Open surgical repair after failed endovascular aneurysm repair: Is endograft removal necessary?

Indication and Outcome of Late Open Conversion after Abdominal Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has become the standard of care for patients with infrarenal aortic aneurysms over the last 2 decades. Endograft technology and treatment of complications like endoleaks, graft migration, or graft occlusion developed over time. However, sometimes open surgical conversion maybe required. Our aim was to analyze the indications, the technical aspects and outcomes in patients who underwent open conversion after EVAR with different types and generations of endografts.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study reviewed all patients who underwent EVAR from 2004 to 2020. Open surgical conversions >1 month post EVAR were identified. Conversions for graft infection were excluded. Indications for conversion and operative technique were analyzed. Primary endpoint of the study was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were re-interventions and follow-up mortality.

RESULTS

During 2004 and 2020, 443 consecutive EVARs were performed, and 28 patients required open surgical conversion, with an additional 3 referred from other hospitals (N = 31). The median age was 75 (range 58-93); 94% were male. Conversion was performed after a median time of 55 months (range 16-209). Twenty patients underwent elective and 11 emergency conversion. Indications for open conversion were graft migration, respectively, disease progression with endoleak type Ia and/or Ib in 52% (16/31) and sac expansion due to endoleak type II in 26% (8/31). Of the 31 patients, 17 (55%) had at least one previous endovascular re-intervention. All patients met the device-specific instructions for use for each implanted endograft. In-hospital intervention rate was 16% (5/31). Thirty-day mortality rate was 3% (1/31) with one patient died due to multiorgan failure after rupture with complete endograft replacement. Five patients (16%) died during follow-up. Mid-term follow-up was 47.5 months (range 24-203) with estimated cumulative survival rates of 97%, 89%, and 84%, at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Late open conversion remains a valuable treatment option and can be performed safely in elective and emergency setting with a low early mortality. Lifelong surveillance and prompt intervention when necessary are essential in ensuring optimal outcomes after EVAR and preventing the need for emergent conversions.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Elective Open Conversion versus Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Repair for Previous Non-Infected Failed Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes of patients electively undergoing fenestrated and branched endovascular repair (F/B-EVAR) or open conversion for failed previous non-infected endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

DATA SOURCES

Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library.

REVIEW METHOD

The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023404091). The review followed the PRISMA guidelines; certainty was assessed through the GRADE and quality through MINORS tools. Outcomes data were pooled separately for F/B-EVAR and open conversion. A random effects meta-analysis of proportions was conducted; heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

Thirty eight studies were included, for a total of 1 645 patients of whom 1 001 (60.9%) underwent an open conversion and 644 (39.1%) a F/B-EVAR. The quality of evidence was generally limited. GRADE certainty was judged low for 30 day death (in both groups) and F/B-EVAR technical success, and very low for the other outcomes. Pooled 30 day death was 2.3% (I2 33%) in the open conversion group and 2.4% (I2 0%) in the F/B-EVAR conversion group (p = .36). Technical success for F/B-EVAR was 94.1% (I2 23%). The pooled 30 day major systemic complications rate was higher in the open conversion (21.3%; I2 74%) than in the F/B-EVAR (15.7%; I2 78%) group (p = .52). At 18 months follow up, the pooled re-intervention rate was 4.5% (I2 58%) in the open conversion and 26% (I2 0%) in the F/B-EVAR group (p < .001), and overall survival was 92.5% (I2 59%) and 81.6% (I2 68%), respectively (p = .005).

CONCLUSION

In the elective setting, and excluding infections, the early results of both open conversion and F/B-EVAR after failed EVAR appear satisfactory. Although open conversion presented with higher complication rates in the first 30 days after surgery, at follow up it seemed to be associated with fewer re-interventions and better survival compared with F/B-EVAR.

[Late Open Semi-conversion with Endograft Preservation for (Type II) Endoleaks with Late Aneurysm Sac Enlargement after EVAR - Indications, Method and Results in Our Own Patient Collective]

EVAR (endovascular aortic repair) is the most common method for treating an abdominal aortic aneurysm, but according to the latest findings it carries the risk of subsequent complications. These can be caused by (late) aneurysm sac growth. If conservative and surgical therapies fail to treat the aneurysm sac growth, open conversion is necessary to prevent aneurysm rupture. There are several options for open conversion, in which the EVAR prosthesis can be completely preserved or is (partially) removed. Late open semi-conversion with complete in-situ preservation of the EVAR-prosthesis and gathering of the aneurysm sac are a less invasive method than complete conversion and may be performed instead for selected patients. The aim of the present work is to present the surgical method, including indications and technical information, as well as the presentation of the results in our recent patient collective.All patients semi-converted in our department of vascular surgery and phlebology due to (type II) endoleak were included. All data are presented as n (%) or median (range).Between 6/2019 and 3/2023, 13 patients underwent semi-conversion 6 (2-12) years (median, range) after the initial EVAR. The aneurysm sac diameter at the time of semi-conversion was 69 mm (58-95 mm), the operating time was 114 min (97-147 min), the blood loss was 100 ml (100-1500 ml). Five (38%) patients received blood transfusion intraoperatively and 2 (15%) postoperatively. The stay in the intensive care unit lasted 1 (1-5) days, the hospitalisation time was 8 (6-11) days. Postoperative complications were intestinal atony (3 [23%], 1 [8%] with nausea/emesis and gastric tube insertion), anaemia (2 [15%]), hyponatraemia (2 [15%]), delirium (1 [8%]), COVID-19 infection (1 [8%]) and 1 [8%] intra-abdominal postoperative bleeding with the indication for surgical revision and the transfusion of 8 erythrocyte concentrates.Semi-conversion is a safe and practicable surgical method with few severe complications for a selected group of patients, which should be considered as an alternative to more invasive methods with (partial) removal of the EVAR-prosthesis. Further long-term studies comparing semi-conversion to full conversion are needed to demonstrate its benefits.

Treatment of a type Ia endoleak following EVAR using a custom-made inner branch device

OBJECTIVES

We represent two cases of late proximal type I endoleak following EVAR with aneurysm expansion that were treated with a custom-made graft with inner branches.

METHODS

Two patients of 87 and 82 years old were operated by EVAR 6 and 8 years ago for abdominal aortic aneurysm. Both had proximal type I endoleak with aneurysm sac expansion. Open surgery had a high risk, and a proximal aortic extension with a simple aortic cuff was not possible neither because previous EVAR grafts were already at the level of the renal arteries. A custom-made endograft with inner branches was planned as a fenestrated graft was not technically possible.

RESULTS

We successfully treated both patients using a custom-made graft with four inner branches from Jotec (Cryolife, Kennesaw, GA). Three months' follow-up CT scan did not show any endoleaks. All target vessels were patent with good conformability of the bridging stents.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of proximal type I endoleak using inner branches' endografts is feasible. This novel technology might broaden the indications for complex aortic repair in a group of patients where fenestrated endografts are not possible.

Partial and complete explantation of aortic endografts in the modern era

OBJECTIVE

Despite the progressive advancement of devices for endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), endografts continue to fail, requiring explant. We present a single-institutional experience of EVAR explants, characterizing modern failure modes, presentation, and outcomes for partial and complete EVAR explantation.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of all EVARs explanted at an urban quaternary center from 2001 to 2020, with one infected endograft excluded. Patient and graft characteristics, indications, and perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed. Partial versus complete explants were performed per surgeon discretion without a predefined protocol. This process was informed by patient risk factors; asymptomatic, symptomatic, or ruptured aneurysm presentation; and anatomical or intraoperative factors, including endoleak type.

RESULTS

From 2001 to 2020, 52 explants met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. More than one-half (57.7%) were explants of EVAR devices placed at outside institutions, designated nonindex explants. Most patients were male (86.5%), the median age was 74 years (interquartile range, 70-78 years). More than one-half (61.5%) were performed in the second decade of the study period. The most commonly explanted grafts were Gore Excluder (n = 9 grafts), Cook Zenith (n = 8), Endologix AFX (n = 7), Medtronic Endurant (n = 5), and Medtronic Talent (n = 5). Most grafts (78.8%) were explanted for neck degeneration or sac expansion. Five were explanted for initial seal failure, five for symptomatic expansion, and seven for rupture. The median implant duration was 4.2 years, although ranging widely (interquartile range, 2.6-5.1 years), but similar between index and nonindex explants (4.2 years vs 4.1 years). Partial explantation was performed in 61.5%, with implant duration slightly lower, 3.2 years versus 4.4 years for complete explants. Partial explantation was more frequent in index explants (68.2% vs 56.7%). The median length of stay was 8 days. The median intensive care unit length of stay was 3 days, without significant differences in nonindex explants (4 days vs 3 days) and partial explants (4 days vs 3 days). Thirty-day mortality occurred in two nonindex explants (one partial and one complete explant). Thirty-day readmission was similar between partial and complete explants (9.7% vs 5.0%), without accounting for nonindex readmissions. Long-term survival was comparable between partial and complete explants in Cox regression (hazard ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-7.56; P = .12).

CONCLUSIONS

Explants of EVAR devices have increased over time at our institution. Partial explant was performed in more than one-half of cases, per operating surgeon discretion, demonstrating higher blood loss, more frequent acute kidney injury, and longer intensive care unit stays, however with comparable short-term mortality and long-term survival.

Perioperative and long-term outcomes after open conversion of endovascular aneurysm repair versus primary open aortic repair

BACKGROUND

The use of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has superseded that of open aneurysm repair (OAR) as the procedure of choice for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. However, significant rates of late reintervention and aneurysm rupture have been reported after EVAR, resulting in the need for conversion to OAR (C-OAR). To assess the relative effects of C-OAR on patients, we compared the outcomes of these patients to those of patients who had undergone P-OAR.

METHODS

The data from all patients who had undergone C-OAR and P-OAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database from 2003 to 2018 were queried. Multivariable logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were used to assess the perioperative long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 4763 patients were included (91.4%, P-OAR; 8.6%, C-OAR). C-OAR was associated with a significant increase in the odds of perioperative mortality (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.7; P = .027) and renal complications (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2; P = .004) vs P-OAR. At 5 years, conversion was associated with a higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.9; P < .001), aneurysmal rupture (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.1; P = .007), and reintervention (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.05-1.97; P = .022) compared with P-OAR. These results also persisted at 10 years, with conversion associated with a higher risk of mortality (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8; P < .001), rupture (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.8; P = .018), and reintervention (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1; P = .010).

CONCLUSIONS

The results from the present study have demonstrated that C-OAR is associated with a significantly higher risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with P-OAR. We found a significant increase in mortality, aneurysm rupture, and reintervention at 5 and 10 years of follow-up.

Outcomes of EVAR Conversion in Octogenarians Treated at a High-Volume Aorta Center

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair(EVAR) is the dominant treatment strategy for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms(AAA) but is especially preferred among octogenarian(age ≥80-years) patients due to concerns surrounding comorbidity severity and physiological frailty. Correspondingly, EVAR failure resulting in subsequent open conversion(EVAR-c) has been increasingly reported in older patients but there is a paucity of literature focusing on outcomes in this subgroup. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate our experience with EVAR-c in octogenarians(≥80-years) compared to younger patients(age <80-years).

METHODS

A retrospective review of all non-mycotic EVAR-c procedures(2002-2020) at a single high-volume academic hospital with a dedicated aorta center(https://www.uf-health-aortic-disease-center) was performed. Patients(n=162) were categorized into octogenarian(age ≥80; n=43) and non-octogenarian(age<80; n=119) cohorts and subsequently compared. The primary end-point was 30-day mortality. Secondary end-points included complications, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. Cox regression determined effects of selected covariates on mortality risk. Kaplan-Meier methodology estimated survival.

RESULTS

No difference in pre-admission EVAR re-intervention rates was present(octogenerians-42% vs. non-octogenerians-43%;p=1) although time to first re-intervention was greater in octogenarians(41 vs. non-octogenarians, 15-months;p=.01). Concordantly, time to EVAR-c was significantly longer among octogenarian patients(61 vs. non-octogenarians, 39-months;p<.01). No difference in rupture presentation was evident(14% vs. 10%;p=.6); however, elective EVAR-c occurred less frequently(octogenerians-42% vs. non-octogenerians-59%;p=.07). AAA diameter was significantly larger for elective octogenarian EVAR-c(7.8±1.9cm vs. non-octogenarians, 7.0±1.5cm;p=.02) and type 1a endoleak was the most common indication overall(58%;n=91). Among all presentations, a trend in higher 30-day mortality was evident for octogenarian patients(16% vs. non-octogenarians, 7%;p=.06). Similarly 90-day mortality was greater among octogenarians(26% vs. non-octogenarians, 10%;p=.02). However, incidence of any complication(56% vs. 49%;p=.5), readmission(12% vs. 6%;p=.3), unplanned re-operation(10% vs. 5%;p=.5) and LOS(11 vs. 9 days;p=.3) was not significantly different. Age ≥80 was predictive of short-term mortality after non-elective but not elective cases; however, increasing comorbidity number, non-elective admission and renal/mesenteric revascularization had the strongest association with mortality risk. One- and three-year survival was not different between groups when comparing all patients after the first 90-days postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Although higher unadjusted peri-operative mortality occurred among octogenarian patients, risk-adjusted elective outcomes were comparable to younger EVAR-c subjects when treated at a high-volume aortic surgery center. This underscores the importance of appropriate patient selection and modulation of operative complexity when feasible to achieve optimal results. Providers caring for octogenarian patients with EVAR failure should consider timely elective referral to high-volume aorta centers to reduce resource utilization and frequency of non-elective presentations.

The failing endograft-A systematic review of aortic graft explants and associated outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The prominent use of endovascular stent grafts in the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms is associated with increased descriptions of late complications such as graft infection and endoleaks, which can confer significant morbidity and mortality. Failed endovascular management of late complications often requires open conversion and graft explantation. This systematic review sought to highlight the peri- and post-operative course of patients undergoing aortic graft explants to inform readers of the associated morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing this procedure.

METHODS

The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of the PubMed, Google Scholar and Ovid MEDLINE databases from January 1995 to April 2021 was performed with a combination of MeSH terms pertaining to endovascular aneurysm repair and open conversion. Articles were screened and included based on pre-determined selection criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 818 studies were identified, with 41 meeting inclusion criteria. These studies examined a total of 1324 patients, 84.3% of whom were male with a mean age of 74 years at explantation. Mean time to graft explantation was 36 months, with a mean aneurysm size of 66 mm. The majority of aortic explants were performed for persistent endoleaks (68%), and 10% for infection. There was high morbidity with the procedure, with high rates of post-operative complications (mean, 37%) and 30-day mortality (11%). The most common complications included renal (15%), respiratory (12%) and cardiac (9%). Most explanted grafts were first-generation endografts. Morbidity and mortality rates were reduced in patients undergoing elective explants compared to emergent procedures (3.3% compared to 43.4%).

CONCLUSION

Aortic graft explant remains a highly co-morbid procedure, with high rates of peri- and post-operative complications and mortality. The number of explant procedures reported over the past 25 years has increased, reflecting the prominent use of EVAR in the management of AAAs. Whilst remaining a highly co-morbid procedure, patients undergoing elective explants had markedly reduced rates of mortality and morbidity compared to emergent explants. Thus, clinical focus should be on identifying patients who require graft explantation early to perform these procedures in an elective setting.

A systematic review of the current status of interventions for type II endoleak after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

To study the mid- and long-term outcomes of type II endoleak treatment after EVAR and the technical aspects of different techniques to exclude endoleaks which different embolic agents.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the approach recommended by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for meta-analyses of interventional studies. The comprehensive search was conducted using the following database: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Patient characteristic, intervention approaches, embolic agents, and results at mid and long term follow up were studied.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies corresponding to a total of 141 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria with a mean age of 73-78.6 years and a mean duration of follow up varying from 25 to 42 months. There were different techniques for embolization used (translumbar, transarterial, and transcaval approach) with various types of embolic agents. In all studies, the indication for embolization of the type II endoleaks was sac enlargement of more than 5 mm. A wide range of technical success rate was reported regardless of the intervention strategy being used (17,6%-100%). The overall technical success rate of all studies was 62%.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows that there is a wide variety of techniques to exclude a persistent type II endoleak. Different kinds of embolic agents have be used. Due to a lack of peer reviewed data on longterm follow-up, it was not possible to come to recommendations what treatment would be the best for a durable exclusion of a persistent type II endoleak after an initially successful EVAR. There remains an urgent need for proper executed studies, either randomized or with close observation in relation to longer follow-up.

EVAR Conversion is an Increasingly Common Indication for Open AAA Repair

OBJECTIVE

Although EVAR re-intervention is common, conversion to open repair(EVAR-c) occurs less frequently but can be associated with significant technical complexity and perioperative risk. There is a paucity of data highlighting the evolution of peri-procedural results surrounding EVAR-c and change in practice patterns, especially for referral centers that increasingly manage EVAR failures. The purpose of this analysis was to perform a temporal analysis of our EVAR-c experience and describe changes in patient selection, operative details and outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective single center review of all open AAA repairs was performed(2002-2019) and EVAR-c procedures were subsequently analyzed. EVAR-c patients(n=184) were categorized into two different eras(2002-2009, n=21; 2010-2019, n=163) for comparison. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used for risk-adjusted comparisons.

RESULTS

A significant increase in EVAR-c as an indication for any type of open aneurysm repair was detected(9%→27%;p<.001). Among EVAR-c patients, no change in age or individual comorbidities was evident[mean age: 71±9 years]; however, the proportion of female subjects(p=.01) and ASA classification >3 declined(p=.05). There was no difference in prevalence[50% vs. 43%;p=.6] or number[median-1.5(0, 5)] of pre-admission EVAR re-interventions; however, time to re-intervention decreased(median: 23[6,34] vs. 0[0,22] months;p=.005). In contrast, time to EVAR-c significantly increased(median: 16[9,39]vs. 48[20,83]-months;p=.008). No difference in frequency of non-elective presentation[mean-52%;p=.9] or indication was identified but a trend toward increasing mycotic EVAR-c was observed(5% vs. 15%;p=.09). Use of retroperitoneal exposure(14% vs. 77%;p<.0001), suprarenal cross-clamp application[6286%;p=.04] and visceral-ischemia time(median: 0[0,11] vs. 5[0,20]min;p=.05) all increased. In contrast, estimated blood loss(P-trend=.03) and procedure-time(p=.008) decreased. The unadjusted elective 30-day mortality rate improved but did not reach statistical significance[elective: 10% vs. 5%;p=.5] with no change for non-elective operations[18% vs. 16%;p=.9]. However, a significantly decreased risk of complications was evident(OR 0.88, 95%CI .8-.9;p=.01). One and 3-year survival was similar over time.

CONCLUSION

EVAR-c is now a common indication for open AAA repair. Patients frequently present non-electively and at increasingly later intervals after their index EVAR. Despite increasing technical complexity, decreased complication risk and comparable survival can be anticipated when patients are managed at a high-volume aortic referral center.

[Removal of ascending aortic dissection and residual blood flow after transcatheter isolation of descending aortic dissection]

Presented herein is a clinical case report concerning successful simultaneous surgical treatment of a female patient with a complication after transcatheter treatment for chronic dissection of the descending portion of the thoracic aorta. The woman was subjected to elective transcatheter isolation of chronic dissection of the descending thoracic aorta using a stent graft with complete coverage of the zone of the origin of the left subclavian artery. Repeat control imaging studies several months after the intervention revealed residual blood flow through the false channel, directed retrogradely from the distal edge of the stent graft to the left subclavian artery. Besides, the patient was also found to have local dissection of the distal part of the ascending aorta (zone 0). An operative intervention was performed: sternotomy, prosthetic repair of the ascending portion of the aorta and part of the aortic arch, as well as transposition of the left subclavian artery to the left common carotid artery. The control imaging studies confirmed radical removal of the false aneurysm of the ascending aorta and the presence of total thrombosis of the false channel at the level of the stent graft.

Hybrid Approach with Angiography and Limited Open Exposure to Treat Type Ia Endoleaks after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Type Ia endoleaks after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) almost always mandate secondary percutaneous reinterventions. Several patients, however, will require conversion to open surgical repair with complete graft explant, which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We herein present 3 cases of hybrid surgical repair for type Ia endoleaks, using a limited open exposure for proximal stent graft edge revision to achieve graft preservation and effective aneurysm sac exclusion.

METHODS

Angiography was used to confirm type Ia endoleak in 3 patients (2 males) who had previous EVAR between October 2017 and October 2019. Time to the endoleak after the index EVAR was immediate in 1 patient during repair of a ruptured aneurysm, 2 months in 1 patient and 2 years in 1 patient. The aorta was exposed through a limited transabdominal (n = 1) or retroperitoneal (n = 2) approach and circumferential aortic control was achieved below the renal arteries. A row of interrupted horizontal mattress sutures of 3-0 polypropylene reinforced with Teflon pledgets was placed along the aortic neck circumference. Multi-planar angiography was then repeated to verify the absence of sac filling and successful type Ia endoleak exclusion. Follow-up abdominal duplex was obtained for all 3 patients after discharge to monitor the stent graft and confirm endoleak resolution. Furthermore, there were no instances of acute renal failure.

RESULTS

In the period of review, 77 patients underwent EVAR. In the 3 patients described, we were able to achieve complete aneurysm sac exclusion and stent graft preservation in all cases. Follow-up imaging was available on 2 patients at 4-6 weeks after surgery demonstrating sustained exclusion of the endoleak. Two patients died during follow-up: one from a myocardial infarction 7 weeks after surgery and one from metastatic lung cancer at 8 months after surgery. Follow up duplex imaging at one year on the single survivor demonstrated sac shrinkage and absence of endoleak.

CONCLUSIONS

Type Ia endoleaks represent a significant source of morbidity and mortality after EVAR and typically require repair to avoid aneurysm rupture. Our use of limited proximal revision without explant provides an alternative approach to resolve the endoleaks while reducing the magnitude of physiological stress when compared to an open explant. It represents a feasible option for high-risk patients.

Lessons Learned from Open Surgical Conversion after Failed Previous EVAR

BACKGROUND

Delayed open conversion (OpC) after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is becoming increasingly common worldwide. We reviewed our experience to characterize the perioperative spectrum of OpC repairs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained institutional database to identify patients who underwent late OpC after failed EVAR was performed. Patient and aneurysm baseline characteristics, mechanism of failure, perioperative details, including type of repair/complications/survival, and late outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

From January 2003 to January 2020, 38 male patients (mean age, 75 ± 7 years; range, 60-90) required late OpC. Interval time from initial EVAR to OpC was 63.6 ± 33.8 months (range, 17-120). Mean diameter of the aneurysms was 82.2 ± 22.1 mm before OpC compared with 62.9 ± 13 mm before endograft implantation. Mechanisms of failure were type Ia, Ib, II, and III endoleaks in 14 (36.8%), 9 (23.7%), 4 (10.5%), and 1 (2.6%) patient(s), respectively; infection in 3 (7.9%), leg ischemia in 2 (5.3%), and multiple causes in 5 (13.2%) patients. We observed 4 (10.5%) asymptomatic, 16 (42.1%) symptomatic, and 18 (47.3%) ruptured aneurysms. Four patients (10.5%) had stable contained ruptures, whereas the remaining 13 (34.2%) and 1 additional patient (2.6%) with aortoenteric fistula presented with hemorrhagic shock (class ≥II). Total endograft explantation, endograft preservation, or proximal/distal partial graft removal was performed in 16 (42.1%), 10 (26.3%), and 2 (5.2%)/9 (23.7%) of patients, respectively. Technical success was 100%, excluding an early postaortic clamping death. Overall, 30-day mortality was 21.1% (8 of 38) and significantly higher in patients with hemorrhagic shock or hemodynamic instability at presentation (P = 0.04 and P = 0.009, respectively) and in patients who had endografts with hooks/barbs or experiencing higher postoperative complication rate (P = 0.02 and P = 0.006, respectively). By definition, procedure success was 81.1%. Mean follow-up was 37.6 ± 39.8 months. By the end of the study, we recorded 11 deaths (2 were aneurysm related).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high technical success, OpC has a significant mortality in patients presenting with hemorrhagic shock and had active fixation endografts or experiencing high complication rate. Many other confounding factors may play a role.

Technical approach and outcomes of failed infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repairs rescued with fenestrated and branched endografts

Background

Endovascular rescue of failed infrarenal repair (EVAR) has emerged as an attractive option to stent graft explantation. The procedure, however, is underutilized due to limited devices accessibility and the challenges associated with their implantation in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to report our outcomes and discuss our approach to rescuing previously failed infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repairs (EVAR) with fenestrated/branched endografts (f/b-EVAR).

Methods

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of consecutive patients with failed EVAR rescued with f/b-EVAR at our institution from November 2013 to March 2019 was conducted. The study primary end point was technical success; defined as the implantation of the device with no type I a/b or type III endoleak or conversion to open repair. Secondary endpoints included major adverse events (MAEs), graft patency and reintervention rates.

Results

During this time, 202 patients with complex aortic aneurysms were treated with f/b-EVAR. Of these, 19 patients (Male: 17, mean age 79 ± 7 years) underwent repair for failed EVAR. The median time from failed repair to f/b-EVAR was 48 (30, 60) months. Treatment failure was attributed to stent graft migration in 9 (47.4%) patients, disease progression in 5 (26.3%), short initial neck in 3 (15.8%) and unable to be determined in 2 (10.5%). Three patients were treated urgently with surgeon modified stent graft. Technical success was achieved in 18 patients (95%), including two who had undergone emergent repair for rupture. Seventy-two targeted vessels (97.3%) were successfully incorporated. Sixteen (84.2%) patients required a thoracoabdominal repair to achieve a durable seal. Major adverse events (MAEs) occurred in 3 patients (15.7%) including paralysis and death in one (5.3%), compartment syndrome and temporary dialysis in another and laparotomy with snorkeling of one renal and bypass of the other in the third patient. Median (IQR) hospital length of stay was 3 (2, 4) days. Late reintervention, primary target vessel patency and primary assisted patency rates were 5.3%, 98.6% and 100%, respectively.

Conclusion

Implantation of f/b-EVAR in patients with failed previous EVAR is a challenging undertaking that can be performed safely with a high technical success and low reintervention rates.

Rescue of proximal failure of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with standard and fenestrated grafts

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the outcomes of standard and fenestrated grafts to treat proximal failure of previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

All patients undergoing elective implantation of a standard or fenestrated graft after proximal failure of a previous EVAR between April 2010-November 2018 were included. Data were collected prospectively.

RESULTS

Fifty procedures were performed in 49 patients (45 male; mean age 74.6±7 years). A fenestrated proximal cuff was used in 24 (48%) cases, a composite bifurcated configuration in 21 (42%) cases, and EVAR in 5 (10%) cases. Technical success was achieved in all 5 EVAR cases and 41 of 45 FEVAR cases (91.1%). Iliac artery access problems due to the presence of the previous graft were encountered in eight (16%) procedures and renal artery catheterization difficulties in grafts with suprarenal fixation in seven (15.6%) procedures. There was one (2%) early death due to retroperitoneal bleeding. Early major complications occurred in three (6%) patients. Median follow-up was 26 months (range 1-77). Late occlusion occurred in two (1.3%) of the 151 targeted vessels. One patient needed permanent dialysis. Nine patients died during follow-up, one (2%) of them aneurysm-related. Ten (20.4%) patients presented with major complications during follow-up of which nine (18.4%) needed reintervention. Estimated freedom from reintervention at 1 and 3 years was 89.3±5.1% and 78.8±7.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Repair with fenestrated grafts represents a safe and effective treatment option. Increased technical challenges are to be expected due to the previous graft.

Late open conversions after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair in an urgent setting

OBJECTIVES

We report a multicenter experience of urgent late open conversion (LOC), with the goal of identifying the mode of presentation, technical aspects, and outcomes of this cohort of patients.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) requiring LOC (>30 days after implantation) from 1996 to 2016 in six vascular centers was performed. Patients with aneurysm rupture or other conditions requiring urgent surgery (<24 hours) were included. Patient demographics, time interval between EVAR and LOC, endograft characteristics, previous attempts at endovascular correction, indications, operative technique, 30-day mortality and morbidity, and long-term survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 42 patients (88.1% men; mean age, 75.8 ± 9.0 years) included. Among the 42 explanted grafts, 33 were bifurcated, 1 tube, 6 aortouni-iliac, and 2 side-branch devices. Suprarenal fixation was present in 78.6%. Twelve patients (28.6%) underwent endovascular reintervention before LOC. Indications for urgent LOC were aneurysm rupture in 24 of the 42 cases (57.1%), endograft infection in 11 (26.2%), endoleak associated with aneurysm growth and pain in 6 (14.3%), and recurrent endograft thrombosis in 2 (4.8%). The proximal aortic cross-clamping site was infrarenal in 38.1% of cases, suprarenal in 19.1%, and supraceliac in 42.9%. Complete removal of the endograft was performed in 32 patients (76.2%) and partial removal in 10 (proximal preservation in 7 of 10). Reconstructions were performed with Dacron grafts in 33 of the 42 cases, cryopreserved arterial allografts in 5, and endograft removal associated with prosthetic axillobifemoral bypass in 4. The 30-day mortality was 23.8%; hemorrhagic shock was an independent risk factor of early mortality (odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-73.7; P = .018). During a mean follow-up of 23.9 ± 36.0 months, two late aneurysm-related deaths occurred. The estimated 1- and 5-year survival rates were 62.1% and 46.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent LOC after EVAR are associated with high postoperative mortality rates and poor long-term survival. Further studies are necessary to define the timing and the best treatment option for failing EVAR.

Rupture after Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair due to Type IA Endoleak: Complete Endograft Preservation Is Feasible with Proximal Suturing, Aortic Neck Banding, and Sac Plication

Rupture of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) after previous endovascular repair (EVAR) may require endograft explantation and replacement with a prosthetic surgical graft. Recent reports have suggested that total endograft removal during late surgical conversion in the nonruptured setting may not be necessary and that preserving functional parts of the endograft may improve results. Similar techniques may be used for ruptured cases diminishing the magnitude of an already difficult and complex procedure. We describe the successful treatment of a ruptured AAA after previous EVAR with complete endograft preservation by combining transmural endograft fixation with sutures, proximal aortic neck banding, and sac plication.

Aortic arch banding procedure for proximal type I endoleak after thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair with the chimney technique

An aortic arch banding procedure was performed on an 82-year-old man for treatment of proximal type I endoleaks 2 days after he had undergone emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair with the chimney technique for a ruptured aortic arch aneurysm. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography after the second procedure demonstrated significant shrinkage of the aneurysmal sac as well as a complete disappearance of the endoleaks. The basic concept of this technique is to treat the type IA endoleak, including possible gutter endoleaks, by creating a new proximal seal zone distal to the chimney graft using a banding technique.

Endovascular and open surgical treatment of complications after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: A single-center experience

While endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has proven to be a safer alternative to open surgical repair for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) repair, the development of stent-graft complications mandates follow-up computed tomography imaging to minimize AAA-related mortality. In this single-institution report, adverse EVAR events identified in 150 consecutive patients are detailed. Early morbidity was low (<3%), with only 1 patient death on post-procedure day 2. After discharge (mean follow-up of 24 months), 2 patients died from cancer and one AAA-related mortality occurred after open conversion for stent-graft migration. Although computed tomography imaging detected no EVAR endoleak at 30 days, 19 patients developed an endoleak, including three Type I and four Type III leaks. Our institutional series review confirmed that EVAR of infrarenal AAA is a safe and valid alternative to open surgical repair, but sac embolization at the primary procedure in patients judged to be at high risk for Type II endoleak should be considered.

A computational assessment of the hemodynamic effects of crossed and non-crossed bifurcated stent-graft devices for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms

There are several issues attributed with abdominal aortic aneurysm endovascular repair. The positioning of bifurcated stent-grafts (SG) may affect SG hemodynamics. The hemodynamics and geometrical parameters of crossing or non-crossing graft limbs have not being totally accessed. Eight patient-specific SG devices and four pre-operative cases were computationally simulated, assessing the hemodynamic and geometrical effects for crossed (n= 4) and non-crossed (n= 4) configurations. SGs eliminated the occurrence of significant recirculations within the sac prior treatment. Dean's number predicted secondary flow locations with the greatest recirculations occurring at the outlets especially during the deceleration phase. Peak drag force varied from 3.9 to 8.7N, with greatest contribution occurring along the axial and anterior/posterior directions. Average resultant drag force was 20% smaller for the crossed configurations. Maximum drag force orientation varied from 1.4° to 51°. Drag force angle varied from 1° to 5° during one cardiac cycle. 44% to 62% of the resultant force acted along the proximal centerline where SG migration is most likely to occur. The clinician's decision for SG positioning may be a critical parameter, and should be considered prior to surgery. All crossed SG devices had an increased spiral flow effect along the distal legs with reductions in drag forces.

Unique Technique for Open Surgical Repair after Failed Endovascular Aneurysm Repair with Proximal Anastomoses

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has revolutionized the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality compared to conventional surgical repair. However, late secondary re-interventions after EVAR are still needed before aneurysm rupture in many cases. A patient with impending rupture of an AAA associated with a type I endoleak 7 years after EVAR who was successfully treated with a unique technique of fixation of the proximal aortic neck taking into account the structure of the stent graft is reported. This technique offers a safe solution to late open conversion after failed EVAR.

Outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair conversion and primary aortic repair for urgent and emergency indications in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative

OBJECTIVE

Open conversion after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR-c) is performed nonelectively in up to 60% of cases. EVAR-c has been reported to have significantly greater risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality than primary aortic repair, but few data exist on outcomes for symptomatic or ruptured presentations. This study determined outcomes and identified predictors of postoperative major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and mortality for patients undergoing nonelective EVAR-c compared with nonelective primary aortic repair (PAR) in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI).

METHODS

All VQI patients undergoing urgent/emergency EVAR-c or urgent/emergency PAR from 2002 to 2014 were reviewed. Urgent presentation was defined by repair ≤24 hours of a nonelective admission, and emergency operations had clinical or radiographic evidence, or both, of rupture. End points included in-hospital MACE (myocardial infarction, dysrhythmia, congestive heart failure) and 30-day mortality. Possible covariates identified on univariate analysis (P < .2) were entered into a multivariable model, and stepwise elimination identified the best subset of predictors. Generalized estimating equations logistic regression analysis was used to determine the relative effect of EVAR-c compared with PAR on outcomes.

RESULTS

During the study interval, we identified 277 EVAR-c, and 118 (43%) underwent urgent/emergency repair. nonelective PAR was performed in 1388 of 6152 total (23%). EVAR-c patients were older (75 ± 9 vs 71 ± 10 years; P < .0001), more likely to be male (84% vs 74%; P = .02), and had a higher prevalence of hypertension (88% vs 79%; P = .02) and coronary artery disease (38% vs 27%; P = .01). No differences in MACE (EVAR-c, 31% [n = 34] vs PAR, 30% [n = 398]) or any major postoperative complication (EVAR-c, 57% [n = 63] vs PAR, 55% [n = 740]; P = .8) were found; however, 30-day mortality was significantly greater in EVAR-c (37% [n = 41]) than in (PAR, 24% [n = 291]; P = .003), with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-4.77; P = .04) for EVAR-c. Predictors of any MACE included age (OR, × 1.03 for each additional year; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P = .0002), male gender (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.03-1.67; P = .03), body mass index ≤20 kg/m² (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.13-2.87; P = .01), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.86-1.80; P = .25), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.98-2.34; P = .06), preoperative chronic β-blocker use (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.97-1.63; P = .09), and emergency presentation (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.8-3.01; area under the curve, 0.70; P < .0001). Significant predictors for 30-day mortality were age (OR × 1.07 for each additional year; 95% CI, 1.05-1.09; P < .0001), female gender (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.01-2.46; P = .04), preoperative creatinine >1.8 mg/dL (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.04-2.35; P = .03), an emergency presentation (OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.93-7.93; P < .0001), and renal/visceral ischemia (OR, × 1.1 for each unit increase log (time-minutes); 95% CI, 1.02-1.22; area under the curve, 0.84; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Nonelective EVAR-c patients are older and have higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors than PAR patients. Similar rates of postoperative complications occur; however, urgent/emergency EVAR-c has a significantly higher risk of 30-day mortality than nonelective PAR. Several variables are identified that predict outcomes after these repairs and may help risk stratify patients to further inform clinical decision making when patients present nonelectively with EVAR failure.

Defining risk and identifying predictors of mortality for open conversion after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Risk of open conversion after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR-c) is poorly defined. The purpose of this analysis was to determine outcomes of elective EVAR-c compared with elective primary open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (PAR) in the Vascular Quality Initiative.

METHODS

Vascular Quality Initiative patients who underwent elective EVAR-c and PAR (2002-2014) were reviewed. Candidate predictors of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) and/or 30-day mortality were entered into a multivariable model, and stepwise elimination was used to reduce the number of covariates to a best subset of predictors. To estimate the additive risk of EVAR-c for MACE or 30-day mortality over PAR, this variable was added along with the best subset of predictors into generalized estimating equations logistic regression models.

RESULTS

We identified 159 EVAR-c and 3741 PAR patients. EVAR-c patients were older (73.5 ± 8.1 vs 69.5 ± 8.4 years; P < .0001), more likely to have diabetes (21% vs 15%; P = .03), and history of lower extremity bypass (9% vs 4%; P = .0006). EVAR-c was associated with a higher incidence of retroperitoneal aortic exposure (41%; n = 64 vs PAR, 26%, n = 976; P < .0001), use of a bifurcated graft (65%; n = 101 vs PAR, 52%; n = 1923; P = .001), greater blood loss (median [interquartile range], 2000 mL [1010-3500] vs PAR, 1200 mL [750-2000]; P < .0001) and longer procedure times (EVAR-c, 275 ± 122 minutes vs PAR, 232 ± 9 minutes; P < .0001). However, PAR more frequently was completed with a suprarenal and/or mesenteric cross-clamp (74%, n = 2749 vs EVAR-c, 53%, n = 83; P < .0001) and had a higher incidence of concomitant procedures (26%; n = 972 vs EVAR-c, 18%; n = 28; P = .03). Nonadjusted 30-day mortality was greater after EVAR-c: EVAR-c, 8% (n = 10) vs PAR, 3% (n = 105); P = .009. There was no difference in complication rates: EVAR-c, 33% (n = 52) vs PAR, 28% (n = 1056); P =.3. Preoperative 30-day mortality predictors included age (odds ratio [OR], 1.06/y, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.1; P < .0001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.6-3.5; P < .0001), history of leg bypass (OR, 2.3, 1.2-4.4;P =.01), suprarenal cross-clamp (OR 2.2, 1.2-4.1;P =.01), prior carotid revascularization (OR 2.2; 95% CI, 1.3-3.8; P = .0004), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.9-3.5; P = .08), and female sex (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3; P = .02; area under the curve, 0.75). When controlling for covariates, EVAR-c was not significantly associated with MACE (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.7-2.0; P = .4) or 30-day mortality (OR, 2.0; 0.9-4.2; P = .08).

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR-c patients are typically older, have more comorbidities, and experience greater blood loss and longer procedure times compared with PAR patients. However, postoperative morbidity and mortality are primarily driven by patient covariates and intraoperative factors, rather than the need for endograft explantation. Several preoperative variables were identified as predictors of 30-day mortality after elective EVAR-c and should be considered during the decision-making process for remedial treatment of failed endovascular PAR.

Surgical infrarenal "neo-neck" technique during elective conversion after EVAR with suprarenal fixation

OBJECTIVES

Conversion of a previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with suprarenal fixation is a challenging situation even in the elective setting. The outcomes of a technique based on preservation of the first proximal covered stent of the endograft, used as a "neo-neck" for proximal anastomosis, are presented.

METHODS

From 2001 to 2014, nine patients underwent elective conversion of a previous suprarenally fixed EVAR. After supraceliac clamping, the aneurysm sac was opened and the endograft identified; the fabric was cut beyond the first covered stent together with its native aortic wall in order to create a "neo-neck." An aortic balloon was inflated into the visceral aorta to avoid back bleeding. A Dacron bifurcated tube graft (Intergard, Maquet) was then sutured to the neo-neck mimicking endobanding, passing the stitches into the aortic wall and the first covered stent.

RESULTS

The mean age was 68 years (range, 52-84 years). The stent grafts removed were four Zenith (Cook Medical), three Endurant (Medtronic), and two E-vita (Jotec). The indication for conversion was type 1A (n = 2), type 2 (n = 2), and type 3 (n = 1) endoleak, complete endograft thrombosis (n = 2), and abdominal pain with sac enlargement with no radiological sign of endoleak (n = 2). Blood loss was 1,428 mL (range 500-3,000 mL); the visceral ischemic time to perform the proximal anastomosis was 23.5 min ± 2.3 min). The post-operative complication rate was 11% (n = 1/9) related to a case of sac wall bleeding requiring re-intervention; mortality at 30 days was 0%. At 22 months (range, 8-41) the computed tomography angiogram demonstrated no signs of leaks or anastomotic pseudoaneurysm.

CONCLUSION

Preservation of the proximal covered stent of an endograft with suprarenal fixation used as an infrarenal "neo-neck" with incorporation of the aorta to the suture line during elective surgical explantation simplifies the procedure, and can be achieved with very low early morbidity and mortality; furthermore, it seems to be durable over mid-term follow up.

Management of a Type Ia Endoleak With the Nellix Endovascular Aneurysm Sealing System

Purpose: To report the application of the Nellix endovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS) device, including two chimney grafts, to successfully treat a type Ia endoleak. Case Report: An 87-year-old man had an asymptomatic 7.6-cm infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and a 4.5-cm right internal iliac artery aneurysm treated using an aortouni-iliac stent-graft. Two years after the index endovascular repair, an asymptomatic type Ia endoleak was detected on duplex ultrasound; the computed tomographic angiogram (CTA) demonstrated significant sac enlargement and stent-graft migration. Initial attempts to treat the leak with 2 aortic cuffs only reduced the size of the endoleak. Another procedure was undertaken using the Nellix device with chimney grafts to increase the proximal sealing zone above the existing stent-graft. Imaging postoperatively demonstrated successful resolution of the endoleak and continuing patency of both renal artery chimney stent-grafts. CTA at 6 months demonstrated persistent sealing of the endoleak. Conclusion: The use of the EVAS system may represent another endovascular solution that can be added to the clinician’s repertoire for treating type Ia endoleak after conventional endovascular repair of infrarenal AAA.

Late open conversion after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

This study determined the incidence, the surgical details, and the outcome of late open conversion after failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm.

METHODS

A review of English-language medical literature from 1991 to 2014 was conducted using the PubMed and EMBASE databases to find all studies involving late conversion after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm. The search identified 26 articles encompassing 641 patients (84% men; median age, 73.5 years).

RESULTS

Mean interval from the initial implantation was 38.5 ± 10.7 months. The cumulative single-center open conversion rate was 3.7%. The indications for late open conversion included endoleak in 62.4%, infection in 9.5%, migration in 5.5%, and thrombosis in 6.7%. Operations were urgent in 22.5% of the patients. The 30-day mortality was 9.1%. Mortality rates were different between elective (3.2%) and nonelective patients (29.2%). Five aneurysm-related deaths (1.5%) and two graft infections (0.6%) occurred during a median follow-up of 26.4 months (range, 5-50.2 months).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of patients with failed EVAR and without further options for endovascular salvage is growing. Endoleak remains the most important weakness of EVAR as the leading cause of late open conversion. Such procedures, although technically demanding, are associated with relatively low mortality rates when performed electively. Open repair still represents a valuable solution for many patients with failed EVAR.

Infective Etiology Affects Outcomes of Late Open Conversion After Failed Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Purpose: To retrospectively review all patients undergoing late open conversion (LOC) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in order to identify any clinical or technical predictors of poor outcome. Methods: Twenty-six consecutive patients (24 men; mean age 74.7±8.3 years) underwent LOC between June 2006 and April 2013 at our institution. The mean interval from index EVAR to LOC was 40.4±29.2 months (range 5–93 months). The indication for LOC was endoleak in 14 (54%) patients and infection in 12 (46%): 2 (8%) patients with endoleak had a ruptured aneurysm and 6 (23%) patients with infection had a recurrent secondary aortoesophageal fistula (sAEF). Results: In all 12 cases of infection and in 12 of 14 endoleaks, the entire endograft was explanted. A rifampin-soaked Dacron silver graft was implanted in all patients with infection. Patients with any infection and with recurrent AEF required more blood units than patients with endoleak (6.40 vs. 1.86, p=0.045; 6.76 vs. 1.86, p=0.0036, respectively). Compared with endoleak, the duration of conversions in the setting of infection (274 vs. 316 minutes, p=0.42) and recurrent sAEF (274 vs. 396 minutes, p=0.021) was longer. All patients with recurrent sAEF died at a mean 3.0±2.5 days after LOC from proximal anastomosis disruption and hemorrhagic shock (n=2), myocardial infarction (n=2), acute stroke (n=1), or persistent sepsis (n=1). Perioperative mortality was significantly higher in patients with endograft infection (6/12, p=0.002) and in cases of supraceliac cross-clamping (4/6, p=0.003). The association of infection with supraceliac cross-clamping was a strong predictor for perioperative mortality (p<0.001). Conclusion: In our experience, endograft infection led to greater perioperative mortality after LOC. Recurrent aortoenteric fistula in association with supraceliac cross-clamping is a strong predictor of poor outcome. Patients surviving the perioperative period may have good chances of long-term survival.

Elective endovascular aortic repair conversion for type Ia endoleak is not associated with increased morbidity or mortality compared with primary juxtarenal aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Type Ia endoleak after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) can be a challenging complication to manage, and due to concerns regarding morbidity and mortality of open surgical conversion (OSC), reports of complex endoluminal salvage techniques are increasing. Despite development of these endovascular remedial strategies, many patients ultimately require OSC. The purpose of this analysis was to outcomes of elective OSC for type Ia endoleak and compare them with elective primary open juxtarenal aneurysm repair (OJAR) to determine if these concerns are warranted.

METHODS

From 2000 to 2012, 54 patients underwent EVAR OSC at median time of 27 months (interquartile range, 9-55 months). Indications included endograft thrombosis in 2 (4%), intraoperative EVAR failure in 3 (6%), rupture in 5 (9%), graft infection in 6 (11%), and type Ia endoleak in 25 (all: 38 [70%]). Because many OSCs are performed for emergency indications without endovascular options, we chose elective type Ia endoleak patients as our study group. These 25 patients were compared with an elective OJAR cohort matched by anatomy and comorbidities. Primary end points were 30-day and 1-year mortality. Secondary end points included early complications, cross-clamp time, procedure time, blood loss, and length of stay.

RESULTS

Demographic and comorbidity data in the OSC and OJAR groups did not differ, with the exception that OJAR patients presented with smaller aneurysm diameter and a higher rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = .03). OSC patients more frequently underwent a nontube graft repair (OSC, n = 20 [80%] vs OJAR, n = 6 [24%]; P = .0002), required longer procedure times (P = .03), and received more plasma transfusions (P = .03). The 30-day mortality was 4% in both groups (observed difference in rates, 0%; 95% confidence interval for difference in mortality rates, -14.0% to 14.0%; P = 1). A similar rate of major complications occurred (OSC, n = 9 [36%] vs OJAR, n = 8 [32%]; P = 1). One-year survival was 83% in OSC and 91% in OJAR (observed difference, 7%; 95% confidence interval, -15% to 29%; P = .65).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite many advances in EVAR technology, the need for OSC persists and will likely become more common as older-generation devices fail or providers attempt EVAR in more anatomically complex patients. Elective OSC for type Ia endoleak can be technically challenging but is not associated with increased morbidity or mortality compared with OJAR in appropriately selected patients. These results should be considered before pursuing complex endovascular remediation of EVAR failures.

Open Conversion after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair with the Ovation Prime™ Endograft

Advances in abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) endograft device technology have contributed to improved outcomes and durability of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), even in complex infrarenal aortic anatomies. However, stent graft failure secondary to endoleaks, migration, endotension and sac enlargement are persistent problems that can result in aneurysm rupture following EVAR.

A symptomatic infrarenal AAA (4mm proximal neck) was treated initially with an Ovation Prime™ device (TriVascular, Inc., Santa Rosa, CA) in an off-label fashion, leading to type Ia endoleak moderately reduced by additional proximal neck ballooning. A failed Chimney technique to the single patent, but severely stenosed, right renal artery preceded the use of this device. A large type Ia endoleak was evident at 6-month follow-up, but following a failed supplementary endovascular intervention with coils to seal the endoleak, the patient presented with hemorrhagic shock from AAA rupture, requiring urgent open conversion. Intraoperatively it was impossible to explant this new type of endograft. Circumferential tying of the infrarenal aorta with a Teflon band was unable to stop the bleeding. However, after dividing the body of the stent-graft below the two proximal polymer rings, the endoleak was successfully treated by suturing the graft with the proximal aortic neck. The procedure was completed with extension of the stump to the common femoral arteries using a bifurcated Dacron prosthesis.

The body of an Ovation Prime™ endograft may be impossible to explant in open conversion conditions. Large prospective studies with longer follow-up are required to adequately reflect the behavior of this particular device.

Hemodynamic variations due to spiral blood flow through four patient-specific bifurcated stent graft configurations for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms

Endovascular repair is now a recognised procedure for treating abdominal aortic aneurysms. However, post-operative complications such as stent graft migration and thrombus may still occur. To assess these complications numerically, the correct input boundary conditions, which include the full human aorta with associated branching, should be included. Four patient-specific computed tomography scanned bifurcated stent grafts (SGs) were modelled and attached onto a full human aorta, which included the ascending, aortic arch and descending aortas. Two of the SG geometries had a twisted leg configuration, while the other two had conventional nontwisted leg configurations. Computational fluid dynamics was completed for both geometries and the hemodynamics assessed. The complexity of the flow patterns and secondary flows were influenced by the inclusion of the full human aorta at the SG proximal section. During the decelerating phase significant recirculations occurred along the main body of all SG configurations. The inclusion of the full human aorta did not impact the velocity contours within the distal legs and there was no difference in drag forces with the SG containing the full human aorta and those without. A twisted leg configuration further promoted a spiral flow formation along its distal legs.

Late conversion of endovascular to open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Failure of endovascular repair (EVAR) of an abdominal aortic aneurysm can result in significant risk of morbidity and mortality. We review our experience with late conversions to open repair.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective database review to identify all EVAR procedures performed between 1997 and 2010 and the number converted to open repair at our university-affiliated medical centre. Late conversion was defined as those occurring at least 30 days after initial EVAR.

RESULTS

In all, 892 EVARs took place during the study period. Six patients (0.7%) required late conversion to open repair. Their mean age was 71 (range 58-83) years, and half were women. Half of the initial EVARs were for ruptured aneurysms. The median time to conversion was 15.6 (range 1.7-61.3) months. Indications for secondary conversion (50% urgent, 50% elective) included persistent type I endoleak (n = 3), combined type II and III endoleak (n = 1), graft thrombosis (n = 1) and aneurysm rupture (n = 1). Supraceliac clamping was required in most patients (67%), and the mean transfusion requirement was 2.6 units. Total endograft explantation occurred in 2 patients (33%), whereas partial or total endograft preservation occurred in 4 (67%). Median length of stay in hospital after conversion was 7 (range 6-73) days. There were no instances of early or in-hospital mortality following conversion.

CONCLUSION

Our EVAR experience includes a low rate of late conversion to open repair, with most conversions being a result of persistent aneurysm perfusion. Although technically challenging, late conversion can be safe. Our experience supports ongoing surveillance after EVAR.

Aortic banding and endovascular aneurysm repair in a case of juxtarenal aortic aneurysm with unsuitable infrarenal neck

The proximal aortic neck is one of the limiting factors for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and represents a crucial factor for success or failure of the procedure. In contrast to open surgery, where a clamp can be placed suprarenally but the repair performed infrarenally, EVAR requires a good infrarenal neck for durable fixation and seal. In a high-risk surgical 79-year-old patient with juxtarenal aortic aneurysm with unsuitable infrarenal neck, a hybrid procedure was chosen: juxtarenal aortic banding and EVAR. The banding allowed a successful EVAR by reshaping the juxtarenal aneurysmal aortic segment, hence converting a previously untreatable anatomy into a treatable one.