Triple In Situ Antegrade Laser Fenestration of Aortic Stent-Graft Extension Using Fusion Imaging for Urgent Treatment of Symptomatic Abdominal Aneurysm with Type 1 Endoleak

Image fusion guidance for left subclavian artery in situ fenestration during thoracic endovascular repair

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility and clinical benefit of utilizing image fusion for thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) with in situ fenestration (ISF-TEVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2020 and December 2020, we prospectively collected 18 consecutive cases with complex thoracic aortic lesions who underwent image fusion guided ISF-TEVAR. As a control group, 18 patients were collected from historical medical records from June 2019 to December 2019. The fusion group involved the use of 3D fusion of CTA and fluoroscopic images for real-time 3D guidance, and the control group involved the use of only regular fluoroscopic images for guidance. The total contrast medium volume, hand-injected contrast medium volume, overall operative time, radiation dose and fluoroscopy time were compared between the two groups. Accuracy was measured based on preoperative CTA and intraoperative digital subtraction angiography.

RESULTS

3D fusion imaging guidance was successfully implemented in all patients in the fusion group. Hand-injected contrast medium volume and overall operative time were significantly lower in the fusion group than in the control group (p = .028 and p = .011). Compared with the control group, the fusion group showed a significant reduction in time and radiation dose-area product (DAP) for fluoroscopy (p = .004 and p = .010). No significant differences in total radiation dose (DAP) or total contrast medium volume were observed (p = .079 and p = .443). Full accuracy was achieved in 8 cases (44%), with a mean deviation of 2.61 mm ± 3.1 (range 0.0-8.4 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

3D image fusion for ISF-TEVAR was associated with a significant reduction in hand-injected contrast medium, time and radiation exposure for fluoroscopy and overall operative time. The image fusion guidance showed potential clinical benefits towards improved treatment safety and accuracy for complex thoracic endovascular interventions.

The role of multimodal imaging in emergency vascular conditions: The journey from diagnosis to hybrid operating rooms

Multimodal imaging is the incorporation of two or more imaging modalities during the same examination, and it has both diagnostic and treatment applications. The use of image fusion for intraoperative guidance in endovascular interventions is being extended increasingly to the field of vascular surgery, especially in the context of hybrid operating rooms. The aim of this work was to perform a review and narrative synthesis of the available literature in order to report on current applications of multimodal imaging in diagnosis and treatment of emergent vascular conditions. Of 311 records selected in the initial search, 10 articles were included in the present review: 4 cohort studies and 6 case reports. The authors have presented their experience in treating ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms; aortic dissections; traumas; standard endovascular aortic aneurysm repair, with or without deterioration of renal function; and complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair, and reported on the long-term clinical results. Although the current literature about multimodal imaging application in emergency vascular conditions is limited, this review highlights the potential of image fusion in hybrid angio-surgical suites, especially for diagnosing and performing treatment in the same operating room, avoiding patient transfer, and allowing procedures with zero or low-dose contrast mean.

Midterm Outcomes of Antegrade In Situ Laser Fenestration of Polyester Endografts for Urgent Treatment of Aortic Pathologies Involving the Visceral and Renal Arteries

OBJECTIVE

Aortic endografting and antegrade in situ laser fenestration of visceral arteries (LFEVAR) may be considered as an alternative to open surgery for the emergency repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) in fragile patients. The aim of this article was to evaluate the midterm results of LFEVAR performed with polyester endografts.

METHODS

From August 2015 to December 2020, all consecutive LFEVAR performed for non-deferrable treatment of complex AAA were analysed. Polyester endografts were deployed and subsequently fenestrated using an atherectomy laser probe; the fenestrations were enlarged using cutting and semicompliant balloons before implantation of balloon expandable bridging stents into the target vessels. Prospectively collected midterm survival, patency, and re-intervention rates were analysed.

RESULTS

Forty four procedures were performed for 11 type 1a endoleaks, five thoraco-abdominal aneurysms, 20 pararenal aneurysms, four segmental renal artery (RA) preservations, three anastomotic aneurysms, and one aortic dissection. One hundred and eight laser fenestrations were performed (26 for the superior mesenteric artery [SMA], 13 for the coeliac trunk, 33 and 31 for the right and left RA, respectively). The median ischaemia duration was 7, 48, 48, and 45 minutes, respectively. The technical success rate was 97%, with no open surgical conversions. The 30 day mortality was 4.5% (n = 2). No spinal cord ischaemia events were observed nor early stent related complications. Kaplan-Meier overall survival at two years was 73%, the aortic related re-intervention free survival was 70%, and the stent related re-intervention free survival was 90.6%. Four target vessel thromboses were detected, of which three were rescued. Three type IIIc endoleaks, one RA false aneurysm, and one SMA stenosis, required re-intervention during a median follow up of 24.7 months.

CONCLUSION

Antegrade LFEVAR is feasible, safe, and provides satisfactory early and midterm outcomes for non-deferrable treatment of aortic pathologies involving the visceral segment. Long term data are mandatory to confirm the usefulness of this promising off label technique.

A systematic review of experimental and clinical studies reporting on in situ laser fenestration of aortic endografts

OBJECTIVE

To summarize available in-situ laser fenestration (ISLF) literature, including experimental studies with their subsequent recommendations regarding optimal fenestration technique and fabric; as well as the short and mid-term results of clinical studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of English articles was performed in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database and EMBASE, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines by two researchers. The search period was without starting date until the 31^st August 2020, and search terms included were in situ, laser, fenestration, and endograft. Quality assessment of the studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale by two other independent researchers.

RESULTS

A total of 19 clinical studies were included, with a total of 428 patients (390 supra-aortic trunk ISLF, 38 visceral vessel ISLF). The technical success was 96.9% and 95.6% supra-aortic and visceral vessel ISLF, respectively. Most studies have less than 12-month follow-up, and the longest available follow-up (in one study) was 5-years for left-subclavian fenestration and 17-months for visceral vessel ISLF. Overall, the quality of the evaluated clinical studies was low. Six experimental studies were included, with the highest level of evidence suggesting fenestration of multifilament polyethylene terephthalate grafts, followed by dilation with either a 6- or 8-mm non-compliant balloon.

CONCLUSION

Experimental studies favour the use of multifilament polyethylene terephthalate , followed by dilation with non-compliant balloons as the most durable "in-vitro" technique for ISLF. Short-term outcomes for arch and visceral vessel revascularization are promising, with low rates of in-hospital mortality, stroke, and end-organ ischemia. Nonetheless, the long-term durability of ISLF is yet to be determined and they should be limited to selected symptomatic or urgent cases.

Recanalization and Stenting of the Celiac and the Superior Mesenteric Artery Supported by Use of a Steerable Introducer Sheath: Report on 2 Years' Experience

PURPOSE

To compare technical parameters and success of recanalization of celiac (CA) or superior mesenteric artery (SMA) with usage of steerable vs not steerable introducer sheaths.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on all consecutive patients who underwent recanalization with stent implantation of CA or SMA between 2015 and 2019. Data regarding technical success (successful stent placement with restoration of sufficient blood flow by the first attempt without changing kind of introducer sheath or access site), indication for treatment, vascular access, kind of introducer sheath, fluoroscopy time and radiation dose were collected. Preinterventional CT were analyzed to classify the difficulty of catheterization of target vessels. Technical parameters were compared with independent t-test (p ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

66 patients underwent recanalization of CA or SMA. Usage of steerable introducer sheaths was associated with higher technical success compared to not steerable introducer sheaths with transfemoral approach respectively of 8/8 vs 15/19 for the CA and 11/11 vs 17/20 for the SMA. Steerable introducer sheaths were used in recanalization considered more technically difficult compared to not steerable introducer sheaths (58% vs 33%). Usage of steerable introducer sheath showed a statistically significant reduction of radiation dose in the recanalization of the SMA (respectively 32035 ± 15716 cGy cm² vs 60102 ± 28432 cGy cm²; p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Even if used in more difficult interventions, steerable introducer sheaths showed a higher technical success compared to not steerable introducer sheaths with transfemoral access.

Combination of Quadruple Antegrade and Retrograde In Situ Stent-Graft Laser Fenestration in the Management of a Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

BACKGROUND

We report a case of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm-anatomically unsuitable for conventional endovascular repair because of narrow distal aorta-successfully treated by endovascular repair facilitated by in situ laser fenestration.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An aortic stent graft was inserted to exclude a juxtarenal aneurysm: under image fusion guidance, antegrade in situ laser fenestration allowed to perfuse superior mesenteric artery and both renal arteries. After complementary insertion of an extended aortouni-iliac stent graft, retrograde in situ laser fenestration was performed to perfuse the contralateral left iliac artery, in order to overcome a narrow distal aorta. Postoperative course was uneventful. Six month's CT showed an excluded aneurysm, patency of the inserted stents and the absence of endoleak.

CONCLUSIONS

In situ laser fenestration seems to be an effective solution for endovascular therapy of complex juxtarenal aneurysms. In this case of narrow distal aorta it was a suitable alternative to overcome endovascular aneurysm repair anatomical restrictions and to prevent other additional open surgical interventions.

CBCT-Based Image Guidance for Percutaneous Access: Electromagnetic Navigation Versus 3D Image Fusion with Fluoroscopy Versus Combination of Both Technologies-A Phantom Study

PURPOSE

We set out to compare three types of three-dimensional CBCT-based imaging guidance modalities in a phantom study: image fusion with fluoroscopy (IF), electromagnetic navigation (EMN) and the association of both technologies (CEMNIF).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four targets with a median diameter of 11 mm [first quartile (Q1): 10; third quartile (Q3): 12] with acute angle access (z-axis < 45°) and four targets of 10 mm [8-15] with large angle access (z-axis > 45°) were defined on an abdominal phantom (CIRS, Meditest, Tabuteau, France). Acute angle access targets were punctured using IF, EMN or CEMNIF and large angle access targets with EMN by four operators with various experiences. Efficacy (target reached), accuracy (distance between needle tip and target center), procedure time, radiation exposure and reproducibility were explored and compared.

RESULTS

All targets were reached (100% efficacy) by all operators. For targets with acute angle access, procedure times (EMN: 265 s [236-360], IF: 292 s [260-345], CEMNIF: 320 s [240-333]) and accuracy (EMN: 3 mm [2-5], IF: 2 mm [1-3], CEMNIF: 3 mm [2-4]) were similar. Radiation exposure (EMN: 0; IF: 708 mGy.cm² [599-1128]; CEMNIF: 51 mGy.cm² [15-150]; p < 0.001) was significantly higher with IF than with CEMNIF and EMN. For targets with large angle access, procedure times (EMN: 345 s [259-457], CEMNIF: 425 s [340-473]; p = 0.01) and radiation exposure (EMN: 0, CEMIF: 159 mGy.cm² [39-316]; p < 0.001) were significantly lower with EMN but with lower accuracy (EMN: 4 mm [4-6] and CEMNIF: 4 mm [3, 4]; p = 0.01). The operator's experience did not impact the tested parameters regardless of the technique.

CONCLUSION

In this phantom study, EMN was not limited to acute angle targets. Efficacy and accuracy of puncture for acute angle access targets with EMN, IF or CEMNIF were similar. CEMNIF is more accurate for large angle access targets at the cost of a slightly higher procedure time and radiation exposure.