Aortic Neck IFU Violations During EVAR for Ruptured Infrarenal Aortic Aneurysms are Associated with Increased In-Hospital Mortality

Serious Failure Modes After EVAR Are Device Specific

OBJECTIVES

Type I and III endoleaks following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) can lead to catastrophic events that require major re-interventions. We reviewed our experience with aortic endograft re-interventions for type I and III endoleaks and other serious failures among different devices.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with a prior EVAR who underwent open conversion (OC) or major endovascular intervention (MEI) (re-lining, cuff/limb extension, parallel graft) for type I/III endoleaks at our institution from 2002 to 2019. Baseline characteristics, procedural details, re-interventions, and outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 229 patients (194 men) underwent re-interventions for type I and III endoleaks after EVAR (90 OC, 139 MEI) for devices implanted between 1997 and 2019. Average age at re-intervention was 78±8.5 years. A total of 135 (59%) were implanted at our institution, whereas 93 (41%) were referred. Median time to re-intervention was 4 years with 25% to 75% interquartile range (IQR) of 2.2-6.6 years. There was no significant difference in baseline demographics or type of re-interventions (OC/MEI) between device types. 42/229 (18%) presented with ruptured aneurysms, 20/229 (9%) were symptomatic, whereas the rest presented with asymptomatic radiographic findings. Type 1A endoleak was present in 146/229 (63.8%-72 with proximal migration), type IB in 46/229 (20.1%), type IIIA in 37/229 (16.6%), type IIIB in 15/229 (6.5%), and persistent aneurysm sac growth with no radiographic evidence of an endoleak in 6/229 (2.6%). Devices included most commercial products: AFX, Excluder, AneuRx, Ancure, Endurant, and Zenith. A smaller number of investigational devices accounted for the rest. Type 1A endoleak was the most common indication for re-intervention among all devices except for AFX and ancure devices, proximal migration was a frequent presentation with AneuRx. AFX devices more frequently presented with a type III and ancure devices more frequently presented with a type IB endoleak.

CONCLUSIONS

Serious failure modes after EVAR differ between endografts and occur throughout the follow-up period. This is important to guide targeted interrogation of surveillance studies and follow-up schedules, even for discontinued devices, as well as comparisons between various series and estimation of EVAR failure rates.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Surveillance after EVAR is critical for long term success of the repair, understanding of the differential modes of failure of every graft available is important in the longitudinal evaluation of these endografts. Equally important is the understanding of the modes of failure of legacy endografts that are no longer on the market but still being followed, in order to be able to tailor a surveillance regiemn and the evntual repair if needed.

Local Anesthesia for Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Allows for Accurate Graft Deployment with Durable Results

BACKGROUND

Local anesthesia (LA) is sparsely used in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) despite short-term benefit, likely secondary to concerns over patient movement preventing accurate endograft deployment. The objective of this study is to examine the association between anesthesia type and endoleak, sac regression, reintervention, and mortality.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for all EVAR cases from 2014 to 2022. Patients were included if they underwent percutaneous elective EVAR with anatomical criteria within instructions for use of commercially approved endografts. Multivariable logistic regression with propensity score weighting was used to determine the association between anesthesia type on the risk of any endoleak noted by intraoperative completion angiogram and sac regression. Multivariable survival analysis with propensity score weighting was used to determine the association between anesthesia type and endoleak at 1 year, long-term reintervention, and mortality.

RESULTS

Thirteen thousand nine hundred thirty two EVARs met inclusion criteria: 1,075 (8%) LA and 12,857 (92%) general anesthesia (GA). On completion angiogram, LA was associated with fewer rates of any endoleaks overall (16% vs. 24%, P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis with propensity score weighting, LA was associated with similar adjusted odds of any endoleak on intraoperative completion angiogram (odds ratio [OR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.68) as well as combined type 1a and type 1b endoleaks (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.47-1.09). Follow-up computed tomography imaging at 1 year was available for 4,892 patients, 377 (8%) LA and 4,515 (92%) GA. At 1 year, LA was associated with similar rate of freedom from any endoleaks compared to GA (0.66 [95% CI 0.63-0.69] vs. 0.71 [95% CI 0.70-0.72], P = 0.663) and increased rates of sac regression (50% vs. 45%, P = 0.040). On multivariable analysis with propensity score weighting, LA and GA were associated with similar adjusted odds of sac regression (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.97-1.55). LA and GA had similar rates of endoleak at 1 year (hazard ratio [HR] 0.14, 95% CI 0.63-1.07); however, LA was associated with decreased hazards of combined type 1a and 1b endoleaks at 1 year (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.96). LA and GA had similar adjusted long-term reintervention rate (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.44-1.38) and long-term mortality (HR 1.100, 95% CI 079-1.25).

CONCLUSIONS

LA is not associated with increased adjusted rates of any endoleak on completion angiogram or at 1-year follow-up compared to GA. LA is associated with decreased adjusted rates of type 1a and type 1b endoleak at 1 year, but similar rates of sac regression, long-term reintervention, and mortality. Concerns for accurate graft deployment should not preclude use of LA and LA should be increasingly considered when deciding on anesthetic type for standard elective EVAR.

The association between frailty and outcomes following ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is a less invasive method than the more physiologically stressful open surgical repair (OSR) for patients with anatomically appropriate abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Early postoperative outcomes are associated with both patients; physiologic reserve and the physiologic stresses of the surgical intervention. Among frail patients with reduced physiologic reserve, the stress of an aortic rupture in combination with the stress of an operative repair are less well tolerated, raising the risk of complications and mortality. This study aims to evaluate the difference in association between frailty and outcomes among patients undergoing minimally invasive EVAR and the physiologically more stressful OSR for ruptured AAAs (rAAAs).

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study included adults undergoing rAAA repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2010 to 2022. The validated Risk Analysis Index (RAI) (robust, ≤20; normal, 21-29; frail, 30-39; very frail, ≥40) quantified frailty. The association between the primary outcome of 1-year mortality and frailty status as well as repair type were compared using multivariable Cox models generating adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Interaction terms evaluated the association's moderation.

RESULTS

We identified 5806 patients (age, 72 ± 9 years; 77% male; EVAR, 65%; robust, 6%; normal, 48%; frail, 36%; very, frail 10%) with a 53% observed 1-year mortality rate following rAAA repair. OSR (aHR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.19-1.73) was associated with increased 1-year mortality when compared with EVAR. Increasing frailty status (frail aHR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.00-1.59; very frail aHR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.26-2.13) was associated with increased 1-year mortality, which was moderated by repair type (P-interaction < .05). OSR was associated with increased 1-year mortality in normal (aHR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.20-1.87) and frail (aHR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.20-1.89), but not among robust (aHR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.59-1.32) and very frail (aHR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.97-1.72) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty and OSR were associated with increased adjusted risk of 1-year mortality following rAAA repair. Among normal and frail patients, OSR was associated with an increased adjusted risk of 1-year mortality when compared with EVAR. However, there was no difference between OSR and EVAR among robust patients who can well tolerate the stress of OSR and among very frail patients who are unable to withstand the surgical stress from rAAA regardless of repair type.

Technical challenges during emergent endovascular aneurysm repair with the ALTO system

INTRODUCTION

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) pose an immediate threat for patient's life and endovascular repair (EVAR) is currently the preferred treatment modality in the presence of suitable anatomy. This is determined based on the requirements of each endograft as described in the instructions for use (IFU). The new ALTO system (Endologix, Irvin, CA, U.S.A.), can accommodate a great range of anatomies such as short necks and/or narrow access, but its unique design requires specific technical modifications during treatment of ruptured AAAs.

AREAS COVERED

The standard double balloon technique has long been described and it is used to provide circulatory support during EVAR for ruptured AAA. While this technique is straightforward with the use of endografts with a traditional design, this would not be the case if one uses the ALTO system. In that case specific maneuvers would be required to treat AAA patients in an acute setting.

EXPERT OPINION

The ALTO system although being able to treat AAAs with adverse anatomy, it may not be appropriate during treatment of ruptured AAA patients with profound hemodynamic instability. A careful evaluation of the individual's patient anatomy and hemodynamic condition is mandatory in order to decide the best endograft for each case.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

The Management of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: An Ongoing Challenge

BACKGROUND

despite improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of elective AAAs, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs) continue to cause a substantial number of deaths. The choice between an open or endovascular approach remains a challenge, as does postoperative complications in survivors. The aim of this manuscript is to offer an overview of the contemporary management of RAAA patients, with a focus on preoperative and intraoperative factors that could help surgeons provide more appropriate treatment.

METHODS

we performed a search on MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from 1 January 1985 to 1 May 2023 and reviewed SVS and ESVS guidelines. A total of 278 articles were screened, but only those with data available on ruptured aneurysms' incidence and prevalence, preoperative scores, and mortality rates after emergency endovascular or open repair for ruptured AAA were included in the narrative synthesis. Articles were not restricted due to the designs of the studies.

RESULTS

the centralization of RAAAs has improved outcomes after both surgical and endovascular repair. Preoperative mortality risk scores and knowledge of intraoperative factors influencing mortality could help surgeons with decision-making, although there is still no consensus about the best treatment. Complications continue to be an issue in patients surviving intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

RAAA still represents a life-threatening condition, with high mortality rates. Effective screening and centralization matched with adequate preoperative risk-benefit assessment may improve outcomes.

Assessing Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Suitability According to Graft-Specific Instructions for Use in Patients With a Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study is to ascertain endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) suitability in relation to stent-graft-specific instructions for use (IFU) in patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA), the aortic morphology of patients undergoing surgical repair of a RAAA in 2 Dutch hospitals between January 2014 and December 2019 was retrospectively assessed. Three-dimensional and central luminal line reconstructions were used. Anatomical suitability was defined according to the IFU of the stent graft system used.

RESULTS

Of 128 included patients, 112 (88%) were men and the mean age was 74.1 (SD=7.6) years. Anatomy within IFU for EVAR was present in 31 patients (24%). Overall, 94 patients (73%) were treated with open surgical repair (OSR) and 34 patients (27%) were treated with EVAR. Anatomy within IFU was present in 15 OSR patients (16%) and 16 EVAR patients (47%). In patients with anatomy outside of IFU, 90% (87/97) had unsuitable neck anatomy and 64% (62/97) had insufficient neck length. An unsuitable distal iliac landing zone was observed in 35 patients. Perioperative mortality was 27% (34/128), with no difference between OSR and EVAR (25/94 vs 9/34; p=0.989).

CONCLUSION

Most RAAA patients in this series did not have aortic anatomy within IFU for EVAR, mainly due to insufficient neck length. However, whether anatomy outside of IFU equates to unsuitability for EVAR in an emergency setting remains a matter of debate and warrants further research.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The treatment of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm can consist of endovascular repair or open repair. Retrospective anatomical assessment shows that most patients do not have anatomy inside the instructions for use for endovascular aneurysm repair, mainly due to insufficient neck length. Whether anatomy outside the instructions for use equates unsuitability for endovascular aneurysm repair remains a matter of debate.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Surgical Decision-Making and Outcomes in Open Versus Endovascular Repair for Various Vascular Diseases

Today's vascular surgeon must navigate their practice through a field of ever-advancing technology while maintaining knowledge of open techniques that remain equally important in the care of their patients. In this article, the authors provide insight into the perioperative decision-making that goes into choosing a surgical plan for each patient based on their disease process, anatomy, nonmodifiable risk factors, and other comorbidities.

Time Distribution of Mortality After Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair is still associated with high mortality. The aim of this population-based study was to analyze the time distribution of mortality and short-term mortality trends after rAAA repair.

METHODS

This was a nationwide retrospective registry study including all patients (n = 3,927) who underwent endovascular (EVAR) (n = 935) or open surgical repair (OSR) (n = 2,992) for rAAA between 2000 and 2018. The National Patient Register was used as a source to extract patient and medical data. The register was cross-linked with the national all-cause mortality registry. The postoperative time of death was divided into <48 hours, 2 to 5 days, 6 to 10 days, 11 to 20 days, 21 to 30 days, and 31 to 90 days during the year intervals 2000-2004, 2005-2009, 2010-2014, and 2015-2018, respectively. The proportion of patients who died within each postoperative time interval was calculated.

RESULTS

The overall median age was 75.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 69.0-80.0) and females were 19.6% (n = 769). The EVAR cohort was older (77 vs. 65 years; P < 0.001) and had significantly more cardiovascular risk factors and a history of malignancy. The overall postoperative 90-day mortality was 33.2%, EVAR 25.7%, and OSR 35.5%. There was an overall improvement in 90-day mortality over time (odds ratio [OR] 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.87; P = 0.001) but not separately for EVAR or OSR. Analyzing all postoperative mortalities within 90 days, 43.4% of deaths occurred within 48 hours followed by 16.3% in 2-5 days. The distribution of mortality proportions in each time interval after OSR was 15.4% in < 48 hours, 7.3% in 2-5 days, 4.4% in 6-10 days, 8.6% in 11-30 days, and 6.0% in 31-90 days and after EVAR 11.1% < 48 hours, 3.6% 2-5 days, 3.1% 6-10 days, 4.6% 11-30 days, and 6% 31-90 days. The overall mortality proportions for patients who died <48 hours after aortic repair had decreased over time (P = 0.024). A logistic regression analysis found the following risk factors associated with mortality <48 hours after rAAA, open repair (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.17-1.89; P = 0.001), female gender (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.14-1.75; P = 0.002), and history of heart failure (OR 1.63; 95% CI 1.19-2.22; P = 0.002) or angina pectoris (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.03-1.81; P = 0.03). The recent operative year interval, 2015-2018, was associated with a lower risk for mortality <48 hours (OR 0.72; 95% 0.53-0.98; P = 0.04) and <90-days (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.49-0.80; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall mortality after rAAA repair had decreased but early deaths remained a significant challenge. The mortality was highest within two days of surgery but the proportion of patients who died <48 hours after aortic repair had decreased in recent years. Open repair, female gender, and cardiovascular comorbidities were associated with mortality within 48 hours after surgery. More focused research in the early postoperative phase after rAAA is warranted.

Relevance of Type II Endoleak After Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is widely used as an alternative to open repair in elective and even in emergent cases of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA). One of the most frequent complications after EVAR is type II endoleak (T2EL). In elective therapy, evidence-based therapeutic recommendations for T2EL are limited. Completely unclear is the role of T2EL after EVAR for rAAA (rEVAR). This study aims to investigate the significance of T2ELs after rEVAR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective single-center data analysis of all patients who underwent rEVAR between January 2010 and December 2020 with primary T2EL. The outcome criteria were overall and T2EL-related mortality and reintervention rate as well as development of aneurysm diameter over follow-up (FU).

RESULTS

During the study period between January 2010 and December 2020, 35 (25%) out of 138 patients with rEVAR presented a primary postoperative T2EL (age 74±11 years, 34 males). At rupture, mean aneurysm diameter was 73±12 mm. Follow-up was 26 (0-172) months. The reintervention-free survival was 69% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 55%-86%) at 30 days, 58% (95% CI: 43%-78%) at 1 year, and 52% (95% CI: 36%-75%) at 3 years. In 40% (n=14), T2ELs resolved spontaneously within a median time of 3.4 (0.03-85.6) months. The overall and T2EL reintervention rates were 43% (n=15) and 9% (n=3), respectively. Within 30 days, 11 patients (31%) required reintervention, of which 2 were T2EL related. Aneurysm sac growth by ≥5 mm was seen in 3 patients (9%), and aneurysm shrinkage rate was significantly higher in sealed T2EL group (86% vs 5%, p<0.0001). The overall survival was 85% (95% CI: 74%-98%) at 30 days, 75% (95% CI: 61%-92%) at 1 year, and 67% (95% CI: 51%-87%) at 3 years. Six deaths were aneurysm related, while 1 was T2EL related within the first 30 days due to persistent hemorrhage. During FU, one more patient died due to a T2EL-related secondary rupture (T2EL-related mortality, 5.7%, n=2). Multivariable analysis revealed that arterial hypertension was associated with an increased risk for reintervention (hazard ratio [HR]: 27.8, 95% CI: 1.48-521, p=0.026) and age was associated with an increased risk for mortality (HR 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.26, p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

T2ELs after rEVAR showed a benign course in most cases. In the short term, the possibility of persistent bleeding should be considered. In the mid term, a consequent FU protocol is required to detect known late complications after EVAR at an early stage and to prevent secondary rupture and death.