufacturing time required. In such cases, alternative endovascular techniques can be used. RESULTS: The "off-the-shelf" and "surgeon-modified" stent grafts are valid options for the endovascular treatment of complex aneurysms in urgent and emergent patients. The former are standardised commercially manufactured fenestrated or branched stent grafts, which are available off-the-shelf with an anatomical feasibility in 50 - 80% of the patients. The "surgeon-modified" stent grafts refer to a technique, in which a commercially available stent graft is modified by the surgeon under sterile conditions directly before the implantation, in order to add the required fenestrations, scallops and/or branches. The modification takes approximately 60 - 120 min and haemodynamic stability of the patient is mandatory. Because of the off-label use of the commercial stent graft, detailed patient consent about the modification complications and risks should be performed whenever possible. A comparison of results on mortality and morbidity between "off-the-shelf" and "surgeon-modified" stent grafts has been published, although a direct comparison would be unfair for several reasons (different design, lack of extensive outcomes reports, long learning curve and different modification techniques). CONCLUSION: The "surgeon-modified" and "off-the-shelf" fenestrated/branched stent grafts are used in the treatment of high-risk patients with symptomatic or contained ruptured complex aneurysms. The outcomes of the two techniques are good, although the long-term durability of the former should be further investigated.

[P1 bypass: Is the Autogenous Vein Still First Choice? - Pro]. / P1-Bypass: Ist die autologe Vene noch indiziert? ­ Pro.

Nowadays endovascular treatment of pathologies of the superficial femoral artery is widely used and often the treatment of first choice. In patients with long-segment artery occlusions, bypass surgery can still be necessary. If so, the decision for adequate bypass material needs to be made. This manuscript summarises the available evidence on autogenous vein bypasses above the knee and presents a clear pro for venous grafts in the suprapopliteal segment.

[Aortic Aneurysm: Fenestrated/Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair (EVAR) and Fenestrated/Branched Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR). Is Total Endovascular Repair Already Here?] / Aortenaneurysma: fenestrierte/gebranchte abdominale EVAR (fbEVAR) und fenestrierte/gebranchte thorakale EVAR (fbTEVAR). Ist die komplette endovaskuläre Therapie schon da?

Five years after the first endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), Park et al. reported the first implantation of a fenestrated endoprosthesis. In the meantime, advanced generations of new fenestrated and branched endografts evolved. Endografts for complex pathologies are either so-called "off-the-shelf" grafts with predetermined length, width, diameter and clock position of the branches and fenestrations, predetermined by the manufacturer, "custom-made" grafts which need to be sized and planned individually for patients with specific thoracoabdominal anatomy. Open aortic repair in the treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) still remains challenging and is associated with high morbidity and mortality, even in the elective setting. The ongoing development of endovascular treatment modalities, such as fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-EVAR, B-EVAR), enables less invasive procedures for more challenging aortic pathologies. In recent years, extensive endovascular treatment of the aortic arch to the thoracoabdominal segment has become more and more important, but its outcomes have not been completely evaluated. The aim of this is article is to provide an overview of the currently available endovascular treatment options for complex aortic aneurysms requiring extensive coverage from the aortic arch to the infrarenal aorta.