Laser Fenestration in TEVAR: Perspectives and Future Directions.

Endovascular aortic repair has been increasingly used to treat a multitude of thoracic aorticpathologies. When placement of a thoracic endograft necessitates coverage of one or more of the great vessels, in situ laser fenestration is a safe and effective option for supra-aortic trunk revascularization. Certain anatomic factors may render laser fenestration more technically challenging, particularly depending on aortic arch type and branch vessel characteristics. Short-term and mid-term outcomes have shown promising results for mortality, stroke, and complication rates. Future developments may extend the utility of this approach and allow it to be applied to a more widespread set of patients with challenging anatomy.

Outcomes of native superficial femoral artery chronic total occlusion recanalization after failed femoropopliteal bypass.

OBJECTIVE: When a bypass fails, the options are lysis, redo bypass, or endovascular intervention. If lysis of the original bypass is not considered an option, which is better-redo bypass or attempts at endovascular recanalization of the native system? This retrospective study examined the outcomes of native superficial femoral artery (SFA) chronic total occlusion (CTO) recanalization compared with redo bypass after failed femoropopliteal bypass. METHODS: Patients presenting with a symptomatic failed femoropopliteal bypass that underwent attempted CTO endovascular (EV) recanalization of the native SFA or a redo femoropopliteal bypass (BP) from 2000 to 2015 were analyzed. Patients undergoing catheter-directed thrombolysis were excluded. Time-dependent outcomes were assessed with life-table analyses. Factor analyses were performed using a Cox proportional hazard model for time-dependent variables. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients (69% male; average age, 65 years) underwent EV (n = 40) or BP (n = 64) after presentation with symptomatic occlusion of a previous femoropopliteal bypass graft (rest pain in 84% and life-style limiting claudication in 16%, 79% to the above-knee popliteal, 81% prosthetic). According to the TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease classification, 91% of the lesions were category D and 19% were category C. Tibial runoff was one tibial vessel in 79% of the patients and two or more runoff vessels in the remainder. Lesions treated endovascularly underwent primary stenting with a median of 3 stents used. Of the bypasses performed, 69% were to the below knee popliteal and remainder were to the proximal tibials (68% of the patients had a venous conduit). At 30 days in EV vs BP, major adverse cardiovascular events were 3% and 8% (P = .24), major adverse limb events were 25% and 11% (P = .01), and the amputation rate was 8% and 8% (P = .96), respectively. Amputation-free survival was 33% ± 9% and 56% ± 8% (P = .02) and freedom from major adverse limb event was 19% ± 8% and 46% ± 7% (P = .04) at 3 years for EV vs BP, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a high-risk cohort when thrombolysis is excluded, BP is superior to EV after failure of a femoropopliteal bypass.

Outcomes of intervention for cephalic arch stenosis in brachiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas.

BACKGROUND: Development of recalcitrant stenotic lesions of the cephalic arch is a significant cause of dysfunction of brachiocephalic access arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs). Endovascular and surgical therapy can be used to treat cephalic arch stenosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of endovascular and surgical interventions for cephalic arch stenosis. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients during a 16-year period with a compromised but not occluded brachiocephalic AVF due to cephalic arch stenosis was undertaken. Patency, reintervention, infection, and functional dialysis rates were examined. RESULTS: From January 2000 to December 2015, 219 patients (67% female; mean age, 58 ± 20 years) with a failing brachiocephalic AVF underwent intervention at the cephalic arch. These interventions included angioplasty, primary stent placement, transposition, and bypass. The average time to intervention for cephalic arch stenosis was 1.7 years after primary access placement. The average number of percutaneous interventions before the decision to intervene surgically on the cephalic arch was three (range, two to six). Technical success was superior in the surgical groups (70% and 80% compared with 96% and 100% for balloon angioplasty, stenting, transposition, and bypass, respectively; P = .02). Major adverse cardiovascular events were overall low but significantly higher in the surgical groups (1%, 1%, 0.3%, and 0.3% for transposition, bypass, balloon angioplasty, and stenting, respectively; P = .02). Both surgical options carried significantly superior patency rates at 2 years for transposition, bypass, balloon angioplasty, and stenting, respectively (63%, 59%, 90%, and 92%; P = .04). There was a lower rate of interventions per person-year of follow-up in the surgical groups compared with the endovascular groups (1.9, 1.4, 3.5, and 3.1 for transposition, bypass, balloon angioplasty, and stenting, respectively; P = .04). Functional dialysis durations were significantly superior in the surgical groups compared with the endovascular group (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Cephalic arch stenosis is a significant cause of brachiocephalic AVF malfunction. Surgical options offer superior long-term patency and functional results and should be considered earlier in the treatment of this disease.

"In situ" endografting in the treatment of arterial and graft infections.

OBJECTIVE: Endografts (eg, aortic aneurysm device or covered stent) are increasingly being used to temporize or treat arterial and graft infections in inaccessible areas, in patients with compromised anatomy, or in the presence of active bleeding or rupture. This summary examines the evidence for "in situ" endografting in the treatment these conditions. METHODS: A two-level search strategy of the literature (MEDLINE, PubMed, Google Scholar, and The Cochrane Library) was performed for relevant articles listed between January 2000 and December 2015. The review was confined to patients with primary and secondary bacterial or viral arterial infections, with or without fistulization and infection of bypass grafts and arteriovenous accesses. For the purposes of this summary, endografts can be considered to be an aortic aneurysm device or a covered stent. RESULTS: There are no societal guidelines. Endografts have been successfully applied to mycotic arterial aneurysms, aortoenteric, aortobronchial, and arterioureteric fistulae, and to anastomotic bleeds secondary to infection. Multiple reports indicate success at the control of hemorrhage in all locations. Short-term outcomes are good, but fatal infection-related complications, especially if antibiotic therapy is halted, are well reported and necessitate a more definitive plan for the long term. CONCLUSIONS: Stent grafts remain an important and viable option for the treatment of mycotic aneurysms, aortoesophageal and aortobronchial fistulae, and infected pseudoaneurysms in anatomically or technically inaccessible locations. In patients with a short life span (<6 months), no further intervention is generally required. In patients with a predicted life span >6 months, careful consideration should be given to a more definitive procedure. Life-long appropriate antibiotic therapy is strongly recommended for any patient receiving an endograft in an infected field.

Popliteal Artery Cystic Adventitial Disease: Early Lessons in Treatment.

BACKGROUND: We present 6 patients who had operative repair of symptomatic popliteal cystic adventitial disease (pCAD). Developmental theories for pCAD and surgical alternatives are presented. METHODS: All patients who had repair of pCAD over the past 3 years are included. RESULTS: Three patients had cyst excision alone, whereas the remaining 3 had cyst and artery excision with interposition vein grafting. Cyst recurrence occurred in 2 patients who had cyst excision alone. Four of the patients had a patent communication between the cyst and the joint capsule. CONCLUSIONS: Our small series suggests that the articular (synovial) theory of development may be the most likely and that cyst and artery excision with interposition vein grafting may be preferred over cyst excision alone.

The Role of Endovascular In Situ Revascularization in the Treatment of Arterial and Graft Infections.

Mycotic aneurysms and prosthetic graft infections are traditionally treated with excision of the infected tissue or graft, often requiring anatomical or extraanatomical bypass, carrying significant morbidity and mortality. Currently, the role of endovascular repair without excision in this setting has yet to be defined. We present 2 case scenarios, whereby mycotic pseudoaneurysms were successfully treated with endovascular stent-graft coverage and to present an in-depth review of endovascular in situ revascularization in the treatment of arterial and graft infections. There are data to support the use of stent grafting in mycotic aortic and iliac aneurysms, lower and upper extremity native arterial infections, lower extremity prosthetic bypass infections, and infections of carotid artery aneurysms. It is our belief that this technique may be utilized as primary therapy if there is no significant contamination and certainly serves an essential role in acute rupture or hemorrhage. In situations where there is significant tissue infection, stent grafting should be considered as a bridge if traditional excision is warranted.

Spinal cord injury after thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

PURPOSE: Thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR) has become a mainstay of therapy for aneurysms and other disorders of the thoracic aorta. The purpose of this narrative review article is to summarize the current literature on the risk factors for and pathophysiology of spinal cord injury (SCI) following TEVAR, and to discuss various intraoperative monitoring and treatment strategies. SOURCE: The articles considered in this review were identified through PubMed using the following search terms: thoracic aortic aneurysm, TEVAR, paralysis+TEVAR, risk factors+TEVAR, spinal cord ischemia+TEVAR, neuromonitoring+thoracic aortic aneurysm, spinal drain, cerebrospinal fluid drainage, treatment of spinal cord ischemia. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Spinal cord injury continues to be a challenging complication after TEVAR. Its incidence after TEVAR is not significantly reduced when compared with open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Nevertheless, compared with open procedures, delayed paralysis/paresis is the predominant presentation of SCI after TEVAR. The pathophysiology of SCI is complex and not fully understood, though the evolving concept of the importance of the spinal cord's collateral blood supply network and its imbalance after TEVAR is emerging as a leading factor in the development of SCI. Cerebrospinal fluid drainage, optimal blood pressure management, and newer surgical techniques are important components of the most up-to-date strategies for spinal cord protection. CONCLUSION: Further experimental and clinical research is needed to aid in the discovery of novel neuroprotective strategies for the protection and treatment of SCI following TEVAR.

Single-center retrospective review of ultrasound-accelerated versus traditional catheter-directed thrombolysis for acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis.

Objective Systemic anticoagulation remains the standard for acute lower extremity (LE) deep venous thrombosis (DVT), but growing interest in catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and its potential to reduce the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) has led to advent of ultrasound-accelerated CDT (US-CDT). Few studies to date have examined the outcomes of US-CDT against traditional CDT (T-CDT). Methods This is a retrospective, single-center review of all patients treated for acute LE DVT over a five-year period with either US- and T-CDT. Patients were stratified based on demographics, presentation, co-morbidities, risk factors, and peri-procedural data. Results Seventy-six limbs in 67 patients were treated; 51 limbs in 42 patients were treated with US-CDT, and 25 limbs in 25 patients were treated with T-CDT. Adjuncts include: pharmacomechanical thrombolysis ( n = 28 vs. 20, p = 0.04), angioplasty ( n = 22 vs. 18, p = 0.11), stenting ( n = 30 vs. 6, p ≤ 0.001), and IVC filter insertion ( n = 5 vs. 0, p = 0.07). Mean lysis times were 21 ± 1.7 and 24 ± 1.8 h for US- and T-CDT, respectively ( p = 0.26). Thirty (25 ultrasound, 5 traditional) limbs had complete lysis. Thirty-one (22 ultrasound, 9 traditional) limbs had incomplete lysis. Fifteen (4 ultrasound, 11 traditional) limbs had ineffective lysis ( p = 0.002 in favor of ultrasound). Four patients (3 US-CDT, 1 T-CDT) had recurrent ipsilateral thrombosis within 30 days ( p = 0.60). By Kaplan-Meier analysis, there were no significant difference between primary patency, primary-assisted patency, secondary patency, re-thrombosis, and recurrent symptoms at 6, 12, and 24 months. Conclusion US-CDT does not significantly improve mid-term patencies but results in greater acute clot burden reduction in patients with acute LE DVTs compared to T-CDT, which may be beneficial in reducing the long-term incidence of PTS.

Equivalent outcomes with standard and heparin-bonded expanded polytetrafluoroethylene grafts used as conduits for hemodialysis access.

BACKGROUND: Obtaining and maintaining dialysis access after failure of autologous access sites remains a significant concern for patients on hemodialysis. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) is the most common conduit used. Heparin-bonded expanded PTFE (HB-PTFE) grafts have recently been introduced as an improved conduit, with suggestions that HB offers benefits because of its resistance to thrombosis. In this retrospective study, the outcomes of HB-PTFE were compared with standard wall PTFE (S-PTFE) arteriovenous grafts (AVGs). METHODS: From January 2004 to December 2014, 483 adults (46% male; mean age, 60 years; range, 25-87 years) with end-stage renal disease underwent placement of AVGs (234 HB-PTFE and 248 S-PTFE). The two groups did not differ significantly in demographics or access history. Patency, reintervention, infection, and functional dialysis rates were examined. RESULTS: Technical success was 99% in HB-PTFE and 98% in S-PTFE. The 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events were 2% in HB-PTFE and 3% in S-PTFE. Mean time to access was 5.1 ± 1.8 weeks for HB-PTFE and 6.9 ± 1.9 weeks for S-PTFE (P = .0001). Median follow-up was 23 months. The 2-year primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates were 20% ± 7% vs 18% ± 8% (P = .85), 35% ± 8% vs 28% ± 7% (P = .51), and 38% ± 6% vs 36% ± 7% (P = .83) for HB-PTFE vs S-PTFE, respectively. Both groups underwent a similar number of secondary interventions (2.1 and 1.9 interventions per person-year of follow-up for HB-PTFE vs S-PTFE respectively; P = .87). There were no significant differences in infection (11% vs 12%) or pseudoaneurysm formation (5% vs 6%) between HB-PTFE and S-PTFE groups. Functional dialysis durations were equivalent between HB-PTFE and S-PTFE groups. CONCLUSIONS: HB-PTFE grafts offer no distinct advantage over S-PTFE grafts for hemodialysis and should not be considered a preferential conduit for AVG.

A randomized phase II study of Xilonix, a targeted therapy against interleukin 1α, for the prevention of superficial femoral artery restenosis after percutaneous revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate an anti-interleukin 1α antibody for its ability to reduce acute postprocedural inflammation, thereby reducing neointimal hyperplasia and restenosis after superficial femoral artery (SFA) angioplasty. Restenosis of the SFA after endovascular intervention is a common problem leading to 1-year primary patency as low as 40%. These failures are primarily due to the development of neointimal hyperplasia, resulting from arterial wall inflammation. METHODS: This was a randomized, phase II trial examining SFA restenosis in patients after percutaneous revascularization. Randomization occurred after successful revascularization, and patients were assigned to either the standard of care arm or the Xilonix (XBiotech USA, Inc, Austin, Tex) plus standard of care arm (N = 43). Xilonix was administered immediately after revascularization, every 2 weeks intravenously for four doses, and monthly subcutaneously until month 12. The major efficacy end points were target vessel event-free survival and incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). RESULTS: At 12 months of follow-up, MACE (43% vs 36%; P = .76) and target vessel restenosis (24% vs 27%; log-rank, P = .79) rates were not significantly different between the groups. At 3-month follow-up, which covers the intravenous dosing period, a trend toward lower incidence of restenosis (0 of 22 [0%] vs 2 of 21 [10%]; P = .14) and MACE (2 of 22 [9%] vs 5 of 21 [24%]; P = .22) was observed in the Xilonix cohort. Adverse events were equally distributed in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: Xilonix was well tolerated. Observed tendency to improved vessel patency with intravenous dosing suggests Xilonix could potentially represent a safe and effective therapeutic approach to preserving vessel patency.

Current Status of Clot Removal for Acute Pulmonary Embolism.

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) continues to carry a high mortality if not recognized early and treated aggressively. Rapid recognition and diagnosis remains the mainstay of all efforts. Risk stratification early is paramount to guide therapy and achieve successful outcomes. Pulmonary emboli can generally be classified as massive, submassive, or stable. Fibrinolysis and/or surgical embolectomy are recommended for the treatment of the patient with massive PE to rescue the patient and restore hemodynamic stability. Current trials support an aggressive approach. In submassive PE, determination of right ventricular (RV) strain by echocardiography and biomarker assessment (troponin and B-type natriuretic peptide) identify patients who can benefit from catheter-directed therapy with the therapeutic intent of achieving a rapid reduction of RV afterload, prevention of impending hemodynamic collapse and prolonged in-hospital and outpatient survival. Current trials have not shown long-term benefit for this approach to date, and thus, this therapy should only be offered to select patients. Stable PE can be treated using both an inpatient and an outpatient approach, based on the available infrastructure. Therapy for PE continues to evolve and stratification of risks and benefits remain the key to implementation of invasive strategies.

Retrograde Pedal Access and Endovascular Revascularization: A Safe and Effective Technique for High-Risk Patients with Complex Tibial Vessel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular revascularization is an established approach for limb salvage in the setting of critical limb ischemia. However, failure rate of antegrade recanalization in complex femoropopliteal to infrapopliteal occlusions is as high as 20%. We report a series of 21 patients who underwent retrograde pedal access and recanalization of below-the-knee chronic total occlusions after failed antegrade attempts. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of prospectively maintained data for all patients who underwent ultrasound-guided percutaneous pedal access for retrograde endovascular treatment of advanced tibial vessel disease between 2011 and 2014. All patients had undergone prior unsuccessful attempts at antegrade revascularization. Pedal vessel access was followed by angioplasty with selective stenting and completion angiogram. Patients were followed up with duplex ultrasound to evaluate for patency. Time-dependent outcomes were determined by Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Median follow-up was 9 months. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients (17 men, 4 women, mean age 68) underwent retrograde tibial recanalization. Eighty-one percent of the patients presented with Rutherford category 4, 5, or 6 critical limb ischemia. The average Prevent III amputation risk score was 7.0 ± 2.9. Eighteen patients (86%) were medium or high risk (Prevent III amputation risk score ≥ 4). Retrograde pedal access was successful in 95% of the patients (dorsalis pedis = 11, posterior tibial = 5, anterior tibial = 4). Retrograde revascularization was achieved in 14 patients (67%) using balloon angioplasty (n = 14) and additional stent placement (n = 2). Revascularization failed in 7 patients (33%). There were no pedal access site complications. Forty-eight percent of the patients experienced improvement or resolution of their symptoms. The 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE), major adverse limb events (MALE), and amputations were all 5%. At 1 year, limb salvage was 88 ± 8% with amputation-free survival of 61 ± 12% and freedom from MALE of 81 ± 10%. Primary assisted and secondary patencies were both 84 ± 10% at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Early outcomes for ultrasound-guided retrograde pedal access show that it is safe, with low 30-day mortality, and a low rate of MACE. Freedom from MALE and limb salvage are both high at 1-year follow-up. This technique expands revascularization options after failed conventional endovascular antegrade approaches.

Objective performance goals after endovascular intervention for critical limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: During the last decade, primary endoluminal therapy for critical limb ischemia (CLI), assessed as rest pain and tissue loss of the lower extremity, has significantly increased. Reporting of patient-centered outcomes using the new Society for Vascular Surgery objective performance goals (OPGs) has been limited. This study examined the OPGs for infrainguinal endovascular management of CLI. METHODS: A prospective database of patients undergoing endovascular treatment of the lower extremity for CLI between 2000 and 2011 was queried. Evaluated were clinical efficacy (absence of recurrent symptoms, maintenance of ambulation and absence of major amputation), amputation-free survival (survival without major amputation), and freedom from major adverse limb events (MALEs; above-ankle amputation of the index limb or major reintervention - new bypass graft, jump/interposition graft revision). RESULTS: A total of 728 patients (60% male; age, 68 ± 14 years) underwent lower extremity interventions for CLI (66% tissue loss); of these, 39% had superficial femoral artery and tibial interventions. Diabetes mellitus was present in 71%, hyperlipidemia in 64%, and chronic renal insufficiency in 37%. Technical success was 96%. The overall rate at 30 days of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) was 3% and MALEs was 12%. At 5 years, clinical efficacy was (mean ± standard error of the mean) 42% ± 5%, amputation-free survival was 41% ± 7%, and freedom from MALEs was 51% ± 4%. Clinical efficacy was significantly different in those presenting with rest pain and tissue loss and in the anatomic high-risk group compared with the clinical high-risk group, and both were worse compared with the group without clinical or high-risk criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Endoluminal therapy for CLI is associated with early low MACE rates but high MALE rates. When the key outcome of amputation free survival is considered, predictors of a better outcome were absence of current smoking, a lower modified Edifoligide for the Prevention of Infrainguinal Vein Graft Failure (PREVENT III) amputation risk score, better preoperative ambulation status, lower MACEs, and discharge disposition to home. The presence of tissue loss and anatomic risk factors negatively affect outcomes. Longer-term outcomes after endovascular intervention for CLI remain relatively poor, with <40% success in objective performance outcomes at 5 years.

Outcomes of Isolated Tibial Endovascular Interventions for Tissue Loss in CLI Patients on Hemodialysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the objective performance goals (OPGs) and patient-centered outcomes of isolated tibial interventions in patients with tissue loss who were on hemodialysis (HD) to patients with tissue loss who were not on HD. METHODS: Interrogation of a prospectively maintained database identified 242 critical limb ischemia (CLI) patients who underwent isolated tibial interventions for tissue loss in a single limb between 2007 and 2012. The 78 patients (mean age 66±12 years; 44 men) on HD were compared with 164 patients (mean age 50±13 years; 82 men) who were not on HD. There was an equal distribution of the tibial vessels treated; 152 (63%) patients had more than one treated tibial vessel. Patient-centered outcomes of clinical efficacy (absence of recurrent symptoms, maintenance of ambulation, and no major amputation), amputation-free survival (AFS), and freedom from major adverse limb events (MALE) were evaluated. The Society for Vascular Surgery OPGs were defined at 30 days and 1 year. RESULTS: The 30-day major adverse cardiac events was significantly higher (p=0.004) in the HD group (5, 5%) compared with the no-HD group (0%), but both remained under the stated OPG of ≤10%. The 30-day MALE rates were significantly higher than the stated ≤9% OPG at 13% and 18% for the no-HD and HD groups, respectively. At 1 year, the rates for AFS, freedom from MALE, limb salvage, and survival did not achieve the stated Society for Vascular Surgery OPGs in the HD group. Clinical efficacy was 61% and 25% at 3 years for the no-HD and HD groups, respectively (p<0.01). Overall, AFS was 54% and 22% and freedom from MALE was 56% and 27% at 3 years for the no-HD and HD groups, respectively (both p<0.01). CONCLUSION: Tibial intervention for tissue loss in patients on HD is a valid treatment option but is associated with a high MALE rate. Three-year outcomes remain relatively poor, with <25% success in terms of clinical efficacy and AFS.

Early Experience With a Novel Hybrid Vascular Graft for Hemodialysis Access Creation in Patients With Disadvantaged Anatomy.

PURPOSE: To describe the use of the Hybrid vascular graft in disadvantaged anatomy for hemodialysis access creation and compare outcomes to standard-wall polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis, 25 patients (mean age 65±14 years; 13 men) who received the Hybrid graft were compared with 35 contemporaneous patients (mean age 63±12 years; 20 men) who received a standard PTFE graft for hemodialysis access over a 2-year period. Criteria for Hybrid graft placement were (1) exhausted or inadequate peripheral veins for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation and concomitant small target veins that precluded conventional PTFE graft placement, (2) previous graft anastomosis or a stent in the venous target at the level of the axilla, or (3) failed brachial-basilic or brachial-brachial upper arm transposition AVF with a small target vein at the axilla. Efficacy, anatomic and clinical considerations, and technique were reviewed; patency rates, complications, and reinterventions were examined. RESULTS: Technical success was achieved in all cases, and all grafts were usable for hemodialysis. Seven of 25 Hybrid patients required stent-graft extensions and 3 patients required angioplasty to improve venous outflow at the time of Hybrid graft insertion. Three of 35 standard PTFE graft patients required angioplasty to improve venous outflow at the time of graft insertion. There was no perioperative mortality or procedure-related morbidity in either group. Median follow-up was 21 months. The patient survival estimate was 66% at 2 years. Estimated primary patency (24% vs 18%, p>0.05), assisted primary patency (34% vs 28%; p>0.05), and secondary patency rates (40% vs 38%, p≥0.05) at 24 months were equivalent for Hybrid vs PTFE grafts, respectively. Venous hypertension was not a complication following Hybrid graft implantation but was seen in 2 patients with the standard PTFE graft. CONCLUSION: The Hybrid graft offers a safe, technically effective alternative for patients with disadvantaged anatomy requiring hemodialysis access and has comparable outcomes to standard PTFE grafts. Further clinical experience and long-term data are required for determining the proper utility of this device in chronic dialysis-dependent patients.

Outcomes of femoropopliteal interventions for critical ischemia in the hemodialysis-dependent patient.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients maintained on hemodialysis is rising. There are limited data on the outcomes of femoropopliteal interventions, both open and endovascular, in this population. This report examines the anatomic and clinical outcomes in this population. METHODS: A database of patients undergoing open (OPEN) and endoluminal (ENDO) intervention for femoropopliteal disease (2000 to 2010) was retrospectively queried. Patients on hemodialysis with critical ischemia at the time of surgery or intervention were selected. Patients who underwent tibial bypass or had concomitant tibial interventions were excluded. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to assess time-dependent outcomes. Factor analyses were performed for time-dependent variables. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-one hemodialysis-dependent patients underwent either OPEN or ENDO procedures for critical ischemia. Of these, 70 patients were treated with OPEN procedures and 91 with ENDO procedures. ENDO patients were more likely to present with a higher cardiac risk index (P = 0.0001), metabolic syndrome (P = 0.02), cerebrovascular disease (P = 0.01), and a dependent living status preoperatively (P = 0.04). ENDO patients presented with more rest pain and tissue loss (P = 0.03). OPEN patients presented with more advanced lesions (P = 0.04). Combined morbidity was higher in the OPEN group (P = 0.05). Cumulative patency (P = 0.04) and clinical efficacy (P = 0.05) were higher in the OPEN group compared to those in the ENDO group. CONCLUSIONS: Hemodialysis patients undergoing femoral-popliteal endovascular interventions for symptomatic disease have a low cumulative patency and clinical efficacy. Although open surgical revascularization has higher perioperative morbidity and a trend toward higher perioperative mortality, it provides a superior 5-year cumulative patency and clinical efficacy and should be considered in this population subgroup.

Retrograde transpopliteal access is safe and effective-it should be added to the vascular surgeon's portfolio.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to review the outcomes of superficial femoral artery (SFA) interventions using a retrograde transpopliteal access approach after failed antegrade recanalization. METHODS: A database of patients undergoing endovascular treatment of the SFA between 2008 and 2011 was retrospectively queried, and those cases with transpopliteal artery retrograde access were analyzed. Time-dependent outcomes were determined by Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. RESULTS: A total of 16 patients (75% men; mean age 61 ± 9 years) underwent retrograde popliteal access after failed antegrade attempts. Patients had multiple cardiovascular comorbidities with a mean modified cardiac index score of 3.1 ± 1.8. The reason for intervention was lifestyle-limiting claudication in 67% of cases and critical ischemia in the remainder. Most of the lesions were Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II C and D. Retrograde ultrasound-guided puncture of the popliteal artery was successful in all cases and there were no local site complications. Intervention was successful in 94% of cases. One uncomplicated perforation (7%) was encountered during attempted recanalization of the SFA in the thigh. There was no perioperative morbidity or 30-day mortality. The 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events rate was 6% but both 30-day major adverse limb events and the 30-day major amputation rate were 0%. There was a 40% increase in actual ankle-brachial index (ABI); 93% of patients achieved an ABI rise >0.15. On longer term follow-up, 2 patients developed restenosis and 1 an asymptomatic occlusion. Both restenosis patients required re-angioplasty. Two patients required expected toe amputations as a result of their presenting symptoms. The primary patency was 66 ± 9%, assisted patency 81 ± 9%, and secondary patency 87 ± 8% at 2 years. Limb salvage was 100%. Clinical efficacy was 63 ± 9% at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided retrograde transpopliteal access is a safe and successful technique, which extends the ability to perform endovascular interventions after failed antegrade approaches.

Dissection of left iliac artery during anterior lumbar interspace fusion: Report of a case.

Vascular injury is an uncommon complication of spine surgery. Among the different approaches, anterior lumbar interbody fusion has increased potential for vascular injuries, since the great vessels and their branches overly the disc spaces to be operated on, and retraction of these vessels is necessary to gain adequate surgical exposure. The reported incidence for anterior lumbar interbody fusion-associated vascular injuries ranges from 0% to 18.1%, with venous laceration as the most common type. We report a case of anterior lumbar interbody fusion-associated left common iliac artery dissection leading to delayed acute limb ischemia developing in early post-operative period.

Open arterial revascularization of the critically ischemic foot using arterial homograft.

BACKGROUND: Revascularization alternatives for patients with critical limb ischemia and without adequate autogenous vein remain challenging. We reviewed our experience with the use of arterial homograft as a conduit for limb salvage in patients with limb ischemia and active lower extremity infections. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent open arterial revascularization of the lower extremity with cryopreserved femoral artery homograft for the treatment of symptomatic critical limb ischemia (i.e., foot ulceration, infection, or gangrene) during an 18-month period was performed. Relevant clinical variables and treatment outcomes were analyzed. Clinical success was defined as limb salvage for one year, patency of the reconstruction, and wound healing. RESULTS: Thirteen patients (5 men; average age 71 +/- 83 years, range 51-87 years) were treated during this study period. Treatment indications included 10 (77%) foot ulcerations, 2 (15%) critically ischemic limbs without ulceration, and 1 (8%) infected polytetrafluoroethylene bypass graft with acute occlusion and limb ischemia. A femoral below-the-knee popliteal bypass was performed in 4 (1%), femoral to anterior tibial artery in 4 (31%), femoral to posterior tibial artery in 3 (23%), and femoral to peroneal artery in 2 (15%). All 13 limbs were preserved. Minor amputations were performed in 6 patients, 2 underwent toe amputations and 4 patients had a trans-metatarsal amputation. The cumulative patency rate at 6, 9, and 18 months was 92.3%, 70.3%, and 58.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Open arterial revascularization with arterial femoral homograft is an acceptable treatment method in patients with critical limb ischemia and active infection in whom autogenous vein is not available or the use of a synthetic conduit is not possible.

Clinical efficacy of concomitant tibial interventions associated with superficial femoral artery interventions in critical limb ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Combined superficial femoral artery (SFA) and tibial angioplasty (TA) are a common treatment for critical limb ischemia. Poor tibial runoff significantly compromises durability and clinical effectiveness of SFA interventions. The aim of this study is to determine clinical and anatomic outcomes of SFA interventions in patients with equally compromised runoff, with and without concomitant TA. METHODS: The database of patients undergoing endovascular treatment of SFA (1999-2009) was retrospectively queried. Patients with poor runoff, scored>10 by modified Society for Vascular Surgery criteria, were selected. Preoperative angiograms were reviewed to assess distal popliteal and tibial runoff. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to assess time-dependent outcomes. Factor analyses were performed for time-dependent variables. RESULTS: A total of 162 limbs with a runoff score>10 (56% men; average age, 69 years) underwent endovascular intervention for symptomatic SFA disease: 61 (54% men) underwent TA but the remaining 101 (57% men) did not. The groups were matched for age, sex, and SFA anatomy (Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II C/D lesions: 56% no TA vs 62% TA; P=.5). Presenting symptoms were similar between no TA and TA groups (rest pain: 40% vs 32%; tissue loss: 60% vs 68%; P=.3). Three-year survival favored the TA group (79%±5%) vs no TA (68%±5%; P=.06). Three-year anatomic outcomes in no TA vs TA group, including primary patency (45%±6% vs 63%±8%; P=.04), assisted primary patency (55%±6% vs 75%±7%; P=.03), and secondary patency (57%±6% vs 77%±7%; P=.03) were all superior in the TA group. Target vessel revascularization in no TA vs TA (61%±6% vs 74%±8%; P=.002) and target extremity revascularization (42%±6% vs 59%±8%; P=.06) also favored the TA group. However the comparison of no TA vs TA for clinical success (39%±6% vs 47%±8%; P=.6), freedom from recurrent symptoms (59%±6% vs 60%±9%; P=.1), amputation-free survival (46%±5% vs 63%±7%; P=.06), and limb salvage at 3 years (63%±6% vs 74%±7%; P=.6) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: TA in patients with poor runoff has a positive effect on SFA anatomic outcomes. However, clinical success was not affected. Concomitant TA appears not to add clinical benefit to SFA intervention in critical limb ischemia.