Endovascular versus open repair of asymptomatic popliteal artery aneurysm

Real-world data of popliteal artery aneurysm treatment. Analysis of the POPART registry

OBJECTIVE

Popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA) is a rare disease with a prevalence of 0.1-1%. Within the last years, endovascular repair of PAA (ER) has been performed more frequently despite the lack of high-level evidence compared to open surgery (OR). In 2014, the POPART registry was initiated to validate current treatment options in PAA repair.
 METHOD: POPART is a multinational multicenter registry for peri- and postoperative outcome of endovascular and open PAA repair. Data sets are recorded by the online survey tool "SurveyMonkey®". Regular monitoring and plausibility checks of the data sets are performed to ensure reliability. The aim of this study is to present results of the POPART registry, with data of 41 centers.
 RESULTS: From June 2014 to August 2019, a total of 794 cases were recorded in the PAA registry. OR was performed in 662 patients and ER in 106 patients; 23 Patients were treated conservatively. Four of the 106 patients with primary ER underwent conversion to OR. ER patients were significantly older (ER x˜= 71 vs. OR x˜= 67 (p<0.05). There were no other significant differences in demographics or comorbidities and aneurysm morphology between the two groups. 50.3% patients in the OR group were symptomatic; in the ER group 29.2% (p<0.05). Emergency treatment for acute ischemia, critical ischemia or rupture was necessary in 149 patients (22.5%) in the OR group vs. 11 patients (10.3%) in the ER group.
Most frequent complications after surgery were impaired wound healing (OR n=47, 7.1%; ER n=3, 2.8%, p>0.05) and major bleeding (OR n=26, 3.9%; ER n=3, 2.8%, p>0.05). In-hospital length of stay (= 10d [3-65] OR vs. x˜=7d [1-73] ER) was significantly higher in the OR group. Overall patency was 83.2% vs. 44.7% (OR/ER, p<0.005) after 12 months and 74.2% vs. 29.1% (OR/ER, p<0.005) after 24 months. There was a significantly poorer outcome for prosthetic graft compared to autologous vein in the OR group (71.4% vs. 88.1% 12-month primary patency).
 CONCLUSION: 
 In order to evaluate new treatment techniques such as endovascular repair (ER) for PAA, real world data is of essential importance. This analysis of the first results for the POPART registry shows good perioperative results for endovascular treatment of PAA in asymptomatic patients with good outflow vessels. The perioperative complication rate is low and the postoperative hospital stay is shorter than after OR. However, the patency rates after 12 and 24 months are low in the ER group compared to patients treated with open repair. More follow-up data is required for further interpretation; the completion of the data sets in the registry is ongoing.

Endovascular versus open repair of asymptomatic popliteal artery aneurysm

BACKGROUND

Popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA) is a focal dilatation and weakening of the popliteal artery. If left untreated, the aneurysm may thrombose, rupture or the clot within the aneurysm may embolise causing severe morbidity. PAA may be treated surgically by performing a bypass from the arterial segment proximal to the aneurysm to the arterial segment below the aneurysm, which excludes the aneurysm from the circulation. It may also be treated by a stent graft that is inserted percutaneously or through a small cut in the groin. The success of the procedure is gauged by the ability of the graft to stay patent over an extended duration. While surgical treatment is usually preferred in an emergency, the evidence on first line treatment in a non-emergency setting is unclear. This is an update of a review first published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of an endovascular stent graft versus conventional open surgery for the treatment of asymptomatic popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA) on primary and assisted patency rates, hospital stay, length of the procedure and local complications.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 29 January 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing endovascular stent grafting versus conventional open surgical repair in patients undergoing unilateral or bilateral prophylactic repair of asymptomatic PAAs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We collected data on primary and assisted primary patency rates (primary endpoints) as well as operating time, the length of hospital stay, limb salvage and local wound complications (secondary endpoints). We presented results as risk ratio or mean difference with 95% confidence intervals and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

No new studies were identified for this update. A single RCT with a total of 30 PAAs met the inclusion criteria. There was a low risk of selection bias and detection bias. However, the risks of performance bias, attrition bias and reporting bias were unclear from the study. Despite being an RCT, the certainty of the evidence was downgraded to moderate due to the small sample size, resulting in wide confidence intervals (CIs); only 30 PAAs were randomised over a period of five years (15 PAAs each in the groups receiving endovascular stent graft and undergoing conventional open surgery). The primary patency rate at one year was 93.3% in the endovascular group and 100% in the surgery group (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.12; moderate-certainty evidence). The assisted patency rate at one year was similar in both groups (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no clear evidence of a difference between the two groups in the primary or assisted patency rates at four years (13 grafts were patent from 15 PAA treatments in each group; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.32; moderate-certainty evidence); the effects were imprecise and compatible with the benefit of either endovascular stent graft or surgery or no difference. Mean hospital stay was shorter in the endovascular group (4.3 days for the endovascular group versus 7.7 days for the surgical group; mean difference (MD) -3.40 days, 95% CI -4.42 to -2.38; P < 0.001; moderate-certainty evidence). Mean operating time was also reduced in the endovascular group (75.4 minutes in the endovascular group versus 195.3 minutes in the surgical group; MD -119.90 minutes, 95% CI -137.71 to -102.09; P < 0.001; moderate-certainty evidence). Limb salvage was 100% in both groups. Data on local wound complications were not published in the trial report.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence to determine the effectiveness of endovascular stent graft versus conventional open surgery for the treatment of asymptomatic PAAs is limited to data from one small study. At one year there is moderate-certainty evidence that primary patency may be improved in the surgery group but assisted primary patency rates were similar between groups. At four years there was no clear benefit from either endovascular stent graft or surgery to primary or assisted primary patency (moderate-certainty evidence). As both operating time and hospital stay were reduced in the endovascular group (moderate-certainty evidence), it may represent a viable alternative to open repair of PAA. A large multicenter RCT may provide more information in the future. However, difficulties in recruiting enough patients are likely, unless it is an international collaboration including a number of high volume vascular centres.

Tratamento endovascular versus tratamento aberto de aneurisma de artéria poplítea: artigo de revisão

Resumo O tratamento convencional do aneurisma da artéria poplítea é a cirurgia aberta de exclusão do aneurisma e revascularização do membro acometido. Nos últimos anos, o tratamento endovascular vem ganhando popularidade e interesse. O tratamento endovascular é menos invasivo e de menor morbidade; porém, é de alto custo e sua perviedade é incerta. O objetivo desta revisão é comparar os dois tratamentos através da análise de desfechos abordados em estudos primários e secundários. Realizou-se uma revisão narrativa da literatura publicada nos últimos 5 anos. Foram selecionados seis estudos retrospectivos, duas metanálises, um ensaio clínico e uma revisão sistemática Cochrane. Número limitado de pacientes e curto período de seguimento não nos permitem extrair conclusões consistentes. Não há evidência clara que sugere melhores resultados entre um ou outro tratamento eletivo. Novos ensaios randomizados devem ser realizados para determinar o papel do tratamento endovascular desse aneurisma.

Successful treatment of a ruptured left internal mammary artery aneurysm with a delayed diagnosis of type I neurofibromatosis

Neurofibromatosis type I (NF-1) induced vasculopathy is rare but catastrophic complication after aneurysmal rupture. We present the case of a 55-year-old female who developed hypovolemic shock because of left internal mammary artery (IMA) pseudoaneurysm rupture associated with NF-1. Even she was not detected NF-1 at the time of arrival in emergency room. We decided to perform percutaneous embolization instead of surgical approach. In this case, after intervention, the ruptured left IMA aneurysm was well treated. After 10 days, the patient discharged without any complications.

Popliteal Artery Aneurysm Repair in the Endovascular Era: Fourteen-Years Single Center Experience

To compare outcomes of popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA) repair by endovascular treatment, great saphenous vein (GSV) bypass, and prosthetic bypass.Single center retrospective analysis of patients presenting PAA from 2000 to 2013. Patients were divided into endovascular treatment (group A); GSV bypass (group B); and prosthetic graft bypass (group C). Outcomes were technical success, perioperative mortality, and morbidity. Survival, primary and secondary patency, and freedom from reintervention rate were estimated. Differences in ankle-brachial index (ABI), in-hospital length of stay (InH-Los), red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, and limb loss were reported. Mean follow-up was 49 (median: 35; 1-145; SD 42) months.Sixty-seven patients were included; 25 in group A, 28 in group B, and 14 in group C. PAA was symptomatic in 23 (34%) cases. Technical success was 100%. No perioperative death occurred. Three (4.5%) perioperative complications were reported with no significant difference between groups (P = 0.866). Five-years estimated survival was 78%. Estimated 5-years primary patency for groups A, B, and C was 71%, 81%, and 69%, respectively (P = 0.19). Estimated 5-years secondary patency for groups A, B, and C was 88%, 85%, and 84% (P = 0.85). Estimated 5-years freedom from reintervention for groups A, B, and C was 62%, 84%, and 70%, respectively (P = 0.16). A significant difference between preoperative ABI versus postoperative ABI was observed (P = 0.001). InH-LoS was significantly shorter in group A (P < 0.001). RBC transfusions were required significantly less in group A when compared to group C (P = 0.045). Overall limb salvage was achieved in all but 1 patient.PAA repair has good early and long-term outcomes with different treatment options. Endovascular treatment was not inferior to surgical repair with a reduced InH-LoS and RBC transfusion. It can be successfully employed even in nonelective setting. A randomized controlled trial with long-term follow-up and appropriate patient inclusion criteria is necessary to compare these 3 treatment options.