Outcomes Of Endovascular Aortic Repair Research Articles

Factors Associated with Increased Fluoroscopy Time During Elective Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair and its Utilization as an Indicator of Intraoperative and Postoperative Outcomes

ObjectivesThis study explores the impact of prolonged fluoroscopy time (FT) on outcomes in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). While total operative time includes multiple variables, FT precisely captures the technical precision of the EVAR procedure. By examining the factors that extend FT, we aim to establish FT as a critical quality metric for evaluating surgical performance and predicting postoperative outcomes. MethodsA retrospective review of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) was conducted (2003-2021). The FT was studied based on a median dichotomy of ≤18 mins (Group I) and >18 mins (Group II). Primary outcomes of in-hospital mortality and discharge status were studied, along with numerous secondary outcomes pertaining to systemic complications. Factors associated with more extended FT were also measured. All the variables examined in multivariate analyses were estimated in odds ratios, and a p-value of <0.05 was deemed significant for all the analyses performed. Results41,841 patients were studied, of which 20,339 were categorized in Group I and 21,502 in Group II. The average fluoroscopy time in the selected patients was reported to be 23.2 minutes. Patients in Group II generally had overall poorer health status with multiple comorbidities and on various medications. Aortic aneurysm parameters can influence the FT, including the greater aorta-neck angle, neck angle, neck diameter, and neck length. Patients treated by high-volume surgeons were observed to have less likelihood of prolonged FT. On trends analysis, it was observed that the FT has been consistent over the study period. ConclusionVarious factors can influence the FT in patients undergoing EVAR, including the patient characteristics and the complexity of the aneurysm. Identifying the risk factors associated with prolonged FT can help prepare the surgeons and devise ways to ensure a high quality of care, better risk stratification, and enhanced safety, especially for more prolonged exposure to radiation and contrast volumes.

Type III Endoleak Incidence and Outcomes in Endovascular Aortic Repair: Comparison of Anatomical and Proximal Fixation Devices.

To evaluate the influence of endograft fixation type on the incidence, treatment, and outcomes of type III endoleaks (TIIIELs). Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) treated with bifurcated endografts between 1994 and 2020 were prospectively collected and reviewed. The endograft included were classified as "Anatomical Fixation" (AF) (Powerlink [Endologix] and AFX [Endologix]) or "Proximal Fixation" (PF). The primary outcome was the incidence of TIIIEL over time, stratified by fixation type. Secondary outcomes included between-group comparisons of baseline characteristics, intraoperative details during TIIIEL correction, and survival analysis after TIIIEL diagnosis. A total of 2065 endovascular aneurysm repairs were performed: 872 (42.2%) with AF and 1193 (57.8%) with PF devices. The estimated incidence of TIIIEL at 1, 5, and 10 years was 0.4%, 4.2%, and 7.3%, and 0.5%, 3.2%, and 4.6% for AF and PF, respectively (p=0.157), and fixation type was not associated with TIIIEL development in the competing risk regression model (p=0.101). The cumulative overall survival rate in patients diagnosed with TIIIEL did not differ significantly between the groups (p=0.077). The rate of recurrent TIIIELs was significantly lower in the AF group (7.1% vs 22.7%; p=0.044); however, no significant difference was found in secondary reintervention between the two groups (11.9% vs 27.3%, p=0.074). Patients with angulated and calcified aortic neck (SHR 3.4, 95% CI 1.2-9.6, p=0.022) and larger aneurysms (SHR 1.2; 95% CI 1.1-1.3; p<0.001) had a higher risk of TIIIEL. Likewise, the use of three or more endograft components increased the risk of TIIIEL by 3.1 times (SHR 3.1; 95% CI 1.7-5.4; p<0.001). The occurrence of TIIIELs was not affected by the type of endograft fixation. For larger abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) and aneurysms with angulated and calcified aortic necks, there is a higher likelihood of developing TIIIELs during follow-up, regardless of the endograft type used. The type of fixation does not influence the incidence of TIII ELs. EVAR in larger AAAs and aneurysms with angulated and calcified aortic necks have a higher risk of developing TIII EL. Moreover, the risk of TIII EL is considerably increased by the use of three or more modular components.

Use of Artificial Intelligence With Deep Learning Approaches for the Follow-up of Infrarenal Endovascular Aortic Repair.

Endoleaks represent one of the main complications after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and can lead to increased re-intervention rates and secondary rupture. Serial lifelong surveillance is required and traditionally involves cross-sectional imaging with manual axial measurements. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based imaging analysis has been developed and may provide a more precise and faster assessment. This study aims to evaluate the ability of an AI-based software to assess post-EVAR morphological changes over time, detect endoleaks, and associate them with EVAR-related adverse events. Patients who underwent EVAR at a tertiary hospital from January 2017 to March 2020 with at least 2 follow-up computed tomography angiography (CTA) were analyzed using PRAEVAorta 2 (Nurea). The software was compared to the ground truth provided by human experts using Sensitivity (Se), Specificity (Sp), Negative Predictive Value (NPV), and Positive Predictive Value (PPV). Endovascular aortic repair-related adverse events were defined as aneurysm-related death, rupture, endoleak, limb occlusion, and EVAR-related re-interventions. Fifty-six patients were included with a median imaging follow-up of 27 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 20-40). There were no significant differences overtime in the evolution of maximum aneurysm diameters (55.62 mm [IQR: 52.33-59.25] vs 54.34 mm [IQR: 46.13-59.47]; p=0.2162) or volumes (130.4 cm3 [IQR: 113.8-171.7] vs 125.4 cm3 [IQR: 96.3-169.1]; p=0.1131) despite a -13.47% decrease in the volume of thrombus (p=0.0216). PRAEVAorta achieved a Se of 89.47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 80.58 to 94.57), a Sp of 91.25% (95% CI: 83.02 to 95.70), a PPV of 90.67% (95% CI: 81.97 to 95.41), and an NPV of 90.12% (95% CI: 81.70 to 94.91) in detecting endoleaks. Endovascular aortic repair-related adverse events were associated with global volume modifications with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.7806 vs 0.7277 for maximum diameter. The same trend was observed for endoleaks (AUC of 0.7086 vs 0.6711). The AI-based software PRAEVAorta enabled a detailed anatomic characterization of aortic remodeling post-EVAR and showed its potential interest for automatic detection of endoleaks during follow-up. The association of aortic aneurysmal volume with EVAR-related adverse events and endoleaks was more robust compared with maximum diameter. The integration of PRAEVAorta AI software into clinical practice promises a transformative shift in post-EVAR surveillance. By offering precise and rapid detection of endoleaks and comprehensive anatomic assessments, clinicians can expect enhanced diagnostic accuracy and streamlined patient management. This innovation reduces reliance on manual measurements, potentially reducing interpretation errors and shortening evaluation times. Ultimately, PRAEVAorta's capabilities hold the potential to optimize patient care, leading to more timely interventions and improved outcomes in endovascular aortic repair.

Survival, Short And Long-Term Outcomes Of Open And Endovascular Surgical Repair Of Unruptured Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

Endovascular Aortic Repair (EVAR) has become the standard management of Unruptured Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (UIAAA); however, current evidence is limited and uncertain in our environment compared to Open repair. Our study aimed to determine the survival, short and long-term outcomes of EVAR vs. Open in a Peruvian cohort of UIAAA. A single-center observational, analytical, longitudinal study using a retrospective registry of 251 patients treated (EVAR=205 vs Open=46) for UIAAA from 2000 to 2017. Variables considered were baseline, comorbidities, type of treatment, short-term (<30 days) and long-term (<5 years) outcomes, postoperative mortality according to the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) Risk Score, survival curves including reoperation-free rate and according to size (<65 mm vs. >65 mm) of long-term UIAAA. All variables were grouped according to the treatment performed (EVAR vs. Open) and we used the descriptive, multivariate, Cox regression, and Kaplan-Meier survival statistical analyses. 251 UIAAA were evaluated and the mean age was 74.5 years [±13.32], smoking, family members with UIAAA, and previous abdominal surgery were the main antecedents. Diabetes mellitus 2 was the main comorbidity; more than 50% of patients with UIAAA had diameters greater than 65 mm (p=0.021). The calculated mortality (VQI) was Open=2.21% vs. EVAR=1.65%. The outcomes in short-term were mortality (Open=2.92% vs. EVAR=0%; p=0.039), blood transfusion >4 Units (Open=72.68% vs. EVAR=17.39%; p=0.021) and overall hospital stay (Open=14 vs. EVAR=5 days; p=0.049. A reduction in mortality (HR 0.76, 95% CI, 0.62-0.96, p=0.045) and readmission for aneurysmal rupture was identified for EVAR (HR 0.81, 95% CI, 0.79-0.85, p=0.031). In long-term outcomes, mortality (Open=3.41% vs. EVAR=19.56%; p=0.047), aneurysmal rupture (Open=0% vs. EVAR 13.04%; p=0.032) and reinterventions (Open=2.43% vs. EVAR=10.86%; p=0.002). An 86% risk of mortality (HR 1.86, 95% CI, 1.32-2.38, p=0.039) and elevated risk of readmission for aneurysmal rupture was identified for EVAR (HR 2.21, 95% CI, 1.98-2.45, p=0.028). At 5 years, survival for Open=93.67% vs. EVAR=80.44% (p=0.043), reintervention-free survival for Open=89.26% vs. EVAR=47.82% (p=0.021), survival for treated IUAAA <65 mm for Open=95.77% vs. EVAR=63.63% (p=0.019) and >65 mm for Open=92.53% vs. EVAR=85.71% (p=0.059). EVAR has shown better short-term benefits and survival than Open management; however, the latter still prevails in the long term in our Peruvian UIAAA cohort. Further follow-up studies are required to demonstrate the long-term benefit of EVAR in our population.

Low-profile versus standard-profile stent grafts in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a case-matched study.

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is nowadays a widespread method of managing abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Low-profile stent grafts (LPSGs) enable treatment of patients with complex and anatomically challenging aneurysms, and facilitate a percutaneous and thus less invasive procedure. To assess the outcomes of EVAR with low-profile versus standard-profile stent grafts (SPSGs). Thirty-one patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) were treated by endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) using LPSGs. The control group of patients treated with SPSGs was matched with MedCalc software. The clinical records and the preoperative and follow-up computed tomography angiography of patients who underwent endovascular treatment of AAA were included in this study. Patients in the LPSG group had significantly more often low access vessel diameter (< 6 mm) compared to the SPSG group (38.7% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.003). In 1-year follow-up, there was no rupture, no infection, no conversion to open repair and no aneurysm-related death. Five secondary interventions were necessary in the SPSG group and only 1 in the LPSG group (p = 0.09). Type of stent graft was not a risk factor of perioperative complications, presence of endoleak or reintervention (p > 0.05). Risk factors for perioperative complications were COPD and conical neck (OR = 6.3, 95% CI: 1.5-25, p = 0.01 and OR = 6.2, 95% CI: 1-39.76, p = 0.04). The risk factor for endoleak was lower maximal aneurysm diameter. The risk factor for reintervention was proximal neck diameter (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.-0.97, p = 0.03). Our study showed that use of LPSGs is a safe and viable method for patients with narrow access vessels who are not eligible for standard-profile systems.

Outcomes After Endovascular Aortic Intervention in Patients With Connective Tissue Disease

Endovascular treatment is not recommended for aortic pathologies in patients with connective tissue diseases (CTDs) other than in redo operations and as bridging procedures in emergencies. However, recent developments in endovascular technology may challenge this dogma. To assess the midterm outcomes of endovascular aortic repair in patients with CTD. For this descriptive retrospective study, data on demographics, interventions, and short-term and midterm outcomes were collected from 18 aortic centers in Europe, Asia, North America, and New Zealand. Patients with CTD who had undergone endovascular aortic repair from 2005 to 2020 were included. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to November 2022. All principal endovascular aortic repairs, including redo surgery and complex repairs of the aortic arch and visceral aorta. Short-term and midterm survival, rates of secondary procedures, and conversion to open repair. In total, 171 patients were included: 142 with Marfan syndrome, 17 with Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 12 with vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (vEDS). Median (IQR) age was 49.9 years (37.9-59.0), and 107 patients (62.6%) were male. One hundred fifty-two (88.9%) were treated for aortic dissections and 19 (11.1%) for degenerative aneurysms. One hundred thirty-six patients (79.5%) had undergone open aortic surgery before the index endovascular repair. In 74 patients (43.3%), arch and/or visceral branches were included in the repair. Primary technical success was achieved in 168 patients (98.2%), and 30-day mortality was 2.9% (5 patients). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 96.2% and 80.6% for Marfan syndrome, 93.8% and 85.2% for Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 75.0% and 43.8% for vEDS, respectively. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 4.7 years (1.9-9.2), 91 patients (53.2%) had undergone secondary procedures, of which 14 (8.2%) were open conversions. This study found that endovascular aortic interventions, including redo procedures and complex repairs of the aortic arch and visceral aorta, in patients with CTD had a high rate of early technical success, low perioperative mortality, and a midterm survival rate comparable with reports of open aortic surgery in patients with CTD. The rate of secondary procedures was high, but few patients required conversion to open repair. Improvements in devices and techniques, as well as ongoing follow-up, may result in endovascular treatment for patients with CTD being included in guideline recommendations.

Outcomes of the Ankura Stent Graft for Endovascular Repair of Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

The purpose of this retrospective cohort study is to report outcomes of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with the novel endograft, Ankura (Lifetech Scientific, Shenzen, China). We identified all patients who underwent elective EVAR with Ankura stent graft in a tertiary unit from January 2015 to November 2021. Patients with ruptured infrarenal and juxtarenal aortic aneurysms were excluded from the study. All patients were anatomically suitable according to the instructions for use (IFU). Follow-up (FU) included computed tomography angiography (CTA) at 1 month, 12 months, and yearly thereafter if endoleak (EL) was not present. Primary outcomes included technical success (primary and secondary) and 30-day overall mortality and morbidity. Secondary outcomes included late overall and aneurysm-related mortality as well as influence of suprarenal fixation of the endograft on renal function at 12 months using eGFR (CKI-EPI formula). The Ankura endograft was successfully implanted in 116 patients (mean age=71.1 years, 96.5% male). Mean aneurysm diameter was 62.3 mm. Median FU was 34 months (2-72 months). Primary and secondary technical success were 95.7% and 100%, respectively. Overall type I EL was 5% (2 proximal, 3 distal) and type II EL was 13%. Thirty days mortality and morbidity were 0% and 5.2%, respectively. All-cause mortality during FU was 13.9% (n=16); aneurysm-related mortality was 2.6% (n=3). Limb endograft patency was 100%. Freedom from reintervention was 98.2% at 2 years, and 97.4% at 4 and 6 years respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between preoperative (73.69 mL/min/1.73 m2) and postoperative (66.66 mL/min/1.73 m2) eGFR at 12 months (p<0.001). Ankura endograft has demonstrated an efficacious durability with low aneurysm-related mortality and high iliac limb patency rate. Elective EVAR is associated with significant decline in renal function at 12 months in our study. Larger series studies are necessary to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy of Ankura endograft. Ankura stent graft is a novel PTFE endograft with suprarenal fixation for infrarenal aneurysm repair. This retrospective cohort study of 116 patients provide a first "picture" of Ankura safety and efficacy in a European tertiary vascular center. High technical success rate, low aneurysm related mortality and high limb patency rate are the main findings of the study with a negative impact of suprarenal fixation on kidney function during follow up.

Midterm Outcomes of Elective Endovascular Aortic Repair in Octogenarians: When Is It Too Old?

Introduction: Endovascular aortic repair outcomes in octogenarians remain unclear. We aim to investigate whether the results for octogenarians differ from those of the younger population in elective endovascular aortic repair. Materials and Methods: From January 2013 to January 2022, 313 patients were treated with elective endovascular aortic repairs. Patient demographics and perioperative and postoperative features were obtained from the hospital database. The primary goals were to explore the early mortality rates of patients aged 80 years and older and compare them with those under 80. The secondary goal was to analyze the comorbid factors. Results: A total of 245 patients were under 80 years old, and 68 patients were 80 years and older. The early mortality rate was 2.94% in the octogenarians and 0.81% in the rest, and there was no significant difference between the two (p = 0.24). However, being 80 years and older led to a significantly lower survival probability at the five-year follow-ups. The American Society of Anesthesiologists’ score was found to help predict late mortality risk and patient selection for elective endovascular aortic repair. Conclusion: As octogenarians are fragile and sensitive to complications, patient selection, careful consideration of life expectancy, and clinical assessment are key to repair. Furthermore, age should not be an independent exclusion criterion in the endovascular aortic repair treatment decision. Keywords: Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Endovascular Procedure; Octogenarians.

Using geometry and biomechanics to understand aortic pathology and endovascular aortic repair outcomes.

Aortic disorders such as dissections and aneurysms affect the structural integrity and strength of the body's major artery. Endovascular aortic repairs have become the preferred course of treatment for such disorders, where a cylindrical stent graft made of metal and fabric is inserted in the aorta to restrict blood flow away from the regions of disease. After endovascular repairs, unfavorable outcomes as a result of the aorta failing to remodel include endoleak, graft migration, neck dilation, graft kinking, and material fatigue. To better understand the interactions between the aorta and stent graft, we need to mechanistically understand how these different biological and synthetic surfaces couple and interact together. Our approach is to apply methods in differential geometry, finite element analysis, and computational fluid dynamics to 3D models of aortas generated from medical imaging. Our results show that there exists a geometric signature that correlates aortic size and shape with clinical outcomes. Additionally, aortas appear to undergo shape preserving growth during normal development; however, pathologic aortas grow with shape changes. For stent grafts to be effective, they must conform to the shape of the aorta and align against the aortic wall. In order to understand why endovascular aortic repairs fail, we capitalize on the enormous availability of medical imaging data on patients with aortic pathology. We hypothesize that geometric incompatibility between stent graft and aorta impacts the mechanical stability of the seal zone. By considering the geometry and biomechanics of the aorta, we hope to develop a risk-stratification and classification scheme to optimize outcomes by defining better patient selection for endovascular surgery and creating design rules for the next generation of stent grafts.

Endovascular Management of Aortic Arch Diseases: Current Status and Future Trends

Treatment of aortic arch (AA) diseases is challenging for surgeons. Conventional open surgery remains the “gold standard” but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality despite improvements in techniques. In the last 2 decades, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become the first-line treatment for diseases of the descending aorta, and its indications have expanded gradually. Various strategies have been proposed to preserve supra-aortic branches in TEVAR: hybrid technique, chimney technique, fenestration technique (including custom-made fenestrated or “scalloped” stent grafts, in situ fenestration, and physician-modified fenestration), and branched stent grafts. Though acceptable outcomes of endovascular aortic repair have been documented, the evidence regarding its long-term safety and efficacy is lacking, and concerns remain about the risk of cerebrovascular events, retrograde type-A dissection, endoleaks, and branch occlusion. This review discusses the current status and progress of endovascular repair of the AA, and looks toward future trends. We believe that multidisciplinary collaboration of a “HENDO” team (professionals in hybrid repair, endovascular repair, open surgery, cardiovascular anesthesia, and genetics) is essential for future repair of the AA to provide the optimal treatment.

The influence of narrow aortic bifurcation on limb graft patency: a two-center retrospective study.

Narrow aortic bifurcation (NAB) has been considered as a potential risk factor for graft limb thrombosis after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). The aim of this study was to compare mid- and long-term outcome of EVAR in patients with NAB and standard aortic bifurcation (SAB). Data from patients receiving EVAR were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. In case of angiographic limb stenosis (>50%), additional stenting was performed. Patients with a NAB (≤20mm) were included in the NAB group, the remaining patients in the SAB group. Primary endpoints were limb thrombosis rate and technical success. A total of 902 patients were included; 18.3% (N.=165/902) in the NAB and 81.7% (N.=737/902) in the SAB group. Mean follow-up time was 43 months (range 0-198 months). Bilateral stenting of the aortic bifurcation was performed in 2.7% (N.=27/902), 8.5% (N.=14/165) in the NAB and 1.4% (N.=10/737) in the SAB group (P=0.001). Limb thrombosis was found in 2.8% (N.=25/902), 3.6% (N.=6/165) in the NAB and 2.6% (N.=19/737) in the SAB group (P=0.55). Technical success was 97.8%, 98.8% in the NAB and 97.6% in the SAB group (P=0.33). Device related reintervention rate was 16% (N.=144/902), 15.2% in the NAB and 16.1% in the SAB group (P=0.75). Standard EVAR could safely be performed in patients with NAB (≤20mm) when a low threshold for additional stenting was applied. This resulted in no significant higher incidence of limb thrombosis. Additional stent deployment did not increase the complication rate.

Five-year outcomes of the Bi- versus Trimodular EndurantTM stent-graft in 100 patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic repair

Recent studies on the Endurant™ endografts mainly compared outcomes of the bimodular stent-graft to other manufacturer's endografts or reported results for cases outside manufacturer's instructions for use (IFU), while data on the experience of standard endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) inside manufacturer's IFU comparing the bi- with the trimodular device is limited. Inclusion criteria were: 1) infrarenal aneurysms (>50 mm diameter) treated by EndurantTM II (END II) or EndurantTM IIs (END IIs) stent-graft inside manufacturer's IFU; 2) available CTA with 1 mm reconstruction of the entire aorta prior to intervention. Endpoints comparing the devices included technical success, 30-day mortality, rate of complications (bleeding with conversion to open repair, stent-graft stenosis/occlusion, acute distal embolism, infection or postprocedural necessity of dialysis), endoleaks and reinterventions (5-year follow-up). Aneurysm sac diameters were compared between baseline preinterventional CTA and last post-interventional CTA. One hundred patients (90% male, mean age 74 years) treated with END II (N.=66) or END IIs (N.=34) were included. Technical success was 99%. One procedure-related active bleeding occurred ending up in surgical conversion (END II N.=1). 30d mortality was 0%. No initial type I/III endoleaks were present. Re-interventions were required in 19/100 (19%) of patients (END II N.=10; END IIs N.=9, P=0.17). The outcome of EVAR including technical success, 30d mortality, rate of complications, endoleaks and re-interventions showed no significant differences comparing END II/IIs. Five-year outcomes of EVAR show consistently safe and effective results for either END II or IIs device.

Long-term outcomes of endovascular aortic repair with flared iliac limb endografts in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm and aneurysmal common iliac arteries.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair with flared iliac limb grafts in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and aneurysmal common iliac arteries (CIAs). This is a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study that involves four tertiary referral hospitals between May 1, 2005, and April 30, 2019. Primary outcomes were freedom from aneurysm-related mortality (ARM), and freedom from iliac-related reintervention. We studied 995 aneurysmal iliac limbs in 795 (85.2%) patients who met the inclusion criteria. Median AAA diameter was 55mm (IQR: 51-60). Early mortality occurred in 3 (0.4%) patients. The median of follow-up time was 52 months (IQR: 26-88). Estimated freedom from ARM was 99±0.002% (95% CI: 99-99.9) at 1 year, and 99±0.004% (95% CI: 97.9-99.6) at 5-years. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR=6.4, 95% CI: 1.7-24.0, P=0.006), chronic kidney disease (HR=5.5, 95% CI: 1.4-21.9, P=0.016), and the presence of an aneurysmal left CIA (HR=5.3, 95% CI: 1.0.5-27.4, P=0.044) was associated with ARM. There were 42 (7.3%) late iliac-related events (limb occlusion, N.=5; iliac-related endoleaks, N.=37). Estimated freedom from iliac-related reintervention was 98±0.003% (95% CI: 97-99) at 1 year, and 95±0.01% (95% CI: 92.7-96.7) at 5-years, which was associated with an aneurysmal right CIA (HR=2.2, 95% CI: 1.3-3.9; P=0.005), and age ≥78 years (HR=1.9, 95% CI: 1.01-1.3; P=0.039). EVAR flared iliac limb grafts showed a high rate of freedom from ARM and a low reintervention rate. Owing to these results, it can be a durable and stable alternative for patients aged >78 years.

Five-year outcomes of endovascular aortic repair at 108 Military Central Hospital

Objective: To evaluate the results of endovascular surgery to treat aortic disease at 108 Military Central Hospital. Subject and method: We conducted a prospective descriptive study of 69 patients undergoing stent graft at 108 Military Central Hospital from 12/2016 to 03/2021. Result: Endpoints: Technical success rate 100% (n = 69); Survival: n = 65 (94.2%); Target vessel patency: n = 67 (97.1%); Re-intervention n = 0 (0%); 30-day in-hospital mortality: n = 3 (4.3%), Endoleak: n = 2 (2.8%), spinal cord ischemia: n = 2 (2.8%), Stroke: n = 2 (2.8%), Infection: n = 1 (1.4%). Conclusion: Endovascular repair to treat aortic disease is a safe and highly effective method. The procedure should be considered in the Hybrid operation room and performed by cardiovascular surgeon- interventional cardiologist.

Female sex is independently associated with in-hospital mortality after endovascular aortic repair for ruptured aortic aneurysm

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) can treat anatomically compatible ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA), but registry data suggests that women undergo more open abdominal aneurysm repairs than men. We evaluate in-hospital outcomes of EVAR for rAAA by sex. The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry was queried from 2013 to 2019 for rAAA patients treated with EVAR. Univariate analysis was performed with Student's t-test and chi-squared tests. Multivariable logistic regression was then performed to assess the association between female sex and inpatient mortality. A total of 1775 patients were included (23.8% female). Female rAAA patients were older (P< 0.01) and weighed less (P < 0.01). They were less likely to have smoked (P <.0 001) and had lower creatinine (1.29 vs. 1.43, P < 0.01) and hemoglobin (10.7 vs. 11.7, P < 0.01). Women had smaller maximum aortic diameters (74 vs. 66 mm, P < 0.01) and were less likely to have iliac aneurysms (P < 0.001). Women were more likely to have concomitant femoral endarterectomy (8.5% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.03). Despite having no significant difference in complication or reintervention rates, women had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (45.9% vs. 34.5%, P < 0.01). In a logistic regression model for predictors of in-hospital mortality (χ2 < .01), increased age (OR 1.08, P < 0.01), female sex (OR 1.7, P=0.02), preoperative cardiac arrest (OR 5.29, P < 0.01), concurrent iliac stenting (OR 2.38, P=0.02), postoperative mesenteric ischemia (OR 2.51, P < 0.01) and postoperative transfusion (OR 1.06, P < 0.01) were independently associated with in-hospital mortality. Increased preoperative hemoglobin was protective (OR 0.89, P < 0.01) CONCLUSIONS: Female sex is independently associated with in-hospital mortality after EVAR for rAAA, suggesting a relationship beyond anatomical, biochemical, and procedural covariates.

Early and Long-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Repair in Young and Low Surgical Risk Patients in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment

Purpose: To investigate early- and long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in young and low surgical risk patients. Methods: The global registry for endovascular aortic treatment (GREAT) was queried for all patients with AAA undergoing standard EVAR; patients were excluded if had previous AAA repair or underwent concomitant procedures. Young patients were defined if age <60; surgical risk was assessed through the validated Medicare perioperative risk score (MPRS) based on age, sex, renal function, heart failure, and peripheral vascular disease. Patients were classified as low (MPRS<3), average (MPRS 3–11), or high (MPRS>11) risk. Young versus older patients and low-risk versus average/high-risk patients were compared. The primary endpoints were early (30 days) major adverse events (MAEs), 5-year freedom from overall mortality, aortic-related mortality, and freedom from device-related reinterventions. Time-to-event endpoints were calculated by Kaplan–Meier curves. Results: Of 3217 included patients, 182 (6%) were <60 years old, 956 (30%) had a low surgical risk, 1561 (49%) an average risk, 700 (22%) a high risk. Young patients had a less angulated proximal neck (27.2±18.4° vs 30.9±21.5°; p=0.05); in low-risk compared to average/high-risk patients, a longer neck length (3±1.8 vs 2.8±1.4 cm; p=0.01) and lower neck angulation (29.7±21.8° vs 33.2±22.2°; p=0.01) were present. Young age alone had no significant impact on early mortality (0% vs 0.6%; p=0.62.) and MAEs (3.9% vs 6.1%; p=0.20), while these were significantly lower in low-risk compared to average/high-risk patients (early mortality: 0.1% vs 0.7%, p=0.04; MAEs: 4.1% vs 6.7%, p=0.005). At 5 years, overall survival was significantly higher in young (88% vs 76%; p<0.001) and lower-risk (77% vs 54%; p<0.001) patients; low-risk patients also had significantly decreased aortic-related mortality (0% vs 2%; p=0.04) and reintervention rates (6% vs 11%; p=0.007). There were no statistically significant differences in mortality (0% vs 2%; p=0.42) and reintervention rate (10% vs 10%; p=1.00) between young and older patients. Conclusion: In this real-world registry, EVAR was more often offered in cases with suitable anatomy in young and low-risk patients. Low operative risk, rather than young age alone, predicted excellent early outcomes and low 5-year mortality, aortic-related mortality, and reintervention rates.

Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair during the Early Days of the COVID-19 Outbreak

Abstract Introduction: We report the results of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in three patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: Three patients were diagnosed with abdominal aortic aneurysm. All three patients were male and aged 68 years. The diameter of the aneurysm was larger than 65 mm and was considered suitable for EVAR. Thorax tomography was performed to exclude SARS-CoV-2 infection before the procedure. Results: We performed EVAR under general anesthesia. “Priority Level” was based on the guideline of the American College of Surgeons. The procedure was conducted in the angiography laboratory by taking advanced precautions. Intensive care admission was avoided. The postoperative period was uneventful, and all patients were discharged without any condition associated with COVID-19. There were no mortality, rupture, secondary intervention, major adverse event, limb occlusion, and 60-day read-mission. Conclusions: During the pandemic, EVAR can be performed for symptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm with a diameter of more than 65 mm. Thorax tomography is safe to exclude SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, tomographic angiography to monitor patients may be difficult during the pandemic.

Short-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Repair in King Hussein Medical Centre : A Single-Centre Experience

Short-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Repair in King Hussein Medical Centre : A Single-Centre Experience

Endovascular Aortic Repair in Nonagenarian Patients

BackgroundThe increasing proportion of elderly patients being treated for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in the endovascular era is controversial. ObjectivesThis study compared 30-day outcomes of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in nonagenarians (NAs) with non-nonagenarians (NNAs). MethodsThis retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database included EVAR procedures performed from 2011 to 2017. Multivariate logistic regression in the unadjusted cohort, followed by propensity-score matching (PSM), was performed. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major adverse events. ResultsA total of 12,267 patients were included (365 NAs). Ruptured aneurysms accounted for 6.7% (n = 819): 15.7% (n = 57) in NAs versus 6.5% (n = 762) in NNAs (p < 0.001). Mean aneurysm diameter was 6.5 ± 1.8 cm in NAs versus 5.8 ± 1.7 cm in NNAs (p < 0.001). The unadjusted 30-day mortality was 9.9% in NA versus 2.2% in NNAs (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed age ≥90 years (odds ratio [OR]: 3.36), male sex (OR: 1.78), functional status (OR: 4.22), pre-operative ventilator dependency (OR: 3.80), bleeding disorders (OR: 1.52), dialysis (OR: 2.56), and ruptured aneurysms (OR: 17.21) as independent predictors of mortality. After PSM, no differences in 30-day mortality (intact AAA [iAAA]: 5.3% NA vs. 3% NNA [p = 0.15]; ruptured AAA [rAAA]: 38% NA vs. 28.6% NNA [p = 0.32]) or 30-day major adverse events (iAAA: 7% NA vs. 4.6% NNA [p = 0.22]; rAAA: 28% NA vs. 36.7% NNA [p = 0.35]) were observed. ConclusionsAge was identified as an independent predictor of 30-day mortality after EVAR on multivariate analysis. However, no differences were found after PSM, suggesting that being ≥90 years of age but with similar comorbidities to younger patients is not associated with a higher short-term mortality after EVAR. Age ≥90 years alone should not exclude patients from EVAR, and tailored indications and carefully balanced risk assessment are advised.

The Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Japan in 2017: A Report from the Japanese Committee for Stentgraft Management.

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) was first approved in Japan a decade ago, and approximately 10,000 EVAR procedures are performed annually.1) The short-term outcomes of EVAR in Japan were reported to be acceptable; however, several issues were revealed. Half of the cases violated the instructions for use, and a quarter of post-EVAR aneurysm sacs dilated by more than 5 mm in 5 years.2) In addition, new devices have emerged, generating a learning curve for their use. Therefore, updating the real-world EVAR data from Japan will serve as a database for physicians to refer to during preoperative sizing or when considering procedural steps. This report demonstrated the number of EVAR procedures and the mortality and complication rates in 2017 in Japan using data from the Japanese Committee for Stentgraft Management (JACSM) nationwide registry, which includes outcome data for nearly all stent grafts shipped to Japan.2,3)