Results of endovascular treatment of venous anastomotic stenosis in prosthetic arteriovenous for hemodialysis PTFE grafts. Comparative analysis between patent and occluded grafts.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the results of endovascular treatment of venous anastomotic stenosis (VAS) in humero-axillary arteriovenous grafts (HAG), comparing outcomes between patent and thrombosed HAG. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was made of endovascular treated patients because of a VAS in a HAG between January 2009 and December 2019. Group A: Thrombosed HAG secondary to a VAS. Group B: Patent HAG with a VAS detected during follow-up. Technical success was defined as residual stenosis after treatment <30%, and clinical success as satisfactory immediate dialysis after surgery. After ET a biannual clinical and ultrasound follow-up was performed. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Survival analysis was performed for time-to-event data to assess patency. RESULTS: Group A: 55 patients. Group B: 22. There were no significative differences in demographic and anatomical factors between groups. Technical and clinical success were 100% in group B and 94.5% and 91% respectively in group A. Primary patency at 1, 6 and 12 months was: Group A: 81.8%, 22.4% y 15.7% respectively. Group B: 100%, 85.9%, 76,4% (p < 0.001). Secondary patency at 1, 6 and 12 months was: Group A: 85.2%, 45.8% y 31.3% respectively. Group B 100%, 95.3%, 95.2% (p < 0.001). Use of non-covered stents was associated with an increased risk of occlusion (HR 2.669 IC 95% 1.146-6.216, p = 0.010). CONCLUSION: A higher patency of EV performed on a patent HAG is expected. It is therefore advisable to develop surveillance programs that are capable to detect VAS before its occlusion.

Resultados del tratamiento endovascular de la estenosis de la anastomosis venosa en las fístulas arteriovenosas protésicas para hemodiálisis de PTFE. Análisis comparativo entre fístulas permeables y trombosadas / Results of endovascular treatment of venous anastomotic stenosis in prosthetic arteriovenous for hemodialysis PTFE grafts. Comparative analysis between patent and occluded grafts

Objetivo: Analizar los resultados del tratamiento endovascular (TEV) de las estenosis en las anastomosis venosas (EAV) de las fístulas arteriovenosas protésicas (FAVp), comparando su utilidad al realizarse sobre FAVp permeables frente a trombosadas.Material y métodosEstudio retrospectivo de pacientes intervenidos mediante TEV por EAV de fístulas humeroaxilares realizadas entre enero de 2009 y diciembre de 2019 en nuestro centro. Grupo A: FAVp trombosada secundaria a EAV; Grupo B: FAVp permeable con EAV detectada en seguimiento. Se definió éxito técnico como estenosis residual ≤ 30% y éxito clínico como diálisis efectiva inmediata. Tras el TEV se realizó un seguimiento clínico y con eco-Doppler semestral. Estudio estadístico: se realizó un análisis de supervivencia mediante el método Kaplan Meier para el estudio de permeabilidades.ResultadosGrupo A: 55 pacientes. Grupo B: 22 pacientes. No existieron diferencias significativas en las características demográficas ni anatómicas entre grupos.El éxito técnico y clínico fueron del 100% en el grupo B frente a un 94,5% y 91%, respectivamente, en el grupo A.La permeabilidad primaria a 1, 6 y 12 meses en el Grupo A fue: 81,8%, 22,4% y 15,7%, respectivamente, frente al Grupo B: 100%, 85,9%, 76,4% (p<0,001). Permeabilidad secundaria a 1, 6 y 12 meses en el Grupo A fue 85,2%, 45,8% y 31,3%, respectivamente, frente al Grupo B 100%, 95,3%, 95,2% (p<0,001). El uso de stents no cubierto se asoció a un mayor riesgo de oclusión (HR 2,669 IC 95% 1,146-6,216, p=0,010).ConclusiónEs esperable una mayor permeabilidad del TEV realizado sobre una FAVp permeable, por lo que es recomendable elaborar programas de seguimiento que sean capaces de detectar la EAV previo a su trombosis. (AU)

Objective: To analyze the results of endovascular treatment of venous anastomotic stenosis (VAS) in humero-axillary arteriovenous grafts (HAG), comparing outcomes between patent and thrombosed HAG.Material and methodsA retrospective cohort study was made of endovascular treated patients because of a VAS in a HAG between January 2009 and December 2019. Group A: Thrombosed HAG secondary to a VAS. Group B: Patent HAG with a VAS detected during follow-up. Technical success was defined as residual stenosis after treatment <30%, and clinical success as satisfactory immediate dialysis after surgery. After ET a biannual clinical and ultrasound follow-up was performed. Statistical analysis: Survival analysis was performed for time-to-event data to assess patency.ResultsGroup A: 55 patients. Group B: 22. There were no significative differences in demographic and anatomical factors between groups.Technical and clinical success were 100% in Group B and 94.5% and 91% respectively in Group A.Primary patency at 1, 6 and 12 months was: Group A: 81.8%, 22.4% and 15.7% respectively. Group B: 100%, 85.9%, 76.4% (p<0.001). Secondary patency at 1, 6 and 12 months was: Group A: 85.2%, 45.8% and 31.3% respectively. Group B 100%, 95.3%, 95.2% (p<0.001). Use of non-covered stents was associated with an increased risk of occlusion (HR 2.669 95% CI 1.146–6.216, p=0.010).ConclusionA higher patency of EV performed on a patent HAG is expected. It is therefore advisable to develop surveillance programs that are capable to detect VAS before its occlusion. (AU)

Results of endovascular treatment of venous anastomotic stenosis in prosthetic arteriovenous for hemodialysis PTFE grafts. Comparative analysis between patent and occluded grafts. / Resultados del tratamiento endovascular de la estenosis de la anastomosis venosa en las fístulas arteriovenosas protésicas para hemodiálisis de PTFE. Análisis comparativo entre fístulas permeables y trombosadas.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the results of endovascular treatment of venous anastomotic stenosis (VAS) in humero-axillary arteriovenous grafts (HAG), comparing outcomes between patent and thrombosed HAG. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was made of endovascular treated patients because of a VAS in a HAG between January 2009 and December 2019. Group A: Thrombosed HAG secondary to a VAS. Group B: Patent HAG with a VAS detected during follow-up. Technical success was defined as residual stenosis after treatment <30%, and clinical success as satisfactory immediate dialysis after surgery. After ET a biannual clinical and ultrasound follow-up was performed. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Survival analysis was performed for time-to-event data to assess patency. RESULTS: Group A: 55 patients. Group B: 22. There were no significative differences in demographic and anatomical factors between groups. Technical and clinical success were 100% in Group B and 94.5% and 91% respectively in Group A. Primary patency at 1, 6 and 12 months was: Group A: 81.8%, 22.4% and 15.7% respectively. Group B: 100%, 85.9%, 76.4% (p<0.001). Secondary patency at 1, 6 and 12 months was: Group A: 85.2%, 45.8% and 31.3% respectively. Group B 100%, 95.3%, 95.2% (p<0.001). Use of non-covered stents was associated with an increased risk of occlusion (HR 2.669 95% CI 1.146-6.216, p=0.010). CONCLUSION: A higher patency of EV performed on a patent HAG is expected. It is therefore advisable to develop surveillance programs that are capable to detect VAS before its occlusion.

Tratamiento del aneurisma de aorta infrarrenal roto: cirugía abierta versus tratamiento endovascular / Treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: open surgical repair versus endovascular repair

Introducción: el aneurisma de aorta abdominal roto (AAAr) es una patología que asocia una elevada morbimortalidad. El objetivo es analizar los resultados del tratamiento del AAAr en nuestro centro, comparando cirugía abierta (CA) y endovascular (EVAR). Material y métodos:estudio de cohortes retrospectivo de pacientes intervenidos por AAAr con cuello infrarrenal entre enero de 2006 y diciembre de 2017, dividido en grupo CA y grupo EVAR. Análisis comparativo de comorbilidad, características anatómicas, técnica y resultados.Resultados:54 pacientes fueron incluidos, 26 (48,1 %) en el grupo CA y 28 (51,9 %) en el EVAR. Sin diferencias en cuanto a edad (70,7 ± 7,8 años vs. 72,5 ± 9,5, p = 0,45) ni comorbilidades, salvo la dislipemia (26,9 % vs. 67,9 % p = 0,003). Los aneurismas eran mayores en el grupo CA (88,1 ± 17,9 mm vs. 72,4 ± 16 mm, p = 0,02), con un mayor porcentaje de aneurisma iliaco asociado (34,6 % vs. 17,8 %, p = 0,07). Un 65,4 % del grupo CA presentó inestabilidad hemodinámica preoperatoria, frente al 60,7 % del EVAR (p = 0,72). Se empleó anestesia local en el 50 % del grupo EVAR. Las necesidades transfusionales intraoperatorias medianas para el grupo CA y EVAR fueron 11 ± 6 y 4 ± 3 concentrados de hematíes respectivamente (p = 0,001). La mortalidad hospitalaria fue mayor en el grupo CA (46,2 % vs. 28,6 %) (p = 0,18). En dicho grupo hubo 4 éxitus intraoperatorios. Un 54,5 % de pacientes del grupo CA y un 64,3 % del EVAR (p = 0,48) presentaron complicaciones mayores, siendo las más frecuentes la intubación prolongada y el fracaso renal que requirió terapia de reemplazo renal. La tasa de reintervención hospitalaria fue 18,2 % en el grupo CA y 25 % en el EVAR (p = 0,56), siendo en este grupo todas las reintervenciones en el subgrupo de endoprótesis aortouniiliaca. La supervivencia a 2 años fue del 51,7 % en el grupo CA y del 65,2 % en el EVAR (p = 0,28).(AU)

Background: the ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is associated with high morbimortality. The purpose of this study was to compare results of open surgical repair (OSR) and EVAR in our institution in the management of rAAA. Material and methods:retrospective observational cohort study was conducted on rAAA patients with infrarenal neck between January 2006 and December 2017. Sample was divided according to intervention: OSR vs. EVAR. Comorbidities, anatomical features, intervention and results were analyzed by repair method. Results:fifty-four patients were included, 26 (48,1 %) using OSR and 28 (51,9 %) using EVAR. Age (70,7 ± 7,8 years vs. 72,5 ± 9,5; p = 0,45) and comorbidities showed no statistical significance, except for dyslipidemia (26,9 % vs. 67,9 %; p = 0,003). Aneurysms were larger in OSR group (88,1 ± 17,9 mm vs. 72,4 ± 16 mm; p = 0,02), with a higher rate of associated iliac aneurysm (34,6 % vs. 17,8 %, p = 0,07). 65,4 % of patients in OSR group showed preoperative hemodynamic instability, compared to 60,7 % in EVAR group (p = 0,72). 50 % of EVAR procedures were performed under local anesthesia. Median intraoperative transfusion requirements for OSR group and EVAR group were, respectively, 11 ± 6 and 4 ± 3 red blood cell concentrates (p = 0.001). Hospital mortality was higher in OSR group (46.2 % vs. 28.6 %) (p = 0.18). There were four intraoperative deaths in this group. 54.5 % of OSR patients and 64.3 % of EVAR presented major complications. The most common ones were longtime intubation and acute renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy. Reintervention rate was 18.2 % in CA group and 25 % in EVAR group (p = 0.56), all reinterventions in EVAR group performed in rAAAs repaired by an aortouniiliac device. Two-year survival rate was 51.7 % in CA group and 65.2 % in EVAR group (p = 0.28).(AU)

Reparación del arco aórtico mediante prótesis híbrida y su combinación con TEVAR / Aortic arch repair with elephant trunk and TEVAR combination

Introducción y objetivos: la reparación del arco y aorta torácica descendente (ATD) se asocia a una elevada morbi-mortalidad. Las prótesis híbridas del arco y las endoprótesis torácicas (TEVAR) pueden disminuir sus complicaciones.El objetivo es describir resultados a corto y medio plazo del abordaje híbrido de esta patología.Material y métodos: análisis retrospectivo de pacientes intervenidos entre agosto de 2016 y febrero de 2020 porpatología aneurismática del arco aórtico y ATD mediante una prótesis híbrida y TEVAR en dos tiempos.Resultados: trece pacientes intervenidos, todos por aneurisma sin disección. Inicialmente se empleó una prótesishíbrida con diámetro mediano de 30 mm (29-33) y una longitud de 130 mm en 12 de ellos. Se conservaron los3 TSA en todos los pacientes, con pastilla para tronco braquiocefálico y carótida izquierda y bypass a subclaviaizquierda en el 69 % de ellos.El tiempo mediano hasta el TEVAR fue de 13,5 semanas (6-20), con un éxito técnico del 100 %. Se implantó un solomódulo en 9 casos con una sobredimensión media del 10 % respecto a la trompa de elefante. No hubo ningúncaso de paraplejia, ictus o muerte perioperatoria. El tiempo mediano de ingreso hospitalario fue de 4 días (2-6) y elseguimiento mediano tras el TEVAR de 17 meses (9-25), con una supervivencia del 100 % a 24 meses. Se comprobóuna correcta exclusión del aneurisma en el angio-TC de control en todos los casos y sin objetivarse fugas de altofl ujo durante el seguimiento.Conclusiones: en nuestra experiencia, el TEVAR es una opción segura como segundo tiempo, y ofrece unos exce-lentes resultados a medio plazo en tasa de exclusión del aneurisma.(AU)

Introduction and objectives: aortic arch and descending thoracic aorta repair are associated with a high mor-bidity and mortality. The frozen elephant trunk combined with TEVAR could improve outcomes. The objective isto describe short and midterm results of the hybrid approach in this pathology.Material and methods: retrospective analysis of patients who underwent two-staged intervention with hybridprosthesis and TEVAR for aortic arch and thoracic descending aneurysm between August 2009 and February 2020.Results: thirteen patients were included, all of them secondary to non-dissecting aneurysm. First-stage interventionwith frozen elephant trunk (average prosthesis diameter: 30 mm [29-33] average length: 130 mm). Supraaorticvessel reimplantation was performed most frequently (69 %) with an island technique for innominate artery andleft common carotid artery and a left subclavian artery bypass to the aortic graft.The average time to TEVAR implantation was 13.5 weeks (6-20), with technical success of 100 %. A single devicewas implanted in 9 cases, with 10 % oversizing relative to the hybrid prosthesis. No cases of paraplegia, stroke orperioperative death were observed. The average hospital stay length was 4 days (2-6) and the average follow-upafter TEVAR was 17 months (9-25), survival at 24 months was 100 %. Correct aneurysm exclusion was documentedin all CT controls, with no high-flow endoleaks during follow-up.Conclusions: based on our experience, TEVAR is a safe option as a second-stage intervention for complex thoracicaortic aneurysm pathology, offering excellent mid-term results for aneurysm exclusion.(AU)

Aortic Rupture by an Acute Dissection of the Thoracoabdominal Aorta in a 12-Year-Old Boy.

Aortic dissection is exceptional in children. When they are affected, many clinical conditions as Marfan syndrome or Ehlers-Danlos syndrome are usually involved, but up to 22% have no associated background. Its high morbidity and low incidence in this age group require a high level of suspicion in children without predisposing factors when the presentation is atypical, to avoid the severe consequences of the delay of their diagnosis. In this article we describe the dissection and aortic rupture in a 12-year-old child without relevant medical history, and the open repair that was performed as treatment.

Prognostic Value of Initial Aneurysmal Sac Regression after EVAR.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of initial aneurysmal sac reduction after endovascular aneurysm repair on the evolution of aneurysmal sac over follow-up. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was made of patients subjected to elective treatment between January 2005 and December 2014, with a minimum follow-up of 18 months. An analysis was made of the evolution of the aneurysmal sac according to its condition one year after surgery, defining of two groups: A (sac reduction) and B (stable sac). Follow-up by computed tomography (CT) angiography was made after one month and then every 6 months or annually, depending on the presence of endoleak. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were included. Fifty-one patients (39.8%) showed a significant decrease in diameter during the first year (group A), whereas 77 patients (60.2%) showed no initial decrease (group B). Preoperative CT angiography showed the patients in group A to have larger aneurysms (63.5 mm vs. 59.25; P = 0.048), a greater presence of posterior thrombus (68.6% vs. 30.7%; P < 0.001), and fewer patent lumbar vessels (56.9% vs. 83.1%; P = 0.001). The prevalence of endoleak at some point during follow-up was lower in group A (31.4% vs. 74% in group B; P < 0.001), and 100% of all aneurysmal growths were associated to the presence of endoleak. After 5 years, significant differences were observed in the growth-free rate (96.9% in group A vs. 85.2% in group B; hazard ratio [HR] 4.8 [1.1-21.4; P = 0.036]) and in the reintervention-free rate (95,7% vs. 84.6%; HR 6.6 [0.8-52.4; P = 0.07]). No reoperation in group A was due to type II endoleak. CONCLUSIONS: The aneurysmal sac can be expected to take a favorable course in those cases characterized by initial aneurysmal sac reduction. These findings may imply a change in the follow-up protocol, even in cases with type II endoleak.