Low profile endografts for the endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

INTRODUCTION: Favorable midterm outcomes have been reported with the use of low-profile endografts (LPE), but long-term data is still needed. Furthermore, it is unclear if each of these LPE may have advantages over the other, which may, in turn, affect the outcomes. We systematically reviewed the literature about complications and reintervention rates of patients submitted to endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using LPE. MATHERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted including articles that reported 30-days and follow-up mortality, complications, and reintervention rates of patients treated with EVAR using Incraft (Cordis), Zenith LP/Alpha (Cook Medical Inc) and Ovation (Endologix) endografts. RESULTS: 36 papers were evaluated, reporting results of 582 patients treated with Zenith device, 1211 with Incraft and 3449 with Ovation. During follow up, similar survival and freedom from reintervention rates were reported among the various types of endograft both at 1 and 3 years. The incidence of limb stenosis/kinking was significantly higher in patients treated with Zenith LP/Alpha (2.1%, P = 0.008), while the Incraft device had a significantly lower proportion of type III endoleaks (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival and freedom from reintervention rates were comparable among the three LPEs. The Cook Zenith device had the highest rates of limb stenosis/kinking, while the Incraft device had the lowest occurrence of type III endoleak. PROSPERO: Registration number: CRD42022315875.

Solving Intraoperative Complications During Endovascular Repair of Late Contained Ruptured Aortic Pseudoaneurysm After Surgical De-coarctation: Case Report and Systematic Review of Literature.

AIM: We present a case of successful endovascular repair of late ruptured aortic anastomotic pseudoaneurysm following previous left subclavian artery-descending thoracic aorta bypass and concomitant emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of complicated endovascular aortic de-coarctation never previously described is also presented. A review of the intraoperative, 30-day, and follow-up morbidity, mortality, and complications of TEVAR as endovascular treatment of late aneurysm/pseudoaneurysms after surgical aortic de-coarctation was also performed. METHODS: The systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and following PICO model. A literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Web of Science using the words "tevar of late complication of aortic coarctation surgical repair" and "endovascular repair of anastomotic pseudoaneurysm in coarctation" up to June 17, 2022. Data were extracted from study documents about study design, patient's demographics and comorbidities, details about primary surgical repair, type of late complication, time between open surgery and occurrence of complications, details of the secondary endovascular procedure with technical success, early, and follow-up mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: A total of 18 papers were included with 78 patients (48 men, 69.5%). The most frequent type of primary open surgical repair was patch aortoplasty (46, 58.9%). Focusing on aneurysm and pseudoaneurysm as late complications, most of the patients were asymptomatic (45, 57.7%). All patients underwent TEVAR, 14 of them (17.9%) in urgent/emergent setting. The technical success was 98.7%, with 1 intraoperative death due to rupture of the aorta. In total, 31 patients out of 78 (39.7%) showed different complications in the immediate postoperative time, with type II endoleak being the most observed (8/31, 25.8%). The mean follow-up time was about 2 years (26.5 months, range 3-92). Overall, 30-day mortality was 2.6%. Complications occurred in 30 patients (39.4%), 23 of them resolved during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: With the limit of low-quality data, TEVAR can be considered a safe and effective option for the treatment of late complications after open surgery for aortic coarctation, even in urgent settings. CLINICAL IMPACT: Different specialists have to face the technical complexities and risks related to treatment of late complications after surgical de-coartaction, which can be either surgical or endovascular, and depend on patient's ages. Although covered stents appear to have some protection from the development of stent fractures, doesn't provide complete protection from late aneurysm formation. In this setting, TEVAR may represent a valuable option, combining the advantages of the covered stent with those of a device that can cover a wider range of aortic length, especially in adult patients. This study shows thoracic endovascular repair can be considered a safe and effective option in clincal practice for the treatment of late complications after open surgery for AC, even in urgent settings.

Four-Dimensional Flow MRI for the Evaluation of Aortic Endovascular Graft: A Pilot Study.

We aimed to explore the feasibility of 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients undergoing thoracic aorta endovascular repair (TEVAR). We retrospectively evaluated ten patients (two female), with a mean (±standard deviation) age of 61 ± 20 years, undergoing MRI for a follow-up after TEVAR. All 4D flow examinations were performed using a 1.5-T system (MAGNETOM Aera, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany). In addition to the standard examination protocol, a 4D flow-sensitive 3D spatial-encoding, time-resolved, phase-contrast prototype sequence was acquired. Among our cases, flow evaluation was feasible in all patients, although we observed some artifacts in 3 out of 10 patients. Three individuals displayed a reduced signal within the vessel lumen where the endograft was placed, while others presented with turbulent or increased flow. An aortic endograft did not necessarily hinder the visualization of blood flow through 4D flow sequences, although the graft could generate flow artifacts in some cases. A 4D Flow MRI may represent the ideal tool to follow up on both healthy subjects deemed to be at an increased risk based on their anatomical characteristics or patients submitted to TEVAR for whom a surveillance protocol with computed tomography angiography would be cumbersome and unjustified.