Emergency treatment of popliteal aneurysms: Single center experience and systematic review and meta-analysis of endovascular versus open repair.

BACKGROUND: Popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA) were traditionally treated by open repair (OR). Endovascular repair (ER) has become a new treatment strategy. The aim of this systemic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate and compare the current outcomes of OR and ER in the emergency treatment of PAA. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the PubMed/Medline database was carried out. Outcomes were 30-day mortality, morbidity, major amputation rate (30 days), major amputation rate (1 year), 1-year primary patency rate, 1-year secondary patency rate and 1-year survival. Additionally, we included clinical data of patients with popliteal aneurysms treated between 2009 and 2021 at the Martin-Luther University Halle-Wittenberg. RESULTS: We identified two cohort studies from 2014 and 2015 with a total of 199 patients that underwent emergent surgery (39 ER and 160 OR). We also included 26 patients from our institution. For emergency treatment, 30-day major amputation rates (18% vs 3%, Odds Ratio 5.82, 95% CI [1.75; 19.30], p = .004), 30-day mortality rates (10% vs 1%, Odds Ratio 5.57, 95% CI [1.01; 30.58], p = .05), 1-year major amputation rates (15% vs 6% Odds Ratio 3.61, 95% CI [1.18; 11.09], p = .02), 1-year loss of primary patency (54% vs 23%, Odds Ratio 3.19, 95% CI [0.91; 11.20], p = .07), and 1-year loss of secondary patency (44% vs 12%, Odds Ratio 6.91, 95% CI [3.01; 15.83], p < .05) were higher in the ER group when compared to the OR group. CONCLUSION: Endovascular repair represents an alternative approach for the emergency treatment of PAA. Limited evidence from the available non-randomized studies shows unfavorable outcomes for patients undergoing ER. However, the results are prone to selection bias, and only randomized trials comparing ER to OR might reveal whether a subgroup of patients would benefit from ER as primary treatment of PAA in an emergency setting.

Single-Center Retrospective Subgroup Analysis of "Primary Aortic" (Aneurysm, Aortic Dissection, PAU) and "Secondary Aortic" (Iatrogenic, Trauma, Aortoesophageal Fistula) Indications for Emergency TEVAR.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in the treatment of "primary aortic" (aneurysm, aortic dissection, penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU)) and "secondary aortic" (iatrogenic, trauma, and aortoesophageal fistula) pathologies. METHODS: Retrospective review of a cohort of patients treated at a single tertiary referral center from 2015 to 2021. The primary end point was postoperative in-hospital mortality. Secondary end points were the duration of the procedure, duration of postoperative intensive care treatment, length of hospital stay, and the nature and severity of postoperative complications according to the Dindo-Clavien classification. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients underwent TEVAR for emergency indications. Twenty-two patients were treated for primary and twelve patients for secondary aortic pathologies. Concerning in-hospital mortality, no statistically significant difference could be observed between the primary and secondary aortic groups (27.3% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.711). Patients with an aortoesophageal fistula had a mortality rate of 66.7%. Postoperative morbidity (Dindo-Clavien > 3) was also not statistically significantly different between the primary and secondary aortic groups (36.4% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.86). Preoperative hemoglobin level (p < 0.001 for mortality, p = 0.002 for morbidity), hemoglobin level difference (p = 0.022, p = 0.032), postoperative creatinine level (p = 0.009, p = 0.035), and pre- and postoperative lactate levels (p < 0.001 for both mortality and morbidity) were found to be independent factors associated with postoperative mortality and morbidity (Dindo-Clavien > 3), respectively. The preoperative creatinine level was found to be associated with mortality (p = 0.024) but not morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity and in-hospital mortality are still considerable after emergency TEVAR for both primary and secondary aortic indications. Pre- and postoperative levels of hemoglobin, creatinine, and lactate may be valuable to predict patient outcomes.

Visceral Aneurysms: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Endovascular Versus Open Repair.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID 348699.

Postoperative Sigmoidoscopy and Biopsy After Elective Endovascular and Open Aortic Surgery for Preventing Mortality by Colonic Ischemia (PSB-Aorta-CI): Protocol for a Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic repair is considered the standard procedure in treating patients diagnosed with pathologies of the abdominal aorta with suitable anatomy. Open surgery remains an option mostly for patients not suitable for endovascular surgery. Colonic ischemia is an important and life-threatening postoperative complication of these procedures. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical value and safety of performing a planned sigmoidoscopy and biopsy for detection of colonic ischemia in patients undergoing elective aortic surgery. We also aim to develop prediction scores which could identify patients at risk for colonic ischemia and facilitate their timely treatment. METHODS: The trial is designed as a prospective study. The decision for aortic surgery and eligibility for these procedures will be ascertained according to current guidelines. Afterward, screening of the patient for the remaining inclusion and exclusion criteria will occur. If eligibility for study inclusion is confirmed, the patient will be informed about the aims of the study and all study-specific procedures (sigmoidoscopy and biopsy) and asked to provide informed consent. RESULTS: The primary end point is the proportion of patients diagnosed endoscopically with subclinical and clinically relevant colonic ischemia among all patients undergoing aortic surgery. Patient recruitment started on June 2021. The final patient is expected to be treated by the end of June 2023. Institutional Review Board review has been completed at the University of Halle (Saale; reference #052-2021). CONCLUSIONS: this shows that sigmoidoscopy can be performed safely and is effective for the timely diagnosis of colonic ischemia in these patients, this could result in its routine implementation in both elective and emergency settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00025587; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId =trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00025587. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/39071.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma with arterial resection.

BACKGROUND: With the advances in multimodality treatment, an analysis of the outcome of arterial resections (AR) in surgery of cholangiocarcinoma is lacking. The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the currently available evidence onof AR for the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: A systematic literature search was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: 10 retrospective cohort studies published from 2007 to 2020 with 2530 patients (408 AR group and 2122 control group) were identified. Higher in-hospital mortality rates (6.8% vs 3.3%, OR 2.65, 95% CI [1.27; 5.32], p = 0.009), higher morbidity rates (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3 ) (52% vs 47%, OR 1.44, 95% CI [1.02; 1.75], p = 0.04) and lower 1-year, 3-year and 5-year survival rates (54% vs 69%, OR 0.55, 95% CI [0.34; 0.91 p = 0.02), (34% vs 38%, OR 0.74, 95% CI [0.55; 0.98, p = 0.03), (18% vs 29%, OR 0.54, 95% CI [0.39; 0.75, p = 0.0002) were observed in the AR group when compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: Evidence from non-randomized studies shows a higher morbidity and mortality and shorter long-term survival in patients undergoing AR. However, the results are prone to selection bias, and only randomized trials comparing AR and palliative treatments AR might reveal a possible benefit of AR. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID 223396.

Acute and chronic mesenteric ischemia: single center analysis of open, endovascular, and hybrid surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to analyse the outcome of open surgical, endovascular, and hybrid interventions in the treatment of acute (AMI) and chronic (CMI) mesenteric ischemia. METHODS: Retrospective review of a cohort of mesenteric ischemia patients at a single tertiary referral center from 2015 to 2021. Primary end point was postoperative in-hospital mortality. Secondary end points were the number of bowel resections, duration of the procedure, length of postoperative intensive care treatment, length of hospital stay, revision surgery (number and type), and the nature and severity of postoperative complications according to Dindo-Clavien. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients, 20 with CMI and 44 with AMI, underwent open, hybrid or endovascular surgery. Bowel resection was performed in 45.5% of the patients with AMI (29.5% small intestine, 2.3% colon and 13.6% both). There was no in-hospital mortality in the CMI cohort as compared to 29.5% in the AMI cohort (p = 0.03), with no differences regarding endovascular and open surgery (29.6 vs 29.4%). Severe postoperative morbidity (Dindo-Clavien ≥ 3) was also significantly more frequent in the AMI group when compared to the CMI group (20 vs 77.3%, p < 0.001). ASA classification and intensive care stay were identified as factors associated with mortality in AMI patients. CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity and in-hospital mortality are low in CMI patients, but substantial in AMI patients. Early diagnosis and open or endovascular treatment may be decisive for the outcome of these patients.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary pancreas surgery with arterial resection.

OBJECTIVE: Advances in multimodality treatment paralleled increasing numbers of complex pancreatic procedures with major vascular resections. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the current outcomes of arterial resection (AR) in pancreatic surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature search was carried out from January 2011 until January 2020. MOOSE guidelines were followed. Predefined outcomes were morbidity, pancreatic fistula, postoperative bleeding and delayed gastric emptying, reoperation rate, mortality, hospital stay, R0 resection rate, and lymph node positivity. Duration of surgery, blood loss, and survival were also analyzed. RESULTS: Eight hundred and forty-one AR patients were identified in a cohort of 7111 patients. Morbidity and mortality rates in these patients were 66.8% and 5.3%, respectively. Seven studies (579 AR patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall morbidity (48% vs 39%, p = 0.1) and mortality (3.2% vs 1.5%, p = 0.27) were not significantly different in the groups with or without AR. R0 was less frequent in the AR group, both in patients without (69% vs 89%, p < 0.001) and with neoadjuvant treatment (50% vs 86%, p < 0.001). Weighted median survival was shorter in the AR group (18.6 vs 32 months, range 14.8-43.1 months, p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Arterial resections increase the complexity of pancreatic surgery, as demonstrated by relevant morbidity and mortality rates. Careful patient selection and multidisciplinary planning remain important.