Protocolo y algoritmo de diagnóstico, tratamiento y derivación ágil de las úlceras de la extremidad inferior / Protocol and algorithm for diagnosis, treatment and early referral of lower limb ulcers

Las úlceras venosas son una patología muy prevalente, especialmente en pacientes de edad avanzada. repercutennegativamente en la calidad de vida de los pacientes y conllevan un importante consumo de recursos. este artículopropone un práctico algoritmo para el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de las úlceras en la pierna con el objetivo deoptimizar su manejo. existe una amplia literatura sobre el tema, pero sigue existiendo una brecha entre la evidenciacientífi ca y la práctica clínica que seguimos tratando de minimizar. Laboratorios Urgo propuso al Capítulo español de Flebología y Linfología la creación de un comité de expertos deespaña y portugal para la elaboración de un algoritmo de diagnóstico, tratamiento y derivación ágil de las úlcerasen la extremidad inferior. Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica sistemática y se tuvieron en cuenta las guías depráctica clínica (GpC). Se diseñó un algoritmo sobre una regla nemotécnica alfabética que busca ayudar a memorizar los pasos clave deldiagnóstico y del tratamiento de estas úlceras. Se englobaron todos los aspectos prácticos, desde la valoración en atención primaria por médicos y enfermerashasta la atención especializada por el especialista en angiología y cirugía vascular. Con las letras del abecedario dela a hasta la F, resumimos los pasos necesarios para asegurar el diagnóstico de la úlcera, el mejor (best) tratamientolocal, terapia compresiva, tratamiento preventivo de recidiva después de la cicatrización de la úlcera y estrategiaquirúrgica y farmacológica.el diagnóstico preciso, la actuación correcta ajustada a las GpC y la derivación temprana para valorar estrategiasquirúrgicas o escleroterapia contribuyen a la resolución y a la reducción del tiempo de cicatrización de las úlcerasy la mejora de la calidad de vida de los pacientes. Seguir las GpC a través de un algoritmo reduce el consumo derecursos y de gasto, acelerando la cicatrización de la úlcera y previniendo su recidiva.(AU)

Venous ulcers are a prevalent disease, especially in elderly patients. they have a negative impact in patients’ qualityof life and carry a significant economic burden. this article suggests an algorithm for the diagnosis and treatment oflower extremity ulcers in order to optimize their management. there is huge evidence and multiple organizationshave published guidelines, consensus documents and treatment recommendations. nevertheless, there is still agap between evidence and clinical practice. Urgo Laboratories proposed the Spanish phlebology and Lymphology Chapter the creation of a Spanish andportuguese experts committee the elaboration of an algorithm for diagnosis and treatment and early referral oflower extremity ulcers. a systematic review was performed, considering the current clinical practice guidelines. the algorithm was designed on a simple alphabetic mnemonic rule aiming to easily memorize the key points andmost relevant issues of the diagnosis and treatment of these ulcers.all necessary steps from primary care nurses and physicians to Vascular Surgery were considered. With the alphabetletters from a to F in Spanish, all key points were summed up. to confirm ulcer diagnosis (asegurar el diagnóstico dela úlcera), best local treatment, compressive therapy, preventive treatment after healing (tratamiento preventivo derecidiva después de la cicatrización de la úlcera), surgical strategy (estrategia quirúrgica) and pharmacological strategy(estrategia farmacológica).an accurate diagnosis, a clinical practice according to the clinical practice guidelines and an early referral to thespecialist in order to determine if there is a surgical or interventional strategy are essential to effective resolutionand reduction of ulcer healing time, and finally to prevent its recurrence.(AU)

Technique for planning and implantation of a branched endograft as a proximal extension of a previous fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair.

Our patient had undergone a previous three-fenestration Anaconda (Terumo Medical Corp, Tokyo, Japan) fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) to treat a juxtarenal aortic aneurysm. At 10 years postoperatively, distal migration of the prosthesis, a proximal type I endoleak, and aortic sac enlargement of 10 mm in 6 months was observed. Because of the short length of the Anaconda's bifurcated body, we chose to use a Zenith custom-made endograft with four branches and a bifurcated body with an inverted contralateral limb. We have also described the issues that can arise during branched EVAR after fenestrated EVAR and some of the bailout techniques we performed to successfully perform the treatment.

Fenestrated and Scalloped Endovascular Grafts in Zone 0 and Zone 1 for Aortic Arch Disease.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to present midterm results of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using scalloped or fenestrated custom-made endovascular grafts (CMEGs) in aortic arch Zones 0 and 1. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data involving consecutive patients with aortic arch disease treated by scalloped or fenestrated Relay Plus stent grafts (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FL) landed in Zones 0 and 1. Patient demographics, operative details, clinical outcomes, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Between February 2014 and February 2020, 14 patients (9 male and 5 female) with a median age of 66 years (range 48-84) underwent scalloped or fenestrated TEVAR to preserve flow to the supra-aortic trunks (SATs). In 6 cases the landing zone was Zone 0 and in 8, Zone 1. Target vessels for the scallops were left common carotid artery in 8 cases (Zone 1) and innominate artery (IA) in 1 (Zone 0). All 5 fenestrations were designed to preserve the IA (Zone 0). Technical success was 100% with no endoleaks on completion angiography. One fatal perioperative stroke (7%) occurred in a patient with a fenestration for the IA and atherosclerotic plaques in the arch. During median follow-up of 37.5 (3-72) months, no other patient died, and all the target vessels and cervical revascularizations remained patent. There was no paraplegia, no retrograde dissection, and no other complication. Two patients (14%) with scallops in Zone 1 developed late endoleak: 1 type Ib at 6 months and 1 type Ia endoleak at 12 months. There were no endoleaks at all in the group of fenestrated endografts (Zone 0). CONCLUSIONS: When anatomy allows, endovascular treatment using scalloped or fenestrated CMEGs in Zones 0 and 1 is a feasible technique to treat patients with aortic arch disease involving the SATs.

Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Arch Lesions Using Scalloped Endografts.

OBJECTIVE: To present our early and midterm results using thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with a custom-made proximal scalloped stent graft to accommodate left common carotid artery (LCCA) and innominate artery (IA) in treating aortic lesions involving the arch. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 2014 and April 2017, select patients presenting with aortic arch lesions and short proximal landing zone were treated by proximal scalloped Relay Plus stent grafts. Patient demographics, operative details, clinical outcomes, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Six patients (50% male) with a median age of 71 years (range, 60-82) underwent scalloped TEVAR using thoracic custom-made Relay Plus stent graft to preserve flow in the proximal supra-aortic trunks. Target vessels for the scallop were LCCA in 5 cases and IA in 1 case. The technical success rate was 100%, and proximal seal was achieved in all cases with no type I endoleaks on completion angiography. The median follow-up period was 20 (7-32) months. No conversion to open surgical repair and no aortic rupture occurred. One patient had a distal type I endoleak on the 6-month computed tomography (CT) scan, and 1 patient had a proximal type I endoleak on the 12-month CT scan. There was no stroke, paraplegia, retrograde type A dissection, or other aortic-related complication. We routinely used temporary rapid right ventricular pacing to obtain a near-zero blood pressure level during the graft deployment. No complications were observed related to the use of rapid pacing. CONCLUSION: When anatomy allows, proximal scalloped stent graft to accommodate LCCA and IA is a viable therapeutic option in treating aortic lesions involving the arch with short proximal landing zones. In addition, these findings represent a strong argument for the use of temporary rapid pacing during graft deployment.