A single-center experience of type B aortic intramural hematoma.

OBJECTIVE: The outcomes of the best medical treatment (BMT) and intervention treatment (INT) in a single-center experience were reported in type B intramural hematoma (IMH). METHODS: From February 2015 to February 2021, a total of 195 consecutive patients with type B IMH were enrolled in the study. The primary end point was mortality, and the secondary end points included clinical and imaging outcomes. The clinical outcomes were aortic-related death, retrograde type A aortic dissection, stent graft-induced new entry tear, endoleak, and reintervention. The imaging outcome was evaluated through the latest follow-up computed tomography angiography, which included aortic rupture, aortic dissection, aortic aneurysm, rapid growth of aortic diameter, newly developed or enlarged penetrating aortic ulcer or ulcer-like projection (ULP) and increased aortic wall thickness. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to assess the association between different treatments. RESULTS: Among the enrolled patients, 115 received BMT, and 80 received INT. There was no significant difference in early (1.7% vs 2.5%; P = 1.00) and midterm all-cause death (8.3% vs 5.2%; P = .42) between the BMT and INT groups. However, patients who underwent INT were at risk of procedure-related complications such as stent graft-induced new entry tear and endoleaks. The INT group was associated with a profound decrease in the risk of ULP, including newly developed ULP (4.3% vs 26.9%; P < .05), ULP enlargement (6.4% vs 31.3%; P < .05), and a lower proportion of high-risk ULP (10.9% vs 45.6%; P < .05). Although there was no significant difference in the incidence of IMH regression between the two groups, the maximum diameter of the descending aorta in patients receiving INT was larger compared with those treated with BMT. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our limited experience, patients with type B IMH treated with BMT or INT shared similar midterm clinical outcome. Patients who underwent INT may have a decreased risk of ULPs, but a higher risk of procedure-related events and patients on BMT should be closely monitored for ULP progression.

Longer Operative Time for Lower Extremity Bypass Surgery is Associated With Inferior Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to assess the association of operative time with the postoperative length of stay and unplanned return to the operating room in patients undergoing femoral to below knee popliteal bypasses, stratified by autologous vein graft or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of vascular quality initiative database (2003-2021). The selected patients were grouped into the following: vein bypass (group I) and PTFE (group II) patients. Each group was further stratified by a median split of operative time (i.e., 210 min for autologous vein and 155 min for PTFE) to study the outcomes. The outcomes were assessed by univariate and multivariate approach. RESULTS: Of the 10,902 patients studied, 3570 (32.7%) were in the autologous vein group, while 7332 (67.3%) were in the PTFE group. Univariate analysis revealed autologous vein and PTFE graft recipients that had increased operative times were associated with a longer mean postoperative length of stay and a higher incidence of all-cause return to the operating room. In PTFE group, patients with prolonged operative times were also found to be associated with higher incidence of major amputation, surgical site infection, and cardiovascular events, along with loss of primary patency within a year. CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing femoral to below knee popliteal bypasses using an autologous vein or PTFE, longer operative times were associated with inferior outcomes. Mortality was not found to be associated with prolonged operative time.

Differential impacts of clinical, anatomical, and procedural factors on early and late mortality following open thoracoabdominal aortic repair: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The operative outcomes of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) are challenged by high operative mortality and disabling complications. This study aimed to explore the baseline clinical, anatomical, and procedural risk factors that impact early and late outcomes following open repair of TAAAs. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of 290 patients who underwent open repair of TAAAs between 1992 and 2020 at a tertiary referral center. Determinants of early mortality (within 30 days or in hospital) were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression models, while those of overall follow-up mortality were explored using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models and landmark analyses. RESULTS: The rates of early mortality and spinal cord deficits were 13.1% and 11.0%, respectively, with Crawford extent II showing the highest rates. In the logistic regression models, older age (P < 0.001), high cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time (P < 0.001), and low surgical volume of the surgeon (P < 0.001) emerged as independent factors significantly associated with early mortality. During follow-up (median, 5.0 years; interquartile range, 1.1-7.6 years), 82 late deaths occurred (5.7%/patient-year). Cox proportional hazards models demonstrated that older age (P < 0.001) and low hemoglobin level (P = 0.032) were significant risk factors of overall mortality, while the landmark analyses revealed that the significant impacts of low surgical volume (P = 0.017), high CPB time (P = 0.002), and Crawford extent II (P = 0.017) on mortality only remained in the early postoperative period, without significant late impacts (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: There were differential temporal impacts of perioperative risk variables on mortality in open repair of TAAAs, with older age and low hemoglobin level having significant impacts throughout the postoperative period, and low surgical volume, high CPB time, and Crawford extent II having impacts in the early postoperative phase.

Midterm survival after aortic repair versus conservative treatment in patients with penetrating aortic ulcer.

Background: The clinical outcomes and survival of patients with penetrating aortic ulcers (PAU) were evaluated in a tertiary care hospital, comparing those who underwent aortic repair to those treated conservatively. Patients and methods: A retrospective single-centre analysis included all patients that underwent a computed tomography angiography (CT-A) scan with the diagnosis of a PAU between January 2009 and May 2019. "PAU" was identified in 1,493 of 112,506 CT-A scan reports in 576 patients. Clinical and angiomorphological data were collected. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), with secondary outcomes focusing on identifying risk factors for poor OS. Survival probabilities were analysed by the Kaplan-Meier method using the log-rank test. A Cox hazard model using survival as dependent variable with stepwise backward eliminations based on the likelihood ratios was employed. Results: 315 PAUs were identified in 278 patients. The prevalence in the cohort was 0.8%. The mean age of the patients was 74.4 years, and they were predominantly male (n = 208, 74.8%). The mean ulcer depth was 11.8 mm (range 2-50 mm). Out of the patients, 232 were asymptomatic (83.5%). Among 178 PAUs (56.5%), high-risk factors, such as ulcer depth >10 mm, aortic diameter >40 mm, and ulcer length >20 mm, were observed. Aortic repair was associated with a better mean OS compared to conservatively managed patients (72.6 versus 32.2 months, p = 0.001). The Cox hazard model showed that ulcer depth >1 mm was associated with poor OS (HR 0.67, p = 0.048), while aortic repair was related to a better OS (HR 4.365, p<0.013). Conclusions: Aortic repair is associated with better OS, but this finding should be interpreted with caution because of differences in age and comorbidities between the groups. Further evaluation is warranted through prospective studies with randomized groups. Further assessment for angiomorphological parameters is recommended to identify patients at increased risk for poor OS.

Temporal Trends and Outcomes of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Care in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has had a dynamic impact on abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) care, often supplanting open AAA repair (OAR). Accordingly, US AAA management is often highlighted by disparities in patient selection and guideline compliance. The purpose of this analysis was to define secular trends in AAA care. METHODS: The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for all EVARs and OARs (2011-2021). End points included procedure utilization, change in mortality, patient risk profile, Society for Vascular Surgery-endorsed diameter compliance, off-label EVAR use, cross-clamp location, blood loss, in-hospital complications, and post-EVAR surveillance missingness. Linear regression was used without risk adjustment for all end points except for mortality and complications, for which logistic regression with risk adjustment was used. RESULTS: In all, 66 609 EVARs (elective, 85% [n=55 805] and nonelective, 15% [n=9976]) and 13 818 OARs (elective, 70% [n=9706] and nonelective, 30% [n=4081]) were analyzed. Elective EVAR:OAR ratios were increased (0.2 per year [95% CI, 0.01-0.32]), while nonelective ratios were unchanged. Elective diameter threshold noncompliance decreased for OAR (24%→17%; P=0.01) but not EVAR (mean, 37%). Low-risk patients increasingly underwent elective repairs (EVAR, +0.4%per year [95% CI, 0.2-0.6]; OAR, +0.6 points per year [95% CI, 0.2-1.0]). Off-label EVAR frequency was unchanged (mean, 39%) but intraoperative complications decreased (0.5% per year [95% CI, 0.2-0.9]). OAR complexity increased reflecting greater suprarenal cross-clamp rates (0.4% per year [95% CI, 0.1-0.8]) and blood loss (33 mL/y [95% CI, 19-47]). In-hospital complications decreased for elective (0.7% per year [95% CI, 0.4-0.9]) and nonelective EVAR (1.7% per year [95% CI, 1.1-2.3]) but not OAR (mean, 42%). A 30-day mortality was unchanged for both elective OAR (mean, 4%) and EVAR (mean, 1%). Among nonelective OARs, an increase in both 30-day (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.1-1.5]) and 1-year mortality (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.3-1.6]) was observed. Postoperative EVAR surveillance acquisition decreased (67%→49%), while 1-year mortality among patients without imaging was 4-fold greater (9.2% versus imaging, 2.0%; odds ratio, 4.1 [95% CI, 3.8-4.3]; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There has been an increase in EVAR and a corresponding reduction in OAR across the United States, despite established concerns surrounding guideline adherence, reintervention, follow-up, and cost. Although EVAR morbidity has declined, OAR complication rates remain unchanged and unexpectedly high. Opportunities remain for improving AAA care delivery, patient and procedure selection, guideline compliance, and surveillance.

Midterm outcomes of "wide neck" abdominal aortic aneurysm after open or endovascular repair in two European centers: a propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare mid-term clinical and morphological outcomes in patients undergoing open (OR) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with a proximal wide neck abdominal aortic aneurysm (WN-AAA). METHODS: Between 2009 and 2014 data of all patients undergoing OR at IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital and EVAR at German Aortic Center Hamburg were retrospectively analyzed. Primary endpoints were aneurysm-related mortality at 5 years, reintervention, and overall mortality. Secondary endpoint was proximal neck enlargement. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. Survival and freedom from AAA-related reintervention were investigated in matched OR and EVAR group by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Of all OR performed at IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital 70 were found to have a proximal neck >28 mm (mean age: 69.8±7.2 years, 67 [95.71%] male); of all consecutive EVAR performed at German Aortic Center Hamburg, 52 required an endograft size of at least 32 mm (mean age of 73.1±8.7 years, 49 [94.2%] male). After PSM, the study cohort consisted of 30 OR and EVAR. One early mortality was registered in both groups (P=NS). Mid-term freedom from reintervention compared in OR and EVAR, with no statistically significant differences (P=0.979). Eight (15.4%) patients treated with EVAR developed a significant proximal diameter enlargement (≥3 mm) while only 1 (1.4%) patient in the OR group had the same evolution (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In WN-AAA neck enlargement is observed more frequently in patients undergoing EVAR, but reintervention rate was similar in the 2 groups, demonstrating that both options were safe and effective.

Phase-specific survival after endovascular versus open surgical repair of descending thoracic aortic aneurysm.

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has gained preference over open surgical repair (OSR) as the intervention of choice for patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (DTA). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients with DTA undergoing OSR and TEVAR with contemporary findings. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was conducted to identify relevant randomized controlled trials or studies utilizing propensity-score analysis or reporting risk-adjusted outcomes. The search was performed up until March 2023. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, including 4 studies using propensity-score matching and four studies reporting risk-adjusted outcomes, comprising 14,873 patients with DTA undergoing OSR (N.=10,882) and TEVAR (N.=3991). Operative mortality was similar between the two interventions (odds ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.70-1.21, P=0.57, I2=0%). However, overall long-term mortality was significantly higher after TEVAR compared to OSR (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.30, 95% CI 1.05-1.59, P=0.01, I2=0%). Phase-specific analysis revealed comparable risks of mortality within 1 year and between one and two years after interventions, while the risk of mortality was significantly higher after TEVAR compared to OSR beyond two years (HR 1.77, 95% CI, 1.19-2.63, P=0.01. I2=0%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated comparable operative mortality between OSR and TEVAR, but higher long-term mortality associated with TEVAR in patients with DTA. The phase-specific analysis highlighted the survival advantage of OSR beyond 2 years. These findings suggest a need for reconsidering OSR indications in the management of DTA.

Two surgical strategies (early carotid reperfusion vs. Central aortic repair-first) of acute type a aortic dissection complicated with cerebral malperfusion syndrome: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Cerebral malperfusion (CM) is a common comorbidity in acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD), which is associated with high mortality and poor neurological prognosis. This meta-analysis investigated the surgical strategy of ATAAD patients with CM, aiming to compare the difference in therapeutic effectiveness between the central repair-first and the early reperfusion-first according to clinical outcomes. METHODS: The meta-analysis and systematic review was conducted based on studies sourced from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane literature database, in which cases of ATAAD with CM underwent surgical repair were included. Data for baseline characteristics, mortality, survival were extracted, and risk ratio (RR) values and the pooled mortality were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 17 retrospective studies were analyzed, including 1010 cases of ATAAD with CM underwent surgical repair. The pooled early mortality in early reperfusion group was lower (8.1%; CI, 0.02 to 0.168) than that in the central repair group (16.2%; CI, 0.115 to 0.216). The pooled long-term mortality was 7.9% in the early reperfusion cohort and 17.4% the central repair-first cohort, without a statistically significant heterogeneity (I [2] = 51.271%; p = 0.056). The mean time of symptom-onset-to-the-operation-room in all the reports was 8.87 ± 12.3 h. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggested that early reperfusion-first may achieved better outcomes compared to central repair-first in ATAAD patients complicated with CM to some extent. Early operation and early restoration of cerebral perfusion may reduce the occurrence of some neurological complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The meta-analysis was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (No. CRD CRD42023475629) on Nov. 8th, 2023.

Aortic arch surgery for DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection in patients aged 60 years or younger.

BACKGROUND: Extended aortic repair is considered a key issue for the long-term durability of surgery for DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection. The risk of aortic degeneration may be higher in young patients due to their long life expectancy. The early outcome and durability of aortic surgery in these patients were investigated in the present study. METHODS: The subjects of the present analysis were patients under 60 years old who underwent surgical repair for acute DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection at 18 cardiac surgery centres across Europe between 2005 and 2021. Patients underwent ascending aortic repair or total aortic arch repair using the conventional technique or the frozen elephant trunk technique. The primary outcome was 5-year cumulative incidence of reoperation on the distal aorta. RESULTS: Overall, 915 patients underwent surgical ascending aortic repair and 284 patients underwent surgical total aortic arch repair. The frozen elephant trunk procedure was performed in 128 patients. Among 245 propensity score-matched pairs, total aortic arch repair did not decrease the rate of distal aortic reoperation compared to ascending aortic repair (5-year cumulative incidence, 6.7% versus 6.7%, subdistributional hazard ratio 1.127, 95% c.i. 0.523 to 2.427). Total aortic arch repair increased the incidence of postoperative stroke/global brain ischaemia (25.7% versus 18.4%, P = 0.050) and dialysis (19.6% versus 12.7%, P = 0.003). Five-year mortality was comparable after ascending aortic repair and total aortic arch repair (22.8% versus 27.3%, P = 0.172). CONCLUSIONS: In patients under 60 years old with DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection, total aortic arch replacement compared with ascending aortic repair did not reduce the incidence of distal aortic operations at 5 years. When feasible, ascending aortic repair for DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection is associated with satisfactory early and mid-term outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04831073.

Physician-modified versus chimney endografting for pararenal aortic aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the existing published evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of the endovascular aortic repair with chimney technique (ch-EVAR) and physician-modified stent-grafts (PMSGs) for the treatment of pararenal aortic aneurysm repair. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search of all relevant studies reported until October 2023 according to the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines was performed. The pooled 30-day mortality, peri- and postoperative complication rates were estimated using fixed or random effect methods. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 679 study titles were identified by the initial search strategy, of which 16 were considered eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. A total of 1094 patients (ch-EVAR N.=861 and PMSG N.=233) (90% male) were identified. The pooled 30-day mortality rate was 3.4% for ch-EVAR and 2.6% for PMSG. The major adverse events (MAE) in the early period was 14.7% for ch-EVAR and 18.5% PMSG, respectively. Higher occlusion rate was observed of the chimney stents grafts (8.2%) than the bridging stents (1.4%) during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Ch-EVAR and physician-modified technology are safe with low 30-day mortality in elective settings for pararenal aortic aneurysms repair. No significant differences were seen between the two surgical methods regarding the early major adverse events rate. However, higher occlusion rate for the chimneys can be expected over time.

Glycemic Variability as a Predictor of Graft Failure Following Infrainguinal Bypass for Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Glycemic variability (GV), measured as the change in visit-to-visit glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), increases the risk of multiple adverse outcomes. However, the impact of GV on graft patency following infrainguinal bypass (IIB) is unknown. A retrospective cohort study was undertaken to assess the impact of GV on graft patency. METHODS: A 3-year single-center retrospective case notes analysis of all people undergoing IIB between 2017 and 2019. Rutherford stage, graft conduit, level of bypass, procedure details, baseline demographics, comorbidities, and GV were assessed. Time to reintervention, ipsilateral amputation, or death was recorded to determine primary patency (PP). RESULTS: One hundred six IIB outcomes were analyzed: mean (± standard deviation) age 68.0 (9.2) years; 69 (65.1%) male, 37 (33.9%), 75 (70.8%) had diabetes mellitus; and 46 (43.4%) underwent elective procedures. GV > 9.1% was associated with significantly lower median PP than GV < 9.1%, 198 (97-753.5) vs. 713 (166.5-1,044.5) days (P = 0.045). On univariate analysis, GV > 9.1% vs. < 9.1% was significantly associated with PP (hazard ratio [HR] 1.85 [confidence interval {CI} 1.091-3.136], P = 0.022). Bypass level was also a univariate predictor, with below knee bypasses (HR 2.31 [CI 1.164-4.564], P = 0.017), and tibial (HR 2.00 [CI 1.022-3.090], P < 0.043) having lower PP than above knee bypasses. On multivariate adjustment, GV > 9.1% and level of bypass remained independent predictors of PP, HR 1.96 (95% CI: 1.12-3.42, P = 0.018) and HR 2.54 (95% CI: 1.24-5.22, P = 0.011), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: GV is an independent predictor of PP following infrainguinal bypass, thus optimizing GV should be a therapeutic target.

Treatment of Aorto-iliac and Infrainguinal Vascular Infections with a Prefabricated Bovine Pericardial Graft.

BACKGROUND: The use of biological grafts provides acceptable mid- and long-term results in native or prosthetic vascular infections. Several reports describe the successful use of bovine pericardium in case of vascular infections, mainly as a large patch to be sutured as a tubular graft. Recently, a novel prefabricated bovine pericardium graft (Biointegral Surgical No-React® Inc, Mississauga, ON, Canada) has been introduced in clinical practice with promising results. In this study, we report our preliminary experience utilizing Biointegral Surgical graft in case of native and or prosthetic aorto-iliac and infrainguinal infection. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 20 patients with native or prosthetic aorto-iliac and infrainguinal infection who underwent in situ reconstruction (ISR) with a Biointegral Surgical No-React bovine pericardium prosthesis between October 2020 and February 2023 at the Vascular Surgery Unit of the Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Gemelli - IRCCS in Rome, Italy. All patients followed a standardized protocol including postoperative anticoagulation and long-term intravenous antibiotics. RESULTS: The indication for surgery was: mycotic aortic aneurysm in 4 patients (20%), graft infection after abdominal aortic repair in 11 patients (55%), peripheral graft infection in 5 patients (25%). Complete excision of the infected aorta or prosthetic graft, surgical debridement and ISR were performed in all patients. Hospital mortality rate was 5% (n = 1) and graft-related mortality of 0%. During follow-up (median 13 months, range 6-34 months), reinfection was 5.2% and primary graft patency 94.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The use of prefabricated bovine pericardial grafts represents a promising option for the treatment of native and prosthetic aorto-iliac and infrainguinal infections. The application of this biological graft with a standardized postoperative protocol has been associated with a satisfactory patency and reinfection rate without increased bleeding complications.

Popliteal-to-Distal Extreme Bypass in Endovascular Era.

BACKGROUND: Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is characterized by rest pain and tissue loss, with an annual mortality rate of 20% and amputation rate of 40%, if not treated. Open bypass surgery is recommended in CLTI, depending on the availability of good quality venous material, outflow artery patency, and surgical expertise. The aim of the study is to analyze primary patency, limb salvage, and survival rate in patients undergoing popliteal-to-distal bypass. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent popliteal-to-distal bypass surgery between January 2016 and December 2021 were enrolled in the study. Primary outcomes were primary patency, limb salvage, and overall survival. Secondary outcomes included amputation-free survival and secondary patency. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were included during the study. Technical success was achieved in 100% of cases. Target outflow artery was in 27% (n. 13) of cases the anterior tibial artery, in 27% (n. 13) the dorsalis pedis, in 2% (n. 1) the peroneal artery, in 30% (n. 15) the retromalleolar tibial artery, in 10% (n. 5) the medial plantar artery, and in 4% (n. 2) the tarsal artery. Two-year primary patency was 85% ± 5. Secondary patency rates were 86% ± 3 at 2 years. The overall survival was 81% ± 6 at 2 years, the amputation-free survival was 70% ± 9, and the limb salvage rate was 81% ± 6. CONCLUSIONS: Popliteal-to-distal bypass requires high technical expertise to be performed. When a good autologous vein and adequate outflow artery are present, they can be feasible with good patency rates and overall survival.

Long-Term Outcomes of Anatomical and Extra-Anatomical Bypass for the Treatment of Unilateral Iliac Artery Lesions a Systematic Review Aggregated Data and Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the long-term safety and efficacy of anatomical and extra-anatomical bypass for the treatment of unilateral iliac artery disease. METHODS: A systematic search on PubMed, Scopus and Web of science for articles published by June 2023 was performed. We implemented a 2-stage individual participant data meta-analysis and pooled survival probabilities using the multivariate methodology of DerSimonian and Laird. The primary endpoint was primary patency at 5 and 10 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Ten studies encompassing 1,907 patients were included. The 5- and 10-year pooled patency rates for anatomical bypass were 83.27% (95% confidence interval (CI): 69.99-99.07) and 77.30% (95% CI: 60.32-99.04), respectively, with a mean primary patency time representing the duration individuals remained event-free for 10.08 years (95% CI: 8.05-10.97). The 5- and 10-year pooled primary patency estimates for extra-anatomical bypass were 77.02% (95% CI: 66.79-88.80) and 68.54% (95% CI: 53.32-88.09), respectively, with a mean primary patency time of 9.25 years, (95% CI: 7.21-9.68). Upon 2-stage individual participant data meta-analysis, anatomical bypass displayed a decreased risk for loss of primary patency compared to extra-anatomical bypass, hazard ratio 0.51 (95% CI: 0.30-0.85). The 5- and 10-year secondary patency estimates for anatomical bypass were 96.83% (95% CI: 90.28-100) and 96.13% (95% CI: 88.72-100), respectively. The 5- and 10-year secondary patency estimates for extra-anatomical bypass were 91.39% (95% CI: 84.32-99.04) and 85.05% (95% CI: 74.43-97.18), respectively, with non-statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. The 5- and 10-year survival for patients undergoing anatomical bypass were 67.99% (95% CI: 53.84-85.85) and 41.09% (95% CI: 25.36-66.57), respectively. The 5- and 10-year survival for extra-anatomical bypass were 70.67% (95% CI: 56.76-87.98) and 34.85% (95% CI: 19.76-61.44), respectively. The mean survival time was 6.92 years (95% CI: 5.56-7.89) for the anatomical and 6.78 years (95% CI: 5.31-7.63) for the extra-anatomical groups. The pooled overall 30-day mortality was 2.32% (95% CI: 1.12-3.87) with metaregression analysis displaying a negative association between the year of publication and mortality (ß =-0.0065, P < 0.01). Further analysis displayed a 30-day mortality of 1.29% (95% CI: 0.56-2.26) versus 4.02% (95% CI: 1.78-7.03), (P = 0.02) for studies published after and before the year 2000. Non-statistically significant differences were identified between the 2 groups concerning long-term and 30-day mortality outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: While we have demonstrated favorable long-term primary and secondary patency outcomes for both surgical techniques, anatomical bypass exhibited a reduced risk of primary patency loss potentially reflecting its inherent capacity to circumvent the anticipated disease progression in the distal aorta and the contralateral donor artery. The reduction in perioperative mortality observed in our review, coupled with the anachronistic demographic characteristics and inclusion criteria presented in the existing literature, underscores the imperative necessity for contemporary research.

A Multicenter Study of the Mid-term Outcomes of Patients with Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection After Distal Porous Talos Stent-Graft Implantation.

BACKGROUND: The Talos stent-graft has extended length to improve aortic remodeling, and distal porous design to decrease the rate of spinal cord ischemia (SCI). This study retrospectively analyzed its mid-term outcomes for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection in a multicenter study. METHODS: The primary safety end point was 30-day major adverse events, including all-cause mortality, dissection-related mortality, conversion to open surgery, and device-related adverse events. The primary efficacy end point was treatment success at 12 months postoperation, defined as no technical failure or secondary dissection-related reintervention. The survival status of the patients was visualized using the Kaplan-Meier curve. Aortic growth was assessed at 4 levels, and SCI was evaluated at 12 months. RESULTS: 113 patients participated with a mean age of 54.4 (11.1) years and 71.7% (81/113) were male. The 30-day mortality was 0.9% (1/113), no conversions to open surgery or device-related adverse events were recorded. The 12-month treatment success rate was 99.1% (112/113), with no dissection-related reinterventions. There was no spinal cord or visceral ischemia at 12 months. At a median of 34 months follow-up, 9 further deaths were recorded and the 3-year survival rate was 91.7%. The percentage of aortic growth was 1.8% (2/111) at the tracheal bifurcation, 3.6% (4/111) below the left atrium, 6.0% (5/83) above the celiac artery, and 12.1% (9/74) below the lower renal artery. The total thrombosis rate of the false lumen at the stented segment was 80.5% (91/113). CONCLUSIONS: The results showed satisfactory results of Talos stent-graft in terms of safety and efficacy. More data are needed to confirm the long-term performance.

Early multicentric outcomes of the on-label and CE-marked combination of the Endurant with the Radiant chimney graft for the chimney endovascular aortic repair (EnChEVAR): The LaMuR Registry.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the early results of the CE-marked standardized device combination consisting of Endurant and the Radiant chimney graft (En-ChEVAR) for the treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms. METHODS: We analyzed multicentric non-industry sponsored case series evaluating the EnChEVAR technique for patients treated between December 2022 and February 2024. Clinical, perioperative procedure-related and radiological data were collected. The primary outcome measure was the freedom of a type Ia gutter-related endoleak at postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA). Secondary outcome measures included early type Ia endoleak-related reinterventions, target vessel complications including dissection or loss of target vessel, major adverse events, and mortality. Continuous variables were presented as median (interquartile range [IQR]) and categorical variables as count and percentage. RESULTS: Ten patients were included in the present study. Eight (80%) were males, in nine cases a single chimney was implanted, and the other one was a double chimney graft placement. The treated aneurysms had an infrarenal neck length of 3.4 (1.2) mm. The rate of main body oversizing was 30%. The new neck length after chimney graft placement was 18 (3) mm. The median procedural time was 130 (17) mm, contrast medium use was 109 (26) mL, radiation time was 45 (12) min. The technical success was 100%. No type Ia endoleak was detected at the postoperative CTA. There were no target vessel issues. No major adverse events or death were observed. CONCLUSIONS: First reported cohort of patients treated with EnChEVAR demonstrated reproducible clinical and procedural outcomes within the 3 vascular centers with total exclusion of the aneurysms, patent renal arteries, and no evidence of gutter-related type IA endoleak. Further evidence with larger sample size of treated patients and longer follow-up are needed.

Editor's Choice - Outcomes of Off the Shelf Outer Branched Versus Inner Branched Endografts in the Treatment of Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in the B.R.I.O. (BRanched Inner - Outer) Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare two commercially available off the shelf branched endografts for thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair, namely the E-nside (Artivion) and Zenith t-Branch (Cook Medical) devices. METHODS: This multicentre retrospective study (2020 - 2023) included patients treated by branched endovascular aortic repair (BEVAR) for TAAA using the inner branched E-nside or the outer branched t-Branch. Endpoints were 30 day technical success and major adverse events (MAEs) as well as one year freedom from target vessel instability and main endograft instability. RESULTS: The study included 163 patients: 79 (307 target vessels) treated with E-nside and 84 (325 target vessels) with t-branch. Aneurysm extent was I - III in 91 patients (55.8%; 47% of E-nside and 66% of t-Branch) and IV in 72 patients (44.2%; 53% of E-nside and 34% of t-Branch) (p = .011). An adjunctive proximal thoracic endograft was used in 43% of E-nside vs. 69% of t-Branch (p < .001), with less frequent thoracic endografting (14% vs. 76%; p < .001) and shorter length of coverage (p = .024) in extent IV TAAA treated by E-nside. E-nside cases had shorter renal artery bridging lengths (66 ± 17 mm vs. 76 ± 20 mm; p < .010) and less frequent use of a distal bifurcated endograft (53% vs. 80%; p < .001). Comparing 30 day results, the mortality rate was 1% vs. 2% (p = .62), any MAE occurred in 18% vs. 21% (p = .55), the stroke rate was 3% vs. 0% (p = .23), and the elective spinal cord ischaemia rate was 5% vs. 8% (p = .40) for E-nside and t-Branch, respectively. At one year, freedom from target vessel instability was 96 ± 3% for E-nside and 95 ± 3% for t-Branch (p = .58), and freedom from endograft instability was 98 ± 2% vs. 97 ± 3% (p = .46), respectively. CONCLUSION: Both off the shelf devices provided excellent early and one year results. The E-nside may require shorter thoracic aortic coverage and bridging length for the renal arteries, and less frequent implantation of a concomitant proximal thoracic or distal abdominal bifurcated endograft. However, these aspects did not determine significant differences in clinical outcomes.

Aortobifemoral bypass vs covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation.

BACKGROUND: Covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation (CERAB) is increasingly used as a first line-treatment in patients with aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). We sought to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent CERAB compared with the gold standard of aortobifemoral bypass (ABF). METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for patients who underwent ABF or CERAB from 2009 to 2021. Propensity scores were generated using demographics, comorbidities, Rutherford class, and urgency. The two groups were matched using 5-to-1 nearest-neighbor match. Our primary outcomes were 1-year estimates of primary patency, major adverse limb events (MALEs), MALE-free survival, reintervention-free survival, and amputation-free survival. Standard statistical methods were used. RESULTS: A total of 3944 ABF and 281 CERAB cases were identified. Of all patients with AIOD, the proportion of CERAB increased from 0% to 17.9% between 2009 and 2021. Compared with ABF, patients who underwent CERAB were more likely to be older (64.7 vs 60.2; P < .001) and more often had diabetes (40.9% vs 24.1%; P < .001) and end-stage renal disease (1.1% vs 0.3%; P = .03). In the matched analysis (229 CERAB vs 929 ABF), ABF patients had improved MALE-free survival (93.2% [±0.9%] vs 83.2% [±3%]; P < .001) and lower rates of MALE (5.2% [±0.9%] vs 14.1% [±3%]; P < .001), with comparable primary patency rates (98.3% [±0.3%] vs 96.6% [±1%]; P = .6) and amputation-free survival (99.3% [±0.3%] vs 99.4% [±0.6%]; P = .9). Patients in the CERAB group had significantly lower reintervention-free survival (62.5% [±6%] vs 92.9% [±0.9%]; P < .001). Matched analysis also revealed shorter length of stay (1 vs 7 days; P < .001), as well as lower pulmonary (1.2% vs 6.6%; P = .01), renal (1.8% vs 10%; P < .001), and cardiac (1.8% vs 12.8%; P < .001) complications among CERAB patients. CONCLUSIONS: CERAB had lower perioperative morbidity compared with ABF with a similar primary patency 1-year estimates. However, patients who underwent CERAB experienced more major adverse limb events and reinterventions. Although CERAB is an effective treatment for patients with AIOD, further studies are needed to determine the long-term outcomes of CERAB compared with the established durability of ABF and further define the role of CEARB in the treatment of AIOD.

Current outcomes following upper and lower extremity arterial trauma from the National Trauma Data Bank.

OBJECTIVE: The modern treatments of trauma have changed in recent years. We aim to evaluate the factors associated with limb salvage and mortality after extremity arterial trauma, especially with respect to the type of conduit used in revascularization. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank was queried to identify patients with upper and lower extremity (UE and LE) arterial injuries between 2016 and 2020. The patients were stratified by the types of arterial repair. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: 8780 patients were found with 5054 (58%) UE and 3726 (42%) LE injuries. Eighty-three percent were men, and the mean age was 34 ± 15 years. Penetrating mechanism was the predominant mode of injury in both UEs and LEs (73% and 67%, respectively) with a mean injury severity score of 14 ± 8. For UEs, the majority underwent primary repair (67%, P < .001), whereas the remainder received either a bypass (20%) or interposition graft (12%). However, LEs were more likely to receive a bypass (52%, P < .00001) than primary repair or interposition graft (34% and 14%, respectively). Compared with the extremely low rates of amputation and mortality among UE patients (2% for both), LE injuries were more likely to result in both amputation (10%, P < .001) and death (6%, P < .001). Notably, compared with primary repair, the use of a prosthetic conduit was associated with a 6.7-fold increase in the risk of amputation in UE and a 2.4-fold increase in LE (P < .0001 for both). Synthetic bypasses were associated with a nearly 3-fold increase in return to the operating room (OR) in UE bypasses (P < .05) and a 2.4-fold increase in return to the OR in LE bypasses (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In recent years, most extremity vascular trauma was due to penetrating injury with a substantial burden of morbidity and mortality. However, both limb salvage rates and survival rates have remained high. Overall, LE injuries more often led to amputation and mortality than UE injuries. The most frequently used bypass conduit was vein, which was associated with less risk of unplanned return to the OR and limb loss, corroborating current practice guidelines for extremity arterial trauma.

Center-level outcomes following elective fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative database.

OBJECTIVE: Hospital volume is associated with mortality after open aortic aneurysm repair. Fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (B-FEVAR) has been increasingly used for repair of complex thoracoabdominal and juxtarenal aneurysms, but evidence of a center-volume relationship is limited. We aimed to measure the association of center volume with in-hospital mortality, postoperative outcomes, and 1-year survival following B-FEVAR. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective endovascular thoracoabdominal and complex abdominal aneurysm repair with branch intervention (2014-2021) listed within the national Vascular Quality Initiative Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair/Complex EVAR database were analyzed. Centers were grouped into quartiles by mean annual procedure volume. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the effect of center volume on in-hospital mortality adjusting for baseline and procedural characteristics. Kaplan-Meier estimation, log rank test, and mixed effects Cox regression were used to evaluate 1-year survival. RESULTS: A total of 4302 adult elective F-BEVAR procedures were identified at a total of 163 centers. In-hospital mortality did not differ by hospital volume (quartile [Q]1 = 35/1059 [3.3%]; Q2 = 30/1063 [2.8%]; Q3 = 33/1120 [2.9%]; and Q4 = 44/1060 [4.2%]; P = .308). The high volume group had a higher rate of major complication (Q1 = 14.9%; Q2 = 12.8%; Q3 = 13.3%; and Q4 = 20.1%; adjusted P < .001). Physician-modified grafts were more frequently employed in high-volume centers (Q1 = 4.5%; Q2 = 18.7%; Q3 = 11.3%; and Q4 = 19.2%; P < .001), with a decreased incidence of any endoleak noted at the end of the procedure (Q1 = 34.9%; Q2 = 32.8%; Q3 = 30.0%; and Q4 = 29.0%; P = .003). In the multivariable analysis, in-hospital mortality was not associated with center volume, comparing very low volume to medium- and high-volume centers (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] vs Q4: Q1 = 1.1 [0.6-1.9], Q2 = 0.6 [0.4-1.1], and Q3 = 0.9 [0.5-1.5]; all P > .05). No significant difference was found in 1-year survival between center volume groups. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital mortality is not associated with procedure volume within centers performing complex endovascular aortic repair. However, complication rates and endoleak may be associated with procedure volume. Long-term outcomes by annualized procedure volume, specifically graft durability and sac expansion, should be investigated.