Percutaneous versus femoral cutdown access for endovascular aneurysm repair

Investigating the effects of percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm on the lumen size of the common femoral artery

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) is the definitive therapy of choice for abdominal aortic aneurysms worldwide. However, current literature regarding the anatomic changes in the common femoral artery (CFA) post-PEVAR is sparse and contradictory, and a significant proportion of these studies did not control for the potential confounding effects of ethnicity. Thus, this study aims to investigate the anatomical effects of PEVAR on the CFA using an Asian study cohort.

METHODS

Between January 2019 and September 2023, the records of 113 patients who received PEVAR were reviewed. Groins with previous surgical interventions were excluded. The most proximate pre- and postoperative CT angiography of patients receiving PEVAR via the Perclose ProGlide™ Suture-Mediated Closure System were retrospectively analysed for changes in both the CFA inner luminal diameter (ID) and outer diameter (OD), the latter also encompassing the arterial walls. Access site complications within 3 months post-PEVAR were also recorded per patient.

RESULTS

One hundred seventeen groins from 60 patients were included in this study, with 1 report of pseudoaneurysm. The CFA ID exhibited a 0.167 mm decrease (p-value = 0.0403), while the OD decreased by 0.247 mm (p-value = 0.0107). This trend persisted when the data was separately analysed with the common cardiovascular risk factors of diabetes mellitus, hypertension and hyperlipidaemia.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in the CFA diameters post-PEVAR. However, the percentage changes were below established flow-limiting values, as reflected by the single access site complication reported. Hence, our findings give confidence in the safety profile of this procedure, even with the reported smaller baseline CFA lumen size in Asians. Moving forward, similar longer-term studies should be considered to characterise any late postoperative effects.

Optimizing Femoral Access in Emergency EVAR with a Decision-Making Algorithm

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the preferred approach over open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) due to its minimally invasive nature. The common femoral artery (CFA) is the main access vessel for EVAR, with both surgical exposure and percutaneous access being utilized. However, in emergent cases, percutaneous access can be challenging and may result in complications such as bleeding or dissection thrombosis, leading to the need for surgical conversion. This study aimed to share experiences in implementing a decision-making algorithm to reduce surgical conversions due to percutaneous access failures. A total of 74 aortic patients treated with EVAR in emergency settings were included in this retrospective study. This study focused on various outcomes such as perioperative mortality, morbidity, procedure time, surgical exposure time, and surgical conversion rate. After the implementation of the decision-making algorithm, decreases in surgical conversions and operating time were observed. Percutaneous access was found to be more challenging in cases with specific anatomical characteristics of the CFA, such as severe atherosclerosis or smaller vessel diameter. This study highlighted the importance of carefully assessing patient anatomical features and utilizing a decision-making algorithm to optimize outcomes in EVAR procedures. Further research is needed to continue improving practices for managing aortic aneurysms and reducing complications in femoral artery access approaches.

Cutdown is Associated with Higher 30-day Unplanned Readmissions and Wound Complications than Percutaneous Access for EVAR

BACKGROUND

A 2023 Cochrane review showed no difference in bleeding/wound infection complications, short-term mortality and aneurysm exclusion between the percutaneous and cut-down approach for femoral access in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). In contrast, single-center studies have shown bilateral cutdown resulting in higher readmission rates due to higher rates of groin wound infections. Whether 30-day readmission rates vary by type of access during EVAR procedures is unknown. The goal of this study was to ascertain which femoral access approach for EVAR is associated with the lowest risk of 30-day readmission.

METHODS

The Targeted Vascular Module from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried to identify patients undergoing EVAR for aortic disease from 2012-2021. All ruptures and other emergency cases were excluded. Cohorts were divided into bilateral cutdown, unilateral cutdown, failed percutaneous attempt converted to open and successful percutaneous access. The primary 30-day outcomes were unplanned readmission and wound complications. Univariate analyses were performed using the Fisher's exact test, Chi-Square test and the Student's t-test. Multivariable analysis was performed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2021, 14,002 patients met study criteria. Most (7,395 [53%]) underwent completely percutaneous access, 5,616 (40%) underwent bilateral cutdown, 849 (6%) underwent unilateral cutdown, and 146 (1%) had a failed percutaneous access which was converted to open. Unplanned readmissions by access strategy included 7.6% for bilateral cutdown, 7.3% for unilateral cutdown, 7.8% for attempted percutaneous converted to cutdown, and 5.7% for completely percutaneous access (P < 0.001, Figure 1). After multivariable analysis, unplanned readmissions compared to percutaneous access yielded: percutaneous converted to cutdown adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.38, 95% CI [0.76-2.53], P = 0.29; unilateral cutdown AOR: 1.18, 95% CI [0.92-1.51], P = 0.20; bilateral cutdown AOR: 1.26, 95% CI [1.09-1.43], P = 0.001. Bilateral cutdown was also associated with higher wound complications compared to percutaneous access (AOR: 4.41, CI [2.86-6.79], P < 0.001), as was unilateral cutdown (AOR: 3.04, CI [1.46-6.32], P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing cutdown for EVAR are at higher risk for 30-day readmission compared to completely percutaneous access. If patient anatomy allows for percutaneous EVAR, this access option should be prioritized.

Initial Outcomes of the Gore TAG Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for Endovascular Repair of Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) has dramatically reduced the morbidity and mortality of intervention. Injuries requiring zone 2 coverage of the aorta traditionally require left subclavian artery (LSA) sacrifice or open revascularization. Furthermore, these injuries are associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and long-term morbidity. Here we report 1-year outcomes of total endovascular repair of BTAI with the GORE® TAG® Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis for LSA preservation.

METHODS

Across 34 investigative sites, 9 patients with BTAI requiring LSA coverage were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective study of a single-branched aortic endograft. The thoracic branch endoprosthesis device allows for graft placement proximal to the LSA and incorporates a single side branch for LSA perfusion.

RESULTS

This initial cohort included 8 male and 1 female patient with a median age of 43 (22, 76) and 12 months of follow-up. Five total years of follow-up are planned. All participants had grade 3 BTAI. All procedures took place between 2018 and 2019. The median injury severity score was 2 (0, 66). The median procedure time was 109 min (78, 162). All aortic injuries were repaired under general anesthesia and with heparinization. A spinal drain was used in one patient. Post-deployment balloon angioplasty was conducted in one case at the distal landing zone. There was one asymptomatic LSA branch occlusion 6 months after repair. It was attributed to the purposeful proximal deployment of the branch stent to accommodate an early vertebral takeoff. The occlusion did not require revascularization. There were no strokes, mortalities, or aortic adverse events (migration, endoleak, native aortic expansion, dissection, or thrombosis) through 12 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial cohort outcomes suggest that endovascular repair of zone 2 BTAI is feasible and has favorable outcomes using the thoracic branch device with LSA preservation. Additional cases and longer-term follow-up are required for a definitive assessment of the device's safety and durability in traumatic aortic injuries.

Comparison of manual compression, Z-stitch, and suture-mediated vascular closure device techniques in dogs undergoing percutaneous transvenous intervention

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Manual compression has been standard of care for maintaining hemostasis after percutaneous endovascular intervention, but can be time-consuming and associated with vascular complications. Alternative closure methods include the figure-of-eight suture (Z-stitch) and vascular closure device (VCD) techniques. We hypothesized that compared to manual compression, Z-stitch and VCD would significantly reduce time-to-hemostasis after transvenous access, and the proportion of dogs with vascular patency would not differ significantly among treatments.

ANIMALS

Forty-six client-owned dogs undergoing percutaneous transvenous interventional procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Dogs with vessel diameter <5 mm were randomized to undergo manual compression or Z-stitch, while those with vessel diameter ≥5 mm were randomized to undergo manual compression, Z-stitch, or VCD. Time-to-hemostasis, bleeding scores, presence of vascular patency one day and two to three months post-procedure, and complications were recorded. Data are presented as median (95% confidence interval).

RESULTS

In all 46 dogs, the right external jugular vein was used. Time-to-hemostasis was significantly shorter in the Z-stitch (2.1 [1.8-2.9] minutes) compared to VCD (8.6 [6.1-11.8] minutes; P<0.001) and manual compression (10.0 [10.0-20.0] minutes; P<0.001) groups. Time-to-hemostasis was significantly shorter in the VCD vs. manual compression (P=0.027) group. Bleeding scores were significantly greater at 5 and 10 min (P<0.001 and 0.013, respectively) in manual compression, compared to Z-stitch group. There was no difference in the proportion of dogs with vascular patency between groups (P=0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Z-stitch and VCD are effective venous hemostasis methods after percutaneous transvenous intervention, with Z-stitch providing the most rapid time-to-hemostasis. Both Z-stitch and VCD techniques have low complication rates and effectively maintain vascular patency.

Development and Validation of a Novel Preoperative Risk Score to Identify Patients at Risk for Nonhome Discharge after Elective Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair (EVAR)

BACKGROUND

Nonhome discharge (NHD) to a rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility after elective endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is uncommon. However, NHD after surgery has an important impact on patient quality of life and postdischarge outcomes. Understanding factors that put patients undergoing EVAR at high risk for NHD is essential to providing adequate preoperative counseling and shared decision making. This study aimed to identify independent predictors of NHD following elective EVAR and to create a clinically useful preoperative risk score.

METHODS

Elective EVAR cases were queried from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative 2014-2018. A risk score was created by splitting the data set into two-thirds for development and one-third for validation. A parsimonious stepwise hierarchical multivariable logistic regression controlling for hospital level variation was performed in the development dataset, and the beta-coefficients were used to assign points for a risk score. The score was then validated, and model performance assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 24,426 patients were included and 932 (3.8%) required NHD. Multivariable analysis in the development group identified independent predictors of NHD, which were used to create a 20-point risk score. Patients were stratified into 3 groups based upon their risk score: low risk (0-7 points; n = 16,699) with an NHD rate of 1.8%, moderate risk (8-13 points; n = 7,315) with an NHD rate of 7.3%, and high risk (≥14 points; n = 412) with an NHD rate of 21.8%. The risk score had good predictive ability with c-statistic = 0.75 for model development and c-statistic = 0.73 in the validation dataset.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel risk score can predict NHD following EVAR using characteristics that can be identified preoperatively. Utilization of this score may allow for improved risk assessment, preoperative counseling, and shared decision making.

Strategy for Totally Percutaneous Management of Vascular Injury in Combined Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Procedures

Minimally invasive treatment of severe aortic stenosis by transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm by endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) requires large-bore vascular access. These percutaneous transfemoral interventions may be performed as a combined procedure, however, vascular injury may necessitate surgical vascular repair. We implemented a strategy designed to enable percutaneous vascular repair, with stent-graft implantation, if necessary, after these combined procedures. We identified all combined percutaneous TAVR and EVAR procedures which were performed at our institution. Patient and procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Six consecutive patients underwent total percutaneous combined TAVR and EVAR procedures. In all cases, TAVR was performed first and was followed by EVAR. Both common femoral arteries served as primary access sites for delivery of the implanted devices and hemostasis was achieved by deployment of vascular closure devices. Secondary access sites included the right brachial artery in all patients and superficial femoral arteries in 50% of the patients. In all cases an "0.014" 300-cm length "safety" wire was delivered to the common femoral artery or descending aorta by way of a secondary access site to facilitate stent graft delivery. Successful device implantation was achieved in all cases. Vascular closure device failure occurred in 2 patients and was treated by stent graft implantation by way of the brachial and superficial femoral arteries, without need for surgical vascular repair. A strategy designed to facilitate percutaneous vascular repair after combined EVAR and TAVR procedures may enable a truly minimally invasive procedure.

Perioperative Mortality and the Long-Term Outcome of Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair (EVAR): A Single-Centre Experience

Background Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a dangerous disorder characterised by abnormal enlargement of the abdominal aorta. The severity of the aneurysm and the presence of symptoms determine the necessary monitoring or treatment to prevent potential fatalities. The objective of this study is to estimate the perioperative mortality and long-term outcome of endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR). Patients and methods This is a descriptive, retrospective, observational study. We retrieved the data of the AAA patients who underwent EVAR at Glan Clwyd Hospital from January 2015 to January 2023. The study sample consisted of patients diagnosed with isolated AAA, with or without iliac branch involvement, who were deemed suitable for EVAR based on factors such as advanced age, presence of comorbidities, the complexity of the condition, history of prior surgery, fulfillment of indication criteria, and patient desire. The data was analysed using SPSS statistical software, version 21.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results Two hundred and twenty-two patients were studied. The outcome of the EVAR among the patients was endo-leak 28.4% (n = 63); migration 1.4% (n = 3); blockage 0.5% (n = 1); infolding 0.5% (n = 1); perioperative mortality 1.4% (3); and other complications like access site or acute kidney injury were 1.4% (n = 3). However, no complications were reported in most of the patients, 66.7% (n = 148). Upon evaluating the variables that could affect the outcome, we observed that the ASA grade, comorbidities, and the indication of the intervention had a significant effect on the outcome (P values = 0.000, 0.048, and 0.014, respectively). Conclusion The findings demonstrate that when EVAR is performed by a skilled team adhering to proper criteria, the results are optimal. The mortality rate during the perioperative period was 1.4%. Furthermore, we have shown a satisfactory rate of complications when compared to international data.

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.

Influence of Operative Time in the Results of Elective Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

A prolonged operative time (OT) is a well-recognized risk factor of postoperative complications after many open surgical procedures, although little is known about its impact in less-invasive endovascular procedures. We aimed to define the characteristics related to a prolonged OT in the endovascular treatment of aorto-iliac aneurysms (EVAR) and to evaluate the influence of OT on postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 284 consecutive patients (mean age 75 years, 95% male) who underwent an elective EVAR between 2000 and 2019. Operative characteristics related to OT and the impact of OT in postoperative results was studied using multiple lineal and logistic regression analyses, respectively.

RESULTS

The mean surgical time was 200 min. OT was associated (regression model) with the implantation of straight endografts (-38 min, P = 0.007), femoral artery surgery (+80 min, P < 0.001), hypogastric preservation procedures (+70 min, P < 0.001), associated peripheral arterial disease (+22 min, P = 0.013), general anesthesia (+34 min, P < 0.001), and aneurysm diameter (+9 min/cm, P = 0.002). During the postoperative period (<30 days or at discharge), 21% presented a complication and 2.8% died. OT was independently associated with a higher incidence of postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR] for each additional 30' of surgery = 1.34, P < 0.001), such as immediate (OR = 1.48, P = 0.003) and 6-month mortality (OR = 1.28, P = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

A prolonged OT is an independent risk factor for complications and mortality after EVAR. Surgeons must take this factor into consideration when defining the best therapeutic strategy for abdominal aortic aneurysms.

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.

Translation gegen die Einbahn – Entwicklung von Simulationsmodellen für die gefäßchirurgische Ausbildung

Bei der Etablierung neuer chirurgischer Methoden und Techniken ist eine Lernkurve, die mit einer höheren Morbidität und Mortalität für die Patient:innen vergesellschaftet sein kann, eine Realität. Um im Rahmen der chirurgischen und endovaskulären Ausbildung die Lernkurve von Patient:innen auf Simulatoren zu übertragen, werden zunehmend lebensnahe Modelle angewendet und getestet. Der Nutzen derartiger Simulationen konnte in mehreren Bereichen dargestellt werden. Wir stellen in diesem Artikel die Schritte von der Konzeption bis zur Produktion und Validierung eines Simulators für ultraschallgezielte Punktionen von arteriellen und venösen Gefäßen dar. Unser Ziel war es eine preiswerte High-Fidelity-Simulation zu entwickeln, die einen möglichst kompletten und lebensnahen Ablauf einer ultraschallgezielten perkutanen Gefäßpunktion erlaubt, direktes haptisches und visuelles Feedback liefert sowie den Einsatz von einigen perkutanen Devices zulässt. Der fertige Prototyp erlaubt eine ultraschallgezielte Punktion der Vene und der Arterie, das Modell ermöglicht das Einführen und Absetzen von endovaskulären Devices und Verschlusssystemen. Eine strukturierte Ausbildung ungeachtet äußerer Einflüsse und Herausforderungen anbieten und durchführen zu können, ist im Interesse von Abteilungen und Assistenzärzten und dient letztlich der Patientensicherheit. Das Simulationstraining an lebensnahen Modellen kann hier einen wertvollen Beitrag liefern und eine willkommene Ergänzung zur klinischen Ausbildung darstellen.

Mini-surgical access prevents local complications and reduces costs in endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

This study aims to propose a minimally invasive surgical approach to the common femoral artery in endovascular aortic repair and assess its value by a single-center retrospective study including 118 patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2017 and 2022, all patients receiving endovascular treatment for thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms in our Center had the anterior wall of the common femoral artery exposed, through a 2- 3cm transverse groin incision, instead of a complete surgical cut-down. We access the artery with a purse-string suture, held tight with a tourniquet. After procedure completion, we tie the purse-string closing the arteriotomy. We retrospectively analyzed the cohort of all consecutive patients treated with endovascular aortic repair in this period and recorded primary and assisted technical success, operative time, in-hospital length of stay, access failure, and access-related complications, comparing the results with the current literature.

RESULTS

All procedures were successful, with no perioperative mortality. Primary technical success was achieved in 116 patients: two required adjunctive procedures. No access failure or access-related complications (thrombosis, groin hematoma, lymphocele, wound dehiscence, or infection) occurred. Two accesses required conversion to complete femoral artery exposure and endarterectomy. Operatory time and length of in-hospital stay were comparable to the outcomes of the major studies reporting on percutaneous access, saving the costs of the closure devices.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgical access is safe and feasible for endovascular aortic procedures. Compared to the costs of percutaneous access found in literature, it is cost-effective. It can be chosen whenever the percutaneous approach is not feasible or at high risk of complications.

Cannulation of visceral vessels using a steerable sheathin fenestrated and branched aortic endografts

INTRODUCTION

A critical step in the endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysm is the cannulation and stenting of renovisceral vessels, especially in cases with a complex anatomy or atherosclerotic lesions. This study aimed to demonstrate the results of renovisceral vessel cannulation using a steerable sheath in fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic procedures (FB-EVAR).

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective FB-EVAR for asymptomatic thoracoabdominal or juxtarenal aneurysm at a single tertiary referral center from 2016 to 2019 were included in this study. Underlying pathologies, renovisceral target vessels (TV), technical success (TS), freedom from reintervention (FFR), and TV patency were assessed. Target vessels were categorized as challenging or non-challenging TV.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients (median age 73 (Q1, Q3 (68 - 80)); 43 male (81%)) who underwent elective FB-EVAR were included. Indications comprised thoracoabdominal aneurysms (Crawford I-IV) (n = 26; 49%), juxtarenal aneurysms (n = 23; 43.5%) and penetrating aortic ulcers (PAU) (n = 4; 7.5%). Two patients (4%) had prior open aortic surgery, and three patients (6%) had undergone a failed standard EVAR before. Of the 196 treated TV, 131 (67%) were categorized as challenging. Cannulation was successful in 194 of 196 vessels (99%). A total of three TV (1.5%) showed periprocedural complications. No significant difference was found in the rate of intraoperative complications between challenging versus non-challenging TV (p = 0.457). One patient died within 30 days of the procedure (1.9%). No stroke or intestinal ischemia occurred. After 12, 24, and 36 months, the survival rate was 87%, 87%, and 81%, respectively Primary patency after 12 months was 98.6%, and 97.9% of vessels remained FFR during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Transfemoral, retrograde cannulation of renovisceral vessels using a steerable sheath is feasible and safe and provides good mid-term results, especially in cases with challenging renovisceral vessels. The potential complications of antegrade vascular access can be avoided.

The Role of Prehospital REBOA for Hemorrhage Control in Civilian and Military Austere Settings: A Systematic Review

Despite the success of prehospital resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in combat and civilian settings, the prevalence of complications and the lack of conclusive evidence has led to uncertainty and controversy. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to evaluate the role of prehospital REBOA for hemorrhage control in trauma populations. We systematically searched Cochrane, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar for all relevant studies that investigated the efficacy of prehospital REBOA on trauma patients with massive hemorrhage. Primary outcome was evaluated by blood pressure elevation and secondary outcome was measured by 30-day mortality and complications. Our search identified 546 studies, but only six studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included studies were low to moderate quality due to limitations within the studies. However, all of the studies reported significant elevation of blood pressure and survival, demonstrating the potential benefits of REBOA. For example, the 30-day mortality rate reduced significantly after REBOA, but studies lacked long-term outcome assessments across the continuum of care. Due to the heterogeneity of the results, a meta-analysis was not possible. We conclude that prehospital REBOA is a feasible and effective resuscitative adjunct for shock patients with lethal non-compressible torso hemorrhage. However, due to the unclear causes of complications and the lack of high quality and homogeneous data, the effects of prehospital REBOA were not truly reflected and comparison between groups was not feasible. Thus, further high-quality studies are required to attest the causality between prehospital REBOA and outcomes.

Predictors of percutaneous access-related complications in aortic endovascular procedures - 'real-world' insights and a comparison to open access

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) is becoming increasingly popular due to fewer access-related complications, shorter procedural times and length of stay (LOS). Our aim was to explore factors associated with access-related complications and their impact on procedural time and LOS.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed consecutive aorto-iliac endovascular procedures in a tertiary hub comprising 2 institutions and 18 consultant vascular surgeons and interventional radiologists between 2016 - 2017. Access-related complications were defined as: bleeding requiring cutdown or return to theatre, acute limb ischaemia or common femoral artery (CFA) pseudoaneurysm requiring intervention and wound infection or dehiscence needing hospitalization.

RESULTS

Of 511 patients, 354 (69%) had a percutaneous approach via 589 CFA access sites. In this percutaneous group, access-related complications occurred in 11% of sites (65/589); Their rate varied with procedure type ranging between 3.6% to 17.6%. The most common complication was bleeding due to closure device failure in 8.5% (50/589) of access sites. When uncomplicated, percutaneous interventions were faster compared to open surgical access (p<0.0001). Operation time and median LOS (3 vs. 2 days) were longer for elective standard EVAR patients experiencing access-related complications (p=0.033). In the percutaneous group, multivariate regression analysis demonstrated significant associations between accessrelated complications and eGFR (odds ratio (OR) 0.984 [0.972-0.997], p=0.014), CFA depth (OR 1.026 [1.008-1.045], p=0.005), device used (Prostar vs. Proglide (OR 2.177 [1.236-3.832], p=0.007) and procedural type (complex vs. standard EVAR) (OR 2.017 [1.122-3.627], p=0.019). We developed a risk score which had reasonably good predictive power (C-statistic 0.716 [0.646-0.787],p<0.0001) for avoiding access complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Physiological (low eGFR level), anatomical (increased CFA depth) and technical factors (choice of device and complex procedures) were identified as predictors of access-related complications in this large retrospective series. These are important for safe selection of patients that would benefit from percutaneous access.

One-Year Results of the INSIGHT Study on Endovascular Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) using the INCRAFT™ AAA Stent Graft System was safe and effective in regulatory approval studies. We herein report on the 1-year results of a real-world clinical study.

METHODS

The INSIGHT study is a multi-center, prospective, open label, post-approval study conducted to continually evaluate the safety and performance of the INCRAFT ™ System. Between 2015 and 2016, 150 consecutive patients with AAA at 23 centers in Europe were treated with the device in routine clinical practice. The primary endpoint was freedom from major adverse events (MAEs), namely death, myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and renal failure, within 30 days of the index procedure. Endpoint data were assessed by a core laboratory. The secondary endpoints included technical success at the conclusion of the procedure and clinical success.

RESULTS

All 150 patients studied (mean age: 73.6 ± 8.0 and 89.3% men) met the primary endpoint without MAEs at 30-day follow up. Technical success was achieved in 99.3% of patients without stent fractures at 30 days. Among the 146 patients eligible for 1-year follow-up, the MAE rate was 8.2%, i.e., 12 patients suffered 13 MAEs: CVA in 8, MI in 1, and 4 died (resulting in a 2.7% all-cause mortality rate). There were no reports of new onset renal failure requiring dialysis. Only 2.7% of patients had type I endoleak and no III endoleaks were identified through 1 year. The rate of clinical success at 1 year was 91.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

The 1-year results of this multicenter real-world study underscore the safety and effectiveness of endovascular treatment of AAA with the INCRAFT System in routine clinical practice.

Comparison of percutaneous access and open femoral cutdown in elective endovascular aortic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes of percutaneous access and femoral cutdown methods for elective bifurcated endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

METHODS

Between November 2013 and September 2020, a total of 152 patient (135 males, 17 females; mean age: 70.6±6, range, 57 to 87 years) who underwent endovascular repair due to infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm were retrospectively analyzed. According to femoral access type, the patients were grouped into two groups as the total percutaneous femoral access and open cutdown femoral access endovascular repair. Intra- and postoperative data were compared, including operative time, amount of contrast media, bleeding requiring transfusion, return to the operating room, access vessel complications, wound complications, and overall length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven (57.2%) femoral cutdown access repair and 65 (42.8%) percutaneous femoral access repair cases were evaluated in the study. The two groups were comparable in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics (p>0.05), except for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease which was more frequent in the percutaneous access group (p=0.014). After adjustment, age, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and obesity were not predictive of percutaneous access failure. Percutaneous femoral access was observed as the only preventing factor for wound infection (odds ratio=0.166, 95% confidence interval: 0.036-0.756; p=0.021).

CONCLUSION

Although femoral access preference does not affect mortality and re-intervention rates, percutaneous endovascular repair reduces operation time, hospital stay, and wound site complications compared to femoral artery exposures.

Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Narrative Review

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has evolved as minimally invasive method of treating infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) with perioperatively mortality of less than 1% compared with 5% with open AAA repair as suggested by many randomized control trials. Computed tomography angiography is the imaging of choice for appropriate selection of a patient with EVAR. For patients with unsuitable anatomy, advanced EVARs techniques, such as fenestrated, branch, and chimney EVARs, are also increasingly being offered to patients with equal success. Patients with ruptured AAA are treated with this minimally invasive procedure. Percutaneous EVAR emerged with less of wound-related complications. Endoleaks are the most common complications peculiar to this procedure, and most are preventable by preoperative planning. They are detected on completion angiogram or on the surveillance imaging. This review discusses indications of EVAR, its selection criteria, procedural steps, and common complications associated with this procedure and advanced EVARs.

Percutaneous Axillary Artery Access for Peripheral and Complex Endovascular Interventions: Clinical Outcomes and Cost Benefits

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the safety, efficacy, and applicability of percutaneous axillary artery (pAxA) access in patients requiring upper extremity large sheath access during complex aortic, cardiac, and peripheral endovascular procedures. We also take this opportunity to address the potential cost-benefits offered by pAxA access compared to open upper extremity access.

METHODS

A total of 26 consecutive patients, between June 2018 and October 2020, underwent endovascular intervention, requiring upper extremity access (UEA). Ultrasound-guided, percutaneous access of the axillary artery was used in all 26 patients with off-label use of pre-close technique with Perclose ProGlide closure devices. Access sites accommodated sheath sizes that ranged from 6 to 14 French (F). End points were technical success and access site-related complications including isolated neuropathies, hematoma, distal embolization, access-site thrombosis, and post-operative bleeding requiring secondary interventions. Technical success was defined as successful arterial closure intraoperatively with no evidence of stenosis, occlusion, or persistent bleeding, requiring additional intervention.

RESULTS

Of the 26 patients requiring pAxA access, 15 underwent complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs (EVAR) with branched, fenestrated, snorkel, or parallel endografts, 6 underwent peripheral vascular interventions, and 5 underwent cardiac interventions. Fifty-three percent accommodated sheath sizes of 12F or higher. Technical success was achieved in 100% of cases with no major perioperative access complications requiring additional open or endovascular procedures. In our series, we had one post-operative mortality secondary to myocardial infarction in a patient with significant coronary artery disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data again demonstrated the proposed safety and efficacy attributable to pAxA access, while extending its application to wide spectrum of endovascular interventions which included peripheral or coronary vascular in addition to complex EVAR.

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.

Femoral vascular access for endovascular resuscitation

ABSTRACT

Endovascular resuscitation is an emerging area in the resuscitation of both severe traumatic hemorrhage and nontraumatic cardiac arrest. Vascular access is the critical first procedural step that must be accomplished to initiate endovascular resuscitation. The endovascular interventions presently available and emerging are routinely or potentially performed via the femoral vessels. This may require either femoral arterial access alone or access to both the femoral artery and vein. The time-critical nature of resuscitation necessitates that medical specialists performing endovascular resuscitation be well-trained in vascular access techniques. Keen knowledge of femoral vascular anatomy and skill with vascular access techniques are required to meet the needs of critically ill patients for whom endovascular resuscitation can prove lifesaving. This review article addresses the critical importance of femoral vascular access in endovascular resuscitation, focusing on the pertinent femoral vascular anatomy and technical aspects of ultrasound-guided percutaneous vascular access and femoral vessel cutdown that may prove helpful for successful endovascular resuscitation.

Outcomes after endovascular reintervention for aortic interventions

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular reinterventions are often performed after previous open or endovascular aortic procedures. We used the GREAT (Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment) database to compare the outcomes between these groups. We also compared reintervention of any type with a group of patients who had undergone primary endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

All patients enrolled in GREAT were grouped according to a previous EVAR or open abdominal aortic procedure (OAP). Univariate analysis was performed using the χ², Wilcoxon rank sum, and Fisher exact tests. Cox proportional analysis was used to test the predictors for all-cause and aorta-related mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 3974 subjects who had undergone EVAR with follow-up data available were included in the GREAT. Of the 3974 procedures, 196 (4.9%) were reinterventions (49 after OAP and 147 after previous EVAR). Reintervention after previous EVAR showed a trend toward a greater endoleak rate through 2 years (13.6% vs 4.1%; P = .07), although no difference was found in the occurrence of the intervention (12.2% vs 17.7%; P = .37). Reintervention after OAP resulted in higher all-cause mortality through 2 years of follow-up (32.7% vs 17.7%; P = .0.03). The predictors of mortality included prior OAP, renal insufficiency, and the use of cutdown for access. Compared with the patients who had undergone primary endovascular repair, patients in the reintervention cohort were older (75.3 years vs 73.3 years; P = .0005), had had only femoral artery access used (95.8% vs 90.3%; P < .0001), and were more likely to have undergone aortic branch vessel procedures (32.3% vs 13.3%; P < .0001). Both all-cause and aorta-related mortality through 2 years was higher in the reintervention group than in the primary EVAR group (21.4% vs 12.5% [P = .0003; and 4.6% vs 1% [P < .0001], respectively). On multivariate analysis, the predictors of aortic-related mortality included reintervention, renal insufficiency, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, underweight body mass index, increasing aortic diameter, and the use of brachial artery or other arterial access sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular reintervention for aortic pathology was associated with higher mortality than was primary EVAR. Reinterventions after prior OAPs were associated with higher mortality than were prior EVARs.

Percutaneous endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with monitored anesthesia care decreases operative time but not pulmonary complications

OBJECTIVES

To report our experience and compare the results of percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (PEVAR) performed under monitored anesthesia care (MAC) to PEVAR under general anesthesia (GA).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent non-emergency endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) was completed. Patients were excluded if they had a complex repair, including fenestrated, branched, or parallel endografting. Demographics, operative data, 30-day mortality/morbidity and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 159 patients were identified with a median age of 69. 115 patients had PEVAR, 45 (39.1%) PEVAR MAC and 70 (60.9%) PEVAR GA. PEVAR MAC compared to PEVAR GA had decreased operative time (106 vs. 134 min, P < 0.001), time in the operating room (163 vs. 245 min, P = 0.016), and estimated blood loss (EBL) (115 vs. 176 mL P = 0.012). There was no statistically significant difference in the hospital length of stay (LOS) (1.9 vs. 2.7 days, P = 0.133), and post-operative complications including pulmonary (2.2 vs. 2.9%, P = 0.835). Forty-four patients had EVAR with a femoral cutdown (FC), including 14 PEVAR conversions. PEVAR conversion was associated with higher EBL (543 vs. 323 mL, P = 0.03), operative time (230 vs. 178 min, P = 0.01), and operating room time (307 vs. 275 min, P = 0.01) compared to planned EVAR with FC.

CONCLUSIONS

PEVAR under MAC is associated with shorter time in the operating room compared to PEVAR under GA. PEVAR under MAC does however not decrease overall morbidities, including postoperative pulmonary complications.

Lateral Axillary Exposure for Antegrade Access during Endovascular Repair of Complex Abdominal Aortic and Thoracoabdominal Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

During endovascular treatment of pararenal aortic aneurysms (PAA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA), our antegrade vascular access of choice is a lateral axillary exposure (LAE). We directly access the axillary artery with multiple sheaths followed by primary closure of the axillary artery at case completion. The aim of this study is to describe our technique and to report our results with this approach.

METHODS

This study is a single-institution, retrospective review of 53 patients who were treated with parallel grafts for endovascular repair of PAA and TAAA from 2006 to 2018. The aortic repairs requiring LAE included: 9 cases of endo-leaks from prior endovascular repair, 20 TAAAs, and 24 PAAs. The axillary artery was exposed with a vertical axillary skin incision followed by retraction of the lateral border of the pectoralis major to expose the axillary artery distal to the pectoralis minor. A 5-French (F) through 12F sheaths were used to directly access the axillary artery for delivery of endovascular devices.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixty reno-visceral stents were delivered through 125 axillary sheaths in an antegrade fashion to 114 arteries without intraoperative complications or technical failures. Two postoperative complications included an access-site hematoma managed conservatively (1.9%) and a left brachial vein thrombosis treated with anticoagulation (1.9%). There were no cases of cerebrovascular or peripheral neurologic events, upper extremity ischemia, or reoperation related to LAE.

CONCLUSIONS

LAE is a valid approach for upper extremity access during the endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysms requiring simultaneous delivery of multiple reno-visceral devices. It does not require the use of a prosthetic conduit. There were no neurologic events or upper extremity ischemia in our series.

Comparison between Totally Percutaneous Approach and Femoral Artery Cut-Down in Endovascular Aortic Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in a Single Hospital

PURPOSE

To evaluate the short-term outcome of totally percutaneous endovascular aortic repair (pEVAR) of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) compared with femoral cut-down endovascular aortic repair (cEVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical records of patients with ruptured AAAs that underwent EVAR between March 2010 and April 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic information, preoperative vital signs, preoperative laboratory data, method of anesthesia, procedure duration, aneurysm morphology, brand of device used, length of hospital stay, access complications, and short-term outcomes were recorded. Univariate as well as multivariate logistic regression was used to identify predictors of 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Among 77 patients with ruptured AAAs, 17 (22.1%) received cEVAR and 60 (77.9%) received pEVAR. Significant differences in the procedure time (P = 0.004), method of anesthesia (P = 0.040), and 30-day mortality (P = 0.037) were detected between the cEVAR and pEVAR groups. Local anesthesia plus intravenous general anesthesia (odds ratio = 0.141, P = 0.018) was an independent factor associated with 30-day mortality and local anesthesia was better than general anesthesia for 24-hr mortality (P = 0.001) and 30-day mortality (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

In patients with ruptured AAAs, pEVAR procedures took less time than cEVAR procedures, but the length of hospital stay did not differ significantly. The 30-day mortality rate was lower with pEVAR than with cEVAR. Local anesthesia may be the key factor in EVAR to improved technical and clinical success.

Influence of Anesthetic Techniques on Perioperative Outcomes after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to explore the influence of anesthetic techniques on perioperative outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in a Chinese population.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed in patients after elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA at our single center. Patients were classified into general anesthesia (GA), regional anesthesia (RA), and local anesthesia (LA) groups. The primary outcomes (30-day mortality and morbidity) and secondary outcomes [procedure time, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and length of hospital stay (LOS)] were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

From January 2006 to December 2015, 486 consecutive patients underwent elective EVAR at our center. GA was used in 155 patients (31.9%), RA in 56 (11.5%), and LA in 275 (56.6%). The GA patients had fewer respiratory comorbidities, shorter and more angulated proximal necks, and more concomitant iliac aneurysms. LA during EVAR was significantly associated with a shorter procedure time (GA, P < 0.001; RA, P < 0.001) and shorter LOS (GA, P = 0.002; RA, P = 0.001), but a higher MAP (GA, P < 0.001; RA, P < 0.001) compared with GA and RA. LA was associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiac (odds ratio (OR) 4.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-15.04), pulmonary (OR 5.37, 95% CI 1.58-18.23), and systemic complications (OR 4.15, 95% CI 1.85-9.33) compared with GA. RA was also associated with a decreased risk of systemic complications (OR 4.74, 95% CI 1.19-18.92) compared with GA. There was no difference in the 30-day mortality, neurologic complications, renal complications, and intraoperative extra procedures among the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Anesthetic techniques for EVAR have no influence on the 30-day mortality. LA for EVAR appears to be beneficial concerning the procedure time, LOS, and 30-day systemic complications for patients after elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA in the Chinese population.

Hemostasis after percutaneous transfemoral access: A protocol for systematic review

BACKGROUND

Access site hemostasis after percutaneous procedures done in the catheterization laboratory still needs to be better studied in relation to such aspects as the different results achieved with different hemostasis strategies, the impact of different introducer sheath sizes, and arterial versus venous access. The objective of this review is to synthesize the available scientific evidence regarding different techniques for hemostasis of femoral access sites after percutaneous diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

METHODS

This review is being reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). The primary outcomes will include the following vascular complications: hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, bleeding, minor, and major vascular complications. The secondary outcomes will include the following: time to hemostasis, repetition of manual compression, and device failure. A structured strategy will be used to search the PubMed/ MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and CENTRAL databases. In addition, a handsearch of the reference lists of selected studies will be conducted. The ERIC research database will be queried for the gray literature and ClinicalTrials.gov, for potential results not yet published in indexed journals. Two reviewers will independently screen citations and abstracts, identify full-text articles for inclusion, extract data, and appraise the quality and risk of bias of included studies. If possible, a meta-analysis will be carried out. All estimations will be made using Review Manager 5.3. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed by considering the I2 proxy, accompanied with qualitative indicators such as differences in procedures, interventions, and outcomes among the studies. If synthesis proves inappropriate, a narrative review will be undertaken.

RESULTS

This protocol adheres to the PRISMA-P guideline to ensure clarity and completeness of reporting at all phases of the systematic review.

CONCLUSION

This study will provide synthesized information on different methods used to achieve hemostasis after femoral access.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval number CAAE 19713219700005327. The results of the systematic review will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed journal and through conference presentations.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019140794.

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.

"Modern Endovascular Therapy"

INTRODUCTION

The past 25 years have been witness to a revolution in how vascular care is delivered. The majority of arterial and venous interventions have converted from open surgery to minimally invasive percutaneous endovascular procedures.

METHODS

This surgical innovations symposium article reviews current endovascular therapy in multiple vascular beds with a primary focus on carotid artery occlusive disease, aortic pathologies, and lower extremity arterial occlusive disease. Mesenteric arterial occlusive disease and lower extremity venous endovascular therapies are also briefly discussed. Indications for intervention, treatment examples and outcomes analysis are presented. While not reviewed in this article, endovascular therapy has also become first line in the treatment of coronary artery disease, chronic mesenteric arterial occlusive disease, superficial venous reflux, central vein occlusion, and acute venous thrombus intervention when indicated.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular therapies are used in all vascular beds to treat the full spectrum of vascular pathologies. Aneurysm disease, atherosclerotic arterial occlusive disease, acute arterial and venous thrombosis, ongoing hemorrhage, and venous reflux are among the issues which can be addressed by endovascular means. The minimally invasive nature of endovascular treatments in what is largely a very co-morbid patient cohort is an attractive method of avoiding major procedural related morbidity and mortality.

Endovascular Treatment of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Since its inception in the 1990s, endovascular aortic repair has quickly replaced traditional open aortic repair (OAR) as the most common method for elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). After numerous iterations and failures of different endografts, the technology has undergone dramatic improvements with evidence pointing to this technology serving as a safe and durable modality, albeit with the requirement of routine surveillance. Not surprisingly, the ability to treat patients with AAAs with minimally invasive technology that could theoretically mitigate some of the risks associated with OAR, such as aortic cross clamping and significant blood loss, was also adopted in patients with ruptured AAAs and is now the preferred treatment method if anatomically feasible.

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.

Regional Variation in Usage of Ultrasound-Guided Femoral Access in the Vascular Quality Initiative

BACKGROUND

Access site complications are among the most common complications following peripheral vascular interventions. Previous studies have demonstrated a reduced rate of complications with ultrasound-guided vascular access (UGVA). The objective of this study is to evaluate the regional use of UGVA within the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI).

METHODS

The VQI peripheral intervention module between 2010 and 2018 was evaluated. Regional ID was used to compare distribution of ultrasound usage. Regions were grouped into terciles based on the rate of ultrasound use. Patients were categorized based on type of access. Primary outcome was use of ultrasound across regions. Secondary outcomes were access site complications.

RESULTS

Over 43,000 cases across the 18 VQI regions were evaluated. The average rate of ultrasound usage was 71% across the regions with a wide variation (range 38-97%). There is a significant difference in utilization among the top third (87%), middle third (79%), and bottom third (58%) (P < 0.001). Average sheath size was similar across all 3 groups. A higher use of ultrasound-guided access was associated with significantly fewer access site complications (top third 1.96% vs. bottom third 3.04%, P < 0.001), the most significant of which was a decreased rate of access site hematoma (top third 1.37% vs. bottom third 2.35%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to evaluate ultrasound-guided access across VQI regions. Our results demonstrate that despite strong evidence supporting the utilization of UGVA, there remains a wide variation in ultrasound usage across VQI regions. This is also the first study to show that the prevalence of ultrasound use in peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) is inversely related to access site complications. Given all of the data supporting the usage of UGVA across numerous specialties, our findings encourage the consideration of an ultrasound-first approach for vascular access in PVI and the implementation of targeted strategies and evidence-based guidelines to enhance UGVA utilization in PVI.

Perclose Proglide™ for vascular closure

In the past 20 years, numerous percutaneous vascular closure devices have been tested and compared with manual compression and to surgical cut-down. The suture-mediated closure device Perclose ProGlide™ system (Abbott Vascular, CA, USA) emerged as a safe and effective alternative for many procedures requiring either small or large bore vascular accesses. In this review, we will discuss the characteristics of this vascular closure device and the main studies that proved its potential to reduce vascular complications, time to deambulation, time to discharge and patient discomfort.

The long-term implications of access complications during endovascular aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Access issues are one of the most common complications of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). However, contemporary rates as well as risk factors for complications and the subsequent impact of access complications on mortality are poorly described.

METHODS

We studied all EVAR for intact abdominal aortic aneurysms without prior aortic surgery in the Vascular Quality Initiative between 2011 and 2018. We studied factors associated with access complications (thrombosis, embolus, wound infection, hematoma, and conversion to cutdown), as well as the interaction with female sex and the impact on survival using multilevel logistic regression and propensity weighting. Multiple imputation was used for missing data.

RESULTS

There were 33,951 EVAR during the study period (91% elective, 9% symptomatic); most cases (70%) involved an attempt at percutaneous access on at least one side, with 30% bilateral cutdowns and 0.1% iliac conduits. There were 1553 patients (4.6%) who experienced at least one access complication. Access complications were almost twice as common in female patients (7.5% vs 3.9%; P < .001). The factors associated with access complications included female sex (odds ratio [OR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-3.6; P < .001), age (OR, 1.05 per 5 years; 95% CI, 1.02-1.1; P < .01), aortouni-iliac device (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3; P < .01), smoking (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7; P < .01), body mass index of less than 16 (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.5; P = .001), dual antiplatelet therapy (1.3; 95% CI, 1.02-1.6 P = .03), prior infrainguinal bypass (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.7; P < .01), and beta blocker use (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.03-1.4; P = .02). Conversion from percutaneous access to open cutdown was associated with higher rates of complications than planned open cutdown (8.6% vs 2.9%; P < .001). In propensity-weighted analysis, percutaneous access was associated with significantly lower odds of access complications in women (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.96; P = .03). Patients who experienced an access complication had more than four times the odds of perioperative death (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.5-7.1; P < .001), and a 60% higher risk of long-term mortality (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1; P = .001). In addition to death, patients with access site complications had higher rates of other major complications, including reoperation during the index hospitalization (19% vs 1.2%; P < .001), myocardial infarction (3.5% vs 0.7%; P < .001), stroke (0.8% vs 0.2%; P < .001), acute kidney injury (12% vs 3%; P < .001), and reintubation (5.7% vs 0.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although access complications are infrequent in the current era, they are associated with both perioperative and long-term morbidity and mortality. Female patients in particular are at high risk of access complications, but may benefit from percutaneous access.

Effect of obesity on radiation exposure, quality of life scores, and outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of obesity on procedural metrics, radiation exposure, quality of life (QOL), and clinical outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data from 334 patients (236 men; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) enrolled in a prospective nonrandomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR from 2013 to 2019. The patients were classified using the body mass index (BMI) as obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m²) or nonobese (BMI <30 kg/m²). QOL questionnaires (short-form 36-item questionnaire) and imaging studies were obtained preoperatively and at 2 months and 6 months postoperatively, and annually thereafter. The procedures were performed using two different fixed imaging systems. The end points included procedural metrics (ie, total operative time, fluoroscopic time, contrast volume), radiation exposure, technical success, 30-day mortality, and major adverse events, QOL changes, freedom from target vessel instability, freedom from reintervention, and patient survival.

RESULTS

The aneurysm extent was a pararenal aortic aneurysm in 117 patients (35%) and a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm in 217 patients (65%). Both groups had similar demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, and aneurysm extent, except for a greater incidence of hyperlipidemia and diabetes among the obese patients (P < .05). No significant differences were found in the procedural metrics or intraprocedural complications between the groups, except that the obese patients had greater radiation exposure than the nonobese patients (mean, 2.5 vs 1.6 Gy; P < .001), with the highest radiation exposure in those obese patients who had undergone the procedure using system 1 (fusion alone) instead of system 2 (fusion and digital zoom; mean, 4.1 vs 1.5 Gy; P < .001). Three patients had died within 30 days (0.8%), with no difference in mortality or major adverse events between the groups. The mental QOL scores had improved in the obese group at 2 and 12 months compared with the nonobese patients, with persistently higher scores up to 3 years. At 3 years, the obese and nonobese patients had a similar incidence of freedom from target vessel instability (74% ± 6% vs 80% ± 3%; P = .99, log-rank test), freedom from reintervention (66% ± 6% vs 73% ± 4%; P = .77, log-rank test), and patient survival (83% ± 5% vs 75% ± 4%; P = .16, log-rank test).

CONCLUSIONS

FB-EVAR was performed with high technical success and low mortality and morbidity, with no significant differences between the obese and nonobese patients. The procedural metrics and outcomes were similar, with the exception of greater radiation exposure among obese patients, especially for the procedures performed using system 1 with fusion alone compared with system 2 (fusion and digital zoom). Obese patients had higher QOL mental scores at 2 and 12 months, with a similar reintervention rate, target vessel outcomes, and survival compared with nonobese patients.

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.

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Comprehensive Review

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) can be defined as an abnormal, progressive dilatation of the abdominal aorta, carrying a substantial risk for fatal aneurysmal rupture. Endovascular aneurysmal repair (EVAR) for AAA is a minimally invasive endovascular procedure that involves the placement of a bifurcated or tubular stent-graft over the AAA to exclude the aneurysm from arterial circulation. In contrast to open surgical repair, EVAR only requires a stab incision, shorter procedure time, and early recovery. Although EVAR seems to be an attractive solution with many advantages for AAA repair, there are detailed requirements and many important aspects should be understood before the procedure. In this comprehensive review, fundamental information regarding AAA and EVAR is presented.

Outcomes of Open Versus Percutaneous Access for Patients Enrolled in the GREAT Registry

BACKGROUND

Arterial access and device delivery in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) have evolved from open femoral or iliac artery exposure to selective percutaneous arterial access. Although regional application of percutaneous access for these 2 procedures varies widely, the use of this technique continues to increase. Currently, differences in the use of percutaneous access between EVAR and TEVAR have not been well explored. The Gore Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) registry collected relevant data for evaluation of these issues and the comparative results between open and percutaneous approaches in regard to complication rates and length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

This study was performed via a retrospective review of patients from the GREAT registry (Clinicaltrials.gov no. NCT01658787). The primary variable of this study was access site complications including postoperative hematoma, vessel dissection, and pseudoaneurysm. Patients were categorized by abdominal (EVAR) and thoracic (TEVAR) aortic procedures using percutaneous-only, cutdown-only, and combined vascular access techniques for a total of 6 groups. Standard statistical methodology was used to perform single-variable and multivariable analysis of a variety of covariates including LOS, geographical location of procedure, procedural success rate, and access sheath size.

RESULTS

Of 4,781 patients from the GREAT registry, 3,837 (80.3%) underwent EVAR and 944 (19.7%) underwent TEVAR with percutaneous-only access techniques being used in 2,017 (42.2%) and cutdown-only in 2,446 (51.2%). There was variable application of percutaneous access by geographic region with Australia and New Zealand using this technique more frequently and Brazil using percutaneous access the least. No significant difference in the rate of access site complications was detected between the 6 groups of patients in the study; however, significantly lower rates of access site complications were associated with percutaneous-only compared with both cutdown-only and combined techniques (P = 0.03). In addition, associated with significantly higher rates of access site complications was longer LOS (P < 0.01). Average LOS was 5.2 days and was higher in the TEVAR group (10.1 days) than that in EVAR (4.0 days, P < 0.05). Increased sheath size does not appear to increase the risk of access site complication.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference found in the complication rate between percutaneous and cutdown access techniques. This analysis demonstrates that percutaneous-only access is safe, has low complication rates, and has lower LOS compared with open access or combined access techniques.

A contemporary assessment of devices for Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA): resource-specific options per level of care

PURPOSE

Use of Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) as adjunct for temporary hemorrhage control in patients with exsanguinating torso hemorrhage is increasing. Characteristics of aortic occlusion balloons (AOB) are diverse and evolving as efforts are made to improve the technology. It is important to select a device that fits the requirements of the medical situation to minimize the risk of failure and complications. The aim of this study is to appraise guidance in the choice of an AOB in a specific situation.

METHODS

We assessed 29 AOB for differences and outline possible advantages and disadvantages of each. Bending stiffness was measured with a three-point bending device.

RESULTS

Diameter of the AOB ranged from 6 (ER-REBOA™) to 10 (Coda^®-46) French. However, some need large-bore access sheaths up to 22 French (Fogarty^®-45 and LeMaitre^®-45) or even insertion via cut-down (Equalizer™-40). Bending stiffness varied from 0.08 N/mm (± 0.008 SD; Coda^®-32) to 0.72 N/mm (± 0.024 SD; Russian prototype). Rescue Balloon™ showed kinking of the shaft at low bending pressures. The only non-compliant AOB is REBOA Balloon^®. ER-REBOA™, Fogarty^®, LeMaitre^®, REBOA Balloon^®, and Rescue Balloon™ are provided with external length marks to assist blind positioning.

CONCLUSION

In resource-limited settings, a guidewire- and fluoroscopy-free, rather stiff device, such as ER-REBOA™, Fogarty^®, and LeMaitre^®, is warranted. Of these devices, ER-REBOA™ is the only catheter compatible with seven French sheaths and specifically designed for emergency hemorrhage control. Of the over-the-wire devices, Q50^® has several features that facilitate use and reduce the risk of malplacement or vessel damage.

Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Is Associated with Higher Mortality Among Nonobese Patients and Higher Risk of Deep Wound Infections Among Obese Patients

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of obesity in the United States is increasing. The impact of obesity on outcomes after endovascular and open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is largely unknown. The purpose of this analysis was to compare the postoperative outcomes between obese and nonobese patients after these operations.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from years 2013-2015 was analyzed. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were compared between obese and nonobese patient groups. Then obese and nonobese patients were divided into 2 groups each, based on the type of surgery (endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) versus. open AAA repair), and the outcomes were compared. Then multivariant analysis was used to compare impact of operative modality on outcomes for obese and nonobese patients.

RESULTS

A total of 6,859 patients (men 80%, women 20%) underwent surgical procedures for AAA during this time period. Among these patients, 2,218 (32.3%) had body mass index (BMI) ≥30, and 4,641 (67.7%) had BMI <30. Obese patients were less likely to be > 80 years old, women, nonwhites, and smokers. Obese patients had lower mortality and higher risk of deep wound infections after surgery (P < 0.05). Among the obese patients, 83.1% underwent EVAR and 16.9% underwent open AAA repair; patients undergoing EVAR had shorter operative times, shorter length of hospital stays, and mortality (P < 0.05). Among nonobese patients, 81% underwent EVAR and 19% underwent open AAA repair. Patients undergoing EVAR had shorter duration of operation, length of hospital stay, and mortality (P < 0.05). Overall, mortality was the highest among nonobese patients undergoing open AAA repair (odds ratio (OR) 0.66, confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.99, P < 0.05). Incidence of deep wound infections was the highest among obese patients undergoing open AAA repair (OR 4.3, CI: 1.2-14.6, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Nonobese patients have high mortality after open AAA repair, and obese patients have higher incidence of deep wound infections after open AAA repair. For patients deemed appropriate anatomic candidates, EVAR should be preferred for nonobese patients to improve mortality and for obese patients to reduce the incidence of deep wound infections.

Pivotal Clinical Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of the MANTA Vascular Closure Device During Percutaneous EVAR and TEVAR Procedures

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the MANTA percutaneous vascular closure device in patients undergoing percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Materials and Methods: The SAFE MANTA Study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02908880) was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter trial in patients undergoing endovascular interventions using large-bore sheaths (transcatheter aortic valve replacement, PEVAR, or TEVAR) at 20 sites in North America. Patient selection intended to test the MANTA device in populations without morbid obesity, severe calcification, or a severely scarred femoral access area. Of the 263 patients enrolled in the primary analysis cohort, 53 (20.2%) patients (mean age 74.9±8.9 years; 41 men) underwent PEVAR (n=51) or TEVAR (n=2) procedures and form the cohort for this subgroup analysis. Per protocol a single MANTA device was deployed in all PEVAR/TEVAR cases. Results: The mean time to hemostasis in the PEVAR/TEVAR cohort was 35±91 seconds, with a median time of 19 seconds vs 24 seconds in the overall SAFE MANTA population. The MANTA device met the definition for technical success in 52 (98%) of 53 PEVAR/TEVAR cases compared with 97.7% in the overall SAFE MANTA population. One (1.9%) major complication (access-site stenosis) occurred in this subgroup compared to 14 (5.3%) events in the SAFE population. In the PEVAR/TEVAR group, 1 pseudoaneurysm was noted prior to discharge, another at 30-day follow-up, and one at 60 days. One (1.9%) of the 3 minor pseudoaneurysms was treated with ultrasound-guided compression and the other 2 required no treatment. Conclusion: The MANTA device demonstrated a short time to hemostasis and low complication rates compared with published literature results of other percutaneous closure devices. Time to hemostasis and complication rates were comparable between the PEVAR/TEVAR patients and the full SAFE MANTA study cohort. The MANTA device provides reliable closure with a single percutaneous device for PEVAR/TEVAR procedures.

Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Most abdominal aortic aneurysms are treated with endovascular repair (EVAR) in current practice. EVAR has lower periprocedural mortality and morbidity than open surgical repair. Aneurysm neck morphology, iliac anatomy, and access vessel anatomy need careful assessment for the successful performance of EVAR. Regular and long-term follow-up with imaging is mandatory after EVAR, and patients who are less likely to comply are less favorable EVAR candidates. Endoleaks are the most frequent complication of EVAR. Most can be managed with transcatheter or endovascular means. Evolving technology and techniques are allowing more patients to be treated with EVAR with better long-term outcomes.

Index and follow-up costs of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair from the Endurant Stent Graft System Post Approval Study (ENGAGE PAS)

OBJECTIVE

Trials for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) report lower perioperative mortality and morbidity, but also higher costs compared with open repair. However, few studies have examined the subsequent cost of follow-up evaluations and interventions. Therefore, we present the index and 5-year follow-up costs of EVAR from the Endurant Stent Graft System Post Approval Study.

METHODS

From August 2011 to June 2012, 178 patients were enrolled in the Endurant Stent Graft System Post Approval Study de novo cohort and treated with the Medtronic Endurant stent graft system (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, Calif), of whom 171 (96%) consented for inclusion in the economic analysis and 177 participated in the quality-of-life (QOL) assessment over a 5-year follow-up period. Cost data for the index and follow-up hospitalizations were tabulated directly from hospital bills and categorized by Uniform Billing codes. Surgeon costs were calculated by Current Procedural Terminology codes for each intervention. Current Procedural Terminology codes were also used to calculate imaging and clinic follow-up reimbursement as surrogate to cost based on year-specific Medicare payment rates. Additionally, we compared aneurysm-related versus nonaneurysm-related subsequent hospitalization costs and report EuroQol 5D QOL dimensions.

RESULTS

The mean hospital cost per person for the index EVAR was $45,304 (interquartile range [IQR], $25,932-$44,784). The largest contributor to the overall cost was operating room supplies, which accounted for 50% of the total cost at a mean of $22,849 per person. One hundred patients had 233 additional post index admission inpatient admissions; however, only 32 readmissions (14%) were aneurysm related, with a median cost of $13,119 (IQR, $4570-$24,153) compared with a nonaneurysm-related median cost of $6609 (IQR, $1244-$26,466). Additionally, 32 patients were admitted a total of 37 times for additional procedures after index admission, of which 14 (38%) were aneurysm-related. The median cost of hospitalization for aneurysm-related subsequent intervention was $22,023 (IQR, $13,177-$47,752), compared with a median nonaneurysm-related subsequent intervention cost of $19,007 (IQR, $8708-$33,301). After the initial 30-day visit, outpatient follow-up imaging reimbursement averaged $550 per person per year ($475 for computed tomography scans, $75 for the abdomen), whereas annual office visits averaged $107 per person per year, for a total follow-up reimbursement of $657 per person per year. There were no significant differences in the five EuroQol 5D QOL dimensions at each follow-up compared with baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Costs associated with index EVAR are driven primarily by cost of operating room supplies, including graft components. Subsequent admissions are largely not aneurysm related; however, cost of aneurysm-related hospitalizations is higher than for nonaneurysm admissions. These data will serve as a baseline for comparison with open repair and other devices.

Clinical and economic outcomes of ProGlide compared with surgical repair of large bore arterial access

Aim: This study compared real-world complication rates, hospitalization duration and costs, among patients undergoing arterial repair using the Perclose ProGlide (ProGlide) versus surgical cutdown (Cutdown). Materials & methods: Retrospective study of matched patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement/repair, endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, thoracic endovascular aortic repair or balloon aortic valvuloplasty with arterial repair by either ProGlide or Cutdown between 1 January 2013 and 24 April 2017. Results: Infections and blood transfusions were lower in the ProGlide cohort. Patients in the ProGlide cohort had a 42.5% shorter index hospitalization, which corresponded to US$14,687 lower costs. Conclusion: The use of ProGlide for arterial repair was associated with significantly lower transfusion rates, shorter index hospitalization and lower hospitalization costs compared with surgical cutdown.

Five-year results of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with the Ovation abdominal stent graft

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been rigorously compared with open repair for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms in randomized trials and observational studies, but a comparison of individual devices is lacking, and single-device registries and trials are limited by small sample size. Here we report a descriptive analysis of the Effectiveness of Custom Seal with Ovation: Review of the Evidence (ENCORE) database, pooled results of multiple studies evaluating the midterm results of EVAR with the Ovation Abdominal Stent Graft Platform.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of the ENCORE database, a cohort of patients undergoing EVAR with the Ovation platform composed of pooled, prospectively collected data from 1296 patients from five clinical trials and the prospectively maintained European Union Post-Market Registry. The primary outcomes were 5-year rates of type IA and type I or III endoleak. Secondary outcomes included were 30-day mortality, 30-day major adverse event, technical success (successful deployment of the aortic body and iliac limbs), as well as 5-year survival, and freedom from aneurysm-related mortality, type II endoleak, device-related intervention, aneurysm rupture, sac expansion, and conversion to open repair.

RESULTS

A total of 1296 patients were included in the analysis. The average age was 73 ± 8 years and 81% of patients were male. Fifty percent of patients had complex aortic anatomy, (neck length <10 mm, neck diameter >28 mm, neck angle >60°, reverse neck taper >10%, distal common iliac artery diameter <10 mm, or external iliac artery diameter <6 mm). Technical success was 99.7%. Thirty-day mortality was 0.3%, 30-day rate of major adverse event was 1.6%, and polymer leak rate was 0.2%. Freedom from type IA endoleak at 1, 3, and 5 years was 97.6%, 97.1%, and 95.8%, respectively; type I or III endoleak at 1, 3, and 5 years was 96.9%, 95.7%, and 94.0%, respectively. Freedom from device-related reintervention at 1, 3, and 5 years was 96.2%, 94.4%, and 92.4% and primary freedom from sac expansion was 97.0% at 1 year, 90.3% at 3 years, and 84.9% at 5 years. Freedom from all-cause mortality and aneurysm-related mortality at 5 years were 78.9% and 99.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of the ENCORE database demonstrates that EVAR with the Ovation platform has favorable midterm durability evidenced by successful aneurysm exclusion and 5-year freedom from aneurysm-related mortality.