Endovascular Repair of One-hundred Urgent and Emergent free or Contained Thoraco-abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Ruptures. An International Multi-Center Trans-Atlantic experience.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the outcomes of urgent/emergent endovascular aortic repair of patients with free/contained ruptured thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (rTAAA). BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of rTAAA has been scarcely described in emergent setting. METHODS: An international multicenter retrospective observational study (ClinicalTrials.govID:NCT05956873) from January-2015 to January-2023 in 6 European and 1 United States Vascular Surgery Centers. Primary end-points were technical success, 30-day and/or in-hospital mortality and follow-up survival. RESULTS: A total of 100 rTAAA patients were included (75 male; mean age 73 y). All patients (86 contained and 14 free ruptures) were symptomatic and treated within 24-hours from diagnosis: multi-branched off-the-shelf devices (Zenith t-branch,Cook Medical Inc.Bjaeverskov,Denmark) in 88 patients, physician-modified endografts in 8, patient-specific device or parallel grafts in two patients each. Primary technical success was achieved in 89 patients and 30-day and/or in-hospital mortality was 24%. Major adverse events (MAEs) occurred in 34% of patients (permanent dialysis and paraplegia in 4 and 8 patients, respectively). No statistical differences were detected in mortality rates between free and contained ruptured patients (43%vs.21%; P =0.075). Multivariate analysis revealed contained rupture favoring technical success (Odd-Ratio10.1;95%Confidence-Interval:3.0-33.6; P =<0.001). MAEs (OR9.4;95%C-I:2.8-30.5; P =<0.001) and pulmonary complications (OR11.3;95%CI:3.0-41.5; P =<0.001) were independent risk factors for 30-day and/or in-hospital mortality. Median follow-up time was 13 months (interquartile range 5-24); 1-year survival rate was 65%. Aneurysm diameter>80 mm (Hazard-Ratio:2.0;95%CI:1.0-30.5; P =0.037), technical failure (HR:2.6;95%CI:1.1-6.5; P =0.045) and pulmonary complications (HR:3.0;95%CI:1.2-7.9; P =0.021) were independent risk factors for follow-up mortality. CONCLUSION: Endovascular repair of rTAAA shows high technical success; the presence of free rupture alone appear not to correlate with early mortality. Effective prevention/management of post-operative complications is crucial for survival.

Medical and interventional outcome of dissection of the cervical arteries: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The management of cervical artery dissections (CADs) is poorly standardized given the scarce number of prospective studies comparing medical and interventional approach to CAD. The aim of the present study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the treatments of CAD. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis (pre-registered on PROSPERO [CRD42022297512] are performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines searching in three different databases [PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Database]) of studies on medical or interventional approach to CAD. Only prospective studies were selected to reduce the risk of bias for the primary meta-analysis. Secondarily, retrospective studies were also included. The aim was to assess the rate of stroke and of stroke/death/bleeding (major or intracranial) by Der Simonian-Laird weights of random effects model. RESULTS: After screening 456 articles, 6 prospective and 22 retrospective studies were identified. Two randomized controlled trials and five retrospective studies comparing antiplatelet (APT) vs oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC) for CAD were identified, as well as four prospective and 17 retrospective single-arm studies evaluating stenting for CAD. In the meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing APT vs OAC, 444 patients were considered, and a borderline significant association was identified in terms of stroke/death in the APT vs OAC groups (odds ratio [OR], 5.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-33.38; P = .06; I2 = 0%). No differences were found for the stroke/death/bleeding outcome (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.19-8.18; P = .81; I2 = 0%) between the two treatments. In the meta-analysis including also retrospective studies, overall risk of bias was considered "serious," and 4104 patients were included with no differences in APT vs OAC for stroke (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.53-2.11; P = .29; I2 = 18%); no other comparisons were possible. The pooled meta-analysis of prospective studies on stenting for CAD included four series, for a total of 68 patients, in whom stenting was adopted primarily after failed medical therapy or after traumatic dissection. The pooled rate of stroke/death was 7% (95% CI, 3%-17%; I2 = 0%). The analysis of moderators identified a significant inverse association between the percentage of traumatic dissection and a reduction in postoperative stroke (Y = -1.60-2.02X; P = .03). The pooled rate of the composite endpoint of stroke/death/ or major bleeding was 8% (95% CI, 3%-18%; I2 = 0%). Secondarily, the meta-analysis also included 17 retrospective studies with overall 457 patients and showed a 2.1% pooled rate of stroke/death (95% CI, 1.0%-3.3%; I2 = 0%) and 3.2% stroke/death/bleeding (95% CI, 1.8%-4.7%; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Few prospective studies on CAD treatment are present in literature. APT and OAC seem to have similar efficacy in reducing the recurrence of stroke after CAD. No definitive conclusion can be drawn for stenting, due to the low number of studies available. More prospective studies are necessary to evaluate its potential additional value over medical therapy alone in the early phase after CAD.

Effect Of Fenestration Configuration On Renal Artery Outcomes During Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of fenestration configuration and fenestration gap on renal artery outcomes during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR). METHODS: A retrospective multicenter analysis was performed, including patients with complex aortic aneurysms treated with F/BEVAR that incorporated at least one small fenestration to a renal artery. The renal fenestrations were divided into groups 1 (8x6 mm) and 2 (6x6 mm). Primary patency, target vessel instability (TVI), freedom from secondary interventions (SIs), occurrence of type IIIc endoleak, all related to the renal arteries, were analyzed at 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year landmarks. The fenestration gap (FG) distance was analyzed as a modifier, and clustering was addressed at the patient level. RESULTS: Seven hundred and ninety-six patients were included in this study, 71.7% male, with a mean age of 73.3±8.1 years. The mean follow-up was 30.0±20.6 months. Of the 1474 small renal fenestrations analyzed, 47.6% were 8x6, and 52.4% were 6x6mm. At the 30-day landmark, primary patency (99.9% vs 98.0%, p-value <0.001 for groups 1 and 2, respectively), freedom from TVI (99.6% vs 97.1%, p-value <0.001 for groups 1 and 2, respectively), and freedom from SI (99.8% vs 98.4%, p-value = .022 for groups 1 and 2, respectively) were higher in 8x6 compared to 6x6 fenestrations, and the incidence of AKI was similar across the groups (92.6% vs 92.7%, p-value = .953 for groups 1 and 2 respectively). The primary patency at 1 and 5 years was higher in 8x6 fenestrations (1-year: 98.8% vs 96.9%; 5-year: 97.8% vs 95.7%, for groups 1 and 2, respectively, p values = .010 and 0.021 for 1 and 5 year comparisons, respectively). The freedom from SIs was significantly higher among 6x6 fenestrations at 5 years (93.1% vs 96.4%, for groups 1 and 2, respectively, p value = .007). The groups were equally as likely to experience a type Ic endoleak (1.3 % and 1.6% for 8x6 and 6x6mm fenestrations, respectively, p = .689). The 6x6 fenestrations were associated with higher risk of kidney function deterioration (17.8%) when compared with 8x6 fenestrations (7.6%) at 5 years (p <.001). The risk of type IIIc endoleak was significantly higher among 8x6 fenestrations at 5 years (4.9% and 2% for 8x6 and 6x6 mm fenestrations, respectively, p= .005). A FG ≥5 mm negatively impacted the cumulative 5-year freedom from TVI (group 1: FG ≥5 mm = 0.714, FG <5 mm = 0.857, p<.001; group 2: FG ≥5 mm = 0.761, FG <5 mm = 0.929, p<.001) and the cumulative 5-year freedom from type IIIc endoleak (group 1: FG ≥5 mm = 0.759, FG <5 mm = 0.921, p=.034; group 2: FG ≥5 mm = 0.853, FG <5 mm = 0.979, p<.001) in both groups and the cumulative 5-year patency in group 2 (group 1: FG ≥5 mm = 0.963, FG <5 mm = 0.948, p=.572; group 2: FG ≥5 mm = 0.905, FG <5 mm = 0.938, p=.036). CONCLUSIONS: Fenestration configuration for the renal arteries impacts outcomes. The 8x6 small fenestrations have better patency at 30-days, 1 year, and 5 years, while 6x6 small fenestrations are associated with lower rates of secondary interventions, primarily due to a lower incidence of type IIIc endoleaks. Fenestration gap ≥ 5 mm at the level of the renal arteries significantly impacts the freedom from TVI, freedom from type IIIc endoleak and 5-year patency independently of the fenestration size or vessel diameter.

Prospective evaluation of upper extremity access and total transfemoral approach during fenestrated and branched endovascular repair.

OBJECTIVE: Total transfemoral (TF) access has been increasingly used during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR). However, it is unclear whether the potential decrease in the risk of cerebrovascular events is offset by increased procedural difficulties and other complications. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of FB-EVAR using a TF vs upper extremity (UE) approach for target artery incorporation. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical data of consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized clinical trial in two centers to investigate the use of FB-EVAR for treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) between 2013 and 2022. Patients were classified into TF or UE access group with a subset analysis of patients treated using designs with directional branches. End points were technical success, procedural metrics, 30-day cerebrovascular events defined as stroke or transient ischemic attack, and any major adverse events (MAEs). RESULTS: There were 541 patients (70% males; mean age, 74 ± 8 years) treated by FB-EVAR with 2107 renal-mesenteric TAs incorporated. TF was used in175 patients (32%) and UE in 366 patients (68%) including 146 (83%) TF and 314 (86%) UE access patients who had four or more TAs incorporated. The use of a TF approach increased from 8% between 2013 and 2017 to 31% between 2018 and 2020 and 96% between 2021 and 2022. Compared with UE access patients, TF access patients were more likely to have CAAAs (37% vs 24%; P = .002) as opposed to TAAAs. Technical success rate was 96% in both groups (P = .96). The use of the TF approach was associated with reduced fluoroscopy time and procedural time (each P < .05). The 30-day mortality rate was 0.6% for TF and 1.4% for UE (P = .67). There was no early cerebrovascular event in the TF group, but the incidence was 2.7% for UE patients (P = .035). The incidence of MAEs was also lower in the TF group (9% vs 18%; P = .006). Among 237 patients treated using devices with directional branches, there were no significant differences in outcomes except for a reduced procedural time for TF compared with UE access patients (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: TF access was associated with a decreased incidence of early cerebrovascular events and MAEs compared with UE access for target artery incorporation. Procedural time was decreased in TF access patients irrespective of the type of stent graft design.

Aneurysm sac shrinkage at 1 year after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of complex aortic aneurysms offers mid-term survival advantage.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of 1-year changes in aneurysm sac diameter on patient survival after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of patients enrolled in a prospective nonrandomized study investigating FB-EVAR (2013-2022). Patients with sequential follow up computed tomography scans at baseline and 6 to 18 months after FB-EVAR were included in the analysis. Aneurysm sac diameter change was defined as the difference in maximum aortic diameter from baseline measurements obtained in centerline of flow. Patients were classified as those with sac shrinkage (≥5 mm) or failure to regress (<5 mm or expansion) according to sac diameter change. The primary end point was all-cause mortality. Secondary end points were aortic-related mortality (ARM), aortic aneurysm rupture (AAR), and aorta-related secondary intervention. RESULTS: There were 549 patients treated by FB-EVAR. Of these, 463 patients (71% male, mean age, 74 ± 8 years) with sequential computed tomography imaging were investigated. Aneurysm extent was thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms in 328 patients (71%) and abdominal aortic aneurysms in 135 (29%). Sac shrinkage occurred in 270 patients (58%) and failure to regress in 193 patients (42%), including 19 patients (4%) with sac expansion at 1 year. Patients from both groups had similar cardiovascular risk factors, except for younger age among patients with sac shrinkage (73 ± 8 years vs 75 ± 8 years; P < .001). The median follow-up was 38 months (interquartile range, 18-51 months). The 5-year survival estimate was 69% ± 4.1% for the sac shrinkage group and 46% ± 6.2% for the failure to regress group. Survival estimates adjusted for confounders (age, chronic pulmonary obstructive disease, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, and aneurysm extent) revealed a higher hazard of late mortality in patients with failure to regress (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.52; P = .005). The 5-year cumulative incidences of ARM (1.1% vs 3.1%; P = .30), AAR (0.6% vs 2.6%; P = .20), and aorta-related secondary intervention (17.0% ± 2.8% vs 19.0% ± 3.8%) were both comparable between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Aneurysm sac shrinkage at 1 year is common after FB-EVAR and is associated with improved patient survival, whereas sac enlargement affects only a minority of patients. The low incidences of ARM and AAR indicate that failure to regress may serve as a surrogate marker for nonaortic-related death.

Pre-emptive False Lumen Embolization to Prevent Persistent Type II Endoleak in Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Repair of Post-Dissection Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

PURPOSE: The purpose was to describe a technique to promote false lumen (FL) thrombosis in post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (PD-TAAAs) managed by fenestrated/branched endografting (F/B-EVAR). TECHNIQUE: A 5/6Fr-90 cm length sheath is advanced from the true lumen (TL) to FL through the most distal entry tear of the infrarenal aorta or iliac arteries. It is parked in the most cranial portion of the FL in the thoracic aorta. Aortic endografts are deployed in the TL excluding all the para-visceral/distal entry tears and target visceral vessels bridging stenting is performed. A selective FL angiography is performed through the 5/6Fr sheath to detect the origin of all segmentary arteries. Embolization of FL is performed from above to below by M-reye pushable coils, obtaining the packaging of FL. After completion angiography, the 5/6Fr sheath is retrieved in external iliac artery and molding ballooning of the distal segment of the aortic/iliac endograft is performed. Between 2019 and 2023, this technique was applied in 11cases with a median number of 73 (interquartile range [IQR=12) coils. Out of 8 (72%) patients with available radiological follow-up at 1 year, 7 exhibited complete FL thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: The FL coiling in PD-TAAAs managed by F/B-EVAR is feasible, safe, and effective to promote the complete FL thrombosis. CLINICAL IMPACT: Preemptive false lumen embolization is a feasible, safe, and effective technique for preventing persistent type II endoleaks after fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. This technique may be routinely recommended to promote FL thrombosis and aortic remodeling after FB-EVAR in PD-TAAAs, thereby reducing the incidence of reinterventions during follow-up.

Cook Zenith Alpha Endograft: A Protocol to Minimise Limb Graft Occlusion.

OBJECTIVE: Numerous articles have reported an increased incidence of limb graft occlusion (LGO) with the Cook Zenith Alpha endograft compared with other endografts in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). The present study aimed to assess the rate of LGO after EVAR in particular with the Cook Zenith Alpha device when adhering to a standardised protocol designed to prevent limb related complications. METHODS: This was a non-sponsored retrospective study performed in two university vascular surgery centres employing the same protocol for limb complication prevention during EVAR from 2016 to 2019. The protocol encompassed: (1) angioplasty of any common/external iliac artery with > 50% stenosis before endograft navigation; (2) proximal sealing zone of limbs at the same level of the flow divider with minimum overlap, which is more restrictive than the Cook Zenith Alpha instructions for use; (3) semicompliant kissing ballooning of limbs; (4) limb stenting in case of any residual tortuosity/kinking/stenosis; and (5) adjunctive common and external iliac stenting for residual stenosis/dissection after EVAR. Patients enrolled in this study were treated with standard aorto-bis-iliac EVAR. Follow up was performed by clinical visit and duplex ultrasonography at discharge, six months, and yearly thereafter. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the LGO rate with different EVAR devices (Cook Zenith Alpha, Gore C3, and Medtronic Endurant) and to determine potential risk factors for LGO associated with the Zenith Alpha. RESULTS: In the study period, 547 EVARs were considered: 233 (42.6%) Cook Zenith Alpha, 196 (35.8%) Gore Excluder, and 118 (21.6%) Medtronic Endurant. The mean follow up was 44 ± 23 months, and the five year freedom from LGO was 97 ± 3%, without differences between groups (97 ± 2%, 95 ± 3%, and 100% with Cook Zenith Alpha, Medtronic Endurant, and Gore Excluder, respectively; p = .080). In the Zenith Alpha group, intra-operative adjunctive iliac artery angioplasty, iliac artery stenting, or iliac limb stenting was performed in 8%, 3.4%, and 9.7%, respectively. Analysis of potential risk factors for LGO identified external iliac artery distal landing and large main bodies (ZIMB 32 - 36) independently associated with LGO during follow up (hazard ratio [HR] 18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3 - 130, p = .004; and HR 12, 95% CI 1.2 - 130, p = .030, respectively). CONCLUSION: The present experience with a protocol for limb complication prevention allows one to obtain a low rate of LGO at five years with Zenith Alpha endografts similar to other endografts. Specific risk factors for the Cook Zenith Alpha endograft are the external iliac artery distal landing and the use of a large main body (ZIMB 32 - 36).

How We Would Treat Our Own Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

This manuscript is intended to provide a comprehensive review of the current state of knowledge on endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). The management of these complex aneurysms requires an interdisciplinary and patient-specific approach in high-volume centers. An index case is used to discuss the diagnosis and treatment of a patient undergoing fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair for a TAAA.

The mid-term results of the Carotid Asymptomatic Stenosis (CARAS) observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACAS) remains a subject of debate. Current recommendations are based on randomized trials conducted over 20 years ago and improvements in medical therapies may have reduced the risk of cerebral ischemic events (CIE). This study presents a mid-term analysis of results from an ongoing prospective observational study of ACAS patients to assess their CIE risk in a real-world setting. METHODS: This is a prospective observational cohort study of patients with ACAS >60 % (NASCET criteria) identified in a single duplex ultrasonography (DUS) vascular laboratory (trial registered: NCT04825080). Patients were not considered for CEA due to their short life expectancy (<3 year) or absence of signs of plaque vulnerability (ulceration, ipoechogenic core). Patient enrollment started in January 2019 and ended in March 2020 with a targeted sample size of 300 patients.A 5-year follow-up was scheduled. Clinical characteristics, risk factors, and medical therapies were documented, and, when necessary, the best medical therapy (BMT), involving antiplatelet agents, blood pressure control, and statins, was recommended during clinical visits. The primary endpoint was to asses CIEs (including strokes, transient ischemic attacks, amaurosis-fugax) ipsilateral to ACAS along with plaque progression rate and patients survival. Follow-up involved annual clinical visit and carotid DUS examination, complemented by telephone interviews at six-month intervals. RESULTS: The study included 307 patients, with an average age of 80 ± 7 years, of whom 55 % were male. Contralateral stenosis exceeding 60 % was present in 61 (20 %) patients. Seventy-seven percent of patients were on BMT. At a mean follow-up of 41±9 months, 7 ispilateral strokes and 9 TIAs occurred, resulting in 14 CIEs (2 patients experienced both TIA and stroke). According to Kaplan-Meier analysis, the 4-year CIE rate was 6±2 %, with an annual CIE rate of 1.5 %. Fifty-eight (19 %) patients had a stenosis progression which was associated with a higher 4-year estimated CIE rate compared to patients with stable plaque (10.3 % vs 3.2 %, P=.01). Similarly, a contralateral carotid stenosis >60 % was associated with a higher 4-year estimated CIE rate: 11.7 % vs 2.9 %, P=.002. These factors were independently associated with high risk for CIE at the multivariate COX analysis: Hazard Ratio (HR): 3.2; 95 % Confidence Interval: 1.1-9.2 and HR: 3.6; 95 % CI: 1.2-10.5. CONCLUSION: The mid-term results of this prospective study suggest that the incidence of CIE in ACAS patients should not be underestimated, with plaque progression and contralateral stenosis serving as primary predictors of CIEs.

Outcomes of Elective and Non-elective Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Aortic Repair for Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes after elective and non-elective fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). BACKGROUND: FB-EVAR has been increasingly utilized to treat TAAAs; however, outcomes after non-elective versus elective repair are not well described. METHODS: Clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing FB-EVAR for TAAAs at 24 centers (2006-2021) were reviewed. Endpoints including early mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), all-cause mortality, and aortic-related mortality (ARM), were analyzed and compared in patients who had non-elective versus elective repair. RESULTS: A total of 2603 patients (69% males; mean age 72±10 year old) underwent FB-EVAR for TAAAs. Elective repair was performed in 2187 patients (84%) and non-elective repair in 416 patients [16%; 268 (64%) symptomatic, 148 (36%) ruptured]. Non-elective FB-EVAR was associated with higher early mortality (17% vs 5%, P <0.001) and rates of MAEs (34% vs 20%, P <0.001). Median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range, 7-37 months). Survival and cumulative incidence of ARM at 3 years were both lower for non-elective versus elective patients (50±4% vs 70±1% and 21±3% vs 7±1%, P <0.001). On multivariable analysis, non-elective repair was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.92; 95% CI] 1.50-2.44; P <0.001) and ARM (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.63-3.62; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-elective FB-EVAR of symptomatic or ruptured TAAAs is feasible, but carries higher incidence of early MAEs and increased all-cause mortality and ARM than elective repair. Long-term follow-up is warranted to justify the treatment.

The optimal operative protocol to accomplish CO2-EVAR resulting from a prospective interventional multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: Carbon dioxide (CO2) angiography for endovascular aortic repair (CO2-EVAR) is used to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), especially in patients with chronic kidney disease or allergy to iodinated contrast medium (ICM). However, some technical issues regarding the visualization of the lowest renal artery (LoRA) and the best quality image through angiographies performed from pigtail or introducer sheath are still unsolved. The aim of this study was to analyze different steps of CO2-EVAR to create an operative standardized protocol. METHODS: Patients undergoing CO2-EVAR were prospectively enrolled in five European centers from 2019 to 2021. CO2-EVAR was performed using an automated injector (pressure, 600 mmHg; volume, 100 cc); a small amount of ICM was injected in case of difficulty in LoRA visualization. LoRA visualization and image quality (1 = low, 2 = sufficient, 3 = good, 4 = excellent) were analyzed at different procedure steps: preoperative CO2 angiography from pigtail and femoral introducer sheath (first step), angiographies from pigtail at 0%, 50%, and 100% of proximal main body deployment (second step), contralateral hypogastric artery (CHA) visualization with CO2 injection from femoral introducer sheath (third step), and completion angiogram from pigtail and femoral introducer sheath (fourth step). Intraoperative and postoperative CO2-related adverse events were also evaluated. χ2 and Wilcoxon tests were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: In the considered period, 65 patients undergoing CO2-EVAR were enrolled (55/65 [84.5%] male; median age, 75 years [interquartile range (IQR), 11.5 years]). The median ICM injected was 17 cc (IQR, 51 cc); 19 (29.2%) of 65 procedures were performed with 0 cc ICM. Fifty-five (84.2%) of 65 patients underwent general anesthesia. In the first step, median image quality was significantly higher with CO2 injected from femoral introducer (pigtail, 2 [IQR, 3] vs introducer, 3 [IQR, 3]; P = .008). In the second step, LoRA was more frequently detected at 50% (93% vs 73.2%; P = .002) and 100% (94.1% vs 78.4%; P = .01) of proximal main body deployment compared with first angiography from pigtail; similarly, image quality was significantly higher at 50% (3 [IQR, 3] vs 2 [IQR, 3]; P ≤ .001) and 100% (4 [IQR, 3] vs 2 [IQR, 3]; P = .001) of proximal main body deployment. CHA was detected in 93% cases (third step). The mean image quality was significantly higher when final angiogram (fourth step) was performed from introducer (pigtail, 2.6 ± 1.1 vs introducer, 3.1 ± 0.9; P ≤ .001). The intraoperative (7.7%) and postoperative (12.5%) adverse events (pain, vomiting, diarrhea) were all transient and clinically mild. CONCLUSIONS: Preimplant CO2 angiography should be performed from femoral introducer sheath. Gas flow impediment created by proximal main body deployment can improve image quality and LoRA visualization with CO2. CHA can be satisfactorily visualized with CO2 alone. Completion CO2 angiogram should be performed from femoral introducer sheath. This operative protocol allows performance of CO2-EVAR with 0 cc or minimal ICM, with a low rate of mild temporary complications.

Outcomes of iliofemoral conduits during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the technical pitfalls and outcomes of iliofemoral conduits during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 466 consecutive patients enrolled in a previous prospective nonrandomized study to investigate FB-EVAR for CAAAs/TAAAs (2013-2021). Iliofemoral conduits were performed through open surgical technique (temporary or permanent) in patients with patent internal iliac arteries or endovascular technique among those with occluded internal iliac arteries. End points were assessed in patients who had any iliac conduit or no conduits, and in patients who had conduits performed prior or during the index FB-EVAR, including procedural metrics, technical success, and major adverse events (MAE). RESULTS: There were 138 CAAAs, 141 extent IV, and 187 extent I-III TAAAs treated by FB-EVAR with an average of 3.89 ± 0.52 vessels incorporated per patient. Any iliac conduit was required in 35 patients (7.5%), including 24 patients (10.4%) treated between 2013 and 2017 and 11 (4.7%) who had procedures between 2018 and 2021 (P = .019). Nineteen patients had permanent conduits using iliofemoral bypass, 11 had temporary iliac conduits, and 5 had endoconduits. Iliofemoral conduits were necessary in 12% of patients with extent I to III TAAA, in 6% with extent IV TAAA, and in 3% with CAAA (P = .009). The use of iliofemoral conduit was more frequent among women (74% vs 27%; P < .001) and in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (49% vs 28%; P = .013), peripheral artery disease (31% vs 15%; P = .009), and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of III or higher (74% vs 51%; P = .009). There were no inadvertent iliac artery disruptions in the entire study. The 30-day mortality and MAE were 1% and 19%, respectively, for all patients. An iliofemoral conduit using retroperitoneal exposure during the index FB-EVAR was associated with longer operative time (322 ± 97 minutes vs 323 ± 110 minutes vs 215 ± 90 minutes; P < .001), higher estimated blood loss (425 ± 620 mL vs 580 ± 1050 mL vs 250 ± 400 mL; P < .001), and rate of red blood transfusion (92% vs 78% vs 32%; P < .001) and lower technical success (83% vs 87% vs 98%; P < .001), but no difference in intraoperative access complications and MAEs, compared with iliofemoral conduits without retroperitoneal exposure during the index FB-EVAR and control patients who had FB-EVAR without iliofemoral conduits, respectively. There were no differences in mortality or in other specific MAE among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR with selective use of iliofemoral conduits was safe with low mortality and no occurrence of inadvertent iliac artery disruption or conversion. A staged approach is associated with shorter operating time, less blood loss, and lower transfusion requirements in the index procedure.

Outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair in patients with or without prior history of abdominal endovascular or open surgical repair.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) in patients with or without prior history of abdominal open surgical (OSR) or endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). METHODS: The clinical data of consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective, non-randomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR for treatment of CAAAs and TAAAs was reviewed. Clinical outcomes were analyzed in patients with no previous aortic repair (Controls), prior EVAR (Group 1), and prior abdominal OSR (Group 2), including 30-day mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), patient survival and freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), secondary interventions, any type II endoleak, sac enlargement (≥5 mm), and new-onset permanent dialysis. RESULTS: There were 506 patients (69% male; mean age, 72 ± 9 years) treated by FB-EVAR, including 380 controls, 54 patients in Group 1 (EVAR), and 72 patients in Group 2 (abdominal OSR). FB-EVAR was performed on average 7 ± 4 and 12 ± 6 years after the index EVAR and abdominal OSR, respectively (P < .001). All three groups had similar clinical characteristics, except for less coronary artery disease in controls and more TAAAs and branch stent graft designs in Group 2 (P < .05). Aneurysm extent was CAAA in 144 patients (28%) and TAAA in 362 patients (72%). Overall technical success, mortality, and MAE rate were 96%, 1%, and 14%, respectively, with no difference between groups. Mean follow up was 30 ± 21 months. Patient survival was significantly lower in Group 2 (P = .03), but there was no difference in freedom from ARM and secondary interventions at 5 years between groups. Group 1 patients had lower freedom from any type II endoleak (P = .02) and sac enlargement (P < .001), whereas Group 2 patients had lower freedom from new-onset permanent dialysis (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR was performed with high technical success, low mortality, and similar risk of MAEs, regardless of prior history of abdominal aortic repair. Patient survival was significantly lower in patients who had previous abdominal OSR, but freedom from ARM and secondary interventions were similar among groups. Patients with prior EVAR had lower freedom from type II endoleak and sac enlargement. Patients with prior OSR had lower freedom from new-onset dialysis.

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.

Comparison of single- and multistage strategies during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of single or multistage approach during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of extensive thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of consecutive patients treated by FB-EVAR for extent I to III TAAAs in 24 centers (2006-2021). All patients received a single brand manufactured patient-specific or off-the-shelf fenestrated-branched stent grafts. Staging strategies included proximal thoracic aortic repair, minimally invasive segmental artery coil embolization, temporary aneurysm sac perfusion and combinations of these techniques. Endpoints were analyzed for elective repair in patients who had a single- or multistage approach before and after propensity score adjustment for baseline differences, including the composite 30-day/in-hospital mortality and/or permanent paraplegia, major adverse event, patient survival, and freedom from aortic-related mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1947 patients (65% male; mean age, 71 ± 8 years) underwent FB-EVAR of 155 extent I (10%), 729 extent II (46%), and 713 extent III TAAAs (44%). A single-stage approach was used in 939 patients (48%) and a multistage approach in 1008 patients (52%). A multistage approach was more frequently used in patients undergoing elective compared with non-elective repair (55% vs 35%; P < .001). Staging strategies were proximal thoracic aortic repair in 743 patients (74%), temporary aneurysm sac perfusion in 128 (13%), minimally invasive segmental artery coil embolization in 10 (1%), and combinations in 127 (12%). Among patients undergoing elective repair (n = 1597), the composite endpoint of 30-day/in-hospital mortality and/or permanent paraplegia rate occurred in 14% of single-stage and 6% of multistage approach patients (P < .001). After adjustment with a propensity score, multistage approach was associated with lower rates of 30-day/in-hospital mortality and/or permanent paraplegia (odds ratio, 0.466; 95% confidence interval, 0.271-0.801; P = .006) and higher patient survival at 1 year (86.9±1.3% vs 79.6±1.7%) and 3 years (72.7±2.1% vs 64.2±2.3%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.714; 95% confidence interval, 0.528-0.966; P = .029), compared with a single stage approach. CONCLUSIONS: Staging elective FB-EVAR of extent I to III TAAAs was associated with decreased risk of mortality and/or permanent paraplegia at 30 days or within hospital stay, and with higher patient survival at 1 and 3 years.

Endovascular Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm With Severe Angulation of Infrarenal Aortic Neck by Gore Conformable Endograft.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study is to report a single-center experience with the Gore Excluder conformable endograft with active control system (CEXC Device, W.L. Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, AZ, USA) in abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with severe infrarenal neck angulation. METHODS: All patients underwent EVAR with CEXC Device between September 2018 and 2020, were prospectively enrolled, and retrospectively analyzed. Anatomical details of the proximal aortic neck were evaluated. Early endpoints were the use of repositionability and angulation system, intraoperative unplanned cuff, technical success (TS), 30-day morbidity/mortality, and reintervention. Follow-up endpoints were type-I endoleaks, endograft migration, aortic neck dilatation, aneurismal sac shrinkage, survival (S), and freedom from reintervention (FFR). RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled (median age: 80 [range = 60-90] years, median AAA diameter: 60 [range = 52-90] mm). All patients had severe infrarenal neck angulation (beta angle ≧ 60°), and 11 (44%) of those had neck beta angle ≧ 90°. Median infrarenal neck angle, length, and diameter were 70° (range = 60°-90°), 22 (range = 13-42) mm and 22 (range = 18-31) mm, respectively. Endograft repositioning system was employed in 15 (60%) cases and the median number of repositioning maneuvers was 1 (range:0-4). Active angulation system was used in 17 (68%) patients. The median proximal diameter of the main-body and oversize were 28 (range = 23-36) mm and 28% (range = 21%-38%), respectively. Proximal cuff was positioned in 1 (4%) patient. Technical success was achieved in all cases. Intraoperative and perioperative morbidity and mortality were 12% and 0%, respectively. Perioperative type-I/III and II endoleaks were observed in 0 and 4 (16%) patients, respectively. The median follow-up was 12 months (range: 3-30). One patient died at 12-month for AAA-unrelated causes. Abdominal aortic aneurysm-sac shrinkage and stability were observed in 9 (36%) and 15 (60%) cases, respectively. No type-I/III endoleak and reintervention occurred during the follow-up. One persistent type-II endoleak was observed. Estimated survival at 24 months was 92%. CONCLUSION: According to the present data, the CEXC Device allows an excellent rate of TS in severe angulated aortic neck. This preliminary data, could increase the rate of patients eligible for EVAR.

Technical Pitfalls for Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair Following PETTICOAT.

PURPOSE: The Provisional Extension to Induce Complete Attachment Technique (PETTICOAT) uses a bare-metal stent to scaffold the true lumen in patients with acute or subacute aortic dissections. While it is designed to facilitate remodeling, some patients with chronic post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) require repair. This study describes the technical pitfalls of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) in patients who underwent prior PETTICOAT repair. TECHNIQUE: We report 3 patients with extent II TAAAs who had prior bare-metal dissection stents treated by FB-EVAR. Two patients required maneuvers to reroute the aortic guidewire, which was initially placed in-between stent struts. This was recognized before the deployment of the fenestrated-branched device. A third patient had difficult advancement of the celiac bridging stent due to a conflict of the tip of the stent delivery system into one of the stent struts, requiring to redo catheterization and pre-stenting with a balloon-expandable stent. There were no mortalities and target-related events after a follow-up of 12 to 27 months. CONCLUSION: FB-EVAR following the PETTICOAT is infrequent, but technical difficulties should be recognized to prevent complications from the inadvertent deployment of the fenestrated-branched stent-graft component in-between stent struts. CLINICAL IMPACT: The present study highlights a few maneuvers to prevent or overcome possible complications during endovascular repair of chronic post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm following PETTICOAT. The main problem to be recognized is the placement of the aortic wire beyond one of the struts of the existing bare-metal stent. Moreover, encroachment of catheters or the bridging stent delivery system into the stent struts may potentially cause difficulties.

Renal Benefits of CO2 as a Contrast Media for EVAR Procedures: New Perspectives on 1 Year Outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Endovascular aneurism repair (EVAR) is a minimally invasive alternative to open surgery for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Iodine contrast medium (ICM) is considered the gold standard, at the high price of related nephrotoxicity and allergic reactions. Carbon dioxide (CO2) has been suggested as an alternative non-nephrotoxic contrast media agent. We aimed to evaluate the safety and the renal impact of the administration of CO2, compared with ICM in EVAR procedures. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS: We retrospectively reviewed data of patients who underwent EVAR at the Vascular Surgery Department of the Sant'Orsola Hospital in Bologna. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was evaluated before intervention, immediately after and at 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 22 patients received CO2 and low-dose ICM (CO2 Group) and 22 received standard ICM (Control Group), matched for clinical characteristics and renal function at the time of procedure. Pre and post-operative renal function values (eGFR) were compared between the two groups: in the immediate post-operative the group treated with CO2 and low-dose ICM globally showed a slight improvement in renal function (mean eGFR +5.10%±3.2), meanwhile the group treated with standard dose of ICM presented a significant worsening of renal function compared with pre-procedure values (mean eGFR -9.65%±4). Incidence of post-contrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI) was 9% in the CO2 group vs 27% in the Control group. At 12 months, the renal impairment was significantly greater in the ICM group than in the CO2 group (mean eGFR decrease -19.2%±11.1 and -7.40%±3.5, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of either CO2 alone or along with low-dose ICM showed to be safer than full-dose ICM alone, lowering the incidence of PC-AKI in patients undergoing EVAR. Unexpectedly, our study revealed also a significant worsening of renal function in patients treated with standard dose of ICM in 1-year follow-up, introducing the concept that acute renal damage caused by ICM could elicit a chronic injury process that affect long-term renal outcomes. CLINICAL IMPACT: Evaluating the safety and the renal impact of the administration of CO2, compared to Iodinate Contrast Medium, in EVAR procedures represents a first step in order to further tayloring medical procedures on patients characteristics. Our findings can guide the clinicians and surgeons in the procedures choice, not considering only the immediate effect of ICM on renal function but also the potential long-term effects.

Revascularisation of Chronic Limb Threatening Ischaemia in Patients with no Pedal Arteries Leads to Lower Midterm Limb Salvage.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI) involving the infragenicular arteries is treated by distal angioplasty or pedal bypass; however, this is not always possible, due to chronically occluded pedal arteries (no patent pedal artery, N-PPA). This pattern represents a hurdle to successful revascularisation, which must be limited to the proximal arteries. The aim of the study was to analyse the outcome of patients with CLTI and N-PPA after a proximal revascularisation. METHODS: All patients with CLTI submitted to revascularisation in a single centre (2019 - 2020) were analysed. All angiograms were reviewed to identify N-PPA, defined as total obstruction of all pedal arteries. Revascularisation was performed with proximal surgical, endovascular, and hybrid procedures. Early and midterm survival, wound healing, limb salvage, and patency rates were compared between N-PPA and patients with one or more patent pedal artery (PPA). RESULTS: Two hundred and eighteen procedures were performed. One hundred and forty of 218 (64.2%) patients were male, mean age 73.2 ± 10.6 years. The procedure was surgical in 64/218 (29.4%) cases, endovascular in 138/218 (63.3%), and hybrid in 16/218 (7.3%). N-PPA was present in 60/218 (27.5%) cases. Eleven of 60 (18.3%) cases were treated surgically, 43/60 (71.7%) by endovascular and 6/60 (10%) by hybrid procedures. Technical success was similar in the two groups (N-PPA 85% vs. PPA 82.3%, p = .42). At a mean follow up of 24.5 ± 10.2 months, survival (N-PPA 93.7 ± 3.5% vs. PPA 95.3 ± 2.1%, p = .22) and primary patency (N-PPA 53.1 ± 8.1% vs. PPA 55.2 ± 5%, p = .56) were similar. Limb salvage was significantly lower in N-PPA patients (N-PPA 71.4 ± 6.6% vs. PPA 81.5 ± 3.4%, p = .042); N-PPA was an independent predictor of major amputation (hazard ratio [HR] 2.02, 1.07 - 3.82, p = .038) together with age > 73 years (HR 2.32, 1.17 - 4.57, p = .012) and haemodialysis (2.84, 1.48 - 5.43, p = .002). CONCLUSION: N-PPA is not uncommon in patients with CLTI. This condition does not hamper technical success, primary patency, and midterm survival; however, midterm limb salvage is significantly lower than in patients with PPA. This should be considered in the decision making process.

Timing of Intervention for Aortic Intramural Hematoma.

Intramural hematoma (IMH) is one of the acute aortic syndromes along with acute aortic dissection and penetrating aortic ulcer. The three conditions can occur alone or in combination with overlapping presentation. Medical, open surgical, and endovascular treatment is tailored depending on clinical presentation, timing, and location within the aorta. Among patients who present with acute IMH affecting the ascending aorta (Type A), urgent open surgical repair is considered the primary line of treatment in patients who are suitable candidates and unstable. The management of IMH in the descending aorta and aortic arch (Type B) is similar to that applied to treat acute dissections in the same segment. Medical treatment with sequential imaging is recommended in patients with uncomplicated course, and endovascular repair is indicated in patients with rupture, persistent pain, end-organ ischemia, or rapid aortic enlargement. This review discusses the ideal timing for treatment of IMH.