Safety of Carotid Revascularization during the Acute Period of Neurological Symptom Onset in Women.

BACKGROUND: Benefit from carotid revascularization is supposed to be lower in women due to increased periprocedural risks. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk of stroke/death after carotid intervention in women treated within 15 days from last neurological event. METHODS: Data from 282 consecutive patients treated during 2009-2015 by carotid endarterectomy or carotid stenting within 15 days from neurological symptoms were analyzed by sex and stratified according to treatment delay toward symptoms onset. RESULTS: Eighty women (28.4%) underwent carotid stenosis correction: in 37 treatment was performed within 7 days from symptoms (in 12 within 48 hr); the remaining underwent carotid disease correction between day 8 and day 15 after the index event. Baseline comorbidity profile, presenting symptoms (stroke, transient ischemic attack, and recurrent symptoms) and treatment delay were comparable between sexes. The 30-day stroke/death rate was 2.5% in women (2/80) and 3.5% (7/202) in men (P = 1.00). There was no 30-day death or cerebral hemorrhage in women and in patients treated within the first 48 hours. In adjusted analyses, female sex was not associated with increased stroke/death risk. At 4 years, for women and men survival was 93.9% vs. 79.2% (P = 0.047) and freedom from stroke 92.6% vs. 92.2% (P = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Women with symptomatic carotid stenosis may benefit as men from intervention when performed within the acute (15 days) or hyperacute (48 hr) period after neurological event. Thirty-day stroke/death rate in this experience is lower or comparable to men's and treatment appears to be effective in preventing new strokes at midterm.

Mortality Risk for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Women.

BACKGROUND: Sex differences in presentation and outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) with increased mortality rates in women are suggested. This study aimed to assess mortality risk after repair of ruptured AAA (rAAA) in women in the endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR) era. METHODS: Patients treated between 2006 and 2015 for rAAA were included in a prospective database. Characteristics at presentation and outcomes were compared between women and men. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional analyses were performed to identify the effect of sex adjusted for other predictors on mortality. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen patients were identified; of these, 17.7% (20/113) of the patients were women. Forty-four procedures (38.9%) were by EVAR, with comparable rates in women (45%) and men (37.6%, P = 0.62). On admission, women and men shared similar comorbidities and presentation (shock 45% vs. 43.0%, P = 0.81; free rupture 65.0% vs. 67.7%, P = 0.80) and comparable mean aneurysm diameter (76.5 vs. 78.8 mm, P = 0.68), but women were older (mean age 86.4 + 5.5 vs. 75.2 ± 10.6 years, P < 0.0001) and octogenarian women were twice as likely as men (90% vs. 40%, P < 0.0001). Perioperative mortality was comparable between women and men (40.0% vs. 38.7%) either after EVAR (22.2% vs. 40.0% in women and men respectively; odds ratio [OR] 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-2.37) or after open surgery (54.5% vs. 37.9%; OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.54-7.21), even though there was a trend for lower mortality in women with EVAR. In adjusted analyses, female sex was not associated with perioperative mortality as it was for older age (octogenarians: OR 6.6, 95% CI 2.08-20.82, P = 0.001) and free rupture (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.29-13.73, P = 0.02). Mean follow-up was 34.32 months. After controlling for age, surgical repair, free rupture, cardiac disease, and shock at presentation, female sex was not a predictor of late mortality. CONCLUSIONS: AAA repair is often delayed in women and applied at older age; nevertheless, currently women do not show increased perioperative mortality risks from rAAA treatment after the introduction of EVAR.

Impact of age and urgency on survival after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Elderly patients are often turned down from receiving treatment for descending thoracic aortic diseases (DTADs) because of the uncertain benefits, especially in acute settings. This study investigated the impact of old age and timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) on outcomes of DTAD in patients older than 75 years of age. METHODS: Patients from a prospective TEVAR database were dichotomized by age (75 and 80 years of age). Older and young patients were compared in three timing scenarios: (1) elective procedures, (2) any emergency (within 15 days from onset), and (3) acute ruptures (any emergency subgroup). Primary outcome was perioperative mortality assessed at 30 and 90 days. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2015, 141 consecutive TEVARs (71.6% men) were performed. Fifty-seven patients (40.4%) were older than 75 years of age; 28 were octogenarians. Eighty-three TEVARs were performed electively and 58 emergently. Among overall emergencies, 42 TEVARs were for acute ruptures. In the elective scenario, the 30-day mortality rate was 5.0% vs 0 (odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.1; P = .23), and 90-day mortality was 7.5% vs 0, for patients older than 75 years of age vs those who were younger than 75, respectively (P = .11). No octogenarian died. In the emergency scenario, 30-day mortality was 41.2% vs 9.8%, for patients older than 75 years of age vs those who were younger than 75, respectively (OR, 6.5; 95% CI, 1.6-26.6; P = .01) with unchanged rates at 90 days. The mortality rate was 50% for octogenarians. In the acute rupture scenario, 30-day mortality was 40% vs 11.1% (OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.10-25.99; P = .05) for patients older than 75 years of age vs those younger than 75 years of age and 46% vs 10% (OR, 7.5; 95% CI, 1.47-37.46; P = .016) for octogenarians vs younger patients. Rates remained unchanged at 90 days. Patients older than age 75 survived for a mean of 53.98 ± 7.7 months after TEVAR. CONCLUSIONS: In the elderly patient population with DTAD, mortality risks from TEVAR are strongly related to timing and age. When compared to younger patients, those older than 75 years of age have three to five times the risk of mortality after urgent or emergent TEVAR. However, older patients should still be considered for emergent life-saving treatment, given that the majority survives.

A propensity-matched comparison for endovascular and open repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate outcomes of patients treated with endovascular repair (ER) with the use of fenestrated and branched stent grafts or open surgery (OS) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) in a current series of patients. METHODS: All TAAA patients undergoing repair at three centers between January 2007 and December 2014 were included in a prospective database. Patients were stratified according to treatment by ER or OS, and outcomes were compared using propensity score matching (1:1). Covariates included age, sex, aneurysm extent, hypertension, coronary disease, chronic pulmonary disease, diabetes, and renal function. The primary end points were mortality and paraplegia. Secondary end points included any spinal cord ischemia (SCI), renal and respiratory insufficiency, and a composite of these complications or death at 30 days. All-cause survival and freedom from reintervention were compared in the two groups. RESULTS: Of 341 patients, 84 (25%) underwent ER and 257 underwent OS (75%). After propensity score matching (65 patients per group), no significant differences were observed in rates of 30-day mortality (7.7% in ER and 6.2% in OS; P = 1) and paraplegia (9.2% and 10.8%; P = 1). Any SCI, renal insufficiency, and respiratory insufficiency were 12.3% and 20% (P = .34), 9.2% and 12.3% (P = .78), and 0% and 12.3% (P = .006) in ER and OS, respectively. The incidence of the composite end point was significantly lower in ER patients (18.5% in ER vs 36.0% in OS; P =.03). According to Kaplan-Meier estimates, all-cause survival at 24 months was 82.8% in ER and 84.9% in OS, with rates unchanged at 42 months (P = .9). Rates of freedom from reintervention were 91.0% vs 89.7% at 24 months and 80.0% vs 79.9% at 42 months in ER vs OS, respectively (P = .3). CONCLUSIONS: A propensity score analysis in patients with TAAA undergoing repair suggests an early benefit from ER compared with OS with regard to the composite end point because of reduced 30-day respiratory complications. No significant differences were found in SCI and renal insufficiency at 30 days and in survival and reintervention rates at midterm.

Bilateral Staged Computed Tomography-Guided Gluteal Artery Puncture for Internal Iliac Embolization in a Patient with Type II Endoleak.

Repair of isolated iliac aneurysm with stent-graft implantation and internal iliac coverage may induce significant type II endoleak from patent internal iliac refilling leading to ongoing aneurysm growth. Subsequent treatment of such complication can be challenging especially in case of bilateral iliac involvement. Open repair is technically demanding and often a high risk procedure, while embolization via transfemoral approach is unviable due to the stent-graft coverage precluding direct antegrade access between the common and the internal iliac lumen. Percutaneous retrograde embolization from superior gluteal artery is a feasible technique in case of impossible access through the origin of internal iliac artery.

Safety of Carotid Revascularization in Symptomatic Patients with less than 70 Years.

BACKGROUND: Age is a main risk factor for stroke and perioperative risk. This study aims to analyze the effect of age by symptomatic status in young patients receiving carotid revascularization. METHODS: Consecutive carotid revascularization procedures performed during the period 2001-2009 were reviewed. Patients were analyzed by age using the 70-year threshold as suggested by trials. Primary end point was perioperative stroke or death rate. Secondary end points included survival and late stroke incidence at 6 years. RESULTS: A total of 2,196 procedures (1,080 by carotid artery stenting [CAS] and 1,116 by carotid endarterectomy [CEA]) were analyzed. Symptomatic patients (n = 684) showed higher perioperative stroke or death risks (24 of 684 [3.5%] versus 29 of 1,512 [1.9%], odds ratio [OR] 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-3.22; P = 0.034) and lower 6-year survival (74% vs. 82%, P < 0.0001) or freedom from late stroke (93% vs. 97%, P = 0.001) when compared with asymptomatic patients with similar differences detected within CEA or CAS procedure. Overall 949 procedures were in patients with 70 years or less at the time of intervention (500 CEA and 449 CAS); 282 were in patients symptomatic for minor stroke or transient ischemic attack within 6 months before revascularization. For young symptomatic patients, primary end point rates were <2.5% after both CEA and CAS procedure. Perioperative stroke or death rates were 2.4% in symptomatic versus 1.5% in asymptomatic (4 of 170 vs. 5 of 330; OR 1.57; 95% CI 0.42-5.91; P = 0.50) within the CEA group and 1.8% in symptomatic versus 1.2% in asymptomatic (2 of 112 vs. 4 of 337; OR 1.51; 95% CI 0.27-8.38; P = 0.64) within the CAS group. At 6 years, symptomatic young patients showed survival (89.5% vs. 89%, P = 0.76) and freedom from late stroke (97% vs. 98%, P = 0.56) rates comparable to those found in asymptomatic patients, with similar incidences after CAS or CEA procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes after carotid revascularization are related to patients' age. At younger ages (<70 years), after carotid revascularization, symptomatic patients show low perioperative risks of stroke or death, comparable with those in asymptomatic patients. The same, 2.5% or lower, threshold for perioperative stroke or death risk related to asymptomatic carotid procedures must be applied today to symptomatic patients when younger than age of 70 years.

Summary of Evidence on Early Carotid Intervention for Recently Symptomatic Stenosis Based on Meta-Analysis of Current Risks.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the evidence on the periprocedural (<30 days) risks of carotid intervention in relation to timing of procedure in patients with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis. METHODS: A systematic literature review of studies published in the past 8 years reporting periprocedural stroke/death after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) related to the time between qualifying neurological symptoms and intervention was performed. Pooled estimates of periprocedural risk for patients treated within 0 to 48 hours, 0 to 7 days, and 0 to 15 days were derived with proportional meta-analyses and reported separately for patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack as index events. RESULTS: Of 47 studies included, 35 were on CEA, 7 on CAS, and 5 included both procedures. The pooled risk of periprocedural stroke was 3.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-4.3) after CEA and 4.8% (95% CI, 2.5-7.8) after CAS performed <15 days; stroke/death rates were 3.8% and 6.9% after CEA and CAS, respectively. Pooled periprocedural stroke risk was 3.3% (95% CI, 2.1-4.6) after CEA and 4.8% (95% CI, 2.5-7.8) after CAS when performed within 0 to 7 days. In hyperacute surgery (<48 hours), periprocedural stroke risk after CEA was 5.3% (95% CI, 2.8-8.4) but with relevant risk differences among patients treated after transient ischemic attack (2.7%; 95% CI, 0.5-6.9) or stroke (8.0%; 95% CI, 4.6-12.2) as index. CONCLUSIONS: CEA within 15 days from stroke/transient ischemic attack can be performed with periprocedural stroke risk <3.5%. CAS within the same period may carry a stroke risk of 4.8%. Similar periprocedural risks occur after CEA and CAS performed earlier, within 0 to 7 days. Carotid revascularization can be safely performed within the first week (0-7 days) after symptom onset.

Results of aberrant right subclavian artery aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this multicenter registry was to review current treatments and late results of repair of aneurysm of aberrant right subclavian artery (AARSA). METHODS: All consecutive AARSA repairs from 2006 to 2013 in seven centers were reviewed. End points were 30-day and late mortality, reintervention rate, and AARSA-related death. RESULTS: Twenty-one AARSA repairs were included (57% men; mean age, 67 years); 3 ruptures (14%) required emergent treatment; 12 (57%) were symptomatic for dysphagia (33%), dysphonia (24%), or pain (19%). Eight cases (38%) presented with thoracic aortic aneurysm, two with intramural hematoma, and one with acute type B aortic dissection. Mean AARSA diameter was 4.2 cm; a single bicarotid common trunk was present in 38% of cases. The majority of patients underwent hybrid intervention (n = 15; 71%) consisting of single (n = 2) or bilateral (n = 12) subclavian to carotid transposition or bypass or ascending aorta to subclavian bypass (n = 1) plus thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR); 19% of cases underwent open repair and 9% simple TEVAR with AARSA overstenting. Perioperative death occurred in two patients (9%): in one case after TEVAR in ruptured AARSA, requiring secondary sternotomy and aortic banding; and in an elective case due to multiorgan failure after a hybrid procedure. Median follow-up was 30 (interquartile range, 15-46) months. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of survival at 36 months was 90% (standard error, 0.64). Late AARSA-related death in one case was due to AARSA-esophageal fistula presenting with continuing backflow from distal AARSA and previous TEVAR. At computed tomography controls, one type I endoleak and one type II endoleak were detected; the latter required reintervention by aneurysm wrapping and ligature of collaterals. AARSA-related death was more frequent after TEVAR, a procedure reserved for ruptures, compared with elective open or hybrid repair. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid repair is the preferred therapeutic option for patients presenting with AARSA. Midterm results show high rates of clinical success with low risk of reintervention. Simple endografting presents high risk of related death; these findings underline the importance of achieving complete sealing to avoid treatment failures.

Contemporary comparison of aortic arch repair by endovascular and open surgical reconstructions.

OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed total aortic arch reconstruction in a contemporary comparison of current open and endovascular repair. METHODS: Endovascular (group 1) and open arch procedures (group 2) performed during 2007 to 2013 were entered in a prospective database and retrospectively analyzed. Endovascular repair (proximal landing zones 0-1), with or without a hybrid adjunct, was selected for patients with a high comorbidity profile and fit anatomy. Operations involving coverage of left subclavian artery only (zone 2 proximal landing: n = 41) and open hemiarch replacement (n = 434) were excluded. Early and midterm mortality and major complications were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 100 (78 men; mean age, 68 years) consecutive procedures were analyzed: 29 patients in group 2 and 71 in group 1. Seven group 1 patients were treated with branched or chimney stent graft, and 64 with partial or total debranching and straight stent graft. The 29 patients in group 2 were younger (mean age, 61.9 vs 70.3; P = .005), more frequently females (48.2% vs 11.3; P < .001) with less cardiac (6.9% vs 38.2%; P = .001), hypertensive (58.5% vs 88.4%; P = .002), and peripheral artery (0% vs 16.2%; P = .031) disease. At 30 days, there were six deaths in group 1 and four in group 2 (8.5% vs 13.8%; odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-6.66; P = .47), and four strokes in group 1 and one in group 2 (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-5.59; P = 1). Spinal cord ischemia occurred in two group 1 patients and in no group 2 patients. Three retrograde dissections (1 fatal) were detected in group 1. During a mean follow-up of 26.2 months, two type I endoleaks and three reinterventions were recorded in group 1 (all for persistent endoleak), and one reintervention was performed in group 2. According to Kaplan Meier estimates, survival at 4 years was 79.8% in group 1 and 69.8% in group 2 (P = .62), and freedom from late reintervention was 94.6% and 95.5%, respectively (P = .82). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the older age and a higher comorbidity profile in patients with challenging aortic arch disease suitable and selected for endovascular arch repair, no significant differences were detected in perioperative and 4-year outcomes compared with the younger patients undergoing open arch total repair. An endovascular approach might also be a valid alternative to open surgery in average-risk patients with aortic arch diseases requiring 0 to 1 landing zones, when morphologically feasible. However, larger concurrent comparison and longer follow-up are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Aortic arch debranching and thoracic endovascular repair.

OBJECTIVE: Currently, the best approach to the aortic arch remains unsupported by robust evidence. Most of the available data rely on small sample numbers, heterogeneous settings, and limited follow-up. The objective of this study was to evaluate early and midterm results of arch debranching and endovascular procedures. METHODS: From 2005 through 2013, 104 consecutive patients underwent elective arch treatment with debranching and thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Rates of perioperative (30-day) mortality and neurological complications, and mortality, endoleak, supra-aortic vessel patency, and arch diameter changes at 5 years were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients' mean age was 69.8 years, and 90 were males. Twenty arches were repaired for dissection. Nineteen patients required total debranching for diseases extended to zone 0. In 59, debranching and thoracic endovascular aortic repair procedures were staged. At 30 days, death, stroke, and spinal cord ischemia occurred in six, four, and three patients, respectively. Extension to ascending aorta (zone 0 landing) was the only multivariate independent predictor for perioperative mortality (odds ratio, 9.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-59.90; P = .015), but not for stroke. Four retrograde dissections, two fatal, occurred during the perioperative period. At 1, 3, and 5 years, Kaplan-Meier survival rates were 89.0%, 82.8%, and 70.9%, and freedom from persistent endoleak rates were 96.1%, 92.5%, and 88.3%, respectively. Over 5-year follow-up, 34 aneurysms shrank ≥ 5 mm, and four grew. Five reinterventions were required. Two supra-aortic vessel occlusions and no late aorta-related mortalities were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the perioperative mortality risk, the late outcome of endovascular arch repair presents a low rate of aorta-related deaths and reinterventions and acceptable midterm survival. Furthermore, more than one-third of the aneurysms' diameters decrease over 5 years as a measure of the long-term efficacy of treatment. Retrograde type A dissection remains a major concern in the perioperative period and careful arch approach is required.

Type II endoleak is an enigmatic and unpredictable marker of worse outcome after endovascular aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: This study analyzed predictors and the long-term consequence of type II endoleak in a large series of elective endovascular abdominal aneurysm repairs (EVARs). METHODS: Baseline characteristics and operative and follow-up data of consecutive patients undergoing EVAR were prospectively collected. Patients who developed type II endoleak according to computed tomography angiography and those without type II endoleak were compared for baseline characteristics, mortality, reintervention, conversion, and aneurysm growth after repair. RESULTS: In 1997-2011, 1412 consecutive patients (91.4% males; mean age, 72.9 years) underwent elective EVAR and were subsequently followed up for a median of 45 months (interquartile range, 21-79 months). Type II endoleak developed in 218. Adjusted analysis failed to identify significant independent predictors for type II endoleak with the exception of age (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.05; P = .003) and intraluminal thrombus (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.92; P = .010). Type II endoleak rates were comparable regardless of the device model. Late aneurysm-related survival was comparable (98.4% vs 99.5% at 60 months; P = .73) in patients with and without type II endoleak. However, at 60 months after EVAR, rates of aneurysm sac growth >5 mm (35.3% vs 3.3%; P < .0001) were higher in patients with type II endoleak. Cox regression identified type II endoleak as an independent predictor of aneurysm growth along with age and cardiac disease. The presence of type II endoleak led to reinterventions in 40% of patients and conversion to open surgery in 8%. However, assessment of these patients after reintervention showed similar 60-month freedom rates of persisting type II endoleak (present in more than two after computed tomography angiography scan studies) among those with and without reinterventions (49.8% vs 45.6%; P = .639). Aneurysm growth >5 mm persisted with comparable rates in type II endoleak patients after reintervention and in those who remained untreated (42.9% vs 57.4% at 60 months; P = .117). CONCLUSIONS: Reintervention for type II endoleak was common in our practice, yet such intervention did not reliably prevent the continued expansion of the abdominal aortic aneurysm. Our data indicate type II endoleak appears to be a marker of EVAR failure that is difficult to predict and treat effectively.

Abdominal aortic endografting beyond the trials: a 15-year single-center experience comparing newer to older generation stent-grafts.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the late results of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with the endografts currently in use and compare outcomes to older devices. METHODS: Clinical, demographic, and imaging data on consecutive patients undergoing elective EVAR from January 1997 to December 2011 at a single center were retrieved from an electronic database and reviewed. Newer stent-grafts (NSG) were defined as those introduced after 2004 (second-generation Excluder and Anaconda) or currently in use without modifications (Zenith, Endurant). Of the 1412 consecutive patients (1290 men; mean age 73 years) who underwent elective EVAR in a tertiary university hospital, 882 were treated with NSGs and 530 with older stent-grafts (OSGs). RESULTS: In the NSG group, the abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) were larger (55.7 vs. 53.2 mm, p<0.0001) and the patients were older (p<0.0001) and less frequently smokers or had pulmonary disease, while hypertension and diabetes were more frequent (all p<0.0001). Thirty-day mortality was 0.8% in the NSG group vs. 1.1% in the OSG group (p=NS). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 174 months (mean 54.1±42.4); the OSG patients had longer mean follow-up compared to the NSG group (80.2±47.9 vs. 38.4±29.1 months, p<0.0001). All-cause survival rates were comparable in both groups. Freedom from late conversion (96.1% vs. 89.1% at 7 years, p<0.0001) or reintervention (83.6% vs. 74.2% at 7 years, p=0.015) and freedom from AAA diameter growth >5 mm (p=0.022) were higher in the NSG group. In adjusted analyses, the use of a new-generation device was a negative independent predictor of reintervention [hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 0.93, p=0.015] and aneurysm growth (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.89, p=0.010). CONCLUSION: Newer-generation endografts can perform substantially better than the older devices. In the long term, incidences of reintervention, conversion, and AAA growth are decreased in patients treated with devices currently in use. However, the need for continuous surveillance is still imperative for all endografts.

Association between sex and perioperative mortality following endovascular repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Women are recognized to experience inferior outcomes following open surgery for elective or ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) when compared with men. The objective of this review was to assess whether there is a sex difference on mortality in patients receiving endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for rAAA. METHODS: A systematic literature review from 2005 to 2012 was performed to investigate early mortality risk of ruptured endovascular aneurysm repair (rEVAR) stratified by sex. Data were analyzed with random-effect meta-analysis; pooled odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for women compared with men. RESULTS: Thirteen studies provided the required information; in most (n = 9), data stratified by sex was identified through unpublished data from direct contact with authors. No study was randomized; there were four prospective and 10 retrospective series. Three were United States population studies. The number of women was limited in most articles. Data were available for 5580 patients treated with rEVAR; 1339 were women (23.9%). Perioperative mortality with rEVAR occurred in 473/1339 women (pooled rate 35.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 33.1-38.2) and in 1334/4241 men (pooled rate 31.7%; 95% CI, 30.3-33.1) without significant difference between sex categories (pooled odds ratio 1.22; 95% CI, 0.97-1.54; P = .09). There was no increased mortality risk in women vs men in ancillary analyses stratified by study size and after excluding unpublished data. CONCLUSIONS: Women may benefit as much as men from EVAR for rAAA. Nevertheless, current evidence supporting EVAR for female patients with rAAA is weak and requires confirmation by further experiences with a larger female representation.

Statins and intracerebral hemorrhage: collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A recent large, randomized trial suggested that statins may increase the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage. Accordingly, we systematically reviewed the association of statins with intracerebral hemorrhage in randomized and observational data. METHODS AND RESULTS: We screened 17 electronic bibliographic databases to identify eligible studies and consulted with experts in the field. We used DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models to compute summary risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Randomized trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies were analyzed separately. Only adjusted risk estimates were used for pooling observational data. We included published and unpublished data from 23 randomized trials and 19 observational studies. The complete data set comprised 248 391 patients and 14 784 intracerebral hemorrhages. Statins were not associated with an increased risk of intracerebral hemorrhage in randomized trials (risk ratio, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.41), cohort studies (risk ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.10), or case-control studies (risk ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.88). Substantial statistical heterogeneity was evident for the case-control studies (I(2)=66%, P=0.01), but not for the cohort studies (I(2)=0%, P=0.48) or randomized trials (I(2)=30%, P=0.09). Sensitivity analyses by study design features, patient characteristics, or magnitude of cholesterol lowering did not materially alter the results. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that statins were associated with intracerebral hemorrhage; if such a risk is present, its absolute magnitude is likely to be small and outweighed by the other cardiovascular benefits of these drugs.

Effects of diabetes on small aortic aneurysms under surveillance according to a subgroup analysis from a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to investigate the impact of diabetes in the management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). METHODS: Three-hundred sixty patients with small AAA (4.1-5.4 cm), enrolled in a randomized trial comparing early endovascular repair versus surveillance and delayed repair (after achievement of >5.5 cm or growth>1 cm/yr), were analyzed with standard survival methods to assess the relation between diabetes and risk of all-cause mortality, complications, and aneurysm growth (on computed tomography as per trial protocol) at 36 months. Baseline covariates were selected with partial likelihood stepwise method to investigate factors (demographic, morphologic, medications) associated with risk of aneurysm growth during surveillance. RESULTS: Prevalence of diabetes was 13.6%. The hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality at 36 months was higher in diabetic compared with nondiabetic patients: (HR, 7.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55-35.13; P=.012). Baseline aneurysm diameter was comparable between diabetic and nondiabetic patients enrolled in the surveillance arm and was related to subsequent aneurysm growth in covariance analyses adjusted for diabetes (49.3 mm for nondiabetic; 50.2 mm for diabetic). Cox analyses found diabetes as the strongest independent negative predictor of 63% lower probability of aneurysm growth>5 mm during surveillance (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.15-0.92; P=.003). Kaplan-Meier cumulative probability of aneurysm growth>5 mm at 36 months was 40.8% in diabetics versus 85.1% in nondiabetics (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Progression of small AAA seems to be more than 60% lower in patients with diabetes. This may help to identify high-risk subgroups at higher likelihood of AAA enlargement, such as nondiabetics, for surveillance protocols in patients with small AAA.

Diabetes is not a predictor of outcome for carotid revascularization with stenting as it may be for carotid endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is prevalent in most patients undergoing carotid revascularization and is suggested as a marker of poor outcome after carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Data on outcome of diabetic patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS) are limited. The aim of this study was to investigate early and 6-year outcomes of diabetic patients undergoing carotid revascularization with CAS and CEA. METHODS: The database of patients undergoing carotid revascularization for primary carotid stenosis was queried from 2001 to 2009. Diabetic patients were defined as those with established diagnosis and/or receiving oral hypoglycemic or insulin therapy. Multivariate and Kaplan- Meier analyses, stratified by type of treatment, were performed on perioperative (30 days) and late outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2196 procedures, 1116 by CEA and 1080 by CAS (29% female, mean age 71.3 years), were reviewed. Diabetes was prevalent in 630 (28.7%). Diabetic patients were younger (P < .0001) and frequently had hypertension (P = .018) or coronary disease (P = .019). Perioperative stroke/death rate was 2.7% (17/630) in diabetic patients vs 2.3% (36/1566) in nondiabetic, (P = .64); the rate was 3.4% in diabetic CEA group and 2.1% in diabetic CAS group (P = .46). At multivariate analyses, diabetes was a predictor of perioperative stroke/death in the CEA group (odds ratio [OR], 2.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-7.61; P = .04) but not in the CAS group (P = .72). Six-year survival was 76.0% in diabetics and 80.8% in nondiabetics (P = .15). Six-year late stroke estimates were 3.2% in diabetic and 4.6% in nondiabetic patients (P = .90). The 6-year risk of restenosis was similar (4.6% % vs 4.2%) in diabetic and nondiabetic patients (P = .56). Survival, late stroke, and restenosis rates between diabetics and nondiabetics were similar in CAS and CEA groups. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic patients are not at greater risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality or late stroke after CAS, however, the perioperative risk can be higher after CEA. This may help in selecting the appropriate technique for carotid revascularization in patients best suited for the type of procedure.

Paradoxical pulmonary embolism with spontaneous aortocaval fistula.

BACKGROUND: Paradoxical pulmonary embolisms are uncommon emergencies and can occur as a consequence of an aortocaval fistula due to unrecognized dislodgement of thrombus from aortic sac into pulmonary circulation. This study reviewed current literature and therapeutic options in this emergency condition requiring prompt management and repair. METHODS: Literature was systematically searched for paradoxical pulmonary embolism associated with aortocaval rupture. RESULTS: Eight published cases were identified. However, many other paradoxical pulmonary emboli could have remained undiagnosed due to challenging clinical presentation. Symptoms of high-output cardiac failure and respiratory distress in the presence of large aortoiliac aneurysm and venous hypertension are findings of a possible major abdominal arteriovenous fistula with paradoxical pulmonary embolism. Successful treatment depends on prevention of new embolism and proper management of perioperative hemodynamics and massive bleeding during fistula repair. Endovascular procedures have been recently used as useful tools in this field. Cava filter placement may be a first step to prevent further thrombus dislodgements during aortocaval repair. Immediate subsequent aortic stent-grafting can allow repair of aortocaval communication and exclusion of the abdominal aortic aneurysm from circulation with successful reversal of altered hemodynamic features. However, experience (especially in the long-term) is limited. CONCLUSIONS: Paradoxical pulmonary embolism from aortocaval fistula represents an extremely rare but true clinical emergency with high fatality rate. Recent advances in diagnostic technology and endovascular techniques can substantially improve outcomes of the disease. Clinical competence in early detection and diagnosis is essential for appropriate emergent management.

Are intrasac pressure measurements useful after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms?

Few would argue with the need for long-term follow-up after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. A small risk of reintervention persists and the challenge remains to identify those patients that will require additional procedures to prevent subsequent complications. The ideal follow-up regimen remains elusive. Up until this point, most regimens have consisted of radiologic imaging, with either computed tomography (CT) scans or ultrasonography to identify continued aneurysm perfusion (endoleaks) and document sac dynamics, either shrinkage, growth, or stability. However, aneurysm sac growth or shrinkage serves only as a surrogate measurement for pressurization, and although it is uniformly believed that attachment site endoleaks require treatment, it remains controversial as to how to determine which type II endoleaks pressurize an aneurysm sufficiently to require therapy. In response to these difficulties, several manufacturers have developed pressure sensors that can be implanted at the time of the initial repair. They have been shown capable of measuring intrasac pressures that have appropriately responded to reinterventions for endoleaks. However, are they the answer we are looking for? Are they ready for widespread use? Do they offer a reliable and consistent measure of intrasac pressure that can be trusted to determine the need, or lack of need, for further therapy? Our debaters will try to convince us one way or another.

Effects of statins on early and late results of carotid stenting.

OBJECTIVES: Increasing data suggest that statins can significantly decrease cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events due to a plaque stabilization effect. However, the benefit of statins in patients undergoing carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) for carotid stenosis is not well defined. The aim of this study was to investigate whether statins use was associated with decreased perioperative and late risks of stroke, mortality, and restenosis in patients undergoing CAS. METHODS: All patients undergoing CAS for primary carotid stenosis from 2004 to 2009 were reviewed. The independent association of statins and perioperative morbidity was assessed using multivariable analysis. Survival curves and Cox regression models were used to assess late morbidity and restenosis. Propensity score adjustment was employed. RESULTS: A total of 1083 consecutive CAS were performed (29% females, mean age 71.5 years; 24.7% symptomatic); 465 (43%) were on statins medication before treatment that was not discontinued at discharge. Statins use was associated with a reduction of perioperative stroke and death (odds ratio [OR] 0.327, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.80, P = .016) according to multivariable analysis. Statins effect was more significant in reducing stroke and death in symptomatic patients (OR 0.13; P = .032) and in males (OR 0.27, P = .01). At 5 years, survival (87.2% vs 78.3%; P = .009) and ischemic stroke-free interval (88.9% vs 99.7%; P = .02) rates were higher in the statins group of patients. Adjusting for propensity score and covariates in Cox regression analyses, statins use was independently associated with reduced long-term mortality risk (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32-0.97; P = .039) and borderline associated with decreased late ischemic stroke risk (HR 0.14; 95% CI 0.018-1.08, P = .059). There was no effect on restenosis rates. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that statins use is associated with decreased perioperative and late ischemic strokes risk and reduced mortality rates in patients undergoing CAS. Statins therapy should be considered part of the best medical treatment in current CAS practice.

Acute type A intramural hematoma: analysis of current management strategy.

BACKGROUND: Management of acute type A intramural hematoma (IMH) remains controversial, varying from immediate surgery to medical management only. Conversion to typical dissection remains a concern. We analyzed our experience managing acute type A IMH. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between October 1999 and May 2008, 251 patients with acute type A aortic dissection were treated, including 36 (14.3%) with type A IMH. Seven IMH patients (19%) were repaired immediately, 28 (80%) managed initially with optimal medical management and eventual repair and 1 (3%) with medical management only. End points analyzed were early mortality and conversion to typical dissection (flow in the false lumen of the ascending aorta). Time (hours) from onset of symptoms defined initiation of IMH. Early mortality for acute type A IMH was 8.3% (3/36): 14.3% (1/7) with immediate repair and 7.1% (2/28) when optimal medical management with eventual repair was undertaken (P=0.69). The 1 medically managed Asian patient survived with resolution of the IMH. Conversion to type A IMH to typical dissection occurred in 33% (12/36) of cases. No conversions were observed within 72 hours. Aortic diameter did not predict conversion. In actuarial analysis among the initially medically managed group with eventual repair, the hazard conversion to typical dissection increased significantly at 8 days from the onset of symptoms (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite optimal medical management, conversion of type A IMH to typical dissection still remains a concern, with the most significant risk beyond 8 days. In our patient population, timely surgical repair is recommended.