Evaluating current acute aortic syndrome pathways: Collaborative Acute Aortic Syndrome Project (CAASP).

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome is challenging and associated with high perihospital mortality rates. The study aim was to evaluate current pathways and understand the chronology of acute aortic syndrome patient care. METHOD: Consecutive patients with acute aortic syndrome imaging diagnosis between 1 January 2018 and 1 June 2021 were identified using a predetermined search strategy and followed up for 6 months through retrospective case note review. The UK National Interventional Radiology Trainee Research and Vascular and Endovascular Research Network co-ordinated the study. RESULTS: From 15 UK sites, 620 patients were enrolled. The median age was 67 (range 25-98) years, 62.0% were male and 92.9% Caucasian. Type-A dissection (41.8%) was most common, followed by type-B (34.5%); 41.2% had complicated acute aortic syndrome. Mode of presentation included emergency ambulance (80.2%), self-presentation (16.2%), and primary care referral (3.6%). Time (median (i.q.r.)) to hospital presentation was 3.1 (1.8-8.6) h and decreased by sudden onset chest pain but increased with migratory pain or hypertension. Time from hospital presentation to imaging diagnosis was 3.2 (1.3-6.5) h and increased by family history of aortic disease and decreased by concurrent ischaemic limb. Time from diagnosis to treatment was 2 (1.0-4.3) h with interhospital transfer causing delay. Management included conservative (60.2%), open surgery (32.2%), endovascular (4.8%), hybrid (1.4%) and palliative (1.4%). Factors associated with a higher mortality rate at 30 days and 6 months were acute aortic syndrome type, complicated disease, no critical care admission and age more than 70 years (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a longitudinal data set linking time-based delays to diagnosis and treatment with clinical outcomes. It can be used to prioritize research strategies to streamline patient care.

Growth, survival and events in patients with aortic arch pathology.

OBJECTIVES: This study describes aortic growth, survival and events in patients with aortic arch pathology. METHODS: Patients with an index diameter ≥4.5 cm or other pathology of the native aortic arch, were followed with longitudinal computed tomography and clinical data collected retrospectively. Aortic growth was estimated using a linear mixed model. Survival and event rates were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox analysis assessed clinical and radiological predictors with outcomes (death, local or remote aortic events (acute aortic syndromes or intervention)). Results. 186 patients underwent 683 CT scans during 638 of patient years. The estimated annual growth was 0.28 (mm/year). 47 (25%) patients had an event and a 66% five-year event-free survival. 29 patients died, of whom 11 suffered an aortic death. 19 events were local and 25 events were remote, mostly primary events were interventions. In Cox analysis, increasing descending aortic diameter was an independent predictor of all cause of death (hazard ratio [HR], 2.16), aortic death (HR 4.81), and local event (HR 1.71). Conclusions. In patients with aortic arch pathology, growth, and aortic events should be expected. Increasing descending aortic diameter could presage an added risk, but other variables appear needed to identify patients at risk, select them for intervention or surveillance.

Association of Life's Essential 8 with abdominal aortic calcification and mortality among middle-aged and older individuals.

AIM: To assess the association of Life's Essential 8 (LE8) and the presence of abdominal aortic calcification (AAC) with mortality among middle-aged and older individuals. METHODS: Participants aged older than 40 years were enrolled from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2013-2014. AAC was assessed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Mortality data were ascertained through linkage with the National Death Index until 31 December 2019. The LE8 score incorporates eight components: diet, physical activity, nicotine exposure, sleep health, body mass index, blood lipids, blood glucose and blood pressure. The total LE8 score, an unweighted average of all components, was categorized into low (0-49), medium (50-79) and high (80-100) scores. RESULTS: This study included 2567 individuals, with a mean LE8 score of 67.28 ± 0.48 and an AAC prevalence of 28.28%. Participants with low LE8 scores showed a significantly higher prevalence of AAC (odds ratio = 2.12 [1.12-4.19]) compared with those with high LE8 scores. Over a median 6-year follow-up, there were 222 all-cause deaths, and 55 cardiovascular deaths occurred. Participants with AAC had an increased risk of all-cause (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.17 [1.60-2.95]) and cardiovascular (HR = 2.35 [1.40-3.93]) mortality. Moreover, individuals with AAC and low or medium LE8 scores exhibited a 137% (HR = 2.37 [1.58-3.54]) and 119% (HR = 2.19 [1.61-2.99]) higher risk of all-cause mortality, as well as a 224% (HR = 3.24 [1.73-6.04]) and 125% (HR = 2.25 [1.24-4.09]) increased risk of cardiovascular mortality, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The LE8 score correlates with AAC prevalence in middle-aged and older individuals and serves as a valuable tool for evaluating the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in individuals with AAC.

Association Between Aortic Wall Thrombus and Thromboembolic Events After Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic events, particularly strokes, remain a major complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Embolic protection devices have failed to show significant clinical benefit in large randomized clinical trials. Aortic wall thrombus (AWT) is often observed on multidetector computed tomography during TAVR work-up, but its prognostic significance is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the association between the presence of AWT and the incidence of thromboembolic outcomes in patients undergoing transfemoral (TF) TAVR for severe aortic stenosis. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent TF TAVR for severe aortic stenosis between January 2011 and April 2022. A dedicated scale (range: 0-10) was qualitatively used to assess AWT. The primary outcome was a composite of procedural thromboembolic events defined as ischemic stroke, blue toe syndrome, bowel ischemia, or other solid organ infarction. The secondary endpoints were ischemic strokes and procedural death. RESULTS: Of the 641 patients included, severe AWT (score ≥8) was identified in 73 (11.4%). The presence of severe AWT was strongly associated with an increase in the primary outcome (OR: 8.48; 95% CI: 3.36-21.40; P < 0.001). This relationship persisted following multivariable analysis, which adjusted for comorbidities and procedural characteristics. The presence of severe AWT was also found to be associated with an increased incidence of stroke and procedural death (OR: 5.66; 95% CI: 2.00-15.30; P = 0.002 and OR: 4.66; 95% CI: 1.80-11.30; P = 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of severe AWT on preprocedural multidetector computed tomography is strongly associated with thromboembolic complications including stroke and mortality after TF TAVR.

Long-term outcomes of TEVAR for thoracic aortic diseases: a retrospective single-center study.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) vary depending on thoracic aortic pathologies, comorbidities. This study presents our comprehensive endovascular experience, focusing on exploring the outcome in long term follow-up. METHODS: From 2006 to 2018, we conducted TEVAR on 97 patients presenting with various aortic pathologies. This retrospective cohort study was designed primarily to assess graft durability and secondarily to evaluate mortality causes, complications, reinterventions, and the impact of comorbidities on survival using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: The most common indication was thoracic aortic aneurysm (n = 52). Ten patients had aortic arch variations and anomalies, and the bovine arch was observed in eight patients. Endoleaks were the main complications encountered, and 10 of 15 endoleaks were type I endoleaks. There were 18 reinterventions; the most of which was TEVAR (n = 5). The overall mortality was 20 patients, with TEVAR-related causes accounting for 12 of these deaths, including intracranial bleeding in three patients. Multivariant Cox regression revealed chronic renal diseases (OR = 11.73; 95% CI: 2.04-67.2; p = 0.006), previous cardiac operation (OR = 14.26; 95% CI: 1.59-127.36; p = 0.01), and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (OR = 7.82; 95% CI: 1.43-42.78; p = 0.001) to be independent risk factors for 10-year survival. There was no significant difference in the survival curves of the various aortic pathologies. In the follow-up period, two non-symptomatic intragraft thromboses and one graft infection were found. CONCLUSION: Comorbidities can increase the risk of TEVAR-related mortality without significantly impacting endoleak rates. TEVAR is effective for severe aortic pathologies, though long-term graft durability may be compromised by its thrombosis and infection.

A single-center experience of type B aortic intramural hematoma.

OBJECTIVE: The outcomes of the best medical treatment (BMT) and intervention treatment (INT) in a single-center experience were reported in type B intramural hematoma (IMH). METHODS: From February 2015 to February 2021, a total of 195 consecutive patients with type B IMH were enrolled in the study. The primary end point was mortality, and the secondary end points included clinical and imaging outcomes. The clinical outcomes were aortic-related death, retrograde type A aortic dissection, stent graft-induced new entry tear, endoleak, and reintervention. The imaging outcome was evaluated through the latest follow-up computed tomography angiography, which included aortic rupture, aortic dissection, aortic aneurysm, rapid growth of aortic diameter, newly developed or enlarged penetrating aortic ulcer or ulcer-like projection (ULP) and increased aortic wall thickness. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to assess the association between different treatments. RESULTS: Among the enrolled patients, 115 received BMT, and 80 received INT. There was no significant difference in early (1.7% vs 2.5%; P = 1.00) and midterm all-cause death (8.3% vs 5.2%; P = .42) between the BMT and INT groups. However, patients who underwent INT were at risk of procedure-related complications such as stent graft-induced new entry tear and endoleaks. The INT group was associated with a profound decrease in the risk of ULP, including newly developed ULP (4.3% vs 26.9%; P < .05), ULP enlargement (6.4% vs 31.3%; P < .05), and a lower proportion of high-risk ULP (10.9% vs 45.6%; P < .05). Although there was no significant difference in the incidence of IMH regression between the two groups, the maximum diameter of the descending aorta in patients receiving INT was larger compared with those treated with BMT. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our limited experience, patients with type B IMH treated with BMT or INT shared similar midterm clinical outcome. Patients who underwent INT may have a decreased risk of ULPs, but a higher risk of procedure-related events and patients on BMT should be closely monitored for ULP progression.

Editor's Choice - Covered Stents Versus Bare Metal Stents in the Treatment of Aorto-iliac Disease: A Systematic Review and Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the comparative safety and efficacy of covered stents (CS) and bare metal stents (BMS) in the endovascular treatment of aorto-iliac disease in patients with peripheral arterial disease. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review was conducted adhering to the PRISMA 2020 and PRISMA for Individual Participant Data 2015 guidelines. REVIEW METHODS: A search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published by December 2023 was performed. The primary endpoint was primary patency. Certainty of evidence was assessed via the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. RESULTS: Eleven studies, comprising 1 896 patients and 2 092 lesions, were included. Of these, nine studies reported on patients' clinical status, with 35.5% classified as Rutherford 4 - 6. Overall primary patency for CS and BMS at 48 months was 91.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 84.1 - 99.0%) (GRADE, moderate) and 83.5% (95% CI 70.9 - 98.3%) (GRADE, low). The one stage individual participant data meta-analyses indicated a significant risk reduction for primary patency loss favouring CS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58, 95% CI 0.35 - 0.95) (GRADE, very low). The 48 month primary patency for CS and BMS when treating TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) C and D lesions was 92.4% (95% CI 84.7 - 100%) (GRADE, moderate) and 80.8% (95% CI 64.5 - 100%) (GRADE, low), with CS displaying a decreased risk of patency loss (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.27 - 0.57) (GRADE, moderate). While statistically non-significant differences were identified between CS and BMS regarding technical success, 30 day mortality rate, intra-operative and immediate post-operative procedure related complications, and major amputation, CS displayed a decreased re-intervention risk (risk ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 - 0.87) (GRADE, low). CONCLUSION: This review has illustrated the improved patency of CS compared with BMS in the treatment of TASC C and D lesions. Caution is advised in interpreting overall primary patency outcomes given the substantial inclusion of TASC C and D lesions in the analysis. Ultimately, both stent types have demonstrated comparable safety profiles.

Gupta Perioperative Risk for Myocardial Infarction or Cardiac Arrest Score is a Long-Term Cardiovascular Risk Predictor After Aortoiliac Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Gupta Perioperative Risk for Myocardial Infarction or Cardiac Arrest (MICA) is a validated self-explanatory score applied in cardiac or noncardiac surgeries. This study aims to assess the predictive value of the MICA score for cardiovascular events after aortoiliac revascularization. METHODS: This prospective cohort underwent elective aortoiliac revascularization between 2013 and 2021. Patients' demographic, clinical characteristics, and outcomes were registered. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the MICA score using optimal binning. Survival analysis to test for time-dependent variables and multivariate Cox regression analysis for independent predictors were performed. RESULTS: This study included 130 patients with a median follow-up of 55 months. Preoperative MICA score was ≥6.5 in 41 patients. MICA ≥6.5 presented a statistically significant association, with long-term occurrence of acute heart failure (HR = 1.695, 95% CI 1.208-2.379, P = 0.002), major adverse cardiovascular events (HR = 1.222, 95% CI 1.086-1.376, P < 0.001), and all-cause mortality (HR = 1.256, 95% CI 1.107-1.425, P < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression confirmed MICA as a significant independent predictor of long-term major adverse cardiovascular events (aHR = 1.145 95% CI 1.010-1.298, P = 0.034) and all-cause mortality (aHR = 1.172 95% CI 1.026-1.339, P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: The MICA score is a quick, easy-to-obtain, predictive tool in identifying patients with a higher risk of postaortoiliac revascularization cardiovascular events, such as acute heart failure, major adverse cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality. Additional research for the validation of the MICA score in the context of aortoiliac revascularization and specific interventions is necessary.

Midterm survival after aortic repair versus conservative treatment in patients with penetrating aortic ulcer.

Background: The clinical outcomes and survival of patients with penetrating aortic ulcers (PAU) were evaluated in a tertiary care hospital, comparing those who underwent aortic repair to those treated conservatively. Patients and methods: A retrospective single-centre analysis included all patients that underwent a computed tomography angiography (CT-A) scan with the diagnosis of a PAU between January 2009 and May 2019. "PAU" was identified in 1,493 of 112,506 CT-A scan reports in 576 patients. Clinical and angiomorphological data were collected. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), with secondary outcomes focusing on identifying risk factors for poor OS. Survival probabilities were analysed by the Kaplan-Meier method using the log-rank test. A Cox hazard model using survival as dependent variable with stepwise backward eliminations based on the likelihood ratios was employed. Results: 315 PAUs were identified in 278 patients. The prevalence in the cohort was 0.8%. The mean age of the patients was 74.4 years, and they were predominantly male (n = 208, 74.8%). The mean ulcer depth was 11.8 mm (range 2-50 mm). Out of the patients, 232 were asymptomatic (83.5%). Among 178 PAUs (56.5%), high-risk factors, such as ulcer depth >10 mm, aortic diameter >40 mm, and ulcer length >20 mm, were observed. Aortic repair was associated with a better mean OS compared to conservatively managed patients (72.6 versus 32.2 months, p = 0.001). The Cox hazard model showed that ulcer depth >1 mm was associated with poor OS (HR 0.67, p = 0.048), while aortic repair was related to a better OS (HR 4.365, p<0.013). Conclusions: Aortic repair is associated with better OS, but this finding should be interpreted with caution because of differences in age and comorbidities between the groups. Further evaluation is warranted through prospective studies with randomized groups. Further assessment for angiomorphological parameters is recommended to identify patients at increased risk for poor OS.

National registry insights on genetic aortopathies and thoracic endovascular aortic interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with genetic aortopathies (GA) is controversial, given concerns of durability. We describe characteristics and outcomes after TEVAR in patients with GA. METHODS: All patients undergoing TEVAR between 2010 and 2023 in the Vascular Quality Iniatitive were identified and categorized as having a GA or not. Demographics, baseline, and procedural characteristics were compared among groups. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the independent association of GA with postoperative outcomes. Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate 5-year survival and 2-year reinterventions. RESULTS: Of 19,340 patients, 304 (1.6%) had GA (87% Marfan syndrome, 9% Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 4% vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome). Compared with patients without GA, patients with GA were younger (50 years [interquartile range, 37-72 years] vs 70 years [interquartile range, 61-77 years]), more often presented with acute dissection (28% vs 18%), postdissection aneurysm (48% vs 17%), had a symptomatic presentation (50% vs 39%), and were less likely to have degenerative aneurysms (18% vs 47%) or penetrating aortic ulcer (and intramural hematoma) (3% vs 13%) (all P < .001). Patients with GA were more likely to have prior repair of the ascending aorta/arch (open, 56% vs 11% [P < .001]; endovascular, 5.6% vs 2.1% [P = .017]) or the descending thoracic aorta (open, 12% vs 2% [P = .007]; endovascular, 8.2% vs 3.6% [P = .011]). No significant differences were found in prior abdominal suprarenal repairs; however, patients with GA had more prior open infrarenal repairs (5.3% vs 3.2%), but fewer prior endovascular infrarenal repairs (3.3% vs 5.5%) (all P < .05). After adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and disease characteristics, patients with GA had similar odds of perioperative mortality (4.6% vs 7.0%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-1.9; P = .75), any in-hospital complication (26% vs 23%; aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.92-1.6; P = .14), or in-hospital reintervention (13% vs 8.3%; aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.84-1.80; P = .25) compared with patients without GA. However, patients with GA had a higher likelihood of postoperative vasopressors (33% vs 27%; aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9; P = .006) and transfusion (25% vs 23%; aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.03-1.9; P = .006). The 2-year reintervention rates were higher in patients with GA (25% vs 13%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.4-2.9; P < .001), but 5-year survival was similar (81% vs 74%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.70-1.50; P = .1). CONCLUSIONS: TEVAR for patients with GA seemed to be safe initially, with similar odds for in-hospital complications, in-hospital reinterventions, and perioperative mortality, as well as similar hazards for 5-year mortality compared with patients without GA. However, patients with GA had higher 2-year reintervention rates. Future studies should assess long-term durability after TEVAR compared with the recommended open repair to appropriately weigh the risks and benefits of endovascular treatment in patients with GA.

Comparative Analysis of Outcomes of Unibody Endoprosthesis and Aortobifemoral Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease.

BACKGROUND: Aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) has traditionally been treated with aortobifemoral bypass (ABF). Unibody endograft (UBE) for AIOD, however, has been increasingly utilized in selected patients. We report outcomes of patients undergoing ABF or UBE for AIOD. METHODS: Patients (2016-2021) undergoing elective ABF or UBE with a unibody device for AIOD were identified at an academic institution. Chi-square and Kaplan-Meier analysis were used to evaluate outcomes by group. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-one patients undergoing UBE or ABF were screened, with 82 included. Twenty-one patients underwent UBE (25.6%) and 61 (74.4%) underwent ABF. UBE patients were older (63.8 vs. 58.2 years; P = 0.01), with a higher prevalence of diabetes (52.4 vs. 19.7%; P = 0.004). Significant differences were seen between UBE and ABF including a shorter surgery length (214 vs. 360 min; P = 0.0001), less blood loss (300 vs. 620 mls; P = 0.001), larger minimum aortic diameter (14.6 vs. 12.6; P = 0.0006), larger common iliac artery (9.5 vs. 7.9; P = 0.005) and lower postoperative ankle-brachial index (0.8 vs. 0.9; P = 0.04). There were no differences in TASC C/D iliac lesions in the UBE than ABF group (66.6% vs. 63.9%; P < 0.82) or Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus classification femoropopliteal lesions. Unadjusted analysis revealed no significant differences between UBE and ABF for 30-day mortality (0 vs. 1.6%; P = 1), stroke (0 vs. 3.3%; P = 1), or major adverse cardiac events (4.8 vs. 4.9%; P = 1). There were no significant differences in mid-term surgical outcomes over a mean follow-up period of 23.7 months between UBE and ABF groups; specifically endovascular (0 vs. 8.2%; P = 0.3) or open/hybrid reintervention (9.5 vs. 14.8%; P = 0.7) with similar limb occlusion (4.8 vs. 27.8; P = 0.12). Kaplan-Meier estimated primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency at 36 months were similar with 94%, 100%, and 94% for UBE and 86%, 95%, and 86% for ABF, respectively. Estimated survival at 36 months was 95% for UBE and 97% for ABF (P = 0.8). CONCLUSIONS: Equivalent outcomes were seen between AIOD treated with UBE or ABF in similar patient populations. Mid-term outcomes such as reintervention and patency are similar for UBE and ABF. We still recommend ABF over UBE as a primary modality of treatment in surgically fit patients with greater complexity aortoiliac lesions and with smaller arterial diameters, especially women.

Sex-based outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: As it remains unclear whether there are sex-based differences in clinical outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), this meta-analysis aimed to evaluate differences in early outcomes and overall survival between female and male patients who underwent TEVAR. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for eligible studies published through June 10, 2023, that reported sex-based differences in clinical outcomes after TEVAR. The primary outcome was operative mortality; second outcomes included stroke, spinal cord ischemia, acute kidney injury, hospital length of stay, and overall survival. Patient characteristics, operative data, and early outcomes were aggregated using the random-effects model, presenting pooled risk ratio (RR) or standardized mean difference along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Overall survival was assessed by reconstructing individual patient data to generate sex-specific pooled Kaplan-Meier curves. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023426069). RESULTS: Of the 1785 studies retrieved, 14 studies met all eligibility criteria, encompassing a total of 17,374 patients, comprising 5026 female and 12,348 male patients. Female patients were older, had a smaller maximum aortic diameter, had lower rates of smoking and coronary artery disease, and had higher rates of anemia. Intraoperatively, female patients were more likely to use iliac conduits and require blood transfusions. There were no sex-based differences in operative mortality (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.90-1.40; P = .309), stroke (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.95-1.38; P = .165), spinal cord ischemia (RR: 1.33, 95% CI: 0.83-2.14; P = .234), acute kidney injury (RR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.52-1.17; P = .228), and hospital length of stay (standardized mean difference: 0.09, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.20; P = .141). Pooled Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a worse overall survival in female patients compared with male patients (87.2% vs 89.8% at 2 years, log-rank P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated by TEVAR, female sex was not associated with increased risk of operative mortality or major morbidity. However, female patients exhibited a lower overall survival after TEVAR compared with male patients.

Predicting the need for subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the effectiveness of left subclavian artery revascularization compared with non-revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and to summarize the current evidence on its indications. METHODS: A computerized search was conducted across multiple databases, including MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, for studies published up to November 2023. Study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment (using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) were independently conducted by two reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. RESULTS: In the 76 included studies, left subclavian artery revascularization was associated with reduced risks of stroke (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.98; n = 15,331), spinal cord ischemia (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56-0.99; n = 11,995), and arm ischemia (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.59; n = 8438). No significant reduction in paraplegia (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.21-1.47; n = 1802) or mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.53-1.12; n = 11,831) was observed. Moreover, the risk of endoleak was comparable in both groups (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.55-2.84; P = .60; n = 793), whereas the risk of reintervention was significantly higher in the revascularization group (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.03-3.83; P = .04; n = 272). Both groups had similar risks of major (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.19-1.09; P = .08; n = 1113), minor (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.01-3.45; P = .27; n = 183), renal (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.12-3.06; P = .55; n = 310), and pulmonary (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.16-2.15; P = .42; n = 8083) complications. The most frequent indications for left subclavian artery revascularization were primary prevention of spinal cord ischemia, augmentation of the landing zone, and primary stroke prevention. CONCLUSIONS: Left subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair was associated with reduced neurological complications but was not found to impact mortality. The study highlights important indications for revascularization as well as significant predictors of complications, providing a basis for clinical decision-making and future research.

Independent Associations of Aortic Calcification with Cirrhosis and Liver Related Mortality in Veterans with Chronic Liver Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Abdominal aortic calcifications (AAC) are incidentally found on medical imaging and useful cardiovascular burden approximations. The Morphomic Aortic Calcification Score (MAC) leverages automated deep learning methods to quantify and score AACs. While associations of AAC and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) have been described, relationships of AAC with other liver diseases and clinical outcome are sparse. This study's purpose was to evaluate AAC and liver-related death in a cohort of Veterans with chronic liver disease (CLD). METHODS: We utilized the VISN 10 CLD cohort, a regional cohort of Veterans with the three forms of CLD: NAFLD, hepatitis C (HCV), alcohol-associated (ETOH), seen between 2008 and 2014, with abdominal CT scans (n = 3604). Associations between MAC and cirrhosis development, liver decompensation, liver-related death, and overall death were evaluated with Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: The full cohort demonstrated strong associations of MAC and cirrhosis after adjustment: HR 2.13 (95% CI 1.63, 2.78), decompensation HR 2.19 (95% CI 1.60, 3.02), liver-related death HR 2.13 (95% CI 1.46, 3.11), and overall death HR 1.47 (95% CI 1.27, 1.71). These associations seemed to be driven by the non-NAFLD groups for decompensation and liver-related death [HR 2.80 (95% CI 1.52, 5.17; HR 2.34 (95% CI 1.14, 4.83), respectively]. DISCUSSION: MAC was strongly and independently associated with cirrhosis, liver decompensation, liver-related death, and overall death. Surprisingly, stratification results demonstrated comparable or stronger associations among those with non-NAFLD etiology. These findings suggest abdominal aortic calcification may predict liver disease severity and clinical outcomes in patients with CLD.

Treatment of Aortoiliac Occlusive Lesions by Aortic Robotic Surgery: Learning Curve and Midterm Outcome.

BACKGROUD: The learning curve and midterm results of aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) revascularization by robot-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) surgery may be known. METHODS: A prospective single-center study was conducted in the vascular surgery department of Georges Pompidou European Hospital (Paris, France). Patients with AIOD treated by RAL from February 2014 to February 2019 were included. Demographic characteristics, past medical history, Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) lesions classifications, mortality, primary and secondary patency, as well as complication rates were collected. Safety was analyzed by the cumulative sum control chart method with a conversion rate of 10%, operative time by cumulative average-time model, and primary and secondary patency by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Seventy patients were included, 18 (25.7%) with TASC C lesions and 52 (74.3%) with TASC D lesions. Before discharge, 14 (24.3%) patients had surgical complications. Among them, 10 (14.3%) required at least one reintervention. One (1.4%) patient died during the hospitalization. The learning curve in terms of safety (conversion rate) was 13 cases with an operating time of 220 minutes after 35 patients. During follow-up (median 37 months [21; 49]), 63 patients (91.3%) improved their symptoms, 53 (76.8%) became asymptomatic, and 3 graft limb occlusions occurred. The primary patency at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months was 94%, 92%, 92%, and 92%, respectively, while the secondary patency for the same intervals was 100%, 98.1%, 98.1%, and 98.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery in AIOD revascularization seems safe and effective; allowing to treat patients with few comorbidities and severe lesions, in a dedicated center experienced in RAL, with excellent patency. Prospective clinical trials should be performed to confirm safety.

Aortobifemoral bypass vs covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation.

BACKGROUND: Covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation (CERAB) is increasingly used as a first line-treatment in patients with aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). We sought to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent CERAB compared with the gold standard of aortobifemoral bypass (ABF). METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for patients who underwent ABF or CERAB from 2009 to 2021. Propensity scores were generated using demographics, comorbidities, Rutherford class, and urgency. The two groups were matched using 5-to-1 nearest-neighbor match. Our primary outcomes were 1-year estimates of primary patency, major adverse limb events (MALEs), MALE-free survival, reintervention-free survival, and amputation-free survival. Standard statistical methods were used. RESULTS: A total of 3944 ABF and 281 CERAB cases were identified. Of all patients with AIOD, the proportion of CERAB increased from 0% to 17.9% between 2009 and 2021. Compared with ABF, patients who underwent CERAB were more likely to be older (64.7 vs 60.2; P < .001) and more often had diabetes (40.9% vs 24.1%; P < .001) and end-stage renal disease (1.1% vs 0.3%; P = .03). In the matched analysis (229 CERAB vs 929 ABF), ABF patients had improved MALE-free survival (93.2% [±0.9%] vs 83.2% [±3%]; P < .001) and lower rates of MALE (5.2% [±0.9%] vs 14.1% [±3%]; P < .001), with comparable primary patency rates (98.3% [±0.3%] vs 96.6% [±1%]; P = .6) and amputation-free survival (99.3% [±0.3%] vs 99.4% [±0.6%]; P = .9). Patients in the CERAB group had significantly lower reintervention-free survival (62.5% [±6%] vs 92.9% [±0.9%]; P < .001). Matched analysis also revealed shorter length of stay (1 vs 7 days; P < .001), as well as lower pulmonary (1.2% vs 6.6%; P = .01), renal (1.8% vs 10%; P < .001), and cardiac (1.8% vs 12.8%; P < .001) complications among CERAB patients. CONCLUSIONS: CERAB had lower perioperative morbidity compared with ABF with a similar primary patency 1-year estimates. However, patients who underwent CERAB experienced more major adverse limb events and reinterventions. Although CERAB is an effective treatment for patients with AIOD, further studies are needed to determine the long-term outcomes of CERAB compared with the established durability of ABF and further define the role of CEARB in the treatment of AIOD.

Endovascular Treatment as an Alternative to Bypass Surgery for Juxtarenal Aortic Occlusion: Results from the CHAOS (CHronic Abdominal Aortic Occlusion, ASian Multicenter) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Juxtarenal aortic occlusion (JRAO), in which the occlusion of the aorta extends to just below the renal artery, is often treated by bypass surgery because of concerns about the risk of procedural failure and fatal embolization to abdominal organs when treated with endovascular treatment (EVT). This study assessed the outcome of EVT for JRAO compared with aorto-biiliac /aorto-bifemoral (AOB) or axillo-bifemoral (AXB) bypass. METHODS: A retrospective review of an international database created by 30 centers in Asia (CHronic Abdominal Aortic Occlusion, ASian Multicenter registry) was performed for patients who underwent revascularization for chronic total occlusion of the infrarenal aorta from 2007 to 2017. Of the 436 patients, 130 with JRAO (Forty-seven AOBs, 32 AXBs, and 51 EVTs) from 25 institutions were included in this study. RESULTS: Patients were significantly older in the AXB and EVT groups and more malnourished in the EVT group than the AOB group. EVT was attempted but failed in 1 patient. Seven patients (1 [2.1%] in the AOB group, 1 [3.1%] in the AXB group, and 5 [9.8%] in the EVT group) died during hospitalization, but most of the causes in the EVT group were not related to the revascularization procedure. No visceral embolism was observed, which had been concerned, even though protection was performed only in 2 cases of the EVT group. At the latest follow-up (median duration 3.0 years), the ankle-brachial pressure index was significantly higher in the order of AOB, EVT, and AXB. At 4 years, the estimated primary and secondary patency rates of the AOB group (87.5% and 90.3%, respectively) were significantly higher than the AXB group (66.7% and 68.6%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: AOB remains the gold standard and should be the first choice for acceptable risk patients. For frail patients, EVT is a good option and likely preferable as a first-line treatment compared to AXB.

A national cross-sectional survey on time-trends for endovascular repair of genetically-triggered aortic disease and connective tissue disorders over two decades.

BACKGROUND: By this survey, we aim to gain national-based information regarding trends in endovascular repair (ER) for the treatment of aortic disease in patients with genetically-triggered aortic disease (GTAD) and connective tissue disorder (CTD) over the last two decades. METHODS: All Italian vascular surgery centers (N.=80) were invited to participate in an anonymous electronic cross-sectional survey on ER for GTAD/CTD. RESULTS: Overall, 29 institutions completed the survey, thereby yielding a 36% response rate. The percentage of responding institutions rises to 64% if only regional hubs were considered (23/36). The median number of index procedures per center was 6.2, and a steady increase in the overall number of interventions over time was also noted. Most patients were males (73%) with a median age of 48 years. The most common endovascular procedure was TEVAR (N.=101), followed by F/BEVAR (N.=43) and EVAR (N.=37). The overall technical success rate was 83.4% while major adverse events and mortality at thirty days were reported at 18.2% and 9.9%, respectively. An additional 5.0% mortality rate was noted for an overall one-year mortality of 14.9%, while 3.7% of all treated patients were diagnosed with a type 1 endoleak. CONCLUSIONS: This national cross-sectional survey, investigating trends in ER of GTADs and CTDs over two decades, highlights a consistent increase in the use of endovascular techniques for their treatment. Early mortality was acceptably low, yet influenced by the urgency of presentation. At one-year follow-up, a 5% additional death rate was noted, and the reintervention rate remained below one in ten.

Comparative outcomes of aortobifemoral bypass with or without previous endovascular kissing stenting of the aortoiliac bifurcation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicenter national study was to compare the outcomes of primary open surgery by aorto-bifemoral bypass (ABFB) with those performed after a failed endovascular treatment (EVT) by kissing stent technique for complex aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) lesions (TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus [TASC] II C and D). METHODS: All consecutive ABFB cases carried out at 12 vascular surgery centers between 2016 and 2021 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Data included patients' baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, procedural details, perioperative outcomes, and follow-up results (survival, patency, amputation). The study cohort was divided into two groups based on indications for ABFB: primary treatment vs secondary treatment after EVT failure. RESULTS: Overall, 329 patients underwent ABFB during the study period (71% males; mean age, 64 years), of which 285 were primary treatment and 44 were after prior EVT. At baseline, no significant differences were found between study groups in demographics and clinical characteristics. TASC C and D lesions were similarly represented in the study groups (TASC C: 22% vs 78%; TASC D: 16% vs 84%). No major differences were found between study groups in terms of procedural details, early mortality, and perioperative complications. At 5 years, primary patency rates were significantly higher for primary ABFB (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 93.2%-84%) as compared with ABFB after prior EVT (69%; 95% CI 84.9%-55%; log rank P value < .001); however, the 5-year rates of secondary patency (100% vs 95%; 95% CI, 100%-86%) and limb salvage (97%; 95% CI, 99%-96 vs 97%; 95% CI, 100%-94%) were similar between study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of TASC C/D AIOD with ABFB seems to be equally safe and effective when performed after prior EVT, although primary ABFB seemed to have higher primary patency rates. Despite the need for more frequent reinterventions, secondary patency and limb salvage rates were similar. However, future large prospective trials are required to confirm these findings.

Safety and Efficacy of Stent-Graft in the Treatment of Aortoiliac Artery Occlusive Disease: A Multicenter Study of Short-Term and Medium-Term Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the short-term and mid-term safety and efficacy of stent-graft compared with bare stents for treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). METHODS: One hundred eighty three patients diagnosed with AIOD who received stent implantation at 3 vascular centers in north China between January 2019 and December 2021 were enrolled. Patients were divided into those undergoing stent-graft (Group A; n = 67) or bare stent (Group B; n = 116) implantation for retrospective cohort analysis. Efficacy was assessed as surgical success rate and rate of freedom from clinically driven target lesion reintervention at each follow-up time point. Safety was assessed by the rate of perioperative complication, major limb amputation, and aortoiliac artery-related mortality. RESULTS: There were no preoperative baseline differences between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). The surgical success was 91.04% for Group A, significantly higher than that for Group B (79.31%; P < 0.05). Incidence of perioperative complications was 2.98% for Group A, significantly lower than that for Group B (9.48%, P < 0.05), as was the rate of major limb amputation (A: 1.49% vs. B: 5.17%) and aortoiliac artery-related mortality (A: 1.49% vs. B: 4.31%), although these 2 indicators were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Follow-up rates were 91.8% for the total follow-up time of 3 years. Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis gave significantly higher 1-year and 2-year freedom from clinically driven target lesion reintervention for Group A (98.51% and 95.52%) than for Group B (95.69% and 89.66%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Stent-graft is more effective and safer than bare stent in the treatment of AIOD.