Bypass For Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease Research Articles

Comparative Analysis of Outcomes of Unibody Endoprosthesis and Aortobifemoral Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease

Aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) has traditionally been treated with aortobifemoral bypass (ABF). Unibody endograft (UBE) for AIOD, however, has been increasingly utilized in selected patients. We report outcomes of patients undergoing ABF or UBE for AIOD. Patients (2016-2021) undergoing elective ABF or UBE with a unibody device for AIOD were identified at an academic institution. Chi-square and Kaplan-Meier analysis were used to evaluate outcomes by group. One hundred thirty-one patients undergoing UBE or ABF were screened, with 82 included. Twenty-one patients underwent UBE (25.6%) and 61 (74.4%) underwent ABF. UBE patients were older (63.8 vs. 58.2years; P=0.01), with a higher prevalence of diabetes (52.4 vs. 19.7%; P=0.004). Significant differences were seen between UBE and ABF including a shorter surgery length (214 vs. 360min; P=0.0001), less blood loss (300 vs. 620mls; P=0.001), larger minimum aortic diameter (14.6 vs. 12.6; P=0.0006), larger common iliac artery (9.5 vs. 7.9; P=0.005) and lower postoperative ankle-brachial index (0.8 vs. 0.9; P=0.04). There were no differences in TASC C/D iliac lesions in the UBE than ABF group (66.6% vs. 63.9%; P<0.82) or Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus classification femoropopliteal lesions. Unadjusted analysis revealed no significant differences between UBE and ABF for 30-day mortality (0 vs. 1.6%; P=1), stroke (0 vs. 3.3%; P=1), or major adverse cardiac events (4.8 vs. 4.9%; P=1). There were no significant differences in mid-term surgical outcomes over a mean follow-up period of 23.7months between UBE and ABF groups; specifically endovascular (0 vs. 8.2%; P=0.3) or open/hybrid reintervention (9.5 vs. 14.8%; P=0.7) with similar limb occlusion (4.8 vs. 27.8; P=0.12). Kaplan-Meier estimated primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency at 36months were similar with 94%, 100%, and 94% for UBE and 86%, 95%, and 86% for ABF, respectively. Estimated survival at 36months was 95% for UBE and 97% for ABF (P=0.8). Equivalent outcomes were seen between AIOD treated with UBE or ABF in similar patient populations. Mid-term outcomes such as reintervention and patency are similar for UBE and ABF. We still recommend ABF over UBE as a primary modality of treatment in surgically fit patients with greater complexity aortoiliac lesions and with smaller arterial diameters, especially women.

Extra-anatomic bypass procedures for severe aortoiliac occlusive disease-A cohort study.

Extra-anatomic bypass (ExAB) grafting has been questioned due its inferior durability compared to anatomic bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). This study aims to present early and late outcomes of patients treated with ExAB as well as to evaluate potential prognostic factors. This is a retrospective cohort study presenting a series of patients treated with ExAB for AIOD. All patients were treated between 2005 and 2022 within the Vascular Surgery Unit of a University Surgery Clinic. Both early (30-day) and late outcomes were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted for potential predictors. Kaplan-Meier curve was produced for long-term patency. A total of 41 patients were treated (85.3% males; mean age: 76.3 ± 4.2years). Indication for treatment included severe claudication or critical limb ischemia (Rutherford stages III-VI). The following procedures were recorded: Femorofemoral bypass (FFB; n = 21) and axillofemoral bypass (AxFB; n = 20). All procedures were conducted using synthetic grafts with external rings. Early outcomes included no death, no myocardial infarction, no major bleeding, no graft infection, and no major amputation. Regarding late outcomes, 14.6% patients were lost after the first month. For the rest of patients (n = 35), five-year primary patency was 88.6%, primary-assisted patency was 94.3%, and secondary patency was also 94.3%. Limb salvage was 100% within follow-up. Endarterectomy at the distal anastomosis was the only independent predictor associated with worse patency in the long-term (OR = 5.356; 95% CI (1.012-185.562); p = .041). FFB and AxFB is a safe and durable strategy for treating patients with severe AIOD where no other option is feasible. Regarding predictors, only endarterectomy at the distal anastomosis site was associated with an increased risk for graft failure.

Our Experience of Renovisceral Interventions in Patients Undergoing Aortobifemoral Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease

Abstract Introduction: Aortobifemoral bypass is the standard recommended procedure for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). Patients of AIOD presenting with claudication pain and tissue loss require revascularization of lower limbs, with few requiring mesenteric and/or renal revascularization. Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients undergoing aortobifemoral bypass with mesenteric/renal revascularization in patients of AIOD with mesenteric/renal occlusion. Objective: The objectives of this study were as follows: (1) restoration of normal renal function in terms of urine output and renal function test in patients who underwent mesenteric revascularization and (2) resolution of abdominal angina in patients who underwent mesenteric revascularization. Methods: A total of 13 patients with a mean age of 45.8 years, presenting with critical limb ischemia with renal/mesenteric occlusion due to AIOD of Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus D type, underwent aortobifemoral bypass with renal/mesenteric revascularization. The demographics of patients, Rutherford stage and WIFI stage, pre- and postoperative ABI, probable etiology, any renovisceral interventions done, duration of procedure, type of renal ischemia (warm/cold), duration of renal ischemia, postoperative complications, duration of stay, patency of graft, wound infection, amputation rates, and mortality were documented on a structured pro forma. Five (38.46%) patients presented with severe claudication, 3 (23.07%) patients with rest pain, and the remaining 5 (38.46%) patients with minor tissue loss. Along with AIOD, 3 (23.07%) patients had concomitant bilateral femoropopliteal disease and tibial vessel disease, 3 (23.07%) patients had unilateral femoropopliteal disease, and 2 (15.38%) patients had bilateral tibial vessel disease. Three (23.07%) patients had infrarenal aortoiliac occlusion and 10 (76.9%) patients had juxtarenal aortoiliac occlusion (managed using Liddicoat/Madiba–Robbs technique). Outcomes were assessed in terms of graft patency, need of dialysis in postoperative period, wound infection, limb survival, amputations, and mortality. Results: Aortic clamp was placed suprarenal (38.46%), infrarenal (53.84%), and interrenal (7.69%) of patients. Cold renal perfusion solution was used in 15.38% of patients with an ischemia time of 38.5 min. The average duration of warm renal ischemia was 5 min 24 s. Revascularization of superior mesenteric artery (SMA) was done in 15.38%, and inferior mesenteric artery in 38.46%. Renal revascularization by Madiba–Robbs technique was done in 30.76% of patients. In 92.3% of patients, bifurcated Dacron synthetic graft was used, and in 7.69%, femoral vein with bovine pericardial patch was used for revascularization. In postoperative period, 7.69% developed acute limb ischemia, 30.07% had severe metabolic acidosis, and 15.38% of patients had respiratory complications with good renal function and no bowel ischemia. Conclusion: Renal and mesenteric revascularization in addition to aortobifemoral bypass is a safe, effective, and durable procedure with acceptable postoperative complications. The effective surgical technique of renal and mesenteric revascularization including the usage of renal perfusion solution was found to be of paramount importance in our study. All patients who underwent SMA revascularization were free from abdominal angina. All patients who underwent renal revascularization were free from dialysis and also there was a decrease in the use of antihypertensive drugs in these patients.

Comparison between Kissing Stents and Direct Surgical Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease.

The optimal management strategy for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) remains debatable. This study compared early and late outcomes between direct surgical bypass and kissing stents for AIOD treatment. We retrospectively reviewed data, including age, sex, risk factors, comorbidities, symptoms, TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) II classification, operation time, perioperative complications, in-hospital mortality, and length of hospital stay, from a cohort of 46 patients treated for AIOD (24 with kissing stents and 22 with direct surgical bypass) at Pusan National University Hostpital from January 2007 to December 2016. The primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates in both groups were compared. The hospital stay (direct surgical bypass vs. kissing stents: 16.36±5.19 days vs. 9.08±10.88 days, p=0.007) and operation time (direct surgical bypass vs. kissing stents: 316.09±141.78 minutes vs. 99.54±37.95 minutes, p<0.001) were significantly shorter for kissing stents. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates in the direct surgical bypass group were 95.5%, 95.5%, and 95.5%, respectively, at 1 year; 86.4%, 86.4%, and 95.5% at 3 years; and 77.3%, 77.3%, and 95.5% at 5 years. The primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates in the kissing stent group were 100.0%, 100.0%, and 100.0%, respectively, at 1 year; 95.8%, 95.8%, and 100.0% at 3 years; and 95.8%, 95.8%, and 100.0% at 5 years. Except for special cases wherein endovascular revascularization is difficult, kissing stents are more advantageous for TASC II C and D lesions.

Successful Open Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair in a Patient with Severe Aorto-Iliac Occlusive Disease: A Rare Case Report.

Open repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) in a patient with severe aorto-iliac occlusive disease is considered to cause an extremely high risk for spinal cord injury. A 71-year-old man who had previously undergone axillo-bifemoral bypass for aorto-iliac occlusive disease presented with persistent dilation of a TAAA. Using distal perfusion via partial extracorporeal circulation at mild hypothermia, we performed segmental sequential repair of Crawford type II TAAA. Various efforts were made to avoid spinal cord injury and ischemic visceral organ damage. Consequently, the patient completely recovered without any serious complications.

Quality of Life (QoL) Assessment in the Patients Operated with Either Laparoscopic or an Open Aortobifemoral Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease (AIOD): 2 Years Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BackgroundQoL assessment within surgical treatment is seldom investigated and sparsely reported in the medical literature. This study aimed to compare QoL in a randomized fashion in the patients treated with either a laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABFB) or an open aortobifemoral bypass (OABFB) for the treatment of AIOD.Patients and MethodsSeventy-one consecutive patients with AIOD, Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II Type D lesions (TASC II, Type D) were randomized to LABFB or OABFB. Thirty-five patients in the LABFB and thirty-six in the OABFB groups were compared for the changes in the QoL, with the short-form health survey (SF-36), EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D), and EQ-5D visual analog scale (VAS) preoperatively, and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. Mann–Whitney U-Test and Wilcoxon sign-rank test were used for group comparison. Mixed model analysis was performed to examine the effect of different variables on the QoL.ResultsIn the patients treated with LABFB, physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) in SF-36 were significantly higher than OABFB, at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. PCS was also significantly higher in the LABFB group than OABFB at 24 months postoperatively. The preoperative QoL scores for both the laparoscopy and the open group were significantly lower than the age-matched general Norwegian population. EQ-5D median scores were significantly higher in the LABFB at all postoperative follow-up time points up to 12 months. The patients in the LABFB group also had a statistically significant increase in EQ-5D VAS compared to OABFB, at 1 and 12 months postoperatively (p = 0.005, and p = 0.037, respectively).ConclusionQoL seems better in patients treated with LABFB than OABFB, particularly during the early months after surgery.

Prior Endovascular Interventions Are Associated With Higher Complication and Lower Patency Rates of Aortobifemoral Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease

Endovascular interventions have largely replaced surgical treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). We reviewed our current indications and contemporary outcomes of aortobifemoral bypass (AFB) for AIOD.

Outcomes of Unibody Bifurcated Endograft and Aortobifemoral Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease.

PurposeWe compared the outcomes between the total endovascular approach using a unibody bifurcated aortoiliac endograft and the gold standard aortobifemoral bypass (ABF) surgery for the management of extensive aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD).MethodsMaterials and This retrospective observational study compared the outcomes of endovascular technique with unibody bifurcated endograft (UBE) using the Endologix AFX unibody stent-graft and a standard surgical approach (ABF) in the management of AIOD based on patient records in Western Vascular Institute, Galway University Hospital, National University of Ireland. Procedural details and outcomes were documented to compare both groups.ResultsFrom January 2002 to December 2018, 67 patients underwent AIOD (20 UBE and 47 ABF). Both the ABF and UBE groups showed 100% immediate clinical and technical successes without 30-day mortality. There were no statistical differences in the overall survival and sustained clinical improvement between the bypass and the UBE groups; however, statistically significant differences were observed in 3-year freedom from re-intervention and amputation-free survival. Furthermore, the mean length of the intensive care unit (ICU) stay was significantly lower in the UBE group than that in the ABF group (0.75 days vs. 3.1 days, P=0.001).ConclusionTotal endovascular reconstruction of AIOD is an alternative to invasive bypass procedures, with a shorter ICU stay.

Descending thoracic aorta to bifemoral bypass grafting in Aortobiiliac occlusive disease

Introduction: The aim of this prospective study is to describe the clinical symptoms, investigation findings and surgical treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease where abdominal approach not feasible or not possible for aortobifemoral bypass grafting. Method: From May 2013 to May 2019, ten patients were treated with descending thoracic aorto-bifemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease at Grant Medical College and JJ group of Hospitals, Mumbai (Maharashtra). Total 20 limbs were re-vascularized. Demographic data, co-morbid factors, per operative findings were noted. Indication for surgery is juxtarenal occlusion of the abdominal aorta, in most of the cases. In postoperative period, all patients were evaluated for appearance of distal pulsations, primary patency, warmness of foot, symptom relief, wound infection, healing of the ulcer, and complications. CT angiography was done in follow-up. Maximal followup of two years and minimum followup of one month was done after surgery. Results: No mortality. Mean duration of surgery was 2.5-5 h and mean blood loss was 250 - 400 mL. Major morbidity includes one graft occlusion. None of the patients developed proximal propagation of aortic thrombus. Ulcers showed healing. All patients had a good quality of life postoperatively. Postoperative angiography showed good re-vascularization. Conclusion: Majority of our patients are old age having juxtarenal aortic occlusion so we decided to use DTA as inflow for primary revascularization to avoid entering abdomen and renal injury. Some authors have recommended supraceliac aorta bypass surgery within the retroperitoneal space for juxtarenal aortic occlusive disease but is technically difficult and associated with morbidity. The major limitation to thoracic aorta bifemoral grafting technique is the morbidity rate associated with thoracotomy in a relatively high-risk vascular surgery population. Also, tunnelling in conventional DTA-to-femoral artery bypass is usually a “blind” procedure.For the cardiothoracic surgeon with experience, the use of descending thoracic aorta could be a very good alternative for infrarenal aortic occlusion or extra-anatomic aortoiliac bypass without any morbidity and mortality with good improvement in quality of life.

Comparison of Early and Late Post-operative Outcomes after Supra-inguinal Bypass for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease

The choice for surgical revascularisation for aortoiliac occlusive disease is often tempered by patient comorbidities. This study compares peri-operative outcomes and the association between choice of operation and one year major adverse limb event (MALE) free survival and five year mortality. The Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) dataset for supra-inguinal bypass operations from 2009 to 2015 was queried. This study excluded cases with bypass other than aortofemoral (AFB), axillofemoral (AXB), and femorofemoral (FFB), and those with endovascular interventions or femoral endarterectomy. Cases combined with other procedures, indications other than occlusive disease, and missing pathology were also excluded. Patients were divided into three groups: AFB, AXB, and FFB. Thirty day post-operative death (POD) and adverse events were compared using univariable and multivariable analyses. One year MALE free survival was compared between groups with log rank test and Kaplan-Meier plot. Proportional hazard Cox regression was used for adjusted comparison of MALE free and five year survival. In total, 1,602 cases were included: 207 (12.9%) AXB; 872 (54.4%) AFB; 523 (32.6%) FFB. AXB patients were older with more comorbidities. Post-operative complications and POD rates were significantly higher for AXB (p<.05). On adjusted analyses, AXB increased the hazard of one year MALE (hazard ratio [HR] 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-2.78; p=.014) and five year mortality (HR 1.54; 95% CI 1.11-2.41; p=.009). Both FFB and AFB had similar one year MALE free survival but significantly better one year MALE free survival than AXB. After adjusting for confounding variables, and while acknowledging limitations related to the VSGNE data set, FFB led to significantly lower rates of post-operative complications than AXB. FFB may serve as the extra-anatomical operation of choice in high risk patients with extensive disease, who cannot undergo AFB, provided that anatomy permits. AFB should be performed preferentially in low risk patients with appropriate anatomy. Owing to its higher complications rates, the study suggests that AXB should be limited to patients with no other option for revascularisation.

Improved patency after axillofemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease

ObjectiveAxillofemoral bypasses (AxFBs) have been used since 1962 to treat aortoiliac disease. In the past, reported patency rates (37%-76%) for these extra-anatomic grafts have been inferior to those for anatomic aortic grafting. Reported low survival rates after AxFB (40%-50%) have confirmed that these procedures have been used primarily in patients at high risk for complications from aortofemoral bypass. However, modern medical and anesthesia management, preoperative scanning, donor artery preparation, postoperative graft surveillance, and graft technology may improve outcomes after AxFB, possibly supporting expansion of its use. We therefore report our last 15-year experience with AxFB. MethodsRing-reinforced, 8-mm expanded polytetrafluoroethylene grafts were used in all cases. The cross-femoral limb of axillobifemoral bypass (AxBFB) grafts was preconstructed. Heparin was administered intraoperatively, with protamine reversal. Loss of primary patency was defined as graft thrombosis of part or all of the inserted graft. Five-year primary patency rates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. ResultsBetween February 1991 and June 2016, a total of 161 grafts were inserted (85 AxBFBs and 76 axillounifemoral bypasses [AxUFBs]) in 91 male and 70 female patients (median age, 72.6 years; mean age, 73 years; range, 41-94 years). Indications for treatment were rest pain (49.6%), ischemic lesions (26%), claudication (22.3%), failed prior revascularization (9.3%), infection (3.7%), and dissecting aneurysm (1.2%). Reasons for performing AxFB rather than aortofemoral bypass were hostile aorta (44.1%), high risk (19.2%), prior failed reconstruction (12.4%), advanced age (8.7%), infection (4.3%), hostile abdomen (4.3%), aortic dissection (0.6%), and morbid obesity (0.6%). During follow up, 63 patients died, 17 within the first year; but only 3 patients died within 30 days of surgery (performed to treat an acute aortic occlusion). The 5-year survival rate was 55%. Five-year patency rates were 83.7% for all procedures, 81.8% for AxBFB, and 85.5% for AxUFB; the difference between AxBFB and AxUFB was not significant. ConclusionsOur data indicate that AxBFB and AxUFB performed with the use of modern protocols and technology may render them an acceptable valid primary intervention in patients in whom endovascular treatment has failed or is unlikely to offer long-term success. The simplicity of performing these grafts and their low mortality and morbidity lend their application to surgeons with limited open aortic experience. Because AxUFB and AxBFB have similar patency rates, AxBFB should be reserved for bilateral indications.

Thirty-year trends in aortofemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease

ObjectiveEndovascular intervention has supplanted open bypass as the most frequently used approach in patients with aortoiliac segment atherosclerosis. We sought to determine whether this trend together with changing demographic and clinical characteristics of patients undergoing aortobifemoral bypass (ABFB) for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AOD) have an association with postoperative outcomes. MethodsUsing a prospectively maintained institutional database, we identified patients who underwent ABFB for AOD from 1985 to 2015. Patients were divided into two cohorts: the historical cohort (HC) included patients who underwent ABFB for AOD from 1985 to 1999 and the contemporary cohort (CC) who underwent ABFB for AOD from 2000 to 2015. Medical and demographic data, procedural information, postoperative complications, and follow-up data were extracted. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate associations with the end point of primary patency. A similar analysis was performed for major adverse limb events (MALEs; the composite of above-ankle amputation, major reintervention, graft revision, or new bypass graft of the index limb) in the subset of patients with critical limb ischemia. ResultsThere were a total of 359 cases: 226 in the HC and 133 in the CC. The CC had more women (56.4% vs 43.8%; P = .02), smokers (87.2% vs 67.7%; P = .001), and patients who failed prior aortoiliac endovascular intervention (17.3% vs 4.8%; P = .0001), but fewer patients with coronary artery disease (32.3% vs 47.3%; P = .005). Thirty-day mortality was less than 1% in both cohorts, but 10-year survival was higher in the CC (67.7% vs 52.6%; P = .02). Five-year primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency were higher in the HC (93.3% vs 82.2%; P = .005; 93.8% vs 85.7%; P = .02; 97.5% vs 90.4%; P = .02, respectively). CC membership, decreasing age, prior aortic surgery, and decreasing graft diameter were significant independent predictors of loss of primary patency after adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 7.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.80-17.63; P < .0001; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.96; P < .0001; HR, 18.80; 95% CI, 5.94-59.58; P < .0001; and HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55-0.95; P = .02, respectively). Similarly, CC membership, prior aortic surgery, and decreasing graft diameter were significant independent predictors of MALE in the critical limb ischemia cohort after adjustment (HR, 21.13; 95% CI, 4.20-106.40; P = .0002; HR, 40.40; 95% CI, 3.23-505.61; P = .004; and HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30-0.86; P = .01, respectively). ConclusionsCompared with the pre-endovascular era, demographic and clinical characteristics of patients undergoing ABFB for AOD in the CC have changed. Although long-term patency is slightly lower among patients in the CC during which a substantial subset of AOD patients are being treated primarily via the endovascular approach, durability remains excellent and limb salvage unchanged. After adjustment, the time period of index ABFB independently predicted primary patency and MALE, as did graft diameter and prior aortic surgery. These changing characteristics should be considered when counseling patients and benchmarking for reintervention rates and other outcomes.

Metabolic Syndrome but not Obesity Adversely Affects Outcomes after Open Aortoiliac Bypass Surgery

Although the incident risk of peripheral artery disease increases in patients with metabolic syndrome, several authors report favorable outcomes in obese patients after arterial bypass surgery. We examine the effect of the so-called "obesity paradox" and metabolic syndrome on outcomes after open aortoiliac bypass surgery. We identified patients between 2004 and 2015 who had open surgical bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease. We excluded patients with endovascular repair and those treated primarily for aneurysmal disease. Variables that were analyzed included preoperative medical history, Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus Document on Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease II classification, Rutherford classification, intra-operative, and postoperative outcomes. Metabolic syndrome was defined by World Health Organization criteria: diabetes and 2 or more of dyslipidemia, hypertension, and obesity (body mass index > 30kg/m2). Data were analyzed by stratified Kaplan-Meier and multiple Cox regression for outcomes including long-term mortality and reintervention rate. There were 154 open bypass surgery patients during the study period with a median age of 60years (interquartile range [IQR] 53-68), median glomerular filtration rate 76.1mL/min (IQR 54-102), and 58% female prevalence. In all, 53 patients had metabolic syndrome (4%), and 14 patients (9%) were obese but did not have metabolic syndrome. Primary bypass graft patency was 89.0±2.7% at 1 year and 77.4±4.1% at 5 years and was not significantly different between metabolic syndrome, obese, and nonmetabolic syndrome patients. Reintervention rate for the entire cohort was 25.3±3.7% at 1 year and 40.6±4.7% at 5 years. In those with and without metabolic syndrome, reintervention rate at 1 and 5 years was 33.0±6.8% vs. 21.1±4.2% and 56.1±7.9% vs. 30.7±5.4%, respectively (log-rank P=0.003). In multivariable analyses, metabolic syndrome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.8, P=0.036) and critical limb ischemia (CLI) (HR: 3.2, P=0.001) were the only independent predictors of reintervention. Neither obesity nor the individual components comprising metabolic syndrome was a risk for reintervention. Multivariate analysis demonstrated age, female gender, CLI, and nonobesity as the independent risk factors for long-term mortality. Our study supports the "obesity paradox" that obesity by itself is not a risk factor for reintervention and was a protective factor for mortality after open aortoiliac bypass surgery. Bypass graft patency and major amputation rates were not affected. Although the individual components do not predispose to worse outcome, metabolic syndrome is a constellation of factors that, together, are associated with adverse events.

Early extubation is associated with reduced length of stay and improved outcomes after elective aortic surgery in the Vascular Quality Initiative

ObjectiveTiming of extubation after open aortic procedures varies across hospitals. This study was designed to examine extubation timing and determine its effect on length of stay (LOS) and respiratory complications after elective open aortic surgery. MethodsWe studied extubation timing for 7171 patients undergoing elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (2687 [37.5%]) or suprainguinal bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease (4484 [62.5%]) from October 2010 to April 2015 in hospitals participating in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI). Our primary outcome was prolonged LOS (>7 days), and the secondary outcome was respiratory complications (pneumonia or reintubation). The association between extubation timing and outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression mixed-effects models that adjusted for confounding factors at the patient and procedure level. A variable importance analysis was conducted using a chi-pie framework to identify factors contributing to the variability of extubation timing. ResultsThe 7171 patients undergoing abdominal aortic surgery were a mean age of 65.4 (standard deviation, 10.2) years, and 63% were male. Extubation occurred (1) in the operating room (76.3%), (2) <12 hours (10.9%), (3) 12 to 24 hours (7.2%), or (4) >24 hours (5.6%) after surgery. Hospitals in the top quartile for case volume had the highest percentage of patients extubated in the operating room (82.8%). Patients least likely to be extubated in the operating room were older, more likely to have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, require vasopressors, have higher estimated blood loss (EBL), and longer procedure times. After adjustment for patient, procedure, and institutional factors, delayed extubation was associated with prolonged LOS (<12 hours: odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-1.7; 12-24 hours: OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.7-2.7; >24 hours: OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 4.0-6.9), and pulmonary complications (<12 hours: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4-2.6; 12-24 hours: OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.8-3.6; >24 hours: OR, 9.6; 95% CI, 7.1-13.0) compared with those extubated in the operating room. Subset analysis of patients extubated in the operating room or <12 hours showed that extubation out of the operating room was associated with prolonged LOS (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.7) and pulmonary complications (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.5). The variable importance analysis demonstrated that EBL (26%) and procedure time (24%) accounted for half of the variation in extubation timing. ConclusionsExtubation in the operating room is associated with shorter LOS and morbidity after open aortic surgery. EBL, procedure time, and center variation account for variability in extubation timing. These data advocate for standardized perioperative respiratory care to reduce variation, improve outcomes, and reduce LOS.

Outcomes after redo aortobifemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease

Patients presenting with occluded aortobifemoral (ABF) bypass grafts are managed with a variety of techniques. Redo ABF (rABF) bypass procedures are infrequently performed because of concerns about procedural complexity and morbidity. The purpose of this analysis was to compare midterm results of rABF bypass with those of primary ABF (pABF) bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease to determine if there are significant differences in outcomes. A retrospective review was performed of all patients undergoing ABF bypass for occlusive disease between January 2002 and March 2012. A total of 19 patients underwent rABF bypass and 194 received pABF bypass during that period. Data for an indication- and comorbidity-matched case-control cohort of 19 elective pABF bypass patients were collected for comparison to the rABF bypass group. Primary end points included rate of major complications as well as 30-day and all-cause mortality. Secondary end points were amputation-free survival and freedom from major adverse limb events. The rABF bypass patients more frequently underwent prior extra-anatomic or lower extremity bypass operations compared with pABF bypass patients (P = .02); however, no difference was found in the incidence of prior failed endovascular iliac intervention (P = .4). By design, indications for the rABF and pABF bypass groups were the same (claudication, n = 6/6 [31.6%]; P = 1; critical limb ischemia, n = 13/13 [78.4%]; P = 1). Aortic access was more frequently by retroperitoneal exposure in the rABF bypass group (n = 13 vs n = 1; P < .0001), and a significantly higher proportion of the rABF bypass patients required concomitant infrainguinal bypass or intraprocedural adjuncts such as profundaplasty (n = 14 vs n = 5; P = .01). The rABF bypass patients experienced greater blood loss (1097 ± 983 mL vs 580 ± 457 mL; P = .02), received more intraoperative fluids (3400 ± 1422 mL vs 2279 ± 993 mL; P = .01), and had longer overall procedure times (408 ± 102 minutes vs 270 ± 48 minutes; P < .0001). Length of stay (days ± standard deviation) was similar (pABF bypass, 11.2 ± 10.4; rABF bypass, 9.1 ± 4.5; P = .7), and no 30-day or in-hospital deaths occurred in either group. Similar rates of major complications occurred in the two groups (pABF bypass, n = 6 [31.6%]; rABF bypass, n = 4 [21.1%]; observed difference, 9.5%; 95% confidence interval, -17.6% to 36.7%; P = .7). Two-year freedom from major adverse limb events (±standard error mean) was 82% ± 9% vs 78% ± 10% for pABF and rABF bypass patients (log-rank, P = .6). Two-year amputation-free survival was 90 ± 9% vs 89 ± 8% between pABF and rABF bypass patients (P = .5). Two-year survival was 91% ± 9% and 90% ± 9% for pABF and rABF bypass patients (P = .8). Patients undergoing rABF bypass have higher procedural complexity compared with pABF bypass as evidenced by greater operative time, blood loss, and need for adjunctive procedures. However, similar perioperative morbidity, mortality, and midterm survival occurred in comparison to pABF bypass patients. These results support a role for rABF bypass in selected patients.

Aorto-bi-Femoral Bypass for Juxtarenal Aortic Occlusion in a Patient with Multiple Co-Morbidities: Report of a Challenging Case

Aorto-bi-femoral bypass for aorto-iliac occlusive disease is a fairly common procedure in vascular surgical practice. The procedure, despite its extensive nature, is generally well tolerated particularly by those having an infrarenal type of aortic occlusion. Patients having a juxtarenal aortic occlusion require a considerably more expeditious surgery necessitating maneuvers to protect the renal arteries. Surgical risk increases significantly in those having multiple co-morbid conditions. We report here a successful case of aorto-bi-femoral bypass for juxtarenal aortic occlusion in a patient having multiple co-morbid conditions like ischemic heart disease, occluded right renal artery with chronic kidney disease, severe malnutrition, hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/cardio.v6i2.18363 Cardiovasc. j. 2014; 6(2): 170-174

Anesthetic management of descending thoracic aortobifemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease: Our experience

Background:Complete obstruction of the abdominal aorta at the renal artery level is a difficult surgical problem. Aortic clamping and declamping can lead to profound haemodynamic changes, myocardial infarction, ventricular failure or even death may result. These complications are important challenges in anesthetic management of these patients.Methods:Between August, 2010 and April, 2012, descending thoracic aorta to femoral artery bypass grafting was used to revascularize lower limbs in 11 patients in our institute. The anesthetic management of these patients is described here. Epidural catheter placement was done in T 5-6 or T 6-7 space for post operative pain relief. Induction was done by, Inj. Glycopyrolate 0.2 mg, Inj. Fentanyl 5 μg/kg., Inj. Pentothal sodium 5 mg/kg, Inj. Rocuronium 0.9 mg/kg, IPPV done. Left sided double lumen tube was inserted, Maintenance of Anesthesia was done by O2 + N2 O (30:70). Increments of Vecuronium and Fentanyl were given Monitoring of Heart rate, arterial pressure, central venous pressure were continuously displayed. The available pharmacological agents were used when there is deviation of more than 15% from base line.Results:In our study, inspite of measures taken to control rise in blood pressure during aortic cross clamping, a rise of 90 mm of Hg in one patient and 60-80 mm of Hg in four patients was observed, which was managed by sodium nitropruside infusion. At the end of surgery seven patients were extubated on the operation table. In remaining four patients DLT was replaced by single lumen endotracheal tube and were shifted to ICU on IPPV. They weaned off gradually in 3-5 hours. In our series blood loss was 400 ml to 1000 ml. There was no mortality in the first 24 hours. Postoperative bleeding was reported in one case which was re-explored and stood well.Conclusion:The anesthetic technique during aortic surgery is directed at minimizing the hemodynamic effects of cross clamping in order to maintain the myocardial oxygen supply demand ratio.

Descending thoracic aorto bifemoral artery bypass for Aortoiliac occlusive disease :A novel anterior subcutaneous tunnel approach

Descending thoracic aortobifemoral bypass via novel anterior subcutaneous tunnel approach was evaluated in 31 patients. Indications for this approach were; infrarenal aortic block with no site for infrarenal aortic clamping(18 cases), calcified infrarenal aorta(11 cases) and history of laparotomy(2 cases). Duration of surgery was 1.5 to 3 hours and blood loss was 300ml to 1000ml. There was mortality of 2 patients. Reexploration due to bleeding was done in 3 patients and 3 patients required prolonged ventilatory support for 2 days. This approach is recommended in selected patients where conventional approach to the abdominal aorta is not feasible. Follow up of 27 pateints had patent grafts in 24 patients and blocked grafts with no symptoms in 3 patients. 2 patients were lost to follow up.

Evaluation of Four Risk-Scoring Methods to Predict Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Aorto-Bifemoral Bypass for Aorto-Iliac Occlusive Disease

This study was done to determine the usefulness of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, the comorbidity Charlson index unadjusted (CCIu),the comorbidity Charlson index adjusted by age (CCIa), and the Glasgow aneurysm score (GAS) for postoperative morbimortality and survival in patients treated with aorto-bifemoral bypass (AFB) for aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD). A series of 278 patients who underwent AFB were restrospectively studied. For the CCIu, CCIa, ASA, and GAS, receiver operating characteristics curve analysis for prediction of morbidity showed area under the curves of 0.61 (p = 0.004), 0.59 (p = 0.026), 0.569 (p = 0.087), and 0.63 (p = 0.001), respectively. Additionally, univariate analysis showed that CCIa (p = 0.016) and GAS (p = 0.006) were associated significantly with an increased risk of developing complications. Furthermore, CCIa (p < 0.001) and GAS (p = 0.001) showed a significant association with survival. Finally, the variable age was related to morbidity (p = 0.004), mortality (p = 0.038), and survival (p < 0.001). The comorbididity and the age should be taken in account in clinical treatment decisions for patients with AIOD. The CCIa and GAS may play a role as predictive factors for postoperative morbidity and survival after AFB.

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Aortobifemoral Bypass in the Treatment of Aortoiliac Disease. Results of a Contemporary Series (2003–2009)

Objectives : The study objective was to describe and evaluate our single center (University Hospital Liège) experience with totally laparoscopic bypass surgery compared with conventional open surgery to treat aortoiliac occlusive disease.Material and methods : A retrospective database review of all patients undergoing aortobifemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease in our center, between 2003 and 2009, was performed. During this period, a total of 251 consecutive patients were identified. Among these patients, 95 underwent totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (group I) and 156 conventional open surgery (group II). Demographic data, operative data, postoperative recovery data, complications, two-year follow-up, morbidity and mortality were analysed according to the laparoscopic and conventional open group.Results : Patients included 160 men and 91 women. The mean age was 61 years (range, 40 to 88 years) in both groups. Indications for surgery were invalidating claudication in 87%, rest pain in 7%, trophic disorders in 5%, impotence in 1.6% and digestive claudication in 1.2%. Prior to bypass surgery, 11 (11.6%) for the group I and 41 (26.3%) for the group II had undergone one or more abdominal surgical procedures. A transperitoneal and retrocolic approach was preferred in all laparoscopic procedures. Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABF) required an operative time of 242 minutes (range, 129 to 465) and open aortobifemoral bypass (OABF), 200 minutes (range, 105 to 430). The mean aortic cross clamping time was 62 minutes in group I and 33 minutes in group II. Mean blood loss was more important in group II (1010 ml) than in group I (682 ml). The average length of hospital stay was 8.1 days for LABF compared with an average of 12 days for OABF. In 21 cases (20%) conversion to open surgery was necessary in the laparoscopic group. Systemic morbidity was significantly higher in the OABF group. Thirty-day postoperative mortality was 2% for group II. There was no hospital mortality in the laparoscopic group. Twenty nine patients were lost to follow-up and the mean follow-up was 23.5 months.Conclusion : Analysis of the results shows that laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease is a safe procedure. The statistically significant advantages observed in the majority of our patients were decreased blood loss, faster post-operative recovery and shorter hospital stay. In the two groups, late morbidity attributable to the bypass prosthesis was minimal compared with other causes.