Relative Thrombus Burden Ratio Reveals Overproportioned Intraluminal Thrombus Growth-Potential Implications for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

Background: An intraluminal, non-occlusive thrombus (ILT) is a common feature in an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). This study investigated the relative progression of ILT vs. AAA volume using a novel parameter, the so-called thrombus burden ratio (TBR), in non-treated AAAs. Parameters potentially associated with TBR progression were analyzed and TBR progression in large vs. small and fast- vs. slow-growing AAAs was assessed. Methods: This retrospective, single-center study analyzed sequential contrast-enhanced computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans between 2009 and 2018 from patients with an AAA before surgical treatment. Patients' medical data and CTA scans were analyzed at two given time points. The TBR was calculated as a ratio of ILT and AAA volume, and relative TBR progression was calculated by normalization for time between sequential CTA scans. Spearman's correlation was applied to identify morphologic parameters correlating with TBR progression, and multivariate linear regression analysis was used to evaluate the association of clinical and morphological parameters with TBR progression. Results: A total of 35 patients were included. The mean time between CT scans was 16 ± 15.9 months. AAA volume progression was 12 ± 3% and ILT volume progression was 36 ± 13%, resulting in a TBR progression of 11 ± 4%, suggesting overproportioned ILT growth. TBR progression was 0.8 ± 0.8% per month. Spearman's correlation verified ILT growth as the most relevant parameter contributing to TBR progression (R = 0.51). Relative TBR progression did not differ significantly in large vs. small and fast- vs. slow-growing AAAs. In the multivariate regression analysis, none of the studied factors were associated with TBR progression. Conclusion: TBR increases during AAA development, indicating an overproportioned ILT vs. AAA volume growth. The TBR may serve as a useful parameter, as it incorporates the ILT volume growth relative to the AAA volume, therefore combining two important parameters that are usually reported separately. Yet, the clinical relevance in helping to identify potential corresponding risk factors and the evaluation of patients at risk needs to be further validated in a larger study cohort.

Radiation Exposure and Contrast Agent Use during Endovascular Aortic Repair Using Mobile Versus Fixed Angiography Systems.

BACKGROUND: For (thoracic) endovascular aortic repair ((T)EVAR) procedures, both mobile (standard operating room (SOR)) and fixed C-arm (hybrid operating room (HOR)) systems are available. This study evaluated differences in key procedural parameters, and procedural success for (T)EVAR in the SOR versus the HOR. METHODS: All patients who underwent standard elective (T)EVAR at the Clinic for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery at the University Hospital Duesseldorf, Germany, between 1 January 2012 and 1 January 2019 were included. Data were retrieved from archived medical records. Endpoints were analyzed for SOR versus HOR during (T)EVAR. RESULTS: A total of 93 patients, including 50 EVAR (SOR (n = 20); HOR (n = 30)) and 43 TEVAR (SOR (n = 22); HOR (n= 21)) were included. The dose area product (DAP) for EVAR and TEVAR was lower in the SOR than in the HOR (EVAR, SOR: 1635 ± 1088 cGy·cm2; EVAR, HOR: 7819 ± 8928 cGy·cm2; TEVAR, SOR: 8963 ± 34,458 cGy·cm2; TEVAR, HOR: 14,591 ± 11,584 cGy·cm2 (p < 0.05)). Procedural fluoroscopy time was shorter in the SOR than in the HOR for EVAR and TEVAR (EVAR, SOR: 7 ± 4 min; EVAR, HOR: 18.8 ± 11.3 min; TEVAR, SOR: 6.6 ± 9.6 min; TEVAR, HOR: 13.9 ± 11.8 min (p < 0.05)). Higher volumes of contrast agent were applied during EVAR and TEVAR in the SOR than in the HOR (EVAR, SOR: 57.5 ± 20 mL; EVAR: HOR: 33.3 ± 5 mL (p < 0.05); TEVAR; SOR: 71.5 ± 53.4 mL, TEVAR, HOR: 48.2 ± 27.5 mL (p ≥ 0.05). CONCLUSION: The use of a fixed C-arm angiography system in the HOR results in higher radiation exposure and longer fluoroscopy times but lower contrast agent volumes when compared with mobile C-arm systems in the SOR. Because stochastic radiation sequelae are more likely to be tolerated in an older patient population and, in addition, there is a higher incidence of CKD in this patient population, allocation of patients to the HOR for standard (T)EVAR seems particularly advisable based on our results.

Accuracy and Sterilizability of In-House Printed Patient-Specific Aortic Model for Surgeon-Modified Stent Grafts-A Workflow Description for Emergency Aortic Endovascular Procedures.

Introduction: The use of 3D-printed aortic models for the creation of surgeon-modified endoprostheses represents a promising avenue in aortic surgery. By focusing on the potential impact of sterilization on model integrity and geometry, this report sheds light on the suitability of these models for creating customized endoprostheses. The study presented here aimed to investigate the safety and viability of 3D-printed aortic models in the context of sterilization processes and subsequent remodeling. Methods: The study involved the fabrication of 3D-printed aortic models using patient-specific imaging data and established additive manufacturing techniques. Five identical aortic models of the same patient were printed. Two models were subjected to sterilization and two to disinfection using commonly employed methods, and one model remained untreated. The models were checked by in-house quality control for deformation (heat map analyses) after the sterilization and disinfection processes. Three models (sterilized, disinfected, and untreated) were sent for ex-house (Lufthansa Technik, AG, Materials Technologies and Central Laboratory Services, Hamburg, Germany) evaluation and subsequent quantification of possible structural changes using advanced imaging and measurement technologies (macroscopic and SEM/EDX examinations). After sterilization and disinfection, each aortic model underwent sterility checks. Results: Based on macroscopic and SEM/EDX examinations, distinct evidence of material alterations attributed to a treatment process, such as a cleaning procedure, was not identified on the three implants. Comparative material analyses conducted via the EDX technique yield consistent results for all three implants. Disinfected and sterilized models tested negative for common pathogens. Conclusions: The evaluation of 3D-printed aortic models' safety after sterilization as well as their suitability for surgeon-modified endoprostheses is a critical step toward their clinical integration. By comprehensively assessing changes in model integrity and geometry after sterilization, this research has contributed to the broader understanding of the use of 3D-printed models for tailor-made endovascular solutions. As medical technologies continue to evolve, research endeavors such as this one can serve as a foundation for harnessing the full potential of 3D printing to advance patient-centered care in aortic surgery.

The Comparison of Endovascular and Open Surgical Treatment for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Terms of Safety and Efficacy on the Basis of a Single-Center 30-Year Experience.

OBJECTIVE: Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is a critical condition with a high mortality rate. Over the years, endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has evolved as a viable treatment option in addition to open repair (OR). The primary objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of EVAR and OR for the treatment of rAAA based on a comprehensive analysis of our single-centre 30-year experience. METHODS: Patients treated for rAAA at the Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany from 1 January 1993 to 31 December 2022 were included. Relevant information was retrieved from archived medical records. Patient survival and surgery-related complications were analysed. RESULTS: None of the patient-specific markers, emergency department-associated parameters, and co-morbidities were associated with patient survival. The 30-day and in-hospital mortality was higher in the OR group vs. in the EVAR group (50% vs. 8.7% and 57.1% vs. 13%, respectively). OR was associated with more frequent occurrence of more severe complications when compared to EVAR. Overall patient survival was 56 ± 5% at 12 months post-surgery (52 ± 6% for OR vs. 73 ± 11% for EVAR, respectively) (p < 0.05). Patients ≥70 years of age showed poorer survival in the OR group, with a 12-month survival of 42 ± 7% vs. 70 ± 10% for patients <70 years of age (p < 0.05). In the EVAR group, this age-related survival advantage was not found (12-month survival: ≥70 years: 67 ± 14%, <70 years: 86 ± 13%). Gender-specific survival was similar regardless of the applied method of care. CONCLUSION: OR was associated with more severe complications in our study. EVAR initially outperformed OR for rAAA regarding patient survival while re-interventions following EVAR negatively affect survival in the long-term. Elderly patients should be treated with EVAR. Gender does not seem to have a significant impact on survival.

The Role of Spatial Aortic Arch Architecture in Type B Aortic Dissection.

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is increasing worldwide; however, the underlying pathomechanisms are not conclusively understood. This study explores the geometric architecture of the aortic arch and supra-aortic branches in TBAD patients as opposed to non-TBAD patients. METHODS: Patient characteristics were retrieved from archived medical records. Computer-assisted tomography (CAT) scans of patients with TBAD and carotid stenosis (CS) from two high-volume centers were analyzed. Various aortic arch parameters and take-off angles of the supra-aortic branches of TBAD patients were measured following centerline normalization in comparison CS patients. A compression index (C-index) was calculated from the para-sagittal, and a torsion index (T-index) was calculated from the para-coronal take-off angles of the supra-aortic branches to analyze aortic arch tortuosity. RESULTS: A total of 199 CAT scans were analyzed, namely, 85 in the TBAD group and 114 in the CS group. The average age was 61.5 ± 13.1 years among the TBAD patients and 71 ± 9.3 years among the CS patients. We found a significantly higher proportion of type III aortic arch configurations in TBAD patients compared with CS patients. Further, the aortic arch angle was steeper in the TBAD group. In the para-sagittal plane, the left subclavian artery (LSA) take-off angle was less steep in TBAD patients. In the para-coronal plane, the left carotid artery (LCA) had a less steep take-off angle, while the LSA had a more obtuse take-off angle in the TBAD group when compared with the CS group. In addition, the inter-vessel distance was increased in TBAD patients. Finally, the T-index was increased, suggesting a significant torsion resulting from the deviating take-off angles of the supra-aortic branches supplying the left half of the body as opposed to the innominate artery (IA) in TBAD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest several aortic arch-specific geometric configurations in patients suffering from TBAD that significantly differ from those in CS patients. Further functional studies are needed to verify the pathogenetic relevance of our results and their disease-specific causality. Although our data are not mechanistically explorative, they may serve as a basis for identifying future patients with aortic arch morphology at higher risk for TBAD development and who may benefit from more stringent adjustment of risk factors as a primary prevention concept.