Type Ia Endoleak Research Articles

Endovascular aneurysm repair using the Gore Excluder Conformable Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Endoprosthesis with active control system in octogenarians with highly angulated aneurysm neck: a UK single-centre experience

Objective: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with highly angulated neck (>60°) in octogenarians represents a challenge to treatment with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). In such cases, EVAR may be used outside the manufacturer’s Instructions for Use and attendant higher risk of failure. The new device Gore Excluder Conformable AAA Endoprosthesis with active control (CEXC) system has been designed to achieve optimal aortic wall apposition and seal in these more challenging geometries. This study reports the initial results and technical success of this device in octogenarians with highly angulated aneurysm necks (>60°). Methods: All patients aged >80 years who had AAAs treated with the CEXC device at a single UK centre between January 2020 and July 2023 were analysed. The primary endpoint was technical success, which was defined as successful introduction and deployment of the device in the absence of surgical conversion or mortality, type I or III endoleaks or graft limb obstruction. The secondary outcomes included 30-day morbidity, mortality, endoleak and re-intervention rates. Results: Twenty patients were included (17 (75%) males) of median age 81 (range 80–84) years. The median AAA diameter was 60 (57–63) mm and the median infrarenal neck angulation was 80 (70–89)°. The active control system was used in six cases. The median procedural time was 277 (254–316) minutes. The immediate technical success rate was 95%, with one type Ia endoleak (5%). In the 30-day postoperative period, four complications were reported. On the 30-day follow-up CT scan, five type II endoleaks were observed and one initial type Ia endoleak had persisted at 30 days. No re-intervention was required during the first 30-day postoperative period. One hospital death occurred during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic; however, the death was unrelated to the surgery. Conclusions: EVAR with the CEXC device in octogenarians with hostile aortic neck anatomy is feasible inside the Instructions for Use, and shows satisfactory initial results.

A Systematic Review of Total Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair: A Promising Technology.

Total endovascular aortic arch repair (TEAAR) represents an emerging alternative for the treatment of aortic arch disease in patients at prohibitive risk for open surgery. A systematic review of TEAAR was performed to delineate early outcomes with this new technology. All studies (excluding single-patient case reports) of CE-certified "custom made" or "off-the-shelf" zone 0 stent graft deployments were included. The primary search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane CENTRAL registry was supplemented with searches of Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and conference abstracts (within last 3 years), and a hand search of citations within relevant articles. Articles underwent 2-stage screening by 2 independent reviewers before inclusion. Fifteen relevant investigations were identified. Indications for TEAAR were chronic arch dissection with degenerative aneurysmal disease (54%, 148/273), pure arch aneurysm (41%, 112/273), penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (2%, 5/273), and type IA endoleak from a zone 2 thoracic endograft (1%, 3/273). Double-branch (70%, 192/273), triple-branch (19%, 53/273), and single-branch (into innominate artery; 10%, 28/273) devices were used. Adjunct left carotid-subclavian bypass occurred in 90% of double- and single-branch procedures. Procedural success with TEAAR was 93% (95% CI 85.8%-96.3%). The proportion of all-cause mortality was 16% (95% CI 8%-26%), stroke 14% (8%-24%), peripheral vascular events 7% (1%-33%), and myocardial infarction 4% (2%-7%). Endoleaks were identified in 13% (7%-25%) of the study population. TEAAR represents an emerging option for the management of aortic arch disease wth high procedural success rates and acceptable early outcomes in a high-risk patient population.

A novel balloon-assisted technique to secure visceral catheterization during a chimney endovascular repair of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in a centenarian patient.

A 100-year-old male patient was admitted with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm due to type IA endoleak. Given the proximity of the ruptured site to the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and renal arteries, a ChEVAR was indicated. Catheterization of the target visceral vessels was a challenging procedural step because of an intensely tortuous thoracic aorta. This hostile aortic anatomy also inhibited exchange for a super stiff guide-wire and selective cannulation with the diagnostic catheter was repeatedly lost when guidewire exchange was attempted. To overcome this issue, a 5 x 40 mm balloon catheter was placed 3cm into the target arteries. The balloon was then inflated below the nominal pressure limit enabling safe exchange for a super stiff guidewire and placement of three 90-cm long 7Fr guiding sheaths. The procedure was thus safely performed with deployment of an aortic extension and the bridging stents.

The effect of supraceliac versus infraceliac landing zone on outcomes following fenestrated endovascular repair of juxta-/pararenal aortic aneurysms.

With increasing experience in fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) over time, devices designed to treat juxta-/pararenal aortic aneurysms have evolved in complexity to extend to more proximal landing zones and incorporate more target vessels. We assessed perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent juxta-/pararenal FEVAR with supraceliac vs infraceliac sealing in the Vascular Quality Initiative. We identified all patients who underwent elective FEVAR (commercially available FEVAR and physician-modified endografts) for juxta-/pararenal aortic aneurysms in the Vascular Quality Initiative between 2014 and 2021. Supraceliac sealing was defined as proximal sealing in aortic zone 5, or zone 6 with a celiac scallop/fenestration/branch or celiac occlusion. Primary outcomes were perioperative and 3-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included completion endoleaks, in-hospital complications, and factors associated with 3-year mortality. We calculated propensity scores and used inverse probability-weighted Cox regression and logistic regression modeling to assess outcomes. Among 1486 patients identified, 1246 patients (84%) underwent infraceliac sealing, and 240 patients (16%) underwent supraceliac sealing. Of the supraceliac patients, 74 (31%) had a celiac scallop, 144 (60%) had a celiac fenestration/branch, and 22 (9.2%) had a celiac occlusion (intentional or unintentional). After risk-adjusted analyses, there were no differences in perioperative mortality following supraceliac sealing compared with infraceliac sealing (2.3% vs 2.5%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-1.8; P= .42), or 3-year mortality (12% vs 15%; HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.53-1.5; P= .67). Compared with infraceliac sealing, supraceliac sealing was associated with lower odds of type-IA completion endoleaks (odds ratio [OR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.05-0.67), but higher odds of any complication (12% vs 6.9%; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.01-2.5) including cardiac complications (5.5% vs 1.9%; OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.3-5.1), lower extremity ischemia (3.0% vs 0.9%; OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.02-9.5), and acute kidney injury (16% vs 11%; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.05-2.3). Though non-significant, there was a trend towards higher risk of spinal cord ischemia following supraceliac sealing compared with infraceliac sealing (1.7% vs 0.8%; OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 0.70-6.4). There were no differences in bowel ischemia between groups (1.7% vs 1.5%; OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.24-1.23). A more proximal aneurysm disease extent was associated with higher 3-year mortality (HR zone 8 vs 9, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.5), whereas procedural characteristics had no influence. Compared with sealing at an infraceliac level, supraceliac sealing was associated with lower risk of type IA endoleaks and similar mortality. However, clinicians should be aware that supraceliac sealing was associated with higher perioperative morbidity. Future studies with longer follow-up are needed to adequately assess durability differences to comprehensively weigh the risks and benefits of utilizing a higher sealing zone within the visceral aorta for juxta-/pararenal FEVAR.

A Novel Bypass Technique to Prevent Vexing Spinal Cord Ischemia in Endovascular Thoracoabdominal Aortic Intervention.

Spinal cord ischemia remains a devastating complication when treating patients with complex thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms using fenestrated endovascular aortic repair. This approach is progressively deployed. However, to date, no strategy has been identified to reduce the feared risk of spinal cord ischemia. To introduce a novel bypass technique using a customized composite graft to create a direct extra-anatomic revascularization before fenestrated endovascular aortic repair in patients with high-risk of spinal cord ischemia. To demonstrate this novel concept, we present here a clinical case that reports the strategy of this novel concept in detail. An 83-year-old man with medical history of endovascular repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm and thoracic aorta presented with a type IA endoleak, located along the posterior superior aspect of the aortic stent graft adjacent to the lumbar arteries. A multidisciplinary plan was developed, which included a novel bypass from the profunda femoris to the left L1 radicular artery before fenestrated endovascular aortic repair to prevent spinal cord ischemia. The patient successfully receives the novel extra-anatomic revascularization bypass before fenestrated endovascular aortic repair. During the first implementation of this strategy, no intraoperative difficulties and postoperative complications were observed. This case demonstrates a novel surgical technique before fenestrated endovascular aortic repair for prevention of spinal cord ischemia. In addition, this concept provides a promising direction to not only complement the existing surgical techniques but also to generate more future innovations.

Conical Aortic Neck as a Predictor of Outcome after Endovascular Aneurysm Exclusion: Midterm Results

Conical neck may affect endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) outcomes. The aim of this study was to present EVAR neck adverse events [endoleak type Ia (ET Ia) and graft migration], in patients with conical neck morphology compared to patients with non-conical necks. An additional analysis of the factors that may affect neck adverse events in patients with conical necks, during the first postoperative year, was executed. A retrospective analysis of prospective data was conducted, including patients that underwent elective EVAR, between 2017 and 2019. All patients completed the clinical and imaging follow-up of the initial 12months. Regarding imaging, all cases underwent computed tomography angiography (CTA), preoperatively, at the 1st and 12th month of follow-up. Preoperative and postoperative aneurysm anatomic characteristics (supra-renal and infra-renal aortic diameters, aneurysm diameter, neck angle, thrombus, and calcification) were recorded. Proximal neck was defined as the infrarenal aortic segment, with a diameter less than 30mm. Conical neck was any neck with a diameter increase ≥2mm per cm of length (from outer-to-outer aortic wall). The proximal 15mm of the neck length were considered the zone of endograft sealing. Migration was any ≥10mm caudal movement of the endograft, relative to its position detected at the CTA of the first month. Neck adverse events were defined as the composite event of ET Ia and migration. The cohort included 150 patients; 66 (44%) presented conical neck morphology. No significant difference was detected regarding the preoperative anatomic characteristics between the conical and non-conical groups. Only distal (15mm) neck diameter was wider in the conical group (P<0.001). Supra-renal active fixation was used in 63.3% of the total cohort; 59.5% in patients with non-conical necks and 68.2% in patients with conical morphology (P=0.275). Graft oversizing was 18.2% and 18.7% in the non-conical and conical group, respectively (P=0.248). Oversizing >20% was equal between groups [37.8% vs. 33.3%% (P=0.608) while oversizing ≥30% was more common among patients with conical necks (3.5% vs. 10.6%, P<0.001, 3.2 odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.79, 12.91). Regarding ET Ia and migration, no difference was recorded between the groups. In a subanalysis among patients with conical necks, a lower graft migration rate was detected among patients with higher oversizing rate (P=0.037). EVAR may offer similarly good midterm outcomes in patients with conical and non-conical neck anatomy. An oversizing to the higher suggested rate may be preventive of graft migration during the first postoperative year in necks with conical morphology. Aggressive oversizing (>20%) do not offer any benefit regarding the prevention of adverse events among patients with conical necks.

Single-branched stent-graft with on-table fenestration for endovascular repair of primary retrograde type A aortic dissection: A multicenter retrospective study.

This study aims to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of a single-branched stent-graft with on-table fenestration for primary retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). From January 2019 to December 2021, 36 patients with primary RTAD from five tertiary hospitals received medical management in the acute phase. They underwent TEVAR with a proximal zone 1 landing for aortic arch reconstruction in the subacute phase, using a fenestration technique on a single-branched stent-graft. Nearly 2 weeks after admission, computed tomography angiography (CTA) was re-examined to evaluate the thrombosis status of retrograde false lumen (FL). The primary outcomes were technical success, patency of the target branch arteries, and absence of type Ia endoleaks. The second outcomes were stent-graft-related complications and all-cause mortality. The mean age was 56.2 ± 11.3 years, and 29 (80.6%) were male. After a median interval of 18.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 17.0-20.3] days of medical treatment, the partial and complete thrombosis of proximal FL rates increased to 52.8% and 47.2%, respectively. One patient (2.8%) experienced postoperative type Ia endoleaks, and was successfully re-treated using coli and Onyx glue. The median hospital stay was 20.5 (IQR, 18.0-23.0) days. The overall technical success rate was 100%. The median follow-up time was 31.5 (IQR, 29.8-34.0) months. There was one death (2.8%) due to gastrointestinal bleeding. Distal aortic segmental enlargement (DASE) occurred in two (5.6%) patients. No major complications or recurrent dissections in the proximal landing zone were recorded during follow up. The retrograde FL in primary RTAD could realize partial or complete thrombosis after medical management in the acute phase, and it might be regarded as a valid proximal landing zone for endovascular repair. The single-branched stent graft with on-table fenestration performed in the subacute phase may be feasible strategy in selective primary RTAD patients.

Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair After a Migrated EVAR Bypassing a Severely Kinked Previous Endograft

Purpose: To describe a novel technique to repair a juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (JAAA) after failed endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with severely kinked anatomy. Technique: We present a patient who underwent an EVAR with a Medtronic Talent device 15 years ago and a proximal cuff extension 3 years earlier for an abdominal aortic aneurysm. Computed tomography (CT) done for a known gastritis showed a 12 cm JAAA, with a migrated endograft and a type Ia endoleak (EL). Endovascular repair was performed, accessing and navigating the aneurysmal sac outside the previous graft. The type I EL was reached and the suprarenal aorta catheterized. A 4-vessel inner-branched EVAR device was deployed in the distal thoracic aorta and their target vessels bridged through femoral access. A distal bifurcated component was deployed and both iliac limbs were extended to the native distal iliac arteries. Completion angiogram as well as early and 12-month CT showed a fully patent straight course branched EVAR with no ELs. Conclusion: Complex aortic reinterventions in the presence of previous EVAR can be performed by choosing a straighter course along and parallel to the previous endograft. Several technical aspects must be considered to successfully perform this type of reinterventions. Clinical Impact We present a technique of a complex endovascular aortic repair in a failed EVAR with kinked anatomy, navigating through the thrombosed aneurysmal sac, outside the previously placed endograft and thus obtaining a straighter path for a new branched endograft. The novelty lies in a different approach to repair a failed EVAR with a branched graft through an uncommon access on the side of the previous endograft, avoiding repeated displacement or occlusion of the new endograft. We exemplify the feasibility of such a complex procedure and highlight important steps to perform it, whether in the abdominal or even thoracic Aorta.

Influence of severe neck angulation on hemodynamic and clinical outcomes following endovascular aneurysm repair: a hemodynamic analysis and a retrospective cohort study.

For patients with severe neck angulation (SNA), hemodynamic and clinical outcomes following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are still unclear. This study aimed to explore the influence of SNA on hemodynamic and clinical outcomes following EVAR. This study included a hemodynamic analysis and a retrospective cohort study from West China Hospital of Sichuan University between January 2011 and December 2020. The Cox regression model, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis were applied. Primary outcome was type IA endoleak (T1AEL). In this hemodynamic analysis, nine non-severe neck angulation (nSNA) and 16 SNA idealized models were constructed. We found a significant difference in drag force between SNA and nSNA models (7.016 ± 2.579 N vs. 4.283 ± 1.460 N, P = 0.008), and proximal neck angles were significantly associated with the magnitude of drag force (F = 0.082 × α-0.006 × β + 2.818, α: 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.070-0.094; P = 0.001; β: 95% CI -0.019 to 0.007; P = 0.319). In our cohort study, 514 nSNA patients (71.5 ± 8.5 years; 459 males) and 208 SNA patients (72.5 ± 7.8 years; 135 males) were included, with a median follow-up duration of 34 months (16-63 months). All baseline characteristics were well balanced after IPTW matching. We found that SNA was associated with a significant risk of adverse limb event (hazard ratio [HR] 2.18, 95% CI 1.09-3.12), yet was not associated with T1AEL, overall survival, or reintervention. In patients without proximal or distal additional procedures (DAP), subgroup analyses suggested a significant risk of T1AEL (Proximal: HR 5.25, 95% CI 1.51-18.23; Distal: HR 5.07, 95% CI 1.60-16.07) and adverse limb event (Proximal: HR 2.27, 95% CI 1.01-5.07; Distal: HR 2.91, 95% CI 1.30-6.54) in SNA patients. However, no noticeable difference was observed in patients with proximal or DAP. SNA has a critical influence on hemodynamic and clinical outcomes following EVAR. Appropriate additional procedures may be of great benefit to SNA patients.

Management of an Isolated Left Vertebral Artery on the Arch During Zone 2 Landing Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Multicentre Retrospective Study

To compare the early and midterm outcomes of three different strategies for an isolated left vertebral artery on the arch (LVoA) revascularisation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with a proximal zone 2 landing. Between January 2016 and December 2021, 67 patients with LVoA and aortic arch pathologies who underwent zone 2 landing TEVAR at four medical centres were enrolled. These patients were divided into three groups for comparison: the novel chimney (group A, n= 28) with the right brachial-left brachial through and through (RLT) procedure; invitro fenestration (group B, n= 24); and transposition (group C, n= 15). The flow direction and velocity of the LVoA was examined by Doppler ultrasound in the pre-, intra-, and post-operative periods. Primary outcomes were all cause mortality and new neurological symptoms. No deaths or new neurological symptoms occurred within 30 days. Early type Ia endoleak rates were 18% (n= 5), 17% (n= 4), and 0% in groups A, B, and C, respectively (p= .22). All patients had antegrade flow of the LVoA. The mean ± standard deviation duration of follow up was 63.6 ± 4.0 months. No deaths were observed during follow up. The rates of new neurological symptoms were 0%, 8%, and 33% in groups A, B, and C, respectively. The rates of midterm type Ia endoleak were 7%, 12%, and 0% in groups A, B, and C, respectively (p= .35). Bidirectional flow rates in the LVoA were 0%, 21%, and 27% in groups A, B, and C, respectively (p= .021). Two (8%) and three (20%) patients in groups B and C underwent a secondary procedure because of mild dizziness, but this was not necessary in group A (p= .058). The novel chimney technique of the RLT procedure may be feasible for patients with a LVoA requiring zone 2 anchoring. Accurate determination of the safety and feasibility of this novel technique requires larger sample sizes and longer follow up.

Identifying high risk for proximal endograft failure after endovascular aneurysm repair in patients suitable for both openand endovascular elective aneurysm repair.

Proximal endograft failure (type Ia endoleak or migration) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is associated with hostile aneurysm neck morphology. Neck scoring systems were developed to predict proximal endograft failure but were studied in retrospective studies, which, due to selection bias, may have led to an overestimation of bad outcomes after EVAR. To predict patients who benefit from open repair, preoperative neck morphology and occurrence of long-term proximal endograft failure were investigated in patients enrolled in the endovascular arm of the Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) trial who were suitable for open repair by definition and have long-term follow-up. A post-hoc on-treatment analysis of patients after EVAR was performed in 171 patients. Aneurysm neck morphology was quantified using the aneurysm severity grading (ASG) neck score calculated on preoperative computed tomography angiography images. The ASG neck score was used to predict proximal endograft failure. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to calculate a threshold to divide favorable and unfavorable aneurysm necks (low and high risk); positive and negative likelihood-ratios were calculated accordingly. Freedom from proximal endograft failure was compared between groups using Kaplan-Meier analysis. During a median follow-up of 7.6years, 20 patients suffered proximal endograft failure. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed an area under the curve of 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.90; P< .001), indicating acceptable prediction. The threshold was determined at ASG neck score ≥5; 30 patients had unfavorable neck morphology, of whom 11 developed proximal endograft failure. The positive likelihood-ratio was 4.4 (95% CI, 2.5-7.8), and the negative likelihood-ratio was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.3-0.8). Twelve years postoperatively, freedom from proximal endograft failure was 91.7% in the favorable group and 53.2% in the unfavorable group, a difference of 38.5% (95% CI, 13.9-63.1; P<.001). In this study, the ASG neck score predicted proximal endograft failure during the entire follow-up. This exhibits the persistent risk for proximal endograft failure long after EVAR and calls for ongoing surveillance especially in patients with unfavorable aneurysm necks.

Outcomes of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair conversion in octogenarians treated at a high-volume aorta center.

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the dominant treatment strategy for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms but has been especially preferred for octogenarian (age ≥80years) patients because of concerns surrounding comorbidity severity and physiologic frailty. However, EVAR failure resulting in subsequent open conversion (EVAR-c) has been increasingly reported in older patients, although a paucity of literature focusing on the outcomes in this subgroup is available. The purpose of the present analysis was to evaluate our experience with EVAR-c for octogenarians (age ≥80years) compared with that for younger patients (age<80years). A retrospective review of all nonmycotic EVAR-c procedures (2002-2020) at a single high-volume academic hospital with a dedicated aorta center (available at: https://www.uf-health-aortic-disease-center) was performed. A total of 162 patients were categorized into octogenarian (age ≥80years; n= 43) and nonoctogenarian (age<80years; n= 119) cohorts and compared. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. The secondary end points included complications, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. Cox regression was used to determine the effects of selected covariates on mortality risk. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival. No differences in the preadmission EVAR reintervention rates were present (octogenarians, 42%; nonoctogenarians, 43%; P= 1.00) although the interval to the first reintervention was longer for the octogenarians (41months) than for the nonoctogenarians (15months; P= .01). In addition, the time to EVAR-c was significantly longer for the octogenarian patients (61months) than for the nonoctogenarian patients (39months; P< .01). No difference in rupture presentation was evident (14% vs 10%; P= .6). However, elective EVAR-c occurred less frequently for octogenarians (42%) than for nonoctogenarians (59%; P= .07). The abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter was significantly larger for elective octogenarian EVAR-c (7.8± 1.9cm) than for nonoctogenarian EVAR-c (7.0± 1.5cm; P= .02), and the presence of a type Ia endoleak was the most common indication overall (58%; n= 91). A trend toward greater 30-day mortality was evident for octogenarian patients (16%) compared with nonoctogenarian patients (7%; P= .06). Similarly, the 90-day mortality was greater for the octogenarian patients (26%) than for the nonoctogenarian patients (10%; P= .02). However, the incidence of any complication (56% vs 49%; P= .5), readmission rate (12% vs 6%; P= .3), unplanned reoperation rate (10% vs 5%; P= .5), and length of stay (11days vs 9days; P= .3) were not significantly different between the two groups. Age ≥80years was predictive of short-term mortality after nonelective but not after elective surgery. However, increasing comorbidities, nonelective admission, and renal or mesenteric revascularization showed the strongest association with mortality risk. Survival at 1 and 3years was not different between the two groups when comparing all patients after the first 90days postoperatively. Although the unadjusted perioperative mortality was greater for octogenarian patients, the risk-adjusted elective outcomes were comparable to those for younger EVAR-c patients when treated at a high-volume aortic surgery center. This finding underscores the importance of appropriate patient selection and modulation of operative complexity when feasible to achieve optimal results. Providers caring for octogenarian patients with EVAR failure should consider timely elective referral to high-volume aorta centers to reduce resource usage and the frequency of nonelective presentations.

Open Repair of a Complicated Late Endoleak Induced by Another Endoleak

A 66-year-old man had an enlarging aortic aneurysm sac after an endovascular aortic replacement procedure that had been performed at another institution 4 years previously; it was without any endoleak but was complicated by the occlusion of the left limb, requiring cross-femoral bypass. Current computed tomography revealed dilatation of the proximal neck and the right common iliac artery. A type Ib endoleak was found from the distal end of the right limb of the endograft, possibly secondary to the dilatation of the artery around it; it then pressurized and caused the dilatation of the juxtarenal aorta around the proximal landing zone and induced a concomitant type Ia endoleak. The patient was operated on owing to the risk of rupture. Pelvic ischemia was a concern during decision-making. The patient underwent removal of the endograft and replacement of a bifurcated aortoiliac and femoral graft with good outcome. Midline laparotomy and a supraceliac clamping approach enable the removal of endografts with suprarenal fixation and revascularization of internal iliac arteries. Open repair offers a definitive solution for complicated endoleaks when endovascular options could be risky and ineffective.

Evolution of open aneurysmorrhaphy for management of sac expansion after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

ObjectiveWe evaluated the perioperative and mid-term clinical outcomes of open aneurysmorrhaphy (OA) for the treatment of sac expansion after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms. MethodsOA involves sac exposure without dissection of the proximal or distal neck, sacotomy and ligation of back-bleeding vessels, preservation of the prior stent graft, and tight closure of the sac around the stent graft. We performed a retrospective review of all patients who had undergone OA for nonruptured sac expansion after standard EVAR at our institution between January 2015 and June 2021. The primary end points were 30-day mortality and aneurysm-related death. The secondary end points were postoperative complications, overall survival, freedom from reintervention, and sac regrowth rate. ResultsA total of 28 patients had undergone OA. Their mean age was 76.9 ± 6.7 years. The median sac diameter at OA was 79 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 76-92 mm). The median duration from the index EVAR to OA was 82 months (IQR, 72-104 months). Preoperative computed tomography angiography confirmed a type II endoleak (EL) in 20 patients, 1 of whom had had a coexisting type Ia EL; a type IIIb EL was identified in 1 patient. Concomitant endovascular procedures had been performed in six patients to treat a type I or III EL or reinforce the proximal and distal seals. The OA technique has been modified since 2017, with the addition of more aggressive dissection of the sac and complete removal of the mural thrombus to further decrease the sac diameter. Postoperative complications occurred in two patients and included abdominal lymphorrhea and failed hemostasis of the common femoral artery requiring surgical repair in one patient each. The 30-day mortality was 0%. During the median follow-up of 36 months (IQR, 14-51 months), the overall survival was 92.7% and 86.9% at 12 and 36 months, respectively, without any aneurysm-related death. In the late (2017-2021) treatment group, the median sac diameter immediately after OA was smaller than that in the early (2015-2016) treatment group (early group: median, 50 mm; IQR, 39-57 mm; vs later group: median, 41 mm; IQR, 32-47 mm; P = .083). Furthermore, in the late group, the sac regrowth rate was lower (early group: median, 0.36 mm/mo; IQR, 0.23-0.83 mm/mo; vs late group: median, 0 mm/mo; IQR, 0-0.11 mm/mo; P = .0075) and the freedom from reintervention rate was higher (late group: 94.7% at both 12 and 36 months, respectively; early group: 71.4% and 53.6% at 12 and 36 months, respectively; log-rank P = .070). ConclusionsOur results have shown that OA for the management of post-EVAR sac expansion is feasible with acceptable mid-term outcomes. Aggressive dissection and tight plication of the sac might be imperative for better mid-term outcomes after OA.

The Effect of EndoAnchors on Aneurysm Sac Regression for Patients Treated With Infrarenal Endovascular Repair With Hostile Neck Anatomies: A Propensity Scored Analysis

Purpose: To analyze sac evolution patterns in matched patients with hostile neck anatomy (HNA) treated with standard endovascular aneurysm repair (sEVAR) and endosutured aneurysm repair (ESAR). Methods: Observational retrospective study using prospectively collected data between June 2010 and December 2019. ESAR group data were extracted from the primary arm of the PERU registry with an assigned identifier (NCT04100499) at 8 centers and those from the sEVAR came from 4 centers. Suitability for inclusion required: no proximal endograft adjuncts (besides EndoAnchor use), ≤15 mm neck length and minimum of 12-months follow-up imaging. Bubble-shaped neck (noncylindrical short neck with discontinuous seal) aspect was analyzed. Both groups were analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM) for aortic neck length, width, angulation, and device fixation type. Main outcome assessed was sac evolution patterns (sac expansion and regression were defined as >5mm increase or decrease, of the maximum sac diameter respectively; all AAAs within this ±5 mm range in diameter change were considered stable) and secondary outcomes were type-Ia endoleaks; other endoleaks and mortality. A power analysis calculation >80% was confirmed for sac regression evaluation. Results: After exclusions, PSM resulted in 96 ESAR and 96 sEVAR patients. Mean imaging follow-up (months) was 44.4±21.3 versus 43.0±19.6 (p=0.643), respectively. The overall number of patients achieving sac regression was higher in the ESAR group (n=57, 59.4% vs n=31, 32.3%; p<0.001) and the cumulative sac regression achieved at 5 years was 65% versus 38% (p=0.003) in favor of the ESAR group. There were no statistically significant differences in type-Ia endoleak and/or other endoleaks. Univariate analysis for sac regression patients in the sEVAR and ESAR group individually showed the bubble-shape neck as a predictor of sac regression failure. There were no statistical differences in overall and aneurysm-related mortality. Conclusion: Endosutured aneurysm repair provided improved rates of sac regression for patients with AAA and HNA when compared with sEVAR at midterm and up to 5 years, despite similar rates of type-Ia endoleaks, and the need to consider some important limitations. The presence of bubble-shaped neck was a predictor of sac regression failure for both groups equally. Clinical Impact The use of EndoAnchors aids and improves EVAR treatment in hostile neck anatomies by an increased rate of sac regression when compared to EVAR treatment alone in up to 5 year analysis. Moreover, a trend to reduced number of type Ia endoleaks is also achieved, although not significant in the present study. This data, adds to current and growing evidence on the usefulness of EndoAnchors for AAA endovascular treatment.

TOTAL ENDOVASCULAR AORTIC ARCH REPAIR

TOTAL ENDOVASCULAR AORTIC ARCH REPAIR

The choice of bridging stents in fenestrated endovascular aortic repair

PURPOSE: To study the medium and long-term patency and endoleak rate of visceral arteries in fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (fEVAR), and explore the strategies for bridging stent selection. METHODS: The clinical data of 44 patients with thoracoabdominal aneurysms, infrarenal short-necked aortic aneurysms and aortic dissection involving the visceral artery treated using fEVAR were reviewed. The indications for stents for different visceral vessels were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 104 target vessels were revascularized with 7 scallops and 97 fenestrations. Among them, 12 were without stents and 92 were bridged with 96 stent-grafts, including 28 uncovered stents and 68 covered stents. The success rate of the one-time placement of bridging stents was 95.7% (88/92). The overall Type-I endoleak rate was 2.9% (3/104), and the overall visceral stent patency rate was 97.1%. The receiver operating characteristic curve revealed that the critical distances between the celiac trunk artery, superior mesenteric artery (SMA), renal artery, and aneurysm were 10.25 mm, 4.3 mm, and 10.05 mm, respectively, for selecting covered stents or uncovered stents and 12.4 mm for SMAs with or without stents. CONCLUSION: The branch-to-aneurysm distance may be important for bridging stents choice in fEVAR.

Procedure and Aortic Remodeling Effects of Entry Closure with Stentgraft for Type B Aortic Dissection: Comparison between the Patients with Narrow True Lumen and Those with Aneurysmal Dilated False Lumen.

Objectives: Appropriateness of device selection, procedure protocol and aortic remodeling effects of entry closure (TEVAR) with stent-graft (SG) for patent false lumen type B aortic dissection (TBAD) were compared between the patients with narrow true lumen (narrow group) and those with aneurysmal dilated false lumen (aneurysmal group).Methods: Twenty-six patients with narrow true lumen (narrow group) and 20 patients with aneurysmal false lumen (aneurysmal group) were included in this study. In narrow group, straight SG was implanted from Zone 3 regardless the distance between the left subclavian artery and entry. In aneurysmal group, straight or taped SG was implanted with proximal landing zone length 20 mm or more. Thoracic aortic anatomy was evaluated by CT and aortic remodeling was defined as true lumen diameter ≥50% of the aortic diameter and occlusion of false lumen. Aorta related death, retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD), stentgraft induced new entry (SINE) and aortic maximum diameter enlargement 5 mm or more (aortic expansion) were included in the aortic event.Results: There was no procedure related complication in narrow group and 1 patient died due to aortic rupture in aneurysmal group, Type Ia endoleak by enhanced CT 7 days after TEVAR was detected in one patient in each group. Achievement of aortic remodeling was significantly better in narrow group. Aortic event occurred in only one patient in narrow group, in whom aortic expansion was observed. In aneurysmal group, aortic event occurred 12 patients (60%) and 2 RTAD, 5 SINE, and 8 aorta expansion were observed. Aortic event free rate was significantly better in narrow group.Conclusion: TEVAR procedure for the TBAD patients with narrow true lumen seemed to be appropriate, however, different TEVAR procedure or additional procedures would be required for those with aneurysmal dilated false lumen to obtain favorable outcomes. (This is secondary publication from Jpn J Vasc Surg 2021; 30: 347–357.)

Thoracic endovascular repair for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury: Long-term results.

This study aims to evaluate the endoprosthesis complications in patients undergoing TEVAR for blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury, through long-term clinical and diagnostic follow-up. During the study interval (November 2000-October 2020), a total of 38 patients (63% male; average age 37.5years) with thoracic aortic injury underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Patients underwent routine follow-up with clinical examination and radiological evaluation (CT-angiography or MRI-angiography plus chest radiograph), scheduled at 1month, at 6months (only in the cases of thoracic aortic dissection), at 1year after the procedure and every 1year thereafter. Technical success was achieved in 38 procedures (100%). The TEVAR-related mortality rate was 0%. No immediate major complications related to the endovascular procedure were observed. The median duration of diagnostic follow-up was 80months. A total of four procedure-related complications (10.5%) were identified at the follow-up. Three (7.9%) distal infoldings and collapses of the thoracic endoprosthesis and one (2.6%) type Ia endoleak were observed. No thrombosis of the prosthesis, nor signs of aortic pseudocoarctation were identified. No further complications related to endograft (endoleaks, infections, rupture, partial or complete thrombosis) occurred. No changes in the native aorta, stenosis, or increases in the endograft's diameters were observed. A total of 20 patients (52.6%) underwent MRI-angiography examinations, while a total of 34 patients (89.5%) underwent chest radiographs at the follow-up. In all cases, CT-angiography examinations were performed at the follow-up. Procedure-related complications were observed within one year of TEVAR, limiting concerns related to the durability of the prosthesis. No morphological changes in the aorta were observed despite long-term follow-up. The consequences of lifelong surveillance in terms of radiation exposure deserve special consideration, especially in younger patients treated for TAI.

Shortest Apposition Length at the First Postoperative Computed Tomography Angiography Identifies Patients at Risk for Developing a Late Type Ia Endoleak After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Purpose: Imaging surveillance following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is strictly recommended. This study investigates the value of endograft apposition and position relative to the aortic neck on the first postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) in determining patients at risk for a late type Ia endoleak (T1aEL). Materials and Methods: Patients with a T1aEL after the first postoperative CTA were selected from a consecutive database and matched with uncomplicated controls. Endograft apposition and position, including the shortest apposition length (SAL), were determined on the first postoperative CTA. The SAL is the shortest distance between the proximal endograft fabric and the first slice where circumferential apposition with the aortic wall is lost. Differences in endograft apposition at the first postoperative CTA were compared between groups. Logistic regression analysis identified independent predictors for late T1aEL. Results: A total of 32 patients with a late T1aEL were included and matched with 32 uncomplicated controls. Median follow-up after primary EVAR was 62.0 (interquartile range [IQR]: 36.8, 83.5) months in the T1aEL group compared with 47.5 (IQR: 34.0, 79.3) months in the control group; p=0.265. Median preoperative neck diameter was significantly larger in the T1aEL group than in the control group (26.6 [IQR: 24.9, 29.6] mm versus 23.4 [IQR: 22.5, 25.3] mm); p<0.001. Patients in the T1aEL group had a median SAL of 11.6 (IQR: 4.3, 20.5) mm compared with 20.7 (IQR: 13.1, 24.9) mm in the control group; p=0.002. SAL <10mm on the first postoperative CTA (odds ratio [OR]: 9.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.60–57.99) and larger neck diameter (OR: 1.80, 95% CI: 1.26–2.57) were independent predictors for developing a late T1aEL. Conclusion: Preoperative neck diameter and SAL on the first postoperative CTA following EVAR are important predictors for the development of a late T1aEL. Patients with a SAL of <10mm had a significantly higher risk of developing a late T1aEL. Future research should determine whether these patients would benefit from reintervention before an actual T1aEL is present. Clinical Impact Understanding the mechanisms of endovascular aneurysm repair failure is essential to further enhance clinical outcomes. Adequate proximal sealing is necessary to foster freedom from type 1a endoleak. This study demonstrates that the shortest apposition length (SAL) at the first postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) is able to identify patients at risk for a late type 1a endoleak. Especially patients with a SAL <10mm are at high risk. Currently, the guidelines advice repeated imaging with CTA in patients with a seal <10mm. Future research should determine whether these patients would benefit from re-intervention before an actual type 1a endoleak is present.