Social Determinants of Health Factors and Loss-To-Follow-Up in the Field of Vascular Surgery.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 22-57% of vascular patients are lost to follow-up (LTF) which is of concern as the Society of Vascular Surgery recommends annual patient follow-up. The purpose of this report was to identify social determinants of health factors (SDoH) and their relationship to LTF in vascular patients. METHODS: The methods employed were a systematic literature review of 29 empirical articles and a retrospective quality improvement report with 27 endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) patients at the University of Chicago. RESULTS: The systematic literature review resulted in 2,931 articles which were reduced to 29 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Demographic variables were more frequently cited than SDoH factors, but the most common were smoking, transportation, and socioeconomic status/insurance. Additionally, 176 EVAR and TEVAR patients were called resulting in 27 patients who completed a SDoH questionnaire. Twenty-six percent indicated they had missed at least 1 appointment with the top reasons being work or family responsibilities. Due to limited patient size no statistical analyses were performed, but frequencies of responses to SDoH questions were reported to augment the existing limited literature and guide future research into variables such as one's ability to pay for basics like food or mortgage. CONCLUSIONS: SDoH factors are important yet understudied aspects of endovascular repairs that require more research to understand their impact on vascular surgery follow-up rates and outcomes. Additional research is needed as lack of consideration of such factors may impact the generalizability of existing research and such knowledge may help in informing clinician treatment plans.

Intravascular lithotripsy supported endovascular aneurysm repair.

As the use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) increases, anatomic constraints remain a challenge. In this case report, we describe the use of intravascular lithotripsy to facilitate EVAR in a patient with a severely calcified and stenotic aortic bifurcation. Future applications of intravascular lithotripsy could help expand the use of EVAR to patients with severely stenotic vasculature and optimize outcomes in the treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Endosutured aneurysm repair (ESAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms with short necks achieves acceptable mid-term outcomes - results from the PERU registry.

INTRODUCTION: The study aims to describe midterm outcomes following treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with short necks by endosutured aneurysm repair (ESAR) using the Heli-FX EndoAnchor system. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of prospectively collected data from nine vascular surgery departments between June 2010 - December 2019, including treated AAAs with neck lengths ≤ 10mm. The decision for the use of EndoAnchors was made by the treating surgeon or multidisciplinary aortic committee according to each centre's practice. There were two subgroups further assessed according to neck length, A (≥4 and < 7mm) and B (≥7 and ≤10mm). The main outcomes analysed were technical success, freedom from type Ia endoleaks (TIaEL), sac size increase, all-cause (ACM) and aneurysm related mortality (ARM). RESULTS: 76 patients were included in the study, 17 fell into Subgroup A and 59 into subgroup B. Median follow-up for the cohort was 40.5 (IQR 12-61) months. A median of 6 (IQR 3) EndoAnchors were deployed in each subject. Technical success was 86.8% for the total group, 82.4% and 88.1% (p=0.534) for subgroups A and B respectively. Six out of ten (60%) of TIaELs at the completion angiographies showed spontaneous resolution. Cumulative freedom from TIaEL at 3 and 5 years for the total group was 89% and 84% respectively; this was 93% and 74% for subgroup A and 88% at both intervals in subgroup B (p=0.545). In total, there were 7 (9.2%) patients presenting with type Ia endoleaks over the entire study period. Two (11.8%) in subgroup A and 5 (8.5%) in subgroup B (p=0.679). There were more patients with sac regression in subgroup B (subgroup A=6 - 35.3% versus subgroup B=34 - 57.6%, p=0.230) with no statistical significance. ACM was 19 (25%) patients, with no difference (4 - 23.5% versus 15 - 25.4%, p=0.874) between subgroups; whereas ARM occurred in one patient from subgroup A and 3 from subgroup B. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates reasonable outcomes for patients with short-necked AAAs treated by ESAR in terms of type Ia endoleaks up to 5 year follow up. EndoAnchor use should be judiciously evaluated in short necks and may be a reasonable option when anatomical constraints are encountered, mainly for those with 7-10mm neck lengths. Shorter neck length aspects, as indicated by the results from Group A, may be an alternative when no other options are available or feasible.

Five-year outcomes for bell bottom, iliac branch endoprosthesis, and coil and cover approaches from the GREAT registry.

OBJECTIVE: There are a variety of methods used today to treat common iliac aneurysms with endovascular techniques. Of these approaches, little is known about whether a particular limb strategy influences endoleak, reintervention, or aneurysm regression rates. We present 5-year data comparing endoleak, stent graft migration, fracture, aneurysm sac dynamics, and aortic rupture rates among patients treated with bell bottom limbs (BB), iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE), and coil and cover (CC) approaches from the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment registry. Secondary end points were all-cause mortality, stroke, reintervention, and paraplegia. METHODS: Subjects from the GORE Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment were enrolled over a 5-year period from October 2017 to August 2022. We included 924 subjects in this study. Statistical data was generated on R software and limb groups were compared using the Pearson's χ2 test and the Kruskal-Wallis rank-sum test. RESULTS: We found no statistical difference in endoleak rates, stent graft migration, fracture, or aortic rupture when stratified by limb strategy. There was no difference between limb approaches with regard to aneurysm sac dynamics among those with abdominal aortic aneurysms and common iliac aneurysms. Similarly, no statistical difference between limb strategies was found in all-cause mortality, stroke, paraplegia, or reintervention rates. Among patients that required an additional graft during reintervention, the highest rates were found within the IBE group 8.6%, compared with BB group 2.2% and CC group 1.3% (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was no difference among limb strategies in endoleak rates, stent graft migration, aneurysm sac dynamics, aortic rupture rates, or our secondary end points. Increased rates of reintervention requiring an additional graft within the IBE group is noteworthy and must be weighed against the adverse effects of hypogastric sacrifice with the CC approach or potentially less advantageous seal zones in the BB approach. This finding suggests that all limb approaches have equivalent effectiveness in managing the aneurysmal common iliac artery; thus, the choice of limb strategy should be individualized and remain at physician discretion. Future research should include a more robust sample size to reproduce these findings.

The geometric evolution of aortic dissections: Predicting surgical success using fluctuations in integrated Gaussian curvature.

Clinical imaging modalities are a mainstay of modern disease management, but the full utilization of imaging-based data remains elusive. Aortic disease is defined by anatomic scalars quantifying aortic size, even though aortic disease progression initiates complex shape changes. We present an imaging-based geometric descriptor, inspired by fundamental ideas from topology and soft-matter physics that captures dynamic shape evolution. The aorta is reduced to a two-dimensional mathematical surface in space whose geometry is fully characterized by the local principal curvatures. Disease causes deviation from the smooth bent cylindrical shape of normal aortas, leading to a family of highly heterogeneous surfaces of varying shapes and sizes. To deconvolute changes in shape from size, the shape is characterized using integrated Gaussian curvature or total curvature. The fluctuation in total curvature (δK) across aortic surfaces captures heterogeneous morphologic evolution by characterizing local shape changes. We discover that aortic morphology evolves with a power-law defined behavior with rapidly increasing δK forming the hallmark of aortic disease. Divergent δK is seen for highly diseased aortas indicative of impending topologic catastrophe or aortic rupture. We also show that aortic size (surface area or enclosed aortic volume) scales as a generalized cylinder for all shapes. Classification accuracy for predicting aortic disease state (normal, diseased with successful surgery, and diseased with failed surgical outcomes) is 92.8±1.7%. The analysis of δK can be applied on any three-dimensional geometric structure and thus may be extended to other clinical problems of characterizing disease through captured anatomic changes.

Current Medicare reimbursement for complex endovascular aortic repair is inadequate based on results from a multi-institutional cost analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Complex endovascular juxta-, para- and suprarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (comEVAR) is frequently accomplished with commercially available fenestrated (FEVAR) devices or off-label use of aortoiliac devices with parallel branch stents (chEVAR). We sought to evaluate the implantable vascular device costs incurred with these procedures as compared with standard Medicare reimbursement to determine the financial viability of comEVAR in the modern era. METHODS: Five geographically distinct institutions with high-volume, complex aortic centers were included. Implantable aortoiliac and branch stent device cost data from 25 consecutive, recent, comEVAR in the treatment of juxta-, para-, and suprarenal aortic aneurysms at each center were analyzed. Cases of rupture, thoracic aneurysms, reinterventions, and physician-modified EVAR were excluded, as were ancillary costs from nonimplantable equipment. Data from all institutions were combined and stratified into an overall cost group and two, individual cost groups: FEVAR or chEVAR. These groups were compared, and each respective group was then compared with weighted Medicare reimbursement for Diagnosis-Related Group codes 268/269. Median device costs were obtained from an independent purchasing consortium of >3000 medical centers, yielding true median cost-to-institution data rather than speculative, administrative projections or estimates. RESULTS: A total of 125 cases were analyzed: 70 FEVAR and 53 chEVAR. Two cases of combined FEVAR/chEVAR were included in total cost analysis, but excluded from direct FEVAR vs chEVAR comparison. Median Medicare reimbursement was calculated as $35,755 per case. Combined average implantable device cost for all analyzed cases was $28,470 per case, or 80% of the median reimbursement ($28,470/$35,755). Average FEVAR device cost per case ($26,499) was significantly lower than average chEVAR cost per case ($32,122; P < .002). Device cost was 74% ($26,499/$35,755) of total reimbursement for FEVAR and 90% ($32,122/$35,755) for chEVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this multi-institutional analysis show that implantable device cost alone represents the vast majority of weighted total Medicare reimbursement per case with comEVAR, and that chEVAR is significantly more costly than FEVAR. Inadequate Medicare reimbursement for these cases puts high-volume, high-complexity aortic centers at a distinct financial disadvantage. In the interest of optimizing patient care, these data suggest a reconsideration of previously established, outdated, Diagnosis-Related Group coding and Medicare reimbursement for comEVAR.

Endovascular treatment for thoracic aortic disease from the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) is an international prospective multicenter registry collecting real-world data on performance of W. L. Gore thoracic and abdominal aortic endografts. This analysis evaluated the long-term differences in patient survival and device performance in patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for any thoracic aortic pathology. METHODS: From August 2010 to October 2016, 5014 patients were enrolled in GREAT. The population of interest was comprised of only patients treated for thoracic aortic pathologies. Through 5 years, primary outcomes were all-cause and aortic-related mortality, stroke, aortic rupture, endoleaks, migration, fracture, compression, paraplegia, and any reintervention through 5 years, grouped by pathology. Secondary outcomes were reintervention rate and freedom from serious device- and aortic-related events. RESULTS: The 578 patients with thoracic aortic pathologies enrolled in GREAT and identified for this analysis were categorized by common pathologies: thoracic aneurysm (n = 239), thoracic dissection (n = 203), arch (n = 26), and other (n = 110). The mean age of this population was 66.1 ± 12.8 years, and 64.7% were male. Procedure survival was 99.7%. In the overall group, at index procedure to 30 days and 31 days to 5 years, Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from all-cause mortality were 99.6% and 66.4%, respectively, and for aortic-related mortality were 97.7% and 94.6%, respectively. Aortic rupture rate was 0.5% (n = 3) at 30 days and 1.4% (n = 8) through 5 years. Stroke and spinal cord ischemic events were 1.9% (n = 11) and 1.6% (n = 9) at 30 days and at 5 years were 3.6% (n = 20), 0.5% (n = 3), respectively. Reinterventions were required in 7.3% (n = 42) at 30 days and 12.4% (n = 69) through 5 years. The number of patients with endoleaks at 30 days was 2.1% (n = 12): n = 3 (1.1%) for each of types IA, 1B, and II; n = 2 (0.3%) for type III; and n = 4 (0.7%) for unspecified. Through 5 years, the percentage of patients was 8.3% (n = 40): n = 15 (3.1%) for type IA; n = 10 (2.1%) for type IB; n = 11 (2.3%) for type II; and n = 9 (1.9%) for unspecified. One patient (0.2%) had stent migration at 30 days (aneurysm group); none were reported through 5 years. There were no incidents of stent compression or fracture from index procedure through 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Data herein demonstrates durability and support for treatment of thoracic aortic disease with the GORE TAG conformable thoracic stent graft, including no incidents of stent compression/fracture and high freedom from aortic-related mortality. The planned analysis of follow-up to 10 years in GREAT will be beneficial.

Raised BMI is associated with fewer Type I endoleaks in patients treated with the Gore Excluder device: data from the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT).

BACKGROUND: Obesity is increasing in prevalence globally and within the cohort of vascular surgical patients, leading to poorer outcomes. There are few data on endoleak as a complication of AAA surgery in obese patients. The aim of this study was to use large scale registry data from the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) to interrogate any relationship between obesity and endoleak following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using a Gore Excluder device (W. L. Gore & Associates, Newark, DE, USA), in order to guide treatment recommendations in the future. METHODS: A retrospective review of the GREAT Registry was carried out and patients who were recorded as having a postoperative endoleak requiring intervention were included. Patient demographics including Body Mass Index (BMI), aneurysm parameters and on- or off-instructions for use (IFU) were recorded. Ruptured AAA were excluded. RESULTS: Data were obtained for 3326 patients with an operation date between August 25, 2010 and September 22, 2019. Obese patients were significantly less likely to have a Type 1 endoleak (Fisher's Exact P value=0.006), and the association was maintained in a multiple logistic regression model which controlled for age, gender, neck angulation and off IFU device use (OR=0.33, P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among AAA patients treated with a Gore Excluder device (W. L. Gore & Associates), a higher BMI category was associated with a lower risk of Type 1 endoleak requiring reintervention. Further work needs to be carried out to assess our findings in other patient cohorts.

Race-based outcomes of thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissections in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: This study characterizes racial differences in presentation, as well as short- and long-term outcomes after endovascular treatment of thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) and type B aortic dissection (TBAD). METHODS: We queried the Gore Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment for thoracic endovascular aortic repairs (TEVARs) performed between 2010 and 2016 and followed through 2022. Pathologies represented were descending TAA, complicated TBAD, and uncomplicated TBAD. Using standard statistical tests, we compared overall and pathology-specific demographics, procedural factors, and outcomes among Black and White patients undergoing TEVAR. RESULTS: We identified 438 TEVAR cases, including 236 descending TAA, 121 complicated TBAD, and 74 uncomplicated TBAD. Overall, Black patients were younger and had a higher incidence of renal insufficiency (P = .001), whereas White patients had more chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = .003) and cardiac arrhythmias (P = .037). In patients treated for descending TAA, Black patients had increased device- and procedure-related complications (34.3% vs 17.4%; P = .014), conversion to open repair (2.9% vs 0%; P = .011) and type II endoleak (5.7% vs 1.0%; P = .040), but no differences in mortality, length of hospital stay, or major adverse cardiovascular events. Whereas outcomes of TEVAR for uncomplicated TBAD were comparable, Black patients more frequently presented with complicated TBAD than White patients (Black, 40.5% vs White, 24.8%; P = .008) and had subsequently greater reintervention rates (28.1% vs 12.4%; P = .012), all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 4.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.74-10.5; P = .002) and aortic-related mortality (hazard ratio, 16.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-186; P = .022). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased device- and procedure-related complications, similar short- and long-term outcomes are achieved in Black and White patients undergoing TEVAR for descending TAA and uncomplicated TBAD. However, Black patients are more likely to present with, require reintervention for, and suffer mortality from complicated TBAD.

Aortoiliac occlusive disease - a novel classification system based on anatomical segments and disease severity for management planning.

AIMS: The aim of this classification system is to provide vascular surgeons with a simple tool that categorises disease severity by anatomical segment in aortoiliac occlusive disease and thus guide decision making and management strategies. Disease of the common femoral arteries is included as the distal extent of disease with respect to access for both open and endovascular intervention is essential to management planning. METHODS: The classification system designates diseased segment letters and numbers to guide treatment planning. The degree of disease other than stenotic or occluded is not required. In a similar manner to the TNM classification, anatomy and disease severity - based on angiography, CTA, and MRA - are categorised using a simple, user-friendly method. Two clinical cases are presented to exemplify the clinical application of this classification system. RESULTS: A simple and useful classification system is presented and ease of use exemplified by two clinical cases. CONCLUSIONS: Management strategies for peripheral artery disease in general, aortoiliac occlusive disease specifically, have evolved rapidly in recent years. Existing classification systems, such as TASC II, steer the clinician towards specific treatment approaches. However, the first step in the management decision-making process is the accurate identification of the arterial segments that require treatment. None of the existing classification systems specifically address anatomy as an entity in itself. This classification system provides an intuitive framework, based on letters and numbers, that provides specific information on arterial segments and disease severity in aortoiliac occlusive disease on which clinicians can base management decisions. It has been developed to bolster this aspect of the vascular surgery armamentarium; to be used as a decision making and management planning tool, in partnership with, not instead of, existing classification systems.

The University of Chicago Clinical Excellence Scholars Track: Aligning Dynamic Students With Innovative Programming in Early Medical Education at the Undergraduate Level.

The Clinical Excellence Scholars Track was developed in 2012 as a shared initiative between the Bucksbaum Institute for Clinical Excellence, the University of Chicago (UChicago) Careers in Healthcare office, and the UChicago Medicine Office of Community and External Affairs. The goal of the Clinical Excellence Scholars Track is to foster an understanding of the physician career and the doctor-patient relationship for a select group of undergraduate students. The Clinical Excellence Scholars Track achieves this goal through carefully tailored curricular requirements and direct mentoring experiences between Bucksbaum Institute Faculty Scholars and the student scholars. After participating in the Clinical Excellence Scholars Track program, student scholars report that their career understanding and preparation have benefitted as a result and that they meet with success in the medical school application process as well.

Mid-term outcomes of the use of endoanchors during thoracic endovascular aortic repair in multicentre analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe mid-term outcomes of the use of EndoAnchors as an adjunct for arch and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). METHODS: A retrospective multicentre series from nine centres using the Heli-FX EndoAnchor System (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, USA) at TEVAR over May 2014-May 2019 is presented. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with number NCT04100499. The primary outcome was freedom from Type I endoleak at EndoAnchors deployments; secondary outcomes included evaluation of aortic wall penetration (AWP) at first computed tomography scan, EndoAnchor-related issues and mortality. RESULTS: 54 high-risk patients (35 males/19 females, age 73 ± 11 years) with arch, thoracic and thoracoabdominal aneurysmal disease (3 chronic post-dissection and one patch pseudoaneurysm), with a mean neck length 19.7 ± 6.6 mm that were treated with multiple hybrid and endovascular techniques were included. A total of 329 EndoAnchors were used with a mean of 6.1 ± 2.5 per patient. Overall adequate AWP was 86%, whereas arch (Ishimaru's zones 0-2) deployments achieved 80.6% when compared to 87.3% in descending thoracic aorta (dTA); although there was no statistical significance. Freedom from type I endoleaks was 88% at 2 year follow-up, due to 4 type IA endoleaks, two of them successfully treated, one with conservative treatment due to complexity of repair and remaining patient died 1 year later due to endograft infection. There were reported five EndoAnchor-related issues; four losses and one renal stent-graft was crushed due to catheter deflection solved with balloon reinflation. None of the losses had clinical significance. Overall mortality is described for 7 (9.5%) patients, one of them aneurysm-related. CONCLUSIONS: The adjunctive use of EndoAnchors in TEVAR and complex TEVAR procedures achieved acceptable outcomes at midterm in a high-risk series with hostile seal zones. Still, they should be still judiciously used as there is lack of data to suggest a more liberal use; therefore, the landing zone should not be compromised in favour of their use.

The Effect of EndoAnchors on Aneurysm Sac Regression for Patients Treated With Infrarenal Endovascular Repair With Hostile Neck Anatomies: A Propensity Scored Analysis.

PURPOSE: To analyze sac evolution patterns in matched patients with hostile neck anatomy (HNA) treated with standard endovascular aneurysm repair (sEVAR) and endosutured aneurysm repair (ESAR). METHODS: Observational retrospective study using prospectively collected data between June 2010 and December 2019. ESAR group data were extracted from the primary arm of the PERU registry with an assigned identifier (NCT04100499) at 8 centers and those from the sEVAR came from 4 centers. Suitability for inclusion required: no proximal endograft adjuncts (besides EndoAnchor use), ≤15 mm neck length and minimum of 12-months follow-up imaging. Bubble-shaped neck (noncylindrical short neck with discontinuous seal) aspect was analyzed. Both groups were analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM) for aortic neck length, width, angulation, and device fixation type. Main outcome assessed was sac evolution patterns (sac expansion and regression were defined as >5mm increase or decrease, of the maximum sac diameter respectively; all AAAs within this ±5 mm range in diameter change were considered stable) and secondary outcomes were type-Ia endoleaks; other endoleaks and mortality. A power analysis calculation >80% was confirmed for sac regression evaluation. RESULTS: After exclusions, PSM resulted in 96 ESAR and 96 sEVAR patients. Mean imaging follow-up (months) was 44.4±21.3 versus 43.0±19.6 (p=0.643), respectively. The overall number of patients achieving sac regression was higher in the ESAR group (n=57, 59.4% vs n=31, 32.3%; p<0.001) and the cumulative sac regression achieved at 5 years was 65% versus 38% (p=0.003) in favor of the ESAR group. There were no statistically significant differences in type-Ia endoleak and/or other endoleaks. Univariate analysis for sac regression patients in the sEVAR and ESAR group individually showed the bubble-shape neck as a predictor of sac regression failure. There were no statistical differences in overall and aneurysm-related mortality. CONCLUSION: Endosutured aneurysm repair provided improved rates of sac regression for patients with AAA and HNA when compared with sEVAR at midterm and up to 5 years, despite similar rates of type-Ia endoleaks, and the need to consider some important limitations. The presence of bubble-shaped neck was a predictor of sac regression failure for both groups equally. CLINICAL IMPACT: The use of EndoAnchors aids and improves EVAR treatment in hostile neck anatomies by an increased rate of sac regression when compared to EVAR treatment alone in up to 5 year analysis. Moreover, a trend to reduced number of type Ia endoleaks is also achieved, although not significant in the present study. This data, adds to current and growing evidence on the usefulness of EndoAnchors for AAA endovascular treatment.

Intravascular ultrasound-guided transcaval approach for thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair will typically require adequate caliber iliofemoral arteries for device deployment. We describe the case of a patient with extensive iliofemoral disease, which necessitated transcaval delivery of an aortic graft to repair a distal aortic arch aneurysm. Our case report highlights the novel use of intravascular ultrasound to localize an optimal site for creation of an aortocaval connection and the subsequent use of a ventricular septal defect occluder to close the connection after successful stent deployment.

Outcomes of "Anterior Versus Posterior Divisional Branches of the Hypogastric Artery as Distal Landing Zone for Iliac Branch Devices": The International Multicentric R3OYAL Registry.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this multicentric registry was to assess the outcomes of "anteRior versus posteRior divisional bRanches Of the hYpogastric artery as distAl landing zone for iLiac branch devices (R3OYAL)." METHODS: The main exposure of interest for the purpose of this study was the internal iliac artery (IIA) divisional branch (anterior vs posterior) that was used as distal landing zone. Early endpoints included technical success and adverse events. Late endpoints included survival, primary/secondary IIA patency, and IIA branch instability. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients were included in the study, of which 50 received bilateral implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs). This resulted in a total of 221 incorporated IIAs included in the final analysis, of which 40 were anterior divisional branches and 181 were posterior divisional branches. Technical success was high in both groups (anterior division: 98% vs posterior division: 100%, P = .18). Occurrence of any adverse event was noted in 14% of patients in both groups (P = 1.0). The overall rate of freedom from the composite IBD branch instability did not show significant differences between patients receiving distal landing in the anterior or posterior division of the IIA at 3 years (79% vs 87%, log-rank test = .215). The 3-year estimates of IBD patency were significantly lower in patients who received distal landing in the anterior divisional branch than those who received distal landing in the posterior divisional branch (primary patency: 81% vs 96%, log-rank test = .009; secondary patency: 81% vs 97%, log-rank test < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the IIA as distal landing zone for IBD implantation shows comparable profiles in terms of immediate technical success, perioperative safety, and side-branch instability up to 3 years. However, IBD patency at 3 years was higher when the distal landing zone was achieved within the posterior divisional branch of the IIA. CLINICAL IMPACT: The results from this large multicentric registry confirm that use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the internal iliac artery (IIA) as distal landing zone for implantation of iliac branch devices (IBD) shows comparable profiles of safety and feasibility, thereby allowing to extend the indications for endovascular repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms to cases with unsuitable anatomy within the IIA main trunk. Although mid-term rates of device durability and branch instability seem to be similar, the rates of primary and secondary IBD patency at three years was favored when the distal landing zone was achieved in the posterior divisional branch of the IIA.

Initial Experience with Fenestrated Physician-Modified Stent Grafts Using 3D Aortic Templates.

The goal of this study was to describe the surgical results of physician-modified endografts (PMEG) utilizing a 3D aortic template in a center with no prior experience in complex endovascular aortic repairs. Forty-three patients underwent physician-modified graft stent implantation using a 3D aortic model. The inclusion criteria were juxtarenal and suprarenal aortic aneurysms, type IV thoracoabdominal aneurysms, and type IA endoleak after endovascular aortic repair. In asymptomatic patients, the diameter threshold for aneurysm repair was 5.5 cm in males and 5.0 cm in females. 3D aortic templates were prepared from the patient's computed tomography angiography scans and sterilized before use in the operating suite. Forty-three stent grafts were modified with the use of a 3D printing template. A total of 162 reinforced fenestrations (37 celiac, 43 right renal, 39 left renal, 43 superior mesenteric) with a mean of 3.8 per patient were performed. All PMEGs had a posterior reducing-diameter tie and a preloaded guidewire. The mean modification time was 86 ± 12 min. The mean follow-up was 14 ± 12 months. The 30-day mortality was 12%. During the follow-up period, the patency rate was 95% per the superior mesenteric artery, 93% per right renal artery, 95% per left renal artery, and 89% per celiac trunk. Twelve (28%) patients had endoleak, of which type I or III was present in 5 (12%) patients, and type II in 7 (16%). 3D printing can be successfully integrated into the physician's everyday practice of stent graft modification. However, the use of this approach in centers without experience performing complex aortic procedures results in worse surgical metrics than those previously reported.

Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair With Chimney Graft for Thoracoabdominal Aneurysm.

Thoracoabdominal aneurysms pose technical challenges for endovascular repair due to involvement of visceral and renal vessels. We report a case series of four patients diagnosed with thoracoabdominal aneurysm who underwent complex endovascular repair with Fenestrated Device and chimney grafts (FEVARCh). FEVARCh is a technically feasible approach for repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms that involve renal, superior mesenteric, and celiac arteries for patients not appropriate for open surgical repair. Further studies are needed to understand the implications of resultant Type 1a endoleaks and strategies to minimize the displacement of the main body graft with adjunct chimneys.