Effect of Family History of Aortic Disease on Outcomes of Fenestrated/Branched Endovascular Aneurysm Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The clinical significance of family history (FH) of aortic disease on the outcomes of fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FB-EVAR) has not been well described. This study aimed to assess how FH of aortic disease affects outcomes following FB-EVAR for complex aortic aneurysms (CAAs). METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of consecutive patients enrolled in 10 ongoing, prospective, non-randomised, physician sponsored, investigational device exemption studies to evaluate FB-EVAR (2005 - 2022) in the United States Aortic Research Consortium database. Patients were stratified by presence or absence of FH of any aortic disease in any relative. Patients with confirmed genetically triggered aortic diseases were excluded. Primary outcomes were 30 day major adverse events (MAEs) and late survival. Secondary outcomes included late secondary interventions and aneurysm sac enlargement. RESULTS: During the study period, 2 901 patients underwent FB-EVAR. A total of 2 355 patients (81.2%) were included in the final analysis: 427 (18.1%) with and 1 928 (81.9%) without FH of aortic disease. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and aneurysm extent were similar between the groups. Patients with FH of aortic disease more frequently had prior open abdominal aortic repair, but less frequently had prior endovascular aneurysm repair (p < .050). There were no statistically significant differences in 30 day mortality (4% vs. 2%; p = .12) and MAEs for patients with or without FH of aortic disease (12% vs. 12%; p = .89). Three year survival estimates were 71% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 - 0.78%) and 71% (95% CI 0.68 - 0.74%), respectively (p = .74). Freedom from secondary intervention and aneurysm sac enlargement were also not statistically significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: A family history of aortic disease had no impact on 30 day and midterm outcomes of FB-EVAR of CAAs. In the absence of an identified genetically triggered aortic disease, treatment selection for CAAs should be based on clinical risk and patient anatomy rather than FH of aortic disease.

Prospective randomized pilot trial comparing prophylactic vs therapeutic cerebrospinal fluid drainage during complex endovascular thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular techniques have transformed the management of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). However, spinal cord ischemia (SCI) remains a prevalent and devastating complication. Prophylactic drainage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is among the proposed strategies for prevention of SCI. Although prophylactic CSF drainage is widely used and conceptually attractive, prophylactic CSF drains have not been demonstrated to definitively prevent the occurrence nor mitigate the severity of SCI in endovascular TAAA repair. Whether or not outcomes of prophylactic drains are superior to therapeutic drains remains unknown. This pilot study was performed to determine the feasibility of a randomized clinical trial designed to investigate the role of prophylactic vs therapeutic CSF drains in the prevention of SCI in patients undergoing endovascular TAAA repair using branched and fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FBEVAR). METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter randomized pilot clinical trial conducted at The University of Alabama at Birmingham and The University of Massachusetts. Twenty patients were enrolled and randomized to either the prophylactic drainage or therapeutic drainage groups, prior to undergoing FBEVAR for extensive TAAAs and arch aortic aneurysms. This was a pilot feasibility study that was not powered to detect statistical differences in clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was feasibility of randomization and compliance with a shared lumbar drain protocol. Secondary outcomes included rate of drain complications and SCI. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled and successfully randomized, without any crossovers, to either the control cohort (n = 10), without prophylactic drains, or the experimental cohort (n = 10), with prophylactic drains. There were no differences in age, comorbidities, or history of prior aortic surgery across the cohorts. All patients were treated with FBEVAR. Aneurysm classifications were as follows: Extent I (10%), Extent II (50%), Extent III (35%), and Extent IV (5%). The average length of aortic coverage was 207 ± 21.6 mm. The length of aortic coverage did not vary across cohorts, nor did procedural times or blood loss volume. Compliance with the SCI prevention protocol was 100% across both groups. Within the prophylactic drain cohort, one patient experienced an adverse event related to lumbar drain placement, manifested as an epidural hematoma requiring laminectomy, without neurologic deficit (n = 1/10; 10%). There was one SCI event (n = 1/20; 5%), which occurred in the prophylactic drain cohort on postoperative day 9 following an episode of hypotension related to a gastrointestinal bleed. CONCLUSIONS: The role of prophylactic CSF drains for the prevention of SCI following endovascular TAAA repair is a topic of ongoing research, with many current practices based on expert opinion and experience, rather than rigorous scientific data. This study demonstrates the feasibility of a multicenter randomized clinical trial to evaluate the role of prophylactic vs therapeutic CSF drains in the prevention of SCI in patients undergoing endovascular TAAA repair.

Occurrence, predictors, and management of late vascular complications following extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

OBJECTIVE: Vascular complications (VCs) associated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) during index hospitalization are prevalent and associated with increased mortality. Few studies have evaluated late VCs following ECMO; this study aims to assess occurrence and management practices of late VCs following discharge. METHODS: A retrospective single-institution review was performed of all patients surviving initial hospitalization after being cannulated for central or peripheral veno-venous (VV) or veno-arterial (VA) ECMO between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020. Primary outcomes were to categorize and determine the rate of late VCs. Late VCs were defined as any cannulated vessel injury resulting from ECMO cannulation presenting after discharge from index hospitalization. Analysis was conducted by cannulated vessel and stratified by VV or VA ECMO configurations. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients were identified, of which 50.6% (n = 116) survived until discharge. Late VCs occurred in 7.8% of the surviving cohort (n = 9/116); with a median time until presentation of 150 days (interquartile range, 83-251 days). The most common late VC was infection (n = 5; 55.6%) followed by progression to limb-threatening ischemia (n = 4; 44.4%). Urgent procedures were required in 55.6% of patients (n = 5), whereas 44.4% (n = 4) were elective interventions. Interventions performed for management of late VCs included lower extremity arterial revascularization (n = 6; 66.7%), major (n = 1; 11.1%) or minor amputation (n = 1; 11.1%), and wound debridement (n = 1; 11.1%). The majority of patients presenting with late VCs had initially been cannulated for peripheral VA ECMO (n = 8; 88.9%), and one patient (11.1%) was cannulated for peripheral VV ECMO. VCs during index hospitalization were seen in 77.8% of patients (n = 7) returning with late VCs. Odds for late VCs were significantly increased in patients that had been cannulated for ECMO as part of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (odds ratio, 8.4; P = .016) and in cases where patients had experienced an index VC during index hospitalization (odds ratio, 19.3; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Late vascular complications after peripheral ECMO cannulation are not rare, particularly after arterial cannulation. Patients should be followed closely early after surviving ECMO with wound evaluation and formal assessment of perfusion with ankle-branchial indices in the cannulated limb.

Clinical Impact of an Enhanced Recovery Program for Lower-extremity Bypass.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of Enhanced Recovery Program (ERP) implementation with length of stay (LOS) and perioperative outcomes after lower-extremity bypass (LEB). BACKGROUND: ERPs have been shown to decrease hospital LOS and improve perioperative outcomes, but their impact on patients undergoing vascular surgery remains unknown. METHODS: Patients undergoing LEB who received or did not receive care under the ERP were included; pre-ERP (January 1, 2016-May 13, 2018) and ERP (May 14, 2018-July 31, 2022). Clinicopathologic characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 393 patients who underwent LEB [pre-ERP: n = 161 (41%); ERP: n = 232 (59%)], most were males (n = 254, 64.6%), White (n = 236, 60%), and government-insured (n = 265, 67.4%). Pre-ERP patients had higher Body Mass Index (28.8 ± 6.0 vs 27.4 ± 5.7, P = 0.03) and rates of diabetes (52% vs 36%, P = 0.002). ERP patients had a shorter total [6 (3-13) vs 7 (5-14) days, P = 0.01) and postoperative LOS [5 (3-8) vs 6 (4-8) days, P < 0.001]. Stratified by indication, postoperative LOS was shorter in ERP patients with claudication (3 vs 5 days, P = 0.01), rest pain (5 vs 6 days, P = 0.02), and tissue loss (6 vs 7 days, P = 0.03). ERP patients with rest pain also had a shorter total LOS (6 vs 7 days, P = 0.04) and lower 30-day readmission rates (32%-17%, P = 0.02). After ERP implementation, the average daily oral morphine equivalents decreased [median (interquartile range): 52.5 (26.6-105.0) vs 44.12 (22.2-74.4), P = 0.019], while the rates of direct discharge to home increased (83% vs 69%, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest single-center cohort study evaluating ERP in LEB, showing that ERP implementation is associated with shorter LOS and improved perioperative outcomes.

A dedicated risk prediction model of 1-year mortality following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair involving the renal-mesenteric arteries.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment goals of prophylactic endovascular aortic repair of complex aneurysms involving the renal-mesenteric arteries (complex endovascular aortic repair [cEVAR]) include achieving both technical success and long-term survival benefit. Mortality within the first year after cEVAR likely indicates treatment failure owing to associated costs and procedural complexity. Notably, no validated clinical decision aid tools exist that reliably predict mortality after cEVAR. The purpose of this study was to derive and validate a preoperative prediction model of 1-year mortality after elective cEVAR. METHODS: All elective cEVARs including fenestrated, branched, and/or chimney procedures for aortic disease extent confined proximally to Ishimaru landing zones 6 to 9 in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative were identified (January 2012 to August 2023). Patients (n = 4053) were randomly divided into training (n = 3039) and validation (n = 1014) datasets. A logistic regression model for 1-year mortality was created and internally validated by bootstrapping the AUC and calibration intercept and slope, and by using the model to predict 1-year mortality in the validation dataset. Independent predictors were assigned an integer score, based on model beta-coefficients, to generate a simplified scoring system to categorize patient risk. RESULTS: The overall crude 1-year mortality rate after elective cEVAR was 11.3% (n = 456/4053). Independent preoperative predictors of 1-year mortality included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic renal insufficiency (creatinine >1.8 mg/dL or dialysis dependence), hemoglobin <12 g/dL, decreasing body mass index, congestive heart failure, increasing age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥IV, current tobacco use, history of peripheral vascular intervention, and increasing extent of aortic disease. The 1-year mortality rate varied from 4% among the 23% of patients classified as low risk to 23% for the 24% classified as high risk. Performance of the model in validation was comparable with performance in the training data. The internally validated scoring system classified patients roughly into quartiles of risk (low, low/medium, medium/high and high), with 52% of patients categorized as medium/high to high risk, which had corresponding 1-year mortality rates of 11% and 23%, respectively. Aneurysm diameter was below Society for Vascular Surgery recommended treatment thresholds (<5.0 cm in females, <5.5 cm in males) in 17% of patients (n = 679/3961), 41% of whom were categorized as medium/high or high risk. This subgroup had significantly increased in-hospital complication rates (18% vs 12%; P = .02) and 1-year mortality (13% vs 5%; P < .0001) compared with patients in the low- or low/medium-risk groups with guideline-compliant aneurysm diameters (≥5.0 cm in females, ≥5.5 cm in males). CONCLUSIONS: This validated preoperative prediction model for 1-year mortality after cEVAR incorporates physiological, functional, and anatomical variables. This novel and simplified scoring system can effectively discriminate mortality risk and, when applied prospectively, may facilitate improved preoperative decision-making, complex aneurysm care delivery, and resource allocation.

Hybrid Pelvic Revascularization in Complex Aortoiliac Aneurysm Repair.

Revascularization of complex pelvic vascular anatomy presents an ongoing clinical challenge when treating aortoiliac disease. As vascular surgeons continue to intervene upon increasingly complex aortoiliac pathology, the role of pelvic revascularization is important for the preservation of pelvic organ function and prevention of devastating spinal cord ischemia. In this study we describe the indications, techniques, and clinical outcomes of a novel hybrid pelvic revascularization repair that focuses on optimizing revascularization while limiting pelvic surgical dissection during the management of complex aortic pathology in patients physiologically or anatomically unsuitable for traditional pelvic revascularization techniques.

The association of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter with mortality in the International Consortium of Vascular Registries.

BACKGROUND: The mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair is high, despite improvements in perioperative care, centralization of emergency vascular surgical services, and the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The diameter of intact AAA has been shown to be a predictor of short- and long-term survival. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of AAA diameter on mortality for rAAA repair using contemporary data collected from the International Consortium of Vascular Registries and compare outcomes by sex and the type of repair patients received. METHODS: Prospective registry data on repair of rAAA from seven countries were collected from 2010 to 2016. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality after EVAR and open surgical repair (OSR). Data were stratified by type of repair and sex. Logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratio (OR) for the association between AAA diameter and perioperative mortality and the association between type of repair and mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for differences in patient characteristics. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 6428 patients with a mean age ranging from 70.2 to 75.4 years; the mean AAA diameter was 7.7 ± 1.8 cm. Females had a significantly smaller AAA diameter at presentation compared with males (6.9 ± 1.6 cm vs 7.9 ± 1.8 cm; P < .001). who underwent OSR had larger AAA diameters compared with those who underwent EVAR (P < .001). Females who underwent repair were significantly older (P < .001). Males were more likely to have cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, and renal impairment. Overall, AAA diameter was a predictor of mortality in univariate and multivariate analysis. When analyzing EVAR and OSR separately, the impact of AAA diameter per cm increase on mortality was apparent in both males and females undergoing EVAR, but not OSR (EVAR: male OR, 1.09 [95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.16] and EVAR: female OR, 1.17 [95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.35]). The early mortality rate for males and females who underwent EVAR was 18.9% and 25.9% (P < .001), respectively. The corresponding mortality for males and females who underwent OSR was 30.2% and 38.6% (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In these real-world international data, there is a significant association between rAAA diameters and early mortality in males and females. This association was more evident in patients undergoing EVAR, but not shown in OSR. Despite improvements in overall AAA repair outcomes, the risk of mortality after rAAA repair is consistently higher for females.

Treatment Location Variation for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia in Patients With Kidney Failure.

INTRODUCTION: End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is an established risk factor for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Procedural location for ESKD patients has not been well described. This study aims to examine variation in index procedural location in ESKD versus non-ESKD patients undergoing peripheral vascular intervention for CLTI and identify preoperative risk factors for tibial interventions. METHODS: Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients were identified in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) peripheral vascular intervention dataset. Patient demographics and comorbidities were compared between patients with and without ESKD and those undergoing index tibial versus nontibial interventions. A multivariable logistic regression evaluating risk factors for tibial intervention was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 23,480 procedures were performed on CLTI patients with 13.6% (n = 3154) with ESKD. End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients were younger (66.56 ± 11.68 versus 71.66 ± 12.09 y old, P = 0.019), more often Black (40.6 versus 18.6%, P < 0.001), male (61.2 versus 56.5%, P < 0.001), and diabetic (81.8 versus 60.0%, P < 0.001) than non-ESKD patients. Patients undergoing index tibial interventions had higher rates of ESKD (19.4 versus 10.6%, P < 0.001) and diabetes (73.4 versus 57.5%, P < 0.001) and lower rates of smoking (49.9 versus 73.0%, P < 0.001) than patients with nontibial interventions. ESKD (odds ratio (OR) 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52-1.86, P < 0.001), Black race (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.09-1.30, P < 0.001), and diabetes (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.71-2.00, P < 0.001) were risk factors for tibial intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ESKD and CLTI have higher rates of diabetes and tibial disease and lower rates of smoking than non-ESKD patients. Tibial disease was associated with ESKD, diabetes, and Black race.

Outcomes of Staged Repairs of Complex Endovascular Repairs of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular treatment allows for the staging of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs (eTAAAs) in an effort to decrease the risk of spinal cord ischemia (SCI), but data are limited. METHODS: We studied all eTAAAs in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2014 to 2021. Inverse probability weighting was used to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of staged and single-stage repairs. Thoracoabdominal life-altering events (TALEs) are the composite endpoint consisting of death/stroke/permanent SCI/permanent dialysis. RESULTS: There were 3,258 total operations during the study period. In total, 841 cases (26%) were staged repairs, and 2,417 (74%) were completed in a single stage, but in the cohort of patients with extensive aneurysms, 44% were staged. Staging methods included thoracic endograft (78%), branch (23%), and iliac (5%). Staged repairs were more often employed by high-volume surgeons at high-volume centers; for larger, more extensive aneurysms, with higher rates of prior aortic surgery. After adjustment, staged repair and single-stage treatment were associated with similar odds of all perioperative outcomes and including mortality, TALE, acute kidney injury, stroke, dialysis, and SCI, as well as long-term survival. This was consistent in the subgroups of patients with extensive aneurysms undergoing elective procedures. Of note, first-stage thoracic endografts were associated with 2.6% mortality, 7.3% TALE, 1.5% dialysis, and 4.1% SCI, and 25% of patients did not undergo a second stage. First-stage procedures accounted for one-third of perioperative complications including half of the deaths in the staged cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Staged eTAAA repairs were associated with similar perioperative and long-term complications to single-stage treatments. However, first stage procedures are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and one-quarter of patients never complete their repairs. These data demonstrate the necessity of evaluating the outcomes of all patients planned for staged procedures, not only those who make it to the final stage. More data are needed as to the optimal method of spinal cord protection for these challenging aneurysms.

Aortic endarterectomy in patients with severe multivessel paravisceral and aortoiliac occlusive disease.

OBJECTIVE: Aortic endarterectomy (AE), once a treatment of choice for aortoiliac occlusive disease, is now rarely performed in favor of endovascular procedures or open aortobifemoral bypass. However, in select patients with paravisceral or aortoiliac occlusive disease, AE remains a viable alternative for revascularization, either as a primary procedure or after prior interventions have failed. Here, we evaluated outcomes for an extended series of patients undergoing paravisceral or aortoiliac endarterectomy, demonstrating that these procedures can be an excellent alternative with acceptable morbidity and mortality in properly selected patients. METHODS: A single institution retrospective review of 20 patients who underwent AE from 2017 to 2023 was performed. RESULTS: Five patients (25%) underwent paravisceral endarterectomy and 15 (75%) underwent aortoiliac endarterectomy. There were no perioperative mortalities. One paravisceral patient died 3 months postoperatively from complications of pneumonia. Three patients in the paravisceral group required reinterventions; one acutely due to thrombosis of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) requiring extension of the endarterectomy and patch angioplasty on postoperative day 0, one due to stenosis at the distal edge of the endarterectomy 1 month postoperatively, successfully treated with SMA stenting, and one at 10-month follow-up due to SMA stenosis at the distal aspect of the endarterectomy, also successfully treated with SMA stenting. With these reinterventions, the 1-year primary patency in the paravisceral group was 40%, primary-assisted patency was 80%, and secondary patency was 100%. In the aortoiliac group, 1-year primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency were 91%, 91%, and 100%, respectively. One patient developed iliac thrombosis 10 days postoperatively owing to an intimal flap distal to the endarterectomy site. She and one other patient, a young man with an undefined hypercoagulable disorder, ultimately required neoaortoiliac reconstructions at 18 and 32 months postoperatively, respectively (the latter in the setting of stopping anticoagulation). The remaining 13 patients experienced no complications. All patients had rapid resolution of clinical symptoms, and median postoperative ankle-brachial indexes of 1.06 on the right and 1.00 on the left, representing a median improvement from preoperative ankle-brachial indexes of +0.59 on the right and +0.56 on the left (P < .01 and P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: In this series of 20 patients undergoing paravisceral and infrarenal aortoiliac endarterectomy, AE was associated with no perioperative mortality, relatively low and manageable morbidity, and excellent clinical outcomes in patients with both paravisceral and aortoiliac occlusive disease. SMA-related early reintervention was not uncommon in the paravisceral group, and attention should be given particularly to the distal endarterectomy site. AE remains a viable treatment for severe multivessel paravisceral or aortoiliac occlusive disease isolated to the aorta and common iliac arteries in select patients.

Retrograde aortic dissection following fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair for an extent III thoracoabdominal aneurysm.

Retrograde aortic dissection is a rare but potentially catastrophic complication after endovascular aortic repair. Reports in the literature regarding retrograde dissection after fenestrated and branched endovascular abdominal aortic repair are rare, and the incidence, risk factors, and treatment options for this complication have not yet been clearly established. Additionally, retrograde dissection after previous intervention can pose technical challenges and increases the risk of spinal cord ischemia during subsequent repair. We present a patient with an acute retrograde dissection after a fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair for an extent III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm successfully managed with proximal endovascular extension.

Clinical presentation, outcomes, and threshold for repair by sex in degenerative saccular vs fusiform aneurysms in the descending thoracic aorta.

OBJECTIVE: Saccular-shaped thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) are often treated at smaller diameters compared with fusiform TAAs, despite a lack of strong clinical evidence to support this practice. The aim of this study was to examine differences in presentation, treatment, and outcomes between saccular TAAs and fusiform TAAs in the descending thoracic aorta. We also examined the need for sex-specific treatment thresholds for TAAs. METHODS: All Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for degenerative TAAs in the descending thoracic aorta from 2012 through 2022 were reviewed. Patients were stratified by urgency: emergent/urgent vs elective repairs (ruptured/symptomatic). Demographics, comorbidities, anatomical/procedural characteristics, and outcomes for fusiform TAAs and saccular TAAs were compared. Cumulative distribution curves were used to plot the proportion of patients who underwent emergent/urgent repair according to sex-stratified aortic diameter. RESULTS: Among 655 emergent/urgent TEVARs, 37% were performed for saccular TAAs, whereas among 1352 elective TEVARs, 35% had saccular TAA morphology. Compared with fusiform TAAs, saccular TAAs more frequently underwent emergent/urgent (ruptured/symptomatic) TEVAR below the repair threshold in both females (<50 mm: 38% vs 10%; relative risk, 3.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.04-5.70; P < .001), and males (<55 mm: 47% vs 21%; relative risk, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.60-3.18; P < .001). Moreover, among patients with emergent/urgent fusiform TAAs, females presented at smaller diameters compared with males, whereas there was no difference in preoperative aneurysm diameter among patients with saccular TAAs. Regarding outcomes, emergent/urgent treated saccular TAAs had similar postoperative outcomes and 5-year mortality compared with fusiform TAAs. Nevertheless, in the elective cohort, patients with saccular TAAs had similar postoperative mortality compared with those with fusiform TAAs, but a lower rate of postoperative spinal cord ischemia (0.7% vs 3.2%; P = .010). Furthermore, patients with saccular TAAs had a higher rate of 5-year mortality compared with their fusiform counterparts (23% vs 17%; hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.10; P = .010). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with saccular TAAs underwent emergent/urgent TEVAR at smaller diameters than those with fusiform TAAs, supporting current clinical practice guideline recommendations that saccular TAAs warrant treatment at smaller diameters. Furthermore, these data support a sex-specific treatment threshold for patients with fusiform TAAs, but not for those with saccular TAAs. Although there were no differences in outcomes following TEVAR between morphologies in the emergent/urgent cohort, patients with saccular TAAs who were treated electively were associated with higher 5-year mortality compared with those with fusiform TAAs.

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.

Severity of acute kidney injury is associated with decreased survival after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Acute kidney injury (AKI) occurs frequently in complex aortic surgery and has been implicated in perioperative and long-term survival. This study sought to characterize the relationship between AKI severity and mortality after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (F/B-EVAR). METHODS: Consecutive patients enrolled by the US Aortic Research Consortium in 10, prospective, nonrandomized, physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies evaluating F/B-EVAR, between 2005 and 2023, were included in this study. Perioperative AKI during hospitalization was defined by and staged using the 2012 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria. Determinants of AKI were evaluated with backward stepwise mixed effects multivariable ordinal logistic regression. Survival was analyzed with conditionally adjusted survival curves and backward stepwise mixed effects Cox proportional hazards modelling. RESULTS: In the study period, 2413 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 74 years (IQR, 69-79 years) underwent F/B-EVAR. The median follow-up duration was 2.2 years (IQR, 0.7-3.7 years). The median baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and creatinine were 68 mL/min/1.73 m2 (IQR, 53-84 mL/min/1.73 m2) and 1.1 mg/dL (IQR, 0.9-1.3 mg/dL), respectively. Stratification of AKI identified 316 patients (13%) with stage 1 injury, 42 (2%) with stage 2 injury, and 74 (3%) with stage 3 injury. Renal replacement therapy was initiated during the index hospitalization in 36 patients (1.5% of cohort, 49% of stage 3 injuries). Thirty-day major adverse events were associated with AKI severity (all P ≤ .0001). Multivariable predictors of AKI severity included baseline eGFR (proportional odds ratio, 0.9 per 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.85-0.95 per 10 mL/min/1.73 m2]; P < .0001), baseline serum hematocrit (0.58 per 10% [95% CI, 0.48-0.71 per 10%]; P < .0001), renal artery technical failure during aneurysm repair (3 [95% CI,1.61-5.72]; P = .0006), and total operating time (1.05 per 10 minutes [95% CI, 1.04-1.07 per 10 minutes]; P < .0001). One-year unadjusted survivals for AKI severity strata were 91% (95% CI, 90%-92%) for no injury, 80% (95% CI, 76%-85%) for stage 1 injury, 72% (95% CI, 59-87%) for stage 2 injury, and 46% (95% CI, 35-59%) for stage 3 injury (P<.0001). Multivariable determinants of survival included AKI severity (stage 1, hazard ratio [HR], 1.6 [95% CI, 1.3-2]); stage 2, HR, 2.2 [95% CI, 1.4-3.4]); stage 3 HR, 4 [95% CI, 2.9-5.5]; P < .0001), decreased eGFR (HR, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.9-1.3]; P = .4), patient age (HR, 1.6 per 10 years [95% CI, 1.4-1.8 per 10 years]; P < .0001), baseline chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.3-1.8]; P < .0001), baseline congestive heart failure (HR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.6-2.1]; P < .0001), postoperative paraplegia (HR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.1-4]; P = .02), and procedural technical success (HR, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-0.8]; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: AKI, as defined by the 2012 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria, occurred in 18% of patients after F/B-EVAR. Greater severity of AKI after F/B-EVAR was associated with decreased postoperative survival. The predictors of AKI severity identified in these analyses suggest a role for improved preoperative risk mitigation and staging of interventions in complex aortic repair.

Multicenter trans-Atlantic experience with fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of chronic post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: This multicenter international study aimed to describe outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repairs (FB-EVAR) in a cohort of patients treated for chronic post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (PD-TAAAs). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of all consecutive patients treated by FB-EVAR for repair of extent I to III PD-TAAAs in 16 centers from the United States and Europe (2008-2021). Data were extracted from institutional prospectively maintained databases and electronic patient records. All patients received off-the-shelf or patient-specific manufactured fenestrated-branched stent grafts. Endpoints were any cause mortality and major adverse events at 30 days, technical success, target artery (TA) patency, freedom from TA instability, minor (endovascular with <12 Fr sheath) and major (open or ≥12 Fr sheath) secondary interventions, patient survival, and freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM). RESULTS: A total of 246 patients (76% male; median age, 67 years [interquartile range, 61-73 years]) were treated for extent I (7%), extent II (55%), and extent III (35%) PD-TAAAs by FB-EVAR. The median aneurysm diameter was 65 mm (interquartile range, 59-73 mm). Eighteen patients (7%) were octogenarians, 212 (86%) were American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥3, and 21 (9%) presented with contained ruptured or symptomatic aneurysms. There were 917 renal-mesenteric vessels targeted by 581 fenestrations (63%) and 336 directional branches (37%), with a mean of 3.7 vessels per patient. Technical success was 96%. Mortality and rate of major adverse events at 30 days was 3% and 28%, including disabling complications such as new onset dialysis in 1%, major stroke in 1%, and permanent paraplegia in 2%. Mean follow-up was 24 months. Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimated patient survival at 3 and 5 years was 79% ± 6% and 65% ± 10%. KM estimated freedom from ARM was 95% ± 3% and 93% ± 5% at the same intervals. Unplanned secondary interventions were needed in 94 patients (38%), including minor procedures in 64 (25%) and major procedures in 30 (12%). There was one conversion to open surgical repair (<1%). KM estimated freedom from any secondary intervention was 44% ± 9% at 5 years. KM estimated primary and secondary TA patency were 93% ± 2% and 96% ± 1% at 5 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR for chronic PD-TAAAs was associated with high technical success and a low rate of mortality (3%) and disabling complications at 30 days. Although the procedure is effective in the prevention of ARM, patient survival was low at 5 years (65%), likely due to the significant comorbidities in this cohort of patients. Freedom from secondary interventions at 5 years was 44%, although most procedures were minor. The significant rate of reinterventions highlights the need for continued patient surveillance.

Accidental central venous catheter cannulation into aberrant arterial anatomy requiring endovascular intervention.

Central venous catheter placement continues to be an extremely common procedure throughout hospital systems. Although ultrasound guidance can mitigate some placement risks, misplacement of lines into neighboring structures, such as arteries, remains an unfortunate complication. In this report, we will discuss an 83-year-old female with aberrant left subclavian artery and right sided arch, which provided for successful stent graft coverage of arterial injury secondary to accidental subclavian artery cannulation with a central venous catheter with preservation of the right common carotid artery and avoidance of a potentially morbid sternotomy.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm or Dissection: Treatment Planning and Follow-Up.

As the incidence of thoracoabdominal aortic pathology (aneurysm and dissection) rises and the complexity of endovascular and surgical treatment options increases, imaging follow-up of patients remains crucial. Patients with thoracoabdominal aortic pathology without intervention should be monitored carefully for changes in aortic size or morphology that could portend rupture or other complication. Patients who are post endovascular or open surgical aortic repair should undergo follow-up imaging to evaluate for complications, endoleak, or recurrent pathology. Considering the quality of diagnostic data, CT angiography and MR angiography are the preferred imaging modalities for follow-up of thoracoabdominal aortic pathology for most patients. The extent of thoracoabdominal aortic pathology and its potential complications involve multiple regions of the body requiring imaging of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis in most patients. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.