Impact of intraoperative adverse events during branched and fenestrated aortic stent grafting on postoperative outcome

Early and mid-term results after endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms using the off-the-shelf multibranched t-Branch device: a national multi-center study

Objective: The multibranched off-the-shelf Zenith® t-Branch (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) device is commonly chosen for endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. The aim of this study was to report early and mid-term outcomes in all patients treated with the t-Branch in Norway; Design and Methods: A retrospective multicenter study with Norwegian centers performing complex endovascular aortic repair was undertaken. T-Branch patients from 2014 to 2020 were included. All postoperative computed tomography angiography images were reviewed, and demographic, anatomical, perioperative and follow-up data were analyzed; Results: Seventy patients were treated in a single-step (n = 55) or staged (n = 15) procedure. Symptomatic presentation was seen in 20 patients, six of which had a contained rupture. Technical success was 87% (n = 59), with failures caused by unsuccessful bridging of target vessels (n = 4), target vessel bleeding (n = 3), persisting type 1c endoleak (n = 1) and t-Branch malrotation (n = 1). 30-day mortality was 9% (n = 6) and was associated with high BMI (p = .038). The spinal cord ischemia rate was 21% (n = 15) and was associated with type II aneurysms (OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.1-26.7, p = .04), smoking (OR 6.0, 95% CI 1.3-27.6, p = .02) and intraoperative blood loss (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.3, p = .01). Survival at one, two and three years was 84 ± 4%, 70 ± 6% and 67 ± 6%, respectively. Freedom from aortic-related reinterventions at one, two and three years was 80 ± 5%, 65 ± 7% and 50 ± 8%, respectively; Conclusion: The study showed low early mortality (9%) and satisfactory mid-term survival. Technical success was achieved in acceptable 87% of procedures. The rate of spinal cord ischemia was high, occurring in 21% of patients.

Influence of Bridging Stent Graft Implantation into the Renal Artery during Complex Endovascular Aortic Procedures on the Renal Resistance Index

Comparative sonographic examination of the renal resistance index (RRI) can provide evidence of renal artery stenosis. The extent to which the RRI is changed after stent graft implantation is not known. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of stent graft implantation into non-diseased renal arteries during endovascular treatment of pararenal aortic aneurysms on the RRI. Sonographic examinations of the kidneys were conducted using a GE ultrasound system. The evaluation was performed according to the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2D standard criteria. RRI values were determined in consecutive patients on the day before and after stent graft implantation and compared for each kidney. A total of 32 consecutive patients (73.9 ± 8.2 years, 5 females, 27 males) were treated with a fenestrated or branched aortic stent graft including bridging stent graft implantations into both renal arteries and received pre- and postinterventional examinations. Sonomorphologically, the examined kidneys were inconspicuous. The arborisation of the renal perfusion was preserved pre- and post-implantation. The RRI did not differ (0.66 ± 0.06 versus 0.67 ± 0.07; p = ns). Successful stent graft implantation into non-stenosed renal arteries did not lead to a relevant change in RRI. Therefore, the RRI is a suitable tool for assessing renal perfusion after fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic therapy.

Intraoperative complications during standard and complex endovascular aortic repair

This study aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the most common intraoperative adverse events that occur during standard endovascular repair and fenestrated-branched endovascular repair to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms, thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms, and aortic arch aneurysms. Despite advancements in endovascular techniques, sophisticated imaging and improved graft designs, intraoperative difficulties still occur, even in highly standardized procedures and high-volume centers. This study emphasized that with the increased adoption and complexity of endovascular aortic procedures, strategies to minimize intraoperative adverse events should be protocolized and standardized. There is a need for robust evidence on this topic, which could potentially optimize treatment outcomes and durability of the available techniques.

Staged Hybrid Treatment with Branched Endovascular Aneurysm Repair of a Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm in the Presence of a Total Infrarenal Aortoiliac Occlusion

Aortoiliac occlusive disease may limit the use of branched endovascular aneurysm repair (BEVAR) of thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAAs). Thus, infrarenal aortoiliac occlusion may preclude the use of BEVAR. We present a case involving a 67-year-old patient with a fast-progressing TAAA (diameter: 70 mm) and a concomitant total aortoiliac occlusion. A multi-staged treatment concept included the creation of the access and the distal landing zone for the consecutive endovascular procedures through an aorto-right femoral-left popliteal bypass. At six-week intervals, thoracic endovascular aortic repair for the creation of the proximal landing zone and a 4-vessel BEVAR were accomplished. At 36 months, a type III endoleak occurred due to the fracture of the bridging stent-graft to the celiac trunk and the superior mesenteric artery. It was successfully treated with VBX stent-grafts. This case illustrates the importance of a staged hybrid approach in the management of complex aortic pathologies with poor access and insufficient distal landing zone.

Incidence and predictive factors for endograft limb patency of the Fenestrated Anaconda™ endograft used for complex endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

To describe the incidence, risk factors and outcomes of treatment for limb occlusion in patients treated for complex (thoraco-)abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) with the Fenestrated Anaconda™.

METHODS

Between June 2010 and May 2018, 335 patients underwent elective fenestrated aortic aneurysm repair in 11 participating centers using the Fenestrated Anaconda™ with a median follow-up of 14.3 months (IQR 27.4). The primary outcome measure was freedom-from-limb-occlusion. Secondary outcome measures were freedom-from-limb-related-reintervention, secondary patency, and risk factors associated with limb occlusion.

RESULTS

Thirty (9.0%) patients presented with limb occlusion during follow-up with freedom-from-limb-occlusion of 98.5%, 91.2%, and 81.7% at 30-days, 1 and 5 years, respectively. In 87% of cases, no obvious cause for limb occlusion was documented. Primary occlusion occurred within 30-days in 36.7% and within 1 year in 80.0%. Twenty-three (6.9%) patients underwent an occlusion-related reintervention; seven (23.3%) patients were treated conservatively. Freedom-from-limb-occlusion-related-reintervention at 30-days, one and five years was 97.8%, 93.2% and 88.6%, respectively. Secondary patency was 91.3% after 1-month and 86.2% after 1 and 5 years, respectively. Female sex (OR 3.27 - 95% CI 1.28 to 8.34, P = .01) was a statistically significant predictor for limb occlusion. A higher percentage of thrombus in the aneurysm sac appeared to be protective for limb occlusion (0% compared to <25%: OR 0.22 - 95% CI 0.07 to 0.63, P = .01; 0% compared to 25-50%: OR 0.20 - 95% CI 0.07 to 0.57, P = .00 and 0% compared to >50%: OR 0.08 - 95% CI 0.02 to 0.38, P = .00), as did iliac angulation (OR 0.99 - 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00, P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Limb occlusion remains a significant impediment of endograft durability in patients treated with the Fenestrated Anaconda™, especially in female patients. Controversially, a high aneurysmal thrombus load and a high degree of iliac angulation appeared to be protective for limb occlusion, for which no obvious cause could be identified.

Incidence, predictive factors, and outcomes of intraprocedure adverse events during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incidence of intraoperative adverse events (IAEs) and their impact on outcomes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAAs).

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical and imaging data of 600 consecutive patients (445 males; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) who underwent FB-EVAR between 2007 and 2019 in a single institution. IAE was defined as any intraoperative complication or technical problem requiring additional and unplanned procedures, and was classified as access-related, target artery (TA)-related, or graft-related. End points included rates of IAEs, 30-day or in-hospital mortality, major adverse events, patient survival, freedom from secondary intervention, and TA instability.

RESULTS

A total of 122 IAEs were identified in 105 patients (18%). IAEs were TA-related in 55 patients (9%), access-related in 46 patients (8%), and graft-related in seven patients (1%). Female sex was more frequent among patients with IAEs (44% vs 22%; P < .001). Patients with IAEs had smaller renal artery diameter (-0.4 mm, 5.4 ± 0.8 mm vs 5.8 ± 0.9 mm; P < .001), and were treated more often for TAAAs (72% vs 54%; P < .03). Technical success was achieved in 96.5% of patients and was lower for patients with IAEs (82% vs 99%; P < .001). Major adverse events were significantly more frequent among patients who had IAEs (odds ratio [OR], 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-3.25), most due to acute kidney injury (27% vs 11%; P < .001) including new-onset dialysis (5% vs 1%; P = .01). On multivariate logistic regression model, female sex (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.0), TA stenosis >50% (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-3.3), and Crawford Extent II TAAA (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.3) were predictive of IAEs, whereas preloaded design (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9) and TA diameter (+1 mm; OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9) were protective of IAEs. IAEs negatively affected secondary intervention (hazard ratio [HR], 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3) and TA instability (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-5.4); however, IAEs did not affect patient survival (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.7-1.4).

CONCLUSIONS

IAEs are common, occurring in nearly one of five patients treated with FB-EVAR for complex aortic aneurysms, and have a negative impact on clinical outcomes. IAEs were associated with female sex, TA diameter, and more extensive aortic disease.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the occurrence of spinal cord ischemia following endovascular repair of thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The rates of endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA-ER) have increased considerably in the last years. While mortality and morbidity rates have improved, spinal cord ischemia (SCI) rates have not declined significantly. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine SCI rates with respect to the efficacy of the different approaches.

METHODS

Cohort studies and case series (>20 patients) reporting SCI rates after TAAA-ER were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the evaluation of SCI. Moderators considered were primarily the staged/non-staged approach, the use of cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) and TAAA extension. Permanent SCI and mortality rates were extracted.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies (n=2333 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled estimate for SCI was 11% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8%-15%; I²:80%). For extent I,II,III and V TAAA, the pooled SCI rate was 13% (95% CI: 10%-17%; I²=71%), while for extent IV TAAA it was 6% (95% CI: 3%-10%; I²=62%). A staged TAAA-ER approach was used in 18 studies and a non-staged approach in 6 (one study included both). A lower pooled SCI rate was identified following staged compared with non-staged TAAA-ER (9% vs. 18%, respectively; P=.02). Staging was accomplished in >1 month in 9 studies and ≤1 month in 2, leading to similar SCI rates (7% vs. 11%, respectively; P=.29). The method of staging (thoracic-endoprosthesis or temporary aortic sac perfusion) did not affect SCI rates. Symptomatic CSFD was associated with a similar pooled rate of SCI compared with prophylactic CSFD (10% vs. 10%, respectively; P=.95). Pooled permanent SCI was 5% (6% following extent I,II,III and V TAAA; 3% following extent IV TAAA). Prophylactic or symptomatic CSFD have a similar rate of SCI (10% vs. 10%, respectively; P=.89). The pooled rate of 30-day mortality was 7%, with a similar incidence for the staged and non-staged approaches (6% vs. 9%, respectively). The inter-stage mortality was reported in 10 studies, with a pooled estimate rate of 1.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

SCI occurs in 11% of TAAA-ER and half of these cases are permanent. A staged approach can reduce SCI rates independently from the timing and the method adopted. The overall mortality rate for staged TAAA-ER is 6%, with one fourth of deaths (1.6%) occurring between stages.

Assessment of fenestrated Anaconda stent graft design by numerical simulation: Results of a European prospective multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

A crucial step in designing fenestrated stent grafts for treatment of complex aortic abdominal aneurysms is the accurate positioning of the fenestrations. The deployment of a fenestrated stent graft prototype in a patient-specific rigid aortic model can be used for design verification in vitro, but is time and human resources consuming. Numerical simulation (NS) of fenestrated stent graft deployment using the finite element analysis has recently been developed; the aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of fenestration positioning by NS and in vitro.

METHODS

All consecutive cases of complex aortic abdominal aneurysm treated with the Fenestrated Anaconda (Terumo Aortic) in six European centers were included in a prospective, observational study. To compare fenestration positioning, the distance from the center of the fenestration to the proximal end of the stent graft (L) and the angular distance from the 0° position (C) were measured and compared between in vitro testing (L1, C1) and NS (L2, C2). The primary hypothesis was that ΔL (|L2 - L1|) and ΔC (|C2 - C1|) would be 2.5 or less mm in more than 80% of the cases. The duration of both processes was also compared.

RESULTS

Between May 2018 and January 2019, 50 patients with complex aortic abdominal aneurysms received a fenestrated stent graft with a total of 176 fenestrations. The ΔL and ΔC was 2.5 mm or less for 173 (98%) and 174 (99%) fenestrations, respectively. The NS process duration was significantly shorter than the in vitro (2.1 days [range, 1.0-5.2 days] vs 20.6 days [range, 9-82 days]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Positioning of fenestrations using NS is as accurate as in vitro and could significantly decrease delivery time of fenestrated stent grafts.

First-in-Human Clinical Application of the Medyria TrackCath System in Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms (ACCESS Trial): A Prospective Multicenter Single-Arm Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

The Medyria TrackCath Catheter (MedTCC) is an innovative, thermal convection-based blood flow velocity (BFV) tracking catheter that may be used during complex aortic endovascular procedures for identification and catheterization of target orifices. The ACCESS Trial analyzes the safety and performance of the MedTCC for targeted vessel catheterization to generally evaluate the feasibility of thermal convection-based BFV.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a first-in-human, proof-of-concept, prospective single-arm multicenter clinical trial between March 2018 and February 2019 in patients who underwent endovascular aortic procedures at 4 high-volume centers. During these procedures, the MedTCC was advanced over a guidewire through the femoral access. The D-shape was enfolded in the reno-visceral part of the aorta and target orifices were identified and catheterized with a guidewire via the side port of the MedTCC through BFV tracking. BFV measurements were performed at baseline (Baseline-BFV), alignment to the orifice (Orifice-BFV), and following catheterization (Confirmation-BFV) to prove correct identification and catheterization of target orifices. The procedural success rate, the catheterization success rate, procedure-related parameters, and (serious) adverse events ((S)AE) during the follow-up were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients were included in the safety group (SG) and 26 in the performance group (PG). The procedural success rate was 89% (PG), the MedTCC catheterization success rate was 98% (PG). The MedTCC reliably measured BFV changes indicated by significant differences in BFV between Baseline-BFV and Orifice-BFV (p<0.05). Median (interquartile range; IQR) fluoroscopy time per orifice was 5.0 (1.5-8.5) minutes [total surgery 49 (26-74) minutes], median (IQR) contrast agent used per orifice was 1.0 (0-5.0) mL [total surgery 80 (40-100) mL], and median (IQR) MedTCC-based procedural time was 3.0 (2.0-6.0) minutes. There was no device-related SAE.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACCESS Trial suggests that BFV measurement allows for reliable target orifice identification and catheterization. The use of MedTCC is safe and generates short fluoroscopy time and low contrast agent use, which in turn might facilitate complex endovascular procedures.

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.

Endovascular Treatment for Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm and Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Using Fenestrated and Branched Grafts

Fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/B-EVAR) is a less invasive treatment for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) and complex abdominal aortic aneurysm. Fenestrated and branched (cuff) grafts facilitate safe and durable repair, and bail-out maneuvers for target vessel cannulation and stenting have been established; however, the available bridging stent grafts have differences. The present article discusses the optimal selection of fenestrated or branched grafts, the cannulation of target vessels that have difficult anatomies, and the advantages and disadvantages of various bridging stents. We review the causes and risk factors of spinal cord injury (SCI), the protocol for prevention of SCI, and the outcomes of target vessel stent grafting, including patency and endoleak.

Although conventional open surgery is the gold standard for the repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA), it is highly invasive. To reduce invasiveness, hybrid surgery that combines open surgery and endovascular therapy has been developed [1, 2], and fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/B-EVAR) is frequently performed at centers in the USA, Europe, and Japan [3-5]. Additionally, a hostile neck may be an independent factor for sac enlargement after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) [6], but a previous study reported that 41% of AAA cases presented with neck lengths outside the range prescribed by the traditional instruction for use [7]. Stark et al. showed that extending the graft above the highest renal artery would create an augmented neck length in 90% of patients with AAA [7]. F/B-EVAR is based on this principle. However, there are some technical tips for, and limitations of, fenestrated and/or branched graft. F/B-EVAR for TAAA and complex AAA will be reviewed in the present article.

Current status of endovascular treatment for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

Open surgical repair (OSR) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) is maximally invasive and associated with high rates of operative mortality and perioperative complications including spinal cord ischemia (SCI), despite improvements in surgical techniques and perioperative care. Elderly patients, patients with a history of aortic surgery, and patients with severe comorbidities are often considered ineligible for this surgery and endovascular treatment may be their only treatment option. Total endovascular aneurysm repair (t-EVAR) without debranching surgery does not require thoracotomy and laparotomy and could improve the outcomes of these patients. t-EVAR includes fenestrated EVAR (f-EVAR), multi-branched EVAR (b-EVAR), and physician-modified fenestration endograft (PMFG). Although these techniques have achieved lower mortality rates than OSR, there are concerns about perioperative complications including limb ischemia, SCI, and long-term outcomes such as endograft migration and endoleaks (ELs). This article provides an overview of available endovascular devices for TAAAs and reviews the short and mid-term results of t-EVAR, as well as alternative options.

Systematic review of contemporary outcomes of endovascular and open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the study was to provide a systematic review of the literature reporting the contemporary early outcomes after endovascular and open repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs).

METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies from January 2006 to March 2018 that reported either endovascular (using branched or fenestrated endografts) or open repair of TAAA in at least 10 patients. Outcomes of interest included perioperative mortality, spinal cord injury (SCI), renal failure requiring dialysis, and stroke. Pooled proportions were determined using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The analysis included 71 studies, of which 24 and 47 reported outcomes after endovascular and open TAAA repair, respectively. Endovascular cohort patients were older and had higher rates of coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes. Endovascular repair was associated with higher rates of SCI (13.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.5%-16.7%) compared with open repair (7.4%; 95% CI, 6.2%-8.7%; P < .01) but similar rates of permanent paralysis (5.2% [95% CI, 3.8%-6.7%] vs 4.4% [95% CI, 3.3%-5.6%]; P = .39), lower rates of postoperative dialysis (6.4% [95% CI, 3.2%-9.5%] vs 12.0% [95% CI, 8.2%-16.3%]; P = .03) but similar rates of being discharged on permanent dialysis (3.7% [95% CI, 2.0%-5.9%] vs 3.8% [95% CI, 2.9%-5.3%]; P = .93), a trend to lower stroke (2.7% [95% CI, 1.9%-3.6%] vs 3.9% [95% CI, 3.0%-4.9%]; P = .06), and similar perioperative mortality (7.4% [95% CI, 5.9%-9.1%] vs 8.9% [95% CI, 7.2%-10.9%]; P = .21).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review summarizes the contemporary literature results of endovascular and open TAAA repair. Endovascular repair studies included patients with more comorbidities and were associated with higher rates of SCI but similar rates of permanent paraplegia, whereas open repair studies had higher rates of postoperative dialysis but similar rates of being discharged on permanent dialysis. Perioperative mortality rates were similar. Universally adopted reporting standards for patient characteristics, outcomes, and the conduct of contemporary comparative studies will allow better assessment and comparisons of the risks associated with the two surgical treatment options for TAAA.

Do Not Blame the Resident: the Impact of Surgeon and Surgical Trainee Experience on the Occurrence of Intraoperative Adverse Events (iAEs) in Abdominal Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are defined as inadvertent injuries that occur during an operation and are associated with increased mortality, morbidity, and health care costs. We sought to study the impact of attending surgeon experience as well as resident training level on the occurrence of iAEs.

DESIGN

The institutional American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and administrative databases for abdominal surgeries were linked and screened for iAEs using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification-based Patient Safety Indicator "accidental puncture/laceration." Each flagged record was systematically reviewed to confirm iAE occurrence and determine the number of years of independent practice of the attending surgeon and the postgraduate year (PGY) of the assisting resident at the time of the operation. The attending surgeon experience was divided into quartiles (<6 years, 6-13 years, 13-20 years, >20 years). The resident experience level was defined as Junior (PGY-1 to PGY-3) or Senior (PGY-4 or PGY-5). Univariate/bivariate then multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and operation type and/or complexity (using RVUs as a proxy) were performed to assess the independent impact of resident and attending surgeon experience on the occurrence of iAEs.

SETTING

A large tertiary care teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients included in the 2007-2012 ACS-NSQIP that had an abdominal surgery performed by both an attending surgeon and a resident.

RESULTS

A total of 7685 operations were included and iAEs were detected in 159 of them (2.1%). Junior residents participated in 1680 cases (21.9%), while senior residents were involved in 6005 (78.1%). The iAE rates for attending surgeons with <6, 6-13, 13-20, and >20 years of experience were 2.7%, 1.7%, 2.4%, and 1.4%, respectively. In multivariable analyses, the risk of occurrence of an iAE was significantly decreased for surgeons with >20 years of experience compared to those with <6 years of experience (odds ratio=0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.86, p = 0.011). On bivariate analyses, iAEs occurred in 1.2% of junior resident cases, while senior residents had an iAE rate of 2.3%. However, after risk adjustment on multivariable analyses, the resident experience level did not significantly impact the rate of iAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The surgeon's level of experience, but not the resident's, is associated with the occurrence of iAEs in abdominal surgery. Efforts to improve patient safety in surgery should explore the value of pairing junior surgeons with the more experienced ones thru formalized coaching programs, rather than focus on curbing resident operative autonomy.

Endovascular robotics

The current state and the future direction.

Are surgeons reluctant to accurately report intraoperative adverse events? A prospective study of 1,989 patients

BACKGROUND

The true incidence of intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) remains unknown.

METHODS

All patients undergoing abdominal surgery at an academic institution between January and July 2016 were included in a prospective fashion. At the end of surgery, using a secure REDCap database, the surgeon was given the Institute of Medicine definition of intraoperative adverse events and asked whether an intraoperative adverse event had occurred. Blinded reviewers systematically examined all operative reports for intraoperative adverse events and their severity. The response rate and the intraoperative adverse event rate reported by surgeons were calculated. The latter was compared with the rate of intraoperative adverse events detected by operative report review. The severity of intraoperative adverse events was assessed based on a previously validated intraoperative adverse event classification system.

RESULTS

A total of 1,989 operations were included. The surgeons' response rate was 71.9%, reporting intraoperative adverse events in 107 operations (7.5%). Of those intraoperative adverse events, 26 (24.3%) were not described in the operative report. Operative report review revealed intraoperative adverse events in 417 operations (21.0%). Most injuries were of lower severity (85.8% were either class I or II). The surgeons' response rate was similar in operations with and without intraoperative adverse events (69.8% versus 72.5%, P=.28), but they underreported low severity intraoperative adverse events-only 13.2% of class I compared with 35.3%, 36.8%, and 55.6% of injury classes II, III, and IV respectively (P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Surgeons are willing to report intraoperative adverse events, but systematically and significantly underreport them, especially if they are of lower severity. This is potentially related to the absence of a clear intraoperative adverse event definition or their personal interpretation of their clinical significance.

Multicentre observational study of surgical system failures in aortic procedures and their effect on patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Vascular surgical care has changed dramatically in recent years with little knowledge of the impact of system failures on patient safety. The primary aim of this multicentre observational study was to define the landscape of surgical system failures, errors and inefficiency (collectively termed failures) in aortic surgery. Secondary aims were to investigate determinants of these failures and their relationship with patient outcomes.

METHODS

Twenty vascular teams at ten English hospitals trained in structured self-reporting of intraoperative failures (phase I). Failures occurring in open and endovascular aortic procedures were reported in phase II. Failure details (category, delay, consequence), demographic information (patient, procedure, team experience) and outcomes were reported.

RESULTS

There were strong correlations between the trainer and teams for the number and type of failures recorded during 88 procedures in phase I. In 185 aortic procedures, teams reported a median of 3 (i.q.r. 2-6) failures per procedure. Most frequent failures related to equipment (unavailability, failure, configuration, desterilization). Most major failures related to communication. Fourteen failures directly harmed 12 patients. Significant predictors of an increased failure rate were: endovascular compared with open repair (incidence rate ratio (IRR) for open repair 0·71, 95 per cent c.i. 0·57 to 0·88; P = 0·002), thoracic aneurysms compared with other aortic pathologies (IRR 2·07, 1·39 to 3·08; P < 0·001) and unfamiliarity with equipment (IRR 1·52, 1·20 to 1·91; P < 0·001). The major failure total was associated with reoperation (P = 0·011), major complications (P = 0·029) and death (P = 0·027).

CONCLUSION

Failure in aortic procedures is frequently caused by issues with team-working and equipment, and is associated with patient harm. Multidisciplinary team training, effective use of technology and new-device accreditation may improve patient outcomes.