Need For Adjunctive Procedures Research Articles

Management of Difficult Access during Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

To describe a large single-institutional experience in managing challenging access situations during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Data from all patients undergoing EVAR at a tertiary academic medical center between 2009 and 2013 were collected retrospectively, including demographics, size of iliac arteries, type of device used, approach to managing difficult access (DA), and outcomes. The median follow-up was 38months. DA was defined as iliac arteries with a diameter of less than 7mm bilaterally. Fenestrated and snorkel repairs were excluded. Of 400 EVARs performed during the study period, 191 (48%) were done in patients with DA. Of the DA patients, 35 (18.3%) underwent 42 adjuncts before the introduction of the main body device: including 15 dilators, 11 balloon angioplasties, 9 aortouniiliac devices, 3 SoloPath sheaths, 1 retroperitoneal cutdown, and 3 iliac stents. In another 29 patients, iliac stents were used to correct stenoses or kinks in the limbs after EVAR devices were deployed. The average diameter of the iliac artery used to deliver main body component was 4.6mm in the group of patients requiring adjuncts and 5.4mm in the remainder of the patients with small iliac arteries (P=0.008). The median size of the main body device was 28mm. Two cases were aborted due to inability to deliver the device. Other complications included 7 (3.6%) iliac ruptures, 3 (1.6%) instances of limb ischemia, and 5 (2.6%) patients needed early reoperation (within 30days). Two patients (1%) had type I endoleaks at the conclusion of EVAR. During follow-up, 12 (6.3%) patients required EVAR revisions. Seven patients (3.6%) had limb thrombosis which occurred only in patients who did not have adjective procedures during the initial EVAR. Limb thrombosis and rate of revisions in patients with DA were not significantly different from the rates observed in non-DA patients. Perioperative mortality after elective repairs was 1.6% in DA patients and 0% in non-DA patients (P=0.12). EVAR can be successfully performed in patients with bilateral small iliac arteries. Adjunctive procedures might increase the technical success rate of EVAR in these patients and should definitely be considered in patients with iliac arteries less than 5mm in diameter. Next generation and "low-profile" devices might minimize the need for adjunctive procedures and facilitate EVAR in these patients.

Aortic anatomic severity grade correlates with resource utilization

Potential cost effectiveness of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open aortic repair (OAR) is offset by the use of intraoperative adjuncts (components) or late reinterventions. Anatomic severity grade (ASG) can be used preoperatively to assess abdominal aortic aneurysms, and provide a quantitative measure of anatomic complexity. The hypothesis of this study is that ASG is directly related to the use of intraoperative adjuncts and cost of aortic repair. Patients who undergo elective OAR and EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms were identified over a consecutive 3-year period. ASG scores were calculated manually using three-dimensional reconstruction software by two blinded reviewers. Statistical analysis of cost data was performed using a log transformation. Regression analyses, with a continuous or dichotomous outcome, used a generalized estimating equations approach with the sandwich estimator, being robust with respect to deviations from model assumptions. One hundred forty patients were identified for analysis, n = 33 OAR and n = 107 EVAR. The mean total cost (± standard deviation) for OAR was per thousand (k) $38.3 ± 49.3, length of stay (LOS) 13.5 ± 14.2 days, ASG score 18.13 ± 3.78; for EVAR, mean total cost was k $24.7 ± 13.0 (P = .016), LOS 3.0 ± 4.4 days (P = .012), ASG score 15.9 ± 4.13 (P = .010). In patients who underwent EVAR, 25.2% required intraoperative adjuncts, and analysis of this group revealed a mean total cost of k $31.5 ± 15.9, ASG score 18.48 ± 3.72, and LOS 3.9 ± 4.5, which were significantly greater compared with cases without adjunctive procedures. An ASG score of ≥15 correlated with an increased propensity for requirement of intraoperative adjuncts; odds ratio, 5.75 (95% confidence interval, 1.82-18.19). ASG >15 was also associated with chronic kidney disease, end stage renal disease, hypertension, female sex, increased cost, and use of adjunctive procedures. Complex aneurysm anatomy correlates with increased total cost and need for adjunctive procedures during EVAR. Preoperative assessment with ASG scores can delineate patients at greater risk for increased resource use. Patient comorbid factors are associated with anatomic complexity defined according to ASG. A critical examination of the relationship between anatomic complexity and finances is required within the context of aggressive endovascular treatment strategies and shifts toward value-based reimbursement.

Outcomes after redo aortobifemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease

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

Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children

To examine our experience of laparoscopic pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) in the pediatric population. From November 2001 to June 2009, 112 patients underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for the treatment of symptomatic or radiographic UPJO. Data were collected retrospectively. Patients were followed at regular intervals with imaging and symptom assessment. Failure was defined as inability to complete the intended procedure, persistent flank pain, radiographic evidence of obstruction, or the need for definitive adjunctive procedures. Mean patient age was 9.4 years (0.2-20.5 years), and follow-up was available on all 112 patients with a mean duration of 15.3 months (0.6-84.5 months). There was one open conversion in the series. Mean operative time was 254 minutes (102-525 minutes). There was one minor intraoperative complication reported (0.8%). There were 12 (10.8%) postoperative complications; most were relatively minor with complete resolution and without long-term sequelae. Postoperative ultrasonography has been performed in 102 patients, with 99 (97%) patients demonstrating improvement of the UPJO. Three patients (3%) continued to have symptomatic and/or radiographic evidence of obstruction that necessitated the need for adjunctive procedures, which included laser endopyelotomy in 2 patients, and a re-do open pyeloplasty in 1 patient. Of those cases that were completed laparoscopicaly, the overall success rate was 97.2%. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for UPJO in the pediatric population is technically challenging; however, with experience, one can expect excellent success rates comparable to open pyeloplasty, with minor complications with reasonable operative times.

Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Endovascular Program Development and Results

Improvements in endovascular technology and techniques have allowed us to treat patients in ways we never thought possible. Today endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms is associated with markedly decreased morbidity and mortality when compared to the open surgical approach, yet there are several fundamental obstacles in our ability to offer these endovascular techniques to most patients with ruptured aneurysms. This article will focus on the technical aspects of endovascular aneurysm repair for rupture, with particular attention to developing a standardized multidisciplinary approach that will help ones ability to deal with not just the technical aspects of these procedures, but also address some of the challenges including: the availability of preoperative CT, the choice of anesthesia, percutaneous vs. femoral cut-down approach, use of aortic occlusion balloons, need for bifurcated vs. aorto-uniiliac stentgrafts, need for adjunctive procedures, diagnosis and treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome, and conversion to open surgical repair.

Endovascular aneurysm repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: The Albany Vascular Group approach

Improvements in endovascular technology and techniques have allowed us to treat patients in ways we never thought possible. Today, endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms is associated with markedly decreased morbidity and mortality compared with the open surgical approach, yet there are several fundamental obstacles in our ability to offer these endovascular techniques to most patients with ruptured aneurysms. This article will focus on the technical aspects of endovascular aneurysm repair for rupture, with particular attention to developing a standardized multidisciplinary approach that will help vascular surgeons deal with not just the technical aspects of these procedures but also address some of the challenges, including the availability of preoperative computed tomography, the choice of anesthesia, the percutaneous vs femoral cutdown approach, use of aortic occlusion balloons, need for bifurcated vs aortouniiliac stent grafts, need for adjunctive procedures, diagnosis and treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome, and conversion to open surgical repair.

Outcomes following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR): An anatomic and device-specific analysis

We performed a device-specific comparison of long-term outcomes following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) to determine the effect(s) of device type on early and late clinical outcomes. In addition, the impact of performing EVAR both within and outside of specific instructions for use (IFU) for each device was examined. Between January 8, 1999 and December 31, 2005, 565 patients underwent EVAR utilizing one of three commercially available stent graft devices. Study outcomes included perioperative (< or =30 days) mortality, intraoperative technical complications and need for adjunctive procedures, aneurysm rupture, aneurysm-related mortality, conversion to open repair, reintervention, development and/or resolution of endoleak, device related adverse events (migration, thrombosis, or kinking), and a combined endpoint of any graft-related adverse event (GRAE). Study outcomes were correlated by aneurysm morphology that was within or outside of the recommended device IFU. chi2 and Kaplan Meier methods were used for analysis. Grafts implanted included 177 Cook Zenith (CZ, 31%), 111 Gore Excluder (GE, 20%), and 277 Medtronic AneuRx (MA, 49%); 39.3% of grafts were placed outside of at least one IFU parameter. Mean follow-up was 30 +/- 21 months and was shorter for CZ (20 months CZ vs 35 and 31 months for GE and MA, respectively; P < .001). Overall actuarial 5-year freedom from aneurysm-related death, reintervention, and GRAE was similar among devices. CZ had a lower number of graft migration events (0 CZ vs 1 GE and 9 MA); however, there was no difference between devices on actuarial analysis. Combined GRAE was lowest for CZ (29% CZ, 35% GE, and 43% MA; P = .01). Graft placement outside of IFU was associated with similar 5-year freedom from aneurysm-related death, migration, and reintervention (P > .05), but a lower freedom from GRAE (74% outside IFU vs 86% within IFU; P = .021), likely related to a higher incidence of graft thrombosis (2.3% outside IFU vs 0.3% within IFU; P = .026). The differences in outcome for grafts placed within vs outside IFU were not device-specific. EVAR performed with three commercially available devices provided similar clinically relevant outcomes at 5 years, although no graft migration occurred with a suprarenal fixation device. As anticipated, application outside of anatomically specific IFU variables had an incremental negative effect on late results, indicating that adherence to such IFU guidelines is appropriate clinical practice.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in children: Evaluation of the results considering the need for auxiliary procedures

Objective To retrospectively evaluate the efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in children with renal stones, with regard to ability of ureters to transport the fragments, and need for adjunctive procedures. Patients and methods Between January 2000 and November 2004, 60 children (24 girls and 36 boys) with a total of 72 stones of the upper urinary tract were treated by ESWL using a PCK V5 lithotriptor. Patients with anatomical abnormalities and staghorn stones were excluded from the study. Stone size ranged from 4 to 28 mm. Mean number of shock waves was 1430 (range 600–2000) per ESWL session and mean energy used for stone disintegration was 12 kV (range 6–18). At 24–48 h after ESWL, a plain film or renal ultrasound was obtained to evaluate stone fragmentation. Results Our stone-free rate after one session of ESWL was 92.8% and 81.2% for patients with stones smaller than 10 mm and stones between 10 and 28 mm, respectively. Seven (11.6%) patients developed distal ureteral steinstrasse, and the stone size was 15–20 mm and 20–28 mm in two and five patients, respectively. The steinstrasse completely cleared under meticulous follow-up. No patient needed an adjunctive procedure, such as a double-J stent or nephrostomy tube placement, or ureteroscopic stone manipulation. Conclusion A child's ureter is capable of transporting the fragments after lithotripsy. Interventional procedures should be a last resort. Expectant management is usually adequate even in patients who develop steinstrasse after ESWL.

Mechanical thrombectomy of embolic occlusion in both the profunda femoris and superficial femoral arteries in critical limb ischaemia.

We report our preliminary experience using the Amplatz device for percutaneous thromboembolectomy in acute occlusion in both the profunda femoris artery (PFA) and superficial femoral artery (SFA) in four patients (mean age 78.5 years). All patients suffered from acute lower limb ischaemia, Fontaine Grade 3, due to cardiac embolization. Estimated occlusion times range from 3 h to 3 days. All four patients were treated successfully. Device activation time for both the PFA and the SFA was 85 s +/- 15 s. Total procedure time was 25 min +/- 10 min. There was no need for adjunctive procedures or intensive care monitoring. We conclude that the Amplatz device is a very effective and safe procedure for the quick restoration of vascular patency in cases of simultaneous embolically occluded PFA and SFA.