Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
J Vasc Surg ; 75(2): 543-551, 2022 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34555478

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Recently, open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair (OSR) has become less common and will often be reserved for patients with more complex aortic anatomy. Despite improvements in patient management, the reduced surgical volume has raised concerns for potentially worsened outcomes in the contemporary era (2014-2019) compared with an earlier era in which OSR was more widely practiced (2005-2010). In the present study, we compared the 30-day outcomes of open AAA repair between these two eras. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program general database was queried for open AAA repair using the Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th, codes. The cases were stratified into two groups by operation year: 2005 to 2010 (early) and 2014 to 2019 (contemporary). In each era, the cases were further divided into elective and ruptured groups. The 30-day outcomes, including mortality, major morbidity, postoperative sepsis, and unplanned reoperation, were compared between the contemporary and early eras in the elective and ruptured groups. Preoperative variables with a P value <.25 were adjusted for in the multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In the contemporary and early eras, 3749 and 3798 patients had undergone elective OSR and 1148 and 907 had undergone ruptured OSR, respectively. These samples were of similar sizes owing to the National Quality Improvement Program sampling process and our relatively strict inclusion criteria. In the contemporary era, fewer patients were elderly and fewer were smokers or had hypertension or dyspnea in the elective and rupture cohorts. More patients had had American Society of Anesthesiologists class >3 in the elective contemporary era (39% vs 24%; P < .0001). The contemporary elective repair group demonstrated increased 30-day mortality (3.7% vs 3.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.36; P = .006), major adverse cardiac events (5.7% vs 3.4%; aOR, 1.87; P < .0001), and bleeding requiring transfusion (58.5% vs 13.7%; aOR, 8.96; P < .0001). The incidence of pulmonary complications (12.1% vs 15.2%; aOR, 0.80; P = .02) and sepsis (3.7% vs 8.4%; aOR, 0.47; P < .0001) had decreased in the contemporary era, with a similar rate of unplanned reoperations (8.4% vs 7.7%; aOR, 1.16; P = .09). The incidence of renal complications in the contemporary era had increased, with a statistically significant difference. However, the absolute increase of <0.5% was likely not clinically relevant (5.5% vs 5.1%; aOR, 1.23; P = .049). In the ruptured cohort, contemporary repair was associated with increased 30-day mortality (41.4% vs 40%; aOR, 1.53; P < .0001), major adverse cardiac events (25.8% vs 12.8%; aOR, 2.49; P < .0001), and bleeding requiring transfusion (88.2% vs 27%; aOR, 23.03; P < .0001). The incidence of pulmonary complications (36.9% vs 48.1%; aOR, 0.67; P < .0001), sepsis (14.6% vs 23%; aOR, 0.75; P = .03), and unplanned reoperations (18.1% vs 22.7%; aOR, 0.74; P = .008) had decreased in the contemporary OSR group. No differences were detected in the incidence of renal complications. CONCLUSIONS: The 30-day mortality has worsened after open AAA repair in the elective and rupture settings despite the improvements in perioperative management over the years. These complications likely stem from increased bleeding events and major cardiac events, which were increased in the contemporary era.


Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Rotura de la Aorta/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/métodos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/métodos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Anciano , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/epidemiología , Rotura de la Aorta/epidemiología , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Sistema de Registros , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Tasa de Supervivencia/tendencias , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
2.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 80: 130-135, 2022 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34748944

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Mega-fistulae are generalized aneurysmal dilations of a high flow (1500-4000 mL/min) autogenous arteriovenous (AV) access which may result in hemorrhage and/or high-output cardiac failure. Current treatments include ligation, ligation with prosthetic jump graft, and imbrication; however, these may not be suitable for advanced disease, or may result in loss of functioning access, poor cosmesis, or recurrence. We describe our early experience with a technique of complete mega-fistula resection and replacement with an early use prosthetic graft that both maintains existing AV access and eliminates the need for long-term catheter (LTC) placement; including lessons learned. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective review of medical records was conducted from March 2018-February 2021. Outcomes were technical success, LTC use, time to cannulation, and complications. Mega-fistulae were completely resected from the proximal to distal aneurysmal segment, including all pseudoaneurysms, followed by tunneling a prosthetic graft (Propaten later converted to Acuseal; W.L. Gore Assoc.) with an end-to-end anastomosis to the remaining arterial and venous ends of the previous AV access. RESULTS: We had 100% immediate technical success (n=12). Pre-operative long-term catheters were placed in all eight Propaten patients; one was already placed in an Acuseal patient.  Average time to cannulation was six weeks with Propaten and 4.5 days with Acuseal. At 30 days, three Propaten patients developed complications including one instance of skin necrosis, one seroma, and one hematoma. Two Acuseal patients developed complications including one central venous occlusion (CVO) and one graft infection. Of the six patients with long-term follow-up, five continue to use their access, however, two required thrombectomies and central venous angioplasties. One patient required a new contralateral access due to CVO. CONCLUSIONS: Complete mega-fistula resection and replacement with Acuseal graft maintains existing AV access and may eliminate the need for long-term catheter placement. Our early experience with this technique is encouraging, but further follow-up is required to determine the durability of this approach.


Asunto(s)
Aneurisma Falso/cirugía , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/métodos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Prótesis Vascular , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/cirugía , Anastomosis Quirúrgica , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Reoperación , Estudios Retrospectivos , Colgajos Quirúrgicos , Técnicas de Sutura , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular
3.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 81: 308-315, 2022 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34743008

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Numerous angiography-based peripheral arterial disease classification schemes have been developed to stratify severity of preoperative patient disease, but few studies have correlated angiography-based anatomic classification schemes to postoperative outcomes. This study examined whether a proposed pre-operative angiography scoring system was predictive of outcomes after isolated common femoral endarterectomy with profundaplasty (CFEP). METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of patients treated with isolated CFEP for claudication and/or rest pain at a single institution from 2016-19. Pre-operative angiograms were assessed quantitatively by 4 blinded surgeons across 3 domains: profunda stenosis, profunda disease length, and outflow disease severity. Table I describes the proposed angiography scoring system. Internal consistency reliability of rater scores was calculated using Cronbach alpha. Outcomes included clinical improvement, further interventions, major amputations, mortality, and mean increase in ankle-brachial index (ABI) at 30 days, and 6 months. McNemar tests, between-group t-tests, Pearson correlations, and linear regression were used. RESULTS: Clinical Outcomes 88% of patients (n = 22) had clinical improvement at 30 days; the remaining 12% of patients (n = 3) required further interventions. One patient (4%) required major amputation between 30 days and 6 months for recurrence of rest pain that had initially resolved after isolated CFEP. There was 0% mortality during the study period. Mean ABI increased by 0.15 ± 0.21 at 30 days, and by 0.06 ± 0.21 at 6 months. Angiography Scoring System Profunda stenosis score was associated with clinical improvement at 6 months (P = 0.04). A profunda stenosis score of ≥2.6 was strongly associated with 6-month clinical improvement (64% of those ≥ 2.6 improved, versus 15% of those <2.6, P = 0.15). Profunda stenosis score was associated with ABI improvement at 30 days (r = 0.73, P = 0.01) and 6 months (r = 0.82, P = 0.007). Profunda disease length score was associated with clinical improvement at 30 days (P = 0.002). 100% of patients with a profunda disease length score of ≥1.5 clinically improved at 30 days, versus 67% of those with <1.5 (P = 0.04). Angiography scores were not found to be associated with further intervention, major amputation, or mortality. Cronbach alpha for profunda stenosis, profunda disease length, and outflow severity scores were 0.90, 0.90, and 0.79, respectively, indicating strong internal consistency. CONCLUSIONS: This institutional angiography scoring system successfully predicts clinical improvement following CFEP.  Higher profunda stenosis and profunda disease length scores were most predictive of operative success within 6 months. Future validation studies will investigate these outcomes in a larger population, and over a longer period.


Asunto(s)
Arteriopatías Oclusivas , Arteria Femoral , Angiografía , Arteriopatías Oclusivas/cirugía , Endarterectomía , Arteria Femoral/diagnóstico por imagen , Arteria Femoral/cirugía , Humanos , Pierna , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
4.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 75: 349-357, 2021 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33831525

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Although fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) has been associated with lower morbidity and mortality than open surgical repair (OSR) in juxtarenal aneurysms (JAAA), there is a paucity of data in the literature comparing outcomes of the approaches specifically in patients with chronic renal insufficiency (CRI). We hypothesized that benefits of FEVAR over OSR observed in the general patient population may be diminished in CRI patients due to their heightened vulnerability to renal dysfunction stemming from contrast-induced nephropathy. This study compares 30-day outcomes between FEVAR and OSR for JAAA in patients with non-dialysis dependent CRI. METHODS: All adults with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min (but not requiring dialysis) undergoing elective, non-ruptured JAAA repairs were identified in the American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement (ACS-NSQIP) Targeted EVAR and AAA databases from 2012-2018. JAAA were identified by recorded proximal aneurysm extent. FEVAR patients were identified in the Targeted EVAR database as those receiving the "Cook Zenith Fenestrated" endograft. OSR cases were defined as those that required proximal clamp positions "above one renal" or "between SMA & renals." Infra-renal or supra-celiac proximal clamp placement, or cases involving concomitant renal/visceral revascularization were excluded. Thirty-day outcomes including mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), pulmonary, and renal complications were compared between FEVAR and OSR groups. RESULTS: There were 284 patients with CRI who underwent elective repair of JAAA (FEVAR: 89; OSR: 195). FEVAR patients were significantly older than those undergoing OSR (77.3±7.2 vs. 74.2±7.7, P=0.001) and less likely to be smokers (25.8% vs 42.1%; P = 0.009). Other baseline demographic and pre-operative parameters were comparable between the two groups.Multivariable analysis revealed no significant difference between FEVAR and OSR in 30-day mortality (4.5% vs 4.6%; OR=1.22; 95% CI=0.35 - 4.22; P=0.753) or unplanned re-operation (4.5% vs 5.1%; OR=0.78; 95% CI=0.22 - 2.70; P=0.693). Patients undergoing FEVAR had significantly fewer pulmonary complications (3.4% vs 18.5%; OR=0.12; 95% CI=0.03 - 0.42; P<0.001) and renal dysfunction (3.4% vs 11.8%; OR 0.24 95% CI=0.07 - 0.86; P=0.029) compared to OSR. FEVAR was also associated with significantly shorter ICU and hospital lengths of stay (ICU stay: 0 days vs 3 days, P<0.0001; hospital stay: 3 days vs 8 days, P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: For patients with chronic renal insufficiency, FEVAR offered improved perioperative renal morbidity compared to OSR without a corresponding mortality benefit. Future studies will be required to determine long term outcomes of this procedure in this vulnerable population.


Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/complicaciones , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/complicaciones , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Prótesis Vascular , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/mortalidad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Procedimientos Endovasculares/mortalidad , Femenino , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Humanos , Riñón/fisiopatología , Masculino , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/mortalidad , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/fisiopatología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
5.
J Vasc Surg ; 73(4): 1139-1147, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32919026

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular repair of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (JAAAs) with fenestrated grafts (fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair [FEVAR]) has been reported to decrease operative mortality and morbidity compared with open surgical repair (OSR). However, previous comparisons of OSR and FEVAR have not necessarily included patients with comparable clinical profiles and aneurysm extent. Although FEVAR has often been chosen as the first-line therapy for high-risk patients such as the elderly, many patients will not have anatomy favorable for FEVAR. At present, a paucity of data has examined the operative outcomes of OSR in elderly patients for JAAAs relative to FEVAR. Therefore, we chose to perform a propensity-matched comparison of OSR and FEVAR for JAAA repair in patients aged ≥70 years. METHODS: Patients aged ≥70 years who had undergone elective nonruptured JAAA repairs from 2012 to 2018 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) targeted endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and AAA databases. Patients who had undergone FEVAR were identified in the targeted EVAR database as those who had received the Cook Zenith Fenestrated endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). Because our study specifically examined JAAAs, those patients who had undergone OSR with supraceliac proximal clamping or concomitant renal/visceral revascularization were excluded. A 1:1 propensity-match algorithm matched the OSR and FEVAR patients by preoperative clinical and demographic characteristics, operative indications, and aneurysm extent. The 30-day outcomes, including mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and pulmonary and renal complications, were compared between the propensity-matched OSR and FEVAR groups. RESULTS: A 1:1 propensity match was achieved, and the final analysis included 136 OSR patients and 136 FEVAR patients. No significant differences were found in 30-day mortality (4.4% vs 3.7%; odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-4.06; P = .759) between the OSR and FEVAR groups. OSR was associated with a higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with FEVAR; however, the trend was not statistically significant (8.1% vs 3.7%; OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 0.78-6.82; P = .131). Compared with FEVAR, the OSR group had significantly greater rates of pulmonary complications (19.1% vs 3.7%; OR, 6.19; 95% CI, 2.30-16.67; P < .001) and renal complications (8.1% vs 2.2%; OR, 3.90; 95% CI, 1.06-14.31; P = .040). CONCLUSIONS: In the samples assessed in the present study, the results with OSR of JAAAs in the elderly did not differ from those of FEVAR with respect to 30-day mortality despite a greater incidence of pulmonary and renal complications. Although FEVAR should remain the first-line therapy for JAAAs in elderly patients, OSR might be an acceptable alternative for select patients with anatomy unfavorable for FEVAR.


Asunto(s)
Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Procedimientos Endovasculares/métodos , Arteria Renal/cirugía , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta/epidemiología , Aneurisma de la Aorta/prevención & control , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Puntaje de Propensión , Estudios Retrospectivos
6.
J Vasc Surg ; 73(4): 1234-1244.e1, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32890718

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has often been reserved in contemporary practice for complex aneurysms requiring a suprarenal or supraceliac proximal clamp level. The present study investigated the associated 30-day outcomes of different proximal clamp levels in OSR of complex infrarenal/juxtarenal AAA in patients with normal renal function and those with chronic renal insufficiency (CRI). METHODS: All patients undergoing elective OSR of infrarenal and juxtarenal AAA were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-targeted AAA database from 2012 to 2018. The patients were stratified into two cohorts (normal renal function [estimated glomerular filtration rate, ≥60 mL/min] and CRI [estimated glomerular filtration rate, <60 mL/min and no dialysis]) before further substratification into groups by the proximal clamp level (infrarenal, inter-renal, suprarenal, and supraceliac). The 30-day outcomes, including mortality, renal and pulmonary complications, and major adverse cardiovascular event rates, were compared within each renal function cohort between proximal clamp level groups using the infrarenal clamp group as the reference. Supraceliac clamping was also compared with suprarenal clamping. RESULTS: A total of 1284 patients with normal renal function and 524 with CRI were included in the present study. The proximal clamp levels for the 1808 patients were infrarenal for 1080 (59.7%), inter-renal for 337 (18.6%), suprarenal for 279 (15.4%), and supraceliac for 112 (6.2%). In the normal renal function cohort, no difference was found in 30-day mortality with any clamp level. Increased 30-day acute renal failure was only observed in the supraceliac vs infrarenal clamp level comparison (5.9% vs 1.5%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-5.18; P = .044). In the CRI cohort, supraceliac clamping was associated with an increased rate of renal composite complications (22.7% vs 5.6%; aOR, 8.81; 95% CI, 3.17-24.46; P < .001) and ischemic colitis (13.6% vs 3.0%; aOR, 4.78; 95% CI, 1.38-16.62; P = .014) compared with infrarenal clamping and greater 30-day mortality (13.6% vs 2.4%; aOR, 6.00; 95% CI, 1.14-31.55; P = .034) and renal composite complications (22.7% vs 10.8%; aOR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.02-8.13; P = .047) compared with suprarenal clamping. Suprarenal clamping was associated with greater renal dysfunction (10.8% vs 5.6%; aOR, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.08-7.13; P = .035) compared with infrarenal clamping, with no differences in mortality. No differences were found in 30-day mortality or morbidity for inter-renal clamping compared with infrarenal clamping in either cohort. No differences were found in major adverse cardiovascular events with higher clamp levels in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In elective OSR of infrarenal and juxtarenal AAAs for patients with CRI, this study found a heightened mortality risk with supraceliac clamping and increased renal morbidity with suprarenal clamping, though these effects were not present for patients with normal renal function. Every effort should be made to keep the proximal clamp level as low as possible, especially in patients with CRI.


Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Riñón/fisiopatología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/fisiopatología , Anciano , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/mortalidad , Comorbilidad , Constricción , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/mortalidad , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...