Analysis of Target Vessel Instability in Fenestrated Endovascular Repair (f-EVAR) in Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Pathologies.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of target vessel anatomy and post-stenting geometry on the outcome of fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (f-EVAR). Methods: A retrospective review of data from a single center was conducted, including all consecutive fenestrated endovascular aortic repairs (f-EVARs) performed between September 2018 and December 2023 for thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) and complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (cAAAs). The analysis focused on the correlation of target vessel instability to target vessel anatomy and geometry after stenting. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of target vessel instability. Secondary endpoints were the 30-day and follow-up re-interventions. Results: A total of 136 patients underwent f-EVAR with 481 stented target vessels. A total of ten target vessel instabilities occurred including three in visceral and seven instabilities in renal vessels. The cumulative incidence of target vessel instability with death as the competing risk was 1.4%, 1.8% and 3.4% at 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively. In renal target vessels (260/481), a diameter ≤ 4 mm (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.035-1.274, p = 0.009) and an aortic protrusion ≥ 5.75 mm (OR 8.21, 95% CI 3.150-12-23, p = 0.027) was associated with an increased target vessel instability. In visceral target vessels (221/481), instability was significantly associated with a preoperative tortuosity index ≥ 1.25 (HR 15.19, CI 95% 2.50-17.47, p = 0.045) and an oversizing ratio of ≥1.25 (HR 7.739, CI % 4.756-12.878, p = 0.049). Conclusions: f-EVAR showed favorable mid-term results concerning target vessel instability in the current cohort. A diameter of ≤4 mm and an aortic protrusion of ≥5.75 mm in the renal target vessels as well as a preoperative tortuosity index and an oversizing of the bridging stent of ≥1.25 in the visceral target vessels should be avoided.

"Loss of landing zone"-Stabilizing endovascular treatment solutions in the aortic arch after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Addressing proximal complications that arise after endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection, such as type Ia endoleaks, "bird-beaking" of the thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) stent, retrograde type A dissection, and postdissection aneurysms, bears considerable complexities. We present a novel and safe method for open arch repair that can ensure a secure and efficient approach for TEVAR complications. The key element of the operative technique is approximating the grafted stent portion to the aortic wall and the arch prosthesis. The technique has successfully been implemented in 11 patients, who received secondary open arch repair from 2019 to 2022 after TEVAR for type B dissection. Our objective is not only to introduce this reliable concept but also to provide a comprehensive demonstration of its advantages and disadvantages compared with currently used open treatment methods and discuss patient outcomes after secondary open arch repair.

The "Bundle Wire" Technique: A Novel Approach to Cannulating Challenging Target Vessels Using Multiple Fine Atraumatic Guidewires That Together Serve as a Stiff Guidewire.

PURPOSE: To present a novel technique that enables safe and effective cannulation of target vessels with challenging anatomy during fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR). TECHNIQUE: Following deployment of the F/B-EVAR endograft, the target vessels (TVs) are cannulated. The bundle wire technique provides a solution to challenging TVs and uses multiple fine atraumatic guidewires that together serve as a stiff guidewire. The technique can be executed in 2 ways using: (1) one 0.018 inch and one 0.014 inch guidewire or (2) three 0.014 inch guidewires. We demonstrate the technique in a case of a complex abdominal aortic aneurysm treated using branched EVAR in which the left renal artery with severe ostial stenosis was catheterized using the bundle wire technique. CONCLUSIONS: The bundle wire technique offers a technically feasible and economically viable solution for facilitating catheter and bridging stent delivery in anatomically challenging TVs during F/B-EVAR. It is a useful addition to the therapeutic armamentarium available to physicians for accessing demanding TVs.

The Impact of Target Vessel Anatomy and Bridging Stent Geometry on Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of target vessel anatomy and bridging stent geometry on target vessel instability in branched endovascular aortic repair (b-EVAR). METHODS: This retrospective, single centre cohort study included all consecutive b-EVARs performed between September 2018 and December 2022 for thoracoabdominal (TAAA) or complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAA). The primary endpoints were target vessel instability and related re-interventions at 12 months. Secondary endpoints were 30 day results, including target vessel instability and re-interventions. Target vessel instability analysis consisted of assessment of target vessel anatomy, including diameter, aortic trunk to branch angle, and tortuosity. Post-operative parameters included change of clock position/horizontal misalignment, bridging length (gap), sealing length, tortuosity, post-stenting angle, and oversizing ratio. RESULTS: A total of 69 patients (TAAA: n = 56, 81%; CAAA: n = 13, 19%) and 271 (133 visceral and 138 renal) target vessels were included. Cumulative incidence of target vessel instability was 4.8%, 6.4%, and 7.9% at one year, two years, and three years, respectively. In the renal target vessel group, vessel diameter ≤ 4 mm (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.116 - 2.54; p = .022) and a bridging length ≥ 25 mm (HR 1.320, 95% CI 1.066 - 1.636; p = .011) were associated to increased target vessel instability. In visceral vessels, a change in clock position/horizontal misalignment ≥ 70 minutes (HR 1.072, 95% CI 1.026 - 1.121; p = .002) showed a significant association with target vessel instability. CONCLUSION: Target vessel diameter, bridging length (gap), and horizontal misalignment seemed to be associated with adverse target vessel outcomes. This may be solved with more customised endograft solutions to reduce the negative impact of the latter parameter.

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.

4-Axis 3D-Printed Tubular Biomaterials Imitating the Anisotropic Nanofiber Orientation of Porcine Aortae.

Many of the peculiar properties of the vasculature are related to the arrangement of anisotropic proteinaceous fibers in vessel walls. Understanding and imitating these arrangements can potentially lead to new therapies for cardiovascular diseases. These can be pre-surgical planning, for which patient-specific ex vivo anatomical models for endograft testing are of interest. Alternatively, therapies can be based on tissue engineering, for which degradable in vitro cell growth substrates are used to culture replacement parts. In both cases, materials are desirable that imitate the biophysical properties of vessels, including their tubular shapes and compliance. This work contributes to these demands by offering methods for the manufacturing of anisotropic 3D-printed nanofibrous tubular structures that have similar biophysical properties as porcine aortae, that are biocompatible, and that allow for controlled nutrient diffusion. Tubes of various sizes with axial, radial, or alternating nanofiber orientation along the blood flow direction are manufactured by a customized method. Blood pressure-resistant, compliant, stable, and cell culture-compatible structures are obtained, that can be degraded in vitro on demand. It is suggested that these healthcare materials can contribute to the next generation of cardiovascular therapies of ex vivo pre-surgical planning or in vitro cell culture.

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.

Endovascular arch repair of anastomotic aneurysm and pseudoaneurysm in patients after open repair of the ascending aorta and aortic arch: a case series.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to investigate the outcomes of branched endovascular arch repair (b-TEVAR) with a custom-made double- or triple-branched arch endograft in patients with distal anastomotic aneurysms after open repair of the ascending aorta or proximal arch replacement. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted of all consecutive patients with anastomotic aneurysms after open surgical repair involving the ascending aorta and/or aortic arch treated with b-TEVAR. All patients were treated with a custom-made double or triple inner-branched arch endograft. Study end points were technical success, 30-day and follow-up mortality/morbidity and re-interventions. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2022, 10 patients were treated with custom-made double- or triple-branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair due to anastomotic aneurysms after open ascending aorta and/or proximal aortic arch replacement. Eight patients received a triple and 2 a double arch-branched endograft. Eight cases were performed electively and 2 urgently for contained rupture. Technical success was achieved in 9 cases (90%). All elective patients survived. Two patients treated due to contained ruptures expired. Within 30 postoperative days, 1 transient ischaemic attack occurred. No early endograft-related re-interventions were necessary. The median follow-up was 20 months. One patient died 2 months after discharge due to sepsis caused by pneumonia. No further deaths or endograft-related re-interventions were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular aortic arch repair with double or triple inner-branched arch endograft for anastomotic aneurysms after open ascending and/or proximal arch replacement is technically feasible and a promising alternative in a patient cohort unfit for surgery.

In vitro evaluation of the optimal degree of oversizing of thoracic endografts in prosthetic landing areas: a pilot study.

Objective: The optimal degree of proximal thoracic endograft oversizing when aiming for durable sealing in prosthetic grafts is unknown. The aim of the present study was to create an in vitro model for testing different oversized thoracic endografts in a reproducible and standardized manner and, subsequently, determine the optimal oversizing range when planning procedures with a proximal landing in prosthetic zones in the descending thoracic aorta or aortic arch. Methods: An in vitro model consisting of a fixed 24-mm polyethylene terephthalate (Dacron; DuPont) graft sutured proximally and distally to two specifically designed 40-mm rings, with four force sensing resistors attached at four equally distant positions and a USB camera attached proximally for photographic and video documentation was used for deployment of Zenith TX2 (Cook Medical Inc) dissection platform endografts with diameters between 24 and 36 mm. After deployment, ballooning with a 32-mm compliant balloon was performed to simulate real-life conditions. The assessment of oversizing included visual inspection, calculation of the valley areas created between the prosthetic wall and the stent graft fabric, distance between the stent graft peaks, the radial force exerted by the proximal sealing stent, and the pull-out force necessary for endograft extraction. Results: A total of 70 endografts were deployed with the oversizing ranging from 0% to 50%: 10 × 24 mm, 10 × 26 mm, 10 × 28 mm, 10 × 30 mm, 10 × 32 mm, 10 × 34 mm, and 10 × 36 mm. Two cases of infolding occurred with 50% oversizing. The valley areas increased from 8.79 ± 0.23 mm2 with 16.7% oversizing to 14.26 ± 0.45 mm2 with 50% oversizing (P < .001). A significant difference was found in the pull-out force required for endografts with <10% oversizing vs ≥10% oversizing (P < .001). The difference reached a plateau at ∼4 N with oversizing of >15%. The mean radial force of the proximal sealing stent was greater after remodeling with a compliant balloon (0.55 ± 0.02 N vs 0.60 ± 0.02 N after ballooning; P < .001). However, greater oversizing did not lead to an increase in the radial force exerted by the proximal sealing stent. Conclusions: The findings from the present study offer additional insight into the mechanics of oversized stent grafts in surgical grafts. In endografts with the Zenith stent design (TX2), oversizing of <16.7% resulted in reduced resistance to displacement forces, and oversizing of >50% was associated with major infolding in 20% of cases. Long-term in vitro and in vivo testing is required to understand how these mechanical properties affect the clinical outcomes of oversizing.

Hybrid and open repair for patients with acute limb ischemia of the lower extremities.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid revascularization procedures for acute limb ischemia (ALI) are becoming increasingly common, bibliographic data on outcomes is however sparse. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective study of consecutive patients with ALI that underwent either surgical treatment (ST) or hybrid treatment (HT) between January 2015 and December 2021. The composite outcome of amputation-free survival (AFS) was the primary endpoint. Technical success, overall survival, amputation, and re-intervention rates were the secondary endpoints. RESULTS: During the study period 266 patients (mean age 70.2±14.5 years; 49.6% males) were treated for ALI, 67.3% undergoing ST and 32.7% HT. HT was more frequently used in patients with a previous vascular intervention in the index limb (38/87; 43.7% HT vs. 40/179; 22.3% ST, P=0.001), a stent- or stent graft-occlusion (16/87; 18.4% HT vs. 10/179; 5.6% ST, P=0.002) and/or a bypass occlusion (16/87; 18.4% HT vs. 16/179; 8.9% ST, P=0.043). Technical success was higher in the OR group (75/87; 86.2% HT vs. 173/179; 96.6% ST, P=0.003). Amputation-free survival rate during follow-up (43/87; 49.4% HT vs. 94/179; 52.5% ST, HR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.49 to 1.18, P=0.22) and overall survival (32/87; 36.8% HT vs. 84/179; 46.9% ST, HR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.49 to 1.34, P=0.41) were comparable between the two groups. No statistical differences were observed between the groups regarding major amputation (19/87; 21.8% HT vs. 15/179; 8.4% ST, HR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.33 to 2.23, P=0.74) or reintervention during follow-up (45/87; 51.7% HT vs. 65/179; 36.3% ST, HR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.51, P=0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid and open surgical treatments showed comparable results in our cohort, even though significantly more patients undergoing HT presented with stent and bypass occlusions rather than de-novo lesions.

[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.

Transaxillary Branch-to-Branch-to-Branch Carotid Catheterization Technique for Triple-Branch Arch Repair.

PURPOSE: To describe the transaxillary branch-to-branch-to-branch carotid catheterization technique (tranaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT) for cannulation of all supra-aortic vessels using only 1 femoral and 1 axillary access during triple-branch arch repair. TECHNIQUE: After deployment of the triple-branch arch device, catheterization and bridging of the innominate artery (IA) should be performed through a right axillary access (cutdown or percutaneous). Then, the retrograde left subclavian (LSA) branch should be catheterized (if not preloaded) from a percutaneous femoral access, and a 12×90Fr sheath should be advanced to the outside of the endograft. Subsequently, catheterization of the left common carotid artery (LCCA) antegrade branch should be performed, followed by snaring of a wire in the ascending aorta which was inserted through the axillary access, creating a branch-to-branch-to-branch through-and-through guidewire. Over the axillary access, a 12×45Fr sheath should be inserted into the IA branch and looped in the ascending aorta using a push-and-pull technique so that it faces the LCCA branch, allowing for stable catheterization of the LCCA. The retrograde LSA branch should then be bridged following the standard fashion. CONCLUSIONS: This series of 5 patients demonstrates that triple-branch arch repair can be performed with the transaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT, allowing catheterization of the supra-aortic vessels without manipulation of the carotid arteries. CLINICAL IMPACT: The transaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT allows catheterization and bridging of all supra-aortic vessels in triple-branch arch repair through only 2 vascular access points, the femoral artery and the right axillary artery. This technique avoids carotid surgical cutdown and manipulation during these procedures, reducing the risk of access site complications, including bleeding and reintervention, reintubation, cranial nerve lesions, increased operating time, and so on, and has the potential to change the current vascular access standard used during triple-branch arch repair.

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.

Use of Secondary Iliac Branch Devices after Previous Endovascular Abdominal and Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of iliac branch devices (IBDs), as secondary procedure, for the treatment of type Ib endoleak or evolution of iliac artery disease after prior endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for thoraco-abdominal (TAAAs) or abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). METHODS: A multicentre observational study of three European centres. The study included 75 patients (age 71 ± 9 years, 96% men) with previous EVAR (n = 64, 85%) or fenestrated or branched (FB) EVAR (n = 11, 15%). Overall, 88 IBDs were implanted to treat aneurysmal iliac artery evolution in 40 (53%) and type Ib endoleak in 35 (47%) cases, respectively. Thirteen (17%) patients received bilateral IBDs. Internal iliac artery (IIA) catheterisation was done through a transaxillary access (n = 82, 93%) or up and over (n = 6, 7%) technique. The primary endpoint was technical success. Secondary endpoints were 30 day major adverse event, early and long term freedom from re-intervention and target vessel instability. RESULTS: All procedures were technically successful (100%). During hospitalisation, there were four (5%) major adverse events and three (4%) early re-interventions, but no death, stroke, or damage to previous endografts. The median follow up was 47 (interquartile range 42) months, and the five year survival rate was 78 ± 6% with no aortic related death. Cox's regression analysis showed pre-operative renal function impairment (hazard ratio [HR] 3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 10.1; p = .033), and primary TAAA repair (HR 6.1; 95% CI 1.6-22.3; p = .006) as independent factors for long term mortality. Freedom from re-interventions was 85 ± 4% at five years with 11 (12%) cases (five endoleaks, four IBD thromboses, two stenoses). IIA instability was reported in three (3%) limbs and freedom from IIA instability was 95 ± 3% after 60 months. CONCLUSION: Secondary IBD after EVAR is a safe and effective procedure with high technical success and low complication rates. The technique of choice to revascularise the IIA seems not to affect early and follow up results. Long term durability of IBD repair is acceptable with low rates of IIA re-intervention.

Additional Aortic Coverage With an Off The Shelf, Multibranched Endograft Compared With Custom Made Devices For Endovascular Repair of Pararenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (p-AAA) require complex endovascular aortic repair or open surgical repair with suprarenal clamping. Custom made devices (CMD), including fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) or off the shelf (OTS) multibranched devices, are available treatment options. The aim of this study was to determine the additional healthy aortic coverage using an OTS multibranched endograft vs. a CMD for the treatment of p-AAAs. METHODS: This was a retrospective single centre analysis of prospectively collected data. Consecutive patients with p-AAAs requiring a proximal landing zone above the coeliac artery (CA), planned and treated with CMDs (Zenith Fenestrated) between January 2017 and December 2021 were included in this study. Treatment with supracoeliac coverage using available OTS multibranched devices was simulated using available pre-operative images: T-Branch; E-nside; and TAMBE. Study endpoints included the need for additional proximal aortic coverage, and the number of the segmental arteries additionally covered proximally from the CA for OTS devices compared with CMDs. RESULTS: Eighty three patients with p-AAAs were treated with CMDs (all FEVAR), including juxtarenal AAAs (n = 46; 56%), suprarenal AAAs (n = 20; 24%), and short neck AAAs (n = 17; 20%). In this study, treatment with 249 (3 × 83) OTS endografts was simulated. When compared with CMDs, OTS devices required a mean of 74 ± 19 mm of additional proximal healthy aortic coverage from the CA (CMD: 33 ± 19 mm vs. OTS: 108 ± 6 mm; p ≤ .001), as well as an average sacrifice of 2.5 additional segmental arteries (CMD: 1.3 ± 0.8 vs. OTS: 3.8 ± 0.9; p ≤ .001). In 94% of patients, at least one of the available multibranched endografts could have been implanted in accordance with instructions for use. CONCLUSION: Despite not requiring customisation time, OTS endografts for the treatment of p-AAA lead to more extensive healthy aortic coverage, as well as an average sacrifice of 2.5 additional segmental arteries, compared with CMDs. When compared with OTS devices, CMDs appear to limit the extent of unnecessary aortic coverage and the theoretical subsequent risk of spinal cord ischaemia.