Open Surgical and Endovascular Conduits for Difficult Access During Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Optimizing Femoral Access in Emergency EVAR with a Decision-Making Algorithm

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the preferred approach over open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) due to its minimally invasive nature. The common femoral artery (CFA) is the main access vessel for EVAR, with both surgical exposure and percutaneous access being utilized. However, in emergent cases, percutaneous access can be challenging and may result in complications such as bleeding or dissection thrombosis, leading to the need for surgical conversion. This study aimed to share experiences in implementing a decision-making algorithm to reduce surgical conversions due to percutaneous access failures. A total of 74 aortic patients treated with EVAR in emergency settings were included in this retrospective study. This study focused on various outcomes such as perioperative mortality, morbidity, procedure time, surgical exposure time, and surgical conversion rate. After the implementation of the decision-making algorithm, decreases in surgical conversions and operating time were observed. Percutaneous access was found to be more challenging in cases with specific anatomical characteristics of the CFA, such as severe atherosclerosis or smaller vessel diameter. This study highlighted the importance of carefully assessing patient anatomical features and utilizing a decision-making algorithm to optimize outcomes in EVAR procedures. Further research is needed to continue improving practices for managing aortic aneurysms and reducing complications in femoral artery access approaches.

Endovascular (stent-graft)-assisted open vascular anastomosis

Endovascular and open surgical approaches are an integral part of treating patients with complex vascular disease and are often considered separately. In some situations, traditional open surgical techniques can be used to facilitate an endovascular approach, as example: iliac conduit use for EVAR/TEVAR, subclavian or axillary conduits for complex endovascular aortic repairs (chimney, B-FEVAR), and bypass to great vessels or visceral artery (celiac, superior mesenteric and renal arteries) debranching. As devices and techniques evolve, the open and endovascular approaches can be utilized in more complimentary fashion. This paper describes the use of endovascular procedures to assist difficult open surgical situations such as iliofemoral bypass, aortic arch debranching involving the left subclavian artery, and distal right iliac artery management during open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair.

Endovascular repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm with external iliac artery occlusion using VBX as the contralateral leg via axillary delivery: A case report

RATIONALE

A hostile iliac access route is an important consideration when enforcing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Herein, we report a case of AAA with unilateral external iliac artery occlusion, for which bifurcated EVAR was successfully performed using a single femoral and brachial artery access.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 76-year-old man who had undergone surgery for lung cancer 4.5 years prior was diagnosed AAA by computed tomography (CT).

DIAGNOSIS

Two and a half years before presentation, CT revealed an infrarenal 48 mm AAA, which had enlarged to 57 mm by 2 months preoperatively. CT identified occlusion from the right external iliac artery to the right common femoral artery, with no observed ischemic symptoms in his right leg. The right external iliac artery, occluded and atrophied, had a 1 to 2 mm diameter.

INTERVENTION

Surgery was commenced with the selection of a Zenith endovascular graft (Cook Medical) with an extended body length. Two Gore Viabahn VBX balloon expandable endoprosthesis (VBX; W.L. Gore & Associate) were delivered from the right axilla as the contralateral leg.

OUTCOMES

CT scan on the 2nd day after surgery revealed no endoleaks.

LESSONS

While the long-term results remain uncertain, this method may serve as an option for EVAR in patients with unilateral external iliac artery occlusion.

Intravascular Iliac Artery Lithotripsy to Facilitate Aortic Endograft Delivery: Midterm Results of a Dual-Center Experience

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility and safety of intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) for enabling transfemoral abdominal (EVAR), thoracic (TEVAR), and thoracoabdominal (BEVAR) endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with narrow and calcified iliac arteries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients treated with IVL for severe calcified and narrowed iliac access before EVAR, TEVAR, or BEVAR between November 2020 and June 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. All anatomical iliac characteristics were acquired by multi-planar reconstruction of preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA). The hostility of the vascular accesses was classified based on Peripheral Arterial Calcium Scoring System (PACSS) and calcified access severity score (CASS), a new score considering both anatomical (calcium grade and length, minimum lumen diameter [MLD], and tortuosity index) and aortic stent-graft (SG/MLD index) parameters. Primary endpoint was technical success defined as successful aortic endograft delivery and deployment without iliac rupture. Freedom from complications and primary patency were additionally analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight iliac axes were treated with IVL (8 bilateral) in 20 patients (mean age 74.5±6.7 years) with a mean follow-up of 26.5±6.2 (range 17-36) months. Ten patients underwent EVAR: 3 TEVAR, and 7 BEVAR procedures. In 14 patients (70%), aneurysm disease was associated with symptomatic aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD), with Rutherford class III to IV. The PACSS was grade IV in 89% of the cases and the CASS (mean 14±2) was grade III to IV in all cases. The stent-graft (SG) outer diameter (5.60±1.65 mm) was significantly larger by 50% than MLD (3.96±1.20 mm), with an SG/MLD index of 1.50±0.51 (p<0.001). Technical success was 100%. No dissection, rupture, or distal embolization occurred. One (3.4%) bail-out stenting was necessary as endoconduit after IVL treatment. One month CTA showed that postoperative luminal gain increased by 93% (p<0.001). An improvement of 2 Rutherford classes occurred in all AIOD patients with a primary patency of 100% at last follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the safety and feasibility of IVL as a valuable option to treat narrow and calcified iliac arteries to facilitate endograft delivery. Further studies will be useful to confirm these results.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In this article, the use of intravascular iliac artery lithotripsy to facilitate aortic endograft delivery is explored. The presence of iliac severe calcifications still represents a contraindication for aortic endovascular repair. Intravascular lithotripsy increases the feasibility and safety of endovascular aortic procedures, facilitating endograft delivery and reducing the risk of iliac rupture and/or dissections by improving vessel compliance and luminal gain. This novel vessel preparation could be an alternative to "paving and cracking" and/or iliac conduits. This study describes a new score to classify the severity of iliac calcifications, considering anatomical parameters and the profile of aortic endografts delivery system.

Impact of iliac access in elective and non-elective endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is nowadays the establishment treatment for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) both in elective and urgent setting. Despite the large applicability and satisfactory results, the presence of hostile iliac anatomy affects both technical and clinical success. This narrative review aimed to report the impact of iliac access and related adjunctive procedures in patients undergoing EVAR in elective and non-elective setting. Hostile iliac access can be defined in presence of narrowed, tortuous, calcified, or occluded iliac arteries. These iliac characteristics can be graded by the anatomic severity grade score to quantitatively assess anatomic complexity before undergoing treatment. Literature shows that iliac hostility has an impact on device navigability, insertion and perioperative and postoperative results. Overall, it has been correlated to higher rate of access issues, representing up to 30% of the first published EVAR experience. Recent innovations with low-profile endografts have reduced large-bore sheaths related issues. However, iliac-related complications still represent an issue, and several adjunctive endovascular and surgical strategies are nowadays available to overcome these complications during EVAR. In urgent settings iliac hostility can significantly impact on particular time sensitive procedures. Moreover, in case of severe hostility patients might be written off for EVAR repair might be inapplicable, exposing to higher mortality/morbidity risk in this urgent/emergent setting. In conclusion, an accurate anatomical evaluation of iliac arteries during preoperative planning, materials availability, and skilled preparation to face iliac-related issues are crucial to address these challenges.

Outcomes of iliofemoral conduits during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

To describe the technical pitfalls and outcomes of iliofemoral conduits during fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 466 consecutive patients enrolled in a previous prospective nonrandomized study to investigate FB-EVAR for CAAAs/TAAAs (2013-2021). Iliofemoral conduits were performed through open surgical technique (temporary or permanent) in patients with patent internal iliac arteries or endovascular technique among those with occluded internal iliac arteries. End points were assessed in patients who had any iliac conduit or no conduits, and in patients who had conduits performed prior or during the index FB-EVAR, including procedural metrics, technical success, and major adverse events (MAE).

RESULTS

There were 138 CAAAs, 141 extent IV, and 187 extent I-III TAAAs treated by FB-EVAR with an average of 3.89 ± 0.52 vessels incorporated per patient. Any iliac conduit was required in 35 patients (7.5%), including 24 patients (10.4%) treated between 2013 and 2017 and 11 (4.7%) who had procedures between 2018 and 2021 (P = .019). Nineteen patients had permanent conduits using iliofemoral bypass, 11 had temporary iliac conduits, and 5 had endoconduits. Iliofemoral conduits were necessary in 12% of patients with extent I to III TAAA, in 6% with extent IV TAAA, and in 3% with CAAA (P = .009). The use of iliofemoral conduit was more frequent among women (74% vs 27%; P < .001) and in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (49% vs 28%; P = .013), peripheral artery disease (31% vs 15%; P = .009), and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of III or higher (74% vs 51%; P = .009). There were no inadvertent iliac artery disruptions in the entire study. The 30-day mortality and MAE were 1% and 19%, respectively, for all patients. An iliofemoral conduit using retroperitoneal exposure during the index FB-EVAR was associated with longer operative time (322 ± 97 minutes vs 323 ± 110 minutes vs 215 ± 90 minutes; P < .001), higher estimated blood loss (425 ± 620 mL vs 580 ± 1050 mL vs 250 ± 400 mL; P < .001), and rate of red blood transfusion (92% vs 78% vs 32%; P < .001) and lower technical success (83% vs 87% vs 98%; P < .001), but no difference in intraoperative access complications and MAEs, compared with iliofemoral conduits without retroperitoneal exposure during the index FB-EVAR and control patients who had FB-EVAR without iliofemoral conduits, respectively. There were no differences in mortality or in other specific MAE among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

FB-EVAR with selective use of iliofemoral conduits was safe with low mortality and no occurrence of inadvertent iliac artery disruption or conversion. A staged approach is associated with shorter operating time, less blood loss, and lower transfusion requirements in the index procedure.

Fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair using unilateral femoral access in patients with iliac occlusive disease

OBJECTIVE

Fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) in patients with occluded iliac arteries is challenging owing to limited access for branch vessel catheterization and increased risk for leg and spinal ischemic complications. The aim of this study was to analyze technical strategies and outcomes of F/BEVAR in patients with unilateral iliofemoral occlusive disease.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of all consecutive patients treated by F/BEVAR in two institutions (2003-2021). Patients with unilateral iliofemoral occlusive disease were included in the analysis. All patients had one patent iliac artery that was used for advancement of the fenestrated-branch component. Preloaded catheter/guidewire systems or steerable sheaths were used as adjuncts to facilitate catheterization. Primary endpoints were technical success, mortality, major adverse events (stroke, spinal cord injury, dialysis or decrease in the glomerular filtration rate of more than 50%, bowel ischemia, myocardial infarction, or respiratory failure), primary iliac patency, and freedom from reinterventions.

RESULTS

There were 959 patients treated with F/BEVAR. Of these, 15 patients (1.56%; mean age, 74 years; 80% male) had occluded iliac arteries and 1 patent iliofemoral access and were treated for a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 8) or juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 7). Brachial access was used in 14 of the 15 patients and preloaded systems in 7 of the 15 patients (47%). The remaining 53% had staggered deployment of stent grafts. There were seven physician-modified endovascular grafts, seven custom-made devices, and one off-the-shelf device used. Thirteen patients (87%) had distal seal using aortouni-iliac stent grafts and two (13%) had distal seal in the infrarenal aorta. Concomitant femoral crossover bypass (FCB) was performed in two patients and six patients had a prior FCB. Technical success was 100%. There were no intraoperative complications or early lower extremity ischemic complications, and all FCB were preserved. There was one mortality (7%) within 30 days owing to retrograde type A dissection. Major adverse events occurred in 20% of patients. The median follow-up was 12 months (range, 0-85 months). Two patients (13%) required three reinterventions. One patient required proximal stent graft extension for an acute type B dissection (3 months) and another required iliac extension for type Ib endoleak of an aortouni-iliac graft (21 months) and thrombolysis of that extension (50 months). At last follow-up, all patients had primary graft patency except one with secondary graft patency without new claudication. One patient had a single renal artery stent occlusion at follow-up with no r-intervention. The overall survival rate was 60%, without aortic-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Although challenging, F/BEVAR with unilateral femoral/brachial approach is feasible in patients with occluded iliac limbs, with an important rate of ischemic complications, but satisfactory outcomes.

Vascular Access Challenges in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Literature Review

BACKGROUND

This review aims to comprehensively summarize access challenges in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) by describing vascular access routes, associated risks, outcomes, and complications.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted utilizing the PubMed (Medline), Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Qualitative and quantitative data from selected studies are extracted and discussed according to available standards for narrative reviews.

RESULTS

In total, there were 109 eligible studies based on predefined inclusion- and exclusion criteria. There were 39 original articles or reviews and 57 case series or case reports. This article summarizes the evidence from these studies and discusses traditional retrograde access routes and techniques for TEVAR via a femoral or iliac route, with or without the use of conduits. Next, alternative antegrade access routes and techniques via a brachial, axillary, carotid, ascending aorta, transapical, transcaval, or another route are discussed. Vascular access complications are presented with specific attention to the importance of gender and alternative antegrade access routes.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple access routes and techniques are currently available to overcome access challenges associated with TEVAR, based on low grade evidence from heterogeneous studies. Future research that compares different access routes and techniques might help in the development of a tailored access protocol for specific patients with challenging TEVAR access.

Use of ascending aortic access for imaging and wire rail access for endograft delivery in complex aortic arch anatomy

In cases of complex aortic arch anatomy, it can be difficult to obtain wire access into the ascending aorta for deployment of a thoracic endograft (thoracic endovascular aortic repair [TEVAR]) using a transfemoral approach. This can result from tortuosity or patulous aneurysmal areas, making platform stability difficult. We report the case of a young adult man with a large proximal left subclavian aneurysm that made zone 0 TEVAR placement very difficult with transfemoral access alone. Direct ascending aortic access through the open chest allowed for a stable through-and-through platform for endograft delivery, highlighting the efficacy of this seldom-needed technique during debranching TEVAR procedures.

Iliac Stent Migration during Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Resulting in Functional Coarctation

Iliac arterial disease, unfavorable anatomy, and prior stenting all pose challenges to access in endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR) and thoracic aortic repair (TEVAR). Iliac access injury during T/EVAR may lead to rupture, dissection, thrombosis, or distal ischemia. Some have advocated iliac stent prior to T/EVAR in patients with suboptimal iliac access. The rate of complication and iliac stent migration during subsequent T/EVAR is undocumented. This case report describes a unique instance of self-expanding iliac stent migration during TEVAR which pinched the thoracic aortic endograft causing functional aortic coarctation.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair of a severely angulated aorta using a double-wire technique

When endovascular treatment is performed, angulation of the access route for a device can make the operative procedure difficult. We encountered a case in which we successfully completed thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in a patient with severely angulated aorta by applying ‘double-wire technique’. The patient was an 80-year-old woman. An aneurysm with a 71-mm diameter was observed in the descending aorta. We performed TEVAR. Device delivery could not be achieved by a conventional procedure using one guide wire since the peripheral aorta was severely angulated. Therefore, in addition to a guide wire for main body, a stiff wire and a stiff sheath were introduced to straighten the angulation. The device was successfully introduced and TEVAR was completed. We used the Relay Plus^® that facilitates tracking through the angulation. The device has a dual structure consisting of a hard sheath and a flexible sheath. We performed TEVAR successfully.

Initial clinical experience with the Zenith alpha stent-graft

PURPOSE

To assess safety and short-term efficacy of endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta with the new Zenith Alpha stent-graft.

METHODS

Between August 2010 and May 2014, 33 patients (21 men; mean age 73.2±9.0 years) were treated Zenith Alpha stent-graft (group ZA). Outcomes of this group were compared with those of 34 patients (25 men; mean age 70.3±8.5 years) treated contemporaneously with the Zenith TX-2 for the same pathologies (group TX). The primary outcome measure was technical success. Data on iliac tortuosity, minimum access vessel diameter, and previous unsuccessful treatment with other endografts was also recorded.

RESULTS

Technical success was 93.9% in group ZA and 91.2% in group TX (p=0.67). There was no case of surgical death or conversion to open repair in either group. Two (6%) type I endoleaks occurred in group ZA and 3 (9%) in group TX (p=0.67). Three patients died within 30 days in group ZA vs. none in group TX (p=0.07). Mean minimum access vessel diameter was significantly smaller (5.07 vs. 6.65 mm, p=0.002) and iliac tortuosity indices significantly higher in group ZA (1.34 vs. 1.25, p=0.02). Access vessel complications occurred in 1 (3%) patient in group ZA and 4 (12%) patients in group TX (p=0.17). Significantly more patients in group ZA (6, 18%) were unsuccessfully treated previously with other endografts vs. none in group TX (p=0.01).

CONCLUSION

The new Zenith Alpha appears to be equally as safe and efficacious as the Zenith TX-2 while being used in patients with demanding access vessel morphology.

Comparison of Efficacy of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Versus Open Surgical Repair in Middle/High-Risk Patients With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

To explore the efficacy of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with traditional open surgical repair (OSR) in the treatment of middle/high-risk patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). With a retrospective method, we analyzed the clinical data of 57 patients with middle/high-risk AAA admitted to Linyi People's Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University from January 2010 to January 2014. Twenty-eight of the 57 patients received EVAR and 29 others received OSR. Statistical analysis was conducted by the design of spreadsheet according to preoperative, intraoperative, perioperative, and postoperative follow-up relevant information. Our study showed that the difference in baseline characteristics of different therapies in middle/high-risk AAA patients was not statistically significant in preoperative period (P > 0.05). In intraoperative period, the efficacy of middle/high-risk AAA patients in EVAR group was significantly superior to OSR group in terms of blood loss, blood transfusion, and general anesthesia rate (all P < 0.01). In perioperative period, the ICU observation time and the average fasting time of middle/high-risk AAA patients in EVAR group were remarkably lower than OSR group (all P < 0.01), but the average hospital stay and the operation cost of middle/high-risk AAA patients in EVAR group were notably higher than OSR group. In postoperative follow-up period, OSR group was identified with a lower incidence of surgery-related complications than EVAR group (P < 0.05), but EVAR group was demonstrated with a higher survival rate than OSR group (P < 0.05); after 12 months of follow-up, SF-36 scale scores in OSR group were higher than EVAR group (P < 0.05). In conclusion, EVAR may have a better short-term effect, whereas OSR may have a better long-term effect in the treatment of middle/high-risk AAA patients.

Technical tips and procedural steps in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair with concomitant recanalization of iliac artery occlusions

PURPOSE

The goal of this paper is to describe our technical strategy and procedural steps for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) when performed with concomitant recanalization of the iliac artery occlusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three octogenarians having abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA)/common iliac artery aneurysms (CIAA) with unilateral external iliac artery (EIA) occlusion underwent EVAR with recanalization of the occluded iliac arteries. Crossing the iliac artery occlusions was attempted in a retrograde approach using a 0.035 inch-hydrophilic guidewire. After passage of a guidewire, predilation was performed using 6mm balloon. Then a 12-Fr sheath was advanced via the occluded EIA for contralateral iliac limb delivery. Internal iliac artery embolization was subsequently performed as needed. A self-expanding stent was then placed in the occluded EIA after EVAR.

RESULTS

Recanalization of the EIA occlusion, followed by stentgraft delivery through the occlusion and EVAR, was successfully performed in all three patients. Penetration of the occluded EIA was successfully achieved only by retrograde approach in two patients, and by bidirectional approach in the other patient. No perioperative complication or death occurred. Postoperative CT showed no type I or III endoleaks in the aneurysms and patent iliac arteries in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Total endovascular repairs were successfully performed for three patients with AAA and concomitant unilateral EIA occlusions. The proposed steps described in this report might reduce the complication rate and enhance the technical success rate associated with this procedure.