Totally percutaneous versus surgical cut-down femoral artery access for elective bifurcated abdominal endovascular aneurysm repair

Exploiting endovascular aortic repair as a minimally invasive method - Nine years of experience in a non-university hospital

Background

At the introduction of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in 2013 in our non-university hospital, we established a quality registry to monitor our EVAR activity.

Purpose

To observe if we over time were able to exploit EVAR as a minimally invasive method in an elective as well as emergency setting, and to monitor our treatment quality in terms of complications, secondary interventions and mortality.

Material and methods

From November 2013 to March 2022, we treated 207 patients with EVAR, including six patients with rupture. Follow-up regimen was partly based on contrast-enhanced computer tomography, and partly on contrast-enhanced ultrasound in combination with plain radiography.

Results

During the observation period, the method of anesthesia changed from general, via spinal, to local anesthesia. The groin access changed from surgical cut down to percutaneous and the median length of postoperative stay decreased from 3 days to 1 day. EVAR on ruptured aneurysm was done for the first time in 2019. Endoleak was detected in 85 patients (42%) and 37 patients (18%) had one or more secondary interventions, of which 85% were endovascular. Estimated five-year survival was 72% in patients below 80 years of age and 45% in patients 80 years or older.

Conclusion

Nine years of experience enabled us to exploit EVAR's advantages as a minimally invasive method in an elective as well as emergency setting. Complications, secondary interventions and survival rates in our low volume non-university hospital matches results from larger vascular centers.

First Experiences With Vascular Closure Devices in the Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Coarctation

The Article Abstract is not available.      

Totally percutaneous versus surgical cut-down femoral artery access for elective bifurcated abdominal endovascular aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are a vascular condition with significant risk attached, particularly if they rupture. Therefore, it is critical to identify and repair these as an elective procedure before they rupture and require emergency surgery. Repair has traditionally been an open surgical technique that required a large incision across the abdomen. Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs (EVARs) are now a common alternative. In this procedure, the common femoral artery is exposed via a cut-down approach and a graft is introduced to the aneurysm in this way. This Cochrane Review examines a totally percutaneous approach to EVAR. This technique gives a minimally invasive approach to femoral artery access that may reduce groin wound complication rates and improve recovery time. However, the technique may be less applicable in people with, for example, groin scarring or arterial calcification. This is an update of the previous Cochrane Review published in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of totally percutaneous access compared to cut-down femoral artery access in people undergoing elective bifurcated abdominal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods The latest search was 8 April 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials in people diagnosed with an AAA comparing totally percutaneous versus surgical cut-down access endovascular repair. We considered all device types. We only considered studies investigating elective repairs. We excluded studies reporting emergency surgery for ruptured AAAs and those reporting aorto-uni-iliac repairs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. short-term mortality, 2. failure of aneurysm exclusion and 3. wound infection. Secondary outcomes were 4. major complications (30-day or in-hospital); 5. medium- to long-term (6 and 12 months) complications and mortality; 6. bleeding complications and haematoma; and 7. operating time, duration of intensive treatment unit (ITU) stay and hospital stay. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for the seven most clinically relevant primary and secondary outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies with 318 participants met the inclusion criteria, 189 undergoing the percutaneous technique and 129 treated by cut-down femoral artery access. One study had a small sample size and did not adequately report the method of randomisation, allocation concealment or preselected outcomes. The other two larger studies had few sources of bias and good methodology; although one study had a high risk of bias in selective reporting. We observed no clear difference in short-term mortality between groups, with only one death occurring overall, in the totally percutaneous group (risk ratio (RR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 36.18; 2 studies, 181 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study reported failure of aneurysm exclusion. There was one failure of aneurysm exclusion in the surgical cut-down femoral artery access group (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.02; 1 study, 151 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For wound infection, there was no clear difference between groups (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.59; 3 studies, 318 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no clear difference between percutaneous and cut-down femoral artery access groups in major complications (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.41; 3 studies, 318 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), bleeding complications (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.29 to 3.64; 2 studies, 181 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or haematoma (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.05; 2 studies, 288 participants). One study reported medium- to long-term complications at six months, with no clear differences between the percutaneous and cut-down femoral artery access groups (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.65; 1 study, 135 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We detected differences in operating time, with the percutaneous approach being faster than cut-down femoral artery access (mean difference (MD) -21.13 minutes, 95% CI -41.74 to -0.53 minutes; 3 studies, 318 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study reported the duration of ITU stay and hospital stay, with no clear difference between groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Skin puncture may make little to no difference to short-term mortality. There is probably little or no difference in failure of aneurysm exclusion (failure to seal the aneurysms), wound infection, major complications within 30 days or while in hospital, medium- to long-term (six months) complications and bleeding complications between the two groups. Compared with exposing the femoral artery, skin puncture may reduce the operating time slightly. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate and low as a result of imprecision due to the small number of participants, low event rates and wide CIs, and inconsistency due to clinical heterogeneity. As the number of included studies was limited, further research into this technique would be beneficial.

Rapid hemostasis of the residual inguinal access sites during endovascular procedures: A case report

BACKGROUND

In endovascular procedures including total percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR), percutaneous access through the common femoral artery is most commonly performed. Access-site bleeding is a major concern in percutaneous techniques. Herein, we present a case of successful control of continuous oozing using a vascular closure device (VCD) and the application of Surgicel (Johnson & Johnson, United States) over the access tract.

CASE SUMMARY

An 82-year-old man presented with an unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm measuring 83 mm × 75 mm. The patient had a medical history of atrial fibrillation and was receiving rivaroxaban (15 mg/d). Routine pEVAR was performed using the preclose technique with ProGlide (Abbott, Santa Clara, CA, United States). Significant amount of bleeding was observed at the end of the procedure after the deployment of the closure device at the access site. A sheet of Surgicel was applied to the suture thread using a surgical needle. Surgicel was applied to the surface of the artery along the access tract using a pusher, and hemostasis was immediately attained.

CONCLUSION

This simple technique is an excellent adjunct to control residual bleeding from the access site following VCD use.

Comparison of Early Efficacy of the Percutaneous Presuture Technique with the Femoral Artery Incision Technique in Endovascular Aortic Repair under Local Anesthesia for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Objective

To compare the efficacy of the percutaneous presuture technique (PPST) and the femoral artery incision technique (FAIT) under local anesthesia in the treatment of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for patients with uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD).

Method

Two hundred and ninety-five patients diagnosed with uTBAD who underwent EVAR under local anesthesia from June 2017 to December 2021 were consecutively and randomly selected for retrospective analysis. The PPST was performed in 178 cases and the FAIT was performed in 117 cases. The clinical characteristics and surgical and postoperative data from the two groups were analyzed.

Results

There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups (p > 0.05). The operative time of the PPST group was significantly shorter than that of the FAIT group (46 (33, 58) versus 72 (67.5, 78.0) minutes, p < 0.001), as was the operative approach procedure time (6 (4.5, 9.0) versus 38 (36.5, 43.5) minutes, p < 0.001), and length of postoperative hospital stay (5.19 ± 2.26 versus 8.33 ± 3.76 days, p < 0.001). There were fewer postoperative approach-related procedural complications in the PPST group than in the FAIT group (2 versus 12, p < 0.001); similarly, the average frequency of postoperative wound disinfection was significantly lower in the PPST group (1.08 ± 0.39 versus 3.31 ± 0.91 times, p < 0.05). Obesity was identified as an independent risk factor for postoperative approach-related procedural complications (OR, 22.26; 95% CI, 4.74–104.49; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The PPST has comparable safety and efficacy to the FAIT in EVAR under local anesthesia. It can shorten the length of hospital stay, reduce operation time, lower the risk of wound-related complications, reduce the frequency of postoperative wound disinfection, and hasten postoperative recovery. It can therefore be used as a first-line surgical technique in EVAR of uTBAD under local anesthesia, especially in obese patients.

Comparison of percutaneous access and open femoral cutdown in elective endovascular aortic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes of percutaneous access and femoral cutdown methods for elective bifurcated endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

METHODS

Between November 2013 and September 2020, a total of 152 patient (135 males, 17 females; mean age: 70.6±6, range, 57 to 87 years) who underwent endovascular repair due to infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm were retrospectively analyzed. According to femoral access type, the patients were grouped into two groups as the total percutaneous femoral access and open cutdown femoral access endovascular repair. Intra- and postoperative data were compared, including operative time, amount of contrast media, bleeding requiring transfusion, return to the operating room, access vessel complications, wound complications, and overall length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven (57.2%) femoral cutdown access repair and 65 (42.8%) percutaneous femoral access repair cases were evaluated in the study. The two groups were comparable in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics (p>0.05), except for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease which was more frequent in the percutaneous access group (p=0.014). After adjustment, age, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and obesity were not predictive of percutaneous access failure. Percutaneous femoral access was observed as the only preventing factor for wound infection (odds ratio=0.166, 95% confidence interval: 0.036-0.756; p=0.021).

CONCLUSION

Although femoral access preference does not affect mortality and re-intervention rates, percutaneous endovascular repair reduces operation time, hospital stay, and wound site complications compared to femoral artery exposures.

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infections Using Fascia Closure After EVAR-A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSI) in the groin after vascular surgery are common. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) on SSI incidence when applied on closed inguinal incisions after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

A multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT). Between November 2013 and December 2020, 377 incisions (336 bilateral and 41 unilateral) from elective EVAR procedures with the primary intent of fascia closure were randomized and included, receiving either NPWT or a standard dressing. In bilateral incisions, each incision randomly received the opposite dressing of the other side, thereby becoming each other's control. The primary endpoint was SSI incidence at 90 days postoperatively, analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Uni and bilaterally operated incisions were analyzed separately, and their respective p-values combined using Fisher's method for combining P-values. Study protocol (NCT01913132).

RESULTS

The SSI incidence at 90 days postoperatively in bilateral incisions was 1.8% (n = 3/168) in the NPWT and 4.8% (n = 8/168) in the standard dressing group, and in unilateral incisions 13.3% (n = 2/15) and 11.5% (n = 3/26), respectively (combined p = 0.49). In all SSIs, bacteria were isolated from incisional wound cultures. No additional SSIs were diagnosed between 90 days and 1 year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

No evidence of difference in SSI incidence was seen in these low-risk inguinal incisions when comparing NPWT with standard dressings after EVAR with the primary intent of fascia closure.

CLINICAL TRIALS

NCT01913132.

Percutaneous Axillary Artery Access for Peripheral and Complex Endovascular Interventions: Clinical Outcomes and Cost Benefits

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the safety, efficacy, and applicability of percutaneous axillary artery (pAxA) access in patients requiring upper extremity large sheath access during complex aortic, cardiac, and peripheral endovascular procedures. We also take this opportunity to address the potential cost-benefits offered by pAxA access compared to open upper extremity access.

METHODS

A total of 26 consecutive patients, between June 2018 and October 2020, underwent endovascular intervention, requiring upper extremity access (UEA). Ultrasound-guided, percutaneous access of the axillary artery was used in all 26 patients with off-label use of pre-close technique with Perclose ProGlide closure devices. Access sites accommodated sheath sizes that ranged from 6 to 14 French (F). End points were technical success and access site-related complications including isolated neuropathies, hematoma, distal embolization, access-site thrombosis, and post-operative bleeding requiring secondary interventions. Technical success was defined as successful arterial closure intraoperatively with no evidence of stenosis, occlusion, or persistent bleeding, requiring additional intervention.

RESULTS

Of the 26 patients requiring pAxA access, 15 underwent complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs (EVAR) with branched, fenestrated, snorkel, or parallel endografts, 6 underwent peripheral vascular interventions, and 5 underwent cardiac interventions. Fifty-three percent accommodated sheath sizes of 12F or higher. Technical success was achieved in 100% of cases with no major perioperative access complications requiring additional open or endovascular procedures. In our series, we had one post-operative mortality secondary to myocardial infarction in a patient with significant coronary artery disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data again demonstrated the proposed safety and efficacy attributable to pAxA access, while extending its application to wide spectrum of endovascular interventions which included peripheral or coronary vascular in addition to complex EVAR.

Comparing and Correlating Outcomes between Open and Percutaneous Access in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Aortic Aneurysms Using a Retrospective Cohort Study Design

Objective

This retrospective cohort study is aimed at determining the safety and efficacy between Femoral Open-Cutdown access and Percutaneous access with Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) by contrasting perioperative complication rates. We hypothesized that the percutaneous approach is a better alternative for aortic aneurysm patients as it is minimally invasive and has been demonstrated to decrease the length of hospital stay.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed data for patients undergoing EVAR between the years of 2005 and 2013. We then compared overall mortality, hematoma or seroma formation, graft infection, arterio-venous injury, distal embolization, limb loss, myocardial infarction or arrhythmia, and renal dysfunction. Results were demonstrated using a retrospective cohort study design to confirm the hematoma rate associated with EVAR open compared to percutaneous access.

Results

Our series involves 73 patients who underwent percutaneous access for EVAR (n = 49) or traditional open cutdown (n = 24). Percutaneous access resulted in significantly less hematoma formation when compared to the traditional open cutdown (4% vs. 12.5%; p < 0.059). Our analysis suggests decreased mortality rates associated with EVAR as compared to the Open-Cutdown method using Northside Medical Center's Study and the OVER Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study (p = 0.0053).

Conclusion

Percutaneous access for EVAR is safe and effective when compared to Open-Cutdown access for aortic aneurysm patients. Percutaneous access was associated with decreased rates of in-hospital mortality, hematoma formation, graft infection, and respiratory failure.

Large arteriotomies closure using a combination of vascular closure devices during TEVAR/EVAR: A single centre experience

In this case series, we share our experience of total percutaneous closure of large arteriotomies using combination of vascular closure devices (VCD). A total of six patients with seven sites for endovascular repair were taken for total percutaneous endovascular aortic repair. Ten femoral arteriotomies (26 French (F) = 2, 24 F = 1, 22 F = 3, 20 F = 1, 18 F = 1 &16 F = 2) were successfully closed with 26 Perclose™ and 07 Angio-seal™ devices. There were no local site complications or VCD failure in any of our patients.

Transverse versus vertical groin incision for femoral artery approach

BACKGROUND

Access to the femoral vessels is necessary for a wide range of vascular procedures, including treatment of thromboembolic disease, arterial grafts (i.e. bifemoral aortic bypass or infrainguinal bypass), endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR), thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The surgical technique used to access the femoral artery may be a factor in the occurrence of postoperative complications; this will be the focus of our review. We will compare the transverse surgical technique-a cut made parallel to the groin crease-versus the vertical groin incision surgical technique-classic technique: a surgical cut made across the groin crease-to access the femoral artery, in an attempt to determine which technique has the lower rate of complications, is safer and is more effective.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transverse groin incision compared with vertical groin incision for accessing the femoral artery in endovascular surgical procedures and open surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and AMED databases, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov to 17 February 2020. The review authors searched the IBECS database to 26 March 2020 and reference lists of relevant studies/papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials (qRCTs) that compare transverse and vertical groin incision, during either endovascular or open surgery procedures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (MVCRC, FCN) independently selected the studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, performed data analysis and graded the certainty of evidence according to GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one RCT and one qRCT in this review. These two studies had a combined total of 237 participants (283 groins). Infection of the surgical wound was the only outcome that was similar in both studies, and that could therefore be submitted to a combined analysis. Meta-analysis of the two studies showed low-certainty evidence that transverse groin incision resulted in a lower risk of surgical wound infection in the 10- to 28-day period following surgery (risk ratio [RR] 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08 to 0.76; 2 studies; 283 groin incisions). There was low heterogeneity between the studies. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for surgical wound infection by one level due to serious limitations in the design (there was a high risk of bias in critical domains). The confidence interval for surgical wound infection is relatively wide, further indicating that the certainty of the effect estimate is low. This is likely due to the small number of studies and participants. We observed no evidence of a difference between the two surgical techniques for the other evaluated primary outcome 'lymphatic complications': lymphocele (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.02; 1 study; 116 groins); and lymphorrhea (RR 2.77, 95% CI 0.92 to 8.34; 1 study; 116 groins). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for lymphatic complications by one level due to serious limitations in the design (there was a high risk of bias in critical domains); and by two further levels because of imprecision (small number of participants and only one study included). High-quality studies are needed to enable a comparison of the two surgical techniques with respect to other outcomes, such as infection of the vascular graft (endoprosthesis/prosthesis), prolonged hospitalization, reoperative surgery, death, neurological deficit (e.g. paresthesia), amputation, graft patency, and postoperative pain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we found low-certainty evidence that performing transverse groin incision to access the femoral artery resulted in fewer surgical wound infections compared with performing vertical groin incision. We observed no evidence of a difference between the two surgical techniques for the other evaluated outcomes (lymphocele and lymphorrhea). Other outcomes were not evaluated in these studies. Limitations of this systematic review are, however, the small sample size, short clinical follow-up period and high risk of bias in critical domains. For this reason, the applicability of the results is limited.

Successful Percutaneous Endovascular Repair in a Very Large, Symptomatic, Non-ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm with Severe Neck Angulation

Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) is a minimally invasive treatment option for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). PEVAR allows for the lower incidence of vascular access site complications and decreased procedure time, yet the utility of this technique depends on the anatomical characteristics of the aneurysm. A detailed evaluation of the access site vessels and aneurysm neck anatomy are critical for standard patient and device selection. An 84-year-old male presented to our institution with the sudden onset of abdominal pain and confusion. Subsequent imaging demonstrated the presence of a 9.5 cm fusiform, infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm with a greater than 60-degree neck angulation and bilateral common iliac aneurysms. The patient underwent percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR), and a type IB endoleak seen at the end of the case was treated successfully. At the one-year follow-up, the patient remained asymptomatic with the AAA stable in size.  This case represents the largest reported symptomatic unruptured AAA repaired with a completely percutaneous technique to date. Building up the stent-graft from the bifurcation with a unibody modular device may allow for support to address the severe angulation of a very hostile neck. PEVAR is a viable option in patients with symptomatic AAA and can be performed despite severe aneurysm neck angulation.