Surgery For Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease Research Articles

Endovascular Therapy for Vascular Graft Infection After Multiple Bypass Surgeries for Aorto-Iliac Occlusive Disease.

Vascular graft infection is a very complex disease. Although complete excision of the infected grafts with extra-anatomic bypass or in situ reconstruction is a general treatment strategy, some concerns including reinfection in the new graft remain. An 88year-old man presented to the hospital with abdominal swelling and bleeding. The patient had undergone revascularization for aorto-iliac occlusive disease twice in the past. The first procedure had been performed 15years previously, with right ilio-femoral bypass grafting for right iliac artery occlusion and stent implantation for left iliac artery stenosis. The second procedure had been performed 10years previously, with aorta-to-left femoral and left-to-right femoro-femoral bypass grafting because the terminal aorta, the first ilio-femoral bypass graft, and the stent of the left iliac artery had been occluded. The patient was diagnosed with vascular graft infection, and endovascular therapy was selected as the revascularization method prior to graft excision. It was successfully performed using various devices and techniques, followed by graft excision without critical limb ischemia. This case demonstrates that endovascular therapy prior to graft excision can be an alternative revascularization method for vascular graft infection after bypass surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease.

Study of endovascular treatment in obstructive aortoiliac lesions: Immediate and short-term results

Objective: Aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD) is a common atherosclerotic disease causing significant morbidity. Transatlantic intersociety consensus for the management of peripheral arterial disease (TASC II) recommends endovascular therapy (ET) for better management of patients with lesions type A and B. With the advent of endovascular therapy, type C and D lesions management is becoming more feasible with endovascular therapy than open surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease. We aimed to evaluate patients with AIOD and to describe short-term outcome of endovascular treatment for such lesions. Methods: Patients with aorto-iliac occlusive diseases who underwent endovascular therapy were enrolled in the study. Their demographic data and risk factors were recorded. Patients were followed at 3 and 6 months and their primary patency rate and symptom status were recorded. Results: We enrolled 100 patients with a mean age of 59.77 (8.75) years with the majority of patients being male. The most common presentation was claudication (59%) followed by rest pain (31%) and gangrene (20%). The majority of patients had Transatlantic inter-society consensus (TASC) II type A (44%) and type B (31%) lesions; 15% of patients had types C lesions and the remaining 10% patients had type D lesions. Access site hematoma and contrast-induced nephropathy were present in 7% and 5% of patients respectively. Stent patency rate was 97% and 95% at 3 and 6 months follow up respectively. Conclusion: Endovascular therapy in aorto-iliac occlusive disease is a safe, effective, and low-cost treatment option with a high patency rate and symptomatic improvement in the short-term.

Novel bypass risk predictive tool is superior to the 5-Factor Modified Frailty Index in predicting postoperative outcomes

ObjectiveThis study aimed to develop risk predictive models of 30-day mortality, morbidity, and major adverse limb events (MALE) after bypass surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) and to compare their performances with a 5-Factor Frailty Index. MethodsThe American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2012-2017 Procedure Targeted Aortoiliac (Open) Participant Use Data Files were queried to identify all patients who had elective bypass for AIOD: femorofemoral bypass, aortofemoral bypass, and axillofemoral bypass (AXB). Outcomes assessed included mortality, major morbidity, and MALE within 30 days postoperatively. Major morbidity was defined as pneumonia, unplanned intubation, ventilator support for >48 hours, progressive or acute renal failure, cerebrovascular accident, cardiac arrest, or myocardial infarction. Demographics, comorbidities, procedure type, and laboratory values were considered for inclusion in the risk predictive models. Logistic regression models for mortality, major morbidity and MALE were developed. The discriminative ability of these models (C-indices) were compared with that of the 5-Factor Modified Frailty Index (mFI-5): a general frailty tool determined from diabetes, functional status, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, history of congestive heart failure, and hypertension. Calculators were derived using the most significant variables for each of the three risk predictive models. ResultsA total of 2612 cases (mean age 65.0, 60% male) were identified, of which 1149 (44.0%) were femorofemoral bypass, 1138 (43.6%) were aortofemoral bypass, and 325 (12.4%) were axillofemoral bypass. Overall, the rates of mortality, major morbidity, and MALE were 2.0%, 8.5%, and 4.9%, respectively. Twenty preoperative risk factors were considered for incorporation in the risk tools. Apart from procedure type, age was the most statistically significant predictor of both mortality and morbidity. Preoperative anemia and critical limb ischemia were the most significant predictors of MALE. All three constructed models demonstrated significantly better discriminative ability (P < .001) on the outcomes of interest as compared with the mFI-5. ConclusionsOur models outperformed the mFI-5 in predicting 30-day mortality, major morbidity, and adverse limb events in patients with AIOD undergoing elective bypass surgery. Calculators were created using the most statistically significant variables to help calculate individual patient's postoperative risks and allow for better informed consent and risk-adjusted comparison of provider outcomes.

Risk factors associated with postoperative prosthetic graft patency in Leriche syndrome

BackgroundIn Leriche syndrome, postoperative graft thrombosis remains one of the most significant clinical challenges. MethodsWe reviewed 51 patients who underwent surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease at our hospital from January 2007 to December 2014. The factors associated with graft patency were determined using the Cox proportional hazard model. ResultsThe 2-year prosthetic graft patency rate was 72.5%. Younger age (p = 0.017, Odd ratio (OR) = 1.112), postoperative uncontrolled hypertension (p = 0.044, OR = 3.797), and associated Trans Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease II (TASC II) D femoropopliteal lesion (p = 0.008, OR = 11.139) were significantly related factors for prosthetic graft patency after surgical repair. The existing comorbidities of the patients that indicated the need for axillo-bifemoral bypass seemed to be related to lower graft patency or other complications. ConclusionsFor better graft patency after an open surgical repair of Leriche syndrome, strict postoperative hypertension control and distal run-off resolution are necessary.

Totally laparoscopic bypass surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease in China

Background Totally laparoscopic aortic surgery is still in its infancy in China. One of the factors preventing adoption of this technique is its steep learning curve. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). Methods From November 2008 to November 2012, 12 patients were treated for severe AIOD with a totally laparoscopic bypass surgery at our university hospital. The demographic data, operative data, postoperative recovery data, morbidity and mortality were analyzed and compared with those of conventional open approach. Results Twelve totally laparoscopic aortic surgery procedures, including two iliofemoral bypasses (IFB), three unilateral aortofemoral bypasses (UAFB), and seven aortobifemoral bypasses (ABFB), were performed. Conversion to open procedures was required in three patients. The mean operation time was 518 (range, 325-840) minutes, mean blood loss was 962 (range, 400-2500) ml, and mean aortic anastomosis time was 75 (range, 40-150) minutes. Compared with conventional open approach for aortofemoral bypasses performed concomitantly during this period, laparoscopic patients required fewer narcotics and a shorter in-hospital stay and earlier recovery. Postoperative complications developed in four patients, including a single patient with transient left hydronephrosis, ischemic colonic fistula and pneumonia, residual aortic stenosis proximal to the anastomotic site, and asymptomatic partial left renal infarction. All patients recovered and were discharged on postoperative Days 7-14 except one patient that died of respiratory failure on Day 46. All grafts were patent with follow-up imaging performed by Duplex examination, with a mean follow-up time of 10.7 (range, 2-61) months. Conclusion Totally laparoscopic bypass surgery is a feasible and safe procedure for AIOD, but attention needs to be paid to improve laparoscopic skills of vascular surgery in order to minimize morbidity during the learning curve of this advanced procedure.

Risk factors for incisional hernia repair after aortic reconstructive surgery in a nationwide study

Abdominal aortic aneurysm disease has been hypothesized as associated with the development of abdominal wall hernia. We evaluated the risk factors for incisional hernia repair after open elective aortic reconstructive surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease and abdominal aortic aneurysm. A retrospective analysis of prospectively recorded data in nationwide databases was carried out, with merged data from the Danish Vascular Registry (January 2006-January 2012), the Danish Ventral Hernia Database (January 2007-January 2012), and the Danish National Patient Register (January 2007-January 2012) to obtain 100% follow-up for incisional hernia repair in patients undergoing open elective aortic reconstructive surgery. The predefined risk factors of age, sex, American Association of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, smoking status, type of aortic surgery, and type of incision were tested in a multivariate Cox regression model for the risk of incisional hernia repair. We identified 2597 patients, of whom 838 and 1759 underwent open elective surgery for an aortoiliac occlusive disease and abdominal aortic aneurysm, respectively. The median follow-up was 28.9 months (range, 0-71.6 months), and the cumulative risk of hernia repair after aortic reconstructive surgery was 10.4% after 6 years of follow-up. Body mass index >25.0 kg/m(2) (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.46) and abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.35) were significantly associated with incisional hernia repair. High body mass index and abdominal aortic aneurysm repair were independent risk factors for a subsequent incisional hernia surgery in patients undergoing aortic reconstructive surgery.

Laparoscopic versus Open Approach for Aortobifemoral Bypass for Severe Aorto-iliac Occlusive Disease – A Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial

ObjectivesTo investigate differences between open and laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease on postoperative morbidity and mortality. DesignA multicentre randomised controlled trial. MethodsBetween January 2007 and November 2009, 28 patients with severe aorto-iliac occlusive disease (TASC II C or D) were randomised between laparoscopic and open approach at one community hospital and one university hospital (TASC = Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus on the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease). ResultsThe operation time was longer for the laparoscopic approach (mean 4 h 19 min (2 h 00 min to 6 h 20 min) vs. 3 h 30 min (1 h 42 min to 5 h 11 min); p = 0.101)). Nevertheless, postoperative recovery and in-hospital stay were significantly shorter after laparoscopic surgery. Also oral intake could be restarted earlier (mean 20 h 34 min (6 h 00 min to 26 h 55 min) vs. 43 h 43 min (19 h 40 min to 77 h 30 min); p = 0.00014)) as well as postoperative mobilisation (walking) (mean 46 h 15 min (16 h 07 min to 112 h 40 min) vs. mean 94 h 14 min (66 h 10 min to 127 h 23 min); p = 0.00016)). Length of hospitalisation was shorter (mean 5.5 days (2.5–15) vs. mean 13.0 days (7–45); p = 0.0095)). Visual pain scores and visual discomfort scores were both lower after laparoscopic surgery. Also return to normal daily activities was achieved earlier. There were no major complications in both groups. ConclusionLaparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease is a safe procedure with a significant decrease in postoperative morbidity and in-hospital stay and earlier recovery.

Mid-term results of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease

The aim of this study was to evaluate middle-term clinical results of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) to treat aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). Between 2002 and 2007, 28 consecutive patients received robot-assisted laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass grafting (n = 24) or aortoiliac endarterectomy (n = 4). Patients were followed prospectively. RALS could be completed successfully in 24 patients; conversion to open surgery was necessary in four patients (14%). Median operative time was 350 min. Median aortic clamping time was 70 min. Median hospital stay was five days. One patient died within 30 days. Non-lethal complications occurred in four patients (14%). Clinical symptoms improved in all patients. Primary and secondary limb-based patencies at 36 months were 89% and 91%, respectively. In conclusion, RALS is a feasible and durable technique for patients with AIOD. Although operative times are long, RALS allows rapid postoperative recovery.

Conversion During Laparoscopic Aortobifemoral Bypass: A Failure?

To study the impact of conversion on postoperative recovery, morbidity and mortality in laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD). Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. Between November 2002 and December 2006, 139 patients were treated for severe AIOD with a laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass at one community and one university hospital. Demographic data, operative data, postoperative recovery data, morbidity and mortality were recorded and analysed according to a conversion and a non-conversion group. Conversion was needed in 13.7% of the patients. Morbidity was 16.5%-14.2% in the non-conversion group and 31.8% in the conversion group. Systemic morbidity was significantly higher in the conversion group (31.6% vs.10%; p=0.002), but only one patient had incomplete recovery; local morbidity was comparable in both groups (10.5% vs. 5.8%; p=0.337). Mortality rate was 2.2%. Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass surgery is a safe procedure for the treatment of AIOD. The outcome of patients after conversion is not affected in the way that it could be an impediment to start a laparoscopic procedure. Conversion in time is a safe way to overcome the learning curve.

Comparison of Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Approaches in Abdominal Aortic Surgery

Background: The transperitoneal approach (TP) to the aorta is the most widely accepted surgical approach in aortic surgery as it is simple, fast and provides excellent exposure of the intra-abdominal cavity and vascular structures. In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the retroperitoneal (RP) approach to the aorta since it has been described as having a better outcome, i.e., preserving pulmonary function and gastro-intestinal physiology, reducing the intra-operative blood loss, minimising patient discomfort or pain, decreasing the incidence of wound complications and shortening ICU and hospital stay. The aim of this study is to compare the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches in aortic surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD).Methods: From December 2003 to June 2006, a total of 153 consecutive patients who had undergone aortic surgery for AIOD, were studied retrospectively. The TP approach was used in 85 patients and the RP approach in 68 patients. Demographic features, intra-operative and postoperative data were analysed and compared according to the approach used.Results: The mean operating time (83.6 ± 23 vs. 104.4 ± 30 min, p < 0.001) and mean aortic cross-clamp time (18.4 ± 3 vs. 15.2 ± 3 min, p < 0.0412) were significantly longer in the RP group. Peri-operative blood loss (700 ± 350 vs. 650 ± 330 ml, p < 0.683) and mortality rate < 30 day (1/1.2% vs. 0/0.0%, p < 0.896) were similar between the groups. The operative 30 day mortality rate was 0.7% (1 of 153) overall. The RP group had an earlier return of bowel functions (17.1 ± 3 vs. 24.2 ± 5 hrs, p < 0.001), earlier resumption of diet (26.4 ± 4 vs. 31.4 ± 5 hrs, p < 0.001), shorter period of intubation (3.5 ± 2 vs. 6.5 ± 3 hrs, p < 0.001), ICU stay (1.5 ± 1 vs. 4.2 ± 1 hrs, p < 0.001) and hospital stay (4.0 ± 1 vs. 5.9 ± 1 days, p < 0.001). Mean effort-pain scores were significantly lower in the RP group (3.8 ± 1 vs. 5.3 ± 1, p < 0.001). Incidence of pulmonary complications (4.4%, 3 of 68 vs. 7.3%, 8 of 85, p < 0.001), paralytic ileus (1.5%, 1 of 68 vs. 3.5%. 3 of 85, p < 0.001) were also lower in the RP group. Wound complications were more common in the TP group (4.7%, 4 of 85 vs. 10.3%, 7 of 86, p < 0.001). Most cases in both groups were related to incisional hernia or evisceration.Conclusion: This report presents our experience with the use of TP and RP approaches in a patient population merely consisting of AIOD. The RP approach was associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications, rapid recovery of gastro-intestinal functions, shorter ICU and hospital stay, less peri-operative blood loss and lower mean effort-pain scores. We conclude that the RP approach is a safe and feasible technique that exposes patients to less postoperative complications.

Investigation of Chlamydia pneumoniae DNA, chlamydial lipopolisaccharide antigens, and Helicobacter pylori DNA in atherosclerotic plaques of patients with aortoiliac occlusive disease

Background and Introduction It has been suggested that chronic infections may have a role in both the initiation and progression of atherosclerosis. While the majority of available data are focused on coronary artery disease, our aim was to investigate the presence of Chlamydia pneumoniae and Helicobacter pylori in samples from aortoiliac occlusive disease. Methods Aorta-iliac atherectomy specimens were collected under sterile conditions from 21 patients (19 male, 2 female) undergoing surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease. Seventeen macroscopically healthy vessels (12 internal mammary arteries, 3 radial arteries, prepared for coronary artery bypass graft, and 2 traumatic artery specimens, one of which was a superficial femoral artery and the other was a radial artery) were used as control. Blood samples for serological assays were obtained immediately before surgery. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was employed to search for H. pylori and C. pneumoniae DNA in atherosclerotic plaques and healthy vessel samples. Group-specific chlamydial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) antigens in atherosclerotic plaques and in healthy vessel samples and serum IgG antibodies to chlamydial LPS were determined by using a commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Antibodies to H. pylori were also tested in all cases by means of an in-house ELISA. Results Chlamydial LPS and DNA were detected in 6 of 21 (28.57%) atherosclerotic lesions using ELISA or PCR, respectively. There was no evidence of H. pylori DNA in any plaque specimens. All cases in which C. pneumoniae DNA was positive were also seropositive for antichlamydial LPS. Neither C. pneumoniae DNA nor antigen nor H. pylori DNA was found in the macroscopically healthy samples. Conclusion Our results suggest that C. pneumoniae but not, as proposed, H. pylori may be involved in the pathogenesis of aortoiliac atherosclerosis.

Factors affecting late survival after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

The late prognosis after repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) may be affected by atherosclerosis, which involves various organs including the aorta. The influence of organ dysfunction and atherosclerosis on the long-term survival of 338 consecutive patients undergoing successful elective AAA repair between 1980 and 1997 was analysed using Cox hazards model. Survival rate was compared with that of 349 patients undergoing successful revascularization for aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) during the same interval. Renal dysfunction and a previous history of cerebrovascular events were important variables predicting late death (risk ratio 1.980 and 1.903 respectively), while a history of cardiac disease predicted only cardiac-related death. The survival rate in patients with normal renal function was significantly better than that in those with renal dysfunction (P = 0.0371). Similarly, the survival rate was significantly better in patients without a history of previous cerebrovascular events (P = 0.0414). The survival rate after AAA repair was nearly identical to that of age- and sex-matched patients with grade II or III symptoms who had surgery for AIOD. Advanced atherosclerosis with underlying organ dysfunction is a true determinant of long-term survival following elective repair of AAA.

Endovascular or open surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease?

Endovascular and open surgical techniques form a spectrum of options for the optimal, current treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease. The results of endovascular intervention are determined primarily by lesion characteristics and the associated pattern of occlusive disease while the results of open vascular surgery are more significantly influenced by the patients’ comorbid conditions and surgical risk. Categorizing lesions according to severity enhances appropriate patient selection. The long-term success is higher with open surgery while the initial morbidity is lower with endovascular techniques. Open surgery is a better choice for patients with extensive occlusive disease and/or less severe comorbid conditions. Endovascular surgery is not as durable but offers a reasonable option for patients with focal disease and/or contraindications to surgery.

Operative results and outcome of twenty-four totally laparoscopic vascular procedures for aortoiliac occlusive disease

Purpose: The study objective was to apply laparoscopic techniques to conventional bypass procedures for aortoiliac occlusive disease. Methods: From October 1995 to August 1997, we performed seven iliofemoral (IFB), five unilateral aortofemoral (UAFB), and 11 aortobifemoral (AFB) bypass procedures and one aortic endarterectomy (TEA) totally laparoscopic. A transabdominal approach with pneumoperitoneum was preferred, and only laparoscopic vascular instruments were used. Endoscopic intervention followed principles of vascular surgery. As in open surgery, we used Dacron grafts and polypropylene sutures. Results: Twenty procedures were carried out totally laparoscopic; four conversions to open surgery were necessary. Severe complications included one postoperative respiratory failure requiring ventilatory support for four days, and one iliac vein lesion with subsequent open surgery. Mean operating time was 258 ± 49 minutes for IFB, 218 ± 54 minutes for UAFB, 279 ± 69 minutes for AFB, and 290 minutes for aortic TEA. Mean blood loss was 92 ± 49 ml for IFB, 390 ± 316 ml for UAFB, 563 ± 516 ml for AFB, and 100 ml for aortic TEA. Mean postoperative stay was 7.4 days for IFB, 7.8 days for UAFB, and 10.1 days for AFB. After the aortic TEA, the patient was discharged on day 6. At control examination all grafts were patent; two patients had mild claudication because of one progressive disease and one distal suture stenosis. Conclusion: Laparoscopic vascular surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease is feasible, safe, and effective. At the beginning, a cooperation between experienced laparoscopists and vascular surgeons is needed to overcome procedural challenge, because operating time and conversion rate decrease with growing experience. The advantages observed in the majority of our patients were minimal tissue trauma, decreased blood loss, and faster postoperative recovery when compared with patients who had open aortic surgery at our institution. Further evidence has to be gained by clinical trials to define the role of laparoscopic vascular surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease. (J Vasc Surg 1998;28:136-42.)

Published Results of Surgery for Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease

Optimal decision making about whether to offer or to undergo any arterial revascularization requires explicit consideration of the risks associated with the natural course of the disease and with specific interventional strategies, as well as the preferences of individual patients concerning specific outcomes. Adequate data are vital to informed decision making. Ideally, one would estimate the likelihood of specific outcomes from the results of prospective population-based studies involving a variety of practice settings and patient types over a broad geographic area. However, with rare exceptions, these data are not presently available for patients with aortoiliac arterial occlusive disease (AIAOD). Instead, practitioners must estimate results from institution-based retrospective studies. The data reported here were collated by use of structured literature review in order to improve decision making for all patients with lower extremity arterial occlusive disease and for their physicians. We accepted the fact of publication bias (for example, the concept that published results would tend to be better than unpublished results), in order to summarize the data physicians are communicating to one another in the literature. These data bring us as close as we can come today to answering the question, ‘‘What can physicians tell patients about the results of reconstructive surgery for aortoiliac arterial occlusive disease, on the basis of available information?’’ The data also focus attention on the related question, ‘‘What additional information do patients and physicians need?’’

Laparoscopic aortofemoral bypass. Initial experience in an animal model.

The study objective was to evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic aortofemoral bypass in a porcine model. Laparoscopic techniques have been applied to numerous general and thoracic surgical procedures. Their application to vascular surgery has been virtually nonexistent. Open surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease is accompanied by significant morbidity rates, and minimally invasive procedures have the disadvantage of reduced patency rates. Laparoscopic aortofemoral replacement has the theoretical advantage of long-term patency with reduced postoperative complications. Between January and September 1993, laparoscopic surgery was performed on 16 pigs: 6 underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic aortic dissection and vessel control alone; 7 underwent complete transperitoneal laparoscopic aortofemoral bypass; and 3 underwent a retroperitoneal approach. The aortic anastomosis was performed using a combination of sutures and titanium clips in an end-to-side fashion in five pigs, and a custom-made nonsutured graft was secured with use of an end-to-end method in five pigs. Femoral anastomoses were performed with the standard open technique. Technical success was achieved in all 10 animals and with no major complications. Mean blood loss was 20 ml (range, 5-50 ml), and mean operative time was 2.45 hours (range, 2-4 hrs). On aortic-clamp release, 2 of the end-to-side anastomoses required additional sutures to stop bleeding between oversized staples, and 2 of the end-to-end anastomoses required additional ties to reinforce loose ties. All 10 grafts and anastomoses were patent and free of leaks after completion of the procedure. Laparoscopic aortofemoral bypass is technically feasible in a porcine model. Further experimental work with new instrumentation and technical refinement will make laparoscopic surgery feasible for the treatment of vascular disease in humans.

Aortoiliac Bypass in a Renal Transplant Patient Using a New Technique

There are only 18 patients described in the English literature who had a preexisting renal transplant and underwent aortic surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease. We describe an additional patient who was treated with a new technique using a Sundt shunt and a GraftAssist. This technique provides antegrade flow and minimal ischemic time and avoids exploration of arteries not involved in the anastomosis.

Successful aortic surgery after renal transplantation without protection of the transplanted kidney

When renal transplant recipients undergo aortic surgery, blood supply to the renal graft is interrupted while the aorta is clamped. Several innovative ways of using shunts have been described to preserve blood flow to the transplanted kidney during such surgery on the assumption that temporary warm ischemia of the renal transplant is poorly tolerated. We have performed aortic surgery in four renal transplant recipients without the use of any form of graft protection. One patient underwent urgent operation to treat an expanding aortic aneurysm and the other three had elective surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease. Ischemic times ranged from 30 to 45 minutes. Two of the four patients had a temporary rise in serum creatinine levels. No patient required hemodialysis. We conclude that in selected renal transplant recipients, aortic surgery can be safely undertaken without graft protection.

Spinal Cord Injury Following Abdominal Aortic Surgery: A Case Report

The incidence of spinal cord injury following abdominal aortic surgery is 0.25%.8 Szilagyi's world literature search yielded 36 case reports, and he added 8 case reports to that number. In Szilagy's series, all of the postoperative cases of spinal cord injury were observed after abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. The incidence in cases of ruptured aneurysms was ten times greater (5 of 247 or 2%) than that noted in cases of unruptured aneurysms (3 of 1,477 or 0.2%) . No spinal cord injury occurred in the patients operated on for aorto-iliac occlusive disease, and the rarity of occurrence of this complication in aorto-iliac occlusive disease is reflected in the number of cases reported in the literature. 2,3,5,6,9 The lower extremity neurologic deficit may occur with or without bowel and bladder paralysis, and may be temporary or permanent. The object of this paper is to present a case report of spinal cord injury following surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease, and a discussion of the pathophysiology of this complication.

Spinal cord ischemia following surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease

A 70-year-old man had aortobifemoral bypass for severe aortoiliac occlusive disease. He developed spinal cord ischemia with anterior spinal artery syndrome. He had minimal recovery of muscle function, multiple postoperative complications, and 11 months postoperatively he died. Spinal cord ischemia is a rare and unpredictable complication of abdominal aortic surgery. It most often has occurred following surgery for aneurysm but can also occur after apparently routine surgery for occlusive disease.