Endovascular Repair Of Complex Aortic Aneurysms Research Articles

Gastrointestinal Complications and Visceral Circulation Changes After Intentional Celiac Artery Embolization During Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Gastrointestinal Complications and Visceral Circulation Changes After Intentional Celiac Artery Embolization During Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Using Machine Learning to Predict Outcomes Following Thoracic and Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Using Machine Learning to Predict Outcomes Following Thoracic and Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Up and over staged endoconduit technique for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Adverse iliofemoral anatomy can preclude complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. This study aims to describe the “up-and-over” staged endoconduit technique to improve access and avoid vascular injury before complex endovascular aneurysm repair. A staged procedure for complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair is performed using an endoconduit (W.L. Gore & Associates). After obtaining contralateral femoral access, the extension of iliofemoral disease is assessed using angiography. The endoconduit is advanced “up and over” the aortic bifurcation and delivered percutaneously into the common femoral artery to treat a diseased access site and maintain intact the ipsilateral femoral access for future stent graft deployment. Internal iliac artery patency is maintained when feasible. During complex aneurysm repair, the endoconduit is accessed directly under ultrasound guidance using sequential dilation to avoid vascular injury. PerClose sutures (Abbott Vascular) are used to close the endoconduit femoral access site. This study found that staged “up and over” endoconduit creation is a useful technique before complex endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with adverse iliofemoral anatomy. Avoiding accessing the main femoral access site during the first stage prevents vascular or access site injuries and allows for both iliac and femoral disease to be addressed.

Long-term outcomes of staged iliofemoral endoconduits prior to complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveAdverse iliofemoral anatomy may preclude complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). In our practice, staged iliofemoral endoconduits (ECs) are planned prior to complex EVAR to improve vascular access and decrease operative time while allowing the stented vessel to heal. This study describes the long-term results of iliofemoral ECs prior to complex EVAR. MethodsBetween 2012 and 2023, 59 patients (44% male; median age, 75 ± 6 years) underwent ECs before complex EVAR using self-expanding covered stents (Viabahn). For common femoral artery (CFA) disease, ECs were delivered percutaneously from contralateral femoral access and extended into the CFA to preserve the future access site for stent graft delivery. Internal iliac artery patency was maintained when feasible. During complex EVAR, the EC extended into the CFA was directly accessed and sequentially dilated until it could accommodate the endograft. Technical success was defined as successful access, closure, and delivery of the endograft during complex EVAR. Endpoints were vascular injury or EC disruption, secondary interventions, and EC patency. ResultsUnilateral EC was performed in 45 patients (76%). ECs were extended into the CFA in 21 patients (35%). Median diameters of the native common iliac, external iliac, and CFA were 7 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 6-8 mm), 6 mm (IQR, 5-7 mm), and 6 mm (IQR, 6-7 mm), respectively. Internal iliac artery was inadvertently excluded in 10 patients (17%). Six patients (10%) had an intraoperative vascular injury during the EC procedure, and six patients (10%) had EC disruption during complex EVAR, including five EC collapses requiring re-stenting and one EC fracture requiring open cut-down and reconstruction with patch angioplasty. In 23 patients (39%), 22 Fr OD devices were used; 20 Fr were used in 22 patients (37%), and 18 Fr in 14 patients (24%). Technical success for accessing EC was 89%. There was no difference in major adverse events at 30 days between the iliac ECs and iliofemoral ECs. Primary patency by Kaplan-Meier estimates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 97.5%, 89%, and 82%, respectively. There was no difference in primary patency between iliac and iliofemoral ECs. Six secondary interventions (10%) were required. The mean follow-up was 34 ± 27 months; no limb loss or amputations occurred during the follow-up. ConclusionsECs improve vascular access, and their use prior to complex EVAR is associated with low rates of vascular injury, high technical success, and optimal long-term patency. Complex EVAR procedures can be performed percutaneously by accessing the EC directly under ultrasound guidance and using sequential dilation to avoid EC disruption.

A narrative review of intraoperative adjuncts and techniques to minimize radiation during complex endovascular aneurysm repair

BackgroundRadiation exposure is a known risk to both patients and providers during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Complex EVAR procedures, such as fenestrated and branched EVAR, inherently involve longer fluoroscopy times and increased radiation doses. While adhering to the as low as reasonably achievable principles and ensuring appropriate personal protective equipment for all operating room staff remains essential, the use of intraoperative techniques and adjuncts to decrease radiation specifically during complex EVAR is necessary. This review aims to summarize intraoperative radiation reduction techniques to provide valuable insights to vascular surgeons and interventional proceduralists to enhance radiation safety during complex EVAR. MethodsThis review focused on intraoperative techniques and adjuncts that have been used to decrease intraoperative radiation exposure to patients and operators. Published and presented preclinical results, prospective and retrospective study data, and future directions are presented. ResultsWe highlight several intraoperative adjuncts and techniques for reducing radiation exposure during complex EVAR including image fusion, digital zooming, intravascular ultrasound examination, Fiber Optic RealShape (FORS) technology, and robotic navigation systems. Short-term outcomes suggest that these techniques are safe, feasible, and effective and decrease radiation exposure to both patients and operators. ConclusionsDecreasing radiation exposure during complex EVAR remains of critical importance. The presented techniques offer promising avenues for significantly decreasing radiation exposure to both patients and providers while maintaining procedural efficacy during complex EVAR.

The value of metal artifact reduction and iterative algorithms in dual energy CT angiography in patients after complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Rationale and objectivesEvaluation of the diagnostic value of linearly blended (LB) and virtual monoenergetic images (VMI) reconstruction techniques with and without metal artifacts reduction (MAR) and of adaptive statistical iterative reconstructions (ASIR) in the assessment of target vessels after branched/fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (f/brEVAR) procedures. Materials and methodsCT scans of 28 patients were used in this study. Arterial phase of examination was obtained using a dual-energy fast-kVp switching scanner. CT numbers in the aorta, celiac trunk, superior mesenteric artery, and renal arteries were measured in the following reconstructions: LB, VMI 60 keV, VMI MAR 60 keV, VMI ASIR 60 % 60 keV. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were calculated for each reconstruction. Luminal diameters (measurements at 2 levels of stent) and subjective image quality (5-point Likert scale) were assessed (2 readers, blinded to the type of reconstruction). ResultsThe highest mean values of CNR and SNR in vascular structures were obtained in VMI MAR 60 keV (CNR 12.526 ± 2.46, SNR 17.398 ± 2.52), lower in VMI 60 keV (CNR 11.508 ± 2.01, SNR 16.524 ± 2.07) and VMI ASIR (CNR 11.086 ± 1.78, SNR 15.928 ± 1.82), and the lowest in LB (CNR 6.808 ± 0.79, SNR 11.492 ± 0.79) reconstructions. There were no statistically significant differences in the measurements of the stent width between reconstructions (p > 0.05). The highest subjective image quality was obtained in the ASIR VMI (4.25 ± 0.44) and the lowest in the MAR VMI (1.57 ± 0.5) reconstruction. ConclusionDespite obtaining the highest values of SNR and CNR in the MAR VMI reconstruction, the subjective diagnostic value was the lowest for this technique due to significant artifacts. The type of reconstruction did not significantly affect vessel diameter measurements (p > 0.05). Iterative reconstructions raised both objective and subjective image quality.

Increased Aortic Exclusion in Endovascular Treatment of Complex Aortic Aneurysms.

Perioperative risk assessments for complex aneurysms are based on the anatomical extent of the aneurysm and do not take the length of the aortic exclusion into account, as it was developed for open repair. Nevertheless, in the endovascular repair (ER) of complex aortic aneurysms, additional segments of healthy aorta are excluded compared with open repair (OR). The aim of this study was to assess differences in aortic exclusion between the ER and OR of complex aortic aneurysms, to subsequently assess the current classification for complex aneurysm repair. This retrospective observational study included patients that underwent complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair by means of fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR), fenestrated and branched EVAR (FBEVAR), or branched EVAR (BEVAR). The length of aortic exclusion and the number of patent segmental arteries were determined and compared per case in ER and hypothetical OR, using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. A total of 71 patients were included, who were treated with FEVAR (n = 44), FBEVAR (n = 8), or BEVAR (n = 19) for Crawford types I (n = 5), II (n = 7), III (n = 6), IV (n = 7), and V (n = 2) thoracoabdominal or juxtarenal (n = 44) aneurysms. There was a significant increase in the median exclusion of types I, II, III, IV, and juxtarenal aneurysms (p < 0.05) in ER, compared with hypothetical OR. The number of patent segmental arteries in the ER of type I-IV and juxtarenal aneurysms was significantly lower than in hypothetical OR (p < 0.05). There are significant differences in the length of aortic exclusion between ER and hypothetical OR, with the increased exclusion in ER resulting in a lower number of patent segmental arteries. The ER and OR of complex aortic aneurysms should be regarded as distinct modalities, and as each approach deserves a particular risk assessment, future efforts should focus on reporting on the extent of exclusion per treatment modality, to allow for appropriate comparison.

Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation under monitored anesthetic care in complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: a single center experience with mid-term follow-up.

Sedation protocols in patients undergoing complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair are not fully investigated. The aim of this study was to compare a dexmedetomidine (DEX) based sedation protocol with a remifentanil-based sedation protocol. Seventy-nine consecutive patients undergoing complex endovascular aortic repair were enrolled and retrospectively analyzed. Forty-two received 0.03 mg/kg midazolam intravenous bolus with remifentanil (0.075-0.1 μg/kg/min for 10 minutes followed by continuous infusion 0.050-0.25 μg/kg/min) and 37 DEX (1 μg/kg over 10 minutes and continuous infusion 0.50-0.75 μg/kg/hour) to achieve an Observer Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAAS) ≤4, a Richmond Agitation/Sedation Scale (RASS) ≤-2 and a Visual Analogic Scale (VAS) <4. The primary endpoint was patients' satisfaction. Secondary endpoints included assessment of sedation and pain, the incidence of perioperative hemodynamic or gas exchange imbalance, and 36 month-mortality. Remifentanil group showed a higher satisfaction rate than DEX (P<0.001). Patients on DEX were more sedated than remifentanil according to OAAS (3 [2-3] vs. 4 [3-4]; P=0.001) and RASS (-2[-3/-2] vs. -2[-2/-2]; P=0.001) with no difference in VAS (2 [1-3] vs. 2 [1-3]; P=0.41). DEX provides reliable sedation with lower patient's satisfaction. A higher number of patients were discharged from the recovery room on vasopressors in the DEX group compare with the remifentanil group (5 vs. 0; P=0.045, respectively). The two groups showed a non-significant difference in the survival rate at 36-month (DEX 67% vs. remifentanil 73%; (P=0.90). In this setting remifentanil provides reliable sedation with higher patient's satisfaction and less hemodynamic effect than DEX.

A Single Center Review of a Total Transfemoral Approach to Upper Extremity Access in Branched and Fenestrated Physician Modified Endografts

Aortic aneurysms are normally treated by an endovascular approach. Due to the lack of devices and increasing experience, there is a growing number of complex aneurysms undergoing repair by physician modified endografts (PMEGs). Previously, our practice was to target visceral vessels exclusively through upper extremity access. We have since then shifted to an all transfemoral approach when possible. This study aims to show the operative benefits of transfemoral only approaches. Patients who underwent a PMEG at a tertiary center between 2015 and 2020 were included. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on branched vessel approach-transfemoral only versus axillary or composite (axillary and femoral). Forty-one patients had a pararenal or type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) and 15 patients had more complex TAAA. Primary outcomes were operative time, radiation exposure, fluoroscopy time, contrast, and blood loss. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and major adverse events. Linear regression models were used to evaluate the association between approach type and the main outcomes. Fifty-six patients were included with 48% (n=27) in the transfemoral group and 52% (n=29) in the axillary/composite group. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Intraoperative outcomes revealed significant increase in the average operative time (418 vs. 246min, P<0.001), in radiation exposure (2,755 vs. 1,740mGy, P=0.03), in fluoroscopy time (108 vs. 74min, P=0.01) and in blood loss (579 vs. 202cc, P=0.002) in the axillary/composite group compared to the transfemoral group. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality or major adverse events including stroke. This study shows a transfemoral approach to complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair as opposed to axillary/composite approach has decreased operative time, radiation exposure, and fluoroscopy time and no significant differences in 30-day mortality or major adverse events. When treating complex aneurysms, improving efficiency is important to minimize morbidity to patients and operators.

Low Psoas Muscle Area is Associated with Increased Mortality and Spinal Cord Injury After Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Low psoas muscle area (PMA) is associated with worse post-operative outcomes. Our objective was to evaluate the association of PMA and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR). Patient characteristics, anatomical and clinical information, and post-operative outcomes were collected from patients undergoing F/BEVAR between 2005-February 2019 who were deemed too high-risk for open repair. PMA was measured using a validated web-based software (coreslicer.com). Post-operative outcomes were compared between patients with low PMA (lowest quartiles) and high PMA (highest quartiles). We included 129 patients with a mean age of 74.6 ± 8.1, 81.4% male, and a mean follow-up of 29.4 ± 32.2 months. Patients in the low PMA group were more likely to be female (33.8% vs. 3.1%, P < 0.0001), less likely to have hypertension (72.3% vs. 87.5%, P = 0.03), dyslipidemia (63.1% vs. 78.1%, P = 0.06), and a trend towards a greater history of endovascular aneurysm repair (4.6% vs. 0%, P = 0.08). There were no significant differences in aneurysm or device characteristics between groups. In a multivariate model including age, sex, aneurysm type, and presence of prophylactic spinal drain, the low PMA group had a significantly increased risk of spinal cord injury (odds ratio 12.7, 95% CI 1.1-143.6). There were no significant differences in other 30-day outcomes. When compared to the highest quartile, the lowest PMA quartile patients had a hazard ratio of 4.6 (95% CI 1.2-17.6) for mortality during follow-up in a model with age, sex, and aneurysm type. For each 1 cm2 increase in PMA, the HR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.82-0.99) for mortality during follow-up. In high-risk patients undergoing F/BEVAR low PMA is associated with spinal cord injury and mortality during follow-up. We found no association between PMA and 30-day mortality. PMA measurement is a simple method to assess for sarcopenia and frailty and may be useful for risk stratification pre-operatively.

Sex-Based Differences in Outcomes of Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Prior studies have demonstrated worse outcomes for women undergoing thoracic and abdominal endovascular repair. The difference in outcomes among men and women undergoing complex endovascular aneurysm repair (cEVAR) has not been well defined. We reviewed the perioperative and short-term outcomes for men and women undergoing cEVAR using the Vascular Quality Initiative database.

An observational assessment of aortic deformation during infrarenal and complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveReal-time aortic deformation during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has not been reported. Successful EVAR relies on predicting intraoperative aortic-endograft deformation from preoperative imaging. Correct prediction is essential, because malalignment of endografts decreases patient survival. We describe intraoperative aortic deformation during infrarenal EVAR and complex fenestrated/branched EVAR (F/BEVAR), relating deformation to preoperative anatomy and follow-up outcomes. MethodsA multicenter, retrospective cohort of aortic aneurysm patients undergoing operation between January 2019 and February 2021, substratified by repair, infrarenal EVAR (n = 50), F/BEVAR (n = 80), and iliac branch graft with F/B/EVAR (IBG + F/B/EVAR; n = 27), were compared using software-based nonrigid two- and three-dimensional aortic deformational intraoperative assessment (CYDAR). Preoperative computed tomography reconstructions of aortic and iliac tortuosities were assessed against intraoperative deformation, the primary outcome, and related to perioperative and follow-up adverse outcomes. ResultsAll treatment groups had low preoperative visceral aortic tortuosity; the EVAR group had higher iliac tortuosity (1.43 ± 0.05; P = .018). Intraoperative aortic visceral deformation was consistently cranial and anterior; IBG + F/B/EVAR patients had the largest magnitude deformation (superior mesenteric artery, EVAR 5.1 ± 0.9 mm; F/BEVAR 4.4 ± 0.4 mm; IBG 8.3 ± 1.2 mm; P = .004). Celiac artery, superior mesenteric artery, and bilateral renal artery deformations were correlated (R = 0.923-0.983). Iliac deformation was variable in magnitude and direction. Preoperative tortuosity was not correlated with the magnitude of intraoperative deformation nor was deformation magnitude related to endograft instability during follow-up, including endoleak development, reinterventions, or visceral vessel complications. ConclusionsThe aorta deforms consistently during EVAR at the visceral aortic segment but unpredictably at the iliac bifurcation. Aortoiliac deformation is unrelated to adverse perioperative outcomes, branch instability, or reinterventions during short-term follow-up.

Iliac Artery Endoconduits Should be the Preferred Adjunctive Access Procedure to Facilitate Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

Iliac artery anatomy can have a dramatic impact on the success of endovascular complex aortic aneurysm (CAA) procedures as endograft delivery systems need to be advanced and manipulated through these access vessels. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of iliac artery conduits with emphasizes on open vs endovascular conduits performed to facilitate CAA endovascular repair. All patients who had open or endovascular iliac conduits prior to endovascular CAA repair to treat thoracoabdominal, juxtarenal, or suprarenal aneurysms at the University of Colorado Hospital from January 2009 through January 2019 were included. Patients who presented with symptomatic or ruptured aortic aneurysms were excluded. Outcomes of interest included postoperative complications and mortality in patients undergoing iliac conduits. Twenty-seven patients with a total of 42 conduits were included in the study. The majority of patients (N = 15, 56%) were female and the average age was 72 ± 9years. The calculated VQI cardiac index was .6% (range, .3%-.8%). Eighteen (43%) endovascular and 24 (57%) open iliac conduits were performed during the study period. Thirty (71%) conduits were performed in a staged fashion, while 12 (29%) were performed at the same time as endovascular CAA repair. The mean time between conduit and definitive aneurysm repair surgery was 130 ± 68days in the endovascular and 107 ± 79days in the open groups (P = .87). No aneurysm rupture occurred during the staging period in either group. The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 18 ± 22months. The median length of hospital stay for patients undergoing endovascular and open ICs was 6 (ranging, 1-28days) and 7days (ranging, 3-18days), respectively. Patients undergoing open conduits had significantly more complications than those undergoing endovascular conduit (endoconduit) creation. A total of 4 (15%) patients died within 30days after aneurysm repair. Out of 23 survivors, 18 (78%) patients were discharged home, 4 (18%) patients were discharged to a skilled nursing facility, and 1 (4%) patient was discharged to an acute rehabilitation facility. No mortality difference based on type of conduit was found. Overall complication rate associated with creation of open iliac artery conduits is not negligible. Endoconduits, which carry less morbidity than open conduits, are preferred as a first-line adjunctive access procedure to facilitate complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Accuracy and Utility of Intraoperative Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound After Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Endovascular repairs of complex aortic aneurysms generate high radiation exposure for patients and operating staff. Large doses of iodinated contrast media used during these procedures may also result in contrast-induced nephropathy. Exclusion of the aneurysm sac after the repair is usually assessed with angiography, which requires the use of significant additional doses of contrast and radiation. New imaging strategies that limit the exposure to radiation and iodinated contrast are necessary. Contrast agents for ultrasound have been introduced to provide improved blood flow echogenicity for vascular imaging without the risk of nephropathy or radiation exposure.

Spinal Cord Ischemia and Other Clinical Outcomes Associated With the Staging of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair and Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) continues to be a devastating complication associated with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Thus, a number of maneuvers such as staging aortic procedures have been increasingly used in attempts to mitigate this risk. Although some evidence has shown the potential for staging to decrease the rates of SCI and mortality, no consensus has been reached regarding its application. Thus, our study evaluated the effect of staging during thoracic and complex abdominal endovascular aortic repair on SCI, perioperative mortality and other major adverse events using the national Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database.

Evaluating the Effects of Increased Utilization of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair and Visceral Vessel Treatment

Evaluating the Effects of Increased Utilization of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair and Visceral Vessel Treatment

Incidence and predictors of early and delayed renal function decline after aortic aneurysm repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative database

BackgroundPostoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) may complicate both open and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality, and health care expense. We aim to evaluate the incidence of postoperative AKI and factors associated with its occurrence and the effects of postoperative AKI on long-term renal function and mortality after open and EVAR in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative registry. MethodsElective aneurysm cases were identified including thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR) and complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (cEVAR), infrarenal endovascular repair (EVAR) and infrarenal open repair (OAR) from 2003 to 2019. The preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula and stratified based on chronic kidney disease (CKD) grades. Postoperative AKI was defined per the Vascular Quality Initiative definition as a creatinine increase of 0.5 mg/dL or if postoperative dialysis was required. Patients on preprocedural hemodialysis and those with previous renal transplant were excluded. Demographics and procedural factors were evaluated for predicting in-hospital postoperative AKI (all approaches) and at 9 to 21 months of long-term follow-up (EVAR only) using logistic regression modeling. ResultsWe identified a total of 2813 cEVAR, 2995 TEVAR, 39,945 EVAR, and 8143 OAR patients. Of those, postoperative AKI occurred in 377 cEVAR (13.5%), 199 TEVAR (6.7%), 1099 EVAR (2.8%), and 1249 OAR (15.5%). Risk factors for postoperative AKI across all groups were worse preoperative eGFR, total number of blood transfusions, perioperative anemia, reinterventions, and postoperative respiratory complications. Additional procedure-specific risk factors of postoperative AKI were preoperative hemoglobin of less than 10 and contrast volume of 125 to 150 mL, hypertension, a low ejection fraction, and a history of percutaneous revascularization for EVAR; for both EVAR/cEVAR, renal artery coverage was a risk factor, whereas for OAR, male sex, non-White race, hypertension, suprarenal aortic cross-clamp, and increased renal ischemic time were risk factors. Among 8133 EVAR patients with long-term follow-up, a decrease in kidney function occurred in 56.7% of patients with postoperative AKI vs 19.9% without postoperative AKI (P < .001). The following risk factors were associated with a decrease in renal function at long-term follow-up: postoperative AKI, a preoperative eGFR of less than 90, and hypertension. A preoperative hemoglobin of greater than 12 was protective. Postoperative AKI was associated with significantly lower survival compared with no postoperative AKI across all procedures (log rank <0.001). ConclusionsPostoperative AKI occurs more often in patients with worse preoperative renal function, lower preoperative hemoglobin, and in open surgeries with inter-renal or suprarenal cross-clamping. Importantly, postoperative AKI is associated with increased mortality across all types of aortic repair. Given the long-term impact of postoperative AKI on outcomes for all aortic repairs and the limitations of current insensitive functional indices, there is a need to seek more sensitive indicators of decreases in early renal structural in this population.

Early outcomes of Jotec inner-branched endografts in complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveComplex aortic endografts have evolved to include inner branches to overcome specific challenges with existing technologies. We have reported the early outcomes of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) using a Jotec inner branched endograft (iBEVAR). MethodsAll patients who had undergone complex EVARs using extra-design engineering iBEVAR (Jotec GmbH, Hechingen, Germany) from 2018 to 2020 at a single center were reviewed. The patient demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, anatomic features of the aneurysms, and target vessels were recorded. The reasons for using inner branches instead of fenestrated and standard branched endografts and the procedural details, outcomes, and reintervention during follow-up were examined. ResultsA total of 110 patients were treated with branched and fenestrated endografts during the study period, of whom 18 patients had had a patient-specific custom-made iBEVAR endograft with downward inner branches. The technical success rate was 100%. A total of 68 target vessels were cannulated, and bridging stent-grafts were placed successfully in all. The reasons for choosing the iBEVAR design included unfavorable target vessel trajectory for fenestrated repair (n = 15), excessive infrarenal aortic angulation and/or adverse iliac access vessels for fenestrated repair (n = 11), the presence of a narrow aortic lumen (n = 14), and/or to reduce aortic coverage compared with that with standard outer branched repair (n = 14). We also used iBEVAR to treat type Ia endoleaks after failed EVAR with a short main body (n = 5). The median contrast volume used was 120 mL (range, 48-200 mL), with a median fluoroscopy screening time of 66 minutes (range, 35-136 minutes) and a median dose-area product of 17,832 dGy∙cm2 (range, 8260-55,070 dGycm2). No 30-day mortality and no major complications occurred. One early intervention was required for a suspected type Ib endoleak from an iliac limb and one late intervention for in-stent stenosis in a renal bridging stent-graft. One patient had died of non–aortic-related causes at 3 months. All other patients continued with follow-up with their aneurysms excluded, patent target vessels, and no type I or III endoleak identified at a median follow-up of 12 months (range, 1-26 months). ConclusionsThe use of Jotec extra-design engineering endografts incorporating downward inner branches resulted in satisfactory early outcomes with a low reintervention rate. The technology has the potential to be a useful addition to our armamentarium for treating complex aortic endografts; however, long-term outcomes data are needed.

Iliac Artery Endoconduits Should Be the Preferred Adjunctive Access Procedure to Facilitate Endovascular Complex Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Anatomic factors of the iliac arteries, including vessel calcification, luminal diameter, and tortuosity can have a dramatic impact on the success complex endovascular aortic procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of open and endovascular iliac conduits performed to facilitate complex aortic aneurysm endovascular repair. All patients who underwent complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair through an iliac conduit to treat thoracoabdominal, juxtarenal or suprarenal aneurysms at the University of Colorado Hospital from September 2013 through June 2019 were included. Primary outcomes were endovascular and open iliac conduits morbidity and mortality. A total of 27 patients with 43 conduits were included in the study. The majority of the patients were female (n = 15, 56%). Hypertension (n = 16, 59%) and diabetes (n = 4, 20%) were the most prevalent risk factors. Twenty-two (51%) endoconduits and 21 (49%) open conduits were performed. Patients undergoing endo conduits had significant less complications than those undergoing open conduits (1, 4% vs 10, 48%; P = .02). The most common complications of open conduits were infection (n = 5, 24%) and postoperative hemorrhage (n = 4, 19%). The only complication noted for endoconduits was one access site hematoma requiring surgical evacuation. Overall mortality rate was similar and not related to type of conduit (endoconduits 1, 4% vs open 0; P = NS). Overall complication rate associated with open iliac artery conduits is not negligible. Endoconduits, however, carry less morbidity than open conduits and are thus preferred as a first line adjunctive access to facilitate complex endovascular aneurysm repair whenever feasible.

Single Angio-Seal vascular closure device for transfemoral access exceeding 8F

BackgroundThis was a retrospective single-center evaluation for off-label use of a single Angio-Seal-VIP 8F vascular closure device (VCD) (Terumo Interventional Systems, Somerset, NJ, USA) for retrograde transfemoral arterial access exceeding 8F. MethodsBetween 2010 and 2018, in 32 consecutive patients (3 females; mean age 67±9; range 46–86 years) retrograde femoral access was performed in 48 groins for aortoiliac stent or stent graft implantations using 9-14F sheaths. For vascular closure, one single Angio-Seal™-VIP 8F was used. Procedural success, closure-related complications, and risk factors were retrospectively evaluated using patient characteristics, duplex-ultrasound, and contrast-enhanced computed tomography angiography (CTA). Receiver-operating-characteristics were used for statistical analysis. ResultsTechnical success for deployment of VCD was 100%. Visual inspection and duplex-ultrasound confirmed immediate hemostasis in 100%. Postinterventional CTA depicted major vascular access site complications in 6.3% (3/48 groins) requiring surgical treatment. A subgroup of 13 patients underwent surgical cut-down one day after VCD deployment as part of a two-staged complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair procedure, allowing for visual assessment of prior used undersized Angio-SealTM. Patient's height (p=0.028) and severe access site calcifications (p=0.028) proved as predictors for one vessel occlusion and two pseudoaneurysms. Low body-mass-index (BMI) showed a non-significant trend. Sheath-size, common femoral artery depth, or body weight were not indicative for occurrence of complications. ConclusionsIn selected cases, without availability of appropriate VCDs, a single Angio-SealTM-VIP 8F served as a feasible option to achieve sufficient hemostasis of transfemoral access exceeding 8F without relevant bleeding complications. Very low BMI, tall body-height, and severe atherosclerosis were identified to predispose to access site complications.