High-volume Aortic Centers Research Articles

Open Aneurysmorraphy Following Branched and Fenestrated Endovascular Repair of Complex Thoracic Aneurysms

We present a review of our hybrid management (endovascular + open surgery) of large thoracic aortic aneurysms (>80mm). The strategy comprises a primary endovascular repair using Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR), and/or Fenestrated and Branched endografts (FBEVAR), followed by open thoracotomy and aneurysmorraphy, specifically without the need for aortic cross-clamping. We performed a retrospective review of all patients who had undergone aneurysmorraphy via thoracotomy following TEVAR & FBEVAR in two high volume aortic centers between December 2017 and March 2024. We performed aneurysmorraphy in two clinical situations: 1) in the setting of a planned staged treatment, shortly after TEVAR or FBEVAR in young patients with aneurysm diameter > 100mm; and 2) as a secondary intervention during follow-up for patients with persistent sac enlargement and aneurysm diameters > 80mm. The primary end-points were 30-day survival and aneurysm related mortality during follow-up. Secondary endpoints were sac size evolution, peri-operative and post-operative complications, freedom from further re-intervention and late aortic complications. Twelve patients underwent aneurysmorraphy following TEVAR and/or FBEVAR during the study period. Mean patient age was 60 +/- 12 years, and the mean sac diameter before thoracotomy was 101 +/- 25 mm. Endovascular embolization of intercostal arteries prior to aneurysmorraphy was performed in 4 patients. The 30-day survival rate was 100%. During the mean follow up period of 21 months, 2 patients died - one of COVID and another of intra-cerebral hemorrhage. No aneurysm-related mortality occurred and sac regression was achieved in all patients except one experiencing aortic growth below the aneurysmorraphy. This study demonstrates that thoracic aneurysmorraphy performed after TEVAR and FBEVAR for complex thoracic aneurysms is a safe and effective technique. This procedure allows the eradication of endoleaks and an immediate sac volume reduction, which prevents aorta-bronchial or esophageal fistulation and secures the endovascular repair; the reduction of the aneurysm mass effect restores normal lung parenchyma expansion. This hybrid management strategy drastically reduces the morbidity associated with standard open surgery performed for thoracic endograft explantation.

Initial Cannulation Strategy Impacts Perioperative Outcomes of Acute Type A Dissection in High Volume Centers

We performed an intention to treat analysis of initial cannulation strategy to assess impact on perioperative outcomes in acute type A dissection using multicenter data. All patients undergoing surgical repair of acute type A dissection from a multicenter national registry of 9 high-volume aortic centers were analyzed. Cannulation strategies included in the analysis were: Axillary, Femoral, Direct Aortic, and Innominate. Among 950 patients, we excluded those with chronic, type B dissections, and unknown initial cannulation strategy. Patients with multiple cannulation strategies were included if the sequence in which strategies were initiated was known. The final cohort consisted of 936 patients. Primary outcomes were stroke and death. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to adjust for baseline differences. P values represent Tukey's post hoc comparisons. Among 936 patients, cannulation strategies in descending order included: Axillary (n=502, 53%), Femoral (n=268, 29%), Aortic (n=104, 11%), and Innominate (n=59, 6%). Of these 46 (5%) had a change in the initial cannulation strategy prior to initiating circulatory arrest, mainly for poor axillary flow or initial femoral cannulation for hemodynamic instability followed by axillary. Femoral patients were younger (61.3±13.8) than Aortic patients (66.4±12.52, p=0.01) and more likely to present with malperfusion (n=123, 45.9%) compared to Aortic, Axillary, or Innominate patients (p <0.01). Femoral patients also had the longest duration of cerebral ischemia (Femoral: 16.9±16min, Aortic: 11.5±11.8min; Axillary: 4.41±10.3min; Innominate: 2.53±6min, p<0.01 for all vs Femoral). Unadjusted risk of death, stroke, and prolonged ventilation was lowest among Axillary and Innominate patients (Figure 1A). Length of stay was also reduced among Innominate patients. Multivariable regression demonstrated Axillary [OR 0.52 (0.36-0.75), p=0.004] and Innominate [OR 0.19 (0.07-0.54), p=0.009] cannulation to be associated with significantly reduced risk of stroke (Figure 1C). A non-significant signal of reduced death in Axillary patients remained [OR 0.66 (0.45-0.96), p=0.07]. In high volume aortic centers, an initial cannulation strategy using Axillary access is associated with reduced risk of stroke compared to Femoral. Axillary cannulation should be the preferred strategy in experienced centers if anatomy and stability allow.

Ten years of physician-modified endografts

ObjectivesPhysician-modified endografts (PMEGs) have expanded the scope of endovascular abdominal aortic repair beyond the infrarenal aorta. Patients with prohibitively high surgical risk and visceral segment disease are often candidates for this intervention, which mitigates much of the morbidity and mortality associated with conventional open repair. Here we present the institutional PMEG experience of a high-volume aortic center. MethodsWe studied all PMEGs performed at our institution from 2012 to 2023. We included cases that were submitted to the US Food sand Drug Administration in support of an investigational device exemption (IDE) trial, as well as those in the subsequently approved IDE trial. Over this 11-year period, we assessed the changes in operative characteristics and perioperative outcomes over time. Additionally, we compared the outcomes from PMEG cases to those of Zenith fenestrated (ZFEN) grafts (done by the surgeon with the PMEG IDE), an alternative device used for aneurysms involving the lower visceral segment. Here we assessed operative characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and 5-year survival and reintervention rates. ResultsWhen assessing the change over time for PMEG operative characteristics, we found a trend toward decreased fluoroscopy time and decreased proportions of completion type I and type III endoleaks (all P < .05). Perioperative outcomes have remained stable over this period, with an overall perioperative mortality rate of 4.9% (noting that this registry also includes cases that were urgent and emergent). Despite the increased complexity of PMEGs relative to ZFENs, we found comparable perioperative outcomes with regard to mortality (4.9% vs 4.3%; P = .86), permanent spinal cord ischemia (1.1% vs 0%; P = .38), postoperative myocardial infarction (4.3% vs 2.9%; P = .60), postoperative respiratory failure (7.1% vs 4.3%; P = .43), and new dialysis use (2.2% vs 4.3%; P = .35). Additionally, 5-year survival (PMEG 54% vs ZFEN 65%; P = .15) and freedom from reintervention (63% vs 74%; P = .07) were similar between these cohorts. ConclusionsThroughout our >10-year experience with PMEGs, we have noted improvements in operative outcomes, which can likely be attributed to technological advances and increased physician experience. Additionally, we have found that PMEGs perform well when compared with ZFENs, despite being a more complicated repair that is able to treat a larger segment of the aorta. PMEGs are crucial for the comprehensive care of vascular patients with complex aortic disease. As further operative advancements are made, we only expect the use of this intervention to increase.

Importance of surgeon's experience in practicing valve-sparing aortic root replacement

BackgroundValve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) requires a unique skill set. This study aimed to examine the influence of surgeon's procedural volume on outcomes of VSRR. MethodsThis retrospective study included 1697 patients from 2 large, high-volume aortic centers who underwent aortic root replacement (ARR) between 2004 and 2021 and were potentially eligible for VSRR. Surgeons were classified as performing <5 ARRs or ≥5 ARRs annually. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the independent association of surgeon volume and the decision to perform VSRR. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to match patients who were operated on by <5 ARR surgeons or ≥5 ARR surgeons and compare long-term survival probability. Cumulative incidence curves with mortality as a competing risk were plotted to compare the rate of aortic valve reoperation. ResultsOf 1697 patients who met the study inclusion criteria, 944 underwent composite-valve conduit ARR and 753 underwent VSRR. The median age of the cohort was 57 years (interquartile range, 45-66 years), and 268 (15.8%) were female. Aortic insufficiency was present in 1105 patients (65.1%), and 200 of the procedures (11.8%) were reoperations. The indication for surgery was aneurysm in 1496 patients (88.2%) and dissection in 201 (11.8%). Among the 743 patients who underwent VSRR, 691 (92%) were operated on by ≥ 5 ARR surgeons and 62 (8%) were operated on by <5 ARR surgeons. In multivariable logistic regression, ≥5 ARRs (odds ratio, 3.33; 95% confidence interval, 2.34-4.73; P < .001) was associated with VSRR as the procedure of choice. Following IPTW, there was no significant difference between <5 ARR and ≥5 ARR surgeons in survival probability after VSRR (P = .59) or in the rate of aortic valve reoperation (P = .60). ConclusionsIn the setting of a high-volume aortic center, patients who undergo ARR are less likely to receive VSRR if operated on by a <5 ARR surgeon; however, VSRR may be safely performed by <5 ARR surgeons.

Risk of Pacemaker Implantation After Aortic Root Replacement With and Without Valve Preservation

BackgroundWe compared the outcomes of aortic root replacement by composite valve grafts (CVG) and valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) operations, with an emphasis on postoperative conduction block and the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPM). MethodsFrom 1997 to 2023, 1712 consecutive patients underwent ARR by VSRR (501 [29%]) or CVG (1211 [71%]) at a high-volume aortic center. ResultsPatients undergoing CVG were older (59 ± 14 vs 49 ± 14 years, P < .001), with more cardiovascular comorbidities. Compared with CVG, there were more women undergoing VSRR (17% vs. 13%, P = .042) and more patients with connective tissue disease (22% vs 7.3%, P < .001). Multivariable analysis found that the risk for PPM was higher after CVG compared with VSRR (6.5% vs 1.2%; odds ratio [OR], 2.83; 95% CI, 1.23-7.69; P = .024). Other variables associated with PPM include older age (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05; P = .006) preoperative renal impairment (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.24-5.6; P = .010), previous operation (OR, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.29-5.62; P = .007), and bicuspid aortic valve (OR, 3.63; 95% CI, 2.13-6.33; P < .001). Among the CVG population, patients who are at increased risk are especially those with some degree of aortic stenosis (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.18-3.61; P = .011). Patients who required PPM had no additive risk for long-term mortality (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.47-2.17; P = .986); however, they were more likely to have reduced ejection fraction (29.3% vs 16%, P = .014). ConclusionsThe incidence of PPM after ARR is low, but rates were higher after CVG compared with VSRR.

Personalizing patient risk of a life-altering event: An application of machine learning to hemiarch surgery

ObjectiveThe study objective was to assess a machine learning model’s ability to predict the occurrence of life-altering events in hemiarch surgery and determine contributing patient characteristics and intraoperative factors. MethodsIn total, 602 patients who underwent hemiarch replacement at a high-volume aortic center from 2009 to 2022 were included. Patients were randomly divided into training (80%) and testing (20%) sets with various eXtreme gradient boosting candidate models constructed to predict the risk of experiencing life-altering events, including stroke, mortality, or new renal replacement therapy requirement. A total of 64 input parameters from the index hospitalization were identified, including 24 demographic characteristics as well as 8 preoperative and 32 intraoperative variables. A SHapley Additive exPlanation beeswarm plot was generated to identify and interpret the impact of individual features on the predictions of the final model. ResultsA life-altering event was noted in 15% (90/602) of patients who underwent hemiarch replacement, including urgent/emergency cases and dissections. The final eXtreme Gradient Boosting model demonstrated a cross-validation accuracy of 88% on the testing set and was well calibrated as evidenced by a low Brier score of 0.12. The best performing model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.76 and an area under the precision recall curve of 0.55. The SHapley Additive exPlanation beeswarm plot provided insights into key features that significantly influenced model prediction. ConclusionsMachine learning demonstrated superior accuracy in predicting hemiarch patients who would experience a life-altering event. This model may help to guide patients and clinicians in stratifying risk on an individual basis, which may in turn influence clinical decision-making.

Validation of the GERAADA score to predict 30-day mortality in acute type A aortic dissection in a single high-volume aortic centre.

This study aimed to evaluate employing the German Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA) score to predict 30-day mortality in an aortic centre in the USA. Between January 2010 and June 2021, 689 consecutive patients underwent surgery for acute type A dissection at a single institution. Excluded were patients with missing clinical data (N = 4). The GERAADA risk score was retrospectively calculated via a web-based application. Model discrimination power was calculated with c-statistics from logistic regression and reported as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve with 95% confidence intervals. The calibration was measured by calculating the observed versus estimated mortality ratio. The Brier score was used for the overall model evaluation. Included were 685 patients [mean age 60.6 years (SD: 13.5), 64.8% male] who underwent surgery for acute type A aortic dissection. The 30-day mortality rate was 12.0%. The GERAADA score demonstrated very good discrimination power with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.762 (95% confidence interval 0.703-0.821). The entire cohort's observed versus estimated mortality ratio was 0.543 (0.439-0.648), indicating an overestimation of the model-calculated risk. The Brier score was 0.010, thus revealing the model's acceptable overall performance. The GERAADA score is a practical and easily accessible tool for reliably estimating the 30-day mortality risk of patients undergoing surgery for acute type A aortic dissection. This model may naturally overestimate risk in patients undergoing surgery in experienced aortic centres.

Total Transfemoral Branched Endovascular Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair (TORCH2): Short-term and 1-Year Outcomes From a National Multicenter Registry.

The use of steerable sheaths to allow total transfemoral access (TFA) of branched endovascular repair (BEVAR) of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms has been proposed as an alternative to upper extremity access (UEA); however, multicenter results from high-volume aortic centers are lacking. The Total Transfemoral Branched Endovascular Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair (TORCH2) study is a physician-initiated, national, multicenter, retrospective, observational registry (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04930172) of patients undergoing BEVAR with a TFA for the cannulation of reno-visceral target vessels (TV). The study endpoints, classified according to Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards, were (1) technical success; (2) 30-day peri-operative major adverse events; (3) 30-day and midterm clinical success; (4) 30-day and midterm branch instability and TV-related adverse events (reinterventions, type I/III endoleaks). Sixty-eight patients (42 males; median age: 72 years) were treated through a TFA. All the centers included their entire experience with TFA: 18 (26%) used a homemade steerable sheath, and in 28 cases (41%), a stabilizing guidewire was employed. Steerable technical success was achieved in 66 patients (97%) with an overall in-hospital mortality of 6 patients (9%, 3 elective cases [3/58, 5%] and 3 urgent/emergent cases [3/12, 25%]) and major adverse event rate of 18% (12 patients). Overall, 257 bridging stents were implanted; of these, 225 (88%) were balloon-expandable and 32 (12%) were self-expanding. No strokes were observed among the patient completing the procedure from a TFA. One patient (2%) who failed to be treated completely from a TFA and needed a bailout UEA suffered an ischemic stroke on postoperative day 2. There were 10 (15%) major access-site complications. At 1-year follow-up, overall survival was 80%, and the rate of branch instability was 6%. A TFA for TV cannulation is a safe and feasible option with high technical success preventing the stroke risk of UEA. Primary patency at midterm seems comparable to historical controls, and future larger studies will be needed to assess potential differences with alternative options. Using a transfemoral approach for retrograde cannulation of reno-visceral branches is feasiable, safe and effective, thereby representing a reliable alternative for BEVAR interventions.

Analysis of Early Death after Elective Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Mortality after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is a quality measure and early death may represent a technical complication or poor patient selection. Our objective was to analyze patients who died in the hospital within postoperative day (POD) 0-2 after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried from 2003-2019 for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs. Operations were categorized as in-hospital death on POD 0-2 (POD 0-2 Death), in-hospital death beyond POD 2 (POD ≥3 Death), and those alive at discharge. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. There were 7,592 elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs with 61 (0.8%) POD 0-2 Death, 156 (2.1%) POD ≥3 Death, and 7,375 (97.1%) alive at discharge. Overall, median age was 70years and 73.6% were male. Iliac aneurysm repair and surgical approach (anterior/retroperitoneal) were similar among groups. POD 0-2 Death, compared to POD ≥3 Death and those alive at discharge, had the longest renal/visceral ischemia time, more commonly had proximal clamp placement above both renal arteries, an aortic distal anastomosis, longest operative time, and largest estimated blood loss (all P<0.05). Postoperative vasopressor usage, myocardial infarction, stroke, and return to the operating room were most frequent in POD 0-2 Death and extubation in the operating room was least frequent (all P<0.001). Postoperative bowel ischemia and renal failure occurred most commonly among POD ≥3 Death (allP<0.001).On multivariable analysis, POD 0-2 Death was associated with congestive heart failure, prior peripheral vascular intervention, female sex, preoperative aspirin use, lower center volume quartile, renal/visceral ischemia time, estimated blood loss, and older age (all P<0.05). POD 0-2 Death was associated with comorbidities, center volume, renal/visceral ischemia time, and estimated blood loss. Referral to high-volume aortic centers could improve outcomes.

The impact of reoperative surgery on aortic root replacement in the United States

ObjectiveReoperative sternotomy is associated with poor outcomes after cardiac surgery. We aimed to investigate the impact of reoperative sternotomy on the outcomes after aortic root replacement. MethodsAll patients who underwent aortic root replacement from January 2011 to June 2020 were identified using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. We compared outcomes between patients who underwent first-time aortic root replacement with those with a history of sternotomy undergoing reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement using propensity score matching. Subgroup analysis was performed among the reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement group. ResultsA total of 56,447 patients underwent aortic root replacement. Among them, 14,935 (26.5%) underwent reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement. The annual incidence of reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement increased from 542 in 2011 to 2300 in 2019. Aneurysm and dissection were more frequently observed in the first-time aortic root replacement group, whereas infective endocarditis was more common in the reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement group. Propensity score matching yielded 9568 pairs in each group. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was longer in the reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement group (215 vs 179 minutes, standardized mean difference = 0.43). Operative mortality was higher in the reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement group (10.8% vs 6.2%, standardized mean difference = 0.17). In the subgroup analysis, logistic regression demonstrated that individual patient repetition of (second or more resternotomy) surgery and annual institutional volume of aortic root replacement were independently associated with operative mortality. ConclusionsThe incidence of reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement might have increased over time. Reoperative sternotomy is a significant risk factor for morbidity and mortality in aortic root replacement. Referral to high-volume aortic centers should be considered in patients undergoing reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement.

Long-Term Propensity-Matched Comparison of Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair and Open Surgical Repair of Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

This study investigated the long-term outcomes of patients treated with fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) or open surgical repair (OSR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (c-AAAs). Complex abdominal aortic aneurysms are defined as aneurysms that involve the renal or mesenteric arteries and extend up to the level of the celiac axis or diaphragmatic hiatus but do not extend into the thoracic aorta. This study compares with a propensity-score matching the outcome of these procedures from 2 high-volume aortic centers. All patients with c-AAAs undergoing repair at 2 centers between January 2010 and June 2016 were included. The long-term imaging follow-up consisted in a yearly computed tomography angiography (CTA) in the F-BEVAR group. Yearly abdominal ultrasound examination and 5-year CTA were performed in the OSR group. The primary endpoints were long-term mortality, aneurysm-related mortality, and chronic renal decline (CRD), defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate reduction to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 or >20%/de novo dependence on permanent dialysis in patients with normal or abnormal preoperative renal function, respectively. Secondary endpoints included aortic-related reinterventions, target vessel occlusion, proximal aorta degeneration, access-related complications, graft infection, and the composite endpoint of clinical failure during follow-up. After 1:1 propensity matching, 102 consecutive patients who underwent F-BEVAR and OSR, respectively, were included. The median follow-up was 67 months. There was no significant difference in long-term overall mortality (40.2% vs 36.3%; p=0.40) and aneurysm-related mortality (6.8% vs 5.8%; p=0.30), in the F-BEVAR and OSR groups, respectively. During follow-up, late renal function decline occurred in 27 (27.8%) versus 46 patients (47.4%) in the F-BEVAR and OSR groups, respectively (p<0.01). During follow-up, 23 reinterventions (23.5%) were performed in the F-BEVAR group, and 5 (5.1%) in the OSR group (p<0.01). No differences in overall and aneurysm-related mortality were observed. Chronic renal decline was significantly higher after OSR, while the reintervention rate was higher in the F-BEVAR group. These long-term results reflect the outcomes of a complex procedure performed by a single experienced operator in 2 high-volume centers, and followed with a strict surveillance imaging follow-up. Nowadays, F-BEVAR and OSR are considered two established techniques for the treatment of c-AAA. However, long-term comparative outcomes are not well studied, and concerns may rise in terms of durability of the repair, risk of reinterventions and late chronic renal decline. The present study showed, with a median follow-up > 5 years, no differences in overall and aneurysm-related mortality. Chronic renal decline was significantly higher after OSR, while the reintervention rate was higher in the endovascular group. To achieve the best possible long-term outcomes, both techniques should be performed in high volume aortic centres, tailored to the patient, and with an adequate surveillance imaging.

Reintervention of Residual Aortic Dissection after Type A Aortic Repair: Results of a Prospective Follow-Up at 5 Years.

Background After a type A aortic dissection repair, a patent false lumen in the descending aorta is the most common situation encountered, and is a well-known risk factor for aortic growth, reinterventions and mortality. The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term results of residual aortic dissection (RAD) at a high-volume aortic center with prospective follow-up. Methods In this prospective single-center study, all patients operated for type A aortic dissection between January 2017 and December 2022 were included. Patients without postoperative computed tomography scans or during follow-up at our center, and patients without RAD were excluded. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality during follow-up for patients with RAD. The secondary endpoints were perioperative mortality, rate of distal aneurysmal evolution, location of distal aneurysmal evolution, rate of distal reinterventions, outcomes of distal reinterventions, and aortic-related death during follow-up. Results In total, 200 survivors of RAD comprised the study group. After a mean follow-up of 27.2 months (1-66), eight patients (4.0%) died and 107 (53.5%) had an aneurysmal progression. The rate of distal reintervention was 19.5% (39/200), for malperfusion syndrome in seven cases (3.5%) and aneurysmal evolution in 32 cases (16.0%). Most reinterventions occurred during the first 2 years (82.1%). Twenty-seven patients were treated for an aneurysmal evolution of RAD including aortic arch with hybrid repair in 21 cases and branched aortic arch endoprosthesis in six cases. In the hybrid repair group, there was no death, and the rate of morbidity was 28.6% (6/21) (one minor stroke, one pulmonary complication, one recurrent paralysis with complete recovery and three major bleeding events). In the branched endograft group, there was no death, no stroke, and no paraplegia. There was one case (16.7%) of carotid dissection. Complete aortic remodeling or complete FL thrombosis on the thoracic aorta was found in 18 cases (85.7%) and in five cases (83.3%) in the hybrid and branched endograft groups, respectively. Conclusions: Despite a critical course in most cases of RAD, with a high rate of aneurysmal evolution and reintervention, the long-term mortality rate remains low with a close follow-up and a multidisciplinary management in an expert center.

Iatrogenic Type A Dissection: Case Series and Surgical Management From a High-Volume Aortic Center

BackgroundIatrogenic type A aortic dissection is a rare complication of surgical and nonsurgical cardiac procedures associated with high morbidity. The purpose of this study was to describe the intraoperative incidence, surgical management, and outcomes of iatrogenic type A dissections at our institution. MethodsRetrospective review of our institution’s adult cardiac surgery database was performed between 2002 and 2018 to identify all iatrogenic type A aortic dissection repairs. Operative reports were reviewed for cause of dissection and repair strategy. Follow-up surveillance for mortality and need for aortic reintervention was queried as available. ResultsOverall, 36 patients undergoing iatrogenic type A repairs were identified (cardiac surgical incidence, 0.1%). Of these, 23 (63.9%) were related to open operation, 5 (13.9%) to percutaneous coronary interventions, 5 (13.9%) to thoracic endovascular repairs, and 3 (8.3%) to other endovascular procedures. Most patients underwent hemiarch repairs under circulatory arrest (28/36 [77.8%]), whereas total arch repair was required in 5 of 36 (13.9%). Among all patients, in-hospital mortality was 36.1% (13/36). Those who survived to discharge had low subsequent mortality, with no differences between endovascular and surgical causes (P = .797). On median follow-up of 3.1 years, need for redo aortic surgery was limited to 4 (11.1%) patients, all successfully treated with endovascular therapy. ConclusionsIatrogenic type A dissections represent a rare but serious complication of cardiac procedures, with high in-hospital mortality for those undergoing surgical repair. A repair strategy involving an open distal anastomosis and proximal root reconstruction ensures durable freedom from need for redo surgery.

Poređenje otvorene hirurgije i endovaskularnog tretmana asimptomatske juksta- i/ili pararenalne aneurizme abdominalne aorte

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has gained widespread acceptance in the treatment of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). The applicability of EVAR is limited by the absence of adequate infrarenal neck or involvement of the visceral arteries, such as in juxtarenal and pararenal AAA (JAAA/PAAA). Current guidelines recommend that elective management of JAAA/PAAA and the choice of different techniques and different options should be considered based on patient status, anatomy, local routines, team expertise, and patient preference. The main advantage of endovascular techniques lies in the avoidance of aortic cross-clamping and subsequent lower risk of renal dysfunction, less surgical trauma and faster recovery, which may be advantageous for patients at high risk of open surgery. However, recent reports show that JAAA/PAAA patients can be treated in high-volume aortic centers with low short-term mortality and morbidity and good medium and long-term results that are equal in both groups. Low-surgical-risk patients might benefit from open surgery, while high-risk patients might benefit from the endovascular first approach of JAAA/ PAAA. This provides useful information to help clinicians and patients choose between the two procedures when both are available.

Long-Term Results of Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Open Repair.

This study investigated the long-term outcomes of patients treated with open surgical repair for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (c-AAAs). A total of 119 patients with c-AAAs undergoing repair between January 2010 and June 2016 in a high-volume aortic center were included. The long-term imaging follow-up consisted of yearly abdominal ultrasound examinations and 5-year computed tomography angiography. At a median follow-up of 76 months (IQR 38 months), forty-three deaths (37%) and three (2.5%) aortic-related deaths were observed. Long-term chronic renal decline was observed in fifty (43.8%) patients, significantly correlated with post-operative acute kidney injury. During the follow-up, five reinterventions (4.3%) were performed. The present study suggests that open c-AAA repair can be performed with acceptable operative risk with durable results. To achieve the best possible long-term outcome, the open surgery repair of complex AAA should be performed in high-volume aortic centers and tailored to the patient.

Early Institutional Experience with One-Piece Bifurcated-Fenestrated Stentgraft in the Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Purpose: To review the early experience of the use of a bifurcated-fenestrated endograft (Bif-FEVAR) to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) in a high-volume aortic center. Methods: A retrospective single-center analysis was conducted between March 2019 and April 2021 including consecutive patients that underwent Bif-FEVAR. Only patients without a proper infrarenal neck and a distance <70 mm between the lowest target artery and the native or prosthetic aortic bifurcation were considered. All Bif-FEVAR custom-made devices were manufactured by Cook Medical (Inc., Bloomington, Indiana). Demographics, anatomical features, technical success, major adverse events, 30-day mortality, and survival according to Kaplan–Meier were analyzed according to Society for Vascular Surgery standards. Results: Overall, 10 patients (100% male with median age 78) were included. The median preoperative maximal aneurysm diameter was 68 mm [51–84]. Eight patients were treated for a proximal type I endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair. A total of 36 fenestrations were planned. The median operative time was 144 min [127–168], with a median fluoro time of 40.5 min [34–54] and a median dose area product of 73 Gy cm2 [61–89]. Technical success rate was 100%. No patients experienced a major postoperative adverse event. Median follow-up time was 8 months [6–13]. Conclusion: Bif-FEVAR is technically feasible when there is a short distance below the lowest target artery and the aortic bifurcation, with favorable short-term results. Clinical Impact This study assessed the use of an innovative one-piece bifurcated fenestrated stent-graft as a primary procedure or in the treatment of proximal endoleak after standard infrarenal EVAR. We demonstrated these custom-made devices can be used safely with favorable short-term results. One-piece bifurcated fenestrated stent-grafts extend the indications of FEVAR for patients with an unusually short distance between the lowest renal artery and the aorto-iliac bifurcation or the diverter flow of a preexisting bifurcated infrarenal stent-graft.

Fenestrated and/or branched aortic stentgrafts: effect of a high volume on the learning curve

The treatment of non infrarenal aortic aneurysms (NIAA) (juxta/pararenal and thoraco-abdominal [TAA]) with fenestrated and/or branched stentgrafts (F/B-EVAR) requires mature technical skills. The objective was to evaluate the results of the initial experiment and the learning curve of an operator trained in a high-volume aortic center.

Endovascular infrarenal aortic aneurysm repair: Perhaps we've gone about it all wrong

Endovascular infrarenal aortic aneurysm repair: Perhaps we've gone about it all wrong

Fenestrated-branched endovascular repair for distal thoracoabdominal aortic pathology after total aortic arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk

ObjectiveTo report the outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (FBEVAR) for thoracoabdominal aortic pathology after total aortic arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk (TAR+FET). MethodsInterrogation of prospectively maintained databases from four high-volume aortic centers identified consecutive patients treated with distal FBEVAR after prior TAR+FET between August 2013 and September 2020. The primary end point was 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Secondary end points were technical success, early clinical success, midterm survival, and freedom from reintervention. Data are presented as median (interquartile range). ResultsA total of 39 patients (21 men; median age, 73 years [67-75 years]) with degenerative (n = 22) and postdissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (n = 17) (median diameter, 71 mm [61-78 mm]) were identified. Distal FBEVAR was intended in 27 patients (median interval, 9.8 months [6.2-16.6 months]), anticipated in 7, and unexpected in 5. A total of 31 patients had a two- (n = 24) or three-stage (n = 7) distal FBEVAR. Renovisceral target vessel preservation was 99.3% (145 of 146). Early primary and secondary technical success was 92% and 97%, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 2.6% (n = 1; respiratory failure and spinal cord ischemia [SCI]). Six survivors also developed SCI, which was associated with complete (n = 4) or partial recovery (n = 2) at hospital discharge. No patients required renal replacement therapy or suffered a stroke. Early clinical success was 95%. Median follow-up was 30.5 months (23.7-49.7 months). Eleven patients required 16 late reinterventions. Estimated 3-year survival and freedom from reintervention were 84% ± 6% and 63% ± 10%, respectively. ConclusionsDistal FBEVAR after prior TAR+FET is associated with high technical success and low early mortality. The risk of SCI is significant although the majority of patients demonstrate full or partial recovery before hospital discharge. Midterm patient survival is favorable, but there remains a high requirement for late reintervention. FBEVAR represents an acceptable alternative to distal open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Stable Treatment and Outcomes Over a Decade of Increasingly Complex Urgent Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Presentation

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been used increasingly for urgent management of symptomatic or ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) and therefore has disseminated increasingly from high-volume aortic centers to community hospitals. Given this, we hypothesized that the presentation and management of patients with rAAA have changed over the past decade at a high-volume aortic center to more complex, including an increase in those not offered repair.