Carotid-subclavian Bypass Research Articles

‘Spontaneous graft pseudoaneurysm presenting a decade after carotid-subclavian bypass’: an extremely rare complication detected on CT

A 61-year-old man who had undergone a right carotid-subclavian bypass with saphenous vein homograft for symptomatic right ostio-proximal subclavian artery (SCA) occlusion 10 years ago, presented with gradually progressive pulsatile...

ANOTHER BLOODY PNEUMONIA? PULMONARY HEMORRHAGE DUE TO LARGE PSEUDOANEURYSM WITH AORTOBRONCHIAL FISTULA

SESSION TITLE: Medical Student/Resident Cardiothoracic Surgery Posters SESSION TYPE: Med Student/Res Case Rep Postr PRESENTED ON: October 18-21, 2020 INTRODUCTION: Aortic pseudoaneurysms are a rare complication of prior vascular or valvular surgery with high mortality. A pseudoaneurysm is a disruption in the blood vessel allowing blood to flow between the tunica media and adventitia. We present a case of an aortic pseudoaneurysm secondary to previous carotid-subclavian bypass presenting as pulmonary hemorrhage. CASE PRESENTATION: A 57-year-old male with a history of carotid-subclavian bypass and recent pulmonary embolism on apixaban presented with hemoptysis. Chest xray showed a left upper lobe mass with consideration for necrotizing pneumonia. Antibiotics were started, however sputum cultures were unrevealing. Then, CT chest revealed an aortic pseudoaneurysm adjacent to a large consolidation that was concerning for malignancy, but follow up PET scan was inconclusive. The patient was discharged home to have further outpatient malignancy workup, but returned within a month for continued hemoptysis. CT aortic dissection protocol revealed a partially thrombosed pseudoaneurysm with aortobronchial fistula. Cardiology evaluated the patient and recommended novel occlusion of pseudoaneursym with duct occluder device given patient’s continued deterioration. The patient was transferred to a quaternary care center for urgent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). DISCUSSION: Hemoptysis is a common presenting complaint typically caused by viral bronchitis, pneumonia, or malignancy. However, rare causes of hemoptysis including aortic pseudoaneurysm should be considered in patients with prior history of cardiothoracic surgery. Pseudoaneurysms typically remain asymptomatic and present late, which leads to high mortality. Most pseudoaneurysms require urgent TEVAR with proposed long-term prophylactic antibiotics to prevent graft infection. Interestingly, in a patient with prohibitively high surgical risk, the pseudoaneurysm can be percutaneously closed with duct occluder devices typically used to close patent foramen ovale and patient ductus arteriosus. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining a wide differential and pursuing further evaluation in the setting of a declining patient is imperative to determine the appropriate treatment. Rarely, hemoptysis can be caused by aortic pseudoaneurysm and should be considered in the differential of patients with a history of cardiothoracic surgery. Reference #1: Fontana, M., Tonelli, R., Gozzi, F. et al. An uncommon cause of hemoptysis: aortobronchial fistula. Multidiscip Respir Med 13, 25 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40248-018-0146-3 Reference #2: MacIntosh EL, Parrott JCW, Unruh HW. Fistulas between the aorta and tracheobronchial tree. Ann Thorac Surg. 1991;51:515e9. DISCLOSURES: No relevant relationships by Anas Ahmed, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Joy Wang, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Steven Young, source=Web Response

Contemporary Surgical Management of Aberrant Right Subclavian Arteries (Arteria Lusoria)

An aberrant right subclavian artery (ARSA) is in most cases an asymptomatic aortic arch anomaly. However, dysphagia, aneurysm formation (ARSAA), associated Kommerell diverticulum, or cerebellar/arm malperfusion may require invasive therapy. Large-scale clinical trials do not exist in current literature. We report our patient's outcome of a single-center experience and delineate indications for treatment and surgical techniques. A single-center retrospective study was conducted between January 1, 2012 through March 1, 2018. Symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with ARSAA who received invasive treatment at the Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital Dusseldorf, Germany were included. Eight patients (4 men, 63±14 (39-78) years) were treated with single-stage (n=4) or multistage (n=4) procedures. Treatment for ARSAA (n=4) included ARSA revascularization (subclavian-carotid transposition (SCT)=3; carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB)=1), aortic arch debranching (left SCT=2, bilateral aorto-carotid bypass+left CSB=1, right-to-left CSB+left-carotid-to-bypass transposition=1), and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR; n=4). Other strategies included SCT for dysphagia (n=2) or subclavian steal syndrome (n=1) and balloon angioplasty for arm claudication (n=1). Complications involved vascular access (n=2) and each one partial common carotid artery overstenting without stroke during TEVAR and Horner syndrome after SCT. Mean follow-up was 23±26 (9-67) months. After 7 months, 1 patient required vertebral artery coiling due to type II endoleak with ARSAA progression. Overall mortality was 0%. Technical and clinical success rates were 100%. Surgical concepts for ARSA aim on preventing aneurysm rupture and alleviate dysphagia or ischemic symptoms. To generate satisfying patient outcomes, individualized therapy planning in specialized centers is vital.

Trends and outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with open concomitant cervical debranching

ObjectiveThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the most common surgical procedure for treatment of descending thoracic aortic pathology. Cervical debranching in the form of carotid–subclavian bypass or transposition (CSBT) and carotid–carotid bypass (CCB) has enabled the use of TEVAR for the treatment of more complex anatomy involving the arch. The present study examined the effects of concomitant cervical bypass on the perioperative outcomes of TEVAR. MethodsThe American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program files (2005-2017) were reviewed. Using the Current Procedural Terminology codes, all patients who had undergone TEVAR were identified and were divided into three groups: TEVAR, TEVAR with one bypass (CSBT or CCB), and TEVAR with two bypasses (CSBT and CCB). The patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes of the three groups were compared. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine the factors associated with mortality. ResultsA total of 3281 patients had undergone TEVAR and 10% had also undergone one or more debranching procedure (one bypass, 9%; two bypasses, 1%). The frequency of debranching had increased from 3.4% to 10.9% (P = .01) during the study period. Significant differences were found among the three groups in age, sex, smoking history, urgency of surgery, and anesthesia technique. The patients who had undergone TEVAR with cervical debranching had had significantly greater morbidity, longer operating times, and longer hospital stays compared with those who had undergone TEVAR alone. The mortality of TEVAR with two bypasses (22.6%) was significantly greater than that of TEVAR alone (7.5%) and TEVAR with one bypass (6.8%; P < .01). The total morbidity (30.9% vs 35.1% vs 67.7%; P < .001) and stroke rate (3% vs 7.5% vs 12.9%; P < .0001) increased with the increasing number of bypasses. A subgroup analysis of patients who had undergone TEVAR with one bypass showed no significant differences in mortality between TEVAR plus CSBT (6.6%) vs TEVAR plus CCB (8.8%; P = .63). Multivariable analysis showed that TEVAR with two bypasses was associated with significantly increased mortality compared with TEVAR alone (odds ratio [OR], 4.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.75-10.73) and TEVAR with one bypass (OR, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.24-9.51). Older age (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.42-2.13), dependent functional status (OR, 1.48; 1.00-2.19), dialysis (OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.57-4.33), and emergent status (OR, 3.66; 95% CI, 2.73-4.90) were also associated with mortality. ConclusionsTEVAR with concomitant cervical debranching has been increasingly used to treat complex aortic pathology but is associated with significantly worse outcomes than TEVAR alone. As advanced endovascular technology to treat the aortic arch emerges, the outcomes of open surgical debranching in the present study constitute an important benchmark for comparison.

Fenestrated and Branched Thoraco-abdominal Endografting after Previous Open Abdominal Aortic Repair

Proximal para-anastomotic aneurysms, or aneurysmal degeneration of the native aorta above a previous open abdominal aortic repair (Pr-AAAs), are challenging scenarios. The aim of this study was to report the early and mid term outcomes of endovascular repair of Pr-AAAs by fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FB-EVAR). From 2006 to 2017, pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative data from patients undergoing FB-EVAR for Pr-AAAs at two European vascular surgery units were prospectively collected and retrospectively analysed. Early results were considered in terms of technical success (target visceral vessel cannulation and stenting, absence of type I - III endoleak, iliac limb occlusion and 24h mortality); spinal cord ischaemia (SCI) and 30 day and in hospital mortality. Survival, target visceral vessel (TVV) patency, and freedom from re-interventions were also considered at the mid term follow up. Five hundred and forty-four patients underwent FB-EVAR to treat juxta/pararenal or thoraco-abdominal aneurysms. Of these patients, 108 (19.8%) cases were Pr-AAAs (94% male; mean±standard deviation [SD] age 71±4 years; American Society of Anesthesiologists' grade 3-4 in 74% and 26%, respectively). The previous open aortic repair (OR) was performed 10±2 years before FB-EVAR. It was a tubular aorto-aortic repair in 63 (58.3%) cases, a bifurcated aortobi-iliac repair in 37 (34.2%) cases, and an aortobifemoral bypass repair in eight (7.4%) cases. A previous thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) had been performed in seven patients (6.5%). The aortic lesion at the time of FB-EVAR was, according to the Crawford classification, a type I - III in 69 (63.9%) or a type IV 39 (36.1%) thoraco-abdominal aneurysm. The mean±SD aneurysm diameter was 64±6mm. Overall, 390 TVVs (3.6±1 TVV/case) were revascularised by an endograft with fenestrations (n=63 [58.3%]), with branches (n=26 [24.1%]), or with both fenestrations and branches (n=19 [17.6%]). Tubular, trimodular, or aorto-uni-iliac implants were planned in 68 (63.0%), 38 (35.2%), and two (1.8%) patients, respectively. Proximal TEVAR, carotid-subclavian bypass, and iliac branch devices were planned as adjunctive procedures in 41 (38.0%), five (4.6%), and three (2.8%) cases, respectively. Overall technical success was 93%, with technical failures including five TVV losses (coeliac trunk, n=1; renal arteries, n=4) and three deaths within 24h. Post-operative SCI occurred in seven patients (6.5%), four of which (3.7%) were permanent. SCI was more frequent in category I - III TAAAs (p=.042) and in endografts incorporating both fenestrations and branches (p=.023). Cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications (reduction in glomerular filtration rate of ≥30% compared with baseline) occurred in 9%, 10%, and 20%, respectively. Bowel ischaemia was seen in three (2.8%) patients. Thirty day mortality was 4% and was associated with pre-operative chronic renal failure (p=.034), post-operative cardiac morbidity (p=.041), and bowel ischaemia (p=.003). Overall in hospital mortality was 5.5% (n=6). Mean±SD follow up was 38±18 months. Survival was 82%, 64%, and 54% at one, three, and five years, respectively, and target visceral vessel patency was 93%, 91%, and 91%, respectively. Permanent haemodialysis was needed in four patients (3.7%). There was no late aneurysm related mortality. Survival during follow up was statistically significantly affected by pre-operative chronic renal failure (p=.022), post-operative cardiac morbidity (p=.042), SCI (p=.044), and bowel ischaemia (p=.003). Freedom from re-intervention at one, three, and five years was 89%, 77%, and 74%, respectively. Endovascular treatment of aneurysmal aortic degeneration above a previous open abdominal repair with FB-EVAR is safe and effective. If those promising results are confirmed at later follow up, FB-EVAR should be considered a prominent therapeutic option, especially in high risk patients.

Utility of Single-Branched Thoracic Endograft in Patients Requiring Zone 2 Seal During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

Single-branched thoracic endografts (SBTEs) are under investigation for treatment of thoracic aortic disease that requires zone 2 seal during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). A variety of anatomic criteria must be met for their effective implantation. Our aim was to analyze anatomic suitability for SBTE. We performed a retrospective review of 103 TEVAR procedures in 88 patients at our academic referral center between 2017 and 2019. Proximal seal was achieved in zone 3 or zone 4 (n = 37 [36%]), zone 2 (n = 30 [29%]), or zone 0 or zone 1 (n = 36 [35%]). We analyzed the zone 2 group’s operative angiograms and preoperative computed tomography angiograms using centerline software to measure arterial diameters and length in relation to the left common carotid artery, left subclavian artery (LSA), and proximal extent of aortic disease to determine whether patients met anatomic criteria using the instructions for use (IFU) of the Navion Mona LSA (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, Calif; Table I). Average age in the zone 2 group was 64 years (range, 26-85 years); 17 were male (57%). Indications (Table II) were acute type B dissection (ATBD; n = 13 [43%]), aneurysm (n = 15 [50%]), and blunt aortic injury (n = 2 [7%]). The LSA was revascularized in 20 (67%): carotid subclavian bypass or transposition, n = 17; laser fenestration, n = 3. Overall, 14 (47%) of the zone 2 patients met the IFU. Reasons for failure are listed in Table I. Of the 16 who did not meet IFU, 9 had multiple exclusion criteria. Inadequate aortic diameter excluded only the two blunt aortic injury patients. The proportion of patients who met IFU criteria by indication are listed in Table II. Fewer ATBDs (5/13 [38%]) met IFU than aneurysms (9/15 [60%]), but this was not statistically significant (P = .26). Of the eight ATBD patients who failed to meet criteria, seven had dissection at or into the origin of the LSA. If dissection into the LSA origin was allowed in ATBD, three of the seven would have otherwise qualified. Approximately half of patients who require TEVAR seal in zone 2 meet criteria for this SBTE. The device may offer the ability to provide flow to the LSA without the need for adjuvant revascularization procedures. Patients with aneurysms more often met the IFU than those with acute dissection. A modification to the IFU to allow dissection up to the LSA origin would increase eligibility in ATBD by >50%. Clinical efficacy data, however, are needed to determine whether this would be effective.Table IAnatomic criteria for the Navion Mona LSAAnatomic criteriaCriteria to meet IFUMean ± SD, mmNo. (%) failing to meet criteriaAortic diameter at proximal seal zoneDissection: 28-44 mm Aneurysm/PAU: 25-42 mm30.2 ± 3.82 (7)LSA diameter8-13 mm9.47 ± 1.30 (0)Distance between orifices of LCCA to LSA≥10 mm10.9 ± 6.012 (40)Distance of LCCA to aortic disease≥20 mm22.1 ± 10.111 (37)Distance of LSA to aortic disease≥0 mm (presence of nondiseased aorta distal to LSA)5.6 ± 6.311 (37)IFU, Instructions for use; LCCA, left common carotid artery; LSA, left subclavian artery; PAU, penetrating aortic ulcer; SD, standard deviation. Open table in a new tab Table IIThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) indications and proportion that met the instructions for use (IFU)IndicationNo.No. (%) meeting criteriaAcute type B dissection135 (38)Aneurysm or penetrating ulcer96 (67)Aneurysm in chronic dissection63 (50)Blunt aortic injury20 (0) Open table in a new tab

Thoracic aortic remodeling with endografting after a decade of thoracic endovascular aortic repair experience

ObjectiveThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) results have been studied in short-term time frames. This study aimed to evaluate midterm and long-term outcomes of TEVAR, emphasizing postoperative aortic remodeling and need for reintervention. MethodsThis is an institutional retrospective review of TEVAR for isolated descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. Data were collected from 2004 to 2018. Primary outcomes studied included aneurysm sac remodeling, freedom from reintervention, and all-cause mortality. Other outcomes studied include endoleak rates, neurologic complication rates, and any overall postoperative complication rates. ResultsDuring the study period, 219 patients underwent TEVAR for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. The median effect of TEVAR on sac diameter was a 0.7-cm decrease in size (interquartile range, −1.4 to 0.0 cm). During the study period, 80% (n = 147) of patients experienced aneurysm sac regression or stability. Perioperative neurologic complications occurred in 16% (n = 34) of patients. Significant predictors of sac growth were endoleak (odds ratio [OR], 65; P < .001), preoperative carotid-subclavian bypass (OR, 8; P = .003), and graft oversizing <20% (OR, 15; P = .046). Every 1-mm increase in aortic diameter at the proximal TEVAR landing zone led to an increased odds of endoleak (OR, 2; P = .049). Access complications (OR, 8) and subclavian artery coverage (OR, 6) significantly increased the odds of reintervention, whereas every percentage of graft oversizing protected against reintervention (OR, 0.005). Life-table analysis revealed an overall survival of 78% (71%-83%) at median follow-up. At 3 years, survival was 88% (80%-93%) for those with aneurysm sac stability or regression, whereas it was 70% (49%-84%) for those with aneurysm sac growth (P = .0402). Cox proportional hazards model showed that the only protective factor for mortality was percentage oversizing, with every 1% of oversizing having a hazard ratio (HR) of <.001 (P = .032). This was counterbalanced by the fact that patients with graft oversizing >30% had an increased odds of mortality with HR >10 (P = .049). Other significant factors that increased the odds of mortality included endoleak (HR, 3.6; P = .033), diabetes (HR, 4.1; P = .048), age (every 1-year increase in age; HR, 1.2; P = .002), year of surgery (every year subsequent to 2004; HR, 1.3; P = .012), and peripheral artery disease (HR, 5.2; P = .041). ConclusionsThe majority of patients (80%) experience sac stability or regression after TEVAR, which offers a clear survival advantage. Endoleaks are predictive of sac growth, conferring increased mortality. Rigorous surveillance is necessary to prevent future aortic events through reintervention.

Periscope sandwich stenting as an alternative to open cervical revascularization of left subclavian artery during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair

ObjectiveRevascularization of the left subclavian artery (LSA) during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) maintains collateral circulation to decrease ischemic complications, including stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and upper extremity ischemia. Both open surgical and endovascular LSA revascularization techniques have been described, each with unique risks and benefits. We describe our “periscope sandwich” technique for the LSA during zone 2 TEVAR, which maintains antegrade access to the distal abdominal aorta if subsequent interventions are necessary. Technical results and short-term outcomes are compared with LSA open surgical debranching. MethodsA single-institution retrospective review was performed for patients requiring zone 2 TEVAR with LSA revascularization by periscope sandwich technique or open surgical debranching with subclavian to carotid transposition (SCT) or carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB). The presenting aortic disease and perioperative details were recorded. Intraoperative angiography and postoperative computed tomography images were reviewed for occurrence of endoleak and branch patency. ResultsBetween January 2013 and December 2018, the LSA was revascularized by periscope sandwich in 18 patients, SCT in 22 patients, and CSB in 13 patients. Compared with open surgical debranching, periscope sandwich had a lower median estimated blood loss (100 mL vs 200 mL for pooled SCT and CSB; P = .03) and lower median case duration (133.5 minutes vs 226 minutes; P < .001). Contrast material volume (120 mL vs 120 mL; P = .98) and fluoroscopy time (13.1 minutes vs 13.3 minutes; P = .92) did not differ significantly between the groups. There was no difference in aorta-related mortality (P = .14), and LSA patency was 100%. Median follow-up for the periscope sandwich group was 11 months, with an overall estimated 91% freedom from gutter leak at 6 months. ConclusionsLSA periscope sandwich technique provides safe and effective LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR. LSA periscope sandwich can be used emergently with off-the-shelf endovascular components and facilitates future branched-fenestrated endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic diseases.

Impact of Adding Carotid Endarterectomy to Supra-aortic Trunk Surgical Reconstruction

Up to 20% of patients requiring open supra-aortic trunk (SAT) reconstruction have significant carotid artery stenosis. The addition of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to SAT has been described. Yet, additive risks are not well defined and controversy remains as to whether concomitant CEA increases stroke risk. This study assessed the perioperative effects of adding CEA to SAT. Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), patients who underwent SAT from 2005 to 2015 were evaluated. SAT+CEA were identified. An isolated SAT (ISAT) cohort was created by removing patients who underwent concurrent secondary procedures. Nonocclusive indications were excluded. SAT+CEA were compared with ISAT as well as a propensity-matched ISAT cohort. Primary outcomes were 30-day stroke, death, and composite stroke/death/myocardial infarction (SDM). Univariate and logistic regression analyses were performed. After review, 1,515 patients were identified: 1,245 ISAT (82%) and 270 SAT+CEA (18%). Most were women (56%), 86% were Caucasian, and 24% were symptomatic. Average age was 65±12years and SAT+CEA were older (69 vs. 64years, P<0.001). CEA+SAT were more likely to be men (53% vs. 42%, P<0.001), have hypertension (86% vs. 75%, P<0.001) and diabetes (26% vs. 20%, P=0.04). SAT procedures included the following: carotid-subclavian bypass (68%), carotid-carotid bypass (16%), aorta-great vessel bypass (9%), and carotid-subclavian transposition (7%). ISAT were more likely to undergo carotid-subclavian bypass than SAT+CEA (71% vs. 54%, P<0.001). Overall stroke was 2.3%, death 1.4%, and SDM 4.6%. There were no differences in 30-day stroke (ISAT 2.0% vs. SAT+CEA 3.7%, P=0.09) or mortality (1.4% vs. 1.5%, P=0.88). SAT+CEA had higher rates of SDM (7% vs. 4%, P=0.03). On logistic regression, urgency was a predictor of SDM (operating room [OR] 3.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-8.4, P=0.003); addition of CEA was not predictive of stroke (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.5-4.2, P=0.52) or SDM (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.6-3.6, P=0.40). After propensity matching, there were no longer differences in demographics or primary end points between the 2 cohorts. Addition of CEA does not confer increased perioperative stroke or SDM risk over ISAT. Perioperative outcomes appear to be more affected by disseminated disease risk factors than the addition of CEA. In patients undergoing SAT, it is reasonable to consider performing combined CEA in populations with tandem carotid bifurcation disease and appropriate operative risk profile.

Autogenous Femoral Vein for Secondary Repair of Subclavian Arteries: A Salvage Solution for Complex Clinical Scenarios

Endovascular stents and prosthetic grafts are commonplace techniques for correction of subclavian artery (SCA) lesions. However, when initial surgical repair of the SCA becomes complicated by subsequent infection or thrombosis of the repair site, stents and prosthetic grafts are no longer suitable for secondary repair because of the risk of recurrent failure and limited longevity. Autogenous tissue is more resistant to infection and has improved long-term patency and thus may be a better option for secondary reconstruction in these complex clinical scenarios. The most commonly used autogenous conduit for SCA reconstruction is the great saphenous vein; however, the significant size mismatch makes this unsuitable in many circumstances. The autogenous femoral vein is a promising alternative conduit for SCA repair. Here, we present three successful cases of its use as a salvage technique after iatrogenic complications of prior surgical repair. From 2015 to 2019, three patients underwent harvest of the femoral vein for use in SCA repair, with two carotid-axillary bypasses and one carotid-subclavian bypass. Indications included a mycotic pseudoaneurysm secondary to an infected SCA stent, an SCA avulsion secondary to an infected carotid-subclavian bypass graft, and an occluded SCA stent in a young patient. Postoperative graft patency was monitored through clinical resolution of symptoms and maintenance of perfusion, intact pulses, and arterial duplex ultrasound or computed tomography scan. All of these patients had a good outcome after their procedures. Each had intact radial pulses immediately postoperatively and maintained normal perfusion to the upper extremity for the duration of follow-up, with bypass patency confirmed by computed tomography scan (Fig 1) or arterial duplex ultrasound (Fig 2). The SCA repair also allowed salvage of the upper extremity and symptomatic relief in all patients. None of the patients developed deep venous thrombosis in the donor extremity, and neither of the infected patients developed recurrent infection of the repair site. The success of these cases demonstrates that the autogenous femoral vein is an effective and safe option for SCA reconstruction. It is particularly useful for secondary salvage when prior surgical repair by standard techniques is complicated by infection or thrombosis and when target vessel size precludes the use of the great saphenous vein. This is an excellent choice of conduit that vascular surgeons should consider for use in complex SCA repairs.Fig 2Postoperative arterial Duplex scan of carotid-subclavian bypass graft via femoral vein.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload Hi-res image Download (PPT)

Carotid-Axillary Bypass as an Alternative to Carotid-Subclavian Bypass Following Coverage of Left Subclavian Artery During Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repairs

Thoracic endovascular aortic repairs (TEVAR) have become the procedure of choice for aneurysms of the descending thoracic aorta and type B aortic dissection since their approval by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2005. Coverage of the left subclavian artery (LSA) is commonly required when TEVAR is performed in zone 3 of the descending thoracic aorta to allow for an adequate proximal landing zone for the endograft. Practice guidelines from the Society for Vascular Surgery suggest routine revascularization following LSA coverage in several categories of patients.

Perioperative Outcomes of Carotid–Subclavian Bypass or Transposition versus Endovascular Techniques for Left Subclavian Artery Revascularization during Nontraumatic Zone 2 Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative

The aim of our study is to examine the perioperative outcomes of carotid-subclavian bypass or transposition (CS-BpTp) versus endovascular techniques (ETs) for left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during nontraumatic zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). We used prospectively collected data from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) to identify patients who had undergone TEVAR at participating centers (2013-2018). Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had undergone nontraumatic zone 2 TEVAR and concomitant LSA revascularization. Our main exposure of interest was LSA revascularization technique, CS-BpTp, or any ET. If a patient underwent multiple TEVAR procedures during the study period, the first case involving zone 2 was used for analysis. Preoperative patient characteristics were reviewed between treatment groups. The primary outcomes were mortality, transient ischemic attack (TIA)/stroke, and spinal cord ischemia (SCI). All outcomes were assessed up to 30 days postoperatively. A total of 837 patients were included in the study. The pathologies most frequently treated were aneurysm in 248 (34%) and dissection in 326 (45%). Overall, 721 subjects (86%) underwent CS-BpTp while 116 subjects (16%) underwent ETs. The latter included the following techniques: 23 chimney grafts, 3 scallops, 15 fenestrated grafts, and 75 branched grafts. Mortality was equal at 3% for both groups (P=0.67). The rate of TIA/stroke was not significantly different in both groups (5.5% vs. 5%, P=0.78). Similarly, the rate of SCI was 3% in the entire cohort without significant differences seen between treatment groups (P=1). Multivariate logistic regression could not identify either CS-BpTp or ETs as independent predictors for death or TIA/stroke. Within VQI, LSA revascularization during nontraumatic zone 2 TEVAR is safely and effectively achieved with either CS-BpTp or ETs across all nontraumatic thoracic aortic diseases. These techniques appear to be associated with similar perioperative outcomes in selected patients with low rates of mortality and major neurologic morbidity. Although no differences were seen in the proportion of early type I or III endoleaks, further prospective studies are warranted to elucidate the long-term durability of ETs compared with CS-BpTp.

Safety and durability of concomitant carotid endarterectomy with carotid-subclavian bypass grafting

BackgroundConcomitant carotid endarterectomy (CEA; for severe internal carotid artery stenosis) with carotid-subclavian bypass grafting (CSBG; for proximal common carotid artery or subclavian artery occlusion) is rarely used. Only a few studies have been reported. This report analyzed early and late clinical outcomes of the largest study to date of the combined procedures in our institution. MethodsElectronic medical records of patients who had concomitant CEA with CSBG during three decades were analyzed. Indications for surgery were arm ischemia, neurologic events, and clinical subclavian steal. Early (30 days) perioperative complications (stroke, death, and others) and late complications (stroke, death) were recorded. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate late graft/CEA primary patency, freedom from stroke, and stroke-free survival rates. Graft patency was determined clinically and confirmed using duplex ultrasound. Outcomes were compared with previously published data on isolated CSBG by the same group. ResultsThere were 37 combined procedures analyzed. Mean age was 64 years (range, 45-81 years). Indications for surgery were arm ischemia in 12 (32%), hemispheric transient ischemic attack or stroke in 15 (41%), vertebrobasilar insufficiency in 4 (11%), symptomatic subclavian steal in 10 (27%), and asymptomatic common carotid artery occlusion with severe internal carotid artery stenosis in 6 (16%). The 30-day perioperative (stroke and death) rate was 5.4% (one stroke and one death). Immediate symptom relief was noted in 100%, with 2.7% (transient ischemic attack) symptom recurrence. The crude patency rate of both CEA and CSBG was 92%. At 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, and 5 years, respectively, primary patency rates were 100%, 96%, 96%, 96%, and 85%; freedom from stroke rates were 97%, 97%, 97%, 97%, and 97%; and stroke-free survival rates were 94%, 94%, 87%, 82%, and 78%. When these outcomes were compared with the isolated CSBG group alone (28 patients), there was no difference in perioperative stroke (2.7% for concomitant CEA/CSBG vs 0% for isolated CSBG), perioperative death (2.7% vs 2.8%), or late patency rates (92% vs 96%). ConclusionsConcomitant CEA/CSBG is safe and durable. There was no significant difference in perioperative stroke/death or late patency rates compared with isolated CSBG.

Midterm outcomes of subclavian artery revascularization in the setting of thoracic endovascular aortic repair

ObjectiveThe outcomes of subclavian artery revascularization (SAR) have been examined extensively in the setting of atherosclerotic occlusive disease but have been poorly characterized in the setting of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). As trials for branched thoracic endovascular stent grafts materialize, the outcomes of the subclavian artery branched prosthesis will need to be compared with TEVAR with SAR by carotid-subclavian bypass or subclavian transposition. MethodsA database of 1516 patients undergoing TEVAR from 2000 to 2015 was queried. Of those undergoing TEVAR, 19% (282 patients) also underwent SAR. Patient demographics, TEVAR indication, 30-day morbidity and mortality, and midterm patency and survival were analyzed. ResultsDuring the study period, 282 patients underwent 288 SARs in the setting of TEVAR. A total of 269 (93%) carotid-subclavian bypasses and 19 (7%) subclavian artery transpositions were performed; 76% of the SARs occurred before TEVAR, 14% occurred concurrently with TEVAR, and 10% occurred after TEVAR. The most common indications for TEVAR was aortic aneurysm (56%), chronic aortic dissection with aneurysmal degeneration (23%), and aortic dissections (13%). The 30-day ipsilateral stroke rate was 3.5%. Eight patients (2.8%) underwent an unplanned return to the operating room (2.1% for hematoma evacuation and 0.7% for management of chyle leak). Six patients (2.1%) sustained a nerve injury. The mean follow-up was 4.2 years. All-cause 30-day mortality was 4.6%. The overall survival rates at 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years were 82%, 60%, and 42%, respectively. The median survival was 7.2 years. Four patients were found to have a failure in primary patency during follow-up. All four patients had undergone a carotid-subclavian bypass. The 1-, 2-, and 5-year primary patency rates were 99.5%, 98.9%, and 98.0%, respectively, for carotid-subclavian bypass and 100% for carotid-subclavian transposition. ConclusionsDuring our 16-year study, we found SAR in the setting of TEVAR to be associated with low morbidity, durable long-term patency, and infrequent need for reintervention.

Parallel stenting for the left subclavian works in some, but selective use is warranted

Darling and colleagues present a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) placement with left subclavian revascularization either by carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB) or chimney stent graft (CSG).1 Given the limited existing data in the literature, the authors' work serves as additional proof of concept for parallel stent grafting for left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization. They have demonstrated excellent early results, notable for no type 1A endoleaks during the study period.

Fenestrated endovascular repair for diseases involving the aortic arch

ObjectiveExtension of aortic disease to the aortic arch is common, frequently requiring cervical debranching procedures to maintain patency of supra-aortic branches. Endovascular aortic arch repair is an attractive alternative in the treatment of aortic arch disease for high-risk patients with thoracoabdominal diseases encroaching on the arch. The aim of our study was to report our experience of fenestrated endovascular repair in the aortic arch. MethodsA retrospective review of prospectively collected data involving consecutive patients in a single tertiary center treated with custom-made fenestrated endografts for the aortic arch (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) was undertaken. End points included technical success, perioperative mortality and morbidity, reintervention, and late survival. ResultsBetween 2011 and 2017, there were 44 patients with a mean age of 67 ± 9 years (27 male [61%]) who were treated with fenestrated endografts for arch aneurysm (n = 11 [25%]), arch penetrating aortic ulcer (n = 6 [14%]), thoracoabdominal aneurysm with arch involvement (n = 11 [25%]), postdissection false lumen aneurysm (n = 13 [29%]), or lusorian artery aneurysm (n = 3 [7%]). The proximal landing zone was at Ishimaru zone 0 in 12 cases (27%), zone 1 in 27 cases (62%), and zone 2 in 5 cases (11%). Nine patients (20%) underwent a unilateral carotid-subclavian bypass, two (5%) a bilateral carotid-subclavian bypass, and four (9%) a subclavian transposition. In total, of the 73 target supra-aortic vessels (average of 1.7 target vessels per patient), 37 were treated with fenestrations and 36 with scallops. The mean operation time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast material volume were 215 ± 152 minutes, 33 ± 23 minutes, and 114 ± 45 mL, respectively. Technical success was 95% (42/44). The median intensive care unit and hospital stays were 3 ± 1 days and 7 ± 6 days, respectively. The 30-day mortality was 9% (4/44; one graft displacement and stroke, one retrograde type A dissection, one access complication and stroke, and one death of unknown cause). Major stroke occurred in three (7%), minor stroke in one (2%), temporary spinal cord ischemia in three (7%), and renal injury in three (7%) patients, whereas three (7%) patients required early reintervention. With mean follow-up of 18 ± 17 months, 10 more patients required secondary interventions, most of which (90%) were planned distal intervention to complete the repair of thoracoabdominal diseases. Overall survival rates were 78% ± 7% and 72% ± 8% at postoperative years 1 and 2, respectively. ConclusionsFenestrated endograft repair of aortic arch disease is a feasible technique with a high technical success rate and acceptable rates of stroke and paraplegia. A high number of secondary interventions were needed to complete the treatment of underlying diseases.

Computational fluid dynamics of a novel perfusion strategy during hybrid thoracic aortic repair.

To mitigate the risk of perioperative neurological complications during frozen elephant trunk procedures, we aimed to computationally evaluate the effects of direct cerebral perfusion strategy through a left carotid-subclavian bypass on hemodynamics in a patient-specific thoracic aorta model. Between July 2016 and March 2019, 11 consecutive patients underwent frozen elephant trunk operation using the left carotid-subclavian bypass with a side graft anastomosis and right-axillary cannulation for systemic and brain perfusion. A multiscale model realized coupling three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics was developed and validated with in vivo data. Model comparison with direct antegrade cannulation of all epiaortic vessels was performed. Wall shear stress, wall shear stress spatial gradient, and localized normalized helicity were selected as hemodynamic indicators. Four cerebral perfusion flows were tested (6 to 15 mL/kg/min). Direct cerebral perfusion of the left subclavian bypass resulted in higher flow rates with augmented speeds in all epiaortic vessels in comparison with traditional perfusion model. At the level of the left vertebral artery (LVA), a speed of 22.5 vs 21 mL/min and mean velocity of 3.07 vs 2.93 cm/s were registered, respectively. With a cerebral perfusion flow of 15 mL/kg, lower LVA wall shear stress (1.596 vs 2.030 N/m2 ), and wall shear stress gradient (1445 vs 5882 N/m3 ) were observed. A less disturbed flow considering the localized normalized helicity was documented. No patients experienced neurological/spinal cord damages. Direct perfusion of a left carotid bypass proved to be cerebroprotective, resulting in a more physiological and stable anterior and posterior cerebral perfusion.

Optimal method of reconstruction in patients with pathology of the 1st segment of the subclavian artery

The study enrolled a total of 318 patients presenting with lesions of the 1st segment of the subclavian artery and the clinical course of vertebrobasilar insufficiency. All patients prior to admission had been receiving the best course of medicamentous therapy under the supervision of a neurologist for more than 6 months but with no significant clinical improvement. According to the type of the reconstructive operation on the 1st segment of the subclavian artery, all patients were subdivided into three groups. Group I included 48 (15.1%) patients presenting with occlusion of the subclavian artery and undergoing carotid subclavian bypass grafting. Group II consisted of 224 (70.4%) patients who underwent endarterectomy from the subclavian artery and its transposition to the common carotid artery. Group III was composed of 46 (14.5%) patients presenting with local stenosis of the subclavian artery and subjected to stenting of the 1st segment of the subclavian artery. The main criteria for assessment of the results were patency of the zone of reconstruction and clinical improvement of the patient after surgery. RESULTS: Clinical improvement in the early postoperative period was observed in 301 (94%) patients. In Group I, in the early postoperative period, clinical improvement was achieved in 32 (66.7%) patients. Clinical improvement after 3 years persisted only in 16 (33.3%) patients. In Group II comprising patients with transposition of the subclavian artery to the common carotid artery, clinical improvement was observed in 223 (99.6%) patients. Within 3 years of follow-up, 13 (6.4%) patients were found to have a relapse of the clinical picture of vertebrobasilar insufficiency. Clinical improvement after transposition of the subclavian artery to the common carotid artery at 3 years persisted in 210 (93.6%) patients. In Group III patients after stenting of the 1st segment of the subclavian artery in the early postoperative period and during the follow-up period up to 1 year, the angiographic and clinical success amounted to 100%. After 3 years, 8 (17.3%) patients developed relapse of the clinical course because of restenosis, fracture, and thrombosis of the stent. Clinical improvement at 3 years persisted only in 38 (82.6%) patients after stenting. Comparing the remote results demonstrated that transposition of the subclavian artery to the common carotid artery turned out to be the most justified (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: For reconstruction of the 1st segment of the subclavian artery, an operation of choice is transposition of the subclavian artery to the common carotid artery.

Right Sided Aortic Arch with Kommerell Diverticulum of the Aberrant Left Subclavian Artery – A Case Report

Introduction: Right sided aortic arch is a rare condition (1:1000 persons) in the setting of an otherwise normal heart and it is an anatomic variant resulting from the persistence of the right fourth aortic arch and involution of the left. Half of cases are associated with an aberrant left subclavian artery that can become aneurysmal (Kommerell´s diverticulum). On account of the propensity to cause symptoms and the possibility of lethal rupture, surgery is often indicated, despite the absence of clear criteria for repair due to the rarity of this finding. Fewer than 50 cases have been reported in literature and a number of operative strategies are described, mainly by left subclavian-to-carotid transposition (subclavian revascularization) and subsequent aneurysm approach, through right thoracotomy. Those are, however, associated to significant morbidity. Methods: This is a case-report of a patient who was referred to a vascular department of a tertiary hospital with an incidentally finding of a right sided aortic arch with Kommerell diverticulum of the aberrant left subclavian artery. Results: The patient was a 51-year-old female with a prior history of hypertension, cervical herniated disc requiring surgery and hysterectomy. She was referred for assessment of vascular anomaly that was found incidentally in an image study. The angio CT showed a right aortic arch with a Kommerell diverticulum with a maximum diameter of 30mm, with mild esophageal compression but no associated symptoms. Pondering the aneurysm size, the need for a cervical approach for the cervical herniated disc and the mild esophageal compression, in a patient with low operatory risk, hybrid operation was planned. A left carotid-subclavian bypass with ligation of the aberrant left subclavian artery was performed. Subsequently, anterograde flow into the aneurysm was excluded by implant of a thoracic endograft and a vascular plug (Amplatzer II) was implanted in the distal segment of the diverticulum. There were no perioperative complications and patient was discharged 3 days later. The follow up CT showed a patent carotid-subclavian bypass and complete aneurysm exclusion. Image subtitle: A- Pre op B- Post op (white arrow: Kommerell Diverticulum) Conclusion: A hybrid approach may offer an effective and less invasive option for aneurysms resulting from an aberrant subclavian artery origin. Long term outcomes are not yet established and cautious follow up is recommended.

Fenestrated and Branched Endografting After Previous Open Infra-renal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Introduction - Proximal para-anastomotic aneurysms, or aneurysmal degenerations of the native aorta above a previous infra-renal aortic open repair (P-AAAs), are not rare challenging scenarios. The aim of this study was to report the early and mid-term outcomes following endovascular repair of P-AAAs with fenestrated and branched endografts (FB-EVAR) Methods - From 2006 to 2017, we prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed pre, intra and postoperative data of patients undergoing FB-EVAR for P-AAAs at two European vascular surgery units. Early outcomes were: technical success (target visceral vessels cannulation and stenting, absence of Type I-III endoleak, iliac limb occlusion and 24-h mortality), spinal cord ischemia (SCI), and 30-day mortality. Mid-term outcomes were: survival, target visceral vessels (TVV) patency, and freedom from re-interventions. Fisher’s exact test, Kaplan Mayer and Log rank were used for the statistical analysis Results - During the study period, 108 patients (M:94%; age:71±4years; ASA 3-4:74%>26%) were enrolled. The previous aortic OR was a tubular aorto-aortic 63(58%), a bifurcated aorto bi-iliac 37(34%) or an aorto bi-femoral 8(8%) bypass. The OR was performed 10±2years prior to the FB-EVAR. A previous TEVAR had also been performed in 7 patients (6%). The aortic lesions at the time of FB-EVAR was a type I-III 69(64%) or type IV 39(36%) thoracoabdominal aneurysm according to the Crawford’s classification. The mean aneurysm diameter was 64±6mm. Overall, 390 TVVs (3.6±1 TVV/case) were perfused by endograft fenestrations (63;58%), branches (26;24%) or both fenestrations and branches (19;18%). Tubular, tri-modular or aorto-monoiliac implants were planned in 68 (63%), 38 (35%) and 2 (2%) patients, respectively. Proximal TEVAR, carotid-subclavian bypass and iliac branch devices were planned adjunctive procedures in 41 (38%), 5 (5%) and 3 (3%) cases, respectively. Technical success was 93%. Technical failures included 5 TVV-loss (celiac trunk:1; renal arteries:4) and 3 deaths within 24 hours (cardiac aetiology). Post-operative SCI was diagnosed in 7 patients (7%), including 4 (4%) permanent. Type I-III TAAAs (p .04) and endograft incorporating both fenestrations and branches (p .04) were associated with SCI. Cardiac and pulmonary morbidity was 9% and 10%, respectively. Post-operative renal failure (GFR reduction >30% of baseline) was diagnosed in 22 patients (20%). Bowel ischemia was depicted in 3 (3%) patients. The 30-day mortality was 4%. Preoperative chronic renal failure (p .03), post-operative cardiac morbidity (p .04), and bowel ischemia (p .003) were associated with 30-day mortality. The mean follow-up was 38±18 months. Survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 82%, 64% and 54%, respectively. There was no late aneurysm-related mortality. Survival during follow-up was significantly impacted by pre-operative chronic renal failure (p .005), post-operative cardiac morbidity (p .04), and SCI (p .04). Target visceral patency at 1, 3 and 5 years was 93%, 91% and 91%, respectively. New onset of hemodialysis was required in 4 patients (4%). Aneurysm enlargement (>5mm) was detected in 6 (5.5%) cases. Freedom from re-interventions at 1, 3 and 5 years was 89%, 77% and 74%, respectively Conclusion - Endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysmal evolution above a prior open AAA repair with FB-EVAR is safe and effective. If those promising results are confirmed during late follow-up, FB-EVAR should be considered as a therapeutic option, especially in high-risk patients