RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Beyond a certain threshold diameter, abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are to be treated by open surgical or endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). In a quarter of patients who undergo EVAR, inversion of blood flow in the inferior mesenteric artery or lumbar arteries may lead to type II endoleak (T2EL), which is associated with complications (e.g. AAA growth, secondary type I endoleak, rupture). As secondary interventions to treat T2EL often fail and may be highly invasive, prevention of T2EL is desirable. The present study aims to assess the efficacy of sac embolization (SE) with metal coils during EVAR to prevent T2EL in patients at high risk. METHODS: Over a 24-month recruitment period, a total of 100 patients undergoing EVAR in four vascular centres (i.e. Klinikum rechts der Isar of the Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Augsburg, University Hospital Dresden, St. Joseph's Hospital Wiesbaden) are to be included in the present study. Patients at high risk for T2EL (i.e. ≥ 5 efferent vessels covered by endograft or aneurysmal thrombus volume <40%) are randomized to one group receiving standard EVAR and another group receiving EVAR with SE. Follow-up assessments postoperatively, after 30 days, and 6 months involve contrast-enhanced ultrasound scans (CEUS) and after 12 months an additional computed tomography angiography (CTA) scan. The presence of T2EL detected by CEUS or CTA after 12 months is the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints comprise quality of life (quantified by the SF-36 questionnaire), reintervention rate, occurrence of type I/III endoleak, aortic rupture, death, alteration of aneurysm volume, or diameter. Standardized evaluation of CTA scans happens through a core lab. The study will be terminated after the final follow-up visit of the ultimate patient. DISCUSSION: Although preexisting studies repeatedly indicated a beneficial effect of SE on T2EL rates after EVAR, patient relevant outcomes have not been assessed until now. The present study is the first randomized controlled multicentre study to assess the impact of SE on quality of life. Further unique features include employment of easily assessable high-risk criteria, a contemporary follow-up protocol, and approval to use any commercially available coil material. Overcoming limitations of previous studies might help SE to be implemented in daily practice and to enhance patient safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05665101. Registered on 23 December 2022.
Assuntos
Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal , Implante de Prótese Vascular , Embolização Terapêutica , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Humanos , Endoleak/diagnóstico por imagem , Endoleak/etiologia , Endoleak/prevenção & controle , Correção Endovascular de Aneurisma , Qualidade de Vida , Implante de Prótese Vascular/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagem , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/cirurgia , Embolização Terapêutica/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Estudos Multicêntricos como AssuntoRESUMO
Importance: Surgical site infections frequently occur after open abdominal surgery. Intraoperative wound irrigation as a preventive measure is a common practice worldwide, although evidence supporting this practice is lacking. Objective: To evaluate the preventive effect of intraoperative wound irrigation with polyhexanide solution. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Intraoperative Wound Irrigation to Prevent Surgical Site Infection After Laparotomy (IOWISI) trial was a multicenter, 3-armed, randomized clinical trial. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to the intervention. The clinical trial was conducted in 12 university and general hospitals in Germany from September 2017 to December 2021 with 30-day follow-up. Adult patients undergoing laparotomy were eligible for inclusion. The main exclusion criteria were clean laparoscopic procedures and the inability to provide consent. Of 11â¯700 screened, 689 were included and 557 completed the trial; 689 were included in the intention-to-treat and safety analysis. Interventions: Randomization was performed online (3:3:1 allocation) to polyhexanide 0.04%, saline, or no irrigation (control) of the operative wound before closure. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was surgical site infection within 30 postoperative days according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition. Results: Among the 689 patients included, 402 were male and 287 were female. The median (range) age was 65.9 (18.5-94.9) years. Participants were randomized to either wound irrigation with polyhexanide (n = 292), saline (n = 295), or no irrigation (n = 102). The procedures were classified as clean contaminated in 92 cases (8%). The surgical site infection incidence was 11.8% overall (81 of 689), 10.6% in the polyhexanide arm (31 of 292), 12.5% in the saline arm (37 of 295), and 12.8% in the no irrigation arm (13 of 102). Irrigation with polyhexanide was not statistically superior to no irrigation or saline irrigation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.23; 95% CI, 0.64-2.36 vs HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.74-1.94; P = .47). The incidence of serious adverse events did not differ among the 3 groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, intraoperative wound irrigation with polyhexanide solution did not reduce surgical site infection incidence in clean-contaminated open abdominal surgical procedures compared to saline or no irrigation. More clinical trials are warranted to evaluate the potential benefit in contaminated and septic procedures, including the emergency setting. Trial Registration: drks.de Identifier: DRKS00012251.