Transcatheter electrosurgical septotomy technique for chronic postdissection aortic aneurysms.

Aortic dissection often results in chronic aneurysmal degeneration due to progressive false lumen expansion. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair and other techniques of vessel incorporation such as fenestrated-branched or parallel grafts have been increasingly used to treat chronic postdissection aneurysms. True lumen compression or a vessel origin from the false lumen can present considerable technical challenges. In these cases, the limited true lumen space can result in inadequate stent graft expansion or restrict the ability to reposition the device or manipulate catheters. Reentrance techniques can be used selectively to assist with target vessel catheterization. Transcatheter electrosurgical septotomy is a novel technique that has evolved from the cardiology experience with transseptal or transcatheter aortic valve procedures. This technique has been applied in select patients with chronic dissection to create a proximal or distal landing zone, disrupt the septum in patients with an excessively compressed true lumen, or connect the true and false lumen in patients with vessels that have separate origins. In the present report, we summarize the indications and technical pitfalls of transcatheter electrosurgical septotomy in patients treated by endovascular repair for chronic postdissection aortic aneurysms.

Technical Pitfalls for Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair Following PETTICOAT.

PURPOSE: The Provisional Extension to Induce Complete Attachment Technique (PETTICOAT) uses a bare-metal stent to scaffold the true lumen in patients with acute or subacute aortic dissections. While it is designed to facilitate remodeling, some patients with chronic post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) require repair. This study describes the technical pitfalls of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) in patients who underwent prior PETTICOAT repair. TECHNIQUE: We report 3 patients with extent II TAAAs who had prior bare-metal dissection stents treated by FB-EVAR. Two patients required maneuvers to reroute the aortic guidewire, which was initially placed in-between stent struts. This was recognized before the deployment of the fenestrated-branched device. A third patient had difficult advancement of the celiac bridging stent due to a conflict of the tip of the stent delivery system into one of the stent struts, requiring to redo catheterization and pre-stenting with a balloon-expandable stent. There were no mortalities and target-related events after a follow-up of 12 to 27 months. CONCLUSION: FB-EVAR following the PETTICOAT is infrequent, but technical difficulties should be recognized to prevent complications from the inadvertent deployment of the fenestrated-branched stent-graft component in-between stent struts. CLINICAL IMPACT: The present study highlights a few maneuvers to prevent or overcome possible complications during endovascular repair of chronic post-dissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm following PETTICOAT. The main problem to be recognized is the placement of the aortic wire beyond one of the struts of the existing bare-metal stent. Moreover, encroachment of catheters or the bridging stent delivery system into the stent struts may potentially cause difficulties.

Technical tips and clinical experience with the Cook Triple inner arch branch stent-graft.

Open surgical repair remains the gold standard for treatment for aortic arch diseases, but these operations can be associated with wide heterogeneity in outcomes and significant morbidity and mortality, particularly in elderly patients with severe comorbidities or those who had prior arch procedures via median sternotomy. Endovascular repair has been introduced as a less invasive alternative to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with open surgical repair. The technique evolved with new device designs using up to three inner branches for incorporation of the supra-aortic trunks. This manuscript summarizes technical tips and clinical experience with the triple inner arch branch stent graft for total endovascular repair of aortic arch pathologies.

Technical tips and clinical experience with the Gore Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis®.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been widely accepted as a treatment option in patients with thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissections who have suitable anatomy. It is estimated that up to 60% of patients treated by TEVAR require extension of the repair into the distal aortic arch across Ishimaru zone 2. In these patients, coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA) without revascularization has been associated with increased risk of arm ischemia, stroke, and spinal cord injury. The Gore Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis (TBE, WL Gore, Flagstaff, AZ, USA) is the first off-the-shelf thoracic branch stent-graft approved by the Federal Drug Administration for treatment of distal aortic arch lesions requiring extension of the proximal seal into zone 2. This article summarizes the technical pitfalls and clinical outcomes of the TBE® device in zone 2.

Outcomes of iliofemoral conduits during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the technical pitfalls and outcomes of iliofemoral conduits during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 466 consecutive patients enrolled in a previous prospective nonrandomized study to investigate FB-EVAR for CAAAs/TAAAs (2013-2021). Iliofemoral conduits were performed through open surgical technique (temporary or permanent) in patients with patent internal iliac arteries or endovascular technique among those with occluded internal iliac arteries. End points were assessed in patients who had any iliac conduit or no conduits, and in patients who had conduits performed prior or during the index FB-EVAR, including procedural metrics, technical success, and major adverse events (MAE). RESULTS: There were 138 CAAAs, 141 extent IV, and 187 extent I-III TAAAs treated by FB-EVAR with an average of 3.89 ± 0.52 vessels incorporated per patient. Any iliac conduit was required in 35 patients (7.5%), including 24 patients (10.4%) treated between 2013 and 2017 and 11 (4.7%) who had procedures between 2018 and 2021 (P = .019). Nineteen patients had permanent conduits using iliofemoral bypass, 11 had temporary iliac conduits, and 5 had endoconduits. Iliofemoral conduits were necessary in 12% of patients with extent I to III TAAA, in 6% with extent IV TAAA, and in 3% with CAAA (P = .009). The use of iliofemoral conduit was more frequent among women (74% vs 27%; P < .001) and in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (49% vs 28%; P = .013), peripheral artery disease (31% vs 15%; P = .009), and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of III or higher (74% vs 51%; P = .009). There were no inadvertent iliac artery disruptions in the entire study. The 30-day mortality and MAE were 1% and 19%, respectively, for all patients. An iliofemoral conduit using retroperitoneal exposure during the index FB-EVAR was associated with longer operative time (322 ± 97 minutes vs 323 ± 110 minutes vs 215 ± 90 minutes; P < .001), higher estimated blood loss (425 ± 620 mL vs 580 ± 1050 mL vs 250 ± 400 mL; P < .001), and rate of red blood transfusion (92% vs 78% vs 32%; P < .001) and lower technical success (83% vs 87% vs 98%; P < .001), but no difference in intraoperative access complications and MAEs, compared with iliofemoral conduits without retroperitoneal exposure during the index FB-EVAR and control patients who had FB-EVAR without iliofemoral conduits, respectively. There were no differences in mortality or in other specific MAE among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR with selective use of iliofemoral conduits was safe with low mortality and no occurrence of inadvertent iliac artery disruption or conversion. A staged approach is associated with shorter operating time, less blood loss, and lower transfusion requirements in the index procedure.

Characterization of Secondary Interventions After Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms and Its Effect on Quality of Life and Patient Survival.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of secondary intervention (SI) on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. BACKGROUND: The effect of SI after FB-EVAR on physical and mental HR-QOL has not been described. METHODS: A cohort of 430 consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR (2013-2020) was assessed with 1325 short-form 36 HR-QOL questionnaires preoperatively and during follow-up visits. SIs were classified as major or minor procedures. Endpoints included patient survival, freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), freedom from SIs, and changes in HR-QOL physical component score (PCS) and mental component score. RESULTS: There were 302 male with mean age 74±8 years treated by FB-EVAR for 133 complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and 297 thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. After a mean follow up of 26±20 months, 97 patients (23%) required 137 SIs. At 5 years, freedom from any SI was 64%±4%, including freedom from minor SIs of 77%±4% and major SIs of 87%±3%. There was no difference in patient survival and freedom from ARM at same interval. On adjusted analysis, minor SIs correlated with improved survival. SIs had a negative correlation with PCS ( r =-0.8). There were no significant changes in mental component score with SIs. Predictors for SIs were fluoroscopy time, graft design, and aneurysm sac change. CONCLUSION: SIs were needed in nearly 1 out of 4 patients treated by FB-EVAR with no effect on patient survival or ARM. SI resulted in decline in PCS.

Transcarotid revascularization in obese patients.

OBJECTIVE: Transcarotid revascularization (TCAR) is a minimally invasive hybrid surgical carotid stenting technique which utilizes cerebral flow reversal as embolic protection during carotid lesion manipulation. This investigation was performed to define the perioperative risks associated with this operation in the obese patient. METHODS: A retrospective review of tandem carotid revascularization databases maintained at two high-volume health systems was performed to capture all TCARs performed between 2015 and 2022. A threshold of body mass index of 35 kg/m2 defined the "obese" patient. Demographics, intraoperative, perioperative, and follow-up characteristics were compared using univariate analysis. RESULTS: We performed 793 TCAR procedures that qualified for study inclusion within the prespecified time. After applying our obesity definition, 129 patients qualified as obese and were compared to the remainder. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics as comparable Charlson Comorbidity Indices were noted between groups; however, obese patients had a significantly higher prevalence of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes. Intraoperative, case complexity in the obese patients did not seem to be increased, as measured by operative time (68.4 ± 23.0 vs 64.2 ± 25.8 min, p = 0.09), fluoroscopic time (4.9 ± 3.2 vs 4.6 ± 3.6 min, p = 0.38), and estimated blood loss (40.6 ± 49.0 vs 46.6 ± 49.4 min, p = 0.22). Similarly, no disparities were observed with respect to ipsilateral stroke (3.1 vs. 1.7%, p = 0.29), contralateral stroke (0 vs. 0.2%, p > 0.99), death (0 vs. 1.1%, p = 0.61), and stroke/death (3.1 vs. 3.0%, p > 0.99) in the 30-day perioperative period. Both cohorts were followed for approximately 1 year (12.0 ± 13.4 vs 11.6 ± 13.4 months, p = 0.76). During this period, rates of ipsilateral stroke (3.1% vs. 2.7%, p > 0.99), contralateral stroke (1.1 vs. 0.8%, p > 0.99), and death (4.7 vs. 6.2%, p = 0.68) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: TCAR performed in the obese population was not more challenging by intraoperative characteristics and did not result in a statistically higher incidence of adverse events in the perioperative phase.

Single-Center Experience with the Femoral-to-Brachial Preloaded Delivery System for Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms.

PURPOSE: To assess technical aspects and outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) using a femoral-to-brachial (FTB) preloaded delivery system (PDS) with two separate configurations. METHODS: Clinical data of all consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective study to evaluate FB-EVAR for complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs & TAAA) between 2013 and 2020 were reviewed. Patients treated with FTB-PDS were included. The two configurations included 4 trans-brachial preloaded wires (4BR) or 2 trans-brachial and 2 transfemoral preloaded wires (2BR-2FE). Outcome measures included technical success, procedural metrics, 30-day or in-hospital mortality, major adverse events (MAEs), and target-vessel outcomes. RESULTS: There were 115 patients with a mean age of 73.8 ± 8 years, treated with FTB-PDS. Of these, 62 patients (54%) had 4BR and 53 patients (46%) had 2BR-2FE FTB-PDS. There were 106 TAAA (92%) and 9 CAAAs (8%). Technical success, defined as successful implantation of the stent-graft and all intended target-vessel stents without type I or III endoleak, was 97%, with no differences in total operating time, endovascular time, and radiation dose between groups. There were 3 deaths (3%) at 30 days. MAEs were noticed in 21 patients (18%) with no difference between groups, including new-onset dialysis (2% vs. 4%, P = 0.59), and paraplegia (7% vs. 11%, P = 0.51), for 4BR and 2BR-2FE, respectively. Patient survival and freedom from aortic-related mortality at 2-years were 79 ± 5% and 97 ± 1.7%, respectively, with no difference between groups. CONCLUSION: The use of FTB-PDS for FB-EVAR is safe with high technical success and a reasonable rate of MAEs. Each configuration provides specific benefits based on patient anatomy, while having similar procedural metrics and clinical outcomes.

Outcomes of low- and standard-profile fenestrated and branched stent grafts for treatment of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the outcomes of fenestrated-branched (FB) endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) using low-profile (LP) and standard-profile (SP) stent grafts for the treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of 466 consecutive patients (70% male; mean age, 74 ± 8 years) enrolled in a prospective nonrandomized study to investigate FB-EVAR for the treatment of CAAAs and TAAAs (2013-2021). The endpoints compared between the patients treated with LP (18F-20F) and SP (20F-22F) devices included procedural metrics, access-related complications, major adverse events (MAE), patient survival, freedom from secondary intervention, thromboembolic events, stent graft integrity issues, aneurysm sac enlargement, and the rate of sac shrinkage. RESULTS: Of the 466 aneurysms treated by FB-EVAR, 138 were CAAAs and 141 were extent IV and 187 extent I to III TAAAs, with a mean number of 3.9 ± 0.5 vessels stented per patient. LP devices had been used in 239 patients (51%) and SP devices in 227 patients (49%). LP devices had been used more frequently for chronic dissections (12% vs 7%; P = .041) and with preloaded systems (77% vs 65%; P = .005) and bilateral percutaneous femoral access (83% vs 74%; P = .020) and less frequently with upper extremity access (67% vs 88%; P < .001) and iliac conduits (2% vs 6%; P = .020). The patients treated using LP devices had experienced similar technical success (96% vs 97%; P = .527), with a shorter total operating time (225 ± 81 minutes vs 243 ± 78 minutes; P = .018), lower radiation exposure (median, 0.93 Gy; interquartile range [IQR], 0.94; vs median, 1.01 Gy; IQR, 0.91 Gy; P < .001), and less use of contrast (median, 135 mL; IQR, 68 mL; vs median, 144 mL; IQR, 80 mL; P = .008). No differences were found in the rates of iliofemoral access complications between the LP and SP device groups (1.3% vs 3.5%; P = .107). At 30 days, 5 patients had died (1%) and MAEs had occurred in 89 patients (19%), with no differences between the two groups. The mean follow-up was 28 months (95% confidence interval, 25-30 months). At 4 years, the patients treated with LP devices had had similar freedom from all-cause mortality (69% ± 6% vs 68% ± 4%; P = .199), freedom from aortic-related mortality (97% ± 1% vs 98% ± 1%; P = .488), freedom from any secondary intervention (65% ± 6% vs 70% ± 4%; P = .433), freedom from thromboembolic events (98% ± 1% vs 99% ± 1%; P = .364) and aneurysm sac enlargement (93% ± 3% vs 91% ± 3%; P = .293). However, the LP group had had less freedom from any integrity-related issues (92% ± 5% vs 100%; P < .001). The cumulative risk of sac shrinkage was greater for patients treated with LP devices (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.040; 95% confidence interval, 1.516-2.744; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: FB-EVAR was performed with low rates of mortality and MAEs, irrespective of the device profile. However, the procedures performed with LP devices had had less need for iliac conduits and had had better procedural metrics. The use of LP devices resulted in higher rates of sac shrinkage. However, the results on stent graft integrity require future investigation.

Endovascular management of left ventricular assist device outflow graft stenosis.

Stenosis of left ventricular assist devices has traditionally required open operative management with device revision or replacement; however, endovascular therapy is emerging as an alternative to open surgery. Limited by the rarity of this approach, consensus is lacking regarding the optimal technique. In this publication, we present a case report of outflow graft stenosis managed with endovascular treatment and discuss technical considerations including preoperative planning, stent selection, and procedural adjuncts.

A Review of Antithrombotic Therapies for Patients with Chronic Peripheral Arterial Disease and after Revascularization.

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) represents a major health issue that significantly impacts patient's survival and quality of life. In addition to limb-related events, patients with PAD have an increased risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, and death. However, compared with coronary and cerebrovascular disease, studies addressing optimal risk reduction modalities including antithrombotic therapies in patients with PAD have been underrepresented in the literature. This publication serves as a narrative review of existing evidence on the effectiveness of antithrombotic therapy in patients with PAD. In patients with chronic stable PAD or post-revascularization, antithrombotic therapies including single or dual antiplatelet agents, anticoagulation, or a combination of these treatments have been shown to reduce cardiovascular and limb events. This narrative review provides a summary of the available literature on the management of patients with PAD, categorized into treatment strategies for chronic, post-endovascular treatment, and post-open surgical revascularization and to discuss the antithrombotic protocol utilized at our institution while providing a rational for our treatment algorithm.

Relining of infrarenal stent-graft with preloaded modified Gore Excluder for occult endoleak with sac expansion.

Endoleaks remain one of the most common indications for reintervention after endovascular aortic repair. Occasionally, aneurysm sac expansion will occur in the absence of a visible endoleak or due to endotension. We describe a case of continued sac expansion without an identifiable endoleak after endovascular aortic repair. Technical challenges during the case included a short distance from the renal arteries to the flow divider and a significant metal artifact. These challenges were addressed by shortening the gate of a Gore Excluder (W.L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) to the desired length. The contralateral gate was preloaded to allow for use of the snare-ride technique for gate cannulation and overcome the metal artifact that was hindering visualization.

Management of a contained ruptured infrarenal abdominal aortic pseudoaneurysm caused by inferior vena cava struts injury: A case report and literature review.

Aortic pseudoaneurysms are rare entities caused by infection, trauma, atherosclerotic plaque rupture, or aortic instrumentation. Their natural course remains unknown; however, repair is invariably recommended. We present a case of a 71-year-old man with a history of recurrent deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolisms who underwent an inferior vena cava filter placement 8 years prior and was found to have a 3.6-cm contained ruptured infrarenal aortic pseudoaneurysm on imaging performed for abdominal pain. His pseudoaneurysm was excluded using a Gore Excluder Endoprosthesis. We further reviewed literature on the subject to highlight the various surgical approaches to this lethal condition.

Clinical application and technical details of cook zenith devices modification to treat urgent and elective complex aortic aneurysms.

PURPOSE: To describe technical details of modifying four different Cook Zenith devices to treat complex aortic aneurysms. MATERIAL: In the first three cases, the modification process involved complete stent graft deployment on a sterile back table. Fenestrations were created using an ophthalmologic cautery and reinforced with a radiopaque snare using a double-armed 4-0 Ethibond locking suture based on measurements obtained on centerline of flow. In each instance, a nitinol wire was withdrawn and redirected through and through the fabric and used as a constraining wire. In the fourth patient, modification involved partial stent graft deployment and creation of additional two fenestrations to accommodate renal arteries. The devices are resheathed and implanted in the standard fashion. RESULTS: Four patients underwent exclusion of their aneurysms, including thoracoabdominal aneurysms (n = 2), a contained ruptured juxtarenal aneurysm (n = 1), and a ruptured failed previous endovascular repair (n = 1). Fifteen fenestrations were successfully bridged with Atrium iCAST stent grafts. Average graft modification time, operative time, contrast volume, radiation dose, estimated blood loss, and hospital length of stay were 89 min, 155.25 min, 58.8 mL, 2451 mGy, 175 mL, and 4.3 days, respectively. One patient required a secondary intervention to treat a type Ib endoleak. During an average follow-up of 25 months, aneurysm sacs progressively shrank without additional intervention. CONCLUSION: Physician-modified fenestrated/branched endografts are a safe alternative to custom made devices, especially in urgent cases and should be part of the armamentarium of any complex aortic program.

Complex redo cervical and vertebral artery reconstruction for Takayasu arteritis.

A 54-year-old woman presented with an enlarging, pulsatile left neck mass and a history of Takayasu arteritis. She had seven prior cervical vascular reconstructions, including a prosthetic right-to-left carotid crossover, and left vertebral and subclavian bypasses done with saphenous vein. The skin of her neck was scarred and thin. The anastomotic pseudoaneurysms were resected, the left carotid bifurcation was reconstructed with the cryopreserved femoral artery because of the concern about wound healing, and the subclavian and vertebral vein grafts were reimplanted. Intraoperative management, clamp sites and sequence, manner of shunting, choice of conduit, and wound healing were important considerations.

Preloaded contralateral gate techniques during endovascular aortic repair for aneurysms and occlusive disease.

We present two preloaded techniques to facilitate gate cannulation during endovascular aortic repair. In the first case, we relined the aorta using a Gore iliac branch endoprosthesis (WL Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) for acute occlusion. This allowed for preloading the contralateral gate, which was compressed when deployed, and subsequently dilated open over the preloaded wire to allow for cannulation. The second patient had had an infrarenal aneurysm. A Gore Excluder was partially deployed extracorporeally to preload the gate from the ipsilateral side. The "snare ride" technique was used to rapidly cannulate the gate. Preloaded wire techniques during endovascular aortic repair can facilitate rapid gate cannulation, especially in patients with challenging anatomy.

Literature review of distal deep vein thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE: Although distal deep vein thrombosis (DDVT) has been more frequently diagnosed with the availability of better ultrasound imaging quality, the data on the best method to manage DDVT have been conflicting. The aim of the present review was to summarize the current and evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of DDVT and to provide a summary of the most recent societal guideline recommendations. METHODS: A literature review of DDVT was performed. The PubMed databases were queried for articles on the epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, and management of DDVT. RESULTS: The prevalence of isolated DDVT has been reported in a broad range. The reported risk factors include older age, active malignancy, a low degree of mobility, acute infection, and atrial fibrillation. With more evidence, anticoagulation therapy was found to be associated with a reduced risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and/or thrombus propagation compared with conservative management. However, anticoagulation was associated with an increased risk of bleeding in a number of studies. The rate of VTE recurrence ranged from 7% to 23% during a follow-up period ranging from 3 months to 8 years. The significant risk factors for VTE recurrence included cancer, older age, an unprovoked event, and inpatient status. CONCLUSIONS: Few studies have addressed the diagnosis and management of DDVT. Further research is needed to standardize the best approach to diagnose and treat DDVT.

Lipid-lowering therapies in peripheral artery disease: A review.

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is estimated to affect approximately 8.5 million individuals in the US above the age of 40, and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and impairment. Despite the significant adverse limb and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes seen in patients with PAD, there is typically less attention paid to risk factor modification relative to other atherosclerotic diseases such as coronary artery disease (CAD) or stroke. In the current literature, statins have been shown to reduce mortality, major adverse CV events, major adverse limb events, and improve symptomatic outcomes in patients with PAD. In addition, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors are emerging as an additional lipid-lowering therapy for patients with PAD. However, despite current guideline recommendations based on growing evidence, patients with PAD are consistently undertreated with lipid-lowering therapies. We provide an extensive literature review and evidence-based recommendations for the use of statins and PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with PAD.

Comparison of Cerebral Embolic Events Between Right and Left Upper Extremity Access During Fenestrated/Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence and outcomes of cerebral embolic events when using right (RUE) vs left upper extremity (LUE) access for fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (f/bEVAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 290 consecutive patients enrolled in a physician-sponsored Investigational Device Exemption study to evaluate f/bEVAR between 2013 and 2018. Of these, 270 patients (93%) had an upper extremity access with 12-F sheaths, including 205 patients (mean age 75±8 years; 147 men) with LUE and 65 patients (mean age 73±8 years; 42 men) with RUE access. Outcome measures were technical success, procedural metrics, major adverse events (MAEs), any stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), and mortality. RESULTS: Technical success was higher (p=0.04) for LUE (99.6%) vs RUE access (98.4%). Patients treated via RUE access more often had extent I-III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (57% vs 39%, p=0.03). Procedural metrics were similar for LUE vs RUE sides, including endovascular time (255±80 vs 246±83 minutes, respectively; p=0.23), fluoroscopy time (84±32 vs 90±35 minutes, respectively; p=0.80), and contrast volume (156±57 vs 153±56 mL, respectively; p=0.82). Total radiation exposure was significantly higher for LUE vs RUE access (2463±1912 vs 1757±1494 mGy, respectively; p=0.02). There were 2 deaths (1%) at 30 days or during hospital admission, both unrelated to access site complications. MAEs occurred in 32% of patients who had LUE and 26% of those who had RUE access (p=0.44). Five patients (2%) had embolic stroke and none had TIA. Embolic strokes were ipsilateral to the access side in 4 patients and affected the posterior circulation in 3. Two patients (1%) had hemorrhagic strokes. The incidence of stroke was 3% for LUE and 2% for RUE access (p>0.99). CONCLUSION: Fenestrated/branched stent-graft repair was associated with low rates of cerebral embolic events and no significant difference between the right vs left upper extremity approach.

Risk and Management of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: One of the most pronounced and poorly understood pathological features of COVID-19 infection has been high risk for venous and arterial thromboembolic complications. An increasing number of thromboembolic events are being reported almost on a daily basis, and the medical community has struggled to predict and mitigate this risk. We aimed to review available literature on the risk and management of COVID-19 related venous thromboembolism (VTE), and provide evidence-based guidance to manage these events. METHODS: A literature review of VTE complications in patients with COVID-19 was performed, in addition to a summary of the societal guidelines and present pathways implemented at our institution for the management of both in- and outpatient COVID-19 related VTE. RESULTS: Although a significant VTE risk has been confirmed in patients with COVID-19, literature addressing best ways to mitigate this risk is lacking. Furthermore, there has been very limited guidance provided by societal guidelines to help prevent and manage VTE associated with the COVID-19 infection. In light of the available data, we advise that all patients admitted with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 receive pharmacological prophylaxis if bleeding risk is acceptable. For patients with COVID-19 who have been discharged from the emergency department or hospital, we suggest extended thromboprophylaxis (up to 39 days) as long as bleeding risk is low. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that this literature summary along with our center recommendations and algorithms provide valuable guidance to providers caring for patients with COVID-19 related VTE. More research is needed to standardize prophylaxis and management protocols for these patients.