Femoral artery calcification as a determinant of success for percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Use of physician-modified inverted limb in conjunction with Zenith fenestrated stent graft to rescue failed previous endovascular and open repair

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes and performance of inverted limbs (ILs) when used in conjunction with Zenith fenestrated stent grafts (Zfens) to treat patients with short distance between the lowest renal artery (RA) and aortic or graft bifurcation (A/GB).

METHODS

This study was a multicenter, retrospective review of prospectively maintained database of patients with complex aortic aneurysms, failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), or open surgical repair (OSR) with short distance between LRA and A/GB treated using a combination of Zfen and an IL between 2013 and 2023. Endpoints included technical success, aneurysm sac regression, long-term device integrity, and target vessel patency. We defined technical success as implantation of the device with no endoleak, conversion to an aorto-uni-iliac or OSR.

RESULTS

During this time, 52 patients underwent endovascular rescue of failed repair. Twenty (38.5%) of them required relining of the failed repairs using IL due to lowest RA to A/GB length restrictions. Two patients had undergone rescue with a fenestrated cuff alone but developed type III endoleaks. One patient with no previous implant had a short distance between the lowest RA and aortic bifurcation to accommodate the bifurcated distal device, and two patients had failed OSR or anastomotic pseudoaneurysms. The majority (94%) were men with a mean age of 76.8 ± 6.1 years. The mean aortic neck diameter and aneurysm size were 32 ± 4 cm and 7.2 ± 1.3 cm, respectively. The median time laps between initial repair and failure was 36 months (interquartile range [IQR], 24-54 months). Sixteen patients (80%) were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists class III, whereas four were class IV. Seventy-eight vessels were targeted and successfully incorporated. Technical success was 100%, and median estimated blood loss was 100 mL (IQR, 100-200 mL). Mean fluoroscopy time and dose were 61 ± 18 minutes and 2754 ± 1062 mGy, respectively. Average hospital length of stay was 2.75 ± 2.15 days. Postoperative complication occurred in one patient who required lower extremity fasciotomy for compartment syndrome. At a median follow-up of 50 months (IQR, 18-58 months), there were no device migration, components separation, aneurysmal related mortality, and type I or type III endoleak. Aneurysm sac regression (95%) or stabilization (5%) was observed in all patients, including in four patients (25%) with type II endoleak.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of IL in conjunction with Zfen to treat patients with short distance between the lowest RA and A/GB is safe, effective, and has excellent long-term results. The technique expands the indication of Zfen, especially in patients with failed previous EVAR.

Analysis of Determinants for Suture-mediated Closure Device Failure During EVAR Procedures

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for elective and emergency infrarenal aortic pathologies is the primary approach for treatment nowadays. During such procedure, the suture-mediated closure device (SMCD) (Perclose ProGlideTM, Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA) is commonly used. This study aimed to identify potential contributors for SMCD failure in a patient cohort of elective and emergency EVAR.

METHODS

Archived medical records from patients who underwent EVAR for aortic pathologies in elective and emergency setting at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany were included. Patient's co-morbidities, access vessel morphologies and hemostasis-related blood parameters were evaluated on their association with SMCD failure applying different statistical methods.

RESULTS

A total of 71 patients (139 femoral accesses) was included. The mean age was 73.5 ± 8.4 years. Overall SMCD failure rate was 4.3%, 4.1% for elective and 5.9% for emergency cases, respectively. Total procedure time was longer for the SMCD failure group (323 ± 117.8 min vs 171 ± 43.7 min). The calcification status of the common femoral artery (CFA), the diameter of the aortic bifurcation, and dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) on the medication plan prior to the procedure were associated with SMCD failure. Univariate binary logistic regression analysis nominated several potentially relevant predictors for SMCD failure who underwent subsequent multivariable binary logistic regression analysis. Here, DAPT on the medication plan was identified as being promising in predicting SMCD failure (OR 30.5), while anterior plaque formation in the CFA maintained as only statistically relevant determinant (OR 44.9).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the CFA calcification status to be associated with SMCD failure. Although discontinued prior to endovascular treatment, DAPT was also found to be associated with SMCD failure. Our results may advocate to perform obligatory platelet testing prior to EVAR to maximize patient safety.

The Safety and Effectiveness of the Prostar XL Closure Device Compared to Open Groin Cutdown for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of percutaneous femoral closure with the Prostar XL for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) to those of open femoral cutdown, and to evaluate factors which may predict the failure of percutaneous closure.

METHODS

Patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm between 2005 and 2013 were included. Patient characteristics, anatomic femoral artery measurements, and postoperative complications were recorded retrospectively. Operator experience was defined with a cut-off point of >30 Prostar XL closures performed. Comparisons were made per access site.

RESULTS

A total of 443 access sites were included, with percutaneous closure used in 257 cases (58.0%) and open cutdown in 186 cases (42.0%). The complication rate was 2.7% for the percutaneous and 4.3% for the open cutdown group (P = .482). No significant differences between groups were found with respect to 30-day mortality, wound infections, thrombosis, seromas, or bleeding complications. Fourteen failures (5.4%) of percutaneous closure occurred. The success rates were similar for experienced and unexperienced operators (94.2% vs 95.5%, P = .768). Renal insufficiency was more common in the failed than in the successful percutaneous closure group (64.3% vs 24.7%, P = .003). Common femoral artery calcification or diameter, BMI, sheath size, or operator experience did not predict failure. No further complications were seen in follow-up CT at 1-3 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

The use of the Prostar XL is safe compared to open cutdown. The success rate is 94.6%. Operator experience, sheath size, obesity, or femoral artery diameter or calcification do not appear to predict a failure of percutaneous closure. Complications seem to occur perioperatively, and late complications are rare.

A Comparative Analysis of the Early and Late Complication Rates and the Effect of Calcification on the Efficacy of MANTA and ProGlide Vascular Closure Devices

Introduction The Perclose ProGlide and, more recently, MANTA Large-Bore Closure Device are commonly used vascular closure devices (VCDs) for managing large-bore vascular access haemostasis. The extent of calcification in the common femoral artery (CFA) plays a crucial role in choosing between these devices. ProGlide may face challenges with anterior calcification, while MANTA may have issues with posterior calcification. Our study compared their effectiveness, adjunct usage, calcification impact and early/late complications. Methods A retrospective analysis of procedures involving large-bore CFA access from 2017 to 2022 was conducted. Closure was grouped according to VCD as Group A (ProGlide) and Group B (MANTA). Calcification was designated as anterior and posterior and combined on pre-operative computed tomography angiography along 10 mm segments with 0.625 mm slice thickness. The success of haemostasis was graded as Grade 1 (haemostasis without adjuncts), Grade 2 (haemostasis with adjuncts) and Grade 3 (failed haemostasis needing rescue); Grades 1 and 2 were pooled as successful haemostasis. Statistical analysis was undertaken in Minitab 21 for Windows, particularly analysing calcification and its impact on the success of haemostasis. Results We evaluated 370 large-bore CFA accesses, distributed across two groups: Group A(64.9%, n=243) and Group B (35.1%, n=127), for a total of 205 endovascular procedures (93.1% (191) EVAR and 5.3% (11) TEVAR). The mean age was 74.9±8 years, predominantly males (88.2%, n=181). The average body mass index (BMI) was 28±5.8, with 20.9% (43) individuals having diabetes and 18.5% (37) current smokers. The mean sheath size OD was 16±2.5, with 4.5% (11) re-do groins in Group A and 6.2% (8) in Group B. Successful haemostasis was achieved in 91.8% (n=223) in Group A (44.8%, n=109 Grade 2) and 90.5% (n=115) in Group B (21%, n=27 Grade 2). Rescue operations were needed in 8.2% (20) in Group A and 9.1% (12) in Group B. Pseudoaneurysms developed more commonly in Grade 2 haemostasis with 9.9% (11) in Group A and 1.6% (2) in Group B (p=0.3). Anterior calcification was observed in 14.8% (36) in Group A and 18.8% (24) in Group B. In comparison, posterior calcification was present in 62.5% (152) in Group A and 66.9% (85) in Group B. Notably, calcification did not significantly impact haemostasis (p=0.79). Additional VCD deployment was necessary due to device failure in 4.5% (11) cases in Group A and 1.5% (2) cases in Group B. Conclusion The overall success rate was comparable between the two groups. However, Group A required more adjuncts to achieve successful haemostasis. The site of calcification did not impact the efficacy of closure devices. Pseudoaneurysm formation was more frequent when adjuncts were needed.

Safety of Percutaneous Femoral Access for Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Through Previously Surgically Exposed or Repaired Femoral Arteries

OBJECTIVE

Percutaneous femoral artery access is being increasingly used in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). The technique can be challenging in patients with previously surgically exposed or repaired femoral arteries because of excessive scar tissue. However, a successful percutaneous approach may cause less morbidity than a "re-do" open femoral approach. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of prior open surgical femoral exposure on technical success and clinical outcomes of percutaneous approach.

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who underwent percutaneous EVAR between 2010 and 2020 at 2 major aortic centers. Patients were divided into 2 groups (with or without prior open surgical femoral access) for analysis of clinical outcomes. Only punctures with sheaths ≥12Fr were included for analysis. The access and (pre)closure techniques were similar in both institutions. Primary end points were intraoperative technical success, access-related revision, and access complications. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify determinants of conversion to open approach and femoral access complications in intact and re-do groins.

RESULTS

A total of 632 patients underwent percutaneous (complex) EVAR: 98 had prior open surgical femoral access and 534 patients underwent de novo femoral percutaneous access. A total of 1099 femoral artery punctures were performed: 149 in re-do and 950 in intact groins. The extent of endovascular repair included 159 infrarenal, 82 thoracic, 368 fenestrated/branched, and 23 iliac branch devices. No significant differences were seen in technical success (re-do 93.3% vs intact 95.3%, p=0.311), access-related surgical revision (0.7% vs 0.6%, p=0.950), and access complications (2.7% vs 4.0%, p=0.443). For the whole group, significant predictors for access complications in multivariate analyses were main access site (odds ratio [OR] 2.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07%-5.35%; p=0.033) and increase of the procedure time per hour (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.34%-2.04%; p<0.001), while increase in sheath-vessel ratio had a protective effect (OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.127%-0.85%; p=0.021). Surgical conversion was predicted by main access site (OR 2.32; 95% CI 1.28%-4.19%; p=0.007) and calcification of 50% to 75% of the circumference of the access vessel (OR 3.29; 95% CI 1.38%-7.86%; p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

Within our population prior open surgical femoral artery exposure or repair had no negative impact on the technical success and clinical outcomes of percutaneous (complex) endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Evaluation of the MYNX CONTROL™ Arterial Closure System for Achieving Primary Hemostasis after Arterial Femoral Access Following Peripheral Arterial Interventions, Compared to the FemoSealTM Closure System

Background: In addition to manual compression, various vascular closure devices (VCD) are available to seal the puncture site following arterial vascular procedures. Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the extravascular MYNX CONTROL closure system for achieving primary hemostasis after femoral arterial access following peripheral arterial procedures, compared to the intravascular FemoSeal Aclosure system. Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent endovascular intervention between April and November 2022 was performed. The primary endpoint was the incidence of significant puncture site complication defined as a complication resulting in medical treatment. Secondary endpoints included peri-interventional incidence of hematoma, peri-interventional changes in hemoglobin, incidence of emergency diagnostics and predictors for closure system failure. Results: Five hundred and forty-eight patients were included in this analysis. False aneurysm occurred in 18/273 cases (6.6%) following the use of the MYNX closure system, compared to 6/275 cases after using the FemoSeal closure system (2.2%, p = 0.006). The incidence of post-interventional hematoma was not significantly different (28 (10.3%) in the MYNX group versus 32 (11.6%) in the FemoSeal group, p = 0.358). Peri-interventional hemoglobin drop did not differ between groups (p = 0.449). Emergency diagnostics were not significantly performed more often in the MYNX group (14 (5.1%) versus 8 (2.9%), p = 0.134). A post-interventional duplex sonography showed stenosis at the puncture site in one patient after use of the MYNX system. For the entire cohort, oral anticoagulation was the only predictor for the failure of the closure device (p = 0.036). Conclusions: Device failure was more common after using the extravascular MYNX CONTROL system than after using the intravascular FemoSeal system. However, the need for surgical or interventional therapy due to device failure was low.

Mixed reality for the assessment of aortoiliac anatomy in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm prior to open and endovascular repair: Feasibility and interobserver agreement

OBJECTIVES

The objective is to evaluate the feasibility and interobserver agreement of a Mixed Reality Viewer (MRV) in the assessment of aortoiliac vascular anatomy of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients.

METHODS

Fifty preoperative computed tomography angiographies (CTAs) of AAA patients were included. CTAs were assessed in a mixed reality (MR) environment with respect to aortoiliac anatomy according to a standardized protocol by two experienced observers (Mixed Reality Viewer, MRV, Brainlab AG, Germany). Additionally, all CTAs were independently assessed applying the same protocol by the same observers using a conventional DICOM viewer on a two-dimensional screen with multi-planar reconstructions (Conventional viewer, CV, GE Centricity PACS RA1000 Workstation, GE, United States). The protocol included four sets of items: calcification, dilatation, patency, and tortuosity as well as the number of lumbar and renal arteries. Interobserver agreement (IA, Cohen's Kappa, κ) was calculated for every item set.

RESULTS

All CTAs could successfully be displayed in the MRV (100%). The MRV demonstrated equal or better IA in the assessment of anterior and posterior calcification (κMRV: 0.68 and 0.61, κCV: 0.33 and 0.45, respectively) as well as tortuosity (κMRV: 0.60, κCV: 0.48) and dilatation (κMRV: 0.68, κCV: 0.67). The CV demonstrated better IA in the assessment of patency (κMRV: 0.74, κCV: 0.93). The CV also identified significantly more lumbar arteries (CV: 379, MRV: 239, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The MRV is a feasible imaging viewing technology in clinical routine. Future efforts should aim at improving hologram quality and enabling accurate registration of the hologram with the physical patient.

Predicting the risk of iliofemoral vascular complication in complex transfemoral-TAVR using new generation transcatheter devices

Objective

Design a predictive risk model for minimizing iliofemoral vascular complications (IVC) in a contemporary era of transfemoral-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR).

Background

IVC remains a common complication of TF-TAVR despite the technological improvement in the new-generation transcatheter systems (NGTS) and enclosed poor outcomes and quality of life. Currently, there is no accepted tool to assess the IVC risk for calcified and tortuous vessels.

Methods

We reconstructed CT images of 516 propensity-matched TF-TAVR patients using the NGTS to design a predictive anatomical model for IVC and validated it on a new cohort of 609 patients. Age, sex, peripheral artery disease, valve size, and type were used to balance the matched cohort.

Results

IVC occurred in 214 (7.2%) patients. Sheath size (p = 0.02), the sum of angles (SOA) (p < .0001), number of curves (NOC) (p < .0001), minimal lumen diameter (MLD) (p < .001), and sheath-to-femoral artery diameter ratio (SFAR) (p = 0.012) were significant predictors for IVC. An indexed risk score (CSI) consisting of multiplying the SOA and NOC divided by the MLD showed 84.3% sensitivity and 96.8% specificity, when set to >100, in predicting IVC (C-stat 0.936, 95% CI 0.911-0.959, p < 0.001). Adding SFAR > 1.00 in a tree model increased the overall accuracy to 97.7%. In the validation cohort, the model predicted 89.5% of the IVC cases with an overall 89.5% sensitivity, 98.9% specificity, and 94.2% accuracy (C-stat 0.842, 95% CI 0.904-0.980, p < .0001).

Conclusion

Our CT-based validated-model is the most accurate and easy-to-use tool assessing IVC risk and should be used for calcified and tortuous vessels in preprocedural planning.

Comparison of upper extremity and transfemoral access for fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

The use of upper extremity (UE) access is an accepted and often implemented approach for fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR). The advent of steerable sheaths has enabled the performance of F-BEVAR using a total transfemoral (TF) approach without UE access, potentially decreasing the risks of cerebral embolic events. The purpose of the present study was to assess the outcomes of F-BEVAR using UE vs TF access.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data from nine physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies at U.S. centers were analyzed using a standardized database. All patients were treated for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) using industry-manufactured fenestrated and branched stent grafts between 2005 and 2020. The outcomes were compared between patients who had undergone UE vs total TF access. The primary composite outcome was stroke or transient ischemia attack (TIA) and 30-day or in-patient mortality during the perioperative period. The secondary outcomes included technical success, local access-related complications, and perioperative mortality.

RESULTS

Among 1681 patients (71% men; mean age, 73.43 ± 7.8 years) who had undergone F-BEVAR, 502 had had CAAAs (30%), 535 had had extent IV TAAAs (32%), and 644 had had extent I to III TAAAs (38%). UE access was used for 1103 patients (67%). The right side was used for 395 patients (24%) and the left side for 705 patients (42%). UE access was preferentially used for TAAAs (74% vs 47%; P < .001). In contrast, TF access was used more frequently for CAAAs (53% vs 26%; P < .01). A total of 38 perioperative cerebrovascular events (2.5%), including 32 strokes (1.9%) and 6 TIAs (0.4%), had occurred. Perioperative cerebrovascular events had occurred more frequently with UE access than with TF access (2.8% vs 1.2%; P = .036). An individual component analysis of the primary composite outcome revealed a trend for more frequent strokes (2.3% vs 1.2%; P = .13) and TIAs (0.54% vs 0%; P = .10) in the UE access group. On multivariable analysis, total TF access was associated with a 60% reduction in the frequency of perioperative cerebrovascular events (odds ratio, 0.39; P = .029). No significant differences were observed between UE and TF access in the technical success rate (96.5% vs 96.8%; P = .72), perioperative mortality (2.9% vs 2.6%; P = .72), or local access-related complications (6.5% vs 5.5%; P = .43).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present large, multicenter, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, a total TF approach for F-BEVAR was associated with a lower rate of perioperative cerebrovascular events compared with UE access. Although the cerebrovascular event rate was low with UE access, the TF approach offered a lower risk of stroke and TIA. UE access will continue to play a role for appropriately selected patients requiring more complex repairs with anatomy not amenable to the TF approach.

Percutaneous Approach in Endovascular Aortic Procedures Using a Suture-Mediated Closure Device

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy of a suture-mediated closure device during percutaneous endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective analysis of patients undergoing endovascular repair for infrarenal, thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and aortic dissections via percutaneous femoral access between April 2017 and June 2021 was performed. The primary endpoint of the study was the efficacy and technical success of the Perclose ProGlide closure device during percutaneous endovascular procedures. The secondary endpoints were intraoperative and postoperative inguinal and vascular complications during and after device use.

RESULTS

A total of 376 punctures were performed in 263 patients with the deployment of the ProGlide vascular closure system. Twenty-two cases involved percutaneous re-puncture as part of a staged procedure. The primary and secondary technical success rates were 93.1% (350/376) and 94.7% (356/376), respectively. In 20 patients (5.3%), intraoperative femoral exposure due to complications was required. Postoperative complications occurred in 13 cases (3.5%), 2 of which required surgical reintervention. There was no statistical significance between the type of endovascular procedure and primary technical success (p = 0.56). The introduction of larger-diameter sheaths was not associated with increased intraoperative and postoperative complication rates (p = 0.75 and p = 0.78, respectively). Percutaneous re-puncture of the vascular access site did not result in a lower overall technical success rate (20/22, 90.9% primary technical success rate, p = 0.67; 21/22, 95.5% secondary technical success rate, p = 0.86) or an increased number of perioperative complications (1/22, 4.5% intraoperative complications, p = 0.86; 2/22, 9.1% postoperative complications, p = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

The application of the ProGlide closure system is a safe and efficient method to achieve hemostasis during percutaneous endovascular aortic repair. Complex aortic pathologies, which often require a staged approach with re-puncture, can also be successfully treated with this closure system.

Comparison of percutaneous and cutdown access‑related minor complications after endovascular aortic repair

The aim of the present study was to compare the open surgical and percutaneous access for thoracic/endovascular aortic repair (T/EVAR) regarding in-hospital and post-hospital minor-complications. Percutaneous (pEVAR) and cutdown (cEVAR) techniques for femoral vessel access for T/EVAR were compared regarding their minor complications. The basic population of this retrospective cohort study consisted of 44 percutaneous and 215 cutdown accesses for endovascular aortic repair (T/EVAR-procedure) conducted between August 2008 and October 2019. The primary outcome consisted of conservatively treatable minor complications until hospital discharge and during follow up. Secondary outcomes comprised postoperative pain and complications requiring invasive treatment. Minor complications were observed in 11.4% (pEVAR) vs. 9% (cEVAR) of cases throughout index hospital stay and 10 vs. 13.7% during follow-up. No significant differences were noticed regarding overall complication rate between pEVAR and cEVAR. Only bleedings treatable through compression occurred significantly more often in the pEVAR-group (6.8 vs. 0.5%; P=0.02). In conclusions, the percutaneous technique represents a safe and quickly executable alternative to cutdown access. A significant difference in overall minor complications could not be observed. In both techniques, complications may occur even months after surgery. In order to demonstrate the superiority of the percutaneous technique compared with cutdown access, possible predictors for the use of the percutaneous technique should be defined in the future.

Comparison of Early Efficacy of the Percutaneous Presuture Technique with the Femoral Artery Incision Technique in Endovascular Aortic Repair under Local Anesthesia for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection

Objective

To compare the efficacy of the percutaneous presuture technique (PPST) and the femoral artery incision technique (FAIT) under local anesthesia in the treatment of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for patients with uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD).

Method

Two hundred and ninety-five patients diagnosed with uTBAD who underwent EVAR under local anesthesia from June 2017 to December 2021 were consecutively and randomly selected for retrospective analysis. The PPST was performed in 178 cases and the FAIT was performed in 117 cases. The clinical characteristics and surgical and postoperative data from the two groups were analyzed.

Results

There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups (p > 0.05). The operative time of the PPST group was significantly shorter than that of the FAIT group (46 (33, 58) versus 72 (67.5, 78.0) minutes, p < 0.001), as was the operative approach procedure time (6 (4.5, 9.0) versus 38 (36.5, 43.5) minutes, p < 0.001), and length of postoperative hospital stay (5.19 ± 2.26 versus 8.33 ± 3.76 days, p < 0.001). There were fewer postoperative approach-related procedural complications in the PPST group than in the FAIT group (2 versus 12, p < 0.001); similarly, the average frequency of postoperative wound disinfection was significantly lower in the PPST group (1.08 ± 0.39 versus 3.31 ± 0.91 times, p < 0.05). Obesity was identified as an independent risk factor for postoperative approach-related procedural complications (OR, 22.26; 95% CI, 4.74–104.49; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The PPST has comparable safety and efficacy to the FAIT in EVAR under local anesthesia. It can shorten the length of hospital stay, reduce operation time, lower the risk of wound-related complications, reduce the frequency of postoperative wound disinfection, and hasten postoperative recovery. It can therefore be used as a first-line surgical technique in EVAR of uTBAD under local anesthesia, especially in obese patients.

Multicenter Experience of Upper Extremity Access in Complex Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

Upper extremity access (UEA) for antegrade cannulation of aortic side branches is a relevant part of endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysms and can be achieved using several techniques, sites and sides. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different UEA strategies in a multicenter registry of complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

In six aortic centers in the Netherlands, all endovascular aortic procedures from 2006 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who received upper extremity access during complex EVAR were included. Primary outcome was a composite endpoint of any access complication, excluding minor hematomas. Secondary outcomes were access characteristics, access complications considered individually, access reinterventions and incidence of ischemic cerebrovascular events.

RESULTS

417 patients underwent 437 UEA for 303 fenestrated/branched EVARs, and 114 chimney EVARs. Twenty patients had bilateral, 295 left-sided, and 102 right-sided UEA. 413 approaches were performed surgically and 24 percutaneously. Distal brachial access was used in 89 cases, medial brachial in 149, proximal brachial in 140 and axillary access in 59 cases. No significant differences regarding the composite endpoint of access complications were seen (DBA 11.3% vs. MBA 6.7% vs. PBA 13.6% vs. AA 10.2%; p=.29). Postoperative neuropathy occurred most after proximal brachial access (DBA 1.1% vs. MBA 1.3% vs. PBA 9.3 % vs. AA 5.1%; p=.003). There were no differences in cerebrovascular complications between access sides (right 5.9% vs. left 4.1% vs. bilateral 5%; p=.75). Significantly more overall access complications were seen after a percutaneous approach (29.2% vs. 6.8%; p=.002). In multivariate analysis the risk for access complications after open approach was decreased by male gender (OR 0.27; CI 95% 0.10 - 0.72; p= .009), while an increase in age per year (OR 1.08; CI 95% 1.004 - 1.179; p=.039) and diabetes mellitus type 2 (OR 3.70; CI 95% 1.20 - 11.41; p= .023) increased the risk.

CONCLUSION

Between the four access localizations, there were no differences in overall access complications. Female gender, diabetes mellitus type 2 and ageing increased the risk for access complications after surgical approach. Furthermore, a percutaneous upper extremity access resulted in higher complication rates than a surgical approach.

Perioperative neurologic outcomes of right versus left upper extremity access for fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Upper extremity (UE) access is frequently used for fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR), particularly for complex repairs. Traditionally, left-side UE access has been used to avoid crossing the arch and the origin of the supra-aortic vessels, which could potentially result in cerebral embolization and an increased risk of perioperative cerebrovascular events. More recently, right UE has been more frequently used as it is more convenient and ergonomic. The purpose of this study was to assess the outcomes and cerebrovascular events after F-BEVAR with the use of right- vs left-side UE access.

METHODS

During an 8-year period, 453 patients (71% male) underwent F-BEVAR at a single institution. UE access was used in more complex repairs. Left UE access was favored in the past, whereas right UE access is currently the preferred UE access side. Brachial artery cutdown was used in all patients for the placement of a 12F sheath. Outcomes were compared between patients undergoing right vs left UE access. End points included cerebrovascular events, perioperative mortality, technical success, and local access-related complications.

RESULTS

UE access was used in 361 (80%) patients. The right side was used in 232 (64%) and the left side in 129 (36%) patients for the treatment of 88 (25%) juxtarenal, 135 (38%) suprarenal, and 137 (38%) thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Most procedures were elective (94%). Technical success was achieved in 354 patients (98%). In-patient or 30-day mortality was 3.3%. Five (1%) perioperative strokes occurred in patients undergoing right UE access, of which three were ischemic and two were hemorrhagic. No transient ischemic attacks occurred perioperatively. Two hemorrhagic strokes were associated with permissive hypertension to prevent spinal cord ischemia. No perioperative strokes occurred in patients undergoing left UE access (P = .16). Overall, perioperative strokes occurred with similar frequency in patients undergoing UE (5, 1%) and femoral access only (1, 1%) (P = .99). Arm access-related complications occurred in 15 (5%) patients, 11 (4.8%) on the right side and 4 (6%) on the left side (P = .74).

CONCLUSIONS

Right UE access can be used for F-BEVAR with low morbidity and minimal risk of perioperative ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attacks. In general, UE access is not associated with an increased risk of perioperative stroke compared with femoral access only. Tight blood pressure control is, however, critical to avoid intracranial bleeding related to uncontrolled hypertension.

Impact of calcification modeling to improve image fusion accuracy for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Since the 1990s, endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become a common alternative to open surgery for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). To aid the deployment of stent-grafts, fluoroscopic image guidance can be enhanced using preoperative simulation and intraoperative image fusion techniques. However, the impact of calcification (Ca) presence on the guidance accuracy of such techniques is yet to be considered. In the present work, we introduce a guidance tool that accounts for patient-specific Ca presence. Numerical simulations of EVAR were developed for 12 elective AAA patients, both with (With-Ca) and without (No-Ca) Ca consideration. To assess the accuracy of the simulations, the image results were overlaid on corresponding intraoperative images and the overlay error was measured at selected anatomical landmarks. With this approach we gained insight into the impact of Ca presence on image fusion accuracy. Inclusion of Ca improved mean image fusion accuracy by 8.68 ± 4.59%. In addition, a positive correlation between the relative Ca presence and the image fusion accuracy was found (R = .753, p < .005). Our results suggest that considering Ca presence in patient-specific EVAR simulations increases the reliability of EVAR image guidance techniques that utilize numerical simulation, especially for patients with severe aortic Ca presence.

Incidence and Predictors of Access Site Vascular Complications Following Ultrasound-Guided MANTA Closure Deployment

Purpose:

There is no report on the reproducibility of the ultrasound-navigated MANTA deployment (US-MANTA) technique and little is known about predictors for US-MANTA-related vascular complication (VC). This study aimed to assess the incidence and predictors of access-site VC using the US-MANTA technique and report insights of MANTA-related VC from consecutive cases following large-bore arteriotomy.

Materials and Methods:

Consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the US-MANTA technique from November 2018 to February 2020 were evaluated. MANTA-related VC was defined as access-site complications leading to major or minor VCs based on Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria.

Results:

Among 378 patients, 23 cases (6.1%) of MANTA-related VC (major VC: n=7 [1.9%], minor VC: n=16 [4.2%]) were identified. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of MANTA-related VC over the observational period (first quartile: 5.3%, second: 5.4%, third: 7.4%, and fourth: 6.3%, p>.50). In 7 patients with MANTA-related major VC, 4 (57.1%) of complications resulted from incomplete apposition of the toggle due to anterior wall calcification of the common femoral artery (CFA). Anterior calcification of the CFA determined by computed tomography was identified as an independent predictor of MANTA-related VCs.

Conclusions:

The US-MANTA technique sustainably provides a low rate of access-site VCs following large-bore arteriotomy. Incomplete apposition of the toggle due to anterior calcification of the CFA may lead to ongoing vascular and bleeding complications.

Preoperative Risk Factors for Access Site Failure in Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Treatment of TASC C and D Aorto-Iliac Occlusive Disease

BACKGROUND

At our institution, we adopted routinely ultrasound guided approach for all percutaneous procedures. The objective of this study was to describe the predictors of access site failures (ASFs) in patients undergoing percutaneous aorto iliac revascularization and to also evaluate whether other factors such as time period or different vascular devices may influence outcomes in terms of ASFs.

METHODS

We reviewed all consecutive percutaneous revascularizations performed for aortoiliac occlusion or stenosis at our institution from 2011 to 2020. All procedure were performed using an ultrasound (US) guided common femoral access. The primary outcome was ASFs, defined as bleeding or groin hematomas that required transfusions; pseduoaneurysm (diagnosed by US); retroperitoneal hematoma; artery laceration or ruptured (diagnosed intraoperatively); and thrombosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine predictors of ASFs.

RESULTS

A total of 502 femoral arteries were accessed under DUS guidance with no failure in sheath placement. Technical success was achieved in 498 of 502 procedures (99.2%). ASFs occurred in 21 patients (7%); but year of procedure appear to be associated with an excess of ASFs as rates were different between the first and second period of the study (10.9% vs. 4.8%, P = 0.04). Results of multivariable logistic regression model indicated that independent predictors of ASFs were common femoral artery (CFA) calcification peripheral artery calcium scoring system (PACCS) grade (odds ratio [OR], 8.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5-13.7), and CFA diameter (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.25-0.85). Compared to patients with successful percutaneous access, ASFs resulted in longer post-op lengths of stay (P = < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous US guided access can be safely performed in patients undergoing endovascular procedures for aorto iliac revascularization with TASC C and D lesions. CFA calcification PACCS grade greater than 3 and smaller femoral vessel diameter are independent risk factors for ASFs.

Is percutaneous access superior to cutdown access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair? A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to investigate whether percutaneous access (pEVAR) is superior to cutdown access (cEVAR) in terms of safety and efficacy during endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from January 1999 to December 2020 for studies reporting on the comparison between percutaneous and cutdown techniques for endovascular repair of AAAs. Outcomes evaluated were technical success rates, access site-related complications and operative time, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials and nine observational studies with a total of 1683 patients comprising 2715 groin accesses were eligible for the meta-analysis. pEVAR was associated with a lower risk of overall complications (odds ratio (OR) = 0.63; p = .005) and seroma/lymphorrhea (OR, 0.18; p = .0001) and shortened operation time (MD = -39.04; p = .002) and the length of hospital stay (MD = -0.75; p < .00001) compared with cEVAR. The technical success rate for pEVAR was 95.1% (694/729), with an overall OR of 0.27 (95% CI 0.14-0.55, p = .0003) comparing pEVAR with cEVAR. Furthermore, pEVAR did not increase the risk of site infection, femoral artery thrombosis, postoperative hematoma, nerve injury, dissection, and bleeding.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair is a safe and effective method for the treatment of AAA. It reduces the risk of overall complications and shortens the operation time and hospital stay. The technical success rate of pEVAR is lower than that of cEVAR, which may be linked to the selection of patients, operator experience, and the use of ultrasound. Large definitive trials are required to draw robust conclusions.

A Single Center Study of ProGlide Used for Closure of Large-Bore Puncture Holes After EVAR for AAA

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the primary and assisted secondary percutaneous and non-invasive technical success of the ProGlide device on all-comers in a consecutive case series of percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (P-EVAR).

METHOD

A single-center consecutive case series where 434 elective and acute P-EVAR procedures were registered prospectively between May 2011 and July 2017. The mean age was 74.5 years ± SD 11.4 years. 82.3% of the patients were male. All patients were pre-planned from CT angiography. Percutaneous access punctures, performed in local anesthesia in the common femoral artery, with a final introducer size between 12-22 Fr OD were included and stratified in 2 groups, 12-16 Fr and 17-22 Fr.

RESULTS

By screening 868 access groins 22 groins were excluded. Of the remaining 846 groins, intended to be treated with ProGlide, 9 groins were excluded peri-procedurally and treated with the Fascia Suture Technique or surgical cutdown. The remaining 837 groins had access closure with ProGlide, with a mean value of 2.15 devices per groin with a slight significant difference between the 2 stratification groups. Primary ProGlide technical success was achieved in 68.1% of the groins. Secondary percutaneous or non-invasive technical success was achieved in 96.9%. Here there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 stratification groups. Thirty-one (3.7%) groin complications were registered during 30-day follow-up and 17 required additional treatment. Total mortality was 2.8%. None of these deaths were related to the access site.

CONCLUSION

ProGlide by itself has a significant failure rate in the closure of large-bore access holes on an unselected cohort of patients eligible for P-EVAR. However, together with adjunct percutaneous or non-invasive methods a success rate of 97% can be achieved. The access complication rate was lower than 4% at 30-day follow-up.

Comparing and Correlating Outcomes between Open and Percutaneous Access in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Aortic Aneurysms Using a Retrospective Cohort Study Design

Objective

This retrospective cohort study is aimed at determining the safety and efficacy between Femoral Open-Cutdown access and Percutaneous access with Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) by contrasting perioperative complication rates. We hypothesized that the percutaneous approach is a better alternative for aortic aneurysm patients as it is minimally invasive and has been demonstrated to decrease the length of hospital stay.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed data for patients undergoing EVAR between the years of 2005 and 2013. We then compared overall mortality, hematoma or seroma formation, graft infection, arterio-venous injury, distal embolization, limb loss, myocardial infarction or arrhythmia, and renal dysfunction. Results were demonstrated using a retrospective cohort study design to confirm the hematoma rate associated with EVAR open compared to percutaneous access.

Results

Our series involves 73 patients who underwent percutaneous access for EVAR (n = 49) or traditional open cutdown (n = 24). Percutaneous access resulted in significantly less hematoma formation when compared to the traditional open cutdown (4% vs. 12.5%; p < 0.059). Our analysis suggests decreased mortality rates associated with EVAR as compared to the Open-Cutdown method using Northside Medical Center's Study and the OVER Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study (p = 0.0053).

Conclusion

Percutaneous access for EVAR is safe and effective when compared to Open-Cutdown access for aortic aneurysm patients. Percutaneous access was associated with decreased rates of in-hospital mortality, hematoma formation, graft infection, and respiratory failure.

Percutaneous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Current Status and Future Trends

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a common, safe, and effective method of treating abdominal aortic aneurysms. Traditionally treated via surgical cutdown over the common femoral arteries, many recent studies demonstrate percutaneous access techniques to avoid the surgical cutdown. Developing familiarity with these percutaneous techniques, including risks, complications, adjuncts, and alternative accesses, can help improve the outcomes and availability of EVAR. As these techniques become increasingly common, it is not unlikely that they can be practiced safely in select patients in an outpatient setting.

Access Type for Endovascular Repair in Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Does Not Affect Major Morbidity or Mortality

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on access type when treating ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Our study's objective was to evaluate if the type of access in ruptured AAAs affected outcomes.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried from 2009 to 2018 for all ruptured AAAs treated with an index EVAR. Procedures were grouped by access type: percutaneous, open, and failed percutaneous that converted to open access. Patients with iliac access, both percutaneous and open access, and concurrent bypass were excluded. Baseline characteristics, procedure details, and outcomes were collected. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed.

RESULTS

There were 1,206 ruptured AAAs identified-739 (61.3%) was performed by percutaneous access, 416 (34.5%) by open access, and 51 (4.2%) by failed percutaneous that converted to open access. Percutaneous access, compared with open access and failed percutaneous access, respectively, had the shortest operative time (min, median) (111 vs. 138 vs. 180, P < 0.001) and was most often performed under local anesthesia (16.7% vs. 5% vs. 9.8%, P < 0.001). The amount of contrast used was similar between the approaches. Univariable analysis comparing percutaneous access, open access, and failed percutaneous access showed differences in 30-day mortality (19.9% vs. 24.8% vs. 39.2%, P = 0.002), postoperative complications (33.7% vs. 40.2% vs. 54%, P = 0.003), and cardiac complications (18.2% vs. 19.8% vs. 34.7%, P = 0.018). However, multivariable analysis did not show access type to have a significant effect on cardiac complications, pulmonary complications, any complications, return to the operating room, or perioperative mortality. Open access was independently associated with a prolonged length of stay (means ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.33, P = 0.012). Factors independently associated with failed percutaneous were prior bypass (odds ratio (OR) 9.77, 95% CI 2.44-39.16, P = 0.001) and altered mental status (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.17-5.15, P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Access type for ruptured AAAs was not independently associated with major morbidity or mortality but did have a differential effect on length of stay. Access during these emergent procedures should be based on surgeon preference and experience.

Access site related vascular complications with third generation transcatheter heart valve systems

OBJECTIVES

This study examines the impact of anatomical and procedural factors on Valve Academic Research Consortium-2-defined vascular complications at the femoral access site in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with third generation transcatheter heart valve (THV)-systems.

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials reported on vascular complications with current THV-systems. However, clinical presentation and consequences of these events are not well studied.

METHODS

All patients who underwent a transfemoral TAVR using an Edwards Sapien3®/Sapien3ultra® or a Medtronic Evolut-R®/Evolut-PRO® have been identified from our institutional database. Only procedures utilizing the PerClose-ProGlide® vascular closure device were included. Risk factors for vascular complications were analyzed with a logistic regression model. Preoperative and procedural data were collected. The postoperative course of patients with and without vascular complications was compared.

RESULTS

A total of 878 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 152 patients (17.3%) had an access-site related vascular complication (87 major complications, 9.9%). Sheath-to-femoral-artery-ratio (SFAR) (OR per 0.1 increase = 1.35, p < .001) and more than 2 vessel entries with large bore sheaths (OR = 1.76, p = .029) were independent risk factors for vascular complications. Female gender (OR = 1.44, p = .07) and two vessel entries with large bore sheaths (OR = 1.2, p = .53) increased the risk, although no statistical significance was shown. Age (OR = 1.07, p = .62), body mass index (OR = 1.1 per 5 points, p = .32) and vessel wall calcification at puncture site (OR = 0.93, p = .7) had no influence on vascular complications. Patients with vascular complications had a higher need for blood transfusion (p < .001) and a higher in-hospital mortality (2.6 vs. 0.4%, p = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

Procedural risk assessment should include SFAR calculation and consider the need for large bore sheath exchange. This might reduce the vascular trauma, lower vascular complication rates and improve the clinical outcome after TAVR.

Protamine use in transfemoral carotid artery stenting is not associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events

BACKGROUND

Protamine use in carotid endarterectomy has been shown to be associated with fewer perioperative bleeding complications without higher rates of thromboembolic events. However, the effect of protamine use on complications after transfemoral carotid artery stenting (CAS) is unclear, and concerns remain about thromboembolic events.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed for patients undergoing transfemoral CAS in the Vascular Quality Initiative from March 2005 to December 2018. We assessed in-hospital outcomes using propensity score-matched cohorts of patients who did and did not receive protamine. The primary outcome was in-hospital stroke or death. Secondary outcomes included bleeding complications, stroke, death, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, and congestive heart failure exacerbation. Bleeding complications were categorized as bleeding resulting in intervention or blood transfusions.

RESULTS

Of the 17,429 patients undergoing transfemoral CAS, 2697 (15%) patients received protamine. We created 2300 propensity score-matched pairs of patients who did and did not receive protamine. There were no statistically significant differences in stroke or death between the two cohorts (protamine, 2.5%; no protamine, 2.9%; relative risk [RR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-1.21; P = .37). Protamine use was not associated with statistically significant differences in perioperative bleeding complications resulting in interventional treatment (0.9% vs 0.5%; RR, 2.10; 95% CI, 0.99-4.46; P = .05) or blood transfusion (1.2% vs 1.2%; RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.53-1.61; P = .78). There were also no statistically significant differences for the individual outcomes of stroke (1.8% vs 2.3%; RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.52-1.16; P = .22), death (0.9% vs 0.8%; RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.62-2.19; P = .63), transient ischemic attack (1.4% vs 1.3%; RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.67-1.82; P = .70), myocardial infarction (0.5% vs 0.4%; RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.52-2.78; P = .67), or heart failure exacerbation (1.0% vs 0.9%; RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.58-1.90; P = .88). Protamine use in patients presenting with symptomatic carotid stenosis was associated with lower risk of stroke or death (3.0% vs 4.3%; RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.47-0.998; P = .048), whereas there were no statistically significant differences in stroke or death with protamine use in asymptomatic patients (1.6% vs 1.0%; RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.67-3.92; P = .28).

CONCLUSIONS

Heparin reversal with protamine after transfemoral CAS is not associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events, and its use in symptomatic carotid disease is associated with a lower risk of stroke or death.

Cumulative sum analysis of the learning curve for the preclosure technique using Proglide

OBJECTIVES

Our study aims to assess the technical quality and the learning curve of the preclosure technique for a vascular surgeon using Proglide using cumulative sum analysis (CUSUM analysis).

METHODS

This study was designed retrospectively and enrolled 81 consecutive patients with 88 access sites who underwent endovascular aortic repair or thoracic endovascular aortic repair with the preclosure technique using Proglide between July 2017 and February 2018. The patients were divided into 2 groups chronologically: (A) the first 40 cases and (B) the latter 41 cases. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the impact of technical risk factors on the success of the preclosure technique, and the χ2 test and 1-way ANOVA were applied to analyse the distribution of individual characteristics and risk factors between the 2 groups. CUSUM analysis was adapted to analyse the learning curve and to monitor the technical quality, with a predetermined target failure rate of 5%, an alternative failure rate of 20% and calculated 80% 'alert', 95% 'alarm' and 80% 'reassurance' lines.

RESULTS

Primary technical success was obtained in 81 (92.05%) access sites. There were no significant correlations between primary technical success and risk factors, including, common femoral artery diameter (P = 0.88), common femoral artery depth from the skin (P =0.94), the level of common femoral artery calcification (P =0.86) and size of sheath (P =0.96). Moreover, the distribution of related risk factors was not significantly different between groups A and B. CUSUM analysis showed that the cumulative failure rate never crossed the 80% 'alert' and 95% 'alarm' lines. Additionally, the failure rate began to approach the 80% 'reassurance' line after ∼22 cases and crossed the 80% 'reassurance' line after 36 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The technique of totally percutaneous access using Proglide is safe and effective for an experienced vascular surgeon, even if the operator has no previous experience with any preclosure techniques. CUSUM analysis showed that 36 cases are necessary to achieve the target failure rate of 5%.

Feasibility and safety of total percutaneous closure of femoral arterial access sites after veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of total percutaneous closure of the femoral artery access site after veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) with the Perclose ProGlide device.This retrospective observational study during an almost 2-year period included 21 patients who underwent VA-ECMO in whom the femoral artery puncture site was closed percutaneously with Perclose ProGlide devices. Technical success was defined as successful arterial closure of the common femoral artery, without the need for additional surgical or endovascular procedures. Access site complications were recorded at 24 hours and 30 days after arterial closure, such as major bleeding requiring transfusion or surgical intervention, minor bleeding, groin infection, pseudoaneurysm, and lymphocele.Technical success was achieved in 20 patients (95.2%). One patient required surgical repair for an access site pseudoaneurysm. Eighteen femoral arteries were closed with 2 devices each, while 3 patients required the use of a third device for femoral artery access site closure to achieve adequate hemostasis. No arterial thrombosis, arterial dissection, arterial stenosis, groin infection, or arteriovenous fistula occurred during the periprocedural period (within 24 hours of arterial closure) or during 30-day follow-up.Percutaneous closure with the Perclose ProGlide device is a feasible procedure for closing femoral arterial access sites after VA-ECMO, with a low incidence of access site complications.

Partial Renal Coverage after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair with Suprarenal Fixation Seems Not to be Associated with Early Renal Impairment

BACKGROUND

Efforts to achieve optimal seal during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) may produce partial coverage of the lowest renal artery and in some cases even occlusion. This coverage might alter the renal ostial flow, which could finally affect renal function. We sought to evaluate the incidence of renal ostium coverage and its possible effects on renal function.

METHODS

All patients undergoing elective EVAR with suprarenal fixation devices between January 2014, and December 2017, at our institution were identified. Patients with preoperative and postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA), as well as the preoperative, postoperative, and one year postintervention creatinine levels and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were included in the present study. Patients in hemodialysis, with a preoperative eGFR <30 mL/min, urgent EVAR, neck adjunctive procedures, excessive aortic thrombus, or procedure-related reintervention were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients received EVAR for aortoiliac aneurysmatic pathologies between January 2014, and December 2017. Forty-three of them met the inclusion criteria having a median follow-up of 18.8 months (range; 12.0-53.9). Twenty-six (60.5%) patients presented at least one criterion of hostile neck condition and 23 (53.5%) had a preoperative eGFR <60 mL/min. The average distance from the proximal endograft fabric to the lower renal artery was 1.5 mm (range, 0.0-6.0) while a total of 15 renal ostia (34.9%) suffered unintended partial coverage (range, 20 to 75% of the renal ostium) in the postoperative CTA. Nine of these patients (60%) had a hostile neck condition. Eight patients (18.6%) suffered significant deterioration (>20% of the eGFR), 27 patients (62.8%) maintained their renal function and 8 (18.6%) presented an improvement of the eGFR in the latest available blood sample. Renal function impairment showed no significant association with renal ostium coverage (P = 0.561), hostile neck condition (P = 0.973), or the diameter of the renal artery (P = 0.835). In the subgroup analysis, patients with the eGFR <60 mL/min did not show significantly greater renal function deterioration (P = 0.568).

CONCLUSIONS

Partial renal coverage is not an uncommon phenomenon occurring in one-third of the treated patients. However, it was not associated with renal function impairment in the early term. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to confirm our results in the long haul.

Comparison of perioperative costs with fast-track vs standard endovascular aneurysm repair

Background

Perioperative health care utilization and costs in patients undergoing elective fast-track vs standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remain unclear.

Methods

The fast-track EVAR group included patients treated with a 14 Fr stent graft, bilateral percutaneous access, no general anesthesia or intensive care monitoring, and next-day hospital discharge. The standard EVAR group was identified from Medicare administrative claims using a matching algorithm to adjust for imbalances in patient characteristics. Hospital outcomes included operating room time, intensive care monitoring, hospital stay, secondary interventions, and major adverse events (MAEs). Perioperative outcomes occurring from hospital discharge to 30 days postdischarge included MAE, secondary interventions, and unrelated readmissions.

Results

Among 1000 matched patients (250 fast-track; 750 standard), hospital outcomes favored the fast-track EVAR group, including shorter operating room time (2.30 vs 2.83 hrs, P<0.001), shorter hospital stay (1.16 vs 1.69 d, P<0.001), less need for intensive care monitoring (4.4% vs 48.0%, P<0.001), and lower secondary intervention rate (0% vs 2.4%, P=0.01). Postdischarge outcomes also favored fast-track EVAR with a lower rate of MAE (0% vs 7.2%, P<0.001) and all-cause readmission (1.6% vs 6.8%, P=0.001). The total cost to the health care system during the perioperative period was $26,730 with fast-track EVAR vs $30,730 with standard EVAR. Total perioperative health care costs were $4000 (95% CI: $3130–$4830) lower with fast-track EVAR vs standard EVAR, with $2980 in savings to hospitals and $1030 savings to health care payers.

Conclusion

A fast-track EVAR protocol using a 14 Fr stent graft resulted in shorter procedure time, lower intensive care utilization, faster discharge, lower incidence of MAE, lower readmission rates, and lower perioperative costs compared to standard EVAR.

Preoperative risk score for access site failure in ultrasound-guided percutaneous aortic procedures

OBJECTIVE

The factors associated with access site failure after ultrasound-guided percutaneous access for aortic endograft procedures remain poorly characterized. We developed a prediction model to risk stratify patients for access site failure.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective institutional review of consecutive patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR), or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) from 2014 to 2016. We excluded patients undergoing direct aortic access through sternotomy and patients treated with physician-modified endografts, given reporting restrictions. Our primary outcome was groin access site failure, which included bleeding and thrombosis. An 8-point risk model was created for access site failure using multivariable fractional polynomials and internally validated using bootstrapping.

RESULTS

We identified 469 femoral arteries from 247 patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair procedures (EVAR, 75%; FEVAR, 8.0%; TEVAR, 17%). Surgeons performed percutaneous access in 97.2% of the femoral arteries, with 99.6% ultrasound use. Twenty-seven (5.9%) access site failures occurred (17 bleeding, 10 thrombosis), all treated with groin cutdown, for a successful percutaneous femoral artery access rate of 94%. Of the 215 patients with attempted bilateral percutaneous access, 90% had successful bilateral access. However, FEVAR had lower rates of successful bilateral access (FEVAR, 78%; EVAR, 91%; TEVAR, 94%; P = .03). Factors independently associated with percutaneous access site failure were femoral artery outer wall diameter (per millimeter increase: odds ratio [OR], 0.003 [0.0002-0.1]; P < .001), femoral artery stenosis >50% (OR, 22.3 [2.7-183.2]; P < .01), and urgent/emergent intervention (OR, 3.6 [1.2-11.0]; P = .03). A risk prediction model based on these criteria produced a C statistic of 0.89, a Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit of 0.99, and a Brier score of 0.04. Excluding treatment for ruptured aneurysms, cutdown for access failure and planned initial groin cutdown resulted in longer postoperative lengths of stay and higher rates of access-related readmission, return to operating room, groin infection, and myocardial infarction compared with successful percutaneous access. There was no difference in major adverse events between planned initial groin cutdown and cutdown after failure; however, the small number of patients in these two comparison groups limits the statistical power to detect a difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous ultrasound-guided access can be safely performed in almost all patients undergoing endovascular aortic procedures, but access site failures do occur. This risk score can help users select patients with high likelihood of success, identify patients who need close scrutiny with postclosure femoral duplex ultrasound, and provide patient guidance about risk of unplanned groin cutdown.

Feasibility of Image Fusion for Concurrent MRI Evaluation of Vessel Lumen and Vascular Calcifications in Peripheral Arterial Disease

OBJECTIVE

With MR angiography of peripheral arterial disease, calcifications are unapparent, so a separate calcification-sensitive pulse sequence (proton density-weighted in-phase 3D stack-of-stars [PDIP-SOS]) is needed for complete assessment. We hypothesized that, despite being acquired separately, MR angiography and PDIP-SOS images could be coregistered and fused without loss of significant diagnostic information.

CONCLUSION

In a prospective study of 15 patients, MR image fusion enabled the simultaneous display of vessel lumen and vascular calcifications similarly to CT angiography.

Noncontrast MR angiography: An update

Both computed tomography (CT) angiography (CTA) and contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CEMRA) have proven to be useful and accurate cross-sectional imaging modalities over a wide range of vascular territories and vascular disorders. A key advantage of MRA is that, unlike CTA, it can be performed without the administration of a contrast agent. In this review article we consider the motivations for using noncontrast MRA, potential contrast mechanisms, imaging techniques, advantages, and drawbacks with respect to CTA and CEMRA, and the level of evidence for using the various MRA techniques. In addition, we explore new developments that promise to expand the reliability and range of clinical applications for noncontrast MRA, along with functional MRA capabilities not available with CTA or CEMRA. Level of Evidence: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:355-373.

Long-Term Evaluation of Percutaneous Groin Access for EVAR

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) has been shown to have high success rates, shorter operating times and length of stay compared to open access. However, there exists a lack of long-term follow-up data on these patients, and questions remain regarding longer-term outcomes. This study aims to assess the long-term complications and evolution of accessed vessels post-PEVAR.

METHODS

Sixty-one cases of bilateral PEVAR (122 groins) with > 36 months follow-up were analysed. Vessel diameter, calcification, dissection, lymphocele, pseudoaneurysm and thrombus formation were reviewed at 30th day and at the most recent follow-up CT. Notes were reviewed for groin infections, haematomas and nerve injury. Complications were considered 'major' if they required intervention or treatment.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time from procedure to most recent scan was 49.9 months. There were no major short- or long-term complications. The early complication rate was 9.8%, with six pseudoaneurysms, four dissections, one thrombus, one nerve injury and no lymphoceles, haematomas or groin infections. The long-term complication rate was 0.8%, with only one pseudoaneurysm. The remainder of early complications resolved naturally without intervention. Accessed vessel showed significantly (P ≤ 0.05) increased diameter and calcification between 30th day and last follow-up scan.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the largest clinical cohort and the longest mean follow-up time reported in the literature and demonstrates the long-term safety of PEVAR. PEVAR has a very low long-term complication rate, without any major complications in our cohort. The accessed common femoral arteries do not show stenosis or thrombosis. Minor short-term complications appear to gradually resolve without intervention. Larger multi-centre studies are recommended.

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging of aorto-iliac and ilio-femoral vascular calcifications using proton density-weighted in-phase stack of stars

BACKGROUND

Comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) angiography with computed tomography angiography (CTA), a major deficiency has been its inability to reliably image peripheral vascular calcifications that may impact the choice of interventional strategy and influence patient prognosis. Recently, MRI using a proton density-weighted, in-phase stack of stars (PDIP-SOS) technique has proved capable of detecting these calcifications. The goal of the present study was two-fold: (1) to determine whether magnetic field strength impacts the apparent size and conspicuity of ilio-femoral arterial calcifications; and (2) to determine whether the technique can be accurately applied to image aorto-iliac arterial calcifications.

MAIN BODY

Two patient cohorts were studied. For the first cohort, ilio-femoral arterial calcifications were imaged at 1.5 Tesla in 20 patients and at 3 Tesla in 12 patients. For the second cohort, aorto-iliac arterial calcifications were imaged in 10 patients at 3 Tesla and one patient at 1.5 Tesla. Qualitative image analysis as well as quantitative analysis using a semi-automated technique were performed using CTA as the reference standard. Qualitatively, most PDIP-SOS CMR images showed good-to-excellent confidence to detect vascular calcifications, with good-to-excellent inter-reader agreement (κ = 0.67 for ilio-femoral region, P < 0.001; κ = 0.80 for aorto-iliac region, P < 0.01). There was an overall excellent correlation (r = 0.98, P < 0.001) and agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.97, P < 0.001) between PDIP-SOS CMR and CTA measures of calcification volume in both regions, with no overt difference in performance at 1.5 Tesla vs. 3 Tesla for ilio-femoral calcifications. CMR lesion volumes were slightly lower than those measured for CTA.

CONCLUSION

Using PDIP-SOS CMR, aorto-iliac and ilio-femoral calcifications could be simultaneously evaluated at 3 Tesla in less than six minutes with excellent correlation and agreement to CTA. Our results suggest that PDIP-SOS CMR provides a reliable alternative to CT for pre-interventional evaluation of peripheral vascular calcium burden.

Abdominal aortic aneurysms: pre- and post-procedural imaging

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a relatively common, potentially life-threatening disorder. Rupture of AAA is potentially catastrophic with high mortality. Intervention for AAA is indicated when the aneurysm reaches 5.0-5.5 cm or more, when symptomatic, or when increasing in size > 10 mm/year. AAA can be accurately assessed by cross-sectional imaging including computed tomography angiography and magnetic resonance angiography. Current options for intervention in AAA patients include open surgery and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), with EVAR becoming more prevalent over time. Cross-sectional imaging plays a crucial role in AAA surveillance, pre-procedural assessment, and post-EVAR management. This paper will discuss the current role of imaging in the assessment of AAA patients prior to intervention, in evaluation of procedural complications, and in long-term follow-up of EVAR patients.

Percutaneous access planning, techniques and considerations for endovascular aortic repair (EVAR)

Percutaneous endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has transformed the field of aortic repair. As techniques and devices improve, interventionalists continue to expand the boundaries of what is possible, enabling these life-saving procedures to be performed on a wider range of more technically challenging cases. This article discusses endovascular access considerations for EVAR including; ultrasound guidance, preclose technique, access vessel options, innovative devices, and bailout strategies that interventionalists should be familiar with to optimize patient outcomes.

Successful percutaneous access for endovascular aneurysm repair is significantly cheaper than femoral cutdown in a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Because of its minimally invasive nature, percutaneous femoral access for endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) is currently undergoing rapid popularization. Compared with surgical cutdown for femoral access (cEVAR), it offers the advantage of faster recovery after surgery as well as a reduction in wound complications. Despite proposed advantages, the method is largely considered uneconomical because of its reliance on costly closure devices.

METHODS

There were 50 patients undergoing EVAR who were enrolled in this randomized prospective single-center trial. Each patient randomly received percutaneous access in one groin and surgical access in the other. The primary end points were access duration and cost. Secondary end points were wound complications and the postoperative pain levels.

RESULTS

Surgery was performed per protocol in 44 patients. Mean access times for pEVAR and cEVAR were 11.5 ± 3.4 minutes and 24.8 ± 12.1 minutes (P < .001), respectively. Total access costs were €559.65 ± €112.69 for pEVAR and €674.85 ± €289.55 for cEVAR (P = .016). Eight complications in six patients were attributed to cutdown, none to pEVAR (P = .02). The percutaneously accessed groin was significantly less painful at day 1 and day 5 after surgery (P < .001). An intention-to-treat analysis (N = 50 patients) included six cases of pEVAR conversion due to technical failure in three patients (6%) and change of the operative strategy in another three patients (eg, aortouni-iliac stent graft followed by crossover bypass). The intention-to-treat analysis showed shorter mean overall access time for pEVAR (pEVAR, 14.65 ± 10.20 minutes; cEVAR, 25.12 ± 11.77 minutes; P < .001) and no cost difference between the two methods (pEVAR, €651.29 ± €313.49; cEVAR, €625.53 ± €238.29; P = .65).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm proposed potential benefits attributable to the minimally invasive nature of pEVAR while demonstrating cost-effectiveness despite the additional cost of closure devices. Taking into account pEVAR failures still does not increase pEVAR costs over cEVAR. Further considering reduced postoperative pain and wound complications, the technique deserves consideration in suitable patients.

Totally Percutaneous Access Using Perclose Proglide for Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Diseases

Objective

To evaluate our experience following the introduction of a percutaneous program for endovascular treatment of aortic diseases using Perclose Proglide® assessing efficacy, complications and identification of potential risk factors that could predict failure or major access site complications.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study during a two-year period was performed. All the patients submitted to totally percutaneous endovascular repair (PEVAR) of aortic diseases and transcatheter aortic valve implantation since we started the total percutaneous approach with the preclosure technique from November 2013 to December 2015 were included in the study. The primary endpoint was major ipsilateral access complication, defined according to PEVAR trial.

Results

In a cohort of 123 patients, immediate technical success was obtained in 121 (98.37%) patients, with only two (0.82%) cases in 242 vascular access sites that required intervention immediately after the procedure. Pairwise comparisons revealed increased major access complication among patients with >50% common femoral artery (CFA) calcification vs. none (P=0.004) and > 50% CFA calcification vs. < 50% CFA calcification (P=0.002). Small artery diameter (<6.5 mm) also increased major access complication compared to bigger diameters (> 6.5 mm) (P=0.027).

Conclusion

The preclosure technique with two Perclose Proglide® for PEVAR is safe and effective. Complications occur more often in patients with unfavorable access site anatomy and the success rate can be improved with proper patient selection.