Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Research Articles

Urgent endovascular repair of juxtarenal/pararenal aneurysm by off-the-shelf multibranched endograft

ObjectiveTo report outcomes of urgent juxtarenal/pararenal aneurysms (J/P-AAAs) managed by off-the-shelf multibranched thoracoabdominal endografts (Cook, T-branch). MethodsIn this observational, multicenter, retrospective study, patients with J/P-AAAs treated by urgent endovascular repair by T-branch in 23 European aortic centers, from 2013 to 2023, were analyzed. Contained J/P-AAAs rupture, presence of related symptoms, and aneurysm diameter of >70 mm were considered as indication for urgent repair. Technical success (TS), spinal cord ischemia (SCI), and 30-day/hospital mortality were assessed as early outcomes. Survival, freedom from reinterventions, and target artery instability (TAI) were evaluated during follow-up. ResultsOverall, 197 patients (J-AAAs, n = 64 [33%]; P-AAAs, n = 95 [48%]; previous failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), n = 38 [19%]) were analyzed. The mean age and aneurysm diameter was 75 ± 8 years and 76 ± 4 mm, respectively. The American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 3 and 4 in 118 (60%) and 79 (40%) patients. Rupture, symptoms, and diameter of >70 mm were present in 51 (26%), 110 (56%), and 53 (27%) patients, respectively. An adjunctive proximal thoracic endograft was used in 28 cases (14%). The mean aortic coverage between the upper portion of the endograft and the lowest renal artery was 154 ± 49 mm. Single-stage repair and cerebrospinal fluid drainage were reported in 144 (73%) and 53 (27%) cases, respectively. TS was achieved in 182 (92%) cases (rupture, 84% vs no rupture, 95%; P = .02). Failures consist of TA loss (11 [6%]: renal artery, 9; celiac trunk, 2), type I to III endoleaks (2 [1%]), and 24-h mortality (2 [1%]). Rupture was a risk factor for technical failure (P = .02; odds ratio [OR], 3.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-12.1). Overall, 15 patients (8%) had persistent SCI (rupture, 14% vs no rupture, 5%) with 11 (6%) , of paraplegia (rupture, 10% vs no rupture, 5%; P = .001). Rupture (P = .04; OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1-8.9) and adjunctive proximal thoracic endograft (P = .01; OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.3-12.9) were risk-factors for SCI. Twenty-two patients (11%) died within 30 days or during a prolonged hospitalization. Previous failed EVAR (P = .04; OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.1-12.3), paraplegia (P < .001; OR, 9.9; 95% CI, 1.6-62.2) and postoperative mesenteric complications (P = .03; OR, 10.4; 95% CI, 1.2-93.3), as well as cardiac (P = .03; OR, 8.2; 95% CI, 2.0-33.0) and respiratory (P < .001; OR, 10.1; 95% CI, 2.9-35.2) morbidities were associated with 30-day/hospital mortality. The mean follow-up was 19 ± 5 months. The estimated 3-year survival and freedom from reinterventions was 58% and 77%, respectively. TAI occurred in 27 patients (14%) (occlusion, 15; endoleak, 14) with an estimated 3-year freedom from TAI of 72%. ConclusionsUrgent repair of J/P-AAAs by T-branch is feasible and effective with satisfactory TS and 30-day/hospital mortality in high-risk patients. However, extensive aortic coverage is necessary, leading to a non-negligible SCI rate, especially in case of aortic rupture or when adjunctive thoracic endografts are necessary. Previous failed EVAR and postoperative mesenteric complications, as well as cardiac and respiratory morbidities were associated with 30-day/hospital mortality and should be subjected to more research for the purposes of improving outcomes.

Pararenal Aortic Thrombus in Patients Undergoing Aortic Aneurysm Repair With Chimney Technique.

Chimney technique (chimney graft in abdominal aortic aneurysm repair [ChEVAR]) can be used to treat patients with pararenal aortic aneurysm unfit for open surgery and not suitable for custom-made fenestrated endograft. Since almost 1 in 5 patients undergo a reintervention within 3 years, features associated with higher risk of complications need to be investigated to tailor the follow-up schedule to each patient. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of mural thrombus in the pararenal aorta on perioperative and follow-up complications after ChEVAR. All consecutive patients undergoing ChEVAR at our center from 2015 to 2022 were included in this retrospective study. Collected variables included number of target vessels, stent graft size, presence, and severity of mural thrombus in pararenal aorta, which was reported with a scoring system from 0 to 10 based on thrombus type, thickness area, and circumferenceAnalyzed outcomes included perioperative and follow-up complications. Thirty-one patients underwent ChEVAR during the study period. In 4 patients the indication for ChEVAR was type 1A endoleak after a previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The number of target vessels was 1 in 17 patients (55%), 2 in 12 (39%), 3 in 1 (3%), and 4 in 1 (%). The mean mural thrombus score was 5.9. Complications were the following: type 1A endoleak in 4 cases (13%), chimney stent complications in 7 cases (23%) (including partial or total thrombosis, intrastent stenosis, displacement), renal function worsening during follow-up in 8 cases (26%). Overall survival was 90% at 2 years. Patients with severe mural thrombus showed lower freedom from ChEVAR-related complications (28% vs 59% at 2 years, p=0.023). The presence of severe pararenal aortic mural thrombus was associated with lower freedom from ChEVAR-related complications in patients undergoing ChEVAR for pararenal aortic aneurysm repair. Further research with a larger number of patients is required to confirm these results. The analysis of severity of mural thrombus in pararenal aorta, which was reported with a scoring system from 0 to 10 based on thrombus type, thickness area and circumference, can be useful and can be represent an important predictor element for complications in patient submitted to Chimney tecnique; in fact the presence of severe pararenal aortic mural thrombus was associated with lower freedom from ChEVAR-related complications in patients undergoing ChEVAR for pararenal aortic aneurysm repair. Then, in patient with pararenal aortic aneurysm, a preoperative evaluation could be focused on severity of mural thrombus to minimize the complications in ChEVAR tecnique or to change the surgical strategy.

Midterm Outcomes and Aneurysm Sac Dynamics Following Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair after Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) represents a feasible option for aortic repair after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), due to improved peri-operative outcomes compared with open conversion. However, little is known regarding the durability of FEVAR as treatment of failed EVARs. Since aneurysm sac evolution is an important marker for success after aneurysm repair, the aim of the study was to examine mid-term outcomes and aneurysm sac dynamics of FEVAR after prior EVAR. Patients undergoing FEVAR for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms from 2008 to 2021 at two hospitals in The Netherlands were included. Patients were categorised into primary FEVAR and FEVAR after EVAR. Outcomes included five year mortality, one year aneurysm sac dynamics (regression/stable/expansion), sac dynamics over time, and five year aortic related procedures. Analyses were done using Kaplan-Meier methods, multivariable Cox regression analysis, chi-square tests, and linear mixed effect models. In total, 196 patients with FEVAR were identified, of whom 27% (n = 53) had a prior EVAR. Patients with prior EVAR were significantly older (78 ± 6.7 years vs. 73 ± 5.9 years, p < .001). There were no significant differences in mortality. FEVAR after EVAR was associated with higher risk of aortic related procedures within five years (hazard ratio [HR] 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 6.5, p = .037). Sac dynamics were assessed in 154 patients with available imaging. Patients with a prior EVAR showed lower rates of sac regression and higher rates of sac expansion at one year compared with primary FEVAR (sac expansion 48%, n = 21/44, vs. 8%, n = 9/110, p < .001)). Sac dynamics over time showed similar results, sac growth for FEVAR after EVAR, and sac shrinkage for primary FEVAR (p < .001). FEVAR after EVAR showed high rates of sac expansion and needed more secondary procedures than patients with primary FEVAR, although this did not affect mid-term survival. Future studies will have to assess whether FEVAR after EVAR is a valid intervention, and the underlying process that drives aneurysm sac growth following successful FEVAR after EVAR.

Use of physician-modified inverted limb in conjunction with Zenith fenestrated stent graft to rescue failed previous endovascular and open repair

ObjectiveTo evaluate outcomes and performance of inverted limbs (ILs) when used in conjunction with Zenith fenestrated stent grafts (Zfens) to treat patients with short distance between the lowest renal artery (RA) and aortic or graft bifurcation (A/GB). MethodsThis study was a multicenter, retrospective review of prospectively maintained database of patients with complex aortic aneurysms, failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), or open surgical repair (OSR) with short distance between LRA and A/GB treated using a combination of Zfen and an IL between 2013 and 2023. Endpoints included technical success, aneurysm sac regression, long-term device integrity, and target vessel patency. We defined technical success as implantation of the device with no endoleak, conversion to an aorto-uni-iliac or OSR. ResultsDuring this time, 52 patients underwent endovascular rescue of failed repair. Twenty (38.5%) of them required relining of the failed repairs using IL due to lowest RA to A/GB length restrictions. Two patients had undergone rescue with a fenestrated cuff alone but developed type III endoleaks. One patient with no previous implant had a short distance between the lowest RA and aortic bifurcation to accommodate the bifurcated distal device, and two patients had failed OSR or anastomotic pseudoaneurysms. The majority (94%) were men with a mean age of 76.8 ± 6.1 years. The mean aortic neck diameter and aneurysm size were 32 ± 4 cm and 7.2 ± 1.3 cm, respectively. The median time laps between initial repair and failure was 36 months (interquartile range [IQR], 24-54 months). Sixteen patients (80%) were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists class III, whereas four were class IV. Seventy-eight vessels were targeted and successfully incorporated. Technical success was 100%, and median estimated blood loss was 100 mL (IQR, 100-200 mL). Mean fluoroscopy time and dose were 61 ± 18 minutes and 2754 ± 1062 mGy, respectively. Average hospital length of stay was 2.75 ± 2.15 days. Postoperative complication occurred in one patient who required lower extremity fasciotomy for compartment syndrome. At a median follow-up of 50 months (IQR, 18-58 months), there were no device migration, components separation, aneurysmal related mortality, and type I or type III endoleak. Aneurysm sac regression (95%) or stabilization (5%) was observed in all patients, including in four patients (25%) with type II endoleak. ConclusionsThe use of IL in conjunction with Zfen to treat patients with short distance between the lowest RA and A/GB is safe, effective, and has excellent long-term results. The technique expands the indication of Zfen, especially in patients with failed previous EVAR.

Aneurysm Sac Dynamics and Mid-term Outcomes Following Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair After Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Research has shown that fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) represents a feasible option for aortic repair after prior EVAR, owing to improved perioperative outcomes. However, little is known regarding the durability of FEVAR as rescue of failure. Since aneurysm sac evolution is an important marker for success after endovascular aneurysm repair, the aim of our study was to examine aneurysm sac dynamics of FEVAR after prior EVAR as well as mid-term outcomes. We included all consecutive patients undergoing FEVAR for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms from 2008 to 2021 at two large hospitals in the Netherlands. FEVARs after open aortic repair were excluded, and patients were subsequently categorized into primary FEVAR and FEVAR after EVAR. Outcomes included 5-year secondary aneurysm-related procedures and mortality. One-year aneurysm sac dynamics (regression/stable/expansion, based upon 5% change compared with 30-day volume), and sac dynamics over time were evaluated between the groups with imaging data. Analyses were done using Kaplan-Meier methods, multivariable Cox regression analysis, χ2 tests, and linear mixed effect models. We identified 196 FEVAR patients of which 27% patients (n = 53) had a prior EVAR. Patients with a prior EVAR were significantly older (78.0 ± 6.7 years vs 73.0 ± 5.9 years; P < .001). FEVAR after EVAR was associated with higher risk of developing secondary aneurysm-related procedures within 5 years (hazard ratio, 2.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-6.50; P = .04) compared to primary FEVAR. Moreover, patients with a prior EVAR showed significantly lower rates of sac regression and higher rates of sac expansion at 1 year compared to primary FEVAR patients (42% sac expansion vs 5% sac expansion; P < .001). Sac dynamics over time showed the same results, sac growth for FEVAR after EVAR and sac shrinkage for primary FEVAR (P < .001) (Figure). Finally, there were no significant differences in f-year mortality between the groups (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-1.49; P = .33). Despite successful proximal extension and relining, FEVAR after EVAR patients had higher rates of sac expansion at one-year and needed more secondary procedures than primary FEVAR patients although this did not seem to effect survival. Future studies will have to assess whether FEVAR after EVAR is a valid intervention following failed infrarenal EVAR, and the underlying process that drives aneurysm sac growth after successful FEVAR after EVAR.

European Multicentric Experience With Fenestrated Branched Endovascular Stent Grafting After Previous Failed Infrarenal Aortic Repair

Objective: To report the midterm outcomes of fenestrated branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) following a failed previous endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) or previous open aneurysm repair (pOAR).

Midterm Results of Physician-Modified Stent Grafts for Thoracoabdominal and Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Repair

To assess midterm results of physician-modified stent grafts (PMSG) for the treatment of emergent complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) in high-risk patients. All consecutive patients with emergent complex abdominal or TAAA undergoing PMSG technique between January 2012 and July 2019 were retrospectively included. Indications for PMSG were symptomatic aneurysms and rapidly growing aneurysms >70mm. Ruptured aneurysms were excluded. Thirty-three patients (mean age: 74 +/- 11years) were included. The mean aneurysm diameter was 76 +- 20mm. Patients presented with TAAA (n=20, 61%), complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAA, n=9, 27%), type I endoleak after previous endovascular aneurysm repair (n=3, 9%) and intramural aortic hematoma (n=1, 3%). Chimney technique was performed in addition to PMSG in seven cases (21%). Intraoperative adverse events were recorded in seven cases (35%) in the TAAA group and one case (11%) in the CAAA group. In-hospital mortality rate was 15% (n=3) in the TAAA group and 11% (n=1) in the CAAA group. Moderate to severe complications were recorded in 45% of cases (n=15). Spinal cord ischemia occurred in two cases (6%, one case without residual deficit and one with minor motor deficit). One (3%) patient required transient hemodialysis. One patient presented with early aortic rupture and required an open conversion. The mean follow-up duration was 31months (1-79). Overall survival estimates were 81.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63.1.-91.2) at 1year and 71.6% (95% CI: 52.6-84.1) at 2years. Freedom from reintervention rates at 1 and 2years were 61.2% (95% CI: 41.7-75.9) and 57.4% (95% CI: 37.9-72.8). Target vessel primary patency rates at 1 and 2years were 99.2% (95% CI: 94.2-99.9) and 97.7% (95% CI: 90.7-99.4). PMSG for high-risk patients with complex aneurysms provided acceptable technical success and excellent target vessel patency rates but were associated with a 12% in-hospital mortality rate. Reinterventions were frequent. This technique should be limited to selected high-risk patients for whom the risk of rupture in the short-term is deemed too high to wait for graft manufacturing of custom-made device.

European Multicentric Experience With Fenestrated-branched ENDOvascular Stent Grafting After Previous FAILed Infrarenal Aortic Repair: The EU-FBENDO-FAIL Registry.

To report the mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) following a failed previous endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) or previous open aneurysm repair (pOAR). Data from consecutive patients who underwent F-BEVAR for pEVAR or pOAR from 2006 to 2021 from 17 European vascular centers were analyzed. Endpoints included technical success, major adverse events, 30-day mortality, and 5-year estimates of survival, target vessel primary patency, freedom from reinterventions, type I/III endoleaks, and sac growth >5mm. Treatment of a failed previous abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is a complex undertaking. F-BEVAR is becoming an increasingly attractive option, although comparative data are limited regarding associated risk factors, indications for treatment, and various outcomes. There were 526 patients included, 268 pOAR and 258 pEVAR. The median time from previous repair to F-BEVAR was 7 (interquartile range, 4-12) years, 5 (3-8) for pEVAR, and 10 (6-14) for pOAR, P <0.001. Predominant indication for treatment was type Ia endoleak for pEVAR and progression of the disease for pOAR. Technical success was 92.8%, pOAR (92.2%), and pEVAR (93.4%), P =0.58. The 30-day mortality was 6.5% overall, 6.7% for pOAR, and 6.2% for pEVAR, P =0.81. There were 1853 treated target vessels with 5-year estimates of primary patency of 94.4%, pEVAR (95.2%), and pOAR (94.4%), P =0.03. Five-year estimates for freedom from type I/III endoleaks were similar between groups; freedom from reintervention was lower for pEVAR (38.3%) than for pOAR (56.0%), P =0.004. The most common indication for reinterventions was for type I/III endoleaks (37.5%). Repair of a failed pEVAR or pOARis safe and feasible with comparable technical success and survival rates. While successful treatment can be achieved, significant rates of reintervention should be anticipated, particularly for issues related to instability of target vessels/bridging stents.

Open surgical conversion and management of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after previous endovascular aneurysm repair

Introduction/Objective. The objective was to present the results and technical considerations from high-volume center when performing late open surgical conversion (LOSC) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) patients. Methods. This was a single center retrospective study. LOSC was performed whenever eventual endovascular reintervention failed, was not feasible due to hostile anatomy and unavailability of specific endograft materials, or when patient was hemodynamically unstable necessitating emergent surgery. Results. All previously implanted EVARs had bimodular configuration with suprarenal fixation. Total endograft explantation was performed in 40% of patients. Hospital mortality was 20%. Both patients who died had total endograft explantation with supraceliac clamp lasting more than 30 minutes. 30-day mortality was 30%, with one more patient who died from pulmonary embolism after hospital discharge and two hospital deaths were due to myocardial infarction. Conclusion. LOSC due to RAAA after previous EVAR carries greater mortality for the patient, suggesting multifactorial impacts on the outcome. The appropriate choice of surgical method and technical success are of ultimate importance, with total graft explantation having negative impact on patient?s survival.

Management of Concealed Type IV Endoleak and Aortic Sac Hygroma by Prone ContrASt EnHancement Computed Tomography Angiography

Aortic sac hygroma and concealed endoleaks (EL) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm needs particular attention with aggressive management as they are associated with rapid sac expansion and rupture risk. However, they can be erroneously reported as type IV or V EL with supine computed tomography (CT) scans, leading to delay in management. Therefore, we describe a novel diagnostic technique, 'Prone contrASt enHanced computed tomography Angiography' (PASHA), to document concealed EL METHODS: We present eight case descriptions with continuous sac expansion after primary EVAR. Management began with diagnosis using the PASHA imaging technique. PASHA is a multiphase CTA positional technique for increasing the accuracy of detecting EL after EVAR. Furthermore, the PASHA imaging technique also guides whether the open or endovascular intervention could be used effectively to manage the sac expansion. In synchrony with the PASHA technique, "EVAR GORE SalvAge FAbric Technique" (ARAFAT) was to salvage previous EVAR. The PASHA technique diagnosed all cases of type IIIb EL, as it enhanced the degree of contrast infiltration into the aortic sac when microleaks were present. ARAFAT was effectively used in five elderly patients. Another three had an open conversion; two with double breasting of the aortic sac and one EVAR explantation. The PASHA protocol helped classify and localize the concealed EL (type IV, V), which were not appropriately diagnosed by supine CT protocols. PASHA and ARAFAT were used as a fully functioning protocol to overcome apparent challenges in accurate diagnosis and subsequent concealed EL management in high-risk patients.

Early and Late Outcomes of Ultrasound-Guided Direct Transabdominal Embolization of Isolated Type 2 Endoleaks after Endovascular Aortic Repair

The aim of this study is to report the early and late outcomes of ultrasound-guided direct transabdominal embolization (UGDTE) of isolated type 2 endoleak (T2EL) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Forty-two consecutive T2EL patients were treated between February 2000 and September 2017 by UGDTE after previous EVAR. During the study period, UGDTE was the firs-line technique implemented for treatment of T2EL. All procedures were carried out using the same predefined technique. Aneurysm sac size change from the index treatment, freedom from recurrent endoleak after treatment, demographics, risk factors, and procedural factors were analyzed with univariate analysis. During the study interval, 612 patients underwent standard EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment and 111 (18.2%) developed an isolated T2EL. Of these, 42 (6.8%) consecutive patients were deemed suitable and treated with UDGT. Median imaging follow-up duration was 18.7months. Median fluoroscopic and procedure times were 7 and 58minutes, respectively. The rate of immediate technical success was 100%. Ten patients (23.8%) underwent reintervention for recurrent T2EL. Freedom from reintervention for T2EL at 1, 2, and 4years was 81%, 78%, and 71%. No aneurysm-related mortality occurred during the follow-up period. The use of UGDTE for treatment of isolated T2EL after EVAR is a safe and feasible technique when performed by experienced operators, resulting in high technical success and low complication rates in selected patients. Although being effective in obtaining T2EL exclusion, up to one-third of the patients may require repeat intervention duringlong-term follow-up. Therefore, lifelong surveillance after the procedure is recommended.

Does a previous aortic endograft confer any protective effect during abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture? Systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.

Whether prior endovascular aneurysm repair confers a protective effect in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is not known. We aimed to systematically review and compare the outcomes of rAAA in patients with and without prior endovascular aneurysm repair. We performed a systematic review that conformed to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis. We selected studies comparing the outcomes in patients with rAAA after prior endovascular aneurysm repair (group 1) and those with de novo rAAAs (group 2). We conducted a proportion meta-analysis of perioperative mortality and obtained summary estimates of odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects models. We included four studies (retrospective observational studies) in quantitative synthesis reporting a total of 719 patients (group 1 (89) group 2 (630)). The perioperative mortality in groups 1 and 2 was 30.4% and 41%, respectively, and there was no statistical significant difference between the groups (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.30-1.43, P = 0.29, I2=58%). However, patients presenting with rAAA following previous endovascular aneurysm repair were more hemodynamically stable (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12-0.90, P = 0.03, I2=74%). The choice between endovascular or open surgery treatment in group 1 did not affect the perioperative mortality (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.41-3.04 P = 0.82, I2=0%). Endoleak types I and III were the main causes of rAAA in group 1. Perioperative mortality was similar for rAAA either de novo or after prior endovascular aneurysm repair. However, ruptures in patients with prior endovascular aneurysm repair presented hemodynamically more stable.

Short-term and Midterm Results of Fenestrated Anaconda Endograft in Patients with Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PurposeTo review short-term and midterm results of the fenestrated Anaconda stent graft in management of patients with pre-existing endovascular aortic stent graft and persistent type 1a endoleak. Materials and MethodsThis single-center retrospective study assessed all consecutive patients with type 1a endoleak and pre-existing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) treated with fenestrated Anaconda stent grafts. Ten patients (9 males; mean age 78 y) with mean follow-up of 22.4 months ± 13 were included. Average aneurysm size was 80.1 mm (range, 62–101 mm). Mean time for conversion to fenestrated EVAR following original EVAR was 53.7 months (range, 22–101 months; median 54 months). Technical and clinical success; anatomic features, including aortic tortuosity, side vessel angulation, and stenosis; complications; and reinterventions were recorded. ResultsThe technical success rate was 90%. There was no open conversion and no 30-day mortality, leading to a clinical success rate of 100%. Five of 10 patients demonstrated an aortic tortuosity index of grade 2 or 3. Additional hostile anatomy that made side vessel catheterization challenging was observed in 15 vessels (45%) with a stenosis of ≥ 50% (related to atherosclerotic disease or struts of indwelling prosthesis) and 21 vessels (66%) with ≤ 70° angulation. Two reinterventions, renal artery stent angioplasty and renal artery covered stent extension, were observed at 2 and 13 months. ConclusionsUse of the fenestrated Anaconda endograft in patients with type 1a endoleaks following previous EVAR is safe, feasible, and offers some technical features that facilitate overcoming certain anatomic difficulties.

Rescue of proximal failure of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with standard and fenestrated grafts.

This study aimed to assess the outcomes of standard and fenestrated grafts to treat proximal failure of previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in a tertiary referral center. All patients undergoing elective implantation of a standard or fenestrated graft after proximal failure of a previous EVAR between April 2010-November 2018 were included. Data were collected prospectively. Fifty procedures were performed in 49 patients (45 male; mean age 74.6±7 years). A fenestrated proximal cuff was used in 24 (48%) cases, a composite bifurcated configuration in 21 (42%) cases, and EVAR in 5 (10%) cases. Technical success was achieved in all 5 EVAR cases and 41 of 45 FEVAR cases (91.1%). Iliac artery access problems due to the presence of the previous graft were encountered in eight (16%) procedures and renal artery catheterization difficulties in grafts with suprarenal fixation in seven (15.6%) procedures. There was one (2%) early death due to retroperitoneal bleeding. Early major complications occurred in three (6%) patients. Median follow-up was 26 months (range 1-77). Late occlusion occurred in two (1.3%) of the 151 targeted vessels. One patient needed permanent dialysis. Nine patients died during follow-up, one (2%) of them aneurysm-related. Ten (20.4%) patients presented with major complications during follow-up of which nine (18.4%) needed reintervention. Estimated freedom from reintervention at 1 and 3 years was 89.3±5.1% and 78.8±7.3%, respectively. Repair with fenestrated grafts represents a safe and effective treatment option. Increased technical challenges are to be expected due to the previous graft.

Increasing use of open conversion for late complications after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveOpen procedures are often required for late complications after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Our aim was to describe the indications for open interventions and their postoperative outcomes and to specifically examine our experience with limited conversions in which problem endoleaks are targeted without endograft explantation. MethodsWe reviewed patients from 2002 to 2017 who underwent any surgical abdominal aortic operation after a previous EVAR. Baseline characteristics, preoperative imaging, procedural details, and postoperative outcomes were reviewed. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. ResultsThere were 102 patients who underwent open conversion 3.8 ± 3.1 years after EVAR. The numbers increased significantly in recent years, with 18 cases performed in 2016; 48.5% of patients had undergone 1.9 ± 1.0 prior endovascular interventions. The indication for surgical conversion was an endoleak in 85 patients and infection in 15. One patient had a limb occlusion and another a proximal aneurysm. The 30-day mortality was 6.2% in 65 patients treated electively for endoleak but higher in 20 ruptures (40.0%) and 15 infections (40.0%). In a multivariate logistic regression model, independent predictors of 30-day mortality were rupture (odds ratio [OR], 6.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.75-25.60; P = .005), endograft infection (OR, 8.48; 95% CI, 1.99-36.20; P = .004), and use of a supraceliac clamp (OR, 4.80; 95% CI, 1.47-15.66; P = .009). Transient acute kidney injury (12.8%) and prolonged intubation (11.8%) were the most common postoperative complications. In 65 patients treated for endoleak without rupture, 37 underwent endograft explantation, whereas 28 had a graft-preserving intervention (branch vessel ligation for type II endoleak in 26, external banding of the aneurysm neck for type IA endoleak in 8). Mortality was 8.1% when the endograft was explanted and 3.6% when it was not (P = .63). During 3.0 ± 3.5 years of follow-up, there was one reintervention after endograft explantation (for rupture secondary to type IB endoleak) and two reinterventions after graft preservation (for a new type IA endoleak and a new type II endoleak). Survival was 87.4% at 1 year and 70.9% at 5 years. ConclusionsOpen conversion is playing an increasing role in the management of late EVAR complications. Endoleaks treated electively by open conversion are reasonably safe and show good midterm durability, even with graft-preserving interventions that avoid endograft explantation.

Use of Bilateral Cook Zenith Iliac Branch Devices to Preserve Internal Iliac Artery Flow During Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Iliac branch devices (IBD) have become a widespread option to preserve antegrade internal iliac artery (IIA) flow during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Reported experience with bilateral implantation of IBDs is limited. This study aimed to describe the indications, technical options, and outcomes with the use of bilateral IBDs. All patients undergoing elective implantation of bilateral Cook Zenith IBD between January 2010 and September 2017 in a single centre were included. Bilateral IBD was indicated in physically active, anatomically suitable patients and those with previous or concomitant surgery for a thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm or impaired collateral circulation to the IIA. Data were collected prospectively. Twenty-nine patients (29 male, mean age 64.1±10 years) were included. Of the 58 IBDs, 48 (83%) were implanted in one procedure and 10 (17%) in two procedures (mean time between procedures 30.4±9 months). Nineteen patients (65%) had a previous or simultaneous EVAR and the remaining 10 (35%) a previous or simultaneous complex aortic repair. Mean CIA diameter was 35.2±8mm. Technical success was achieved in 55 of the 58 IBDs (95%) with no mortality. Axillary artery access was used in 13 (38%) procedures. During follow up, four (7%) IIA branches occluded (1 bilateral occlusion and 2 unilateral). Estimated IIA branch patency at one and three years was 97.8%±2% and 88.5%±7%, respectively. All patients with late IIA occlusion remained asymptomatic. Re-intervention was needed in four patients (14%): two bridging stent graft extensions for type Ib endoleak, one relining of the external iliac artery because of mural in-stent thrombus and one femoro-femoral crossover bypass to treat an external iliac limb occlusion. Bilateral implantation of IBDs is a safe and effective technique to preserve IIA flow in selected patients with suitable anatomy, showing similar technical success and mid-term outcomes to the unilateral use of the device.

Modelling the growth of popliteal artery aneurysms.

Popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) comprise up to 85 per cent of all peripheral aneurysms. Few longitudinal studies track their progression. This study aimed to track the growth of asymptomatic PAAs in a hospital-based ultrasound service, and compare models of aneurysm growth. This retrospective single-centre cohort study included patients who had a PAA on arterial duplex ultrasound imaging of the lower limbs between 1 January 2011 and 1 January 2016. Progression of PAA size and progression to event or intervention were the primary outcome measures. Some 282 images were analysed: 47 limbs with PAA were included in a cohort of 32 patients (15 had bilateral PAAs). Twenty patients also had an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Linear multilevel modelling estimated that PAA growth was 2·4 (95 per cent c.i. 1·6 to 3·7) mm a year. Growth was estimated at 0·8 (0·1 to 1·5) mm per year in patients without an AAA and 3·5 (2·9 to 4·2) mm per year in those with a known AAA (previous open repair, previous endovascular aneurysm repair or AAA under surveillance) (P < 0·001). Growth rates of PAA were heterogeneous but were optimally predicted by multilevel modelling. Patients with an existing AAA may have faster PAA progression than those without.

Use of the Zenith Fenestrated platform to rescue failing endovascular and open aortic reconstructions is safe and technically feasible

ObjectiveProximal neck dilation is a serious long-term complication directly causing the failure of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms. However, the implantation of a fenestrated device presents the opportunity for proximal extension of the aortic reconstruction into a healthy segment while maintaining patency of the visceral vessels. The objective of this investigation was to report perioperative and follow-up outcomes using the Zenith Fenestrated (ZFEN; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) aortic stent system in salvaging previous aortic repairs undergoing type IA endoleak or aneurysmal degeneration of the proximal neck. MethodsWe performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained institutional database capturing all fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) cases with the ZFEN platform. Fenestrated cases were classified as primary FEVAR or reoperative FEVAR (rFEVAR) after previous EVAR or OSR. Cohort comparisons were performed using Fisher exact tests and Student t-tests for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. ResultsBetween October 2012 and March 2017, a total of 103 patients diagnosed with abdominal aortic aneurysm with an inadequate proximal seal zone for traditional EVAR were treated with ZFEN. In 12 patients, FEVAR was performed as a reoperation after previous EVAR (n = 6) or OSR (n = 6). The indications for rFEVAR were proximal neck dilation (>55 mm) after OSR (n = 6), type IA endoleak after EVAR (n = 5), and proximal neck dilation after EVAR without endoleak (n = 1). No difference in ability to achieve technical success was observed between primary FEVAR and rFEVAR (97.8% vs 100%; P = 1.00). In addition, there were no differences in estimated blood loss (363 vs 500 mL; P = .25) and intraoperative use of contrast material (97.3 vs 104.0 mL; P = .55). However, a significant increase in fluoroscopy time (61.1 vs 79.8 minutes; P = .04), radiation exposure (415.9 vs 606.3 rad; P = .02), and operative time (228.4 vs 287.6 minutes; P = .03) in the rFEVAR cohort was observed. In the 30-day perioperative period, there were no significant differences with regard to mortality (2.2% vs 0%; P = 1.0), major adverse cardiovascular events (5.5% vs 0%, P = 1.0), and stent-related adverse events (2.2% vs 0%; P = 1.0). There were no differences in rates of perioperative (5.5% vs 0%; P = 1.0) or follow-up reintervention after a mean follow-up duration of 20.8 months (18.6% vs 25.0%; P = .70). ConclusionsFEVAR with the ZFEN platform of failed and failing aortic reconstructions due to disease progression is safe and feasible without increased morbidity and mortality in select patients. These preliminary results support the inclusion of ZFEN as a treatment option for aortic reintervention.

Endovascular Aneurysm Sealing (EVAS) Alone or in Combination with Chimney Grafts (chEVAS) for Treating Complications of Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) Procedures

Late complications after previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) procedures include type I/III endoleaks causing aneurysm growth and rupture. We reviewed our results from the management of such complications with endovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS) techniques. Analysis of our prospectively maintained aneurysm database was performed (December 2013-May 2017). Primary outcomes were: (1) success of the procedure in excluding the primary complication, (2) perioperative mortality, (3) post-operative complications and (4) survival. Ten consecutive patients were treated for complications of EVAR procedures performed 2-12years previously. All patients underwent EVAS with/without chimney grafts for 6 type Ia,1 type IIIb and 3 undetermined (but presumed type IIIb) endoleaks. Overall, 19 Nellix® devices were used. The technical success with type Ia endoleaks was 100%. All sealed using proximal extension through chimney EVAS with 1 target vessel loss. There were no perioperative deaths. All but 1 type Ia endoleak remained eliminated at follow-up (range 2-29months) as did the proven type IIIb endoleak. Two of the 3 undetermined endoleaks demonstrated continued sac expansion requiring surgical exploration by laparotomy, during which type II endoleaks were identified. EVAS provides effective short-term treatment of type Ia/IIIb endoleaks after EVAR. However, late complications may occur due to disease progression. Level 4, case series.

IF01. Collected Worldwide Experience From the PERICLES Registry With the Use of Chimney Grafts in the Treatment of Type I Endoleaks After Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Shows Reproducible Results

IF01. Collected Worldwide Experience From the PERICLES Registry With the Use of Chimney Grafts in the Treatment of Type I Endoleaks After Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Shows Reproducible Results