Risk factors for restenosis after carotid artery angioplasty and stenting.

OBJECTIVES: With carotid artery stenting (CAS) becoming an ever-increasing procedure, we sought to determine risk factors for in-stent restenosis after CAS. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing CAS between January 2002 and October 2004 at a tertiary care hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Patient, filter, and stent selection were left to the discretion of the attending surgeon. High-risk patients were defined by significant comorbidities or a hostile neck (prior surgery or radiation, or both), and risk factor analysis was performed. In-stent restenosis was defined as >60%, and selective angiography was performed on patients with an in-stent restenosis >80% by duplex ultrasound imaging. RESULTS: Reviewed were 101 patients (55 men, 46 women) who underwent 109 CAS procedures. Comorbidities were typical for patients with atherosclerosis. In addition, 38% (n = 41) of procedures were performed in patients who had prior neck surgery, of which 29% (n = 32) had previous ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy. Seventeen patients (16%) had a history of neck cancer, and all had prior neck radiation. Median follow-up was 5 months (range, 0 to 30 months). Neurologic complications included three transient ischemic attacks (2.8%) and one nondisabling stroke (0.9%). There were two myocardial infarctions (1.9%) and no periprocedural deaths (30 days), for a combined stroke, myocardial infarction, and death rate of 2.9%. Asymptomatic in-stent restenosis developed in 12 carotids (11%), five of which required endovascular intervention, with a mean of 6 months to restenosis. Univariate Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to determine risk factors for the development of restenosis. Prior stroke, transient ischemic attack, amaurosis fugax, and prior neck cancer were all significant risk factors. When these significant risk factors from univariate analysis were put into multivariate analysis, however, the only marginally significant risk factor was prior neck cancer (P = .06). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a cumulative freedom from in-stent restenosis at 24 months of 88% +/- 6% in patients without neck cancer compared with 27% +/- 17% (P = .02) in patients with neck cancer. CONCLUSIONS: CAS has been shown to be safe and effective in high-risk patients, with minimal adverse events.

Endoleaks after endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Endoleaks are one of the unique complications seen after endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysms (TEVAR). This investigation was performed to evaluate the incidence and determinants of endoleaks, as well as the outcomes of secondary interventions in patients with endoleaks, after TEVAR. METHODS: Over a 6-year period, 105 patients underwent TEVAR in the context of pivotal Food and Drug Administration trials with the Medtronic Talent (n = 64) and Gore TAG (n = 41) devices. The medical and radiology records of these patients were reviewed for this retrospective study. Of these, 69 patients (30 women and 39 men) had follow-up longer than 1 month and were used for this analysis. The patients were evaluated for the presence of an endoleak, endoleak type, aneurysm expansion, and endoleak intervention. RESULTS: The mean follow-up in this patient cohort was 17.3 +/- 14.7 months (range, 3-71 months). Endoleaks were detected in 29% (20/69) of patients, of which 40% (8/20) were type I, 35% (7/20) were type II, 20% (4/20) were type III, and 5% (1/20) had more than one type of endoleak. Patients without endoleaks experienced greater aneurysm sac regression than those with endoleaks (-2.89 +/- 9.1 mm vs -0.13 +/- 7.2 mm), although this difference was not statistically significant (P = .232). All but 2 endoleaks (90%; 18/20) were detected on the initial postoperative computed tomographic scan at 30 days. Two endoleaks (10%; 2/20) developed late. The endoleak group had more extensive aneurysms with significantly larger aneurysms at the time of intervention (69.4 +/- 10.5 mm vs 60.6 +/- 11.0 mm; P = .003). Factors predictive of endoleak included male sex (P = .016), larger aneurysm size (P = .003), the length of aorta treated by stent grafts (P = .0004), and an increasing number of stents used (P < .0001). No open conversions were performed for treatment of endoleaks. Four (50%) of the eight type I endoleaks were successfully repaired by using endovascular techniques. None of the type II endoleaks was treated by secondary intervention. During follow-up, the maximum aneurysm diameter in the type II endoleak patients increased a mean of 2.94 +/- 7.2 mm (range, -4.4 to 17 mm). Spontaneous thrombosis has occurred in 29% (2/7) of the type II endoleaks. Patients with type III endoleaks experienced a decrease in mean maximal aneurysm diameter of 0.78 +/- 3.1 mm during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Endoleaks are not uncommon after TEVAR. Many type I endoleaks may be treated successfully by endovascular means. Short-term follow-up suggests that observational management of type II endoleaks is associated with continued sac expansion, and these patients should be monitored closely.

A comparison of renal function between open and endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with baseline chronic renal insufficiency.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is rapidly becoming the predominant technique for repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Results from current studies, however, are conflicting on the effect of EVAR on renal function compared with standard open repair. Furthermore, data for open repair in patients with baseline renal insufficiency suggests worse outcomes, including renal function. This analysis compared the effects of open repair vs EVAR on renal function in patients with baseline renal insufficiency. METHODS: We reviewed our records for patients with preoperative chronic renal insufficiency (serum creatinine, 1.5 mg/dL) who underwent open repair or EVAR between 1999 and 2004. The same group of vascular surgeons at a single institution performed aneurysm repair on 98 patients: 46 open (37 men, 9 women) and 52 EVAR (50 men, 2 women). Preoperative, postoperative, and follow-up serum creatinine and creatinine clearance were compared, as was the development of postoperative renal impairment (increase in serum creatinine >30%). RESULTS: Serum creatinine and creatinine clearance were not statistically different between the open and EVAR groups during any time period studied. Likewise when comparing the magnitude of change in serum creatinine in patients between the postoperative and follow-up times with preoperative values, no significant differences existed between the open and EVAR groups. When the change in serum creatinine over time within each group was compared, however, the open group had a significant increase in serum creatinine postoperatively (2.43 +/- 1.20 vs 2.04 +/- 0.64, P = .012), which returned to baseline during follow-up (1.96 +/- 0.94, P = .504). Although serum creatinine in the EVAR group increased compared with preoperative values of 2.04 +/- 0.55 (postoperative, 2.27 +/- 1.04; follow-up, 2.40 +/- 1.37), this failed to reach statistical significance for the postoperative (P = .092) or follow-up (P = .081) periods. A similar pattern was noted in creatinine clearance. Postoperative renal impairment was noted in 13 open (28%) and 15 EVAR patients (29%) and was not statistically different between groups. Overall, two patients (4.3%) from the open group and four (7.7%) from the EVAR group required hemodialysis; one in the EVAR group required permanent hemodialysis. This difference was not statistically significant (P = .681). CONCLUSIONS: Open and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in patients with pre-existent renal insufficiency can be performed safely with preservation of renal function. In contrast to previous reports, no significant differences existed between open repair and EVAR in postoperative alterations in renal function. Although a significant increase in serum creatinine develops in patients with renal insufficiency postoperatively with open repair, this appears to be transient, and preoperative renal dysfunction alone should not exclude either approach. After EVAR, patients with pre-existing renal insufficiency continue to be at risk for progressive renal dysfunction, and protective measures should be taken to preserve renal function in this patient population.

Femoral neuropathy following retroperitoneal hemorrhage: case series and review of the literature.

Femoral neuropathy due to retroperitoneal hematoma has been infrequently described in the literature. While occasionally due to trauma, it has been most commonly reported in association with various bleeding diatheses and therapeutic anticoagulation. As the indications for the use of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents increase, associated hemorrhagic complications will likely also increase. The management of retroperitoneal hematoma with consequent femoral nerve palsy remains controversial. We present a series of four cases of femoral nerve palsy due to retroperitoneal hematoma managed by surgical decompression. Hematoma evacuation at the time of the development of femoral neuropathy results in immediate benefit, with greater likelihood of a return to pre-event neurological status. Delays in operative treatment, despite the presence of a neurological deficit, may lead to significant and prolonged neurological dysfunction. Surgical decompression should be highly considered in all patients who develop femoral neuropathy from a retroperitoneal hematoma.

Ruptured popliteal artery aneurysm: a case report.

A high index of suspicion for popliteal aneurysms must be present when evaluating a popliteal mass. Though typically pulsatile, in the presence of chronic thrombosis, the absence of a pulse may make the diagnosis even more difficult. A case is presented that illustrates this point, where an 83-year-old man presents following the biopsy of what turned out to be a very large popliteal aneurysm. In the presence of chronic thrombosis and adequate collateral flow, decompression and ligation of any feeding vessels is typically sufficient. These patients must be followed lifelong for the development of other associated aneurysms.

Outcomes of accessory renal artery occlusion during endovascular aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Accessory renal arteries are frequently encountered when patients are evaluated for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Some have considered their presence a contraindication to EVAR in fear of endoleak and the end result of renal function. We sought to determine whether the coverage of accessory renal arteries during EVAR was associated with any adverse sequelae. METHODS: Retrospective review of the medical records and computed tomographic scans of all patients undergoing EVAR (1998 to 2003) was performed. Note was made of the presence or absence of accessory renal arteries, hypertension, and renal function. Preoperative computed tomographic images were compared with postoperative images to determine the presence of renal infarction. A control group of 26 consecutive patients without accessory renal arteries was used for comparison of the results of EVAR. RESULTS: EVAR was performed in 550 patients over the study interval. The mean follow-up was 16 months (range, 1-48 months). The average age was 74 years (range, 57-90 years). Thirty-five patients (6.6%; 32 male and 3 female) were documented to have accessory renal arteries; the average number of accessory arteries was 2 (range, 1-4). Bilateral accessory arteries were present in 13 patients: all but 1 patient (n = 34) had a left-sided accessory renal artery, and 23 had a right-sided accessory renal artery. EVAR was performed with a variety of endografts: AneuRx (n = 10), Talent (n = 7), PowerLink (n = 7), Zenith (n = 5), LifePath (n = 4), and Ancure (n = 2). There were no mortalities. Twelve endoleaks were documented: three type I, eight type II, and one type III. The accessory renal arteries were not implicated in any of the endoleaks, and none of these accessory vessels was embolized before or after EVAR. Seven patients (20%) had renal infarcts associated with EVAR that were noted on follow-up computed tomographic scans. The mean follow-up for patients with segmental infarction was 23 months (range, 8-48 months). Hypertensive status did not change in any patient in whom an accessory renal artery had been covered. The average serum creatinine was 1.08 mg/dL (range, 0.6-1.8 mg/dL) before EVAR in patients with accessory renal arteries covered by an endovascular graft and did not change significantly in response to EVAR. Serum creatinine increased almost twofold in two patients but spontaneously resolved in follow-up. The average preoperative creatinine clearance was 79 mL/min (range, 35-166 mL/min) in patients without an accessory renal artery and was 80 mL/min (range, 35-167 mL/min) after EVAR. The average preoperative creatinine clearance was 67 mL/min (range, 31-137 mL/min) in patients with an accessory renal artery and 68 mL/min (range, 45-83 mL/min) in patients with renal infarcts. None of the patients required temporary or permanent dialysis. There was no difference between control patients and patients with covered accessory renal arteries with respect to hypertensive status, presence of renal infarcts, serum creatinine, or creatinine clearance after EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Occlusion of accessory renal arteries is not associated with clinically significant signs or symptoms, even in patients with mild or moderate renal insufficiency. Sacrifice of accessory renal arteries most commonly does not lead to detectable renal infarction, either clinically or radiographically. When segmental infarction of the kidney does result, it seems to be well tolerated in this group of patients. Accessory renal arteries were not found to contribute to endoleaks and should not be prophylactically embolized.

Endovascular aneurysm repair with suprarenal vs infrarenal fixation: a study of renal effects.

OBJECTIVES: Although suprarenal fixation may be of benefit during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), its safety with regards to renal effects remains uncertain. To date, there has been no controlled study of the topic, with most reports relying upon single-center experiences that use heterogeneous patient populations and devices from different manufacturers. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the effect of suprarenal fixation on renal function by comparing homogeneous patient populations receiving EVAR grafts from a single manufacturer that are identical in design and delivery method, except for utilizing either suprarenal (SR) or infrarenal (IR) fixation. METHODS: During two pivotal US Food and Drug Administration trials, 283 patients underwent EVAR with the Powerlink bifurcated graft. The trials' inclusion and exclusion criteria and grafts were identical except for fixation scheme. Clinical, laboratory, and computed tomographic (CT) data were retrospectively reviewed. A comparison of preoperative, perioperative (1 to 7 days), and postoperative (>7 days) alterations in serum creatinine (SCr), creatinine clearance (CrCl), and blood pressure was performed. Renal adverse events were determined by CT scan and clinical chart review and included renal infarction, renal artery stenosis (either progressive or requiring renal stent placement), and renal artery occlusion. RESULTS: Both SR and IR groups demonstrated a significant increase in SCr and a decrease in CrCl over time. No significant difference in SCr or CrCl existed between groups during any time period. There were no differences in postoperative renal impairment (IR, 10.2%; SR, 7.6%, P = .634), the need for hemodialysis (IR, 0.7%; SR, 0%, P = 1.00), or systolic and diastolic blood pressure during subsequent follow-up between treatment groups. There was no significant difference in the number of renal adverse events detected by CT between the IR (10, 6.8%) and SR (3, 3.8%) groups (P = .550). CONCLUSION: Suprarenal fixation does not lead to a significant increase in acute renal events, renal impairment, or alteration in blood pressure compared with infrarenal fixation. Patients undergoing aneurysm repair with devices that use either suprarenal or infrarenal fixation develop progressive renal dysfunction over time. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term effects of suprarenal fixation on renal function and progression of renal artery stenosis.