Computerized Differentiation of Growth Status for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Feasibility Study.

Fast-growing abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) have a high rupture risk and poor outcomes if not promptly identified and treated. Our primary objective is to improve the differentiation of small AAAs' growth status (fast versus slow-growing) through a combination of patient health information, computational hemodynamics, geometric analysis, and artificial intelligence. 3D computed tomography angiography (CTA) data available for 70 patients diagnosed with AAAs with known growth status were used to conduct geometric and hemodynamic analyses. Differences among ten metrics (out of ninety metrics) were statistically significant discriminators between fast and slow-growing groups. Using a support vector machine (SVM) classifier, the area under receiving operating curve (AUROC) and total accuracy of our best predictive model for differentiation of AAAs' growth status were 0.86 and 77.50%, respectively. In summary, the proposed analytics has the potential to differentiate fast from slow-growing AAAs, helping guide resource allocation for the management of patients with AAAs.

Five-year outcomes of physician-modified endografts for repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: There is paucity of data on the durability of physician modified endografts (PMEGs) for complex abdominal (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) despite widespread use. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the early and long-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for CAAAs and TAAAs using PMEGs. METHODS: We reviewed clinical data and outcomes of patients treated by FB-EVAR using PMEGs for CAAAs (defined as short-neck infrarenal, juxtarenal, and pararenal AAAs) and TAAAs between 2007 and 2019. All patients were treated by a dedicated team with extensive manufactured device experience. Endpoints included 30-day mortality and major adverse events, patient survival and freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), freedom from secondary intervention, target artery (TA) patency, and freedom from TA endoleak and TA instability. RESULTS: Of 645 patients undergoing FB-EVAR, 156 patients (24%) treated with PMEG (121 males; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) were included. There were 89 CAAAs, 33 extent IV TAAAs and 34 extent I to III TAAAs. A total of 452 renal-mesenteric targets (3.1 ± 1.0 vessels/patient) were incorporated. Patients with TAAAs had significantly (P < .05) larger aneurysms (73 ± 11 vs 68 ± 14 mm), more TAs incorporated (3.4 ± 0.9 vs 2.8 ± 1.0), and more often had previous aortic repair (54% vs 27%). Technical success was higher in patients treated for CAAAs (99% vs 91%; P = .04). Thirty-day and/or in-hospital mortality was 5.7% and was significantly lower for CAAAs compared with TAAAs (2% vs 10%; P = .04), with three of nine early mortalities (33%) among patients treated emergently. After a mean follow-up of 49 ± 38 months, there were 12 aortic-related deaths (7.6%), including nine early deaths (5.7%) from perioperative complications and three late deaths (1.9%) from rupture. At 5 years, patient survival was 41%. Patients treated for CAAAs had higher 5-year freedom from ARM (P = .016), TA instability (P = .05), TA endoleak (P = .01), and TA secondary interventions (P = .05) with a higher, but non-significant, freedom from sac enlargement ≥5 mm (P = .11). Primary and secondary TA patency was 91% ± 2% and 99% ± 1%, respectively. Sac regression ≥5 mm occurred in 67 patients (43%) and was associated with increased survival (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.80) compared with those without sac regression. CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR using PMEGs was performed with acceptable long-term outcomes. Overall patient survival was low due to significant underlying comorbidities. Patients treated for CAAAs had higher freedom from ARM, TA instability, TA endoleak, TA secondary interventions, and a trend towards higher freedom from sac enlargement compared with patients treated for TAAAs. Sac regression was associated with improved patient survival.

Evolution from physician-modified to company-manufactured fenestrated-branched endografts to treat pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to review treatment trends and outcomes of patients who underwent fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) of pararenal aneurysms (PRAs) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) using physician-modified endografts (PMEGs) or company-manufactured devices (CMDs). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of 316 consecutive patients (242 male patients; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) who underwent F-BEVAR between 2007 and 2016. F-BEVAR was performed under two prospective investigational device exemption protocols since 2013. End points were mortality, major adverse events (MAEs), patient survival, reintervention, branch instability, aneurysm-related mortality, renal function deterioration, and target vessel patency. RESULTS: There were 145 patients (46%) treated by PMEGs (84 PRAs, 26 extent IV and 35 extent I-III TAAAs) and 171 patients (54%) who had CMDs (88 PRAs, 42 extent IV and 41 extent I-III TAAAs). Choice of endograft evolved from PMEGs in 131 patients (83%) treated in the first half of experience to CMDs in 144 patients (91%) treated in the second half of experience (P < .001). Patients treated by PMEGs had significantly (P < .05) larger aneurysms, more chronic pulmonary and kidney disease, and higher comorbidity severity scores. A total of 1081 renal-mesenteric arteries were targeted in both groups. Technical success was lower for PMEGs (98% vs 99.5%; P = .02). Thirty-day mortality was 5.5% for PMEGs (PRAs, 1.2%; extent IV 3.8% and extent I-III, 17.1%) and 0% for CMDs (P = .0018). Patients treated by PMEGs had significantly more (P < .001) MAEs (48% vs 23%) and longer hospital stay (9 ± 10 days vs 6 ± 6 days; P = .001). Mean follow-up was significantly longer for patients treated by PMEGs (38 ± 26 months vs 14 ± 12 months; P < .001). At 3 years, patient survival (68% ± 4% vs 67% ± 8%; P = .11), freedom from reintervention (68% ± 4% vs 68% ± 8%; P = .17), primary (94% ± 2% vs 92% ± 2%; P = .64) and secondary target vessel patency (98% ± 1% vs 98% ± 1%; P = .89), and freedom from renal function deterioration (75% ± 4% vs 65% ± 6%; P = .24) were similar for patients treated by PMEGs or CMDs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Choice of F-BEVAR evolved from PMEGs to almost exclusively CMDs under physician-sponsored investigational device exemption protocols. PMEG patients had more comorbidities and larger aneurysms. CMDs were performed with higher technical success, no mortality, and fewer MAEs.

Outcomes of total percutaneous endovascular aortic repair for thoracic, fenestrated, and branched endografts.

OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous endovascular aortic repair (PEVAR) has been increasingly used to treat infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms, but few studies have evaluated the results in complex aortic aneurysms. We reviewed the technical success and clinical outcomes of PEVAR using large-diameter sheaths for the treatment of complex aortic aneurysms with thoracic, fenestrated, and branched stent grafts. METHODS: The clinical data of patients who underwent total PEVAR for descending thoracic aneurysm, thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, pararenal, and aortoiliac aneurysms using thoracic, fenestrated, and branched stent grafts between 2009 and 2014 were reviewed. Repairs with fenestrated-branched stent grafts were performed using commercially available or investigational devices under a physician-sponsored investigational device protocols. Percutaneous closure was performed using ultrasound guidance and two Perclose devices (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara Calif) per femoral puncture site. End points were technical success, access-related complications, morbidity, and mortality. RESULTS: There were 102 patients, 77 male and 25 female, with a mean age of 75 ± 8 years. Aneurysm extent was pararenal in 48 patients (47%), thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm in 27 (26%), descending thoracic aneurysm in 19 (19%), and aortoiliac in 8 (8%). Fenestrated or branched endografts, or both, were placed in 72 patients (71%). Total percutaneous closure was performed in 170 femoral arteries using ≥20F-diameter sheaths in 163 (96%). Technical success was obtained in 161 femoral arteries (95%). There were no factors associated with technical failure. Access-related complications occurred in five patients (5%), including femoral artery thrombosis in three (3%), and retroperitoneal hematoma or pseudoaneurysm in one patient each (1%). There were no 30-day deaths. Freedom from access-related complications was 97% ± 1% at 30 days and 1 year. No access-related complications occurred >30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Total percutaneous technique can be safely performed with a high technical success rate and low rate of access complications in patients with thoracic and complex aortic disease requiring large-diameter sheaths. The rate of access-related complications (5%) is similar to that reported for PEVAR of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms using smaller-profile devices.

Infectious and ischemic complications from percutaneous closure devices used after vascular access.

The introduction of percutaneous closure devices (PCDs) to seal arteriotomy sites following percutaneous vascular access (PVA) can lead to greater complications than those with manual compression. The aim of this study was to compare complications and outcome between patients requiring surgery after receiving a PCD and those undergoing standard manual compression. This retrospective study evaluated 56 patients (mean age, 63 years) requiring surgical intervention from January 1, 1998 to April 30, 2002, following complications of PVA. Operative indications were pseudoaneurysm, hemorrhage, infectious complications, and limb ischemia. Patients were divided into two groups for comparison: group I (n = 15, PCD) and group II (n = 41, no PCD). In group 1 patients there were 18 limbs in which 20 Perclose devices were used and 1 limb in which a Duett device was used. From the outcomes in these two groups we concluded that patients undergoing surgical intervention following complications of PVA are at a significantly increased risk for infectious and ischemic complications and require more complex vascular repair when percutaneous closure devices are used.