Complicated and Uncomplicated Isolated Abdominal Aortic Dissections Demonstrate Different Patient Characteristics and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Isolated abdominal aortic dissection (IAAD) is a rare entity with poorly defined risk factors and wide variation in management. We set forth to compare patient characteristics, management, and outcomes of uncomplicated isolated abdominal aortic dissection (uIAAD) versus high risk and complicated isolated abdominal aortic dissection (hrcIAAD) to investigate whether these categories can be utilized to guide IAAD management and provide risk stratification for intervention. METHODS: Retrospective chart review was performed to identify all patients with spontaneous IAAD at a tertiary health care system between 1996 and 2022. Demographics, comorbidities, factors relating to initial presentation including imaging findings, and dissection outcomes including long-term all-cause mortality and aortic-related mortality from time of dissection to final available record were abstracted. IAAD demonstrating rupture or malperfusion were designated as complicated, those with aortic diameter greater than 4 cm on presentation or refractory pain were designated as high risk, and the remainder was designated as uIAAD. All variables were compared between hrcIAAD and uIAAD using Fisher's exact test, unpaired t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test as appropriate. RESULTS: Over the study period, 74 patients presented with spontaneous IAAD (mean age 60 ± 16 years, 61% male) with postdissection follow-up records to an average of 6.8 ± 5.8 years. Of these, 76% presented with uIAAD versus 24% with hrcIAAD. hrcIAAD was diagnosed at a significantly younger age on average than uIAAD (52 ± 14 vs. 62 ± 16 years, P = 0.02), was less likely to present with concomitant hyperlipidemia (0% vs. 41%, P < 0.01), coronary artery disease (6% vs. 47%, P < 0.01), and prior smoking history (39% vs. 72%). hrcIAAD was more likely to present in patients with a genetic aortopathy (27% vs. 7%, P = 0.03). Hypertension was not significantly different between groups. Patients with hrcIAAD were significantly more likely to present with extension into iliac arteries compared to uIAAD (61% vs. 18%, P < 0.01). A much higher proportion of hrcIAAD required hospitalization compared to uIAAD (83% vs. 30%, P < 0.01) and operative intervention (67% vs. 7%, P < 0.01). While there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between groups, there was a significant difference between aortic-related mortality which only occurred in those with hrcIAAD (28% vs. 0%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of long-term outcomes suggests that hrcIAAD is associated with increased hospitalization and need for operative intervention compared to uIAAD. Significant differences in atherosclerotic risk factors and proportions of connective tissue disease history between patients who present with hrcIAAD and uIAAD suggest that differences in underlying etiology are largely responsible for whether IAAD progresses towards rupture or has a more benign course and should be considered in risk stratification to guide more specific and targeted management of IAAD.

Early survival benefit of a low-profile endograft in blunt traumatic aortic injury.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a low-profile thoracic endograft (19-23 French) in subjects with blunt traumatic aortic injury. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter study assessed the RelayPro thoracic endograft for the treatment of traumatic aortic injury. Fifty patients were enrolled at 16 centers in the United States between 2017 and 2021. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The cohort was mostly male (74%), with a mean age of 42.4 ± 17.2 years, and treated for traumatic injuries (4% Grade 1, 8% Grade 2, 76% Grade 3, and 12% Grade 4) due to motor vehicle collision (80%). The proximal landing zone was proximal to the left subclavian artery in 42%, and access was primarily percutaneous (80%). Most (71%) were treated with a non-bare stent endograft. Technical success was 98% (one early type Ia endoleak). All-cause 30-day mortality was 2% (compared with an expected rate of 8%), with an exact two-sided 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.1%, 10.6% below the performance goal upper limit of 25%. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated freedom from all-cause mortality to be 98% at 30 days through 4 years (95% CI, 86.6%-99.7%). Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from major adverse events, all-cause mortality, paralysis, and stroke, was 98.0% at 30 days and 95.8% from 6 months to 4 years (95% CI, 84.3%-98.9%). There were no strokes and one case of paraplegia (2%) during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: RelayPro was safe and effective and may provide an early survival benefit in the treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injury.

Using Machine Learning to Predict Outcomes of Patients with Blunt Traumatic Aortic Injuries.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal management of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) remains controversial, with experienced centers offering therapy ranging from medical management to TEVAR. We investigated the utility of a machine learning (ML) algorithm to develop a prognostic model of risk factors on mortality in patients with BTAI. METHODS: The Aortic Trauma Foundation registry was utilized to examine demographics, injury characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with BTAI. A STREAMLINE (A Simple, Transparent, End-To-End Automated Machine Learning Pipeline Facilitating Data Analysis and Algorithm Comparison) model as well as logistic regression (LR) analysis with imputation using chained equations was developed and compared. RESULTS: From a total of 1018 patients in the registry, 702 patients were included in the final analysis. Of the 258 (37%) patients who were medically managed, 44 (17%) died during admission, 14 (5.4%) of which were aortic related deaths. 444 (63%) patients underwent TEVAR and 343 of which underwent TEVAR within 24 hours of admission. Amongst TEVAR patients, 39 (8.8%) patients died and 7 (1.6%) had aortic related deaths. (Table 1) Comparison of the STREAMLINE and LR model showed no significant difference in ROC curves and high AUCs of 0.869 (95% CI, 0.813 - 0.925) and 0.840 (95% CI, 0.779 - 0.900) respectively in predicting in-hospital mortality. Unexpectedly, however, the variables prioritized in each model differed between models (Figure 1A-B). The top three variables identified from the LR model were similar to that from existing literature. The STREAMLINE model, however, prioritized location of the injury along the lesser curve, age and aortic injury grade (Figure 1A). CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning provides insight on prioritization of variables not typically identified in standard multivariable logistic regression. Further investigation and validation in other aortic injury cohorts are needed to delineate the utility of ML models. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IIIStudy TypeOriginal research (prognostic/epidemiological).

Surgeon volume and outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury.

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) at high-volume hospitals has previously been associated with lower perioperative mortality, but the impact of annual surgeon volume on outcomes following TEVAR for BTAI remains unknown. METHODS: We analyzed Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) data from patients with BTAI that underwent TEVAR between 2013 and 2023. Annual surgeon volumes were computed as the number of TEVARs (for any pathology) performed over a 1-year period preceding each procedure and were further categorized into quintiles. Surgeons in the first volume quintile were categorized as low volume (LV), the highest quintile as high volume (HV), and the middle three quintiles as medium volume (MV). TEVAR procedures performed by surgeons with less than 1-year enrollment in the VQI were excluded. Using multilevel logistic regression models, we evaluated associations between surgeon volume and perioperative outcomes, accounting for annual center volumes and adjusting for potential confounders, including aortic injury grade and severity of coexisting injuries. Multilevel models accounted for the nested clustering of patients and surgeons within the same center. Sensitivity analysis excluding patients with grade IV BTAI was performed. RESULTS: We studied 1321 patients who underwent TEVAR for BTAI (28% by LV surgeons [0-1 procedures per year], 52% by MV surgeons [2-8 procedures per year], 20% by HV surgeons [≥9 procedures per year]). With higher surgeon volume, TEVAR was delayed more (in <4 hours: LV: 68%, MV: 54%, HV: 46%; P < .001; elective (>24 hours): LV: 5.1%; MV: 8.9%: HV: 14%), heparin administered more (LV: 80%, MV: 81%, HV: 87%; P = .007), perioperative mortality appears lower (LV: 11%, MV: 7.3%, HV: 6.5%; P = .095), and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke was lower (LV: 6.5%, MV: 3.6%, HV: 1.5%; P = .006). After adjustment, compared with LV surgeons, higher volume surgeons had lower odds of perioperative mortality (MV: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.97; P = .039; HV: 0.45; 95% CI, 0.16-1.22; P = .12; MV/HV: 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.96; P = .038) and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke (MV: 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.81; P = .011; HV: 0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.61; P = .008). Sensitivity analysis found lower adjusted odds for perioperative mortality (although not significant) and ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke for higher volume surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI, higher surgeon volume is independently associated with lower perioperative mortality and postoperative stroke, regardless of hospital volume. Future studies could elucidate if TEVAR for non-ruptured BTAI might be delayed and allow stabilization, heparinization, and involvement of a higher TEVAR volume surgeon.

Surgical release of anterior tibial artery entrapment with associated popliteal artery entrapment.

Popliteal artery entrapment syndrome (PAES) is compression of the popliteal artery from embryologic myotendinous variation or calf muscle hypertrophy. PAES necessitates prompt diagnosis and complete release of the entrapped vasculature for symptom relief and to prevent chronic cumulative vascular damage. Our patient is a 27-year-old female referred for progressive bilateral claudication. Workup was consistent with bilateral PAES with preoperative imaging notable for an atypically proximal origin of the anterior tibial artery, which was also encased anterior to the popliteus muscle. Preoperative angiogram confirmed the diagnosis, and complete surgical release resolved symptoms by 4 months postoperatively.

Modified Harborview Risk Score accurately predicts mortality for patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: The modified Harborview Risk Score (HRS) is a simple measure initially derived from a single institutional dataset used to predict ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair survival preoperatively using basic labs and vital signs collected upon presentation. However, validation of this widely applicable scoring system has not been performed. This study aims to validate this scoring system using a large multi-institutional database. METHODS: All patients who underwent repair of an rAAA from 2011 to 2018 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and at a single academic medical center were included. The modified HRS was calculated by assigning 1 point for each of the following: age >76 years, creatinine >2 mg/dL, international normalized ratio >1.8, and any systolic blood pressure less than 70 mmHg. Assessment of the prediction model was then completed. Using a primary outcome measure of 30-day mortality, the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve was calculated. The discrimination between datasets was compared using a Delong test. Mortality rates for each score were compared between datasets using the Pearson χ2 test. Comparative analysis for patients with a score of 4 was limited due to a small sample size. RESULTS: A total of 1536 patients were identified using NSQIP, and 163 patients were assessed in the institutional dataset. There were 518 patients with a score of 0 (455 NSQIP, 63 institutional), 676 patients with a score of 1 (617 NSQIP, 59 institutional), 391 patients with a score of 2 (364 NSQIP, 27 institutional), 106 with a score of 3 (93 NSQIP, 13 institutional), and 8 patients with a score of 4 (7 NSQIP, 1 institutional). No difference was found in the receiver operating characteristic area under the curves between datasets (P = .78). Thirty-day mortality was 10% NSQIP vs 22% institutional for a score of 0; 28% NSQIP vs 36% institutional for a score of 1; 41% NSQIP vs 44% institutional for a score of 2; 45% NSQIP vs 69% institutional for a score of 3; and 57% NSQIP vs 100% institutional for a score of 4. Score 0 was the only score with a significant mortality rate difference between datasets (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The modified HRS is confirmed to be broadly applicable as a clinical decision-making tool for patients presenting with rAAAs. Therefore, this easily applicable model should be applied for all patients presenting with rAAAs to assist with provider and patient decision-making prior to proceeding with repair.

Development and Validation of a Risk Prediction Tool for In-hospital Mortality After Thoracic Endovascular Repair in Patients with Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury Using the Aortic Trauma Foundation Registry.

BACKGROUND: The objective of our present effort was to use an international blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) registry to create a prediction model identifying important preoperative and intraoperative factors associated with postoperative mortality, and to develop and validate a simple risk prediction tool that could assist with patient selection and risk stratification in this patient population. METHODS: For the purpose of the present study, all patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for BTAI and registered in the Aortic Trauma Foundation (ATF) database from January 2016 as of June 2022 were identified. Patients undergoing medical management or open repair were excluded. The primary outcome was binary in-hospital all-cause mortality. Two predictive models were generated: a preoperative model (i.e. only including variables before TEVAR or intention-to-treat) and a full model (i.e. also including variables after TEVAR or per-protocol). RESULTS: Out of a total of 944 cases included in the ATF registry until June 2022, 448 underwent TEVAR and were included in the study population. TEVAR for BTAI was associated with an 8.5% in-hospital all-cause mortality in the ATF dataset. These study subjects were subsequently divided using 3:1 random sampling in a derivation cohort (336; 75.0%) and a validation cohort (112; 25.0%). The median age was 38 years, and the majority of patients were male (350; 78%). A total of 38 variables were included in the final analysis. Of these, 17 variables were considered in the preoperative model, 9 variables were integrated in the full model, and 12 variables were excluded owing to either extremely low variance or strong correlation with other variables. The calibration graphs showed how both models from the ATF dataset tended to underestimate risk, mainly in intermediate-risk cases. The discriminative capacity was moderate in all models; the best performing model was the full model from the ATF dataset, as evident from both the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (Area Under the Curve 0.84; 95% CI 0.74-0.91) and from the density graph. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we developed and validated a contemporary risk prediction model, which incorporates several preoperative and postoperative variables and is strongly predictive of early mortality. While this model can reasonably predict in-hospital all-cause mortality, thereby assisting physicians with risk-stratification as well as inform patients and their caregivers, its intrinsic limitations must be taken into account and it should only be considered an adjunctive tool that may complement clinical judgment and shared decision-making.

Iliac tortuosity increases reinterventions but not adverse outcomes following repair of juxtarenal aneurysms using physician-modified endografts.

OBJECTIVE: Increased angulation of the proximal aortic neck has been associated with complications following endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms, including increased incidence of endoleaks, stent migration, secondary interventions, and conversions. However, knowledge on the impact of aortoiliac tortuosity on outcomes following fenestrated repair remains limited. This study aims to quantify the effect of aortoiliac tortuosity on outcomes following fenestrated repair. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective review of all patients who underwent a physician-modified endovascular repair for the treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms under a single physician-sponsored investigation device exemption study from 2011 to 2021 was performed. Center luminal lines and geometric distances were obtained using TeraRecon software (San Mateo, CA). A tortuosity index was calculated (tortuosity index = centerline distance/geometric line distance) for each iliac vessel as well as for the infrarenal aorta according to Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. Aortic and iliac tortuosity were assessed independently and stratified as low and high. Demographics, comorbidities, anatomic and operative details, and outcomes were compared using univariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 135 patients were identified. Thirty-eight patients (28%) had high aortic tortuosity, and 55 patients (42%) had high iliac tortuosity. Patients with high tortuosity were older (aortic: 78 vs 76 years; P = .04; iliac: 78 vs 75 years; P = .01) and differed by sex. Twenty-two percent of men and 50% of women had high aortic tortuosity (P = .01). Forty-seven percent of men and 20% of women had high iliac tortuosity (P = .01). There were no differences in comorbidities based on aortic tortuosity, but coronary artery disease (high: 58% vs low: 36%; P = .01) and hypertension (high: 69% vs low: 86%; P = .02) differed based on iliac tortuosity. Aneurysm diameter was larger for patients with high iliac tortuosity (72 mm vs 64 mm; P < .01), and fluoroscopy time was longer for patients with high aortic tortuosity (41 vs 31 minutes; P = .02). When outcomes were assessed, high iliac tortuosity was associated with increased rate of reinterventions (hazard ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-6.0) and type 1 or 3 endoleak (hazard ratio, 5.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-16); however, all other outcomes were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with physician-modified endovascular repair for juxtarenal aneurysms, iliac tortuosity but not aortic tortuosity, is associated with increased reinterventions and type 1 or type 3 endoleaks. Long-term follow-up is critical for patients with high iliac tortuosity to ensure that high-risk endoleaks are identified and treated early to avoid the risk of rupture.

Modified Harborview Risk Score improves ease in predicting mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The Harborview Risk Score (HRS) is a simple, accurate 4-point preoperative risk scoring system used to predict 30-day mortality following ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair. The HRS assigns 1 point for each of the following: age >76 years, pH <7.2, creatinine >2 mg/dL, and any episode of severe hypotension (systolic blood pressure <70 mmHg). One potential limitation of this risk scoring system is that arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis is required to determine arterial pH. Because ABG analysis is not routinely performed prior to patient transfer or rAAA repair, we sought to determine if the HRS could be modified by replacing pH with the international normalized ratio (INR), a factor that has been previously shown to have a strong and independent association with 30-day death after rAAA repair. METHODS: A retrospective review of all rAAA repairs done at a single academic medical center between January 2002 and December 2018 was performed. Our traditional HRS was compared with a modified score, in which pH <7.2 was replaced with INR >1.8. Patients were included if they underwent rAAA repair (open or endovascular), and if they had preoperative laboratory values available to calculate both the traditional and modified HRS. RESULTS: During the 17-year study period, 360 of 391 repairs met inclusion criteria. Observed 30-day mortality using the modified scoring system was 17% (18/106) for a score of 0 points, 43% (53/122) for 1 point, 54% (52/96) for 2 points, 84% (27/32) for 3 points, and 100% (4/4) for 4 points. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed similar ability of the two scoring systems to predict 30-day death: there was no significant difference in the area under the curve (AUC) comparing the traditional (AUC = 0.74) and modified (AUC = 0.72) HRS (P = .3). CONCLUSIONS: Although previously validated among a modern cohort of patients with rAAA, our traditional 4-point risk score is limited in real-world use by the need for an ABG. Substituting INR for pH improves the usefulness of our risk scoring system without compromising accuracy in predicting 30-day mortality after rAAA repair.

The impact of urgency of repair on outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury.

OBJECTIVE: Current societal recommendations regarding the timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) vary. Prior studies have shown that elective repair was associated with lower mortality after TEVAR for BTAI. However, these studies lacked data such as Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) aortic injury grades and TEVAR-related postoperative outcomes. Therefore, we used the Vascular Quality Initiative registry, which includes relevant anatomic and outcome data, to examine the outcomes following urgent/emergent (≤ 24 hours) vs elective TEVAR for BTAI. METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI between 2013 and 2022 were included, excluding those with SVS grade 4 aortic injuries. We included covariates such as age, sex, race, transfer status, body mass index, preoperative hemoglobin, comorbidities, medication use, SVS aortic injury grade, coexisting injuries, Glasgow Coma Scale, and prior aortic surgery in a regression model to compute propensity scores for assignment to urgent/emergent or elective TEVAR. Perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality were evaluated using inverse probability-weighted logistic regression and Cox regression, also adjusting for left subclavian artery revascularization/occlusion and annual center and physician volumes. RESULTS: Of 1016 patients, 102 (10%) underwent elective TEVAR. Patients who underwent elective repair were more likely to undergo revascularization of the left subclavian artery (31% vs 7.5%; P < .001) and receive intraoperative heparin (94% vs 82%; P = .002). After inverse probability weighting, there was no association between TEVAR timing and perioperative mortality (elective vs urgent/emergent: 3.9% vs 6.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-4.7; P = .90) and 5-year mortality (5.8% vs 12%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.21-4.3; P > .9).Compared with urgent/emergent TEVAR, elective repair was associated with lower postoperative stroke (1.0% vs 2.1%; adjusted OR [aOR], 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.94; P = .044), even after adjusting for intraoperative heparin use (aOR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.92; P = .042). Elective TEVAR was also associated with lower odds of failure of extubation immediately after surgery (39% vs 65%; aOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.35; P < .001) and postoperative pneumonia (4.9% vs 11%; aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13-0.91; P = .031), but comparable odds of any postoperative complication as a composite outcome and reintervention during index admission. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BTAI who underwent elective TEVAR were more likely to receive intraoperative heparin. Perioperative mortality and 5-year mortality rates were similar between the elective and emergent/urgent TEVAR groups. Postoperatively, elective TEVAR was associated with lower ischemic stroke, pulmonary complications, and prolonged hospitalization. Future modifications in society guidelines should incorporate the current evidence supporting the use of elective TEVAR for BTAI. The optimal timing of TEVAR in patients with BTAI and the factors determining it should be the subject of future study to facilitate personalized decision-making.

Five-year outcome of a staged giant Shamblin type III carotid body tumor excision.

Giant carotid body tumors, defined as those >8 cm in size, are extremely rare. Definitive surgical management is a complex undertaking because these large tumors tend to have grown to envelop cranial nerves and the carotid artery, and few data exist regarding the long-term outcomes for these patients. We present the case of a patient with bilateral giant carotid body tumors who underwent staged embolization and excision of a >10-cm carotid body tumor. After 5 years of follow-up, we demonstrated that elective open repair can provide long-term symptomatic relief. We describe and illustrate the crucial steps and considerations regarding the excision of complex Shamblin type III carotid body tumors.

Dynamic Imaging is the Ideal Modality for the Diagnosis of Popliteal Artery Entrapment Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Popliteal Artery Entrapment Syndrome (PAES) is a rare vascular condition with significant equipoise on how to properly diagnose and evaluate relevant imaging. This can lead to misdiagnosis and delay in surgical management. The objective of this study is to describe and compare distinct imaging features of dynamic versus static images to help determine the ideal imaging modality for diagnosis of PAES. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients referred for PAES at a single institution. We reviewed noninvasive imaging studies, diagnostic arteriograms, and cross-sectional images which include computed tomography angiography (CTA) or magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). For each affected and unaffected extremity, the characteristic collaterals for PAES were named and measured on arteriogram using Picture Archiving and Communication Software. Available cross-sectional images were also analyzed and compared with arteriogram and intraoperative findings during surgical exploration. RESULTS: There were 23 patients referred for PAES who underwent diagnostic evaluation and surgical management between 2013 and 2022. All patients had a duplex ultrasound that revealed a mean popliteal peak systolic velocity of 78 cm/sec at rest. With forced plantar flexion, the peak systolic velocity increased to a mean 175 cm/sec. A total of 12 extremities had complete loss of flow with provocation during duplex ultrasound. All patients underwent diagnostic angiography of 46 extremities. All limbs with PAES (n = 35) exhibited complete popliteal artery occlusion during angiography with forced plantar flexion. Distinct angiographic findings on resting images included a well-developed medial sural artery in 100% of limbs with PAES with a mean diameter of 2.7 mm. In limbs without PAES, only 80% had a visualized medial sural artery on arteriogram with a mean diameter of 2.0 mm (P = 0.1). A lateral sural artery was seen in 85% of affected extremities (mean diameter of 1.8 mm), while an anterior tibial recurrent artery was seen in 59% of affected extremities (mean diameter of 1.3 mm). In unaffected limbs, there were no visible lateral sural or anterior tibial recurrent arteries. The mean contrast used with diagnostic arteriograms was 58 milliliters (range 10-100 milliliters). Axial imaging was available for 9 affected extremities. Five had a previous MRA with only 1 being truly positive for arterial compression. Four extremities had previous CTA with 3 being falsely negative despite having type 3 PAES discovered during surgical exploration. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic imaging with angiography provides immediate surgeon feedback by visualizing popliteal artery compression and enlarged sural collaterals during resting arteriography. The medial sural collateral is enlarged in patients with PAES and often the lateral sural and anterior tibial recurrent arteries can be visualized as well. CTA and MRA are associated with high false-negative rates, and therefore cause delays in diagnosis and surgical management of PAES. Dynamic imaging should, therefore, be the gold standard for the diagnosis of PAES.

Open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in patients with vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome.

Vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (VEDS) is rare, affecting an estimated 1 per 50,000 individuals, and is associated with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), among other arteriopathies. We present three patients with genetically confirmed VEDS who underwent successful open AAA surgical repair and demonstrate that elective open AAA repair with careful tissue manipulation is safe and feasible for patients with VEDS. These cases also demonstrate that the VEDS genotype is associated with the aortic tissue quality (genotype-surgical phenotype correlation), with the most friable tissue encountered in the patient with a large amino acid substitution and the least friable tissue in the patient with a null (haploinsufficiency) variant.

Outcomes following thoracic endovascular aortic repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury stratified by Society for Vascular Surgery grade.

OBJECTIVES: Although the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) aortic injury grading system is used to depict the severity of injury in patients with blunt thoracic aortic injury, prior literature on its association with outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is limited. METHODS: We identified patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI within the VQI between 2013 and 2022. We stratified patients based on their SVS aortic injury grade (grade 1, intimal tear; grade 2, intramural hematoma; grade 3, pseudoaneurysm; and grade 4, transection or extravasation). We assessed perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality using multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses. Secondarily, we assessed the proportional trends in patients undergoing TEVAR based on SVS aortic injury grade over time. RESULTS: Overall, 1311 patients were included (grade1, 8%; grade 2, 19%; grade 3, 57%; grade 4, 17%). Baseline characteristics were similar, except for a higher prevalence of renal dysfunction, severe chest injury (Abbreviated Injury Score >3), and lower Glasgow Coma Scale with increasing aortic injury grade (Ptrend < .05). Rates of perioperative mortality by aortic injury grade were as follows: grade 1, 6.6%; grade 2, 4.9%; grade 3, 7.2%; and grade 4, 14% (Ptrend = .003) and 5-year mortality rates were 11% for grade 1, 10% for grade 2, 11% for grade 3, and 19% for grade 4 (P = .004). Patients with grade 1 injury had a high rate of spinal cord ischemia (2.8% vs grade 2, 0.40% vs grade 3, 0.40% vs grade 4, 2.7%; P = .008). After risk adjustment, there was no association between aortic injury grade and perioperative mortality (grade 4 vs grade 1, odds ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-3.5; P = .65), or 5-year mortality (grade 4 vs grade 1, hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-2.30; P = .82). Although there was a trend for decrease in the proportion of patients undergoing TEVAR with a grade 2 BTAI (22% to 14%; Ptrend = .084), the proportion for grade 1 injury remained unchanged over time (6.0% to 5.1%; Ptrend = .69). CONCLUSIONS: After TEVAR for BTAI, there was higher perioperative and 5-year mortality in patients with grade 4 BTAI. However, after risk adjustment, there was no association between SVS aortic injury grade and perioperative and 5-year mortality in patients undergoing TEVAR for BTAI. More than 5% of patients with BTAI who underwent TEVAR had a grade 1 injury, with a concerning rate of spinal cord ischemia potentially attributable to TEVAR, and this proportion did not decrease over time. Further efforts should focus on enabling careful selection of patients with BTAI who will experience more benefit than harm from operative repair and preventing the inadvertent use of TEVAR in low-grade injuries.

Cover with caution: Management of the Left Subclavian Artery in TEVAR for trauma.

BACKGROUND: Elective Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) with left subclavian artery coverage (LSA-C) without revascularization is associated with increased rates of ischemic stroke. In patients with blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) requiring TEVAR, LSA-C is frequently required in over one-third of patients. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes of TEVAR in BTAI patients with and without LSA-C. METHODS: The largest existing international multicenter prospective registry of BTAI, developed and implemented by the Aortic Trauma Foundation, was utilized to evaluate all BTAI patients undergoing TEVAR from March 2016 to January 2021. Patients with uncovered left subclavian artery (LSA-U) were compared with patients who had left subclavian artery coverage with (LSA-R) and without (LSA-NR) revascularization. RESULTS: Of the 364 patients with BTAI who underwent TEVAR, 97 (26.6%) underwent LSA-C without revascularization, 10 (2.7%) underwent LSA-C with revascularization (LSA-R). Late and all ischemic strokes were more common in LSA-NR patients than LSA-U patients ( p = 0.006, p = 0.0007). There was no difference in rate of early, late, or overall incidence of paralysis/paraplegia between LSA-NR and LSA-U. When compiled as composite central nervous system ischemic sequelae, there was an increased rate in early, late, and overall events in LSA-NR compared with LSA-U ( p = 0.04, p = 0.01, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: While prior studies have suggested the relative safety of LSA-C in BTAI, preliminary multicenter prospective data suggests there is a significant increase in ischemic events when the left subclavian artery is covered and not revascularized. Additional prospective study and more highly powered analysis is necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Reinterventions after physician-modified endovascular grafts for treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms are non-detrimental to long-term survival.

OBJECTIVE: Reintervention after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair is common. However, their frequency and impact on mortality after physician-modified endografts (PMEGs) is unknown. This study aims to describe reinterventions after PMEG for treatment of juxtarenal aneurysms and their effect on survival. METHODS: Data from a prospective investigational device exemption clinical trial (Identifier #NCT01538056) from 2011 to 2022 were used. Reinterventions after PMEG were categorized as open or percutaneous and major or minor by Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards and as high or low magnitude based on physiologic impact. Reinterventions were also categorized by timing, based on whether they occurred within 30 days of PMEG as well as within 1 week of PMEG. Survival was compared between patients who did and did not undergo reintervention and between reintervention subcategories. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients underwent PMEG, 50 (29%) of whom underwent a total of 91 reinterventions (mean reinterventions/patient, 1.8). Freedom from reintervention was 84% at 1 year and 60% at 5 years. Reinterventions were most often percutaneous (80%), minor (55%), and low magnitude (77%), and the most common reintervention was renal stenting (26%). There were 10 early reinterventions within 1 week of PMEG. Two aortic-related mortalities occurred after reintervention. There were no differences in survival between patients who underwent reintervention and those who did not. However, survival differed based on the timing of reintervention. After adjusted analysis, reintervention within one week of PMEG was associated with an increased risk of mortality both compared with late reintervention (hazard ratio, 11.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.7-46.5) and no reintervention (hazard ratio, 5.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-16.8). CONCLUSIONS: Reinterventions after PMEG were most commonly percutaneous, minor, and low magnitude procedures, and non-detrimental to long-term survival. However, early reinterventions were associated with increased mortality risk. These data suggest that a modest frequency of reinterventions should be expected after PMEG, emphasizing the critical importance of lifelong surveillance.

Planning and sizing of fenestrated/branched stent grafts.

Precise preoperative planning for fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms is essential for safe and successful surgery. Planning should begin with a high-quality computed tomography angiography of the chest abdomen and pelvis, which is input into post-processing software to create centerline formatting of the aorta, iliac, and target vessels. The aorta and its branches should then be assessed for aberrant anatomy, dissection, and extent of disease. In any patient with evidence of dissection, a plan should be established for intravascular ultrasound assessment of wire location to confirm the appropriately selected lumen. The proximal and distal seal zones should be selected in areas of a healthy, nonangulated, and parallel vessel free from degeneration calcification and atheroma. The proximal and distal devices can then be selected with 10% to 20% oversizing. Target vessels are evaluated for incorporation and assessed for vessel size, stenosis, dissection, and distance to branching vessels, all of which guide suitability for fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms and sizing for bridging stents. The celiac and superior mesenteric arteries should be incorporated for repair, even if evidence of proximal stenosis is identified, as should accessory renal arteries >4 mm. Although total femoral access is now widely used, all access options should be carefully evaluated for size, calcification, and dissection, including bilateral femoral, iliac, subclavian, and brachial vessels. Finally, optimal C-Arm gantry angles should be planned to clearly identify the orifice and first branch of target vessels, as well as proximal and distal sealing zones.

Five-year results of the STABLE II study for the endovascular treatment of complicated, acute type B aortic dissection with a composite device design.

OBJECTIVE: To provide the 5-year outcomes of the use of a composite device (proximal covered stent graft + distal bare stent) for endovascular repair of patients with acute, type B aortic dissection complicated by aortic rupture and/or malperfusion. METHODS: Study of Thoracic Aortic Type B Dissection Using Endoluminal Repair (STABLE) II was a prospective, multicenter study of the Zenith Dissection Endovascular System (William Cook Europe). Patients were enrolled between August 2012 and January 2015 at sites in the United States and Japan. Five-year follow-up was completed by January 2020. RESULTS: In total, 73 patients (mean age: 60.7 ± 10.9 years; 65.8% male) with acute type B dissection complicated by malperfusion (72.6%), rupture (21.9%), or both (5.5%) were enrolled. Patients were treated with either a composite device (79.5%) or the proximal stent graft alone (no distal bare stent, 20.5%). Dissections were more extensive in patients who received the composite device (408.9 ± 121.3 mm) than in patients who did not receive a bare stent (315.9 ± 100.1 mm). The mean follow-up was 1209.4 ± 754.6 days. Freedom from all-cause mortality was 80.3% ± 4.7% at 1 year and 68.9% ± 7.3% at 5 years. Freedom from dissection-related mortality remained at 97.1% ± 2.1% from 1-year through 5-year follow-up. Within the stent-graft region, the rate of either complete thrombosis or elimination of the false lumen increased over time (82.1% of all patients at 5 years vs 55.7% at first postprocedure computed tomography), with a higher rate at 5 years in patients who received the composite device (90.5%) compared with patients without the bare stent (57.1%). Throughout the follow-up, overall true lumen diameter increased within the stent-graft region, and overall false lumen diameter decreased. At 5 years, 20.7% of patients experienced a decrease in maximum transaortic diameter within the stent-graft region, 17.2% experienced an increase, and 62.1% experienced no change. Distal to the treated segment (but within the dissected aorta), 23.1% of patients experience no change in transaortic diameter at 5 years; a bare stent was deployed in all these patients at the procedure. Five-year freedom from all secondary intervention was 70.7% ± 7.2%. CONCLUSIONS: These 5-year outcomes indicate a low rate of dissection-related mortality for the Zenith Dissection Endovascular System in the treatment of patients with acute, complicated type B aortic dissection. Further, these data suggest a positive influence of composite device use on false lumen thrombosis. Continuous monitoring for distal aortic growth is necessary in all patients.

Clinical Outcomes of a Diagnostic and Management Protocol for Popliteal Artery Entrapment Syndrome at a Large Referral Center.

BACKGROUND: Popliteal Artery Entrapment Syndrome (PAES) is a rare clinical entity without a standardized algorithm for diagnosis and treatment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a unique diagnostic and management algorithm for patients with PAES managed at a quaternary referral center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients diagnosed with PAES at a single institution between 2013 and 2021. Demographics, physical exam findings, noninvasive imaging results, and angiographic images were assessed to validate a diagnostic and management algorithm (Figure 1). Surgical findings, operative technique, post-operative complications, and symptomatic improvement were assessed to validate this clinical algorithm. RESULTS: There were 35 extremities in 23 patients treated for PAES (Table I). The mean age was 28, and 82.6% of patients were female. Physical exam revealed a decrement in pedal pulse with provocative maneuvers in 90% of treated limbs. Noninvasive studies to include treadmill exercise testing revealed a mean Ankle-brachial indices (ABI) drop of 0.28 and positional duplex demonstrated that the mean peak systolic velocity (PSV) in the popliteal artery was 78 cm/sec at rest which increased to 175 cm/sec with provocation. Diagnostic arteriography was performed in all patients and revealed awell-developed geniculate and sural collaterals in 100% of the treated limbs and complete effacement of the popliteal artery with active provocative maneuvers in all treated limbs (Figure 2). Surgical exposure was performed via a posterior approach and intraoperative completion duplex was performed in all cases. Type III PAES was discovered in 89% of cases. Arterial reconstruction was required in 2 patients who presented with an occluded popliteal artery. All but one patient was discharged on post-operative day one. Wound complications occurred in 4 limbs (3 patients) and included seroma and hypertrophic scarring. All patients experienced symptomatic relief with a median follow-up of 4 months. CONCLUSIONS: We reported 100% technical and clinical success in patients with PAES diagnosed and managed using our clinical algorithm. Cross-sectional imaging is not necessary for the diagnosis. Dynamic angiography confirms the diagnosis and intraoperative duplex is essential for successful clinical outcome by confirming complete release of the popliteal artery.