RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: As a result of conflicting, inadequate or controversial data in the literature, several issues concerning the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remain unanswered. The aim of this international, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to provide some guidance for clinicians on these controversial topics. METHODS: A 3-Round Delphi Consensus document was produced with 44 experts on 6 pre-specified topics regarding the management of AAAs. All answers were provided anonymously. The response rate for each round was 100%. RESULTS: Most participants (42 of 44; 95.4%) agreed that a minimum case volume/year is essential (or probably essential) for a center to offer open/endovascular AAA repair (EVAR). Furthermore, 33 of 44 (75.0%) believed that AAA screening programs are (probably) still clinically effective and cost-effective. Additionally, most panelists (36 of 44; 81.9%) voted that surveillance after EVAR should be (or should probably be) lifelong. Finally, 35 of 44 (79.7%) participants thought that women smokers should (or should probably/possibly) be considered for screening at 65 years of age similar to men. No consensus was achieved regarding lowering the threshold for AAA repair and the need for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in patients undergoing EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: This expert-based Delphi Consensus document provides guidance for clinicians regarding specific unresolved issues. Consensus could not be achieved in some topics, highlighting the need for further research in those areas.
RESUMEN
Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) are life-threatening and require emergent surgical therapy. Endovascular aortic repair for rupture (rEVAR) has become the leading strategy due to its minimal invasive approach with expected lower morbidity and mortality, especially in patients presenting with hemodynamic instability and relevant comorbidities. Following rEVAR, intraoperative angiography or early postinterventional computed tomography angiography have to exclude early type 1 or 3 endoleaks requiring immediate reintervention. Persistent type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) after rEVAR, in contrast to elective cases, can cause possibly lethal situations due to continuing extravascular blood loss through the remaining aortic aneurysm rupture site. Therefore, early identification of relevant persistent T2ELs associated with continuous bleeding and hemodynamic instability and immediate management is mandatory in the acute postoperative setting following rEVAR. Different techniques and concepts for the occlusion of T2ELs after rEVAR are available, and most of them are also used for relevant T2ELs after elective EVAR. In addition to various interventional embolization procedures for persistent T2ELs, some patients require open surgical occlusion of T2EL-feeding arteries, abdominal compartment decompression or direct surgical patch occlusion of the aneurysm rupture site after rEVAR. So far, in the acute situation of rAAAs, indications for preemptive or intraoperative T2EL embolization during rEVAR have not been established. In the long term, persistent T2ELs after rEVAR can lead to continuous aneurysm expansion with the possible development of secondary proximal type I endoleaks and an increased risk of re-rupture requiring regular follow-up and early consideration for reintervention. To date, only very few studies have investigated T2ELs after rEVAR or compared outcomes with those from elective EVAR regarding the special aspects of persisting T2ELs. This narrative review is intended to present the current knowledge on the incidence, natural history, relevance and strategies for T2EL management after rEVAR.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this cross-sectional survey was to gather attitudes and practices of physicians from different countries regarding the implementation of contrast-enhanced ULTRAsound (CEUS) for vascular diseases in clinical practice as well as in academic research. METHODS: A web-based survey was developed in English, including 35 questions. Two-hundred sixty physicians were invited by email to fill in the survey anonymously on Google Forms using a dedicated link. The survey started on 25th February 2024 and was closed on 13th March 2024 (17 days). A reminder was sent after the first 10 days. In addition to descriptive statistics, sub-analyses of answers according to country of origin (Italy vs other States), years of experience (≤20 years vs > 20 years), and type of institution (Academic/University vs Non-Academic/Private) were also established a priori. RESULTS: A total of 121 practitioners from 20 countries completed our survey (response rate 121/260, 46%). Most responders were males (95/121, 78.5%). Most participants were vascular surgeons (118/121, 97.5%). CEUS was available in 87/121, 70.2% of the centers involved, even though a standardized protocol was present in 54/121, and 44% of surveyed institutions. Italian institutions presented greater CEUS availability (62/72, 86.1% vs 25/49, 51.0%; p = .001) and higher presence of standardized protocols (38/72, 52.8% vs 16/49, 32.6%; p = .022) than foreign institutions. The diagnostic tool was thought to be more useful for carotid artery stenosis in the postoperative phase, while for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in the preoperative phase. For diagnosis and/or preoperative management of carotid stenosis 53/121, 44% of physicians believed that CEUS should be performed only in selected cases, while for AAA 42/121, 35% of them believed that it could be useful only for scientific purposes. Similarly, 99/121, 82% of participants answered that CEUS was usually prescribed in 0%-20% of the cases during the preoperative diagnostic pathway of patients with peripheral arterial disease. No differences between country of origin, years of experience, and type of institution were found for the reported items. There was also 106/121, 88% of respondents agreed upon the need for better integration of CEUS in current guidelines and 114/121, 94% of them upon the need for further studies. CONCLUSIONS: This ULTRA-VASC survey has demonstrated that CEUS is still rarely used in current practice for many vascular diseases despite the availability of this tool in most centers Future studies are needed, as well as enhanced guidance on the proper implementation of CEUS from guidelines.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze early and midterm results of custom-made proximal scallop and fenestrated stent grafts for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with a proximal landing zone (PLZ) in the aortic arch. METHODS: All consecutive patients treated with the custom made proximal scalloped and fenestrated Relay stent grafts (Terumo Aortic Bolton Medical Inc.) in 10 Italian centers between January 2014 and December 2022 were included. The primary end points were technical success, incidence of intraoperative major adverse events, deployment accuracy, and rate of early neurological complications, endoleaks (ELs) and retrograde aortic dissection. RESULTS: During the study period, 49 patients received TEVAR with Relay custom-made endograft in Italy were enrolled. The median patient age was 70.1 years (interquartile range, 23-86 years) and 65.3% were male. The indication for treatment was atherosclerotic aneurysms in 59.2% of cases and penetrating aortic ulcer in 22.4%. The endograft configuration was proximal fenestration in 55.1% and scallop in 44.9%. The proximal landing zone was zone 0 in 25 cases (51%), zone 1 in 14 cases (28.6%), and zone 2 in 10 cases (20.4%). The supra-aortic debranching procedures were 38 (77.5%). Technical success was 97.9% (48/49) owing to one case (2.0%) of inaccurate deployment. Intraoperatively, one (2.0%) type Ia and one (2.0%) type III EL were detected. There were no cases of in-hospital mortality, major adverse events, or retrograde dissection. Three minor strokes (6.1%) (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of ≤4) were observed. At a mean follow-up time of 36.3 ± 21.3 months the rate of types I to III ELs and reintervention was 4.1%, respectively. Four patients (8.2%) died during the follow-up period, one (2.1%) from abdominal aortic rupture and three (6.1%) from nonaortic causes. CONCLUSIONS: Our early and midterm outcomes suggest that scalloped and fenestrated TEVAR may provide an acceptable alternative treatment option for aortic arch pathologies. Large-scale studies are needed to assess the long-term durability of this technique.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) represents one of the most devastating scenarios of vascular trauma. Different management strategies are available with varying clinical outcomes. However, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the first-line option for most BTAI patients, mainly owing to its minimally invasive nature, yielding improved immediate results. This meta-analysis aims to investigate mortality, long-term survival, and reintervention following TEVAR in BTAI. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review conducted a comprehensive literature search on multiple electronic databases using strict search terms. Twenty-seven studies met the set inclusion/exclusion criteria. A proportional meta-analysis of extracted data was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software, v.4. RESULTS: 1498 BTAI patients who underwent TEVAR were included. Using the SVS grading system, 2.6% of the population had Grade 1 injuries, 13.6% Grade 2, 62.2% Grade 3, 19.6% Grade 4, and 1.9% unspecific. All-cause mortality did not exceed 20% in all studies except one outlier with a 37% mortality rate. Using the random effects model, the pooled estimate of overall mortality was 12% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.35-8.55%; I2 = 70.6%). This was 91% (95% CI, 88.6-93.2; I2 = 30.2%) at 6 months, 90.1% (95% CI, 86.7-92.3; I2 = 53.6%) at 1 year, 89.2% (95% CI, 85.2-91.8; I2 = 62.3%) at 2 years, and 88.1% (95% CI, 83.3-90.9; I2 = 69.6%) at 5 years. Moreover, the pooled estimate of reintervention was 6.4% (95% CI, 0.1-0.49%; I2 = 81.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high morbidity and mortality associated with BTAI, TEVAR has proven to be a safe and effective management strategy with favorable long-term survival and minimal need for reintervention. Nevertheless, diagnosis of BTAI requires a high index of suspicion with appropriate grading and prompt transfer to trauma centers with appropriate TEVAR facilities.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a potentially devastating complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR). The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of neuromonitoring modalities to mitigate the risk of SCI during TEVAR and F-BEVAR procedures. METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a detailed literature search of databases including PubMed, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL, from 1998 to the present. Inclusion criteria were original research articles examining neuromonitoring during TEVAR and F-BEVAR. The primary outcome was the incidence of SCI, while the secondary outcome included early mortality. The quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: From 1,450 identified articles, 11 met inclusion criteria, encompassing data from 1,069 patients. Neuromonitoring modalities included motor-evoked potentials (MEPs), somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), and near-infrared spectroscopy. The combination of MEPs and SSEPs was most commonly used, with 93% sensitivity and 96% specificity for detecting SCI risks. SCI incidence ranged from 3.8 to 17.3%, with permanent deficits occurring in 2.7-5.8% of cases. In-hospital mortality ranged from 0.4 to 8%. Risk factors for SCI were identified, including operation duration and extent of aortic coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Neuromonitoring with MEPs and SSEPs appears to be effective in detecting perioperative SCI risk during TEVAR and F-BEVAR. However, discrepancies between neuromonitoring changes and actual SCI outcomes suggest the need for cautious interpretation. While the incidence of SCI remains variable, identified risk factors may guide clinical decisions, particularly in high-risk procedures. Future research should focus on prospective studies and randomized controlled trials to validate these findings and improve SCI prevention strategies in TEVAR and F-BEVAR.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) requires extensive preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative imaging for planning, surveillance, and detection of endo-leaks. There have been manyadvancements in imaging modalities to achieve this purpose. This review discussed different imaging modalities used at different stages of treatment of complex EVAR. METHODS: We conducted a literature review of all the imaging modalities utilized in EVAR by searching various databases. RESULTS: Preoperative techniques include analysis of images obtained via modified central line using analysis software and intravascular ultrasound. Fusion imaging (FI), carbon dioxide (CO2) angiography, intravascular ultrasound, and Fiber Optic RealShape (FORS) technology have been crucial in obtaining real-time imaging for the detection of endo-leaks during operative procedures. Conventional imaging modalities like computed tomography (CT) angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance (MR) angiography are still employed for postoperative surveillance along with computational fluid dynamics and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). The advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have been the breakthrough in developing robust imaging applications. CONCLUSIONS: This review explains the advantages, disadvantages, and side-effect profile of the abovementioned imaging modalities.
RESUMEN
Advanced endovascular techniques, such as fenestrated stent grafts, are nowadays available that permit minimally invasive treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms. However, thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm patients have anatomic limitations to fenestrated stent-grafts given a large lumen, that is, the gap between the endograft and the inner aortic wall. This has led to the development of branched endovascular aneurysm repair as the ideal option for such patients. The Zenith t-Branch multibranched endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN), which has been commercially available in Europe to treat thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm since June 2012, represents a feasible off-the-shelf alternative for treatment of such pathologies, especially in the urgent setting, for patients who cannot wait the time required for manufacturing and delivery of custom-made endografts. The device's anatomical suitability should be considered, especially for female patients with smaller iliofemoral vessels. Several tips may help deal with particularly complex scenarios (such as, for instance, in case of narrow inner aortic lumens or when treating patients with failure of prior endovascular aneurysm repair), and a broad array of techniques and devices must be available to ensure technical and clinical success. Despite promising early outcomes, concerns remain particularly regarding the risk for spinal cord ischemia and further assessment of long-term durability is needed, including the rate of target vessel instability and need for secondary interventions. As the published evidence mainly comes from retrospective registries, it is likely that reported outcomes may suffer from an intrinsic bias as most procedures reported to date have been carried out at high-volume aortic centers. Nonetheless, with the never-ceasing adoption of new and refined techniques, outcomes are expected to ameliorate.
RESUMEN
Simultaneous carotid artery stenosis (CS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) is a common condition among patients with several cardiovascular risk factors; however, its optimal management still remains under investigation, such as the assumption that carotid disease is causally related to perioperative stroke and that preventive carotid revascularization decrease the risk of this complication. Synchronous surgical approach to both conditions, performing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) before coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) during the same procedure, should still be considered in selective patients, in order to reduce the risk of perioperative stroke during coronary cardiac surgery. For the same purpose, staged approaches, such as CEA followed by CABG or CABG followed by CEA during the same hospitalization or a few weeks later have been described. Hybrid approach with carotid artery stenting (CAS) and CABG can also be an option in selected cases, offering a minimally invasive procedure to treat CS among patients whom CABG cannot be postponed. When carotid intervention is indicated in patients with concomitant CAD requiring CABG, a personalized and tailored approach is mandatory, especially in asymptomatic patients, in order to define the ideal surgical strategy. The aim of this paper is to summarize the current "state of the art" of the different approaches to carotid artery diseases in patients undergoing CABG.
RESUMEN
Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, highlighting the urgent need for advancements in risk assessment and management strategies. Although significant progress has been made recently, identifying and managing apparently healthy individuals at a higher risk of developing atherosclerosis and those with subclinical atherosclerosis still poses significant challenges. Traditional risk assessment tools have limitations in accurately predicting future events and fail to encompass the complexity of the atherosclerosis trajectory. In this review, we describe novel approaches in biomarkers, genetics, advanced imaging techniques, and artificial intelligence that have emerged to address this gap. Moreover, polygenic risk scores and imaging modalities such as coronary artery calcium scoring, and coronary computed tomography angiography offer promising avenues for enhancing primary cardiovascular risk stratification and personalised intervention strategies. On the other hand, interventions aiming against atherosclerosis development or promoting plaque regression have gained attention in primary ASCVD prevention. Therefore, the potential role of drugs like statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, omega-3 fatty acids, antihypertensive agents, as well as glucose-lowering and anti-inflammatory drugs are also discussed. Since findings regarding the efficacy of these interventions vary, further research is still required to elucidate their mechanisms of action, optimize treatment regimens, and determine their long-term effects on ASCVD outcomes. In conclusion, advancements in strategies addressing atherosclerosis prevention and plaque regression present promising avenues for enhancing primary ASCVD prevention through personalised approaches tailored to individual risk profiles. Nevertheless, ongoing research efforts are imperative to refine these strategies further and maximise their effectiveness in safeguarding cardiovascular health.
Asunto(s)
Prevención Primaria , Humanos , Medición de Riesgo , Prevención Primaria/métodos , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/prevención & control , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Factores de Riesgo de Enfermedad Cardiaca , Aterosclerosis/prevención & control , Aterosclerosis/diagnóstico , Biomarcadores/sangre , Factores de Riesgo , Valor Predictivo de las PruebasRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The management of the false lumen (FL) when dealing with aortic dissection is a crucial aspect since inducing its thrombosis is necessary in order to achieve aortic remodeling. One of the pitfalls of endovascular treatment of aortic dissection (AD) is retrograde distal FL perfusion and pressurization, which prevents FL thrombosis and thus aortic remodeling, while being associated with aneurysmal degeneration of the FL and poor long-term outcomes. AREAS COVERED: Currently, there is no CE/FDA approved device for FL closure, however different techniques and devices have been proposed to overcome this challenge, the most known of which is the Candy Plug (CP). This review aims to describe the CP device, its implantation technique, and the available data in the literature (PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases; last queried, December 31, 2023). EXPERT OPINIONS: While the treatment of AD remains technically challenging, the use of the CP technique to close any distal FL reperfusion proved to be feasible and safe with excellent rates of both technical and clinical success. Furthermore, recent studies have shown a quick learning curve with this technique.
RESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The heparin-bonded expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (He-ePTFE) conduit is an option for patients requiring infrainguinal revascularization (iIR), but the risk of failure may be unpredictable, especially in cases with poor run-off. Intraoperative transit-time flow (TTF) provides an automated and quantitative analysis of flow and may serve as an adjunct evaluation during surgical revascularization. The aim of this study was to assess TTF in patients undergoing iIR with He-PTFE at 3 referral hospitals and to establish a predictive flow threshold for graft occlusion. METHODS: A prospective registry initiated in 2020 enrolled patients undergoing iIR using He-PTFE for critical limb ischemia or severe claudication, and TTF measurement was analyzed. Preoperative assessments of anatomical and clinical characteristics were available for all patients. The HT353 Optima Meter (Transonic Systems Inc., Ithaca, NY, USA) was used in all procedures according to a standardized protocol. The institutional ethics committee approved the study. A predictive model using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was utilized to establish the threshold of flow, and variables were compared. Anatomical and clinical evaluation were reported according to Rutherford grade, Global Limb Anatomic System and Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection classification. The main outcome considered was the correlation between TTF and graft occlusion. Secondary outcomes included survival, other predictors of graft occlusion, freedom from major adverse cardiovascular events, and freedom from major amputation. RESULTS: Among 68 patients, 55.8% had Rutherford 5-6, 45.6% had Global Limb Anatomic System 3 and 73.5% had Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection 3-4. Distal anastomosis was at tibial level in 23.5% and mean diameter of conduit was 6.4 mm. Basal and postoperative TTF were 27.8 ± 15.6 ml/min and 109.0 ± 53.0 ml/min, respectively. After a mean follow-up of 18 ± 13 months, 7 (10.9%) patients presented graft occlusion and 5 (7.8%) required major amputation. TTF threshold = 80 ml/min revealed a sensitivity and specificity of 81.8% (95% confidence interval 48.2-97.7) and 80.7% (95% confidence interval 68.1-90.0) respectively, and it was selected as cut-off for graft occlusion. Freedom from graft occlusion in patients with TTF >80 ml/min vs. TTF ≤80 ml/min at 6, 12, and 24 months was 95.7% (standard error (SE) = 0.030) vs. 65.5% (SE = 0.115), 95.7% (SE = 0.030) vs. 58.9% (SE = 0.120) and 90.9% (SE = 0.054) vs. 51.6% (SE = 0.126), P = 0.0003. No statistical difference in primary patency, secondary patency and limb salvage was observed. At multivariate analysis, distal anastomosis at tibial vessel (odds ratio 8.50) and TTF ≤80 ml/min (odds ratio 9.39) were independent predictors of graft occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that TTF may serve as a valuable tool in the management of iIR. A TTF measurement of ≤80 ml/min should be regarded as a predictor of graft occlusion, prompting consideration of additional intraoperative maneuvers to enhance arterial flow. Caution should be exercised in patients requiring direct tibial artery revascularization, as it represents a predictor of failure independent of TTF levels. Larger cohorts of patients and longer follow-up periods are necessary to confirm these findings.
Asunto(s)
Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Prótesis Vascular , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular , Heparina , Isquemia , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Politetrafluoroetileno , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Diseño de Prótesis , Flujo Sanguíneo Regional , Sistema de Registros , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Estudios Prospectivos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Heparina/administración & dosificación , Heparina/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/fisiopatología , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/cirugía , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico por imagen , Factores de Tiempo , Factores de Riesgo , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/etiología , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/fisiopatología , Isquemia/fisiopatología , Isquemia/cirugía , Isquemia/diagnóstico , Isquemia/diagnóstico por imagen , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Velocidad del Flujo Sanguíneo , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Crítica , Recuperación del Miembro , Insuficiencia del Tratamiento , Amputación Quirúrgica , Medición de Riesgo , Claudicación Intermitente/fisiopatología , Claudicación Intermitente/cirugía , Claudicación Intermitente/diagnóstico por imagen , Claudicación Intermitente/diagnósticoRESUMEN
The effectiveness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) with angiography compared with angiography guidance alone in treating 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 endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and abdominal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was conducted in March 2024 adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 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 4,219 patients (n = 2,655 IVUS and n = 1,564 non-IVUS) from 9 observational studies were included. The IVUS group exhibited a reduction in contrast agent volume (weighted mean difference -34.65 mL, 95% CI -54.73 to -14.57) and fluoroscopy time (weighted mean difference -6.13 minutes, 95% CI -11.10 to -1.15), with no difference in procedural time. The perioperative type I and III endoleak occurrences were similar (risk ratio 2.36, 95% CI 0.55 to 10.11; risk ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.09 to 5.77, respectively). Reintervention and mortality during follow-up were comparable (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.97; hazard ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.18, respectively). All the included studies had small risks of bias. In conclusion, this meta-analysis provides evidence that IVUS enables the safe deployment of TEVAR/EVAR with reduced contrast agent and radiation exposure.
Asunto(s)
Aorta Torácica , Reparación Endovascular de Aneurismas , Ultrasonografía Intervencional , Humanos , Angiografía/métodos , Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aorta Torácica/cirugía , Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/cirugía , Reparación Endovascular de Aneurismas/métodos , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: We conducted this survey to gain insight into the real-life application and perceptions regarding the importance of peri-operative frailty assessment amongst vascular surgeons in Italy. METHODS: Italian vascular surgeons were invited to participate in the survey using the list provided by the Italian Society for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (1050 invited participants). A dedicated link to the survey was emailed through Google Forms, and reminders were automatically sent on a bi-weekly basis for a total of 8 weeks before stopping data collection. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 225 respondents, thereby yielding an overall 21.5% response rate. While the vast majority of respondents stated they were aware of the meaning of frailty (93%) and agreed that its assessment was clinically relevant for patients undergoing vascular surgery (99%), only 44% of surveyed surgeons reported that they used a specific tool for peri-operative frailty assessment. However, most respondents indicated that routine evaluation of frailty was not performed at their institution (87%). The main limitations were identified as being the lack of confidence in choosing the best tool, followed by lack of awareness, lack of skilled operators, and lack of time. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that whilst most vascular surgeons in Italy are aware of the importance of frailty in affecting surgical outcomes across various interventions in the elective and non-elective settings, there is poor implementation of formal frailty assessment.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has had a dynamic impact on abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) care, often supplanting open AAA repair (OAR). Accordingly, US AAA management is often highlighted by disparities in patient selection and guideline compliance. The purpose of this analysis was to define secular trends in AAA care. METHODS: The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for all EVARs and OARs (2011-2021). End points included procedure utilization, change in mortality, patient risk profile, Society for Vascular Surgery-endorsed diameter compliance, off-label EVAR use, cross-clamp location, blood loss, in-hospital complications, and post-EVAR surveillance missingness. Linear regression was used without risk adjustment for all end points except for mortality and complications, for which logistic regression with risk adjustment was used. RESULTS: In all, 66â 609 EVARs (elective, 85% [n=55â 805] and nonelective, 15% [n=9976]) and 13â 818 OARs (elective, 70% [n=9706] and nonelective, 30% [n=4081]) were analyzed. Elective EVAR:OAR ratios were increased (0.2 per year [95% CI, 0.01-0.32]), while nonelective ratios were unchanged. Elective diameter threshold noncompliance decreased for OAR (24%â17%; P=0.01) but not EVAR (mean, 37%). Low-risk patients increasingly underwent elective repairs (EVAR, +0.4%per year [95% CI, 0.2-0.6]; OAR, +0.6 points per year [95% CI, 0.2-1.0]). Off-label EVAR frequency was unchanged (mean, 39%) but intraoperative complications decreased (0.5% per year [95% CI, 0.2-0.9]). OAR complexity increased reflecting greater suprarenal cross-clamp rates (0.4% per year [95% CI, 0.1-0.8]) and blood loss (33 mL/y [95% CI, 19-47]). In-hospital complications decreased for elective (0.7% per year [95% CI, 0.4-0.9]) and nonelective EVAR (1.7% per year [95% CI, 1.1-2.3]) but not OAR (mean, 42%). A 30-day mortality was unchanged for both elective OAR (mean, 4%) and EVAR (mean, 1%). Among nonelective OARs, an increase in both 30-day (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.1-1.5]) and 1-year mortality (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.3-1.6]) was observed. Postoperative EVAR surveillance acquisition decreased (67%â49%), while 1-year mortality among patients without imaging was 4-fold greater (9.2% versus imaging, 2.0%; odds ratio, 4.1 [95% CI, 3.8-4.3]; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There has been an increase in EVAR and a corresponding reduction in OAR across the United States, despite established concerns surrounding guideline adherence, reintervention, follow-up, and cost. Although EVAR morbidity has declined, OAR complication rates remain unchanged and unexpectedly high. Opportunities remain for improving AAA care delivery, patient and procedure selection, guideline compliance, and surveillance.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Humanos , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/mortalidad , Procedimientos Endovasculares/tendencias , Factores de Tiempo , Factores de Riesgo , Femenino , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano , Masculino , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/mortalidad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Medición de Riesgo , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/tendencias , Adhesión a Directriz/tendencias , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Bases de Datos Factuales , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios Retrospectivos , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Sistema de Registros , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/tendencias , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/efectos adversosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Repair of aortic arch pathologies such as degenerative aneurysms and dissections still represents a significant challenge for vascular and cardiac surgeons. We focused on the design, evolution, implementation, and prospects of endovascular dual branch technology for treatment of pathologies in the aortic arch. AREAS COVERED: The literature search was conducted in a non-systematic fashion through the PubMed and Scopus databases; articles deemed relevant to the scope of the work and fully published in English language from January 12,000 until December 2023 were considered for inclusion. Two companies so far have developed and launched in market a dedicated arch dual branch platform: Terumo Aortic and Cook Medical. EXPERT OPINION: A common limitation to the available technology is represented by the fact that urgent cases (i.e. large or rapidly growing aneurysms, symptomatic patients) cannot be treated because the customization process generally takes between 6 and 8 weeks, and there is an inherent risk for aorta-related adverse events to happen during the waiting time. While the future holds much promise, several technical hurdles still exist and further developments (in device design, operators' skills, patients' selection, and outcomes assessment) are needed to establish the safety and effectiveness of treatment particularly over the long-run.
RESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
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.