Autotransplantation or In Situ Surgical Treatment of Complex Renal Artery Aneurysm: Surgical Technique and Outcomes.

Background and objective: Renal artery aneurysm (RAA) is a rare condition. Our study investigates the effectiveness and outcomes of surgical treatments for complex RAA, comparing the in situ (IS) and ex vivo autotransplantation (AT) methods. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study from June 2015 to March 2023, including all consecutive patients treated surgically for complex RAA in our center. We focused on patients with complex RAA locations requiring open surgical multidisciplinary treatment, excluding those with simple aneurysms or who were treated endovascularly. Preoperative data including demographics, comorbidities, and cardiovascular risk factors were collected. The measured primary outcome was the absence of residual aneurysm and main renal arterial thrombosis after surgery. The secondary outcomes included pre- and postoperative kidney perfusion analyses and surgical complications as per Clavien-Dindo classification. Differences between AT and IS were assessed by Wilcoxon, chi-square, or Fischer's exact test. Key findings and limitations: Twenty-seven aneurysms were treated in 25 patients. No residual aneurysm or main artery thrombosis was found after surgery. Ten (40%) patients underwent AT surgery. The median kidney perfusion differences were 2 cc (-12; 13), 0 cc (-13; 10), and 2 cc (-10; 13; p = 0.41) in the whole, AT, and IS cohorts, respectively. Clavien-Dindo grade 1 and 2 complications occurred in 11% and 30% of patients, respectively, with no grade 3 or 4 complications observed. Conclusions and clinical implications: Complex RAA can be managed effectively through open surgery, ensuring good ipsilateral renal preservation and tolerable toxicity. Both AT and IS surgeries yielded similar outcomes. Further multicenter studies are warranted to confirm our findings. Patient summary: This study explored the treatment of a rare kidney blood vessel condition called renal artery aneurysm using two surgical approaches. Our findings suggest that both surgical techniques are effective in treating this condition without major complications, ensuring good kidney preservation. These promising results need further confirmation through larger studies across different medical centers.

Benefits of Prehabilitation before Complex Aortic Surgery.

The purpose of this narrative review was to detail and discuss the underlying principles and benefits of preoperative interventions addressing risk factors for perioperative adverse events in open aortic surgery (OAS). The term "complex aortic disease" encompasses juxta/pararenal aortic and thoraco-abdominal aneurysms, chronic aortic dissection and occlusive aorto-iliac pathology. Although endovascular surgery has been increasingly favored, OAS remains a durable option, but by necessity involves extensive surgical approaches and aortic cross-clamping and requires a trained multidisciplinary team. The physiological stress of OAS in a fragile and comorbid patient group mandates thoughtful preoperative risk assessment and the implementation of measures dedicated to improving outcomes. Cardiac and pulmonary complications are one of the most frequent adverse events following major OAS and their incidences are correlated to the patient's functional status and previous comorbidities. Prehabilitation should be considered in patients with risk factors for pulmonary complications including advanced age, previous chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and congestive heart failure with the aid of pulmonary function tests. It should also be combined with other measures to improve postoperative course and be included in the more general concept of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). Although the current level of evidence regarding the effectiveness of ERAS in the setting of OAS remains low, an increasing body of literature has promoted its implementation in other specialties. Consequently, vascular teams should commit to improving the current evidence through studies to make ERAS the standard of care for OAS.

Evaluation of Arterial and Venous Allografts in Subinguinal Bypasses.

BACKGROUND: Autologous saphenous vein is the preferred conduit for below-the-knee bypasses in patients with critical limb-threatening ischemia. Alternative graft must be considered for patients without (autologous saphenous vein). The aim of this article is to evaluate the mid-term performance of arterial allograft (AA) and venous allograft (VA) used as alternative conduits. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with critical limb-threatening ischemia, with or without a history of homolateral femoropopliteal bypass, and no autologous veins were available who underwent infrainguinal arterial reconstructions using VA or AA from 2008 to 2018. Patients undergoing revision operations for infected bypasses were excluded. Primary patency (PP), primary assisted patency, secondary patency, major amputation, and death from any cause were the endpoints. For each event, a set of analyses were performed. RESULTS: Overall, 111 patients (63 VAs and 48 AAs) were included, with 108 having below-the-knee bypass. The median follow-up time was 27.8 months (15.6-37.4). The difference in PP between the 2 allograft types was significant (P = 0.049), with 65.9% (43.7-81.0), 44.1% (24.2-62.3), and 44.1% (24.2-62.3) in the AA group, respectively, at 6, 12, and 18 months, whereas 55.6% (40.0-68.6), 46.0% (30.6-60.2), and 33.2% (18.2-49.0) in the VA group. The choice of an AA over a VA was an independent factor associated with patency (for PP: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.43 [0.24-0.75], P = 0.003); primary assisted patency: HR = 0.52 (0.30-0.89], P = 0.018; and secondary patency: HR = 0.49 (0.27-0.88), P = 0.016. The allograft type did not affect either the incidence of major amputation or death from any cause (respectively, HR = 1.20 [0.49-2.93], and 0.88 [0.37-2.14]). CONCLUSIONS: The nature of the allograft appears to influence the patency of infrainguinal reconstruction, but not the course of the disease. Performant alternative grafts answering infectious issues are needed.

Early Institutional Experience with One-Piece Bifurcated-Fenestrated Stentgraft in the Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

PURPOSE: To review the early experience of the use of a bifurcated-fenestrated endograft (Bif-FEVAR) to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) in a high-volume aortic center. METHODS: A retrospective single-center analysis was conducted between March 2019 and April 2021 including consecutive patients that underwent Bif-FEVAR. Only patients without a proper infrarenal neck and a distance <70 mm between the lowest target artery and the native or prosthetic aortic bifurcation were considered. All Bif-FEVAR custom-made devices were manufactured by Cook Medical (Inc., Bloomington, Indiana). Demographics, anatomical features, technical success, major adverse events, 30-day mortality, and survival according to Kaplan-Meier were analyzed according to Society for Vascular Surgery standards. RESULTS: Overall, 10 patients (100% male with median age 78) were included. The median preoperative maximal aneurysm diameter was 68 mm [51-84]. Eight patients were treated for a proximal type I endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair. A total of 36 fenestrations were planned. The median operative time was 144 min [127-168], with a median fluoro time of 40.5 min [34-54] and a median dose area product of 73 Gy cm2 [61-89]. Technical success rate was 100%. No patients experienced a major postoperative adverse event. Median follow-up time was 8 months [6-13]. CONCLUSION: Bif-FEVAR is technically feasible when there is a short distance below the lowest target artery and the aortic bifurcation, with favorable short-term results. CLINICAL IMPACT: This study assessed the use of an innovative one-piece bifurcated fenestrated stent-graft as a primary procedure or in the treatment of proximal endoleak after standard infrarenal EVAR. We demonstrated these custom-made devices can be used safely with favorable short-term results. One-piece bifurcated fenestrated stent-grafts extend the indications of FEVAR for patients with an unusually short distance between the lowest renal artery and the aorto-iliac bifurcation or the diverter flow of a preexisting bifurcated infrarenal stent-graft.

Iliac branch device to treat type Ib endoleak with a brachial access or an "up-and-over" transfemoral technique.

OBJECTIVE: In the present study, we reviewed the results of secondary iliac branch device (IBD) implantation for patients with a type Ib endoleak after prior fenestrated and/or branched (F/B) or infrarenal endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) using either brachial access or an "up-and-over" transfemoral technique. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, single-center analysis between January 2016 and October 2021 of consecutive patients who had undergone IBD to correct a type Ib endoleak after prior EVAR or F/B-EVAR. The groups were defined by arterial access, which was either brachial (group 1) or transfemoral (group 2). All implanted IBDs had been manufactured by Cook Medical, Inc (Bloomington, IN). The demographics, anatomic features, technical success, and 30-day major adverse events were recorded in accordance with the current Society for Vascular Surgery standards. The survival curves using the Kaplan-Meier method were calculated. Branch instability was a composite end point of any internal iliac artery (IIA) branch-related complication or reintervention indicated to treat endoleak, kink, disconnection, stenosis, occlusion, or rupture. RESULTS: Overall, 28 patients (93% male; median age, 74 years), who had received 32 IBDs, were included, with 14 patients in each group. The prior endovascular aortic repairs included 23 cases of EVAR and 5 cases of F/B-EVAR, with an interval from the initial repair of 58 months (interquartile range [IQR], 48-70 months). The median pre-IBD maximal aneurysm diameter was 63.5 mm (IQR, 59.0-78.0 mm). The baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups, except for pulmonary status. All procedures were performed in a hybrid operative room. The median total operating time, fluoroscopy time, and dose area product was 120 minutes (IQR, 86-167 minutes), 23 minutes (IQR, 15-32 minutes), and 54 Gyccm2 (IQR, 40-62 Gyccm2), respectively. The total operating time was shorter for group 2 (P = .006). The technical success rate was 100%, and no early deaths occurred. One 30-day major adverse event, medically treated colonic ischemia, had occurred in one patient in group 2. Aortic-related secondary interventions had been required for seven patients (five in group 1 and two in group 2), including three cases of surgical explantation. The median follow-up was 31 months (IQR, 24-42 months) and 6 months (IQR, 3-10 months) for groups 1 and 2, respectively. For group 1, the 2-year freedom from aortic-related secondary intervention and IIA branch instability was 84.6% (IQR, 67.1%-100%) and 92.3% (IQR, 78.9%-100%), respectively. For group 2, the 6-month freedom from aortic-related secondary intervention and IIA branch instability was 87.5% (IQR, 67.3%-100%) and 91.7% (IQR, 77.3%-100%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present study have shown that secondary implantation of an IBD to correct a distal type I endoleak from a previous aortic stent graft is safe with a high technical success rate. The "up-and-over" technique can be considered an alternative to brachial access for patients with suitable anatomy.

Hybrid Room: Does it Offer Better Accuracy in the Proximal Deployment of Infrarenal Aortic Endograft?

BACKGROUND: This work aims to evaluate the impact of hybrid rooms and their advanced tools on the accuracy of proximal deployment of infrarenal bifurcated endograft (EVAR). METHODS: A retrospective single center analysis was conducted between January 2015 and March 2019 including consecutive patients that underwent EVAR. Groups were defined whether the procedure was performed in a hybrid operating room (HOR group) or using a mobile 2D fluoroscopic imaging system (non-HOR group). The accuracy of the proximal deployment was estimated by the distance (mm) between the bottom of the lowest renal artery (LwRA) origin and the endograft radiopaque markers parallax (LwRA/EDG distance) after curvilinear reconstruction. The impact of HOR on the LwRA/EDG distance was investigated using a multiple linear regression model. A composite "proximal neck"-related complications event was studied (Cox models). RESULTS: Overall, 93 patients (87 %male, median age 73 years) were included with 49 in the HOR group and 44 in the non-HOR group. Preoperative CTA analysis of the proximal neck exhibited similar median length, but different median aortic diameter (P = 0.012) and median beta angulation (P = 0.027) between groups. The median LwRA/EDG distance was shorter in the HOR group (multivariate model, P = 0.022). No difference in "proximal neck"-related complications was evidenced between the HOR and non-HOR groups (univariate analysis, P = 0.620). Median follow-up time was respectively 25 [14-28] and 36 months [23-44] in the HOR group and in the non-HOR group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: HOR offer more accurate proximal deployment of infrarenal endografts, with however no difference in "proximal neck"-related complications between groups.

Influence of nocturnal hypoxemia on follow-up course after type B acute aortic syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Association between sleep nocturnal breathing disorders and acute aortic syndrome (AAS) has been described but mid-term data are scarce. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the prognostic value of sleep apnea parameters and their relationship with aortic morphology after the onset of a type B AAS. METHODS: Between January 2010 and January 2018, sleep apnea screening in post type B AAS was prospectively performed. The association of sleep apnea parameters with aortic morphology and aortic expansion during follow-up was studied. RESULTS: Over the 8-year-study period, 103 patients were included, with a mean age of 57.8 ± 12.1 years old. Median follow-up was 25.0 months (11.0-51.0). Thirty-two patients (31%) required aortic stenting during the acute phase. In patients treated by aortic stenting, the descending thoracic aortic diameter was positively associated with a higher percentage of nocturnal time of saturation ≤ 90% after adjustment (p = 0.016). During follow-up, the nocturnal time of saturation ≤ 90% in patients treated by medical therapy was the only parameter associated with significant aortic expansion rate (r = 0.26, p = 0.04). Thirty-eight patients started and sustained nocturnal ventilation during follow-up. The association between aortic expansion rate and nocturnal time of saturation ≤ 90% did not persist during follow-up after adjustment on nocturnal ventilation initiation (r = 0.25, p = 0.056). CONCLUSIONS: Nocturnal hypoxemia parameters are positively associated with the max onset aortic diameter and significant aortic growth after type B AAS. Nocturnal ventilation seems to mitigate aortic expansion during follow-up.

Management of Type IA Endoleak After EVAR by Explantation or Custom Made Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Proximal type 1 endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysmal repair (EVAR) remains challenging to solve with no existing consensus. This work aims to compare two different surgical strategies to remedy type IA endoleak: endograft explantation (EXP) and aortic reconstruction or relining by custom made fenestrated EVAR (F-EVAR). METHODS: A retrospective single centre analysis between 2009 and 2018 was conducted including patients treated for type IA endoleak after EVAR with either EXP or F-EVAR. The choice of surgical technique was based on morphological factors (F-EVAR eligibility), sac growth rate, emergency presentation and/or patient symptoms. Technical success, morbidity, secondary interventions, 30 day mortality, and long term survival according to Kaplan-Meier were determined for each group and compared. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (91% male, mean age 79 years) underwent either EXP (n = 26) or F-EVAR (n = 33) during the study period. The two groups were equivalent in terms of comorbidity and age at the time of procedure. The median time from initial EVAR was 60.4 months (34-85 months), with no difference between groups. The maximum aneurysm diameter was greater in the EXP group compared with the F-EVAR group, 86 mm (65-100) and 70 mm (60-80), respectively (p = .008). Thirty day secondary intervention (EXP: 11.5% vs. F-EVAR: 9.1%) and mortality (EXP: 3.8% vs. F-EVAR: 3.3%) rates did not differ between groups, while major adverse events at 30 days, defined by the current SVS guidelines, were lower in the F-EVAR group (2.4% vs. 13.6%; p = .016). One year survival rates were similar between the groups (EXP: 84.0% vs. F-EVAR: 86.6%). CONCLUSION: Open explantation and endovascular management with a fenestrated device for type IA endoleak after EVAR can be achieved in high volume centres with satisfactory results. F-EVAR is associated with decreased early morbidity. Open explantation is a relevant option because of acceptable outcomes and the limited applicability of F-EVAR.

Prognostic value of aerobic capacity and exercise oxygen pulse in postaortic dissection patients.

BACKGROUND: Although recommendations encourage daily moderate activities in post aortic dissection, very little data exists regarding cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) to personalize those patient's physical rehabilitation and assess their cardiovascular prognosis. DESIGN: We aimed at testing the prognostic insight of CPET regarding aortic and cardiovascular events by exploring a prospective cohort of patients followed-up after acute aortic dissection. METHODS: Patients referred to our department after an acute (type A or B) aortic dissection were prospectively included in a cohort between September 2012 and October 2017. CPET was performed once optimal blood pressure control was obtained. Clinical follow-up was done after CPET for new aortic event and major cardio-vascular events (MCE) not directly related to the aorta. RESULTS: Among the 165 patients who underwent CPET, no adverse event was observed during exercise testing. Peak oxygen pulse was 1.46(1.22-1.84) mlO2/beat, that is, 97 (83-113) % of its predicted value, suggesting cardiac exercise limitation in a population under beta blockers (92% of the population). During a follow-up of 39(20-51) months from CPET, 42 aortic event recurrences and 22 MCE not related to aorta occurred. Low peak oxygen pulse (<85% of predicted value) was independently predictive of aortic event recurrence, while low peak oxygen uptake (<70% of predicted value) was an independent predictor of MCE occurrence. CONCLUSION: CPET is safe in postaortic dissection patients should be used to not only to personalize exercise rehabilitation, but also to identify those patients with the highest risk for new aortic events and MCE not directly related to aorta.

Protocol Adaptation of Optical Coherence Tomography in Lower Limb Arteries Revascularization.

In lower limb arteries, assessment of stent apposition and/or the single opening of the diseased artery remains poor since this relies on 2-dimensional angiogram. Extrapolating experience gained with coronary arteries, optical coherence tomography (OCT) could provide 3-dimensional reconstructions of the arterial wall and the stent implanted. A modified protocol of OCT acquisition, which usually includes large amount of iodine contrast flush, is presented here in 3 patients with long and complex occlusion of the superficial femoral artery. Its potential benefits and wider application to improve patient outcomes are discussed.

Risk factors for early and late mortality after fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of complex aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes after fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) performed in high-risk patients to treat pararenal (PR) aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) and to identify those patients likely to benefit from this treatment. METHODS: A prospective single-center review of patients treated electively for PR aneurysm and TAAA using F-BEVAR between 2004 and 2016 was performed. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Risk factors associated with 30-day morbidity and mortality during follow-up were determined using multivariate statistical techniques and a Cox regression model including all variables that were significant on univariate analysis (P < .05). RESULTS: There were 468 patients (median age, 71.6 years) identified, with American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3 in 94.7%. There were 221 (47.2%) type I to type III TAAAs and 247 (52.8%) type IV and type V TAAAs and PR aneurysms, with a median diameter of 58 mm. Technical success for target vessel stenting was 99.1% (1493/1506). The 30-day mortality rate was 4.9% (23 patients). The spinal cord ischemia rate was 3.8% (18 patients). Twenty patients (4.3%) required postoperative dialysis and four patients (0.8%) long-term dialysis after discharge. Median follow-up was 29 months. Survival at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years was 86.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 83.1-89.6), 73.3% (95% CI, 68.3-77.6), and 59.6% (95% CI, 53.4-65.2), respectively. Freedom from any target vessel occlusion and freedom from secondary procedures were 96.2% (95% CI, 93.8-97.7) and 88.2% (95% CI, 84.8-90.9) at 1 year and 90.0% (95% CI, 84.5-91.9) and 70.2% (95% CI, 63.9-75.6) at 5 years, respectively. In multivariate analysis, early mortality was associated with procedure time (hazard ratio [HR], 1.007 per minute; 95% CI, 1.003-1.010; P < .001), TAAA preoperative diameter (HR, 1.053 per millimeter; 95% CI, 1.020-1.087; P = .001), and chronic kidney disease (HR, 3.139; 95% CI, 1.369-7.196; P = .007). Mortality during the first 24 months of follow-up was associated with Crawford types I to III (HR, 1.526; 95% CI, 1.061-2.196; P = .023) compared with infradiaphragmatic repairs, chronic kidney disease (HR, 1.874; 95% CI, 1.294-2.712; P < .001), and TAAA preoperative diameter (HR, 1.027 per millimeter; 95% CI, 1.010-1.044; P = .002). In addition to these risk factors, mortality after 24 months of follow-up was also associated with age at repair (HR, 1.055 per year; 95% CI, 1.021-1.090; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: F-BEVAR performed in high-risk patients is associated with favorable outcomes. Judicious selection of patients should take into consideration the reported risk factors associated with early and late mortality.

Aortic treatment in connective tissue disease.

Connective tissue disease (CTD) represents a group of genetic conditions characterized by disruptive matrix remodeling. When this process involves aortic and vascular wall, patients with CTD have a high risk of developing arterial aneurysms, dissections and ruptures. Open surgical repair is still the gold standard therapy for patients with CTD with reasonable morbidity and mortality risk. The surgical treatment of CTD often requires multiple operations. In the endovascular era, fenestrated and branched stent grafts may play a role in reducing the complications of multiple open operations. Although the long-term results of endovascular treatment in the setting of CTD are unknown, it is generally accepted that endovascular treatment is restricted to selected patients with high surgical risk. In an emergency setting, endovascular intervention can serve as a lifesaving bridge to elective open aortic repair. Aortic centers performing a large volume of complex open and endovascular aortic repairs have started to combine these two techniques in a staged fashion. The goal is to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with extensive aortic repairs in CTD patients. For this reason, recommend endovascular therapy when a "graft-to-graft" approach is possible. In this scenario, the surgeon who performs the open repair must take into consideration future interventions. Surgical repair in any aortic segment should allow creation of proximal and distal landing zones over 4 cm to secure the sealing of a future stent graft. Connective tissue disease should be treated with a multidisciplinary approach, in high volume centers. Endovascular treatment represents a potential option in patients at high risk for open repair. Staged hybrid procedures have emerged as a way to reduce spinal cord ischemia and avoid multiple open surgeries. The aim of this article is to discuss the management of aortic diseases in CTD, focusing on to the role of standard open surgery and emerging endovascular treatment, and to give an overview of the few series published regarding this topic with a small number of patients.

[Optimizing medical treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm: Interest of vascular centers]. / Optimiser le traitement médical de l'anévrysme de l'aorte abdominale : intérêt des centres vasculaires.

Diagnosis of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) at preoperative stage is increasingly frequent. It carries both a local risk of rupture and an increased global cardiovascular risk. Patients with AAA have indeed a 20 times higher risk of dying from myocardial infarction or stroke than from a ruptured aneurysm. Cardiovascular risk factors control is therefore essential, particularly smoking cessation. Treatment in cardiovascular prevention is also warranted. Seeking for atheromatous sites is needed as they determine prognosis. Evidence of the benefit of medical treatment to slow AAA growth is still lacking. In practice, it is recommended to prescribe statins and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor to prevent cardiovascular events. These preventive measures are as well necessary to improve postoperative prognosis and must be continued after surgical repair. A vascular medical and surgical cooperation is primordial to enhance comprehensive management of patients with AAA.

Complex endovascular repair of postdissection arch and thoracoabdominal aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: We report our experience of the treatment of postdissection arch aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) by endovascular repair using fenestrated and branched endografts. METHODS: This study includes all patients presenting with chronic postdissection aneurysms >55 mm in diameter deemed unfit for open surgery and treated by complex endografting between October 2011 and April 2017. Where appropriate, staged management strategies including left subclavian artery revascularization, thoracic endografting, dissection flap fenestration, and tear enlargement were performed before the complex endovascular repair. Outcome data were collected prospectively, specifically including technical success, endoleaks, target vessel patency, aneurysm diameter, adverse events, reinterventions, and mortality. RESULTS: We treated 40 patients with a median age of 63 years (55-71 years). In total, 43 procedures were performed: 19 arch repairs using inner branch endografts (one to three branches) and 24 TAAA repairs using fenestrated or branched endografts. Three patients were treated using both arch and TAAA repair. The median time between initial presentation with acute dissection and the first complex aortic repair was 5 years (3.0-10.0 years). Staged procedures were performed in 33 of 40 patients (82.5%). The technical success rate was 93%, the median procedure length was 240 minutes (170-285 minutes), and the median dose-area product was 80 Gy · cm2 (54.3-138.4 Gy · cm2). The 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates were 2.3% (1/43) and 4.7% (2/43), respectively. The spinal cord ischemia rate was 7% and occurred only after TAAA repair. One stroke with partial recovery and one transient ischemic attack were observed (4.7%) after arch repair. Six early reinterventions (14%) were performed: three for access complications, two to treat acute hemorrhage, and one to treat a type II endoleak. Median follow-up was 25.5 months (11-42.25 months). The 1- and 5-year survival rates were 90% and 76.4%, respectively. Late reinterventions were required in eight patients, two in the arch group (to treat endoleaks at 3 and 33 months) and six in the TAAA group (2 iliac and 1 bifurcated endograft extensions, 2 additional renal stents, 1 inferior mesenteric artery embolization). Aneurysm diameter was stable (72%) or shrank (23%) during follow-up. Enlargement was shown in two patients with endoleaks. CONCLUSIONS: Complex endovascular repair of postdissection aneurysms is a safe procedure in patients deemed unfit for open surgery. Our experience suggests that close follow-up is mandatory as secondary procedures are frequently required to completely exclude the false lumen.

Recent developments in intraoperative imaging and navigation during aortic interventions.

With the advent of endovascular techniques, rapid improvements have been made in intraoperative imaging. This review intends to summarize the latest imaging technologies available and the new leads currently investigated for the future.

Impact of the Management of Type B Aortic Dissection on the Long-Term Blood Pressure.

Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) measurement (ABPM) is recommended to assess optimal BP control, and we studied its influence after an acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD). We retrospectively collected data from 111 patients with ATBAD from January 2004 to September 2014. Controlled BP group was defined according to a 24-hour BP under 130/80 mm Hg during chronic phase. The population consisted of 85 men, with a mean age of 61 ± 13 years and mean body mass index of 28 ± 6 kg/m2. The median delay between ambulatory BP measurement and ATBAD was 2 (0.3 to 4) months. The mean 24-hour BP of the entire population was 124/71 ± 15/8.8 mm Hg. BP was not controlled in 41 patients (37%). The treatment score at discharge was 3.9 ± 1.4. The mean glomerular filtration rate was 83 ± 28 ml/min/1.73 m2, with no difference between groups. Visceral stent implantation in the acute phase (odds ratio [OR] 3.857 [1.199 to 12.406], p = 0.023), higher left ventricular ejection fraction (OR 1.092 [1.005 to 1.187], p = 0.038), and higher platelet count at discharge (OR 1.064 [1.018 to 1.112], p = 0.006) were identified as predictors of good BP control by multivariate analysis. The analysis showed that nighttime systolic BP was associated with aortic events during follow-up (hazard ratio [HR] 5.2 [1.01 to 27.2], p = 0.049), particularly for a threshold of 124 mm Hg or more (HR 1.967 [1.052 to 3.678], p = 0.0341). Nighttime pulse pressure showed also its significance (HR 20.1 [1.4 to 282.7], p = 0.026). In conclusion, subclinical renal malperfusion revascularization seems to improve BP control. A greater nighttime systolic BP was associated with the risk of new aortic events during follow-up.

Total Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Arch Disease Using an Arch Endograft With 3 Inner Branches.

PURPOSE: To report early experience with a new endovascular graft developed for aortic arch aneurysm repair in patients unfit for open surgery. CASE REPORT: Three consecutive men (62, 74, and 69 years old) at high risk for open repair were treated for postdissection aortic arch aneurysms using a custom-made 3 inner branched endovascular graft. The 2 proximal branches are antegrade and perfuse the innominate artery and the left common carotid artery; the third branch is retrograde and perfuses the left subclavian artery. The latter is preloaded with a catheter and wire to aid cannulation. Technical success was achieved in each case. The mean procedure time, fluoroscopy duration, and contrast volume were 180 minutes, 35 minutes, and 145 mL, respectively. The perioperative period was uneventful. All branches were patent on 6-month computed tomography and duplex ultrasound imaging. CONCLUSION: This new patient-specific device allows total endovascular revascularization of the supra-aortic trunks during arch repair. These encouraging results support its more widespread use.

Endovascular Repair of Thoracoabdominal and Arch Aneurysms in Patients with Connective Tissue Disease Using Branched and Fenestrated Devices.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic open surgery is the standard practice in patients with connective tissue and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) and aortic arch disease. Branched and fenestrated devices offer a less invasive alternative but there are concerns regarding the durability of the repair and the effect of the stent graft on the fragile aortic wall. The aim of this study is to evaluate mid-term outcomes of fenestrated and/or branched endografting in patients with connective tissue disease. METHODS: All patients with connective tissue disease who underwent TAAA or arch aneurysm repair using a fenestrated and/or branched endograft in a single, high-volume center between 2004 and 2015 were included. Ruptured aneurysms and acute aortic dissections were excluded from this study, but not chronic aortic dissections. RESULTS: In total, 427 (403 pararenal and TAAAs, and 24 arch aneurysms) endovascular interventions were performed during the study period. Of these, 17 patients (4%) (16 TAAAs, 1 arch) had connective tissue disease. All patients were classified as unfit for open repair. The mean age was 51 ± 8 years. Thirteen patients with TAAA were treated with a fenestrated, 1 with a branched, and 2 with a combined fenestrated/branch device. A double inner branch device was used to treat the arch aneurysm. The technical success rate was 100% with no incidence of early mortality, spinal cord ischemia, stroke, or further dissection. Postoperative deterioration in renal function was seen in 3 patients (18.8%) and no hemodialysis was required. The mean follow-up was 3.4 years (0.3-7.4). Aneurysm sac shrinkage was seen in 35% of patients (6/17) and the sac diameter remained stable in 65% of patients (11/17). No sac or sealing zone enlargement was observed in any of the patients and there were no conversions to open repair. Reintervention was required in 1 patient at 2 years for bilateral renal artery occlusion (successful fibrinolysis). One type II endoleak (lumbar) is under surveillance and 1 type III (left renal stent) sealed spontaneously. One patient died at 2 years after the procedure from nonaortic causes (endocarditis). CONCLUSIONS: The favorable mid-term outcomes in this series that demonstrate fenestrated and/or branched endografting should be considered in patients with connective tissue and TAAA and aortic arch disease, which are considered unfit for open surgery. All patients require close lifetime surveillance at a center specializing in aortic surgery, with sufficient experience in both open and endovascular aortic surgery, so that if endovascular treatment failure occurs it can be recognized early and further treatment offered.

What should we expect from the hybrid room?

The concept of hybrid room was defined as an optimized surgical theater, offering the best compromise between asepsis criteria from standard surgical rooms and high quality imaging equipment from fixed radiological suites. This review aimed at summarizing what vascular surgeons should expect from hybrid rooms in daily practice and in the near future.

Total Endovascular Aortic Repair in a Patient with Marfan Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to describe a total endovascular aortic repair with branched and fenestrated endografts in a young patient with Marfan syndrome and a chronic aortic dissection. Open surgery is the gold standard to treat aortic dissections in patients with aortic disease and Marfan syndrome. METHODS: In 2000, a 38-year-old man with Marfan syndrome underwent open ascending aorta repair for an acute type A aortic dissection. One year later, a redo sternotomy was performed for aortic valve replacement. In 2013, the patient presented with endocarditis and pulmonary infection, which necessitated tracheostomy and temporary dialysis. In 2014, the first stage of the endovascular repair was performed using an inner branched endograft to exclude a 77-mm distal arch and descending thoracic aortic aneurysm. In 2015, a 63-mm thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm was excluded by implantation of a 4-fenestrated endograft. Follow-up after both endovascular repairs was uneventful. RESULTS: Total aortic endovascular repair was successfully performed to treat a patient with arch and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm associated with chronic aortic dissection and Marfan syndrome. The postoperative images confirmed patency of the endograft and its branches, and complete exclusion of the aortic false lumen. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair is a treatment option in patients with connective tissue disease who are not candidates for open surgery. Long-term follow-up is required to confirm these favorable early outcomes.