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

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.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Brazilian Society for Angiology and Vascular Surgery guidelines on abdominal aortic aneurysm

The Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, through the Guidelines Project, presents new Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Guidelines, on the subject of care for abdominal aortic aneurysm patients. Its development prioritized descriptive guidelines, using the EMBASE, LILACS, and PubMed databases. References include randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and cohort studies. Quality of evidence was evaluated by a pair of coordinators, aided by the RoB 2 Cochrane tool and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale forms. The subjects include juxtarenal aneurysms, infected aneurysms, and new therapeutic techniques, especially endovascular procedures. The current version of the guidelines include important recommendations for the primary topics involving diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up for abdominal aortic aneurysm patients, providing an objective guide for medical practice, based on scientific evidence and widely available throughout Brazil.

Management of Endoleaks After Elective Infrarenal Aortic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: A Review

Importance

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the dominant treatment strategy for abdominal aortic aneurysms, encompassing 80% of all repairs in the United States. Endoleaks are ubiquitous and affect 30% of patients treated by EVAR, potentially leading to sac enlargement and increased risk of rupture. The care of EVAR patients requires long-term surveillance by a multidisciplinary team. Accordingly, physicians should be familiar with the fundamentals of endoleak management to achieve optimal outcomes, including timely referral for remediation or providing counseling and reassurance when needed.

Observations

PubMed and the Cochrane database were searched for articles published between January 2002 and December 2022 in English, addressing epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of endoleaks after EVAR. Endoleaks can be detected intraoperatively or years later, making lifelong surveillance mandatory. Type I and III have the highest risk of rupture (7.5% at 2 years and 8.9% at 1 year, respectively) and should be treated when identified. Intervention should be considered for other types of endoleak when associated with aneurysm sac growth larger than 5 mm based on current guidelines. Type II endoleaks are the most common, accounting for 50% of all endoleaks. Up to 90% of type II endoleaks resolve spontaneously or are not associated with sac enlargement, requiring only observation. Although the risk of rupture is less than 1%, cases that require reintervention are challenging. Recurrence is common despite endovascular treatment, and rupture can occur without evidence of sac growth. Type IV endoleaks and endotension are uncommon, are typically benign, and primarily should be observed.

Conclusions and Relevance

Endoleak management depends on the type and presence of sac expansion. Type I and III endoleaks require intervention. Type II endoleaks should be observed and treated selectively in patients with significant sac expansion. Since endoleaks can appear any time after EVAR, at least 1 contrast-enhanced computed tomographic angiogram or duplex ultrasound by an experienced laboratory is recommended every 5 years.

Use of Secondary Iliac Branch Devices after Previous Endovascular Abdominal and Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and effectiveness of iliac branch devices (IBDs), as secondary procedure, for the treatment of type Ib endoleak or evolution of iliac artery disease after prior endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for thoraco-abdominal (TAAAs) or abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

METHODS

A multicentre observational study of three European centres. The study included 75 patients (age 71 ± 9 years, 96% men) with previous EVAR (n = 64, 85%) or fenestrated or branched (FB) EVAR (n = 11, 15%). Overall, 88 IBDs were implanted to treat aneurysmal iliac artery evolution in 40 (53%) and type Ib endoleak in 35 (47%) cases, respectively. Thirteen (17%) patients received bilateral IBDs. Internal iliac artery (IIA) catheterisation was done through a transaxillary access (n = 82, 93%) or up and over (n = 6, 7%) technique. The primary endpoint was technical success. Secondary endpoints were 30 day major adverse event, early and long term freedom from re-intervention and target vessel instability.

RESULTS

All procedures were technically successful (100%). During hospitalisation, there were four (5%) major adverse events and three (4%) early re-interventions, but no death, stroke, or damage to previous endografts. The median follow up was 47 (interquartile range 42) months, and the five year survival rate was 78 ± 6% with no aortic related death. Cox's regression analysis showed pre-operative renal function impairment (hazard ratio [HR] 3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 10.1; p = .033), and primary TAAA repair (HR 6.1; 95% CI 1.6-22.3; p = .006) as independent factors for long term mortality. Freedom from re-interventions was 85 ± 4% at five years with 11 (12%) cases (five endoleaks, four IBD thromboses, two stenoses). IIA instability was reported in three (3%) limbs and freedom from IIA instability was 95 ± 3% after 60 months.

CONCLUSION

Secondary IBD after EVAR is a safe and effective procedure with high technical success and low complication rates. The technique of choice to revascularise the IIA seems not to affect early and follow up results. Long term durability of IBD repair is acceptable with low rates of IIA re-intervention.

Open conversion after failed endovascular aneurysm repair is increasing and its 30-day mortality is higher than that after primary open repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the preferred treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Recent studies have demonstrated that cases of EVAR failure repair and subsequent open conversion have increased. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the national trend of annual cases and assess the 30-day outcomes of conversion to open repair after failed EVAR compared with primary open repair.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for relevant Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revision, codes to identify patients who had undergone conversion to open repair or primary open repair of nonruptured AAAs from 2009 to 2018. The annual trend of cases was assessed, and the perioperative outcomes of both procedures were compared. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify independent perioperative factors associated with mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 9635 patients with nonruptured AAAs included in the present analysis, 9250 had undergone primary repair and 385 had required open conversion. During the 10-year period, the annual number of cases of open conversion had steadily increased and that of primary repair had decreased. The incidence of postoperative complications was similar between both groups, except for cardiac arrest, which had occurred more frequently in the open conversion group. The 30-day mortality was higher in the open conversion group than in the primary group (9.6% vs 3.9%; P < .0001). Open conversion was also independently associated with higher odds of death (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-2.4; P < .0001). When the average mortality in both groups was compared between the first and last 5 years, no difference was found (open conversion: 9.8% vs 9.5% [P = 1.00]; primary repair: 3.6% vs 4.2% [P = .19]). Other perioperative factors independently associated with mortality included increased age (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.1; P < .0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥III (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1-6.6; P = .029), insulin-dependent diabetes (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.3; P = .005), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8; P = .006), the presence of dyspnea at rest (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.8-6.1; P < .0001), and a high preoperative hematocrit (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93-0.97; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Open conversion to treat nonruptured AAAs after failed EVAR was independently associated with higher mortality. Also, the annual cases of open conversion have continued to increase without any significant changes in postoperative mortality. This highlights the danger of open conversion and stresses the need for better solutions to prevent and manage EVAR failure.

Embolization for Type Ia Endoleak after EVAR for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review of the Literature

(1) Successful endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms is based on the complete exclusion of the aneurysm sac from the systemic circulation. Type Ia endoleak (ELIA) is defined as the persistent perfusion of the aneurysm sac due to incomplete proximal sealing between aorta and endograft, with a consequent risk of rupture and death. Endoleak embolization has been sporadically reported as a viable treatment for ELIA. (2) A systematic literature search in PubMed of all publications in English about ELIA embolization was performed until February 2022. Research methods and reporting were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Data regarding patient numbers, technical success (endoleak absence at control angiography), reinterventions, clinical and imaging follow-up, and outcomes were collected and examined by two independent authors. (3) Twenty-one papers (12 original articles, 9 case reports) reported on 126 patients (age range 58–96 years) undergoing ELIA embolization 0–139 months after the index procedure. Indication for embolization was most often founded on unfavorable anatomy and patient comorbidities. Embolic agents used include liquid embolic agents, coils, plugs and combinations thereof. Technical success in this highly selected cohort ranged from 67–100%; the postprocedural complication rate within 30 days was 0–24%. ELIA recurrence was reported as 0–42.8%, with a secondary ELIA-embolization-intervention success rate of 50–100%. At a follow-up at 0–68 months, freedom from sac enlargement amounted to 76–100%, freedom from ELIA to 66.7–100%. (4) Specific literature about ELIA embolization is scant. ELIA embolization is a valuable bailout strategy for no-option patients; the immediate technical success rate is high and midterm and long-term outcomes are acceptable.

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.

Aortic graft explants - A single institution analysis of incidence and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Explantation of both endovascular endovascular aneurysm repair and open aortic grafts is a procedure associated with high peri-operative risk, and the current study sought to determine the outcomes and trends over time in these patients.

METHODS

This study examined data from all patients undergoing explant of an aortic graft (both open and endovascular) between January 2004 and December 2020 at a single centre. Variables analysed included comorbidities, duration to and indication for explantation, type of revascularization, in-hospital complications and mortality, duration of hospital and ICU stay, and out-patient mortality.

RESULTS

Of 688 open and 1352 EVARs performed, 46 patients underwent 48 explants. Five were open grafts and 43 were endografts, equating to an explant rate of 0.73% of open and 3.18% EVARs. Average time to explant was 70 months, with patients presenting electively having a significantly longer duration to representation than those presenting emergently (51 vs 44 months, p=0.003). Indication for explant was endoleak in 70%, infection in 23%, and occlusion in 6%. Of the endoleaks, 61% of were Type 1, 22% Type II, 11% Type IV, and 6% Type V. On representation, 17 patients (35%) were symptomatic. Overall mortality rate was 8.3%, with a trend for higher mortality in emergent than elective presentations (11.8 vs 6.5%, p=0.55). There was no change in explant rate over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Elective aortic graft explantation is associated with low mortality, despite its complexity and patient comorbidities. Patients presenting with symptoms suffered higher mortality and a longer post-operative course, suggesting that aortic graft explantation should be considered sooner rather than later, rather than persisting with repeated endovascular management.

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.

Evolving Concepts, Management, and Treatment of Type 1 Endoleaks after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Over the past 20 years, there has been tremendous progress in endovascular aneurysm repair techniques and devices. The application of new third- and fourth-generation devices (from 2003 onward) has led to changes in the incidence and management of endoleaks. This comprehensive review aims to outline the most recent concepts with respect to pathophysiology/risk factors and management of Type 1 endoleaks.

Open Surgical Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Maintains a Pivotal Role in the Endovascular Era

Since the advent of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) nearly three decades ago, there has been a paradigm shift in the treatment of the abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) to favor EVAR due to its reduced operative mortality, less invasive nature, and faster recovery times. However, more recently there has been an accumulation of data from large meta-analyses and randomized clinical trials revealing that EVAR has no survival benefit after approximately 2 years and is associated with substantially higher rates of reintervention and aneurysm rupture in the long term. These findings call into question the durability of EVAR compared with open aortic repair and emphasize the need for surgeons to remain competent with open aortic surgery in the modern era. This article will provide comprehensive review of a large body of literature comparing endovascular repair to open aortic surgery for the management of AAAs, and it will offer an overview of the open surgical repair technique for AAAs.

Elective late open conversion after endovascular aneurysm repair is associated with comparable outcomes to primary open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Three of four patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm are now treated with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The incidence of secondary procedures and surgical conversions is increasing for a population theoretically unfit for open surgery. The indications and outcomes of late open surgical conversions after EVAR in a high-volume tertiary vascular unit are reported.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study includes all patients who underwent a late open conversion between January 1996 and July 2018. Data were collected from records on patient demographics, operative indications, surgical strategy, perioperative outcomes, and medium-term survival.

RESULTS

Sixty-two consecutive patients (88.7% male) with a mean age of 77.5 years are included. The median duration since index EVAR was 38.5 months; 65% of stent grafts requiring late open conversion had suprarenal fixation. Indications included 22.6% type IA, 16.1% type IB, and 45.2% type II endoleaks; 12.9% graft thrombosis; and 14.5% endoprosthesis infection. Complete endograft explantation was performed in 37.1% of patients and a partial explantation in 54.8%, whereas 8.1% of stent grafts were wholly preserved in situ. Overall 30-day mortality was 12.9% (n = 8) in the cohort and 2.7% for elective patients. The all-cause morbidity rate was 40.1%, and the median length of hospital stay was 9 days. After follow-up of 28.4 months (range, 1.8-187.3 months), all-cause survival was 58.8%. Avoidance of aortic clamping (P = .006) and elective procedures (P = .019) were associated with a significant reduction in the length of hospital stay. Moreover, the 30-day mortality (P = .002), occurrence of postoperative renal dysfunction (P = .004), and intestinal ischemia (P = .017) were increased in the emergency setting. Excluding cases with rupture or infection, survival estimates were 97%, 97%, and 71% at 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Technically more complex than primary open surgery, late open conversion is a procedure that generates an acceptable perioperative risk when it is performed in a high-volume aortic surgical center. Elective open conversion is associated with excellent early and late outcomes. Endograft preservation strategies decrease perioperative morbidity.

The role of fEVAR, chEVAR and open repair in treatment of juxtarenal aneurysms: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Open repair (OR), fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (fEVAR) and endovascular exclusion using parallel graft (chEVAR) are complementary procedures used for treatment of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (jrAAA). The aim of our study was to assess available literature and analyze dispersion of OR, fEVAR and chEVAR procedures among reported papers related to treatment of jrAAA.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The PubMed database was systematically searched using predefined strategy and key words related to treatment of jrAAA on September 28th, 2019. Studies were assessed for eligibility using the inclusion and exclusion criteria with at least five patients treated with at least one of the procedures while systematic reviews, meta-analysis, reviews, comments, editorials and letters were excluded as well as studies without clear classification of the location of the aneurysm, studies not specifying the number of patients treated with each of the techniques or not discriminated between aortic pathologies (juxtarenal, paravisceral and thoracoabdominal), hybrid procedures, endoanchors or with branched stent-graft.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Overall, 1533 papers were identified while papers that met inclusion criteria were either representing experience of single institution (87 papers) or from multicenter studies (6 papers), national or international registries (18 papers). In the period between January 1977 and December 2017, treatment of 5664 patients with jrAAA was reported in 87 papers as a single institution report. Out of them 2531 (45%) were treated with OR, 2592 (46%) with fEVAR and 541 (9%) with chEVAR. Out of 29 institutions reporting OR, there were 11 (37.9%) with more than 100 treated patients while 21 (41.1%) out of 51 institutions that reported more than 50 jrAAA treated with fEVAR. Only four institutions reported results of all three treatment modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results reported in the literature, regardless of its complexity and costs, fEVAR for jrAAA has been accepted in substantial number of hospitals worldwide, while number of reported procedures is reaching OR.

Outcomes of endovascular treatment of endoleak type Ia after EVAR: a systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular repair of infra-renal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) has become treatment of choice. However, individuals undergoing EVAR have a high re-intervention rate. The aim of this study is to evaluate the current endovascular treatment modalities of endoleak type Ia (ET Ia) treatment after EVAR and their outcome.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched with PRISMA methodology for studies reporting on endovascular treatment of ET Ia after EVAR. Studies presenting treatment of intra-operative ET Ia were excluded.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Two international registries, fourteen non-randomized retrospective and twelve case-report studies were included reporting on 356 patients. Reported endovascular techniques included fenestrated-, branched-, chimney EVAR, endovascular sealing (EVAS), endoanchors, embolization techniques, cuff and/or "giant" Palmaz stents. Technical success rate ranged from 90% to 100%, with intra-operative mortality rate of 0%. During early period, persistence of ET Ia was 3.4% (9/262) and the re-intervention rate was 3.5% (8/227). The 30-day mortality rate was 2% (7/356). Mean follow-up was 22.4 months±18. Presence of ET Ia was 5.9% (21/356), and the reintervention rate was 5.1% (18/349). The mortality rate was 13% (26/203), while the primary patency rate of TVs ranged from 94.3% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

A multitude of techniques for endovascular repair for ET Ia exists. No strong evidence supports one specific technique. The early and mid-term outcomes are encouraging in terms of ET Ia resolution, mortality and morbidity rates.

A Novel Technique for Sutureless Proximal Aortic Endograft Revision in Type 1A Endoleak

Management of type 1A endoleaks can be challenging. In the endovascular era, this condition is expected to become more frequent. Conventionally, surgical explant of the endograft remains the "last-resort" surgical treatment when all endovascular or other open options are exhausted. Endograft removal is a difficult and morbid procedure. An alternative technique is described that involves cinching the endograft after disengagement of the proximal fixation hooks. The endograft is redeployed within a prosthetic aortic replacement graft with an overlapping zone. This can reduce complications such as from additional anastomoses, graft bleeding, prolonged clamping, operative time, and associated comorbidities.

Late open conversion after endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysm failure: Better and easier option than complex endovascular treatment

AIM

Conversion to open repair becomes the last option in case of endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysm failure, when radiological interventional procedures are unfeasible. While early conversion to open repair generally derives from technical errors, aetiopathogenesis and results of late conversion to open repair often remain unclear.

METHODS

We report data from our Institute's experience on late conversion to open repair. Twenty-two late conversion to open repairs out of 435 consecutive patients treated during a 18 years period, plus two endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysms performed in other centres, are analysed. The indication for conversion to open repair was aneurysm enlargement because of type I, type III, type II endoleak and endotension. Even if seven cases (23%) had shown an initial aneurysmal shrinkage, in a later phase, the sac began to enlarge again. In 12 patients, conversion to open repair was the last chance after unsuccessful secondary endovascular procedures.

RESULTS

Three cases (12.5%) were treated in emergency. Aortic cross-clamping was only infrarenal in 10 cases, only or temporarily suprarenal in 14 and temporarily supraceliac in 9 cases, for 19 total and 5 partial endograft excisions. Two patients died for Multiple Organ Failure (MOF), on 42nd (endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysm infection) and 66th postoperative day. No other conversion to open repair-related deaths or major complications were revealed by follow-up post-conversion to open repair (mean: 68 months ranging from 24 to 180 months).

CONCLUSION

Late conversion to open repair is often an unpredictable event. It represents a technical challenge: specifically, the most critical point is the proximal aortic clamping that often temporarily excludes the renal circulation. In our series, conversion to open repair can be performed with a low rate of complications. In response to an endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysm failure, before applying complex procedures of endovascular treatment, conversion to open repair should be taken into account.

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.