Outcomes Of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Research Articles

Anesthesia choice for frail patients undergoing endovascular repair of non-ruptured infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms

BackgroundWhile general anesthesia is the predominant choice in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), recent studies have suggested that locoregional anesthesia could be a viable alternative for suitable patients. Frailty has been identified as an independent predictor of elevated mortality and morbidity in EVAR. However, the choice of anesthesia in frail patients undergoing EVAR has not been explored. MethodsThis study aimed to compare the 30-day outcomes of non-emergent intact infrarenal EVAR in frail patients receiving either locoregional or general anesthesia. Patients who underwent infrarenal EVAR were identified in ACS-NSQIP database from 2012-2022. Frail patients were selected by 5-item Modified Frailty Index (mFI-5)≥2. Exclusion criteria included age<18 years, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), emergency, and acute intraoperative conversion to open. A 1:1 propensity-score matching was used to match demographics, baseline characteristics, aneurysm diameter, distal aneurysm extent, and concomitant procedures between patients under locoregional and general anesthesia. Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were evaluated. ResultsAmong 16,438 patients who underwent EVAR, 4812 (29.27%) were frail. Among the frail patients, 483 (10.04%) were under locoregional anesthesia while 4,329 (89.96%) were under general anesthesia. After propensity-score matching, patients under locoregional or general anesthesia had comparable 30-day mortality (2.07% vs 2.48%, p=0.83) or any complications. ConclusionLocoregional and general anesthesia were found to have comparable postoperative outcomes in frail patients undergoing EVAR unruptured AAA, which did not align with the suggestion that locoregional anesthesia might be more advantageous in frail patients. While the patient’s preferences should be considered, the choice of anesthesia should still be individualized to take into account the patient’s age, comorbidities, AAA anatomy and the complexity of the case, as well as previous surgical and anesthesia experiences.

Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Managed with the EndurantTM Endograft under Elective Setting.

Background/Objectives: Device selection during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remains an important issue for ensuring endograft durability. This study evaluated the early and follow-up outcomes of elective EVAR with the Endurant platform. Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted including consecutive elective EVAR procedures with the Endurant II/IIs (2008 to 2024) device. Primary outcomes were technical success, mortality and major complications at 30 days. Survival, endoleak I/III and freedom from reintervention were secondary outcomes. Cox proportional hazards models were employed for risk-adjusted follow-up outcomes. Results: In total, 361 patients were included (72.7 ± 7 years; 96% males; mean AAA diameter 62 ± 14 mm); 92% received a bifurcated device, and 89% conformed to the instructions for use. Technical success was 99.7%. Intra-operative adjunctive procedures included 4.4% proximal cuffs and 1.7% endoanchors. The thirty-day mortality rate was 0.6%, and the major complication rate was 4.1%. Survival was 81% (SE 4.8%), 72% (SE 6.4%) and 52% (SE 9.2%) at 4, 6 and 8 years, with aneurysm-related mortality at 1.7%. Freedom from endoleak Ia was 76% (SE 7.3%) at 6 years, freedom from endoleak Ib was 79% (SE 7.4%) at 7 years and freedom from endoleak III was 94% (SE 3.7%) at 5 years. Freedom from reintervention was 71% (SE 6.1%) and 55% (SE 7.9%) at 5 and 7 years, respectively. No device-related co-factor affected long-term outcomes. Conclusions: Endurant II/IIs endograft is a safe and effective EVAR solution with excellent early outcomes and low long-term aneurysm-related mortality. The need for reintervention in the long term affected less than 50% of cases.

Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair and Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Approaches for Managing Aortic Pathologies: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background/Objectives: Since thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are increasingly utilized, examining their outcomes and safety in real-world scenarios is crucial. This study investigated the management and outcomes of TEVAR and EVAR as alternatives to traditional open surgical repair for managing aortic pathologies. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. We analyzed the data from 59 consecutive patients who underwent TEVAR or EVAR between 2015 and 2022 at a single tertiary care center. The primary outcome was survival, and secondary outcomes were complications assessment, including re-intervention and occurrence of endoleaks. Results: TEVAR accounted for 47.5% of cases (n = 28), while EVAR comprised 52.5% (n = 31). Patients were mostly 61-70 years old (23.7%) and male (91.5%). Surgery indications differed, with aneurysmal repair being the prevalent indication for EVAR (90.3%, n = 28) and trauma being the main indication for TEVAR (67.9%, n = 19). Regarding the primary outcome, 11 patients (18.6%) died for various reasons; of those, 2 patients (3.4%) were determined to have died from vascular-related issues. Most patients (81.4%, n = 48) did not experience intraoperative complications. The most common intraoperative complications were endoleaks and access failure, each affecting 5.1% (n = 3) of patients. Re-intervention was necessary in 16.9% (n = 10) of cases, with endoleaks being the major indication (60%). Emergency intervention was more frequent in the TEVAR group (p = 0.013), resulting in significantly longer hospitalization (p = 0.012). Conclusions: Despite limitations, our analysis indicates a good safety profile with high success rates and a low incidence of adverse health outcomes and mortality in TEVAR/EVAR procedures. Nevertheless, the results emphasize the ongoing concern of endograft leaks, necessitating re-interventions.

Early and Mid-Term Results of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair with the Cordis Incraft Ultra-Low Profile Endograft: A High-Volume Center Experience.

Background/Objectives: In recent years, manufacturers have developed new low-profile stent grafts to allow endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) in patients with small access vessels. We evaluated the early and mid-term outcomes of the Incraft (Cordis Corp, Bridgewater, NJ, USA) ultra-low profile endograft implantation in a high-volume single center. Methods: Between 2014 and 2023, 133 consecutive endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) procedures performed using the Incraft endograft were recorded in a prospective database. Indications included infrarenal aortic aneurysms, common iliac aneurysms, and infrarenal penetrating aortic ulcers. Mid-term results were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: During the study period, 133 patients were treated with the Cordis Incraft endograft, in both elective and urgent settings. The Incraft graft was the first choice for patients with hostile iliac accesses, a feature characterizing at least one side in 90.2% of the patients in the study cohort. The immediate technical success rate was 78.2%. The intraoperative endoleak rate was 51.9% (20.3% type 1 A, 0.8% type 1 B, and 30.8% type 2 endoleak). Within 30 days, technical and clinical success rates were both 99.3%; all type 1A and 1B endoleaks were resolved at the 30-day follow-up CT-angiogram. After a mean follow-up of 35.4 months, the actuarial freedom from the re-intervention rate was 96.0%, 91.1%, and 84.0% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. The iliac leg patency rate was 97.1%, 94.1%, and 93.1% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between hostile and non-hostile access groups, nor between the groups with grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3 access hostility. Conclusions: The ultra-low profile Cordis Incraft endograft represents a valid option for the endovascular treatment of AAA in patients with hostile iliac accesses. The procedure can be performed with high rates of technical and clinical success at 30 days and the rates of iliac branch occlusion observed during the follow-up period appear acceptable in patients with poor aorto-iliac outflow.

Socioeconomic Status Based on Area Deprivation Index Does Not Affect Postoperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair in the VA Health-Care System

Living conditions and socioeconomic status are known to impact individual health and access to medical care. Prior research has validated the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) tool as a measure of socioeconomic disadvantage for a given locality. Living in a neighborhood with a higher ADI score has been associated with increased rates of hospital readmission due to complications following surgery. We set forth to identify the possible associations between a patient's ADI score and post-operative endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) outcomes in the Veterans Health Care Administration (VHA). We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of patients who underwent EVAR from January 2010 to December 2021 at a Level 1A VHA Hospital. Patient demographics and intra-operative variables were obtained. ADI score was calculated based on home addresses and resulted in a local score on a scale of 1-10 and a national percentile on a scale of 1-100. We then further stratified these patients into local and national quintile groups. Local ADI 1 included scores of 1-2, and local ADI 5 included scores of 9-10. National ADI 1 comprised scores 1-20, and national ADI 5 scored 81-100. The other scores were equally divided into ADI 2, 3, and 4. Higher ADI scores were associated with lower socioeconomic status. We identified clinical outcomes, including wound infection, respiratory failure, urinary tract infection, acute kidney injury, limb stenosis, readmission, length of stay, and subsequent re-intervention rates. 241 patients underwent EVAR over the time period examined. 57.3% (n=138) of patients were in quintiles 4 and 5 for local ADI; when national ADI percentiles organized these same patients, 47.3% (n=114) were in quintiles 4 and 5. Patient demographics did not vary between the local and national groups. We saw no statistically significant difference in intra-operative variables, postoperative complications, readmission, loss to follow-up, or 1-year mortality rates across ADI quintiles at the local or national level. Binary Logistic Regression showed no statistical significance for local and national ADI quintiles for hospital readmission and overall postoperative complications. We found that there was no statistical significance between hospital readmission rates or worse surgical outcomes across local and national ADI quintiles. This suggests that the VHA resources and multidisciplinary support may improve care across neighborhoods. This comprehensive care provided at VHA may mitigate post-operative complications in patients undergoing EVARs. Further research is warranted to investigate the role of area deprivation in healthcare and EVAR outcomes in a veteran population.

Correlation Between Calcium Scoring and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Endovascular Repair Outcomes.

Endovascular aneurysm repair, though minimally invasive and has the benefit of relatively low perioperative complication rates, it is associated with significant long term reintervention rates related to endoleaks. Several variables have been studied to predict the outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair, 1 of which is the calcium burden of the vasculature. This prompted us to study the association between calcium burden measured by the standardized Agatston scoring system and the outcomes of Endovascular aneurysm repair. This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent Endovascular aneurysm repair from 2008 to 2020 at our institution and who had a non-contrast computerized tomography scan preoperatively, accounting for 87 patients. The calcium burden of the vasculature was measured by the Agatston scoring system allowing for better reproducibility, and the outcome variables included mortality and endoleaks. Patients with higher median total calcium scores (≥12966.9) had significantly lesser survival (79.8% vs 52.3% (P = .002) at five years compared to patients with lower median total calcium score (<12966.9). Also, patients with type 2 endoleaks had higher calcium scores in above the aneurysm level ((1591.2 vs 688.2), P = .05)) compared to patients with no type 2 endoleaks. Calcium score assigned using a standardized Agatston scoring system can be used as a predictor of mortality risk assisting in deciding the treatment of choice for patients.

Prior abdominal surgery is not associated with 30-day mortality or morbidities after endovascular repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Prior abdominal surgery (PAS) has the potential to affect outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Recently, endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been expanded among patients with complex AAA, which involves visceral branches in the upper abdominal aortic. However, outcomes of EVAR for complex AAA in patients with PAS have not been examined. This study aimed to investigate the impact of PAS on 30-day outcomes in EVAR for complex AAA. Patients who underwent EVAR for complex AAA were identified in ACS-NSQIP targeted database from 2012 to 2022. Complex AAA was defined as juxtarenal, suprarenal, or pararenal proximal extent, Type IV thoracoabdominal aneurysm, or aneurysms treated with Zenith Fenestrated endograft. Patients with age less than 18 years, ruptured AAA with or without hypotension, acute intraoperative conversion to open, and emergency presentation were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare 30-day postoperative outcomes of patients with and without PAS. Demographics, baseline characteristics, aneurysm diameter, indication for surgery, proximal and distant aneurysm extent, anesthesia, and concomitant procedures were adjusted. There were 515 (28.34%) and 1302 (71.66%) patients with and without PAS, respectively, who underwent EVAR for complex AAA. Patients with and without PAS had comparable 30-day mortality (3.11% vs 3.00%, aOR = 0.766, 95 CI = 0.407-1.442, p = .41). Organ system complications including cardiac complications, stroke, pulmonary complications, and renal complications were comparable between patients with and without PAS. All other 30-day outcomes were similar between groups. However, patients with PAS had higher 30-day readmission rate (11.65% vs 7.14%, aOR = 1.634, 95 CI = 1.145-2.331, p = .01). While PAS has high prevalence among patients undergoing EVAR for complex AAA, it does not impact 30-day mortality and morbidities. Thus, EVAR for complex AAA can be considered safe for patients with PAS in terms of short-term outcomes, despite the long-term prognosis in these patients being needed in further studies.

The Role of Narrow Aortic Bifurcation in Affecting EVAR Treatment and Outcomes

The narrow aortic bifurcation (NAB) is considered a risk factor for endograft thrombosis after aorto-biiliac endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for aortic or iliac aneurysm. Nowadays, no consensus on the threshold diameter for the definition of NAB is reached and other aortic bifurcation features are rarely considered. The aim of the study is to assess the EVAR outcomes using bifurcated endograft according to anatomical characteristics of aortic bifurcation. The study included patients treated with primary EVAR from 2016 to 2022. A retrospective analysis of single-center prospectively collected database was performed. Patients were classified in standard aortic bifurcation (SAB) (aortic bifurcation diameter >20mm), NAB (≤20mm and >16mm), and extremely NAB (eNAB) (≤16mm). The 3 groups were compared in terms of patient demographics, risk factors, procedure setting (elective or urgent/emergent), and type of deployed endograft. In NAB and eNAB groups, severe calcification (SC) and length of stenotic aortic bifurcation >10mm (long-NAB) were assessed from preoperative imaging. In SAB, NAB, and eNAB groups, following outcomes were evaluated: rate of intraoperative iliac endograft stenting (unilateral or kissing stenting), primary patency (PP), freedom from endograft-related reintervention, and overall survival during follow-up. The total number of deployed aorto-biiliac endografts was 365 (mean age: 76.6±7.4 years; male 89.3%): SAB 298 (81.6%), NAB 57 (15.6%), and eNAB 10 (2.7%) cases. Female gender, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, and active smokers were more frequent in patients with smaller aortic bifurcation diameter (P=0.002, 0.039, and 0.010, respectively). In NAB and eNAB groups, SC was reported in 18/67 cases (26.9%) and long-NAB in 15/67 cases (25.4%). Patients with eNAB have more frequent SC of aortic bifurcation (60% vs. NAB 21.1%, P=0.018) and long-NAB (50% vs. NAB 17.5%, P=0.023). In SAB, NAB, and eNAB, intraoperative iliac endograft stenting was performed in 34/298 (11.4%), 9/57(15.8%), and 5/10 (50%), respectively (P=0.001). Kissing stenting was performed more frequently in groups with smaller aortic bifurcation diameter (P=0.010). Mean follow-up was 30.2±21.5 months. At 1, 3, and 5years, PP was 98.5%, 96.6%, and 95.6%, respectively. eNAB had lower rate of PP compared to NAB group (P=0.030). Long-NAB had lower rate of PP (P=0.035). At 1, 3, and 5years, endograft-related reintervention was 96.8%, 86.7%, and 76.7%, respectively, with no differences between 3 groups (P=0.423). At 1, 3, and 5years, survival was 92.5%, 77.6%, and 58.1%, respectively, with no difference between SAB, NAB, and eNAB (P=0.673). Female gender, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, and active smokers have more frequently smaller aortic bifurcation diameter. eNAB patients have more challenging anatomical characteristics compared with NAB group, requiring higher rate of intraoperative stenting, especially kissing stenting. Mid-term PP seems to be negatively influenced by aortic bifurcation ≤16mm and long-NAB.

Midterm outcomes of endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm using the cuff-first technique to prevent type II endoleaks

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the initial and midterm outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using the cuff-first technique (CFT) to prevent type II endoleak (T2EL). MethodsCFT involves deploying an aortic cuff inside the AAA to cover the ostium of the aortic side branch vessels before deploying the main body. We performed a retrospective review of all patients undergoing EVAR with CFT or side branch embolization (SBE) for AAAs at The Jikei University Hospital between 2016 and 2022. Primary endpoint was the rate of aneurysm sac shrinkage. Secondary endpoints were procedure time, radiation exposure, technical and clinical success rates, occurrence of T2EL, and freedom from reintervention or aneurysm-related death. ResultsOf 406 patients who underwent EVAR for AAAs, CFT was utilized in 56 (CFT group) and SBE in 35 (SBE group); all 91 patients were included in this study. There were no differences in patient demographics between groups, but there were differences in patency rate of the inferior mesenteric artery and absent intraluminal thrombus. The technical success rate per target vessel in the CFT and SBE group was 97.8% and 91.8%, and the clinical success rate was 91.0% and 100%, respectively. The median procedure time was shorter for CFT than for SBE: CFT, 10 (interquartile range [IQR], 6-14) minutes vs SBE, 25 (IQR, 18.5-45) minutes; P < .05), and median radiation exposure was lower for CFT than for SBE (CFT, 1455 (IQR, 840-2634) mGy vs SBE, 2353 (IQR, 1552-3586) mGy; P < .05). During the median follow-up of 25 months (IQR, 12.5-47 months), sac shrinkage occurred at similar rates in both groups (CFT, 37.5% vs SBE, 40.0%; P = .812), and there were no differences in freedom from reintervention (CFT, 96.2% and 91.4% at 12 and 36 months vs SBE, 100% and 89.5% at 12 and 36 months; log-rank P = .761) and freedom from aneurysm-related death (100% at 36 months in both groups; log-rank P = .440). The odds ratio of CFT vs SBE for sac regression was calculated by adjusting for inferior mesenteric artery patency and absent intraluminal thrombus, resulting in no statistical significance (odds ratio, 1.231; 95% confidence interval, 0.486-3.122). ConclusionsCFT is feasible with a shorter procedure time and lower radiation exposure than SBE and comparable mid-term outcomes, including sac shrinkage rate, compared with SBE. We believe that CFT, if anatomically suitable, is an alternative to SBE for the prevention of T2EL during EVAR.

Early and midterm outcomes of EVAR with 34 and 36 mm large endograft sizes: A single tertiary center study

Aim: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become a preferred method for accessing anatomically suitable abdominal aortic aneurysms in recent years. Advances in techniques and materials have led to the management of more challenging cases. Anatomical difficulties in the structure of the aneurysm neck can adversely affect the success of the procedure. In this study, we aimed to evaluate early and midterm outcomes in patients with wide-necked infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms treated with 34 mm or 36 mm EVAR endografts. Material and Methods: We evaluated infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms treated with 34 mm or 36 mm long EVAR allografts between January 2019 and January 2023 at Ankara Bilkent City Hospital Cardiovascular Surgery Clinic. We included and assessed patients with a neck diameter of 28 mm or greater using follow-up computed tomography angiography (CTA). We evaluated early and midterm morbidity and mortality as well as endovascular complications such as endoleak or migration. Results: A total of 58 patients with wide-neck infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms underwent 34 mm or 36 mm EVAR endograft deployment. There was no early mortality. The mean follow-up period was 21.7±6.4 months. Eight patients were found to have endoleaks—four had type 2 endoleaks, two had type 1b endoleaks, one had type 3 endoleak and one had type 1a endoleak. Except for type 2 endoleaks, all patients underwent endovascular reintervention. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated the successful application of 34 mm or 36 mm long endografts to patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms with a wide neck diameter. Regarding the midterm outcomes, standard EVAR procedures with large endografts are feasible and have successful outcomes.

Long Term Outcomes of the Gore Excluder Low Permeability Endoprosthesis for the Treatment of Infrarenal Aortic Aneurysms

This study evaluated the long term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair using the Gore Excluder Low Permeability (LP) endoprosthesis across high volume Dutch hospitals. A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients treated with the Excluder LP for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in four hospitals between 2004 and 2017. Primary outcomes were overall survival, freedom from re-interventions (overall, inside and outside instructions for use, IFU), and AAA sac dynamics: growth (> 5 mm), stabilisation, and regression (< 5 mm). Secondary outcomes were technical success (device deployment), procedural parameters, and re-interventions. Follow up visits were extracted from patient files, with imaging assessed for complications and AAA diameter. Five hundred and fourteen patients were enrolled, with a median (IQR) follow up of 5.0 (2.9, 6.9) years. Survival rates were 94.0% at one year, 73.0% at five years, and 37.0% at 10 years, with freedom from re-interventions of 89.0%, 79.0%, and 71.0%, respectively. 37.9% were treated outside IFU, leading to significantly more re-interventions over 10 years compared with those treated inside IFU (36.0% vs. 25.0%, respectively; p= .044). The aneurysm sac regressed by 53.5% at one year, 65.8% at five years, and 77.8% at 10 years, and grew by 9.8%, 14.3%, and 22.2%, respectively. Patients with one year sac growth had significantly worse survival (p= .047). Seven patients (1.4%) had a ruptured aneurysm during follow up. Over 15 years, type 1a endoleak occurred in 5.3%, type 1b in 3.1%, type 3 in 1.9%, type 4 in 0.2%, and type 2 in 35.6% of patients. This multicentre study of real world endovascular aneurysm repair data using the Gore Excluder LP endoprosthesis demonstrated robust long term survival and re-intervention rates, despite 37.9% of patients being treated outside IFU, with type 4 endoleak being rare. Treatment outside IFU significantly increased re-intervention rates and one year sac growth was associated with statistically significantly worse survival.

The impact of endovascular stents types on perioperative outcomes of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: a single-center experience.

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) represents a critically urgent vascular surgical condition, and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a clinically effective treatment option. This study aims to investigate whether the type of intravascular graft used for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms has an impact on perioperative outcomes of EVAR. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent EVAR for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm at a single medical center from 2019 to 2022. Patients who required simultaneous stent implantation in the renal arteries or visceral arteries, as well as those with ruptured aneurysms located in the para-renal, supra-renal, or thoracoabdominal regions, were excluded from the analysis. Additionally, patients who underwent open surgery during the initial procedure or converted to open repair were excluded. The primary endpoint was perioperative mortality rate. Other study outcomes included perioperative complications, reoperation rates, and length of hospital stay. Characteristics and corresponding outcomes of patients receiving different endovascular stent treatments were compared using SPSS software. A total of 58 patients received treatment with two types of endovascular stents: Gore Excluder (n = 29) and Microport Hercules (n = 29). The number of other endografts was too small for statistical analysis. Compared to patients treated with Hercules, those treated with Excluder had a significantly increased likelihood of concomitant coronary atherosclerosis (P = 0.009) and potentially higher creatinine levels (P = 0.014). Additionally, Excluder was more commonly used in patients with shorter aneurysm necks (P < 0.001). There was a statistically significant difference in overall mortality between the two groups (Hercules 27.6%, Excluder 6.9%, P = 0.037). Furthermore, patients who received Excluder treatment had lower mortality rates in subgroups of non-alcohol users (P = 0.028), non-diabetic patients (P = 0.027), and patients with dispersed thrombosis at the proximal neck (P = 0.046). In the multivariate analysis, the type of stent used (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.00-1.31) and the occurrence of intraoperative complications (OR 20.70, 95% CI 1.14-76.70) in patients with rAAA was identified as an independent risk factor for perioperative mortality. Our study suggests that the management of intraoperative complications may be a modifiable factor that can improve outcomes. Patients receiving Excluder treatment demonstrated better performance in EVAR for single-center rAAA patients compared to other endovascular stents, and this difference warrants further investigation.

Locoregional Anesthesia Has Lower Risks of Cardiac Complications Than General Anesthesia After Prolonged Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

ObjectivesWhile general anesthesia is the primary anesthesia in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), some studies suggested locoregional anesthesia could be a feasible alternative for eligible patients. However, most evidence was from retrospective studies and was subjected to an inherent selection bias that general anesthesia is often chosen for more complex and prolonged cases. To mitigate this selection bias, this study aimed to compare 30-day outcomes of prolonged non-emergent intact infrarenal EVAR in patients undergoing locoregional or general anesthesia. In addition, risk factors associated with prolonged operative time in EVAR were identified. Designretrospective large-scale national registry study. SettingAmerican College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) targeted database from 2012-2022 Participants4075 out of 16,438 (24.79%) patients had prolonged EVAR. Among patients with prolonged EVAR, 324 (7.95%) were under locoregional anesthesia. There were 3,751 (92.05%) under general anesthesia, where 955 of them were matched to the locoregional anesthesia cohort. InterventionsPatients undergoing infrarenal EVAR were included. Exclusion criteria included age<18 years, emergency cases, ruptured AAA, and acute intraoperative conversion to open. Only cases with prolonged operative times (>157 minutes) were selected. A 1:3 propensity-score matching was used to address demographics, baseline characteristics, aneurysm diameter, distant aneurysm extent, and concomitant procedures between patients under locoregional and general anesthesia. Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were assessed. Moreover, factors associated with prolonged EVAR were identified by multivariable logistic regression. Measurements and Main ResultsExcept for general anesthesia contraindications, patients undergoing locoregional or general anesthesia exhibited largely similar preoperative characteristics. After propensity-score matching, patients under locoregional and general anesthesia had a lower risk of myocardial infarction (0.93% vs 2.83%, p=0.04) but comparable 30-day mortality (3.72% vs 2.72%, p=0.35) and other complications. Specific concomitant procedures, aneurysm anatomy, and comorbidities associated with prolonged EVAR were identified. ConclusionsLocoregional anesthesia can be a safe and effective alternative to general anesthesia, particularly in EVAR cases with anticipated complexity and prolonged operative times, as it offers the potential benefit of reduced cardiac complications. Risk factors associated with prolonged EVAR can aid in preoperative risk stratification and inform the decision-making process regarding anesthesia choice.

Long-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Repair Within and Outside the Instructions for Use in Korean Patients With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been used worldwide to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Outcomes after EVAR within and outside the instruction for use (IFU) remain controversial. We analyzed long-term outcomes of EVAR within-the-IFU compared with that outside-the-IFU and baseline clinical/anatomical characteristics that influence outcomes of EVAR. The study included 546 patients who underwent EVAR for infrarenal AAA from 1997 to 2021 at 2 Korean medical centers. The primary endpoint was graft-related adverse events (GRAEs), including type 1 or 3 endoleak, reintervention (included open conversion), aneurysm sac enlargement, aneurysm-related mortality (ARM), rupture, stent-graft migration, and stent thrombotic occlusion. The patients who underwent EVAR outside the IFU were 287 (52.6%). A neck angle of >60° was most common outside the IFU criteria (n=146, 50.9%). This study revealed that patients outside the IFU had a higher rate of GRAEs compared with patients within the IFU (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.879; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.045-2.386). A neck angle of >60° was a significant risk factor for GRAEs (adjusted HR: 2.229; 95% CI: 1.418-3.503), type 1 or 3 endoleak (adjusted HR: 2.640; 95% CI: 1.343-5.189), and reintervention (adjusted HR: 1.891; 95% CI: 1.055-3.388). Our study revealed EVAR with outside the IFU was associated with increased GRAEs, mainly attributed to endoleak and ARM, compared with EVAR with within the IFU. In addition, severe neck angulation was an independent risk factor for GRAEs, type 1 or 3 endoleak, and reintervention. Our study revealed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with outside-the-instruction for use (IFU) was associated with increased graft-related adverse events (GRAEs) compared with EVAR with within-the-IFU. In the low-risk population, the incidence of GRAEs and Aneurysm related mortality were higher in the outside-the-IFU group rather than within-the-IFU group. In addition, severe neck angulation was an independent risk factor for GRAEs, type 1 or 3 endoleak and reintervention.

Procedural and long-term outcomes of elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians

The aim of the study was to compare the immediate and long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) between patients under and over the age of 80 with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). From 2011 to 2017, we conducted a retrospective cohort study with AAA patients who received elective EVAR. Primary outcomes included hospital mortality, length of stay, acute kidney injury, and the need for re-interventions. Secondary outcomes included aneurysm-related mortality, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischemia, and prolonged mechanical ventilation. A total of 77 (62.6%) patients under the age of 80 years old and 46 (37.4%) octogenarians were included in the study. The male gender and AAA diameter did not differ among groups (92.2% vs. 82.6%, p = 0.11 and 5.4 cm [4.9-6.2 cm] vs. 5.4 cm [5-6 cm], p = 0.53, respectively). The younger patients had a higher prevalence of tobacco use (72.7% vs. 41.7%, p = 0.01). There were no deaths during the index hospitalization. The incidence of reinterventions (5.3% vs. 15.2%, p = 0.11) and acute kidney injury (14.3% vs. 23.9%, p = 0.18) did not differ between groups, but the length of stay was longer for octogenarian patients (3 days [2-4] vs. 2 days [2-3, p = 0.04)]. Endoleaks were the most common cause for re-interventions (81.8%), with a prevalence of 34% across the entire cohort. There were no differences in any of the secondary outcomes between groups. In octogenarian patients with AAA, EVAR represents a safe procedure both during the index hospitalization and during long-term follow-up.

Long-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Patients Aged ≤70 Years.

Objectives: The efficacy of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) against abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in younger patients remains unknown. Hence, the current study aimed to investigate whether the aneurysm-related mortality rate of EVAR is acceptable among patients aged ≤70 years. Methods: Among 644 patients, 148 underwent EVAR (EVAR group), and 496 received open surgical repair (OSR group). The cumulative incidence rates of aneurysm-related death, any intervention, and serious aneurysm-related events after AAA repair were evaluated using the cumulative incidence function in the presence of competing risks. Results: The EVAR group had higher prevalences of several comorbidities, and overall survival for the EVAR group was significantly inferior to that of the OSR group. The cumulative incidence rates of aneurysm-related death, any intervention, and serious aneurysm-related events at 5 years were 1.5%, 11.7%, and 6.4% in the EVAR group and 1.3%, 5.3%, and 5.9% in the OSR group, respectively. EVAR was not a significant prognostic factor of aneurysm-related mortality and serious aneurysm-related events. However, it was an independent poor prognostic factor of any intervention. Conclusion: EVAR was not a significant prognostic factor of aneurysm-related mortality and serious aneurysm-related events. Therefore, it demonstrated acceptable procedure-related long-term outcomes, at least in high-risk young patients.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Anticoagulation on Outcomes After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

Our objective was to investigate whether patients who receive anticoagulation therapy have different outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) from those who do not. We conducted a systematic review of studies that compared outcomes of EVAR in patients who were on therapeutic anticoagulation vs those who were not. We developed and reported the review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines with a registered protocol (CRD42022375894). The Ovid interface was used to search Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to November 2022. The quality of studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) (maximum score=9), and the evidence was appraised with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was the effect estimate in time-to-event meta-analyses, calculated using the inverse-variance statistical method and random-effects models. Sixteen studies qualified for inclusion reporting a total of 35 739 individuals. Anticoagulated patients had a statistically significantly higher hazard of death (HR=1.93, 95% CI=1.03-3.63), endoleak (HR=2.13, 95% CI=1.55-2.93), reintervention (HR=1.79, 95% CI=1.27-2.52), and aneurysm sac expansion (HR=2.72, 95% CI=1.57-4.72) than patients not receiving anticoagulation therapy. The median score on the NOS was 7 (range=4-9). The certainty of evidence was very low for mortality and reintervention and low for endoleak and sac expansion. Anticoagulation is a poor prognostic factor after standard EVAR and should be considered in decision-making, consent processes, and surveillance strategies. The number of individuals who take anticoagulation treatment has been rapidly increasing over the recent years. We aimed to investigate the effect of such treatment on outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Anticoagulated patients were found to have increased mortality, endoleak, and reintervention rates after EVAR compared to their non-anticoagulated counterparts. Anticoagulation therapy has a prognostic role in EVAR and should be considered in decision making and EVAR surveillance. Anticoagulated patients need to be informed of the higher failure rates of EVAR, and intensified surveillance strategies may need to be implemented in this patient cohort.

The impact of large proximal aortic neck on endovascular aneurysm repair outcomes

Background: This study aims to investigate the effect of large proximal aortic neck diameter on post-endovascular aneurysm repair clinical outcomes. Methods: A total of 180 patients (168 males, 12 females; mean age: 69.9±7.4 years; range, 46 to 88 years) who underwent elective endovascular aneurysm repair between June 2016 and September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the proximal infrarenal aortic neck diameter, the patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 (&lt;25 mm; normal aortic neck) and Group 2 (≥25 mm; pre-aneurysmatic aortic neck). Patient characteristics, proximal infrarenal aortic neck diameter measurements with computed tomography angiography, and clinical outcomes were recorded. The primary endpoint was to assess post-endovascular aneurysm repair aortic neck dilatation, mortality, endoleaks, overall survival, type 1a endoleaks-free survival, and eventfree survival regarding the groups. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in early mortality (p=0.55) and type 1a endoleak incidence between the groups (p=0.55). In Group 1, the mean change in diameter A (proximal infrarenal level) was 2.89±1.74 mm (p=0.01), and it was 2.31±2.1 mm in diameter B (proximal pre-aneurysm-sac level) (p=0.01). The mean change in Group 2 was 2.8±3.4 mm for diameter A (p&lt;0.01) and 2.22±2.3 mm for diameter B (p&lt;0.01). Aortic neck dilatation rates were similar between the groups (p=0.82 for diameter A; p=0.78 for diameter B). The five-year survival, event-free survival, and type 1a endoleak-free survival were also similar (p=0.54, p=0.26, p=0.24, respectively). Conclusion: Our study results showed that patients with &lt;25 mm and ≥25-mm aortic neck diameters had similar mid-term results and aortic neck dilatation ratio. Endovascular aneurysm repair outcomes can be improved with careful patient and graft selection, and early intervention for complications.

Early and Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair With Zenith Alpha Abdominal Stent-Graft: Results From a Multicenter Retrospective Tuscany Registry.

Zenith Alpha Abdominal (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) is one of the new-generation low-profile stent-grafts with demonstrated satisfactory early and midterm clinical outcomes for endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The aim was to evaluate early and midterm results of this device in the framework of a multicenter regional retrospective registry, with the analysis of morphological factors affecting outcomes, including different limb configurations. Between January 2016 and November 2021, 202 patients with AAA underwent elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with implantation of a Zenith Alpha Abdominal in 7 centers. Early (30 day) outcomes in terms of technical and clinical success were assessed. Estimated 5 year outcomes were evaluated in terms of survival, freedom from type I/III endoleak, freedom from surgical conversion, freedom from limb graft occlusion, freedom from any device-related reintervention, and graft infection evaluation by life-table analysis (Kaplan-Meier test). A comparative analysis between different limb configurations (Zenith Spiral Z AAA iliac legs, codes ZISL vs ZSLE) was performed in terms of limb graft occlusion. The 30 day technical and clinical success rates were 97.5% and 99.5%, respectively. Median follow-up period was 25.5 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 12-43.25). The 5 year survival rate was 73.6%. The estimated 5 year outcomes in terms of freedom from type I/III endoleak, freedom from surgical conversion, freedom from limb graft occlusion, freedom from any device-related reintervention, and freedom from graft infection were 88.6% (95% CI [confidence interval]: 83.4%-93.1%), 95.8% (95% CI: 92.7%-97.1%), 93.6% (95% CI: 90.2%-96.8%), 87% (95% CI: 83.3%-91.6%), and 97.7% (95% CI: 95.1%-98.9%), respectively. About limb configuration, no differences were found in terms of 5 year freedom from limb graft occlusion (ZSLE 93.4% [95% CI: 89.8%-95.5%] vs ZISL 94.3% [95% CI: 90.1%-95.9%], p=0.342; log-rank 0.903). Zenith Alpha Abdominal in elective EVAR offered satisfactory early and 5 year outcomes with low complication rates. Limb graft occlusion continued to be an issue. Limb configuration did not affect outcomes. The authors describe satisfactory early and 5 year outcomes of Zenith Alpha Abdominal in elective endovascular aortic repair in the framework of a multicenter regional retrospective registry. At 5 years freedom from type I endoleak was 88.6%, and rate of endograft infections and conversions to open repair were very low. in the present study. Hot topic about about Zenith stent-graft still remains the limb graft occlusion with a 30-day overall rate of 2%, and estimated 5-year freedom from limb graft occlusion of 93.6%. Limb graft configuration did not affect limb graft occlusion rate. A standardized protocol including iliac stenting should be adopted to reduce kimb graft occlusion.

Five-year results of the LEOPARD trial of commercially available endografts

ObjectiveThe LEOPARD (Looking at EVAR Outcomes by Primary Analysis of Randomized Data) trial is a randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using commercially available devices in a real-world population. MethodsA prospective, randomized, multi-center trial was performed to compare the anatomically fixated (AF) AFX/AFX2 endograft system (Endologix) with endografts with proximal fixation (PF) (Cook Medical Zenith Flex; Gore Excluder; and Medtronic Endurant II) in patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. The primary endpoint was freedom from aneurysm-related complications (ARCs), a composite endpoint consisting of perioperative death (≤30 days), aneurysm rupture, conversion to open surgical repair, postoperative endoleaks, endograft migration (≥10 mm), aneurysm enlargement (≥5 mm), endograft limb occlusion, and device- or aneurysm-related reintervention. ResultsThe study population was 455 patients enrolled at 56 United States centers: 235 patients were treated with AF devices and 220 with PF devices. The primary endpoint supported noninferiority of the AF cohort at 1 year. The 5-year freedom from ARC Kaplan-Meier estimates were 63.8% for AF patients and 55.5% for PF patients (P = .10). Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from aneurysm-related mortality were 98.7% and 97.0% in the AF group and 99.5% and 98.5% in the PF group at 1 and 5 years. There was no difference in aneurysm-related mortality, all-cause mortality, rupture, secondary interventions, and type I and type III endoleak between the two cohorts. The type III endoleak rate at 5 years for the AFX cohort was 1.5% and 0.0% for the comparator cohort (P = .11). There was a lower type II endoleak rate in the AF group at 5 years (78.8% vs 68.4%; P = .037). There were zero open surgical conversions (0.0%) in the AF group and four (2.0%) in the PF group. ConclusionsThe 5-year results from the LEOPARD study demonstrated that there was no clinically significant difference in overall aneurysm-related outcomes between patients randomized to the AFX endograft system or commercially available endografts with proximal fixation.