Identification of microRNA biomarkers simultaneously expressed in circulating extracellular vesicles and atherosclerotic plaques.

Background: Atherosclerosis is a widespread disorder of the cardiovascular system. The early detection of plaques by circulating biomarkers is highly clinically relevant to prevent the occurrence of major complications such as stroke or heart attacks. It is known that extracellular vesicles (EVs) are important in intercellular communication in atherosclerotic disorders and carry many components of their cells of origin, including microRNAs (miRNAs). In this study, we test the assumption that miRNAs present in material acquired from plaques in patients undergoing surgery for atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis are also expressed in circulating EVs obtained from the identical patients. This would allow the adoption of a liquid biopsy approach for the detection of plaques. Methods: We studied 22 surgical patients with atherosclerotic carotid arterial stenosis and 28 healthy controls. EVs were isolated from serum by precipitation. miRNA expression profiles of serum-derived EVs were obtained by small RNA sequencing and in plaque material simultaneously acquired from patients. A comparative analysis was performed to identify circulating atherosclerosis-associated miRNAs that are also detectable in plaques. Results: Seven miRNAs were found to be differentially regulated in patient serum compared with the serum of healthy controls. Of these, miR-193b-5p, miR-193a-5p, and miR-125a-3p were significantly upregulated in patients compared with that in healthy controls and present in both, circulating EVs and plaque material. An overrepresentation analysis of experimentally validated mRNA targets revealed an increased regulation of inflammation and vascular growth factors, key players in atherosclerosis and plaque formation. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that circulating EVs reflect plaque development in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis, which can serve as biomarker candidates for detecting the presence of atherosclerotic plaques.

Outcome of the Be Graft Bridging Stent in Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair in a High-Volume Single Center and an Overview of Current Evidence.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) has become one of the standard treatment options for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (cAAAs) and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Despite technological advances in the main endograft design, the lack of dedicated bridging stent-grafts (BSGs) is still the Achilles heel of the procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the mid-term outcomes of the BeGraft stent-graft as a dedicated bridging stent for FEVAR and to review the current evidence in literature. METHODS: Retrospective single center study, including all consecutive FEVARs performed between September 2018 and December 2022 for the treatment of cAAAs and TAAAs with implantation of at least one BeGraft peripheral as the main BSG in one of the target vessels (TVs). Primary endpoints were technical success and TV instability of TV bridged with a BeGraft stent, as well as 30-day mortality and re-intervention rates. Secondary endpoints were follow-up TV instability, re-interventions, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 113 patients (93 male, mean age 71.1±9.7) and 440 TV (14 scallops and 426 fenestrations) were included. Of the 440 TV, 406 received primary stenting. Be Grafts were used in 88.9% of these (n=361; celiac trunk [CT]=67, superior mesenteric artery [SMA]=98, right renal artery [RRA]=97, and left renal artery [LRA]=99). The technical success rate was 99.4% (359/361). The 30-day TV instability rate was 0.27% (1/361) with one early renal artery occlusion. During a median follow-up of 20 months (6-32), TV instability rate was 0.8% (3/361). Freedom from TV instability was 99.3%, 98.8%, and 98.8% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: Early-term and mid-term results regarding TV instability are satisfactory and support the use of BeGraft as BSG in FEVAR for cAAAs and TAAAs. CLINICAL IMPACT: The findings of the current study show that the use of the BeGraft stent graft as bridging stent in FEVAR is associated with a high technical success and low early and mid-term instability rate and support the standard use as a bridging stent in fenestrated aneurysm repair.

Burden of Stroke in Europe: An Analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study Findings From 2010 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: While most European Regions perform well in global comparisons, large discrepancies within stroke epidemiological parameters exist across Europe. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the stroke burden across European regions and countries in 2019 and its difference to 2010. METHODS: The GBD 2019 analytical tools were used to evaluate regional and country-specific estimates of incidence, prevalence, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years of stroke for the European Region as defined by the World Health Organization, with its 53 member countries (EU-53) and for European Union as defined in 2019, with its 28 member countries (EU-28), between 2010 and 2019. Results were analyzed at a regional, subregional, and country level. RESULTS: In EU-53, the absolute number of incident and prevalent strokes increased by 2% (uncertainty interval [UI], 0%-4%), from 1 767 280 to 1 802 559 new cases, and by 4% (UI, 3%-5%) between 2010 and 2019, respectively. In EU-28, the absolute number of prevalent strokes and stroke-related deaths increased by 4% (UI, 2%-5%) and by 6% (UI, 1%-10%), respectively. All-stroke age-standardized mortality rates, however, decreased by 18% (UI, -22% to -14%), from 82 to 67 per 100 000 people in the EU-53, and by 15% (UI, -18% to -11%), from 49.3 to 42.0 per 100 000 people in EU-28. Despite most countries presenting reductions in age-adjusted incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life year rates, these rates remained 1.4×, 1.2×, 1.6×, and 1.7× higher in EU-53 in comparison to the EU-28. CONCLUSIONS: EU-53 showed a 2% increase in incident strokes, while they remained stable in EU-28. Age-standardized rates were consistently lower for all-stroke burden parameters in EU-28 in comparison to EU-53, and huge discrepancies in incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-year rates were observed between individual countries.

Impact of Previous Open Abdominal Surgery on Open Abdominal Aortic Repair: A Study from the NSQIP Database.

BACKGROUND: While endovascular aneurysm repair has become a first-line strategy in many centers, open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is still the best option for certain patients. A significant number of patients who are offered OSR for AAA have been previously submitted to other open abdominal surgeries (PAS). It is unclear, however, how this may impact their outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is an association between PAS and outcomes of OSR of AAA. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study based on clinical data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, including all patients undergoing elective OSR for AAA between 2011 and 2017. Excluded were patients with missing data on prior abdominal surgery, supramesenteric clamping, or urgent repairs. Patients with prior abdominal surgery (PAS) and patients without prior abdominal surgeries (nonPAS) were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes were operating time, ischemic colitis, postoperative complications, and lengths of hospital stay. RESULTS: Of the 2034 patients included, 27% had previous open abdominal surgery and 73% did not. Overall, the median age was 71(interquartile range 65-76), 72% of patients were male, 44% were smokers, and the average body mass index was 27 kg/m2. Univariate analysis showed no difference in postoperative 30-day mortality (4.0% PAS vs. 4.1% nonPAS, P = 0.91) or overall postoperative complication rates (33% PAS vs. 29% nonPAS, P = 0.07). Previous open abdominal surgery was significantly associated with longer operating times (P = 0.032) and an almost doubled rate of ischemic colitis (4.7% PAS vs. 2.6% nonPAS, P = 0.02). Postoperative intensive care unit and hospitalization were also significantly longer in patients with prior abdominal surgery (P = 0.005 and P = 0.014, respectively). Finally, there were significantly less patients discharged home, as opposed to institutionalized care (75.7% PAS down from 82.4% nonPAS, P = 0.001). Despite these initial univariate analysis results, on multivariate analysis, PAS actually did not prove to be a statistically significant independent risk factor for 30-day mortality, ischemic colitis, or longer operating times. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that patients who have undergone PAS may have some disadvantages in OSR of AAA. However, these negative trends do not go so far as to statistically significantly identify PAS as an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality, ischemic colitis, or longer operating times. As such, we suggest that a history of previous open abdominal surgery, in and of its own, should not exclude patients from consideration for open aortic abdominal aneurysm repair.

Secondary Endovascular Conversions for Failed Open Repair.

Late aortic and graft-related complications after open aortic repair are not infrequent and a significant number of them are missed, diagnosed at a very late stage, or present as urgent complications such as aortic rupture or aorto-enteric fistula. Once a late complication is diagnosed and reintervention is necessary, both open and endovascular strategies are possible. Open reintervention is complex and usually associated with very high rates of morbidity and mortality. Endovascular techniques may offer several solutions for these cases, which may be tailored to the patient and specific complication. In this review, we aim to summarize current indications, options, and strategies for endovascular salvage after failed or complicated open surgical repair.

Stroke risk management in carotid atherosclerotic disease: A Clinical Consensus Statement of the ESC Council on Stroke and the ESC Working Group on Aorta and Peripheral Vascular Diseases.

Carotid atherosclerotic disease continues to be an important cause of stroke, often disabling or fatal. Such strokes could be largely prevented through optimal medical therapy and carotid revascularization. Advancements in discovery research and imaging along with evidence from recent pharmacology and interventional clinical trials and registries and the progress in acute stroke management have markedly expanded knowledge base for clinical decisions in carotid stenosis. Nevertheless, there is variability in carotid-related stroke prevention and management strategies across medical specialities. Optimal patient care can be achieved by (1) establishing a unified knowledge foundation and (2) fostering multi-specialty collaborative guidelines. The emergent Neuro-Vascular Team concept, mirroring the multi-disciplinary Heart Team, embraces diverse specializations, tailores personalized, stratified medicine approaches to individual patient needs, and integrates innovative imaging and risk-assessment biomarkers. Proposed approach integrates collaboration of multiple specialists central to carotid artery stenosis management such as neurology, stroke medicine, cardiology, angiology, ophthalmology, vascular surgery, endovascular interventions, neuroradiology and neurosurgery. Moreover, patient education regarding current treatment options, their risks and advantages, is pivotal, promting patient's active role in clinical care decisions. This enables optimization of interventions ranging from lifestyle modification, carotid revascularization by stenting or endarterectomy, as well as pharmacological management encompassing statins, novel lipid-lowering and antithrombotic strategies and targeting inflammation and vascular dysfunction. This consensus document provides a harmonized multi-specialty approach to multimorbidity prevention in carotid stenosis patients, based on comprehensive knowledge review, pinpointing research gaps in an evidence-based medicine approach. It aims to be a foundational tool for interdisciplinary collaboration and prioritized patient-centric decision-making.

[Malperfusion after Aortic Dissection - Management and Techniques]. / Malperfusion nach Aortendissektion - Management und Techniken.

Malperfusion is a common complication of aortic dissection and further increases this deadly disease's mortality. An effective treatment strategy requires a timely diagnosis based on the clinical findings and the available instruments, understanding the disease's pathomechanism, recognising the therapy options recommended by the guidelines, and the diagnostic and therapeutic innovations of the area of research. The final treatment decision should be patient- and case-specific. In this work, we have considered malperfusion after aortic dissection, not only as a complication of aortic dissection but as a separate disease and summarise important information that can contribute to efficient therapy decisions in everyday clinical practice.

Acute Kidney Injury Following Revascularization in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia and Non-Dialysis-Dependent Chronic Kidney Disease: Insights From the NSQIP Database at 30-Day Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at risk of developing renal injury following revascularization. We aimed to compare the risk of adverse renal events following endovascular revascularization (ER) or open surgery (OS) in patients with CLTI and CKD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) databases (2011-2017) was performed including patients with CLTI and non-dialysis-dependent CKD, comparing ER to OS. The primary outcome was a composite of postprocedural kidney injury or failure within 30 days. Thirty-day mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), amputation, readmission or target lesion revascularization (TLR) were compared using multivariate logistic regression and propensity-score matched analysis. RESULTS: A total of 5009 patients were included (ER: 2361; OS: 3409). The risk for the composite primary outcome was comparable between groups (odds ratio [OR]: 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53-1.17) as for kidney injury (n=54, OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.39-1.19) or failure (n=55, OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.39-1.19). In the adjusted regression, a significant benefit was observed with ER for the primary outcome (OR: 0.60, p=0.018) and renal failure (OR: 0.50, p=0.025), but not for renal injury (OR: 0.76, p=0.34). Lower rates of MACCE, TLR, and readmissions were observed after ER. Thirty-day mortality and major amputation rates did not differ. In the propensity score analysis, revascularization strategy was not associated with renal injury or failure. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, the incidence of renal events within 30 days of revascularization in CLTI was low and comparable between ER and OR. CLINICAL IMPACT: In a cohort of 5009 patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia and non-end-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD), postprocedural kidney injury or failure within 30 days was comparable between patients submitted to open or endovascular revascularization (ER). Lower rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, target lesion revascularization, and readmissions were observed after endovascular revascularization. Based on these findings, ER should not be avoided due to fear of worsening renal function in CKD patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia. In fact, these patients benefit more from ER regarding cardiovascular outcomes with no increased risk of kidney injury.

Cervical Debranching: Regional versus General Anesthesia for Carotid-Subclavian Bypass. A Single Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: We report here the first cohort study comparing regional and general anaesthesia for left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective cohort study was performed, including all consecutive patients who underwent cervical debranching with carotid-subclavian bypass before aortic repair from February 2018 to May 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the type of anesthesia: Regional anesthesia (RA) versus general anesthesia (GA). Primary endpoints included the following: 1) technical success of RA and 2) neurological complications (NCs) (stroke and peripheral neurological lesions). Secondary endpoints included postoperative bleeding, wound complications, 30-day reintervention rate, and midterm events. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were included in the study. The mean age was 64 years (interquartile range [IQR]:13.5) and 69% were male. Thirty-seven patients (44.5%) were performed under RA. Technical success of RA was 89.2%. Two minor strokes (2.4%) were observed in the GA group (P = 0.199). Peripheral neurological disorders occurred in 4 patients (4.8%) (RA group n = 1 (2.7%), GA group n = 3 (6.5%), P = 0.491). 30-day complication rate was 27.7% (n = 23, GA: n = 15 (32.6%), RA: n = 8 (21.6%), P = 0.266). 30-day reintervention rate was 14.5% (n = 12) ten bleeding complications (12%) (RA group n = 3 (8.1%), GA group n = 7 (15.2%), P = 0.323), and 2 seroma evacuations (2.4%) in the RA group. The incidence of superficial wound infections was n = 6 (7.2%) (RA group n = 2 (5.4%), GA group n = 4 (8.7%), P = 0.565). Median follow-up time was 22 months (IQR 22 min/max 1-44). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, RA for carotid subclavian bypass surgery proved to be a feasible and effective anesthetic procedure compared with GA.

Expert opinion: How to treat type IA endoleakage.

Type Ia endoleaks due to failed sealing or loss of landing zone and the adequate management thereof remain crucial for long-term therapeutic success following TEVAR. This expert opinion summarizes our institutional experience with endovascular, open surgical, and hybrid techniques in the context of recent scientific publications. The rapid turnover of technical innovations, but most importantly outcome data demonstrate the requirement for increasingly patient-tailored treatment strategies and the need for specialized aortic centers. The latter should offer a complete range of treatment options, an adequate perioperative management, and the highest level of multidisciplinary expertise.

A Single-Center Experience With Total Percutaneous Implantation of a Low-Profile Thoracic Aortic Stent-Graft.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of total percutaneous implantation of the Zenith Alpha Thoracic (ZTA) endograft in the treatment of diseases of the descending thoracic aorta. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 56 consecutive patients undergoing total percutaneous ZTA implantation between 2018 and 2020 was performed in a single center. Patients' demographics, clinical characteristics, anatomical parameters, operative details, device features, and postoperative outcomes were assessed. The primary endpoint was ongoing clinical success. A Cox regression model was used to determine the predictive factors of worse postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-three ZTA endografts were implanted in 35 men and 21 women with a mean age of 69±11 years for the treatment of 26 degenerative aneurysms, 15 type B dissections, and 8 penetrating ulcers, among others. Primary technical success was 100%, with a 30-day ongoing clinical success rate of 94.6%. The 1-year ongoing clinical success rate was 91.1% (51 patients), and freedoms from all-cause mortality, type 1 and 3 endoleaks, and any unplanned reintervention were, respectively, 95.3%, 91.4%, and 88.2% at 1 year. During follow-up, there was one case of surgical conversion for an aorto-esophageal fistula. On the contrary, neither aneurysmal rupture nor significant aneurysmal expansion was recorded. Repair of ruptured thoracic aorta and a high ratio of sheath outer diameter to external iliac artery diameter were found to be independently associated with worse outcomes, with adjusted odds ratios of 4.4 [1.5-15.3] and 4.9 [1.1-23.9], respectively. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of total percutaneous implantation of ZTA endograft show excellent primary technical success and favorable midterm ongoing clinical success. Factors associated with worse outcomes include the repair of ruptured aorta and a high sheath to access vessel ratio.

Salvage of an Incomplete Sandwich With a Covered Celiac Trunk and a "Floating" Superior Mesenteric Artery Stent in a Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

PURPOSE: To report a case of a patient with a large thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) extent V treated with a custom-made fenestrated and branched endovascular repair (F/B-EVAR) after a failed and incomplete attempt of a Sandwich repair technique. REPORT: An 83-year-old patient was referred to our department after a failed attempt at endovascular repair of type V TAAA with a sandwich technique. The celiac trunk was inadvertently covered with the first endograft and a covered long superior mesenteric artery stent was placed and left facing upward inside the aorta. We performed a staged repair, by first catheterizing and stenting the celiac trunk and bringing it under and inside the main aortic endograft. In interval, a F/B-EVAR was performed using a bimodular custom-made device (CMD) with a proximal 2 branch module for the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery and distal module with fenestrations for both renal arteries. The intervention was successful, and the follow-up was uneventful at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Re-intervention after failed endovascular attempts of TAAA repair are technically challenging and require advanced endovascular techniques. The ability to construct CMDs allowed to extend repair to our patient which had severe anatomical constraints for other techniques.

Current state and future directions of endovascular ascending and arch repairs: The motion towards an endovascular Bentall procedure.

Endovascular repair of the ascending aorta and aortic arch has evolved at an astonishing pace in the past several decades. Results of endovascular arch repair in experienced centers have been improving and the technology evolving, and it has begun to challenge the current gold standard status of open surgery in some groups of patients. Hybrid strategies with adjunctive cervical debranching for distal arch lesions are being replaced by fenestrated arch repairs. Total endovascular repair for proximal aortic arch pathologies with the use of inner branches has achieved the best results; however, the main current limitations of endovascular arch repair are diameter-, length-, and angulation-related issues with the ascending aorta (proximal landing zone). Ascending aorta endovascular repair has allowed extending treatment further proximally in patients with post-surgical pseudoaneurysms of the ascending aorta or post-type A chronic aortic dissections. However, sufficient proximal landing zone is still needed in the proximal aorta for these repairs; in a significant number of patients, this is not feasible with simple proximal tubular grafts. Therefore, new technologies and techniques are being developed to deal with this limitation, including the endovascular Bentall concept, with incorporation of the aortic valve and coronary ostia. In this review, the current state and future directions of endovascular ascending and arch repairs and the motion towards an endovascular Bentall procedure are discussed.

Postoperative Outcomes and Reinterventions Following Fenestrated/Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair in Post-Dissection and Complex Degenerative Abdominal and Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of FBEVAR in post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms has not been well established in the literature. The aim of this study was to compare midterm outcomes following FBEVAR in post-dissection aneurysms to degenerative aneurysms. (2) Methods: This was a retrospective review of all patients undergoing FBEVAR in a single center between 2017 and 2020. The baseline characteristics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes of patients with post-dissection aneurysms were compared to those with degenerative outcomes. The primary end point was unplanned reinterventions. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify the determinants of worse outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 137 subjects with a mean age of 70 ± 10 years were included in the study, out of which 30 presented post-dissection aneurysms (22%). Custom-made devices were employed in 119 patients, off-the-shelf devices in 13 and physician-modified endografts in 5, with incorporation in 505 target vessels. The technical success rate was comparable in both groups (97% vs. 98%, p = 0.21). However, the one-year freedom from unplanned reintervention was lower in the post-dissection group (67% vs. 89%, p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: FBEVAR in post-dissection aneurysms is associated with a favorable technical success rate, but reintervention rates remain high. Long procedural duration and the use of adjunctive techniques are associated with increased risk of reinterventions.

Endovascular Repair With Triple Inner-Branch Endograft for Aberrant Subclavian Artery Aneurysm: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) is the preferred option for the treatment of the distal arch and descending thoracic aorta. Fenestrated and branched TEVAR have become an option to treat pathologies of the aortic arch, avoiding sternotomy and cardiopulmonary arrest as well as total surgical debranching. We describe here the case of a symptomatic patient with an arteria lusoria aneurysm associated with Kommerel diverticulum who underwent total endovascular repair with a triple-branched TEVAR. CASE REPORT: A 66-year-old male patient was treated for a symptomatic arteria lusoria artery associated with a Kommerel diverticulum, resulting in difficulty swallowing and choking. We used a custom-made triple inner-branch endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana) following implantation of a right-sided carotid-subclavian (C-S) bypass. The C-S bypass occluded in the interval time between the 2 procedures and required recanalization and stent-graft placement during the aortic arch procedure. The arteria lusoria was embolized with a vascular plug. No complications occurred and postoperative tomography showed exclusion and thrombosis of the Kommerel diverticulum and perfusion of the supra-aortic vessels. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of arteria lusoria aneurysms can be performed with total endovascular arch inner-branch repair, avoiding increased risk of morbidity and mortality caused by open or hybrid procedures.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Physician Modified Endografts for Treatment of Thoraco-Abdominal and Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the outcomes of physician modified endografts (PMEG) for the treatment of thoraco-abdominal (TAAA) and complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (C-AAA). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science Core Collection, Scielo, and Open Grey. REVIEW METHODS: The databases were searched from inception to July 2021 for studies reporting on outcomes of PMEGs for TAAA or C-AAA repair. A systematic review was conducted (protocol CRD42021267856) and data were pooled using a random effects model of proportions. The outcomes analysed were major adverse events at 30 days (30 day mortality, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure requiring prolonged ventilation [> 24 hours or re-intubation], renal failure requiring dialysis, bowel ischaemia requiring surgery, major stroke, or definitive paraplegia); technical success; 30 day mortality; ruptures; spinal cord ischaemia; endoleaks; re-interventions; and target vessel patency. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included. Overall study quality assessment was found to be low. Overall, 909 PMEGs were reported and analysed. Regarding aneurysm location (n = 867), 222 patients had extent I - III TAAAs and 645 had C-AAA or extent IV TAAA. Regarding presentation, 14 studies reported whether the patients were treated in an elective or urgent setting (n = 782). Overall, 500 (63.9%) patients were treated in an elective setting and 282 (36.1%) in an urgent setting. Major adverse events (at 30 days) occurred in 15.5% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.8 - 20.8; I2 = 63%, 135/832 cases): 11.6% (95% CI 8.1 - 15.7; I2 = 0%, 23/280 cases) for elective patients and 24.6% for urgent (95% CI 14.1 - 36.6; I2 = 65%, 50/192 cases). Overall technical success was 97.2% (95% CI 95.4 - 98.7; I2 = 0%, 587/611 cases): 98.0% (95% CI 92.1 - 100; I2 = 0%, 106/113cases) for extent I - III TAAAs and 99.4% (95% CI 97.5 - 100; I2 = 0%, 317/324 cases) for C-AAA and extent IV TAAAs. Regarding technique, technical success was 96.1% for fenestrated endovascular repair (FEVAR; 95% CI 93.2 - 98.4; I2 = 0%, 313/329 cases) and 99.8% for FEVAR/branched endovascular repair (95% CI 99.8 - 100; I2 = 0%, 17/18 cases). CONCLUSION: Physician modified fenestrated or branched grafts for endovascular aortic repair seem feasible and safe in the short term. However, the quality of the available data is low, which highlights the need for better and more accurate data regarding this technique.