Preoperative Sizing to Lower In-Stent Restenosis in Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease.

BACKGROUND: The primary treatment for lower-extremity peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) is angioplasty stenting. Its main complication is in-stent restenosis. Poor selection of stent dimensions has been identified as a factor contributing to early in-stent restenosis. The aim of this study is to determine whether the implantation of stents, selected based on arterial morphological reconstruction using a sizing software program, reduces the occurrence of in-stent restenosis. The study also aims to evaluate the potential benefits of routine preoperative sizing. METHODS: Between January 2016 and December 2020, all patients treated for PAOD through scheduled angioplasty stenting in our department were included in the study. Using systematic preoperative computed tomography angiography, precise reconstruction and sizing were performed to select the ideal length and diameter of stents, resulting in the selection of a so-called IDEAL stent. During the procedure, the surgeon implanted either the IDEAL stent or a different one, named the ACTUAL stent, based on intraoperative data and/or availability. We compared the in-stent restenosis rate between IDEAL and ACTUAL stents. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the overall characteristics between the IDEAL and ACTUAL stent groups. The in-stent restenosis rate at 1 year was 13% (N = 28/212, P = 0.994) in the IDEAL group and 17% (N = 25/149, P = 0.994) in the ACTUAL group. Among the ACTUAL stents, a total of 19.6% of stents with a diameter mismatch when chosen based on arteriography showed a significantly higher restenosis rate during the first year of follow-up (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our study did not demonstrate a significant difference in 1-year restenosis rate between the IDEAL and the ACTUAL stent groups. It specifically revealed the significant impact of diameter selection on the intrastent restenosis rate during the first year of follow-up. Stents chosen based on arteriographic criteria, which exhibited diameter discordance, compared to the IDEAL stents group selected using sizing reconstructions, could be either oversized or undersized. This led to a significantly higher restenosis rate at 1 year postoperatively.

Surgical Management of Carotid Body Tumors: Experience of Two Centers.

BACKGROUND: Carotid body tumors (CBTs) are rare but require surgical resection given their potential for growth and malignancy. For some surgical teams, tumor hypervascularity justifies preoperative embolization to facilitate resection and limit complications. The objective of our study was to evaluate 2 different practices of surgical resection with or without preoperative embolization in a 2-center cohort. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients who underwent CBT surgery, from January 2011 to June 2019, were divided into 2 groups, as to whether they were (embolized CBT [ECBT]) or not (nonembolized CBT [NECBT]) preoperatively embolized. Both groups were compared specifically according to the duration of operation, postoperative complications, and length of stay. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients with a mean age of 48.5 ± 14.3 years were included. In the series, 23 CBTs were resected: 13 were embolized preoperatively; the mean time between embolization and surgery was 2.62 ± 1.50 days. Both groups were comparable based on characteristics of population and tumor, with a mean size of 33.2 ± 11.9 mm. We noted a significant increase in operation duration in the ECBT group: 151 min (±40.9) vs. 87.0 min (±21); P < 0.01. There was no difference between the 2 groups regarding cranial nerve (50% vs. 46%; P = 1), sympathetic nervous system (20% vs. 23%; P = 1), or vascular nerve (20% vs. 23%; P = 0.18) complications. No cerebrovascular accident was identified. The length of stay was 3.60 days (±1.78) vs. 3.73 days (±1.19; P = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: This study reflects the experience of 2 centers in the management of CBT which is a rare pathology with no standardized treatment. Our series showed no significant difference between the ECBT and NECBT groups regarding postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. The reduction in operating time in the NECBT group remains to be demonstrated.

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Endovascular Treatment of Type 2 Endoleaks.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a safe and minimally invasive alternative to open surgical repair for infra renal aortic aneuvrysm. EVAR requires lifelong post-procedural surveillance. Endoleaks represent the main complication. Type II endoleaks (EL2) are the most frequent and tend to be indolent. Most practitioners do not treat in EL2 as long as they are associated with stable aneurysm diameter. European guidelines recommend treatment in case of aneurysm growth. Several techniques can be offered, such as transarterial embolization and translumbar embolization. This study reports the experience and results of a single center for EL2 endovascular treatment. The aim of this study was to determine more precisely the efficacity of embolization for type 2 endoleaks treatment. METHODS: A single center cohort of patients treated for EL2 with endovascular technique between 1998 and 2018 was formed to perform a descriptive analysis. Preoperative sizing, risk factors of endoleaks and intraoperative data were collected. Computed topography (CT) scans were regularly performed after EVAR to detect endoleak recurrence. Clinical recurrence was defined as the persistence of aneurysm sac growth and radiological recurrence was defined as the occurrence of EL2 on a post-embolization CT scan. Data related to reintervention, overall mortality and aneurysm related mortality were also collected. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used to determine the rates of reoperation-free survival and recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: Six hundred seven patients underwent an endovascular treatment for abdominal aorta aneurysm between 1998 and 2018. One hundred forty-five type 2 endoleaks occurred during this period. Nineteen patients (median age 76 years), underwent endovascular treatment for EL2, with immediate success on 15 patients (8 transarterial embolization, 8 direct sac puncture and 3 combined procedures). During follow-up, 5 patients required a new translumbar embolization and 6 required an open surgery for recurrence of the EL2. Six patients died, 2 of them of causes related to the aneurysm. At 59,6 months median follow-up, 53% of the patients presented a radiologic recurrence, with a sac growth of more than 5 mm since last procedure in 4 patients (24%). CONCLUSIONS: Long term clinical recurrence of type 2 endoleaks treated by endovascular procedures appear to be frequent in our experience, leading to several deaths and requiring open surgical treatment.

Validation and update of the thoracic surgery scoring system (Thoracoscore) risk model.

OBJECTIVES: The performance of prediction models tends to deteriorate over time. The purpose of this study was to update the Thoracoscore risk prediction model with recent data from the Epithor nationwide thoracic surgery database. METHODS: From January 2016 to December 2017, a total of 56 279 patients were operated on for mediastinal, pleural, chest wall or lung disease. We used 3 recommended methods to update the Thoracoscore prediction model and then proceeded to develop a new risk model. Thirty-day hospital mortality included patients who died within the first 30 days of the operation and those who died later during the same hospital stay. RESULTS: We compared the baseline patient characteristics in the original data used to develop the Thoracoscore prediction model and the validation data. The age distribution was different, with specifically more patients older than 65 years in the validation group. Video-assisted thoracoscopy accounted for 47% of surgeries in the validation group compared but only 18% in the original data. The calibration curve used to update the Thoracoscore confirmed the overfitting of the 3 methods. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was significant for the 3 updated models. Some coefficients were overfitted (American Society of Anesthesiologists score, performance status and procedure class) in the validation data. The new risk model has a correct calibration as indicated by the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, which was non-significant. The C-index was strong for the new risk model (0.84), confirming the ability of the new risk model to differentiate patients with and without the outcome. Internal validation shows no overfitting for the new model. CONCLUSIONS: The new Thoracoscore risk model has improved performance and good calibration, making it appropriate for use in current clinical practice.