Current expert-based opinions on endovascular treatment of blunt thoracic aortic injury: A state-of-the-art narrative review on indications, techniques, results, and challenges.

INTRODUCTION: Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) represents one of the most devastating scenarios of vascular trauma which warrants prompt recognition with expedited management. Clinical manifestations of BTAI may not be straightforward to detect and may be misdiagnosed. Therefore, diagnosis of BTAI requires a high index of suspicion based on the mechanism of injury along with urgent transfer to centers with appropriate expertise and facilities. METHODS: We provide an expert-based narrative review on endovascular treatment of BTAI highlighting indications, techniques, results, and challenges. RESULTS: Multiple imaging modalities can be used including computed tomography angiography, transesophageal echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and intravascular ultrasound. Whilst conservative pharmacological management can be a safe option in low-grade BTAI, thoracic endovascular aortic repair has become the gold-standard strategy in most cases, replacing open surgical repair. Nevertheless, it is important to account for patient demographics particularly age, severity of injury, choice of endograft including its type and size, and endovascular technique including landing zone and left subclavian artery revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, TEVAR in BTAI has been shown to be an efficacious strategy with favorable early outcomes. In contrast, less is known on the long-term clinical outcomes of TEVAR in BTAI. Hence, despite the optimal early technical and clinical success rates, concerns remain about the need for long-term surveillance. The exact timing of follow-up and the integration of different modalities that can also investigate potential downstream cardiovascular effects remain hot topics for future research. Finally, industry should focus on developing more compliant endografts to improve the stiffness mismatch between the endograft and the aorta to optimize results.

Comparative Effectiveness of Intravascular Ultrasound versus Angiography in Abdominal and Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The effectiveness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) with angiography compared with angiography-guidance alone in the treatment of aortic conditions, such as dissections, aneurysms, and blunt traumatic injuries, remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the current literature for IVUS use during thoracic (TEVAR) and abdominal (EVAR) endovascular aortic repair. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was conducted in March 2024 adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing outcomes of TEVAR/EVAR with and without IVUS were identified. The outcomes of interest included contrast volume, fluoroscopy and procedural time, perioperative endoleak, and reinterventions and all-cause mortality during follow-up. Data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted. Pooled analysis was performed using a random-effect model. Subgroup analysis was performed stratified by the condition being treated. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. A total of 4219 patients (n=2655 IVUS and n=1564 non-IVUS) from 9 observational studies were included. The IVUS group exhibited a reduction in contrast agent volume (weighted mean difference (WMD) [95% CI] = -34.65 mL [-54.73, -14.57]) and fluoroscopy time (WMD [95% CI] = -6.13 min [-11.10, -1.15]), with no difference in procedural time. The perioperative type I and III endoleak occurrence were similar (RR [95% CI] = 2.36 [0.55-10.11], RR [95% CI] = 0.72 [0.09-5.77], respectively). Reintervention and mortality during follow-up were comparable (HR [95% CI] = 0.80 [0.33-1.97], HR [95% CI] = 0.75 [0.47-1.18], respectively). All the included studies had low risks of bias. In conclusion, this meta-analysis provides evidence that IVUS enables the safe deployment of TEVAR/EVAR with reduced contrast agent less radiation exposure.

Early and midterm results of covered balloon-expandable stents (VBX-Gore) for endovascular treatment of chronic aorto-iliac occlusion.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular treatment is nowadays accepted as first-line treatment for most patients with aorto-iliac obstructive disease (AIOD), including those with Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II (TASC-II) lesion types C and D. Aim of the study was to evaluate the role of Viabahn VBX (W. L. Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, AZ, USA), in patients with chronic occlusive aorto-iliac disease (ChO). METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergone elective endovascular repair with VBX (W. L. Gore and Associates) for ChO at five referral vascular institutions in Italy from 2018 to 2022 was conducted. Primary endpoints were technical success and the incidence of any early and midterm procedure-related reintervention. Secondary endpoints were clinical success, primary and secondary patency. RESULTS: Among 89 included patients, technical success was obtained in 87 patients (97.8%). Postoperative complication requiring early surgical reintervention was necessary in 5 (6%), all but one for arterial bleeding. Clinical improvement of at least 3 classes was observed in 49 (55%). After a mean follow-up of 24.1 months ±14.1, primary patency and freedom from any procedure-related reintervention at 12, 24 and 36 months was 83.0% and 94.8%, 80.0% and 91.5%, 77.9% and 89.3%, respectively. Secondary patency was 100%. TASC-II D lesion (OR=3.67, 95% CI: 1.1289-11.9823, P=0.03) and Grade III iliac calcification (OR=3.41, 95% CI: 1.0944-10.6428, P=0.03) were identified as independent predictors for procedure-related reintervention. CONCLUSIONS: Use of VBX (W. L. Gore and Associates) in ChO was safe and effective with low rate of stenosis/occlusion in the early and mid-term follow-up. TASC-II D and Grade III calcifications resulted as independent predictors for procedure-related reintervention.

Plug-Based Embolization Techniques of Aortic Side Branches during Standard and Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair.

Vascular plugs are an evolving family of vessel occluders providing a single-device embolization system for large, high-flow arteries. Nitinol mesh plugs and polytetrafluoroethylene membrane plugs are available in different configurations and sizes to occlude arteries from 3 to 20 mm in diameter. Possible applications during complex endovascular aortic procedures are aortic branch embolization to prevent endoleak or to gain an adequate landing zone, directional branch occlusion, and false lumen embolization in aortic dissection. Plugs are delivered through catheters or introducers, and their technical and clinical results are comparable to those of coil embolization. Plugs are more accurate than coils as repositionable devices, less prone to migration, and have fewer blooming artifacts on postoperative computed tomography imaging. Their main drawback is the need for larger delivery systems. This narrative review describes up-to-date techniques and technology for plug embolization in complex aortic repair.

Gender-Related Disparities Among Vascular Surgeons in Italy: Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: To assess the presence, quality and impact of gender-related discrepancies in academic vascular surgery at a national level. METHODS: This was an anonymous national structured nonvalidated cross-sectional survey on gender disparity perceptions, named "I love it when you call me Señorita", distributed to 645 participants from academic Italian vascular centers. Endpoints were related to job-related characteristics, satisfaction, and sexual harassment. RESULTS: The survey yielded a 27% response rate (n = 174, 78 males and 96 females). Significant differences between male and female responders were found in terms of job satisfaction (83.3% vs. 53.1%, P < 0.001), perception of career opportunities (91.7% vs. 67.9%, P < 0.001), surgical activity in the operating theater (34.6% vs. 7.3%, P < 0.001), involvement in scientific activities (contribution in peer-reviewed articles: 37.2% vs. 9.4%, P < 0.001; scientific meeting attendance/year: 42.3% vs. 20.8%, P = 0.002), and perception of lower peer support at work (2.6% vs. 22.9%, P < 0.001). In addition, female physicians more frequently suffered sexual harassment from male peers/colleagues (10% vs. 34%, P < 0.001), male health-care workers (7% vs. 26%, P = 0.001), or patients/caregivers independently from their sex (6% vs. 38.5%, P < 0.001 for males and 5% vs. 22%, P = 0.001 for females). CONCLUSIONS: A significant number of the female vascular surgeons in Italian academic vascular centers responding to the survey have experienced workplace inequality and sexual harassment. Substantial efforts and ongoing initiatives are still required to address gender disparities, emphasizing the need for the promotion of specific guidelines within scientific societies.

Intraoperative Predictors and Proposal for a Novel Prognostic Risk Score for In-Hospital Mortality after Open Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms (SPARTAN Score).

(1) Background: Several mortality risk scores have been developed to predict mortality in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs), but none focused on intraoperative factors. The aim of this study is to identify intraoperative variables affecting in-hospital mortality after open repair and develop a novel prognostic risk score. (2) Methods: The analysis of a retrospectively maintained dataset identified patients who underwent open repair for rAAA from January 2007 to October 2023 in three Italian tertiary referral centers. Multinomial logistic regression was used to calculate the association between intraoperative variables and perioperative mortality. Independent intraoperative factors were used to create a prognostic score. (3) Results: In total, 316 patients with a mean age of 77.3 (SD ± 8.5) were included. In-hospital mortality rate was 30.7%. Hemoperitoneum (p < 0.001), suprarenal clamping (p = 0.001), and operation times of >240 min (p = 0.008) were negative predictors of perioperative mortality, while the patency of at least one hypogastric artery had a protective role (p = 0.008). Numerical values were assigned to each variable based on the respective odds ratio to create a risk stratification for in-hospital mortality. (4) Conclusions: rAAA represents a major cause of mortality. Intraoperative variables are essential to estimate patients' risk in surgically treated patients. A prognostic risk score based on these factors alone may be useful to predict in-hospital mortality after open repair.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of cerebrospinal fluid drain-related mortality and morbidity after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the incidence of cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD)-related complications specifically in patients who underwent fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR). This objective was chosen considering the limitations and uncertainties surrounding its efficacy in preventing spinal cord injury. METHODS: A systematic review following Cochrane Handbook and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted (PROSPERO; #CRD42022359223). Literature searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were performed until May 1, 2023, focusing on studies published after January 1, 2000. The inclusion criteria encompassed studies reporting on F/B-EVAR, CSFD, and drain-related complications. Data extraction and quality assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were performed by multiple reviewers to ensure accuracy and reliability. A proportion meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled rate and 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary and secondary outcomes were CSFD-related mortality and morbidity, respectively. RESULTS: Six retrospective, observational, single-center studies were included, totaling 1079 patients and 730 CSFD placements (all prophylactic except for one). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale showed a high to moderate risk of bias. The analysis revealed a CSFD-related mortality rate of 1.4% (95% CI: 0.0-4.8; I2 = 67.7%) and an overall morbidity rate of 25.6% (95% CI: 13.6-39.7; I2 = 83.2%). The overall major, moderate, and minor estimated complication rates were 6.1% (95% CI: 4.1-8.5; I2 = 0%), 4.6% (95% CI: 2.4-7.3; I2 = 33.5%), and 26.4% (95% CI: 16.5-37.7; I2 = 84.9%), respectively. Severe complications included intracranial hemorrhage (2.8%), spinal hematoma (1.4%), subarachnoid hemorrhage (1.4%), and CSFD-related neurological deficits (1.1%). A pooled estimate of 11.4% for nonfunctioning drainage was found. CONCLUSIONS: F/B-EVAR patients showed a notable incidence of CSFD-related death and substantial morbidity. This study highlights the limitations of the available data, the high prevalence of complications associated with CSFD, and the need for further research to better understand the risks and benefits of CSFD in F/B-EVAR. This calls for careful consideration regarding the routine use of prophylactic drainage due to the accumulating evidence of the risks associated with CSFD without proven benefit in this specific context.

The sac evolution imaging follow-up after endovascular aortic repair: An international expert opinion-based Delphi consensus study.

OBJECTIVE: Management of follow-up protocols after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) varies significantly between centers and is not standardized according to sac regression. By designing an international expert-based Delphi consensus, the study aimed to create recommendations on follow-up after EVAR according to sac evolution. METHODS: Eight facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study topic that were voted, using a 4-point Likert scale, by a selected panel of international experts using a three-round modified Delphi consensus process. Based on the experts' responses, only those statements reaching a grade A (full agreement ≥75%) or B (overall agreement ≥80% and full disagreement <5%) were included in the final document. RESULTS: One-hundred and seventy-four participants were included in the final analysis, and each voted the initial 29 statements related to the definition of sac regression (Q1-Q9), EVAR follow-up (Q10-Q14), and the assessment and role of sac regression during follow-up (Q15-Q29). At the end of the process, 2 statements (6.9%) were rejected, 9 statements (31%) received a grade B consensus strength, and 18 (62.1%) reached a grade A consensus strength. Of 27 final statements, 15 (55.6%) were classified as grade I, whereas 12 (44.4%) were classified as grade II. Experts agreed that sac regression should be considered an important indicator of EVAR success and always be assessed during follow-up after EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the elevated strength and high consistency of this international expert-based Delphi consensus, most of the statements might guide the current clinical management of follow-up after EVAR according to the sac regression. Future studies are needed to clarify debated issues.

Comparative outcomes of aortobifemoral bypass with or without previous endovascular kissing stenting of the aortoiliac bifurcation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter national study was to compare the outcomes of primary open surgery by aorto-bifemoral bypass (ABFB) with those performed after a failed endovascular treatment (EVT) by kissing stent technique for complex aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) lesions (TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus [TASC] II C and D). METHODS: All consecutive ABFB cases carried out at 12 vascular surgery centers between 2016 and 2021 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Data included patients' baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, procedural details, perioperative outcomes, and follow-up results (survival, patency, amputation). The study cohort was divided into two groups based on indications for ABFB: primary treatment vs secondary treatment after EVT failure. RESULTS: Overall, 329 patients underwent ABFB during the study period (71% males; mean age, 64 years), of which 285 were primary treatment and 44 were after prior EVT. At baseline, no significant differences were found between study groups in demographics and clinical characteristics. TASC C and D lesions were similarly represented in the study groups (TASC C: 22% vs 78%; TASC D: 16% vs 84%). No major differences were found between study groups in terms of procedural details, early mortality, and perioperative complications. At 5 years, primary patency rates were significantly higher for primary ABFB (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 93.2%-84%) as compared with ABFB after prior EVT (69%; 95% CI 84.9%-55%; log rank P value < .001); however, the 5-year rates of secondary patency (100% vs 95%; 95% CI, 100%-86%) and limb salvage (97%; 95% CI, 99%-96 vs 97%; 95% CI, 100%-94%) were similar between study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of TASC C/D AIOD with ABFB seems to be equally safe and effective when performed after prior EVT, although primary ABFB seemed to have higher primary patency rates. Despite the need for more frequent reinterventions, secondary patency and limb salvage rates were similar. However, future large prospective trials are required to confirm these findings.

A national cross-sectional survey on time-trends for endovascular repair of genetically-triggered aortic disease and connective tissue disorders over two decades.

BACKGROUND: By this survey, we aim to gain national-based information regarding trends in endovascular repair (ER) for the treatment of aortic disease in patients with genetically-triggered aortic disease (GTAD) and connective tissue disorder (CTD) over the last two decades. METHODS: All Italian vascular surgery centers (N.=80) were invited to participate in an anonymous electronic cross-sectional survey on ER for GTAD/CTD. RESULTS: Overall, 29 institutions completed the survey, thereby yielding a 36% response rate. The percentage of responding institutions rises to 64% if only regional hubs were considered (23/36). The median number of index procedures per center was 6.2, and a steady increase in the overall number of interventions over time was also noted. Most patients were males (73%) with a median age of 48 years. The most common endovascular procedure was TEVAR (N.=101), followed by F/BEVAR (N.=43) and EVAR (N.=37). The overall technical success rate was 83.4% while major adverse events and mortality at thirty days were reported at 18.2% and 9.9%, respectively. An additional 5.0% mortality rate was noted for an overall one-year mortality of 14.9%, while 3.7% of all treated patients were diagnosed with a type 1 endoleak. CONCLUSIONS: This national cross-sectional survey, investigating trends in ER of GTADs and CTDs over two decades, highlights a consistent increase in the use of endovascular techniques for their treatment. Early mortality was acceptably low, yet influenced by the urgency of presentation. At one-year follow-up, a 5% additional death rate was noted, and the reintervention rate remained below one in ten.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy. METHODS: The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed. CONCLUSION: The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Development and Validation of a Risk Prediction Tool for In-hospital Mortality After Thoracic Endovascular Repair in Patients with Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury Using the Aortic Trauma Foundation Registry.

BACKGROUND: The objective of our present effort was to use an international blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) registry to create a prediction model identifying important preoperative and intraoperative factors associated with postoperative mortality, and to develop and validate a simple risk prediction tool that could assist with patient selection and risk stratification in this patient population. METHODS: For the purpose of the present study, all patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for BTAI and registered in the Aortic Trauma Foundation (ATF) database from January 2016 as of June 2022 were identified. Patients undergoing medical management or open repair were excluded. The primary outcome was binary in-hospital all-cause mortality. Two predictive models were generated: a preoperative model (i.e. only including variables before TEVAR or intention-to-treat) and a full model (i.e. also including variables after TEVAR or per-protocol). RESULTS: Out of a total of 944 cases included in the ATF registry until June 2022, 448 underwent TEVAR and were included in the study population. TEVAR for BTAI was associated with an 8.5% in-hospital all-cause mortality in the ATF dataset. These study subjects were subsequently divided using 3:1 random sampling in a derivation cohort (336; 75.0%) and a validation cohort (112; 25.0%). The median age was 38 years, and the majority of patients were male (350; 78%). A total of 38 variables were included in the final analysis. Of these, 17 variables were considered in the preoperative model, 9 variables were integrated in the full model, and 12 variables were excluded owing to either extremely low variance or strong correlation with other variables. The calibration graphs showed how both models from the ATF dataset tended to underestimate risk, mainly in intermediate-risk cases. The discriminative capacity was moderate in all models; the best performing model was the full model from the ATF dataset, as evident from both the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (Area Under the Curve 0.84; 95% CI 0.74-0.91) and from the density graph. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we developed and validated a contemporary risk prediction model, which incorporates several preoperative and postoperative variables and is strongly predictive of early mortality. While this model can reasonably predict in-hospital all-cause mortality, thereby assisting physicians with risk-stratification as well as inform patients and their caregivers, its intrinsic limitations must be taken into account and it should only be considered an adjunctive tool that may complement clinical judgment and shared decision-making.

Systematic review of risk factors and outcomes of post-implantation syndrome following endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Post implantation syndrome (PIS) is an early systemic inflammatory response following endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). The response is variable in patients and the clinical significance of PIS upon outcomes is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and prognostic implication of PIS. METHODS: Systematic literature review and analysis was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines of PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible English-language studies regarding PIS after infrarenal EVAR were included, after removing duplicates. RESULTS: After screening, 31 studies were included. A total of 2847 patients were reviewed, with mean age of 70.7 years, of which 2012 (90.4%) were male, with a pooled mean follow-up of 26.1 months. PIS was reported in 25.3% of cases, with mean aneurysm diameter of 56.4 cm. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts were utilized in 794 patients (27.9%) with polyester in 1839 (64.6%). White blood cell count, C-reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, and IL-10 levels were all significantly elevated postoperatively. Thirty-day outcomes included type I endoleak rate of 0.8%, type II endoleak rate of 1.7%, reintervention rate of 0.35%, and mortality rate of 0.25%. Subgroup pooled analysis of patients with PIS (n = 309) vs No-PIS (n = 691) revealed that polyester (n = 642), rather than PTFE (n = 234) grafts, were associated with a higher rate of PIS (94.8% vs 3.7%; P = .0001), White blood cell count was higher in the PIS group both preoperatively (7.61 vs 6.76 × 109/L; P = .04) and postoperatively (15.0 vs 9.8 × 109/L; P = .0007) and IL-6 levels were higher in the PIS group postoperatively (98.6 vs 25.2 pg/mL; P = .02). Aneurysm diameter and amount of chronic or new thrombus within the aneurysm sac was not identified as a risk factor for PIS. Pooled outcomes of patients with PIS vs No-PIS demonstrated a significantly higher rate of 30-day mortality (0.6% vs 0%; P = .03) and major adverse cardiac events (5.8% vs 0.43%; P < .0001) without any differences seen in reintervention or 30-day type I or type II endoleaks. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that polyester grafts are strongly associated with PIS compared with PTFE. Interestingly, this report is suggestive of an association between 30-day mortality and major adverse cardiac events and PIS. Given these clinical sequelae, consideration for use of PTFE over polyester grafts to reduce the incidence of PIS may be a simple step to improve overall outcome. Further, exploration of the relationship between inflammatory mediators associated with PIS and mortality and cardiac complications may engender deeper understanding of risks, leading to eventual mitigation of harm for patients experiencing PIS.

Robustness of Longitudinal Safety and Efficacy After Paclitaxel-Based Endovascular Therapy for Treatment of Femoro-Popliteal Artery Occlusive Disease: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were: i) to assess fragility indices (FIs) of individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared paclitaxel-based drug-coated balloons (DCBs) or drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus standard endovascular devices, and ii) to meta-analyze mid-term and long-term safety and efficacy outcomes from available RCT data while also estimating the FI of pooled results. METHODS: This systematic review has been registered in the PROSPERO public database (CRD42022304326 http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). A query of PubMed (Medline), EMBASE (Excerpta Medical Database), Scopus, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) databases was performed to identify eligible RCTs. Rates of primary patency (PP) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) were assessed as efficacy outcomes, while lower limb amputation (LLA) consisting of major amputation that is. below or above the knee and all-cause mortality were estimated as safety outcomes. All outcomes were pooled with a random effects model to account for any clinical and study design heterogeneity. The analyses were performed by dividing the RCTs according to their maximal follow-up length (mid-term was defined as results up to 2-3 years, while long-term was defined as results up to 4-5 years). For each individual outcome, the FI and reverse fragility index (RFI) were calculated according to whether the outcome results were statistically significant or not, respectively. The fragility quotient (FQ) and reverse fragility quotient (RFQ), which are the FI or RFI divided by the sample size, were also calculated. RESULTS: A total of 2,337 patients were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. There were 2 RCTs examining DES devices and 14 RCTs evaluating different DCBs. For efficacy outcomes, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy increased the PP rate and reduced the TLR rate at mid-term, with a calculated pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.66 for patency (95% CI, 1.55-1.86; P < 0.001), with a corresponding number needed-to-treat (NNT) of 3 patients (95% CI, 2.9-3.8) and RR of 0.44 for TLR (95% CI, 0.35-0.54; P = 0.027), respectively. Similarly, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy both increased PP and decreased TLR rates at long-term, with calculated pooled RR values of 1.73 (95% CI, 1.12-2.61; P = 0.004) and 0.53 (95% CI, 0.45-0.62; P = 0.82), respectively. For safety outcomes, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy increased all-cause mortality at mid-term, with a calculated pooled RR of 2.05 (95% CI, 1.21-3.24). However, there was no difference between treatment arms in LLA at mid-term (95% CI, 0.1-2.7; P = 0.68). Similarly, neither all-cause mortality nor LLA at long-term differed between treatment arms, with a calculated pooled RR of 0.66, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.31-3.42) and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.30-5.21; P = 0.22), respectively. The pooled estimates of PP at mid-term were robust (FI = 28 and FQ = 1.9%) as were pooled rates of TLR (FI = 18 and FQ = 0.9%). However, when safety outcomes were analyzed, the robustness of the meta-analysis decreased significantly. In fact, the relationship between the use of paclitaxel-coated devices and all-cause mortality at mid-term showed very low robustness (FI = 4 and FQ = 0.2%). At 5 years, only the benefit of paclitaxel-based devices to reduce TLR remained robust, with an FI of 32 and an FQ of 3.1%. CONCLUSIONS: The data supporting clinical efficacy endpoints of RCTs that examined paclitaxel-based devices in the treatment of femoral-popliteal arterial occlusive disease were robust; however, the pooled safety endpoints were highly fragile and prone to bias due to loss of patient follow-up in the original studies. These findings should be considered in the ongoing debate concerning the safety of paclitaxel-based devices.

An International Expert-Based CONsensus on Indications and Techniques for aoRtic balloOn occLusion in the Management of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms (CONTROL-RAAA).

OBJECTIVE: To report on the recommendations of an expert-based consensus on the indications, timing, and techniques of aortic balloon occlusion (ABO) in the management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA). METHODS: Eleven facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study issues that were voted on using a 4-point Likert scale with open-comment fields, by a selected panel of international experts (vascular surgeons and interventional radiologists) using a 3-round modified Delphi consensus procedure (study period: January-April 2023). Based on the experts' responses, only the statements reaching grade A (full agreement ≥75%) or B (overall agreement ≥80% and full disagreement <5%) were included in the final study report. The consistency of each round's answers was also graded using Cohen's kappa, the intraclass correlation coefficient, and, in case of double resubmission, Fleiss kappa. RESULTS: Sixty-three experts were included in the final analysis and voted on 25 statements related to indication and timing (n=6), and techniques (n=19) of ABO in the setting of rAAA. Femoral sheath or ABO should be preferably placed in the operating room, via a percutaneous transfemoral access, on a stiff wire (grade B, consistency I), ABO placement should be suprarenal and last less than 30 minutes (grade B, consistency II), postoperative peripheral vascular status (grade A, consistency II) and laboratory testing every 6 to 12 hours (grade B, consistency) should be assessed to detect complications. Formal training for ABO should be implemented (grade B, consistency I). Most of the statements in this international expert-based Delphi consensus study might guide current choices for indications, timing, and techniques of ABO in the management of rAAA. Clinical practice guidelines should incorporate dedicated statements that can guide clinicians in decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: At arrival and during both open or endovascular procedures for rAAA, selective use of intra-aortic balloon occlusion is recommended, and it should be performed preferably by the treating physician in aortic pathology. CLINICAL IMPACT: This is the first consensus study of international vascular experts aimed at defining the indications, timing, and techniques of optimal use of ABO in the clinical setting of rAAA. Aortic occlusion by endovascular means (or ABO) is a quick procedure in properly trained hands that may play an important role as a temporizing measure until the definitive aortic repair is achieved, whether by endovascular or open means. Since data on its use in hemodynamically unstable patients are limited in the literature, owing to practical challenges in the performance of well-conducted prospective studies, understanding real-world use by experts is of importance in addressing critical issues and identifying main gaps in knowledge.

Risk Prediction Models for Peri-Operative Mortality in Patients Undergoing Major Vascular Surgery with Particular Focus on Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: The present scoping review aims to describe and analyze available clinical data on the most commonly reported risk prediction indices in vascular surgery for perioperative mortality, with a particular focus on ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A scoping review following the PRISMA Protocols Extension for Scoping Reviews was performed. Available full-text studies published in English in PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases (last queried, 30 March 2023) were systematically reviewed and analyzed. The Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) framework used to construct the search strings was the following: in patients with aortic pathologies, in particular rAAA (population), undergoing open or endovascular surgery (intervention), what different risk prediction models exist (comparison), and how well do they predict post-operative mortality (outcomes)? RESULTS: The literature search and screening of all relevant abstracts revealed a total of 56 studies in the final qualitative synthesis. The main findings of the scoping review, grouped by the risk score that was investigated in the original studies, were synthetized without performing any formal meta-analysis. A total of nine risk scores for major vascular surgery or elective AAA, and 10 scores focusing on rAAA, were identified. Whilst there were several validation studies suggesting that most risk scores performed adequately in the setting of rAAA, none reached 100% accuracy. The Glasgow aneurysm score, ERAS and Vancouver score risk scores were more frequently included in validation studies and were more often used in secondary studies. Unfortunately, the published literature presents a heterogenicity of results in the validation studies comparing the different risk scores. To date, no risk score has been endorsed by any of the vascular surgery societies. CONCLUSIONS: The use of risk scores in any complex surgery can have multiple advantages, especially when dealing with emergent cases, since they can inform perioperative decision making, patient and family discussions, and post hoc case-mix adjustments. Although a variety of different rAAA risk prediction tools have been published to date, none are superior to others based on this review. The heterogeneity of the variables used in the different scores impairs comparative analysis which represents a major limitation to understanding which risk score may be the "best" in contemporary practice. Future developments in artificial intelligence may further assist surgical decision making in predicting post-operative adverse events.

Bypass vs endovascular treatment for occluded femoro-popliteal stents in patients with critical limb-threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the early and medium-term outcomes of bypass vs endovascular treatment of occluded femoro-popliteal stents in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (the OUT-STEPP multicentric registry). METHODS: Between January 2016 and December 2021, 317 patients in 14 centers underwent treatment for a symptomatic occlusion of femoro-popliteal stent/stents. One hundred sixty-one patients were included into the present study: 46 (28.6%) underwent open bypass surgery (Group OPEN), and 115 (71.4%) underwent endovascular revascularization (Group ENDO). Early (30 days) results were assessed and compared between the two groups. Estimated 5-year outcomes were evaluated and compared with the log rank test. RESULTS: At 30 days, no differences were found in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events, acute kidney injury, reinterventions, major amputation, and all-cause mortality between the two groups. The need for blood transfusions was higher for patients in Group OPEN (17; 36.9% vs 13; 11.3%; P < .001). The mean length of intensive care unit stay and the mean hospital stay were higher for patients in Group OPEN ([0.3 ± 0.9 vs 0 days; P < .001] and [9.7 ± 5.8 vs 3.3 ± 1.4 days; P < .001], respectively). The overall median duration of follow-up was 33.1 months (interquartile range, 14-49.5 months). At 5 years, there were no differences between the two groups in terms of survival (68.7% Group OPEN vs 68.8% Group ENDO; P = .27; log-rank, 1.21), primary patency (56.3% Group OPEN vs 67.8% Group ENDO; P = .39; log-rank, 0.75), secondary patency (59.1% Group OPEN vs 77.8% Group ENDO; P = .24; log-rank, 1.40), absence of target lesion restenosis (56.8% Group OPEN vs 62.7% Group ENDO; P = .42; log-rank, 0.65), and limb salvage (77.2% Group OPEN vs 90.4% Group ENDO; P = .17; log-rank, 1.87). CONCLUSIONS: Both bypass and endovascular treatment provided safe and effective restoration of patency for femoro-popliteal in-stent occlusion in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia. Open surgery was associated with longer stay in hospital and increased use of blood transfusions. At 5 years, no significant differences were found in the rates of overall patency or limb salvage between bypass and endovascular treatment.