Fast-track endovascular aortic repair: Interim report from the prospective LIFE registry

Assessment of percutaneous closure for decannulation of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Despite the evidence supporting the use of Perclose Proglide® (PP) suture-mediated vascular closure devices in various clinical scenarios, limited evidence exists regarding its role in percutaneous arterial closure of the femoral artery after venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Compared to conventional methods, this study evaluates the effectiveness and complications of bedside percutaneous femoral artery closure using Perclose ProGlide (PP) for VA-ECMO decannulation.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort of consecutive patients managed with mechanical circulatory support VA-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock, who survived decannulation between January 2017 and August 2023. A comparison between PP and other decannulation strategies was established to evaluate the effectiveness and procedure-related complications of bedside percutaneous femoral artery closure using a PP with a post-closure technique compared to conventional approaches of surgical and manual decannulation.

RESULTS

Among 122 patients decannulated from VA-ECMO with a mean age of 48.6 ± 13.1 and 78 (63.9) males, 49.2% comprised the PP group. Despite the older age (p = 0.021) and higher prevalence of arterial hypertension (p = 0.045), the PP group had a larger number of patients free from decannulation-related adverse events. Additionally, a higher haemoglobin level 24 h post decannulation (p = 0.047), with no difference in terms of transfusion of red blood cells between groups (p = 0.263) was found. The pseudoaneurysm was the most frequently reported complication, while the arterial cannulation surgical wound site infection was only documented in the open repair subgroup. A trend towards reduced Intensive Care (ICU) and hospital length of stay after decannulation was noted, although it did not reach statistical significance. There was no difference in mortality between both groups and no procedure-related deaths occurred. A mean of 2.7 PP devices were required to achieve complete haemostasis in the PP cohort, where technical failure was documented in four cases (6.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Bedside Percutaneous decannulation of VA-ECMO using a PP device with a post-closure technique is safe and reliable for achieving effective haemostasis, with fewer vascular complications than conventional approaches and a low device failure rate.

Real-world experience of suture-based closure devices: Insights from the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience

OBJECTIVES

We analyzed post-marketing surveillance data from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database for suture-based vascular closure devices (VCDs) - Perclose ProGlide (Abbott, Chicago, Illinois) and Prostar XL (Abbott).

BACKGROUND

Suture-based VCDs are mostly used for large-bore femoral arterial access-site closure. Real-world, contemporary experience on the most commonly reported complications and modes of failure associated with these devices is limited.

METHODS

Post-marketing surveillance data from the FDA MAUDE database, for the ProGlide system and for the Prostar XL system, were analyzed, yielding 827 Perclose ProGlide reports and 175 Prostar XL reports.

RESULTS

Of the 827 reports of major complications involving the Perclose ProGlide devices, 404 reports involved injury, and one involved death related to the device. In the Prostar XL analysis, 94 reports involved injury, and one involved death. Bleeding from vessel injury was the most common adverse outcome described with both devices, followed by hematoma and thrombus. Surgical repair was the most commonly used treatment strategy. In terms of device malfunction, suture-related malfunction (212 reports) was most commonly seen in the Perclose ProGlide group, while failed deployment was most commonly seen in the Prostar XL group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of the MAUDE database demonstrates that in real-world practice, suture-based VCDs were found to be associated with complications, including vascular injury, difficulties with the device itself, and even death. Ongoing user education and pre-procedural patient selection are important to minimize risks associated with suture-based vascular closure devices.

Regional anesthesia for vascular surgery: does the anesthetic choice influence outcome?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Outcomes following surgery are of major importance to clinicians, institutions and most importantly patients. This review examines whether regional anesthesia and analgesia influence outcome after vascular surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Large database analyses of contemporary practice suggest that utilizing regional anesthesia for both open and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair, lower limb revascularization and carotid endarterectomy reduces morbidity, length of stay and possibly even mortality. Results from such analyses are limited by an inherent risk of bias but are nevertheless important given the number of patients required in randomized trials to detect differences in rare outcomes. There is minimal evidence that regional anesthesia influences longer term outcomes except for arteriovenous fistula surgery where brachial plexus blocks appear to improve 3-month fistula patency.

SUMMARY

Patients undergoing vascular surgery often have multiple comorbidities and it is important to be able to outline both benefits and risks of regional anesthesia techniques. Regional anesthesia in vascular surgery allows avoidance of general anesthesia and does provide short-term benefits beyond superior analgesia. Evidence of long-term benefits is lacking in most procedures. Further work is required on newer patient centered outcomes.

Peripheral Vascular Disease in Women: Therapeutic Options in 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent years, there have been advances in the prevention, management, and control of peripheral vascular disease (PVD). There is a trend towards aggressive risk factor modification, noninvasive screening, and endovascular revascularization with surgical approaches reserved only for select cases. This article reviews the different management strategies ranging from pharmacotherapy, revascularization, and rehabilitation with an emphasis on the response of women to these therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Overall, the representation of women in the majority of the published data in this arena remains poor. Studies examining medical therapy and endovascular and surgical revascularization were not designed to address sex disparities. Nevertheless, we dissect these therapies and their relevant randomized trials. The paucity of data investigating the response of women to the different management options makes it difficult to make any evidence-based recommendations. This not only applies to the type of intervention, but also the appropriate timing and risks entailed.

Peripheral artery disease is associated with poor clinical outcome in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

We investigated the effects of coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) on clinical outcomes of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) treated with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated a total of 475 patients with AAA treated with EVAR at a single center. Patients were divided into three groups: group A (n = 166), patients without CAD or PAD; group B (n = 196), patients with CAD but without PAD; and group C (n = 113), patients with PAD regardless of CAD. The primary endpoint was the accumulated rate of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke.

RESULTS

The prevalence of CAD and PAD in patients with AAA was 55.8 and 23.8%, respectively. Patients were followed for 40.2 ± 35.3 months. Baseline characteristics were similar among the groups except for current smoking (A, 27.4%; B, 20.8%; C, 50.5%; p = 0.001). Three years after EVAR, the incidences of MACCE (A, 5.6%; B, 9.5%; C, 16.7%; p = 0.021) and stroke (A, 0%; B, 2.2%; C, 5.2%; p = 0.025) were highest in group C. All-cause death and aneurysm death did not differ among the groups. PAD [hazard ratio (HR) 2.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-6.29, p = 0.008] and previous stroke (HR 4.39, 95% CI 1.94-9.93, p < 0.001) were independent predictors of MACCE.

CONCLUSIONS

PAD was an independent risk factor of increased MACCE and stroke for patients with AAA undergoing EVAR. More intensive secondary prevention may be needed to reduce adverse cardiovascular events in AAA patients with PAD.

Perioperative Outcomes From the Prospective Multicenter Least Invasive Fast-Track EVAR (LIFE) Registry

Purpose: To determine the feasibility, perioperative resource utilization, and safety of a fast-track endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) protocol in well-selected patients. Methods: Between October 2014 and May 2016, the LIFE (Least Invasive Fast-track EVAR) registry ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02224794) enrolled 250 patients (mean age 73±8 years; 208 men) in a fast-track EVAR protocol comprised of bilateral percutaneous access using the 14-F Ovation stent-graft, no general anesthesia, no intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and next-day discharge. The primary endpoint was major adverse events (MAE) through 30 days. The target performance goal for the MAE endpoint was 10.4%. Results: Vascular access, stent-graft delivery, and stent-graft deployment success were 100%. A total of 216 (86%) patients completed all elements of the fast-track EVAR protocol. Completion of individual elements was 98% for general anesthesia avoidance, 97% for bilateral percutaneous access, 96% for ICU avoidance, and 92% for next-day discharge. Perioperative outcomes included mean procedure time of 88 minutes, median blood loss of 50 mL, early oral nutrition (median 6 hours), early mobilization (median 8 hours), and short hospitalization (median 26 hours). Fast-track EVAR completers had shorter procedure time (p<0.001), less blood loss (p=0.04), faster return to oral nutrition (p<0.001) and ambulation (p<0.01), and shorter hospital stay (p<0.001). With 241 (96%) of the 250 patients returning for the 30-day follow-up, the MAE incidence was 0.4% (90% CI 0.1% to 1.8%), significantly less than the 10.4% performance goal (p<0.001). No aneurysm rupture, conversion to surgery, or aneurysm-related secondary procedure was reported. There were no type III endoleaks and 1 (0.4%) type I endoleak. Iliac limb occlusion was identified in 2 (0.8%) patients. The 30-day hospital readmission rate was 1.6% overall. Conclusion: A fast-track EVAR protocol was feasible in well-selected patients and resulted in efficient perioperative resource utilization with excellent safety and effectiveness.

The Impact of System Factors on Quality and Safety in Arterial Surgery: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

A systems approach to patient safety proposes that a wide range of factors contribute to surgical outcome, yet the impact of team, work environment, and organisational factors, is not fully understood in arterial surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize and discuss what is already known about the impact of system factors on quality and safety in arterial surgery.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of original research papers in English using MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases, was performed according to PRISMA guidelines.

REVIEW METHODS

Independent reviewers selected papers according to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, and using predefined data fields, extracted relevant data on team, work environment, and organisational factors, and measures of quality and/or safety, in arterial procedures.

RESULTS

Twelve papers met the selection criteria. Study endpoints were not consistent between papers, and most failed to report their clinical significance. A variety of tools were used to measure team skills in five papers; only one paper measured the relationship between team factors and patient outcomes. Two papers reported that equipment failures were common and had a significant impact on operating room efficiency. The influence of hospital characteristics on failure-to-rescue rates was tested in one large study, although their conclusions were limited to the American Medicare population. Five papers implemented changes in the patient pathway, but most studies failed to account for potential confounding variables.

CONCLUSIONS

A small number of heterogenous studies have evaluated the relationship between system factors and quality or safety in arterial surgery. There is some evidence of an association between system factors and patient outcomes, but there is more work to be done to fully understand this relationship. Future research would benefit from consistency in definitions, the use of validated assessment tools, measurement of clinically relevant endpoints, and adherence to national reporting guidelines.

A Real-World Experience Comparison of Percutaneous and Open Femoral Exposure for Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in a Tertiary Medical Center

Objective:

To compare the outcomes of elective percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) versus surgical cutdown endovascular aneurysm repair (SEVAR) procedures performed at a tertiary medical center from 2012 to 2015.

Methods:

This is a unique study using procedure data from two vascular surgeons who performed SEVAR in almost every case versus three vascular surgeons who performed PEVAR in all cases except when considered prohibitive on account of circumferential calcification or severe occlusive disease of the common femoral artery or some other technical consideration. Medical records of patients aged 18 years or older undergoing elective PEVAR or SEVAR between January 2012 and December 2015 were reviewed. Differences in readmissions and complications between patients who received PEVAR and those who received SEVAR were assessed using Fisher’s exact test. The exact Cochran-Armitage test was used to assess trends in length of stay between the PEVAR and SEVAR group.

Results:

A total of 183 patients were analyzed. In total, 132 underwent PEVAR and 51 underwent SEVAR. A statistically significant difference was noted with regard to 30-day readmissions (2.3% vs 13.7%, P = .006) in favor of PEVAR and categorical length of stay tended to be longer in the SEVAR group ( P = .003). The 30-day complication rate was not statistically different (6.8% vs 15.7%, P = .09).

Conclusions:

Surgical cutdown endovascular aneurysm repair results in more readmissions, often related to groin wound complications, which lead to prolonged length of stay and expense. Patients undergoing PEVAR tend to have a shorter length of stay. Overall complication rate was similar in the two groups. We recommend PEVAR for patients with appropriate anatomy.