Comparative outcomes of aortobifemoral bypass with or without previous endovascular kissing stenting of the aortoiliac bifurcation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter national study was to compare the outcomes of primary open surgery by aorto-bifemoral bypass (ABFB) with those performed after a failed endovascular treatment (EVT) by kissing stent technique for complex aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) lesions (TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus [TASC] II C and D). METHODS: All consecutive ABFB cases carried out at 12 vascular surgery centers between 2016 and 2021 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Data included patients' baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, procedural details, perioperative outcomes, and follow-up results (survival, patency, amputation). The study cohort was divided into two groups based on indications for ABFB: primary treatment vs secondary treatment after EVT failure. RESULTS: Overall, 329 patients underwent ABFB during the study period (71% males; mean age, 64 years), of which 285 were primary treatment and 44 were after prior EVT. At baseline, no significant differences were found between study groups in demographics and clinical characteristics. TASC C and D lesions were similarly represented in the study groups (TASC C: 22% vs 78%; TASC D: 16% vs 84%). No major differences were found between study groups in terms of procedural details, early mortality, and perioperative complications. At 5 years, primary patency rates were significantly higher for primary ABFB (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 93.2%-84%) as compared with ABFB after prior EVT (69%; 95% CI 84.9%-55%; log rank P value < .001); however, the 5-year rates of secondary patency (100% vs 95%; 95% CI, 100%-86%) and limb salvage (97%; 95% CI, 99%-96 vs 97%; 95% CI, 100%-94%) were similar between study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of TASC C/D AIOD with ABFB seems to be equally safe and effective when performed after prior EVT, although primary ABFB seemed to have higher primary patency rates. Despite the need for more frequent reinterventions, secondary patency and limb salvage rates were similar. However, future large prospective trials are required to confirm these findings.

Open Surgical Therapy for Peripheral Artery Disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The surgical management of symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD) has changed in the last few decades. Improvement in endovascular technology has resulted in more complex lesion once reserved for open surgery being addressed in an endovascular fashion. Even with these advances, there are lesions and patients that are better managed with an open surgical procedure. The aim of this review is to describe the most commonly performed open surgical procedures for PAD. RECENT FINDINGS: The recently published Best Endovascular versus Best Surgical Therapy (BEST-CLI) trial was an international, prospective, randomized controlled trial that aimed to investigate which revascularization (endovascular vs. surgical bypass) approach was superior for limb salvage. The evidence supports an open surgical bypass as an initial approach. The advancements made in the surgical management of PAD have provided options for patients who were once deemed poor surgical candidates. The goal continues to be utilization of the best available tools to address patient disease. In this current era, it is important to be familiar with the open surgical therapies.

Covered endovascular reconstruction of the aortic bifurcation: A systematic review aggregated data and individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the early and midterm efficacy and safety of covered endovascular reconstruction of the aortic bifurcation (CERAB) in the treatment of aortoiliac disease (AID). METHODS: A systematic search on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published by August 2023 was performed. The primary end points were primary patency and secondary patency. RESULTS: Eleven retrospective case series, involving 579 patients, were incorporated in the review with 88.9% of the included lesions being categorized as Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) C or D. The pooled primary patency estimates at 12, 24 and 36 months were 94.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.4-99.7), 84.4% (95% CI, 72.3-98.5) and 83.8% (95% CI, 71.4-98.3) respectively. The mean primary patency time, representing the period during which individuals remained event-free, was 51.9 months (95% CI, 43.6-55.4). The pooled 36 months primary patency for studies with a predominantly claudicant patient population (>75% of patients) was 89.4% (95% CI, 78.5-100.0), compared with 71.5% (95% CI, 45.6-100.0) for studies with a mixed population (50% of patients). The pooled 36 months primary patency for studies with a predominantly TASC D patient population (>82% of patients) was 70.4% (95% CI, 46.4-100.0) compared with 91.0% (95% CI, 79.1-100.0) for studies with a more homogenous cohort. The pooled secondary patency estimates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 98.6% (95% CI, 96.2-100.0), 97% (95% CI, 93.1-100.0), and 97% (95% CI, 93.1-100.0), respectively. The pooled technical success, 30-day mortality and 30-day systemic complications estimates were 95.9% (95% CI, 93.7- 97.4), 1.9% (95% CI, 1.0-3.5), and 6.4% (95% CI, 4.4-9.1), respectively. The pooled intraoperative and postoperative 30-day CERAB-related complications estimates were 7.3% (95% CI, 2.0-23.0) and 4.2% (95% CI, 0.7-21.0), respectively. The pooled major amputation and target lesion reinterventions by the end of follow-up were 1.9% (95% CI, 1.0-3.4) and 13.9% (95% CI, 9.9-19.2), respectively. The pooled access site complication estimate was 11.7% (95% CI, 5.9-21.7). CONCLUSIONS: Although this review has showcased the safety and feasibility of the CERAB technique in treating AID, it has also highlighted the necessity for a close and prolonged follow-up period extending beyond 1 year. Moreover, the favorable secondary patency estimates predominantly attained via endovascular reinterventions emphasize a potentially advantageous characteristic of the CERAB technique, particularly valuable when addressing late-stage AID disease or anatomically complex lesions.

Percutaneous Aortoiliac Thromboendarterectomy for Acute Limb Ischemia.

Aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) can occur from either chronic, progressive atherosclerotic disease, acute on chronic thrombosis or acute arterial embolism, and can all result in limb ischemia. Bypass surgery had long been the gold standard for treatment for AIOD, however, with advances in endovascular techniques, minimally invasive treatment of aortoiliac lesions has become the first line choice of management in many cases. Herein, we describe a case of utilizing the Inari ClotTriever to perform aortoiliac mechanical thrombectomy and the ARTIX thrombectomy system to perform an embolectomy the superficial femoral artery, highlighting new therapies to treat AIOD.

Single access covered endovascular reconstruction of the aortic bifurcation.

We describe the feasibility of covered endovascular reconstruction of the aortic bifurcation (CERAB) through a single femoral access and a steerable sheath. We present the technique, which we used for a patient with severe aortoiliac calcification and bilateral involvement of the common femoral artery. The patient underwent endarterectomy of the left common femoral artery plus CERAB with an aortic stent graft and bilateral covered stents for the common iliac artery with kissing dilatation with a steerable sheath using only left femoral access. CERAB can be performed using unilateral access with the aid of a steerable sheath, reducing the potential for access site complications.

A Patient With Foot Pain Found to Have Leriche Syndrome: A Case Report and Brief Review of the Literature.

Leriche syndrome, a rare and critical complication of peripheral arterial disease (PAD), affects the distal abdominal aorta (infrarenal) and, similar to PAD, is a result of plaque buildup in the arterial lumen. The Leriche syndrome triad includes claudication in the proximal lower extremity, decreased or absent femoral pulses, and, in some cases, impotence. This article presents a patient with an atypical presentation of foot pain who was subsequently found to have Leriche syndrome. The patient was a 59-year-old female, a former smoker, who presented to the emergency department (ED) with atraumatic, acute right foot pain. All right lower extremity pulses were faintly audible on bedside Doppler. Computed tomography with angiography of the abdominal aorta revealed a Leriche-type occlusion of the infrarenal abdominal aorta and left common iliac and a 10 cm right popliteal arterial occlusion. Pharmacological anticoagulation was initiated by the ED. Definitive treatment in this patient included catheter-directed tissue plasminogen activator lysis to the thrombus on the right and placement of kissing stents in the distal aorta without complication. The patient made an excellent recovery and had a complete resolution of her symptoms. PAD is an omnipresent condition and, when untreated, can result in a myriad of high mortality and morbidity conditions such as Leriche syndrome. Collateral vessel formation can make the symptoms of Leriche syndrome vague and inconsistent, often making early recognition difficult. Optimal outcomes hinge on the clinician's ability to efficiently recognize, diagnose, stabilize, and coordinate multidisciplinary involvement of vascular and interventional radiology specialties. Case reports such as this one help to illuminate some of the more infrequent presentations of Leriche syndrome.

Results of iliac branch devices for hypogastric salvage after previous aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicentric study was to assess the "REsults of iliac branch deviceS for hypogastriC salvage after previoUs aortic rEpair (RESCUE)." METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs) after previous open aortic repair (OAR) or endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) at seven centers were captured. The study cohort was divided into two groups according to the type of repair originally performed. Early outcomes included immediate technical success and perioperative adverse events. Late outcomes included survival, side branch (SB) primary patency, SB instability, and new onset buttock claudication. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients (82 male) were included in the study, 10 of them received bilateral implantation of IBDs. This resulted in a total of 104 devices included in the final analysis. Indication for treatment were endoleak 1b or progressive iliac aneurysmal degeneration or distal para-anastomotic aortic aneurysms; 73 were implanted after previous EVAR and 31 after previous OAR. Technical success was 100% in both groups. The 3-year rate of freedom from SB instability was 90.1% after previous EVAR and 85.4% after previous OAR, respectively (P = .05). The 3-year estimates of SB primary patency were significantly lower in patients who had received OAR as compared with those that had received EVAR (89.8% vs 94.9%; P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment with IBDs following previous OAR or EVAR is safe and effective up to 3 years. Freedom from SB instability during follow-up was lower in patients who had previously undergone OAR than EVAR.

Low Morbidity Anatomical Revascularisation for an Infected Aorto-Bifemoral Graft Using a Staged Hybrid Procedure.

A 66-year-old woman presented with a right femoral false aneurysm following an aortobifemoral bypass for lifestyle-limiting claudication. A computed tomography (CT) angiogram revealed features of complete aortobifemoral graft infection. A two-stage procedure was performed. The first hybrid stage involved the excision of only the femoral components and covered stenting of the aortic stump, along with recanalization of bilateral native iliac systems. The second stage, six weeks later, involved aortic stent and graft explant via midline laparotomy with aortic bovine pericardium patch repair (LeMaitre Vascular Inc, Burlington, Massachusetts). Follow-up imaging demonstrated no residual infection, and the patient remained without complication at the 12-month follow-up. This novel approach utilizes hybrid surgical techniques and modern bioprosthetic material to safely manage an infected aortobifemoral bypass graft.

Effect of access site choice on inferior vena cava filter angulation and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In the present study, we compared the outcomes of inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement between the femoral vein (FV) and internal jugular (IJ) vein access sites. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study using the Vascular Quality Initiative database to assess patients who had undergone IVC filter placement from 2013 to 2019. The patients were placed into two groups according to the access site location: FV and IJ vein. The FV group included patients with access via the right and left FVs and other leg veins, and the IJ group included patients with access via the right or left IJ vein. The primary outcome was the rate of filter angulation. The secondary outcomes included access site complications such as deep vein thrombosis, hematoma, and bleeding requiring transfusion. RESULTS: Of 13,221 patients, 8214 (63%) had undergone IVC filter placement via FV access and 4789 (37%) via IJ access. The remaining 218 patients had had an unknown access site or were excluded. Within the IJ group, 4696 (98.0%) had undergone access via the right IJ and 93 (2%) via the left IJ. Within the FV (common femoral, femoral, or other infrainguinal veins) group, 7007 (85.3%) had undergone access via the right FV and 1207 (14.6%) via the left FV. The mean patient age was 63 ± 15.9 years, the mean body mass index was 30.9 ± 9.60 kg/m2, and 6788 of the patients were men (52.0%). The most common indication for filter placement was a contraindication to anticoagulation because of a recent or active bleeding episode (30%), followed by planned surgery (22%), new deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (7%), fall risk (5%), and trauma (4%). Infrarenal filters had been placed in 97.9% of the patients. Univariate analysis identified body mass index and suprarenal placement as independent risk factors for angulation. The final multivariate analysis showed a significant increase in angulation (0.9% vs 0.34%; odds ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.11; P = .04) and increased access site complications (0.25% vs 0.07%; odds ratio, 2.068; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-4.23; P = .048) in the FV access group. No significant correlation between the access site and retrieval rate was found (P = .9270). CONCLUSIONS: Placement of IVC filters via IJ access showed a lower rate of filter angulation in the IVC and fewer access site complications compared with FV access.

Outcomes of "Anterior Versus Posterior Divisional Branches of the Hypogastric Artery as Distal Landing Zone for Iliac Branch Devices": The International Multicentric R3OYAL Registry.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicentric registry was to assess the outcomes of "anteRior versus posteRior divisional bRanches Of the hYpogastric artery as distAl landing zone for iLiac branch devices (R3OYAL)." METHODS: The main exposure of interest for the purpose of this study was the internal iliac artery (IIA) divisional branch (anterior vs posterior) that was used as distal landing zone. Early endpoints included technical success and adverse events. Late endpoints included survival, primary/secondary IIA patency, and IIA branch instability. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients were included in the study, of which 50 received bilateral implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs). This resulted in a total of 221 incorporated IIAs included in the final analysis, of which 40 were anterior divisional branches and 181 were posterior divisional branches. Technical success was high in both groups (anterior division: 98% vs posterior division: 100%, P = .18). Occurrence of any adverse event was noted in 14% of patients in both groups (P = 1.0). The overall rate of freedom from the composite IBD branch instability did not show significant differences between patients receiving distal landing in the anterior or posterior division of the IIA at 3 years (79% vs 87%, log-rank test = .215). The 3-year estimates of IBD patency were significantly lower in patients who received distal landing in the anterior divisional branch than those who received distal landing in the posterior divisional branch (primary patency: 81% vs 96%, log-rank test = .009; secondary patency: 81% vs 97%, log-rank test < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the IIA as distal landing zone for IBD implantation shows comparable profiles in terms of immediate technical success, perioperative safety, and side-branch instability up to 3 years. However, IBD patency at 3 years was higher when the distal landing zone was achieved within the posterior divisional branch of the IIA. CLINICAL IMPACT: The results from this large multicentric registry confirm that use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the internal iliac artery (IIA) as distal landing zone for implantation of iliac branch devices (IBD) shows comparable profiles of safety and feasibility, thereby allowing to extend the indications for endovascular repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms to cases with unsuitable anatomy within the IIA main trunk. Although mid-term rates of device durability and branch instability seem to be similar, the rates of primary and secondary IBD patency at three years was favored when the distal landing zone was achieved in the posterior divisional branch of the IIA.

Valsalva maneuvers during computed tomography (CT) can demonstrate seemingly worrisome but ultimately transient aortoiliac narrowing.

Computed tomography (CT) being performed with Valsalva is an efficacious and common technique performed to evaluate for abdominal hernias. In certain circumstances, Valsalva can generate sufficient intra-abdominal pressure to cause aortoiliac compression that can raise concerns for possible aortic atresia. Repeat CT without Valsalva generally demonstrates that these changes are transitory, and no further intervention is typically required. Given the ever-growing number of CTs with Valsalva being performed for hernia evaluation, clinicians involved in interpreting abdominal CTs should be aware of this concerning appearing but ultimately benign phenomenon.

Incidental Pathogenic Fibrin-Associated Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma Found During Aorto-Biiliac Bypass.

Fibrin-associated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (FA-DLBCL) is in and of itself a rare entity and is a subset of the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated lymphoma. Due to its indolent course, FA-DLBCL is generally an incidental finding on histopathological examinations. We present the first reported case of FA-DLBCL found within a native aortic thrombus during an aorto-biiliac bypass. This is a 77-year-old male who was taken to the operative theater for open aorto-biiliac bypass secondary to aortooclusive disease resulting in intermittent claudication and gangrene of the right lower extremity digits. Intraoperatively, suspicious inflammatory changes were noted around the aorta. Pathological evaluation of the thrombus within the aorta noted cells of B-cell lineage with BCL2 and MYC positivity in addition to CD30 and EBV positivity. Postoperatively, the patient's course was complicated by acute tubular necrosis, uremia, dialysis dependence, intubation, and cardiac arrhythmias including cardiac arrest. He was able to recover from these complications, however, he ultimately chose to self-enroll in hospice care. An extensive literature review of over 128 mentions of FA-DLBCL noted a complete paucity of reported cases of FA-DLBCL within a native aorta. The patient's clinical presentation and histopathology without mass-forming lesions lead to the diagnosis of FA-DLBCL. FA-DLBCL is an extremely rare EBV+ lymphoproliferative disorder associated with chronic inflammation (DLBCL-CI). FA-DLBCL is a rare condition without defined uniform treatment. This article serves to highlight the first reported case of FA-DLBCL found within an abdominal aortic thrombus in a native aorta. Given the paucity of literature on this condition, postoperative treatment and long-term outcomes should be the focus of this condition.

External iliac artery extension causes greater aneurysm sac regression than the bell-bottom technique or iliac branch endoprosthesis for repair of concomitant infrarenal aortic and iliac artery aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: Aneurysmal extension of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) to the common iliac artery (CIA) presents a technical challenge to successful endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). In the present study, we compared sac shrinkage and perioperative outcomes after the bell-bottom technique (BBT), internal iliac artery embolization and external iliac artery extension (EIE), and iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE). METHODS: Using the Vascular Quality Initiative database, a retrospective analysis was conducted for patients who had undergone EVAR from 2013 to 2019. The demographic, anatomic, and perioperative data were analyzed. All patients with a proximal aortic neck length <10 mm and aortic graft diameter >32 mm were excluded from the analysis. The patients were subdivided into four groups according to the distal limb strategy: group 1, control group with a bilateral common iliac artery limb <20 mm; group 2, BBT with either a unilateral or bilateral limb >20 mm; group 3, EIE technique; and group 4, IBE. The primary endpoint was the maximal change in the aortic diameter during follow-up. The secondary endpoints included postoperative complications and the rate of endoleak. RESULTS: The records for 14,455 patients who had undergone EVAR were queried and 5788 met the anatomic criteria. The average age was 73 years, and 86.3% were men. The maximal change in the aortic diameter in the control, BBT, IBE, and EIE groups was -7.2 mm, -6.1 mm, -4.6 mm, and -6.8 mm, respectively (P = .06). The differences were not statistically significant on univariate analysis at an average follow-up of 405 days. However, on multivariable analysis (P = .01), compared with the control group, the BBT and IBE groups were 18.4% (odds ratio [OR], 0.816; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.98) and 48.0% (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33-0.82) less likely to experience aneurysmal shrinkage, respectively. In contrast, the EIE group showed no significant difference in shrinkage compared with that in the control group. Multivariable analysis of the groups also revealed that compared directly with the BBT group, the EIE group was 69.5% more likely to have experienced shrinkage in the aortic aneurysmal diameter (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.05-2.75). The BBT and IBE groups had a significantly higher rate of type II endoleaks (17.63% and 16.95%, respectively; P = .03). The EIE group had a higher rate of type Ib endoleaks (1.9%) compared with the BBT (1.1%), IBE (1.7%), and control (0.3%) groups (P = .01). No differences were found between the groups in terms of postoperative myocardial infarction (P = .47) or respiratory (P = .61) or intestinal (P = .71) complications. However, the rates of limb complications and reoperation were higher in the EIE group. CONCLUSIONS: The present study revealed that the EIE technique was more likely to demonstrate shrinkage in the aortic aneurysmal diameter than were the BBT and IBE groups compared with the control group on multivariable analysis. The EIE technique was also more likely to result in aneurysmal sac shrinkage than was the BBT group, albeit with greater rates of limb-related complications.

Outcome Analysis Using the Modified Frailty Index-5 in Patients With Complex Aortoiliac Disease.

OBJECTIVES: Vascular surgery patients commonly have several comorbidities that cumulatively lead to a frailty status. The cumulative comorbidities disproportionately increase the risk of adverse events and are also associated with worsened long-term prognosis. In recent years, several tools have been elaborated with the objective of quantifying a patient's frailty. One of them is the modified frailty index-5 (mFI-5), a simplified and easy to use index. There is scarce data regarding its value as a prognostic factor in aortoiliac occlusive disease. The aim of this work is to validate mFI-5 as a potential postoperative prognostic indicator in this population. METHODS: From January 2013 to January 2020, 109 patients who underwent elective revascularizations, either endovascular or open surgery, having Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II type D aortoiliac lesions in a tertiary and a regional hospital were selected from a prospective vascular registry. Demographic data was collected including diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, arterial hypertension requiring medication and functional status. The 30-d and subsequent long-term surveillance outcomes were also collected including major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), major adverse limb events (MALE) and all-cause mortality were assessed in the 30-d post-procedure and in the subsequent long-term surveillance period. The mFI-5 was applied to this population to evaluate the prognostic impact of this frailty marker on mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: In the long-term follow-up, mFI-5 was significantly associated with MACE (hazard ratio [HR] 2.469; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.267-4.811; P = .008) and all-cause mortality (HR 2.585; 95% CI: 1.270-5.260; P = .009). However, there was no significant association with 30-day outcomes. Along with the presence of chronic kidney disease, mFI-5 was the prognostic factor better able of predicting MACE. No prognostic value was found regarding short-term outcomes. CONCLUSION: The mFI-5 index may have a role in predicting long term outcomes, namely MACE and all-cause mortality, in the subset of patients with extensive aortoiliac occlusive disease. Its ease of use can foster its application in risk stratification and contribute for the decision-making process.

Treatment of Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease With the Covered Endovascular Reconstruction of the Aortic Bifurcation (CERAB) Technique: Results of a UK Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: This UK multicenter study aims to report early- and medium-term results following covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation (CERAB) for the treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) in patients with chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) or intermittent claudication (IC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective case analysis was performed of patients who underwent CERAB between November 1, 2012 and March 31, 2020 in 6 centers across the United Kingdom. Anatomical data, including degree of plaque calcification, were assessed using preoperative imaging. Outcome measures included mortality, perioperative complications, target lesion reintervention (TLR), and major limb amputation. Primary, assisted primary, and secondary patencies were calculated at set intervals. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients underwent CERAB over the study period for the following reasons [48% presenting with CLTI (Rutherford 4-6) and 52% with IC (Rutherford 1-3)]; 82% presented had Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) D AIOD disease. Median age was 65 years (range 42-90 years); 76% of the cohort were male. Severely calcified aortic and iliac lesions were noted in 90% and 80% of patients, respectively. Over a median follow-up of 18 months (range 1-91 months), 2 (1.7%) patients were lost to follow up. In total 5, (4.3%) patients died and 2 (1.7%) had a major amputation. Endovascular TLR was required in 14 (12.1%) patients at last follow up. Surgical TLR was performed in 4 (3.4%) patients at last follow-up. Seven (6%) patients developed an aortic/iliac stent occlusion at last follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) freedom from TLR at 1 year was 94% and KM 1-year primary patency, assisted primary patency, and secondary patency were 88%, 94%, and 98% respectively. Subanalysis found the following features were associated with need for TLR; TASC D disease (OR = 2.45, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.71), severe aortic calcification (OR = 2.01, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.20), and presence of tissue loss at baseline (OR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.63). CONCLUSION: Perioperative (<30 days) and medium-term morbidity, mortality, and patency rates in this pragmatic cohort of patients with severe AIOD lesions show that CERAB is a valid revascularization option. A direct comparison with surgical treatments for AIOD in a randomized controlled trial is justified.

Bilateral Use of Iliac Branch Devices for Aortoiliac Aneurysms Is Safe and Feasible, and Procedural Volume Does Not Seem to Affect Technical or Clinical Effectiveness: Early and Midterm Results From the pELVIS International Multicentric Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate early and follow-up outcomes following bilateral use of iliac branch devices (IBD) for aortoiliac endografting and assess the impact of center volume. We used data from the pELVIS international multicentric registry. METHODS: For the purpose of this study, only those patients receiving concomitant bilateral IBD implantation were analyzed. To assess the impact that procedural volume of bilateral IBD implantation could have on early and follow-up outcomes, participating institutions were classified as Site(s) A if they had performed >10 and/or >20% concomitant bilateral IBD procedure, otherwise they were classified as Site(s) B. Endpoints of the analysis included early (ie, 30-day) mortality and morbidity, as well as all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality during follow-up. Additional endpoints that were evaluated included IBD-related reinterventions, IBD occlusion or stenosis requiring reintervention (ie, loss of primary patency), and IBD-related type I endoleak. RESULTS: Overall, 96 patients received bilateral IBD implantation (out of 910 procedures collected in the whole pELVIS cohort), of whom 65 were treated at Site A (ie, Group A) and 31 were treated at Site(s) B (ie, Group B). In total, only 1 death occurred within 30 days from bilateral IBD implantation, and 9 patients experienced at least 1 major complication without any significant difference between subjects in Group A versus those in Group B (10.8% vs 6.5%, p=0.714). In the overall cohort, the 2-year freedom from IBD-related type I endoleaks and IBD primary patency were 96% and 92%, respectively; no significant differences were seen in those rates between Group A or Group B (95% vs 100%, p=0.335; 93% vs 88%, p=0.470). Freedom from any IBD-related reinterventions was 83% at 2 years, with similar rates between study groups (85% vs 83%, p=0.904). CONCLUSIONS: Within the pELVIS registry, concomitant bilateral IBD implantation is a safe and feasible technique for management of aortoiliac aneurysms in patients with suitable anatomy. Despite increased technical complexity, effectiveness of the repair is satisfactory with low rates of IBD-related adverse events at mid-term follow-up. Procedural volume does not seem to affect technical or clinical outcomes after bilateral use of IBD, which remains a favorable treatment option in selected patients.

Secondary Relining With Focal Flaring of Novel-Generation Balloon-Expandable Covered Stents for Endovascular Treatment of Significant Diameter Mismatch in the Aorto-Iliac Territory.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to report on the safety and feasibility of secondary relining with focal flaring of novel-generation balloon-expandable covered stents for endovascular treatment of significant diameter mismatch in the aorto-iliac territory. Significant diameter mismatch was defined as >20% difference in the nominal diameter between the intended proximal and distal landing zones. METHODS: Patient A was an 84-year-old man with prior abdominal aortic aneurysm open repair with a straight 20 mm Dacron tube. He presented with a right common iliac artery aneurysm (Ø88 mm) with contained rupture. The Gore Viabahn endoprosthesis (9 mm × 5 cm) was inserted proximally about 15 mm above the occluded ostium of the internal iliac artery. Subsequently, the BeGraft Aortic® (16 mm × 48 mm) was inserted proximally up to the common iliac artery origin; its proximal portion was flared to 22 mm. Patient B was a 77-year-old man with prior endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with a Medtronic Endurant stent-graft. He presented with occlusion of the right limb of the aortic endoprosthesis and thrombosis that extended down to the level of the superficial femoral artery. After mechanical thrombectomy, two Gore Viabahn endoprosthesis (first one, 8 mm × 10 cm; second one, 10 mm × 15 cm) were inserted into the right iliac limb. Subsequently, the BeGraft Aortic® (12mm × 39mm) was inserted proximally up to the gate of the aortic stent-graft; its proximal portion was flared to 16 mm. RESULTS: Technical success and clinical success were achieved in both patients. Imaging follow-up (6 months for Patient A, 12 months for Patient B) showed correct placement of all stent-grafts without any graft-related adverse event. The patients remained free from new reinterventions or recurrent symptoms. Patient A died 8 months after the index procedure from acute respiratory failure after community acquired pneumonia. CONCLUSION: Secondary relining with focal flaring of novel-generation balloon-expandable covered stents for endovascular treatment of significant diameter mismatch in the aorto-iliac territory is safe and feasible. Although mid-term results seem to be effective, longer follow-up is warranted to establish durability of the technique.

Percutaneous endoluminal anatomical bypass for patients with external iliac artery occlusion after failed conventional endovascular recanalization.

Endovascular therapy, an established first-line treatment for isolated iliac artery (IA) occlusion (IAO), may be of limited use in challenging lesions. We describe a novel percutaneous endoluminal anatomical bypass (PEApass) technique for uncrossable external IA (EIA) occlusion. A 70-year-old man on hemodialysis with a history of colostomy presented with chronic limb-threatening ischemia due to a left EIA with below-the-knee occlusions. During a previous colostomy, the left EIA was accidentally ligated. Conventional endovascular recanalization for the ligated EIA failed, and a femoral-femoral bypass and below-knee angioplasty were performed as alternative therapy. Two weeks later, surgical site infection developed at both anastomosis sites. PEApass was performed prior to removing the infected graft. An arteriovenous fistula (AVF) in the distal location was created using a re-entry device, and its proximal location was created using a 0.014-in. penetration guidewire, which was snared on the inside of the iliac vein (IV) using a retrograde snare. The proximal and distal sections of the IA were connected using an 8.0-mm × 100-mm stent graft implanted through the IV. A final angiogram indicated that flow to the occluded IA was completely restored without complications. Following the PEApass, the infected graft was removed. Complete wound healing was achieved within approximately 1 month. This innovative PEApass procedure is feasible and could be an alternative procedure for patients with uncrossable IAO.

Current Status of Endovascular Preservation of the Internal Iliac Artery with Iliac Branch Devices (IBD).

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the most utilized treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), but the presence of common iliac dilatation or aneurysm may prevent the achievement of effective distal seal and fixation. Ideal repair in these cases should involve both effective preservation of the pelvic circulation and durable exclusion of the AAA. Unilateral or bilateral internal iliac artery (IIA) preservation with iliac branch devices (IBD) is safe, feasible and effective with technical and clinical outcomes comparable to standard EVAR. The versatility of current devices has allowed extended application to complex cases, but must be considered carefully in difficult anatomies. Pending long-term durability results and formal cost-effectiveness appraisals, IBD implantation has several advantages to anatomically eligible patients as compared with other available open or endovascular/hybrid solutions for IIA preservation during EVAR for aortoiliac aneurysms.

Hybrid surgery for bilateral lower extremity inflow revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Aortobifemoral (ABF) bypass is the preferred method of bilateral inflow revascularization, with axillobifemoral (AXBF) bypass reserved for high-risk patients. Hybrid (HYB) surgery in the form of femorofemoral bypass and retrograde endovascular aortoiliac intervention is increasingly being used to achieve the same goal. This study compared the perioperative outcomes of HYB surgery with traditional surgery for bilateral inflow revascularization. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program files for the years 2012 to 2015 were reviewed, and all patients undergoing ABF bypass, AXBF bypass, and HYB surgery (femoral-femoral bypass and retrograde endovascular intervention) were included. Patients' demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes were compared between the three groups. A propensity-matched analysis was subsequently performed to compare HYB surgery with ABF bypass only. The χ2 test and analysis of variance with post hoc analysis were conducted to evaluate between-group differences in risk factors and outcomes. SPSS statistical software (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY) was used. RESULTS: There were 1426 patients (ABF bypass, 976; AXBF bypass, 257; HYB surgery, 193). There were significant differences in the three populations of patients, with ABF bypass patients significantly more likely to have age <70 years (ABF bypass, 84.2%; AXBF bypass, 49.8%; HYB surgery, 58%; P < .001) and more likely to be independent (ABF bypass, 98%; AXBF bypass, 89.1%; HYB surgery, 93.2%; P < .001). Patients undergoing AXBF bypass were significantly more likely to be treated for critical limb ischemia (ABF bypass, 46.5%; AXBF bypass, 72.4%; HYB surgery, 51.8%; P < .001) under emergent conditions (ABF bypass, 0.9%; AXBF bypass, 5.1%; HYB surgery, 3.6%; P < .001). There was no difference in mortality between the three groups (P = .178). After propensity matching, a total of 571 patients with ABF bypass were compared with HYB surgery patients. HYB surgery patients had significantly less pneumonia (ABF bypass, 8.7%; HYB surgery, 1.6%; P < .001), unplanned intubation (ABF bypass, 7.7%; HYB surgery, 3.1%; P = .032), cardiac arrest (ABF bypass, 3.7%; HYB surgery, 0.5%; P = .025), transfusion (ABF bypass, 44.4%; HYB surgery, 18.1%; P < .001), and composite morbidity (ABF bypass, 55%; HYB surgery, 32.6%; P < .001). Patients undergoing ABF bypass had significantly higher mortality (ABF bypass, 4.2%; HYB surgery, 1%; P = .043) and 30-day reoperation (ABF bypass, 17.5%; HYB surgery, 9.3%; P = .009) and longer total hospital length of stay (ABF bypass, 9.79 ± 10.69 days; HYB surgery, 5.79 ± 9.72 days; P < .001). There was no difference in major amputation (P = .607) and readmission (P = .495) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: ABF bypass is the most common surgery for bilateral lower extremity revascularization in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database and continues to have good outcomes. In selected patients, HYB surgery was associated with improved perioperative, 30-day outcomes compared with ABF bypass.