A Prevention Protocol Reduces Spinal Cord Ischemia in Patients Undergoing Branched/Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair.

OBJECTIVES: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a devastating complication that is associated with thoracoabdominal aortic repair, with higher risk associated with increased aortic coverage length, making patients undergoing branched/fenestrated endovascular repair(B/FEVAR) particularly vulnerable. A bundled SCI prevention protocol was previously reported to reduce SCI rates when compared to a historic cohort in a single-center study. Therefore, this analysis aims to further validate and update outcomes associated with the protocol given the routine implementation of this strategy at two institutions (University of Florida [UF] and the University of Alabama at Birmingham [UAB]) since inception. METHODS: Components of the SCI prevention protocol include selective cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage, specified blood pressure parameters, transfusion goals, and selective pharmacologic adjuncts (naloxone, steroids). This protocol was routinely implemented in May 2015. Patients undergoing B/FEVAR from May 2015-December 2022 constituted the post-protocol cohort(n=402) and were compared to the pre-protocol cohort (n=160, January 2010-April 2015). The primary outcome was SCI incidence and subgroup analysis was conducted among patients deemed to be high-risk (Crawford extent I- III thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAA) dissection-related disease, prior aortic repair, coverage proximal to zone 5). Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier methodology. RESULTS: The pre- and post-protocol cohorts were demographically similar, though more post-protocol patients were American Society of Anesthesiology(ASA) class IV (86.1% vs. 55.0%; p<0.001). TAAA was the most common indication in both groups. CSF drain placement was more common in the post-protocol group, particularly among high-risk patients. SCI occurred in 15.9% of pre-protocol patients versus 3.0% of post-protocol patients(p<0.001). In high-risk patients, the pre- and post-protocol cohort SCI incidence was 23.2% vs. 5.0%, respectively (p<0.001). 30-day mortality was decreased in the post-protocol cohort (6.3% vs. 2.2%, p=0.02). Although the post-protocol group had a trend toward improved 1-year survival, this was not statistically significant (84.4% vs. 88.3%, log-rank p=0.35). Among SCI patients, one-year mortality was 28% and 33.3% in the pre- and post-protocol groups, respectively(p=0.46). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a bundled SCI prevention protocol significantly reduces SCI rates in B/FEVAR patients, which has now been validated at two institutions, with the most significant reductions occurring among high-risk patients. Although the overall one-year mortality difference was not significantly different between the cohorts, the high mortality rates among SCI patients highlights the importance of preventative measures.

An international, expert-based, Delphi consensus document on controversial issues in the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: As a result of conflicting, inadequate or controversial data in the literature, several issues concerning the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remain unanswered. The aim of this international, expert-based Delphi consensus document was to provide some guidance for clinicians on these controversial topics. METHODS: A three-round Delphi consensus document was produced with 44 experts on 6 prespecified topics regarding the management of AAAs. All answers were provided anonymously. The response rate for each round was 100%. RESULTS: Most participants (42 of 44 [95.4%]) agreed that a minimum case volume per year is essential (or probably essential) for a center to offer open or endovascular AAA repair (EVAR). Furthermore, 33 of 44 (75.0%) believed that AAA screening programs are (probably) still clinically effective and cost effective. Additionally, most panelists (36 of 44 [81.9%]) voted that surveillance after EVAR should be (or should probably be) lifelong. Finally, 35 of 44 participants (79.7%) thought that women smokers should (or should probably/possibly) be considered for screening at 65 years of age, similar to men. No consensus was achieved regarding lowering the threshold for AAA repair and the need for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in patients undergoing EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: This expert-based Delphi consensus document provides guidance for clinicians regarding specific unresolved issues. Consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting the need for further research in those areas.

Outcomes using inverted iliac limb bifurcate components in fenestrated/branched endografting.

BACKGROUND: The use of standard bifurcate pieces in fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) requires adequate length from the lowest branch or fenestration to the aortic bifurcation. In patients with prior aortic surgery, the aortic bifurcation is often artificially established in a more proximal position, compromising the infrarenal length, which hinders the placement of a standard bifurcate component below the fenestrated/branched component. Short bifurcate bodies using an inverted contralateral limb have been purpose-built to address this challenge. However, reported outcomes for this device remain limited, with specific concerns about the durability of the inverted iliac limb sealing region. We sought to evaluate outcomes of F/BEVAR using an investigational inverted iliac limb bifurcate, manufactured by Cook Medical. METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of prospectively maintained data from the US-Aortic Research Consortium from 2005 to 2022. Patients were included if they underwent F/BEVAR for thoracoabdominal or complex abdominal aortic aneurysms. Patients were excluded if they did not have a bifurcate device placed. Patients were then compared based on the use of an inverted iliac limb or standard bifurcate component. The primary outcome for this study was technical success. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, freedom from ischemic leg complications, freedom from type I endoleaks (TIELs), freedom from type II endoleaks (TIIELs), freedom from type III endoleaks (TIIIELs), and graft component separations. RESULTS: A total of 1944 patients met study criteria with 442 (22.8%) inverted iliac limb bifurcates and 1502 (77.2%) standard bifurcates. Patients who received inverted iliac limbs were more likely to have had prior aortic surgery (63.8% vs 28.5%; P < .001). Patients receiving inverted iliac limbs had longer procedure times (265 minutes; interquartile range [IQR], 201-342 minutes vs 241 minutes; IQR, 186-313 minutes; P < .001), more contrast use (89 mL [IQR, 55-135 mL] vs 109 mL [IQR, 75-156 mL]; P < .001), and higher estimated blood loss (250 mL [IQR, 150-500 mL] vs 250 mL [IQR, 110-400 mL]; P = .042). There were no differences in rates of technical success (97.3% vs 96.1%; P = .310), rates of endoleaks upon completion of the case (18.0% vs 21.4%; P = .123), or 30-day mortality rates (1.8% vs 2.5%; P = .466) between patients receiving inverted iliac limb and standard bifurcated components. There were no differences in cumulative survival, freedom from limb ischemia, freedom from aneurysm rupture, and freedom from TIIIELs over the course of 5 years between patients receiving inverted bifurcates and standard bifurcated components. Patients with inverted iliac limb bifurcate components had decreased freedom from reinterventions, TIELs, and TIIELs. After adjustment for potential confounders, the use of an inverted iliac limb was not associated with reinterventions (hazard ratio,1.044; 95% confidence interval, 0.849-1.285; P = .682). There was a total of 2 component separations (0.1%) of the bifurcate component from the fenestrated/branched component over the study period, both of which occurred in the standard bifurcate components. CONCLUSIONS: The use of investigational inverted iliac limb bifurcate components is a safe option with favorable mid-term outcomes in patients who are not anatomical candidates for standard bifurcate components. Patients undergoing investigational inverted iliac limb bifurcate component implantation had decreased freedom from reinterventions, which likely corresponds with the complexity of repair associated with them.

Appropriate Use Criteria Committees: The professional society role in the development and implementation of Appropriate Use Criteria.

Vascular surgeons have the ability to manage and intervene on numerous vascular diseases of both the arterial and venous systems. With the growing number of interventions available as endovascular technology evolves, it is important to determine when a procedure is safely indicated for a vascular surgery patient. Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) offer synthesized clinical information and practice standards that can aid clinicians in making these management decisions. Professional societies, such as the Society for Vascular Surgery, bring experts in the field together to collaborate and create AUC for various vascular diseases and interventions. It is essential to publish these criteria in peer-reviewed journals, as well as make them available on public websites so the information is available to vascular surgeons and interventionalists from other specialties who also treat patients with vascular disease. Cardiology, interventional radiology, and interventional nephrology are some other specialties that perform procedures for vascular disease, and vascular interventions by nonsurgeon specialists continue to increase. The Society for Vascular Surgery has published AUC on intermittent claudication, carotid disease, and abdominal aneurysm management. These are intended to guide practice, but also have highlighted areas for improvement that would allow for more universal implementation of AUC in vascular patient care across medical specialties. Increased intersocietal participation and perhaps inclusion of government and other payer participation will allow professional society-sponsored AUC to evolve, resulting in coordinated, appropriate care for vascular surgery patients.

Long-Term Outcomes of Vein Adjuncts in Distal Infrainguinal Bypass.

BACKGROUND: Autologous vein is recommended for infrainguinal bypass due to improved freedom from occlusion compared to prosthetic graft. In patients without adequate vein, a vein adjunct at the distal anastomosis has been suggested to improve patency in small studies. This study aimed to determine if performance of a distal vein adjunct was associated with improved freedom from occlusion in below-knee popliteal and tibial bypasses compared to prosthetic bypass alone. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Vascular Quality Initiative Infrainguinal Bypass database was conducted. Patients undergoing prosthetic-only and prosthetic with vein adjuncts were compared. Inclusion criteria included age ≥18 years, and bypass to below-knee popliteal or tibial vessels. Exclusion criteria included autologous vein conduits and prior interventions. Groups were further divided into below-knee popliteal and tibial subgroups. RESULTS: A cohort of 3,939 patients underwent bypass to the below-knee popliteal artery, with 287 (7.3%) receiving vein adjuncts. More patients were male (68.8 vs. 57.8%, P < 0.001) and had higher rates of congestive heart failure (21.1 vs. 16.0%, P = 0.040) within the below-knee popliteal group. Two-year bypass occlusion was decreased in patients receiving vein adjuncts (11.6 vs. 17.1%, P = 0.004). A cohort of 2,378 patients underwent tibial bypass, with 473 (19.9%) receiving vein adjuncts. Within the tibial group, patients were similar in age, body mass index, race, comorbidities, and indications. Bypass occlusion (24.8 vs. 17.6%, P = 0.005) and amputation (20.5 vs. 15.9%, P = 0.048) rates at 2 years were worse for patients who did not receive a distal vein adjunct to tibial arteries. CONCLUSIONS: Distal vein adjuncts are associated with improved freedom from occlusion, amputation, major adverse limb events, and overall survival when compared to bypasses performed with prosthetic graft alone for tibial bypasses within the Vascular Quality Initiative. A vein adjunct was not associated with improved freedom from occlusion in below-knee popliteal bypasses. Consideration should be given to utilization of a distal vein adjunct to improve prosthetic bypass longevity and limb salvage for patients requiring tibial bypasses.

Severe platelet transfusion refractoriness after thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair.

Severe thrombocytopenia after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair poses a significant clinical risk in the immediate postoperative period. Understanding the mechanisms of refractoriness to platelet transfusion is relevant to supporting thrombocytopenic patients postoperatively. We present the case of a 76-year-old woman with refractory thrombocytopenia secondary to alloimmunization following open repair of a Crawford extent IV thoracoabdominal aneurysm. The patient provided written informed consent for the report of her case details and imaging studies.

Multicenter Study on Physician-Modified Endografts for Thoracoabdominal and Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

BACKGROUND: Physician modified endografts (PMEGs) have been widely used in the treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysm and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, however, previous data are limited to small single center studies and robust data on safety and effectiveness of PMEGs are lacking. We aimed to perform an international multicenter study analyzing the outcomes of PMEGs in complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. METHODS: An international multicenter single-arm cohort study was performed analyzing the outcomes of PMEGs in the treatment of elective, symptomatic, and ruptured complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Variables and outcomes were defined according to the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. Device modification and procedure details were collected and analyzed. Efficacy outcomes included technical success and safety outcomes included major adverse events and 30-day mortality. Follow-up outcomes included reinterventions, endoleaks, target vessel patency rates and overall and aortic-related mortality. Multivariable analysis was performed aiming at identifying predictors of technical success, 30-day mortality, and major adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 1274 patients were included in the study from 19 centers. Median age was 74 (IQR, 68-79), and 75.7% were men; 45.7% were complex abdominal aortic aneurysms, and 54.3% were thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms; 65.5% patients presented electively, 24.6% were symptomatic, and 9.9% were ruptured. Most patients (83.1%) were submitted to a fenestrated repair, 3.6% to branched repair, and 13.4% to a combined fenestrated and branched repair. Most patients (85.8%) had ≥3 target vessels included. The overall technical success was 94% (94% in elective, 93.4% in symptomatic, and 95.1% in ruptured cases). Thirty-day mortality was 5.8% (4.1% in elective, 7.6% in symptomatic, and 12.7% in ruptured aneurysms). Major adverse events occurred in 25.2% of cases (23.1% in elective, 27.8% in symptomatic, and 30.3% in ruptured aneurysms). Median follow-up was 21 months (5.6-50.6). Freedom from reintervention was 73.8%, 61.8%, and 51.4% at 1, 3, and 5 years; primary target vessel patency was 96.9%, 93.6%, and 90.3%. Overall survival and freedom from aortic-related mortality was 82.4%/92.9%, 69.9%/91.6%, and 55.0%/89.1% at 1, 3, and 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: PMEGs were a safe and effective treatment option for elective, symptomatic, and ruptured complex aortic aneurysms. Long-term data and future prospective studies are needed for more robust and detailed analysis.

Early and Late Aortic-Related Mortality and Rupture After Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) has been used as a minimally invasive alternative to open surgical repair to treat patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). The aim of this study was to evaluate aortic-related mortality (ARM) and aortic aneurysm rupture after FB-EVAR of TAAAs. METHODS: Patients enrolled in 8 prospective, nonrandomized, physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies between 2005 and 2020 who underwent elective FB-EVAR of asymptomatic intact TAAAs were analyzed. Primary end points were ARM, defined as any early mortality (30 days or in hospital) or late mortality from aortic rupture, dissection, organ or limb malperfusion attributable to aortic disease, complications of reinterventions, or aortic rupture. Secondary end points were early major adverse events, TAAA life-altering events (defined as death, permanent spinal cord injury, permanent dialysis, or stroke), all-cause mortality, and secondary interventions. RESULTS: A total of 1109 patients were analyzed; 589 (53.1%) had extent I-III and 520 (46.9%) had extent IV TAAAs. Median age was 73.4 years (interquartile range, 68.1-78.3 years); 368 (33.2%) were women. Early mortality was 2.7% (n=30); congestive heart failure was associated with early mortality (odds ratio, 3.30 [95% CI, 1.22-8.02]; P=0.01). Incidence of early aortic rupture was 0.4% (n=4). Incidence of early major adverse events and TAAA life-altering events was 20.4% (n=226) and 7.7% (n=85), respectively. There were 30 late ARMs; 5-year cumulative incidence was 3.8% (95% CI, 2.6%-5.4%); older age and extent I-III TAAAs were independently associated with late ARM (each P<0.05). Fourteen late aortic ruptures occurred; 5-year cumulative incidence was 2.7% (95% CI, 1.2%-4.3%); extent I-III TAAAs were associated with late aortic rupture (hazard ratio, 5.85 [95% CI, 1.31-26.2]; P=0.02). Five-year all-cause mortality was 45.7% (95% CI, 41.7%-49.4%). Five-year cumulative incidence of secondary intervention was 40.3% (95% CI, 35.8%-44.5%). CONCLUSIONS: ARM and aortic rupture are uncommon after elective FB-EVAR of asymptomatic intact TAAAs. Half of the ARMs occurred early, and most of the late deaths were not aortic related. Late all-cause mortality rate and the need for secondary interventions were 46% and 40%, respectively, 5 years after FB-EVAR. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT02089607, NCT02050113, NCT02266719, NCT02323581, NCT00583817, NCT01654133, NCT00483249, NCT02043691, and NCT01874197.

Postdissection aortic aneurysm sac enlargement after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVES: Aneurysm sac changes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FBEVAR) for postdissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (PD-TAAs) are poorly understood. Partial thrombosis of the false lumen and endoleaks may impair sac regression. To characterize sac changes after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs, this study examined midterm results and predictors for sac enlargement. METHODS: FBEVARs performed for PD-TAAs in 10 physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2008 to 2023 were analyzed. The maximum aortic aneurysm diameter was compared between the 30-day computed tomography angiogram and follow-up imaging studies. Aneurysm sac enlargement was defined as an increase in diameter of ≥5 mm. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were used to evaluate sac enlargement and midterm FBEVAR outcomes. RESULTS: Among 3296 FBEVARs, 290 patients (72.4% male; median age, 68.4 years) were treated for PD-TAAs. Most aneurysms treated were extent II (72%) and III (12%). Mean aneurysm diameter was 66.5 ± 11.2 mm. Mortality at 30 days was 1.4%. At a mean follow-up of 2.9 ± 1.9 years, at least one follow-up imaging study revealed sac enlargement in 43 patients (15%), sac regression in 115 patients (40%), and neither enlargement nor regression in 137 (47%); 5 (2%) demonstrated both expansion and regression during follow-up. Freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement was 93%, 82%, and 80% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Overall, endoleaks were detected in 27 patients (63%) with sac enlargement and 143 patients (58%) without enlargement (P = .54). Sac enlargement was significantly more frequent among older patients (mean age at the index procedure, 70.2 ± 8.9 years vs 66.5 ± 11 years; P = .04) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year (74% vs 52%; P = .031). Cox regression revealed age >70 years at baseline (hazard ratio [HR], 2.146; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.167-3.944; P = .010) and presence of type II endoleak at 1 year (HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.07-4.79; P = .032) were independent predictors of sac enlargement. Patient survival was 92%, 81%, and 68% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Cumulative target vessel instability was 7%, and aneurysm-related mortality was 2% at 5 years. At least 42% of patients required secondary interventions. Sac enlargement did not affect patient survival. CONCLUSIONS: Aneurysm sac enlargement occurs in 15% of patients after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs. Elderly patients (>70 years at baseline) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year may need closer monitoring and secondary interventions to prevent sac enlargement. Despite sac enlargement in some patients, aneurysm-related mortality at 5 years remains low and overall survival was not associated with sac enlargement.

A patient-centered textbook outcome measure effectively discriminates contemporary elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair quality.

BACKGROUND: There is persistent controversy surrounding the merit of surgical volume benchmarks being used solely as a sufficient proxy for assessing the quality of open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Importantly, operative volume quotas may fail to reflect a more nuanced and comprehensive depiction of surgical outcomes most relevant to patients. Accordingly, we herein propose a patient-centered textbook outcome (TO) for AAA repair that is analogous to other large magnitude extirpative operations performed in other surgical specialties, and test its feasibility to discriminate hospital performance using Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) volume guidelines. METHODS: All elective open infrarenal AAA repairs (OAR) in the SVS-Vascular Quality Initiative were examined (2009-2022). The primary end point was a TO, defined as a composite of no in-hospital complication or reintervention/reoperation, length of stay of ≤10 days, home discharge, and 1-year survival rates. The discriminatory ability of the TO measure was assessed by comparing centers that did or did not meet the SVS annual OAR volume threshold recommendation (high volume ≥10 OARs/year; low volume <10 OARs/year). Logistic regression and multivariable models adjusted for patient and procedure-related differences. RESULTS: A total of 9657 OARs across 198 centers were analyzed (mean age, 69.5 ± 8.4 years; female, 26%; non-White, 12%). A TO was identified in 44% (n = 4293) of the overall cohort. The incidence of individual TO components included no in-hospital complication (61%), no in-hospital reintervention or reoperation (92%), length of stay of ≤10 days (78%), home discharge (76%), and 1-year survival (91%). Median annual center volume was 6 (interquartile range, 3-10) and a majority of centers did not meet the SVS volume suggested threshold (<10 OARs/year, n = 148 [74%]). However, most patients (6265 of 9657 [65%]) underwent OAR in high-volume hospitals. When comparing high- and low-volume centers, a TO was more likely to occur in high-volume institutions: ≥10 OARs/year (46%) vs <10 OARs/year (42%; P = .0006). The association of a protective effect for higher center volume remained after risk adjustment (odds ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.26; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: TOs for elective OAR reflect a more nuanced and comprehensive patient centered proxy to measure care delivery, consistent with other surgical specialties. Surprisingly, a TO was achieved in <50% of elective AAA cases nationally. Although the likelihood of a TO seems to correlate with SVS center volume recommendations, it more importantly reflects elements which may be prioritized by patients and thus offers insights into further improving real-world AAA care.

Readmissions Following Endovascular Thoracic and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repairs in the Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VISION).

BACKGROUND: Investigate readmission rates, diagnoses associated with readmission, and associations with mortality through 90 days postoperatively after elective endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic repair overall and by extent of coverage. METHODS: A cohort of index elective nontraumatic endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic cases from 2010 to 2018 was derived from the Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network. Cohort readmissions within 90 days postoperative were examined both overall and by Crawford extent (CE) of aortic coverage. Postoperative mortality was examined by reason for readmission and CE. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 2,105 patients who underwent endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic repair (1,550 CE 0A/0B; 242 CE 1-3; 313 CE 4-5). Cumulative risk for 90-day readmission was 34.3% in CE 0A/0B repairs, 33.4% in CE 4-5 repairs, and 47.4% in CE 1-3 repairs. Compared with CE 0A/B, patients with CE 1-3 repairs experienced an increased risk of readmission within 90 days postoperatively after adjusting for preoperative factors (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.27 [1.00, 1.61]), while the readmission risk for CE 4-5 repairs did not differ significantly (adjusted HR 0.83 [0.64, 1.06]). Significant risk factors for 90-day readmission included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dialysis dependence, limited ambulation, visceral/spinal ischemia, and in-hospital stroke. Discharge to home was protective against readmission (HR 0.65, confidence interval 0.54-0.79). Patients with a readmission within 90 days had a 7.89-fold increase in 90-day mortality (HR 7.84; 5.17, 11.9) compared with those not readmitted. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing extent of endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic repair was associated with higher 90-day readmission rates. Readmission for all CE was associated with near 8-fold increased risk of mortality. Risk factors associated with increased risk for readmission included pulmonary insufficiency, renal disease, and poor functional status. These findings can inform stakeholders about investment of resources to improve processes of care that both target prevention and mitigate risk of readmission after elective endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic repair.

Preoperative risk factors for 1-year mortality in patients undergoing fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in the US Aortic Research Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Early survival (1-year) after elective repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) can be used as an indicator of successful repair and provides a reasonable countermeasure to the annual rupture risk based on diameter. We aimed to identify preoperative factors associated with 1-year mortality after fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) and develop a predictive model for 1-year mortality based on patient-specific risk profiles. METHODS: The US-Aortic Research Consortium database was queried for all patients undergoing elective F/BEVAR for complex AAA (cAAA) or TAAA from 2005 to 2022. The primary outcome was 1-year survival based on preoperative risk profile. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine preoperative variables associated with 1-year mortality overall and by extent of aortic pathology. Logistic regression was performed to build a predictive model for 1-year mortality based on number of risk factors present. RESULTS: A total of 2099 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study (cAAA: n = 709 [34.3%]; type 1-3 TAAA: n = 777 [37.6%]; type 4-5 TAAA: n = 580 [28.1%]). Multivariable Cox regression identified the following significant risk factors associated with 1-year mortality: current smoker, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure (CHF), aortic diameter >7 cm, age >75 years, extent 1-3, creatinine >1.7 mg/dL, and hematocrit <36%. When stratified by extent of aortic involvement, multivariable Cox regression revealed risk factors for 1-year mortality in cAAA (CHF maximum aortic diameter >7 cm, hematocrit <36 mg/dL, and current smoking status), type 1-3 TAAA (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, CHF, and age >75 years), and type 4-5 TAAA (age >75 years, creatinine >1.7 mg/dL, and hematocrit <36 mg/dL). Logistic regression was then used to develop a predictive model for 1-year mortality based on patient risk profile. Appraisal of the model revealed an area under the curve of 0.64 (P < .001), and an observed to expected ratio of 0.85. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes multiple risk factors associated with an increase in 1-year mortality after F/BEVAR. Given that elective repair of cAAA or TAAA is offered to some patients in whom future rupture risk outweighs operative risk, these findings suggest that highly comorbid patients with smaller aneurysms may not benefit from repair. Descriptive and predictive models for 1-year mortality based on patient risk profiles can serve as an adjunct in clinical decision-making when considering elective F/BEVAR.

Practice patterns of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy after fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy are commonly prescribed after fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR). However, the optimal regimen remains unknown. We sought to characterize practice patterns and outcomes of antiplatelet and anticoagulant use in patients who underwent F/BEVAR. METHODS: Consecutive patients enrolled (2012-2023) as part of the United States Aortic Research Consortium (US-ARC) from 10 independent physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies were evaluated. The cohort was characterized by medication regimen on discharge from index F/BEVAR: (1) Aspirin alone OR P2Y12 alone (single-antiplatelet therapy [SAPT]); (2) Anticoagulant alone; (3) Aspirin + P2Y12 (dual-antiplatelet therapy [DAPT]); (4) Aspirin + anticoagulant OR P2Y12 + anticoagulant (SAPT + anticoagulant); (5) Aspirin + P2Y12 + anticoagulant (triple therapy [TT]); and (6) No therapy. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to compare 1-year outcomes including survival, target artery patency, freedom from bleeding complication, freedom from all reinterventions, and freedom from stent-specific reintervention. RESULTS: Of the 1525 patients with complete exposure and outcome data, 49.6% were discharged on DAPT, 28.8% on SAPT, 13.6% on SAPT + anticoagulant, 3.2% on TT, 2.6% on anticoagulant alone, and 2.2% on no therapy. Discharge medication regimen was not associated with differences in 1-year survival, bleeding complications, composite reintervention rate, or stent-specific reintervention rate. However, there was a significant difference in 1-year target artery patency. On multivariable analysis comparing with SAPT, DAPT conferred a lower hazard of loss of target artery patency (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.84; P = .01). On sub-analyses of renal stents alone or visceral stents alone, DAPT no longer had a significantly lower hazard of loss of target artery patency (renal: HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.35-1.27; P = .22; visceral: HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.05-1.9; P = .21). Lastly, duration of DAPT therapy (1 month, 6 months, or 1 year) did not significantly affect target artery patency. CONCLUSIONS: Practice patterns for antiplatelet and anticoagulant regimens after F/BEVAR vary widely across the US-ARC. There were no differences in bleeding complications, survival or reintervention rates among different regimens, but higher branch vessel patency was noted in the DAPT cohort. These data suggest there is a benefit in DAPT therapy. However, the generalizability of this finding is limited by the retrospective nature of this data, and the clinical significance of this finding is unclear, as there is no difference in survival, bleeding, or reintervention rates amongst the different regimens. Hence, an "optimal" regimen, including the duration of such regimen, could not be clearly discerned. This suggests equipoise for a randomized trial, nested within this cohort, to identify the most effective antiplatelet/anticoagulant regimen for the growing number of patients being treated globally with F/BEVAR.

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

OBJECTIVE: The clinical significance of family history (FH) of aortic disease on the outcomes of fenestrated and 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 a FH of aortic disease. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and aneurysm extent were similar between the groups. Patients with a 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 (12% vs. 12%; p = .89) for patients with or without a FH of aortic disease. Three year survival estimates were 71% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67 - 78%) and 71% (95% CI 68 - 74%), respectively (p = .74). Freedom from secondary intervention and aneurysm sac enlargement were also not statistically significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: A FH of aortic disease had no impact on 30 day or 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.

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.

Prospective randomized pilot trial comparing prophylactic and 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.

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.