Late open conversion after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

RETROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY ON EVAR OPEN SURGICAL CONVERSION: FOCUS ON ENDOLEAKS WRONG PRE OPERATIVE CATEGORISATION

INTRODUCTION

Late open conversion (LOC) following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a rare complication with a high morbidity and mortality and is often proposed as the last line of treatment after failure of endovascular reintervention of any type. This study aimed to highlights the limitations of EVAR follow-up imaging in characterizing endoleaks, which may contribute to the failure of endovascular reinterventions and lead to LOC.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study recruited all EVAR implanted in Amiens University Hospital (France) between January 2008 and December 2022. Elective LOC was defined as surgical conversion > 1 month after EVAR. The primary endpoint was the rate of wrong categorisation of endoleaks by follow-up exams before LOC. Secondary endpoints were the morbidity and the mortality associated with LOC.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and eight EVAR were performed in our institution, 30 required elective LOC. Twenty-five of them were treated for sac enlargement due to an endoleak (83,3%) (all types). Wrong categorisation of the endoleak was noted in 13 of the patients (52.2%). Twelve of these re-categorisations involved the preoperative diagnosis of a type II endoleaks (92.3%). The change in categorisation in 7 out of 12 cases (58%) was in favor of a type I endoleak, other re-categorisation included 1 Type III (8%), 4 Types IV (33%). One patient died during 30 days post-operative period and 7 patients (28%) presented a major complication, the median length of stay was 13 days (IQR 9-21).

CONCLUSION

Routine follow-up examinations such as angioscanner and contrast Doppler ultrasound appear to be limited in their ability to categorise the type of persistent endoleak, which may increase the number of patients requiring LOC. New precision diagnostic imaging techniques, such as dynamic examinations, need to be developed to limit the need for LOC.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Late Open Abdominal Aneurysm Reconstruction and Graft Salvage in a Patient With Persistent Endoleak Type II Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

This study highlights a case of late open conversion repair (OCR) for persistent Type II endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), presenting a 78-year-old male with a history of EVAR for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. Despite conservative management of the initial endoleak, the aneurysm sac's progressive growth necessitated open reconstruction to salvage the graft. Successful postoperative outcomes emphasize the critical need for meticulous intervention strategies and surveillance in managing persistent Type II endoleaks. This case underlines the importance of a tailored approach, leveraging both endovascular and open surgical techniques, to optimize long-term outcomes and prevent aneurysm rupture in complex cases.

Endotension Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Retrospective Review of Treatment and Clinical Outcome

Purpose

: Endotension is a rare late complication characterized by an increase in sac size without any type of endoleak following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Due to its rarity, few studies have demonstrated the mechanism behind and the management of endotension. In this study, we aimed to better understand the treatment and the long-term outcome of endotension in a single-center cohort.

Materials and Methods

: This study was designed for a retrospective review of the patients diagnosed with endotension between January 2006 and December 2017. The study patients were categorized into two groups (primary versus secondary) based on the presence of any type of endoleak before the diagnosis of endotension. We collected data related to endotension treatment, intraoperative findings, and long-term outcomes.

Results

: In a cohort of 15 patients diagnosed with endotension following EVAR, eight were classified into the primary endotension (PE) group without prior endoleak, and seven exhibited secondary endotension (SE). Among the eight PE patients, endovascular intervention for a preemptive purpose was conducted in six patients; however, three (50%) showed continuous sac expansion and finally received open conversion. Overall, eight patients (five in PE and three in SE) underwent open conversion, and one (12.5%) presented with an undetected endoleak during the operative findings. Postoperative morbidity was observed in three patients with no operative mortality.

Conclusion

: Endotension can be managed initially through simple observation for changes on serial images, along with preemptive endovascular intervention. However, surgical intervention should be considered for patients with specific indications including continuous aneurysm sac enlargement, presence of symptoms, suspicions of migration of stent-graft with endoleak, and infection.

Multicenter Comparative Analysis of Late Open Conversion in Patients With Adherence and Nonadherence to Instructions for Use Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

The widespread adoption of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) as preferred treatment modality for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has enlarged the number of patients needing open surgical conversion (OSC). The relationship between adherence to Instructions For Use (IFU) and EVAR long-term outcomes remains controversial. The aim of this study is to compare preoperative differences and postoperative outcomes between EVAR patients not adjusted to IFU and adjusted to IFU who underwent OSC.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study reviewed 33 explanted EVARs between January 2003 and December 2019 at 14 Vascular Units. Patients were included if OSC occurred >30 days after implantation and excluded if explantation was performed to treat an endograft infection, aortic dissection, or traumatic transections. Variables analyzed included baseline characteristics, adherence to IFU, implant and explant procedural details, secondary reinterventions, and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifteen explanted patients (15/33, 45.5%) were identified not accomplished to IFU (out-IFU) at initial EVAR vs 18 explanted patients adjusted (in-IFU). During follow-up, a mean of 1.73±1.2 secondary reinterventions were performed, with more type I endoleaks treated in the subgroup out-IFU: 16.7% vs 6.3% in-IFU patients and more type III endoleaks (8.3% vs 0%). Patients out-IFU had shorter mean interval from implant to explant: 47.60±28.8 months vs 71.17±48. Type II endoleak was the most frequent indication for explantation. Low-flow endoleaks (types II, IV, V) account for 44% of indications for OSC in subgroup of patients in-IFU, compared with 13.3% in patients out-IFU and high-flow endoleaks (types I and III) were the main indication for patients out-IFU (33.3% vs 16.7% in-IFU). Total endograft explantation was performed in 57.5% of cases (19/33) and more suprarenal clamping was required in the subgroup out-IFU. Overall, 30-day mortality rate was 12.1% (4/33): 20% for patients out-IFU and 5.6% in-IFU.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, type II endoleak is the most common indication for conversion and differences have been found between patients treated outside IFU with explantation taking place earlier during follow-up, mainly due to high-flow endoleaks and with higher mortality in comparison with patients adjusted to IFU. Ongoing research is required to delve into these differences.

Risk factors for readmission after open abdominal aortic aneurysms repair and its outcome in chronic kidney disease patients

OBJECTIVE

Readmission after vascular procedures is a burden to hospitals and the Medicare system. Therefore, identifying risk factors leading to readmission is vital. We examined the frequency of and risk factors for 30-day readmission after open aneurysm repair (OAR) and explored post-operative outcomes with special attention for those with preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

Patients who underwent OAR were identified in the National Readmission Database (2016-2018). Demographic information and comorbidities were collected. Patients readmitted within 30 days after their index hospitalization were identified and compared to patients without readmission records.

RESULTS

A total of 5090 patients underwent OAR during the study timeframe with 488 patients (9.6%) were readmitted within 30 days. Females were more readmitted than males (F = 11.1% vs M = 9.0%, P < 0.001). Readmitted patients had more comorbidities (median ECI 12, P < 0.05), were on Medicare (73.7%, P < 0.001), had higher surgery admission cost ($146,844, P < 0.001), longer length of stay (8 days, P < 0.001), and were discharged to a lower level care facility (62.7%, P < 0.001). Comorbidities that predisposed patients for readmission include: peripheral arterial disease (OR 2.15, P < 0.01), asthma (OR 1.87, P < 0.01), chronic heart failure (OR 1.74, P < 0.05). On readmission visit, acute renal failure (23.8%) was the most common diagnosis, while intestinal surgery (13.7%) was the most common procedure. Patients with CKD (n = 968, 18.9% of total population) had double the mortality rate compared to non-CKD patients on surgery admission (10.4%, P < 0.001) and readmission (10.1%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Certain factors were noted to increase readmission rate, special attention need to be paid when dealing with such group of patients requiring OAR. Vascular surgeons should meticulously weigh benefits and risks when considering OAR in patients with CKD who are not a candidate for endovascular repair, and optimize their kidney function before considering such approach.

A Meta-Analysis of Mid-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Sealing

BACKGROUND-AIM

Several studies have been published showing conflicting results on the outcome after endovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS). The aim of the present study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published evidence to assess the efficacy of EVAS in the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

METHODS

An electronic search of the English medical literature, from 2010 to March 2021, was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to find studies relevant to outcome after EVAS.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 12 articles published between 2011 and 2021, including 1440 patients. In total, 79.3% of the included patients underwent aneurysm treatment according to the instructions for use. Technical success was 98.8%. Overall, 30-day mortality was 1.3%. Procedure-related complications were reported in 4% of the cohort. During median follow-up of 28.1 months (range 9-72 months), the pooled estimate of endoleak type I, migration and reinterventions was 16% (95% confidence interval [CI]=7-25), 16% (95% CI=9-23), and 19% (95% CI=11-28), respectively. In a sub-analysis, 7 studies (703 patients) reported outcome with a mean follow-up of more than 2 years (range 24-72 months). In these studies, the pooled estimate of endoleak type I, migration, and reinterventions was 25% (95% CI=13-38), 22% (95% CI=19-26), and 27% (95% CI=21-33), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Patients who have been treated with EVAS are in high risk for reintervention especially beyond 2 years following implantation. Close surveillance for patients treated with EVAS is mandatory.

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

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

Mechanism of sac expansion without evident endoleak analyzed with X ray phase-contrast tomography

Objective

Synchrotron radiation-based X ray phase-contrast tomography (XPCT) was used in this study to evaluate abdominal aorta specimens from patients with sac expansion without evidence of an endoleak (endotension) following endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). The aim of this study was to analyze the morphologic structure of the aortic wall in patients with this condition and to establish the cause of the endotension.

Methods

Human aortic specimens of the abdominal aorta were obtained during open repair, fixed with formalin, and analyzed among three groups. Group A was specimens from open abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs (n = 7). Group E was specimens from sac expansion without an evident endoleak after EVAR (n = 7). Group N was specimens from non-aneurysmal "normal" cadaveric abdominal aortas (n = 5). Using XPCT (effective voxel size, 12.5 μm; density resolution, 1 mg/cm3), we measured the density of the tunica media (TM) in six regions of each sample. Then, any changes to the elastic lamina and the vasa vasorum were analyzed pathologically. The specimens were immunohistochemically examined with anti-CD31 and vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies.

Results

The time from EVAR to open aortic repair was 64.2 ± 7.2 months. There were significant differences in the thickness of the TM among three groups: 0.98 ± 0.03 mm in Group N; 0.31 ± 0.01 mm in Group A; and 0.15 ± 0.03 mm in Group E (P < .005). There were significant differences in the TM density among the groups: 1.087 ± 0.004 g/cm3 in Group N; 1.070 ± 0.001 g/cm3 in Group A; and 1.062 ± 0.007 g/cm3 in Group E (P < .005). Differences in the thickness and density of the TM correlated with the thickness of the elastic lamina; in Group N, uniform high-density elastic fibers were observed in the TM. By contrast, a thinning of the elastic lamina in the TM was observed in Group A. A marked thinness and loss of elastic fibers was observed in Group E. CD31 immunostaining revealed that the vasa vasorum was localized in the adventitia and inside the outer third of the TM in Group N, and in the middle of the TM in Group A. In Group E, the vasa vasorum advanced up to the intima with vascular endothelial growth factor-positive cells in the intimal section.

Conclusions

XPCT could be used to demonstrate the densitometric property of the aortic aneurysmal wall after EVAR. We confirmed that the deformation process that occurs in the sac expansion after EVAR without evidence of an endoleak could be explained by hypoxia in the aortic wall.

Complex endoleak treatment after failed endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has created new possibilities for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), and in recent years it has become tremendously popular. Use of EVAR in selected groups of patients allows mortality and morbidity to be reduced in comparison to open repair. However, complications such as endoleaks (ELs) can be of great concern and warrant urgent therapy to prevent sac rupture.

CASE PRESENTATION

The case report presents urgent endovascular treatment of a high-risk type IA EL in a polymorbid 68-year-old patient 7 years after primary EVAR. The principle of treatment was parallel implantation of the proximal SG extension with the renal SG into the right renal artery (chimney technique). The subsequent type II collateral EL was treated by direct transabdominal AAA sac puncture and thrombin embolization.

CONCLUSION

EL can be a cause for urgent intervention, but specific anatomic features often require specialized SG types which are not readily available. The chimney technique allows the use of immediately available stent grafts to address endoleak in the setting of impending abdominal aneurysm rupture.

Clinical presentation, operative management, and long-term outcomes of rupture after previous abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the presentation trends, intervention, and survival of patients who had been treated for late abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture (LAR) after open repair (OR) or endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data from a single-center, retrospective database for patients treated for LAR from 2000 to 2020. The end points were the 30-day mortality, major postoperative complication, and survival. The outcomes between LAR managed with EVAR (group I) vs OR were compared (group II).

RESULTS

Of 390 patients with infrarenal aortic rupture, 40 (10%) had experienced aortic rupture after prior aortic repair and comprised the LAR cohort (34 men; age 78 ± 8 years). LAR had occurred before EVAR in 30 and before OR in 10 patients. LAR was more common in the second half of the study with 32 patients after 2010. LAR after prior OR was secondary to ruptured para-anastomotic pseudoaneurysms. After initial EVAR, LAR had occurred despite reintervention in 17 patients (42%). The time to LAR was shorter after prior EVAR than after OR (6 ± 4 vs 12 ± 4 years, respectively; P = .003). Treatment for LAR was EVAR for 25 patients (63%; group I) and OR for 15 (37%, group II). LAR after initial OR was managed with endovascular salvage for 8 of 10 patients. Endovascular management was more frequent in the latter half of the study period. In group I, fenestrated repair had been used for seven patients (28%). Salvage for the remaining cases was feasible with EVAR, aortic cuffs, or limb extensions. The incidence of free rupture, time to treatment, 30-day mortality (8% vs 13%; P = .3), complications (32% vs 60%; P = .1), and disposition were similar between the two groups. Those in group I had had less blood loss (660 vs 3000 mL; P < .001) and less need for dialysis (0% vs 33%; P < .001) than those in group II. The median follow-up was 21 months (interquartile range, 6-45 months). The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival was 76%, 52%, and 41%, respectively, and was similar between groups (28 vs 22 months; P = .48). Late mortality was not related to the aorta.

CONCLUSIONS

LAR after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair has been encountered more frequently in clinical practice, likely driven by the frequency of EVAR. However, most LARs, including those after previous OR, can now be salvaged with endovascular techniques with lower morbidity and mortality.

Partial and complete explantation of aortic endografts in the modern era

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Surgical Treatment of Sac Enlargement Due to Type II Endoleaks Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

An aneurysm sac enlargement caused by type II endoleak (T2EL) following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms may cause serious complications such as rupture. Consequently, methods that preoperatively prevent or postoperatively treat T2EL have been employed. When significant aneurysm enlargement occurs due to persistent T2EL, embolization is first performed through several access points. However, although these endovascular reinterventions have a high technical success rate and are safe, their effectiveness remains questionable. When such endovascular procedures fail to stabilize sac enlargement, open surgical conversion (OSC) becomes the last-resort treatment option. We review several strategies of OSC for the repair of T2EL following EVAR. Among the three main OSC procedures, namely, complete endograft removal, partial endograft removal, and complete endograft preservation, partial endograft removal under infrarenal clamping was considered the most appropriate owing to its less invasiveness and durability.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

A fenestrated, double-barrel technique for proximal reintervention after open or endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Objective

Proximal endovascular reintervention after prior endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) or open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OR) can be challenging due to the short distance to the visceral branches. We present a novel solution to allow the use of the commercially available ZFEN device using a double-barrel, kissing-limb technique.

Methods

Patients who underwent fenestrated repair for proximal failure after EVAR or OR were identified. The ZFEN device is deployed above the prior graft flow divider. Once the visceral branches are secured, kissing limbs are used to connect with the prior graft limbs. The distal diameter of the standard ZFEN is 24 mm, accommodating two 20 mm components according to the formula 2πD_LIMB = πD_ZFEN + 2D_ZFEN.

Results

Of 235 patients who underwent repair using ZFEN from 2012 to 2021 at a single institution, 28 were treated for proximal failure of prior repairs, with 13 treated using the double-barrel technique (8 EVAR, 5 OR). The distance from the flow divider to the lowest renal artery was 67 ± 24.4 mm (range, 39-128 mm), and the distance to the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) was 87 ± 30.5 mm (range, 60-164 mm). Technical success was 100%. Seven patients had standard ZFEN builds (2 renal small fenestrations, SMA large fen/scallop). The minimum distance to the lowest renal artery and SMA to accommodate a standard ZFEN build was 56 and 60 mm, respectively. Four patients required adjunctive snorkel grafts and two required laser fenestrations. Two patients had gutter leaks at 1 month that self-resolved; one patient developed a late type 1a endoleak. Freedom from reintervention was 90%, 72%, and 48% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively.

Conclusions

This double-barrel technique allows for distal seal of commercial ZFEN devices into prior open or endovascular repairs with good technical success. Long-term outcomes remain to be quantified.

Open Repair of a Complicated Late Endoleak Induced by Another Endoleak

A 66-year-old man had an enlarging aortic aneurysm sac after an endovascular aortic replacement procedure that had been performed at another institution 4 years previously; it was without any endoleak but was complicated by the occlusion of the left limb, requiring cross-femoral bypass. Current computed tomography revealed dilatation of the proximal neck and the right common iliac artery. A type Ib endoleak was found from the distal end of the right limb of the endograft, possibly secondary to the dilatation of the artery around it; it then pressurized and caused the dilatation of the juxtarenal aorta around the proximal landing zone and induced a concomitant type Ia endoleak. The patient was operated on owing to the risk of rupture. Pelvic ischemia was a concern during decision-making. The patient underwent removal of the endograft and replacement of a bifurcated aortoiliac and femoral graft with good outcome. Midline laparotomy and a supraceliac clamping approach enable the removal of endografts with suprarenal fixation and revascularization of internal iliac arteries. Open repair offers a definitive solution for complicated endoleaks when endovascular options could be risky and ineffective.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: JACC Focus Seminar, Part 1

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), defined by an aortic diameter >3 cm, affect >1 million people in the United States. Risk factors for AAA include male sex, family history of AAA, smoking, Caucasian ethnicity, and age. Patients with known AAA should undergo regular surveillance via ultrasonography. Medical management, including smoking cessation and blood pressure management, is recommended for asymptomatic patients who do not meet the threshold for intervention. Repair options include endovascular aortic repair and open surgical repair, with good outcomes in long-term follow-up. Men with AAA >5.5 cm and women with AAA >5.0 cm in general should undergo elective repair. Medical management, including smoking cessation and blood pressure management, is recommended for asymptomatic patients who do not meet the threshold for intervention.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Open surgical conversion and management of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after previous endovascular aneurysm repair

Introduction/Objective. The objective was to present the results and technical considerations from high-volume center when performing late open surgical conversion (LOSC) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) patients. Methods. This was a single center retrospective study. LOSC was performed whenever eventual endovascular reintervention failed, was not feasible due to hostile anatomy and unavailability of specific endograft materials, or when patient was hemodynamically unstable necessitating emergent surgery. Results. All previously implanted EVARs had bimodular configuration with suprarenal fixation. Total endograft explantation was performed in 40% of patients. Hospital mortality was 20%. Both patients who died had total endograft explantation with supraceliac clamp lasting more than 30 minutes. 30-day mortality was 30%, with one more patient who died from pulmonary embolism after hospital discharge and two hospital deaths were due to myocardial infarction. Conclusion. LOSC due to RAAA after previous EVAR carries greater mortality for the patient, suggesting multifactorial impacts on the outcome. The appropriate choice of surgical method and technical success are of ultimate importance, with total graft explantation having negative impact on patient?s survival.

Longer follow-up intervals following EVAR are safe and appropriate after marked aneurysm sac regression

BACKGROUND

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) shrinkage after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a surrogate marker for successful exclusion. Our study characterized aneurysm sac remodeling after EVAR to identify a pattern that may be associated with benign AAA behavior and would safely allow a less rigorous follow-up regimen after EVAR.

METHODS

Elective infrarenal EVARs performed between 2008 and 2011 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. AAA sac diameters using the minor axis measurement from ultrasound imaging or computer tomography angiogram imaging were compared with the baseline diameter from the 1-month postoperative computer tomography angiogram. The primary outcome was a composite of freedom from postoperative reintervention or rupture. We compared those with AAA sacs who regressed to predefined minimum diameter thresholds with those who did not. Outcomes were plotted with Kaplan-Meier curves and compared using log-rank testing and Fine-Gray regression using death as a competing risk, clustered on graft type. For patients whose AAA reached the minimum sac diameter, landmark analysis evaluated ongoing size changes including further regression and sac re-expansion.

RESULTS

A total of 540 patients (aged 75.1 ± 8.2 years; 82.0% male) underwent EVAR with an average preoperative AAA size of 55.2 ± 11.5 mm. The median postoperative follow-up was 5.3 years (interquartile range, 1.4-8.7 years) during which 64 patients underwent reintervention and 4 ruptured. AAA sac regression to ≤40 mm in diameter was associated with improved freedom from reintervention or rupture overall (log-rank, P < .01), which was maintained after controlling for the competing risk of death (P < .01). In 376 patients (70%) whose aneurysm sac remained >40 mm, 99 reinterventions were performed on 63 patients. Of 166 (31%) patients whose sac regressed to ≤40 mm, only 1 patient required a reintervention, and no one ruptured. The mean time to a diameter of ≤40 mm was 2.3 ± 1.9 years. Only eight patients (5%) developed sac re-expansion to >45 mm; all but two occurred at least 3 years after initially regressing to ≤40 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

In long-term follow-up, patients whose minimum AAA sac diameter regressed ≤40 mm after EVAR experienced a very low rate of reintervention, rupture, or sac re-expansion. Most sac re-expansion occurred at least 3 years after reaching this threshold and did not result in clinical events. Increasing follow-up frequency up to 3-year intervals once the AAA sac regresses to 40 mm would carry minimal risk of aneurysm-related morbidity.

Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair with Prevention of type 2 Endoleak by Intraoperative Aortic Side Branch Coil Embolization

OBJECTIVE

The midterm results of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) with aortic side branch coil embolization during EVAR was evaluated.

METHODS

Our center began coil embolization for all patent inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and lumbar artery (LA) with an inner diameter more than 2.0 mm during EVAR since June 2015. When four or more LA were patent, coil embolization for LA with inner diameter 2.0 mm or less was done. EVAR without aortic side branches coil embolization was performed for 59 patients prior to June 2015 (control group) and 79 patients underwent EVAR with coil embolization during EVAR (coil group). The success rate of coil embolization for IMA and LA was evaluated in coil group. The frequency of type 2 endoleak (T2EL), freedom from aneurysm sac expansion (5 mm or more) rate and the rate of the aneurysm sac shrinkage (10 mm or more) were compared between the coil and control groups. Additionally, multiple logistic regression analysis for all patients was conducted to analyze whether IMA patency and the number of patent lumbar artery at the end of EVAR were the risk factors of the aneurysm sac expansion of 5 mm or more.

RESULTS

The success rate of IMA coil embolization was 96.4% and that of LA was 74.5%. Compared to the control group, the frequency of T2EL was significantly lower in coil group at 7 days (1.3% vs. 60.4%, P <0.0001) and at 6 months (2.1% vs 38.2%, P <0.0001) after EVAR. The freedom from aneurysm sac expansion rate was significantly better in the coil group at 5 years (100% in coil group and 65.2% in control group, P = 0.002). The rate of aneurysm sac shrinkage was significantly better in coil group (15.5% vs. 2.0% at 1 year, 42.8% vs. 6.3% at 2 years and 53.4% vs. 17.8% at 3 years, p = 0.0007). The risk of aneurysm sac expansion of 5 mm or more was estimated to be 11 times greater when the IMA was patent, and 4.9 times greater when 3 or more LAs were patent at the end of EVAR.

CONCLUSION

When IMA was occluded and the number of patent LA became 2 or less by aortic side branch coil embolization during EVAR, favorable mid-term results were safely obtained and good long-term result could be expected with EVAR.

Fenestrated-Branch Endovascular Repair After Prior Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

To report the outcome of fenestrated and branch endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR-BEVAR) for asymptomatic and acute symptomatic proximal aortic pathology in patients with prior open (OSR) or endovascular (EVAR) abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair.

METHODS

This was a single centre retrospective study of consecutive patients with non-ruptured (asymptomatic and acute symptomatic) proximal aortic pathology after prior OSR or EVAR treated between December 2007 and February 2020. The primary endpoint was 30 day/in hospital mortality. Secondary endpoints were technical success, primary clinical success, and Kaplan-Meier estimates of medium term survival and freedom from re-intervention. Data are presented as median (interquartile range [IQR]). The effect of covariates on medium term survival was estimated using multivariable (Cox proportional hazards model) analysis. A p value < .05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients (83 men; median age 75 years [IQR 71 - 80 years]; median diameter 73 mm [IQR 64 - 89 mm]; 82 elective, 10 acute) underwent FEVAR-BEVAR after prior OSR (n = 47) or EVAR (n = 45). Indications for intervention were aneurysmal degeneration with or without type 1a endoleak (n = 57; four juxtarenal [JR] AAA, 21 extent II/III, 32 extent IV thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms); type 1a endoleak alone (n = 27) and to create a more durable repair after acute infrarenal EVAR (n = 8; JRAAA). In total, 348 renovisceral vessels were targeted for preservation and 324 were stent grafted. Twenty-four unstented vessels comprised one bypass, 11 scallops and six fenestrations intentionally not stent grafted, two vessels occluded before graft implantation, and four vessels occluded intra-operatively. Primary technical success was 95.6%. The thirty day mortality rate was 1.1% and one patient each (1.1%) required permanent dialysis or developed temporary spinal cord ischaemia. Early primary clinical success was 94.6%. Median follow up was 36 months (IQR 23 - 64 months). Estimated overall survival (± standard error) at one, two, and three years was 86% ± 4%, 85% ± 4%, and 70% ± 5%, respectively. Multivariable analysis did not demonstrate any independent predictors of survival. Four target vessels occluded during follow up. Nineteen patients underwent 28 late re-interventions, with almost half performed for issues arising distal to the FEVAR-BEVAR. Patients treated with a cuff were statistically significantly more likely to require distal re-intervention compared with those treated by relining (9/49 vs. 1/43, p = .018 [odds ratio 9.3, 95% confidence interval 1.2 - 423]). In patients with prior EVAR alone, this did not reach statistical significance (cuff 7/25 vs. relining 1/20, p = .059 [odds ratio 7.1, 95% confidence interval 0.8 - 350]). Estimated freedom from re-intervention at one, two, and three years was 88% ± 3%, 81% ± 4%, and 81% ± 4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

FEVAR-BEVAR after prior OSR or EVAR is associated with low peri-operative morbidity and mortality, and acceptable medium term survival and freedom from re-intervention. Treatment with a FEVAR-BEVAR cuff is associated with a higher requirement for distal re-intervention than relining of the original repair.

A rapid aneurysmal formation after late open conversion of endovascular abdominal aortic repair with complete endograft explant

Late open conversion (LOC) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Standard surgical technique of LOC has not been established. This report presents a rapid aneurysmal formation in the unreplaced infrarenal aorta after LOC with complete endograft explantation without suprarenal fixations. A 76-year-old man presented with a left common iliac artery aneurysm (CIAA), for which he underwent EVAR to embolize the left internal iliac artery. Although his aneurysmal sac size initially showed a reduction, computed tomography at the 3-year interval post-EVAR demonstrated an increased sac size. Thus, he underwent open aortic repair of the CIAA. Though the postoperative course was uneventful, the size of the unreplaced infrarenal aorta showed a significant increase one year after open conversion. Reoperation was performed, but vascular prosthesis infection occurred as a complication and the patient died on the 196th postoperative day.

Early and mid-term outcomes following open surgical conversion after failed endovascular aneurysm repair from the "Italian North-easT RegIstry of surgical Conversion AfTer Evar" (INTRICATE)

OBJECTIVE

To report the early and mid-term outcomes following open surgical conversion (OSC) after failed endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) using data from a multicentric registry.

METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out on consecutive patients undergoing OSC after failed EVAR at eight tertiary vascular units from the same geographic area in the North-East of Italy, from April 2005 to November 2019. Study endpoints included early and follow-up outcomes.

RESULTS

144 consecutive patients were included in the study. Endoleaks were the most common indication for OSC (50.7%), with endograft infection (24.6%) and occlusion (21.9%) being the second most prevalent causes. The overall rate of 30-day all-cause mortality was 13.9% (n=20); 32 patients (22.2%) experienced at least one major complication. Mean length of stay (LoS) was 13 ± 12.7 days. On multivariate logistic regression, age (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.01-1-19, p= .02), renal clamping time (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.13, p= .01), and suprarenal/celiac clamping (OR 6.66, 95% CI 1.81-27.1, p= .005) were identified as independent predictors of peri-operative major complications. Age was the only factor associated with peri-operative mortality at 30 days. Renal clamping time > 25 minutes had sensitivity of 65% and specificity of 70% in predicting the occurring of major adverse events (AUC 0.72; 95% CI 0.61-0.82). At 5 years, estimated survival was significantly lower for patients treated due to aortic rupture/dissection (28%, 95% CI 13-61), compared to patients in whom the indication for treatment was endoleak (54%, 95% CI 40-73), infection (53%, 95% CI 30-94), or thrombosis (82%, 95% CI 62-100; p= .0019). 5-year survival rates were significantly lower in patients who received emergent treatment (28%, 95% CI 14-55) as compared with those who were treated in urgent (67%, 95% CI 48-93) or elective setting (57%, 95% CI 43-76; p= .00026). Subjects who received suprarenal/celiac (54%, 95% CI 36-82) or suprarenal (46%, 95% CI 34-62) aortic cross-clamping had lower survival rates at 5 years than those whose aortic-cross clamp site was infrarenal (76%, 95% CI 59-97; p= .041). Using multivariate Cox Proportional Hazard, older age and emergency setting were independently associate with higher risk for overall 5 years mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

OSC after failed EVAR was associated with relatively high rates of early morbidity and mortality, particularly for emergency setting surgery. Endoleaks with secondary sac expansion were the main indication for OSC and suprarenal aortic cross-clamping was frequently required. Endograft infection and emergent treatment remained associated with poorer short-term and long-term survival.

Simultaneous Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Endovascular Infrarenal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Background/Aim: With the increasing use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and the availability of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for treating abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) and cholelithiasis, respectively, the association between these elective treatments is not yet well-defined. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the results of elective and simultaneous EVAR and LC.

Methods: Thirteen patients (mean age, 72 years) with concomitant large and asymptomatic AAA and asymptomatic cholelithiasis underwent simultaneous EVAR and LC.

Results: Post-operative mortality was absent, and the morbidity rate was 7%. The mean total duration of the procedure was 142 min. The mean duration of fluoroscopy was 19 min, and the mean radiation dose was 65 mGy. The mean amount of iodinated contrast injected was 49 mL. The timing of oral fluid intake was 28 h (range, 24–48 h) and that of the oral low-fat diet was 53 h (range, 48–72 h). No patient presented with an aortic graft infection during the entire follow-up period (mean duration, 41 months). The mean length of post-operative hospital stay was 6 days (range, 5–8 days). Late survival was 85%, and the exclusion of AAA was 100%.

Conclusion: Simultaneous EVAR and LC can be performed safely, allowing effective and durable treatment under both AAA and cholelithiasis conditions.

Complications of endo-vascular aortic repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm: A retrospective single-centre experience

Background

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is obviously less invasive than open aortic repair (OAR) for the treatment of infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). However, it is not free of complications which can potentially result in severe morbidity or even mortality. The purpose of this study was to share our single-center experience with stent-graft related and systemic complications associated with EVAR.

Methods

Patients with infra-renal AAA treated by elective and emergency EVAR between March 2014 and November 2020 were retrospectively identified. Demographic data, risk factors, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, systemic complications, stent-graft related complications, surgical site complications, 30-day mortality, late EVAR related mortality, estimated blood loss, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS and follow-up durations were collected and analyzed.

Results

A total of 43 patients underwent EVAR during the period of study. There were 42 males (97.7%) and 1 female (2.3%). The mean age was 68.8 ± 6.2 years. Elective EVAR was performed in 36 (83.7%) and emergency EVAR in 7 (16.3%). Technical success was achieved in 42 patients (100%) with no conversion to OAR. Stent-graft related complications were (21.0%) endoleaks, (2.3%) graft limb occlusion, (0%) graft infection, and (2.3%) rupture-EVAR. Systemic complications were (2.3%) myocardial infarction (MI), (2.3%) stroke, (2.3%) spinal cord injury (SCI), (2.3%) respiratory failure, (19.0%) wound complications, and (2.3%) acute lower limb ischemia (ALI). The 30-day mortality was (2.3%) due to perioperative MI and the late graft related mortality was (2.3%) due to rupture-EVAR.

Conclusion

EVAR showed a high technical success rate with no conversion to OAR. The most common complications were type II and type I endoleaks followed by graft limb occlusion. The 30-day mortality was 2.3% due to perioperative MI. Only one late stent-graft related mortality was registered due to rupture-EVAR.

Ten-year single center experience in elective standard endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the treatment of choice for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), demonstrating excellent early outcomes. However, EVAR durability has been questioned in the long-term period. The aim of this study was to assess EVAR outcomes in terms of survival and freedom from re-intervention during a long-term period.

METHODS

All consecutive patients being treated, with elective standard EVAR, in a single tertiary center, were included between 2008 and 2018. Outcomes were defined as survival and freedom from re-intervention and were reported using Kaplan-Meyer lifetables. In subgroup analyses, sex, age (threshold at 65 and 80 years), neck diameter>28mm and type of fixation were also analyzed. Type of re-intervention and endoleak type I (ETIa) were also reported.

RESULTS

Five hundred and eight patients (94% males, mean age 72±7.3, mean AAA diameter 59±9mm) were included. The median follow-up was 3 years (range 0-10 years). The survival rate was 92.8% (SE 1.5%), 76.5% (SE 3.1%) and 41.6% (SE 6%), at 2, 5 and 10 years of follow-up, respectively. In total, 78 patients died; 8 deaths (8/75, 10%) were aneurysm related. In multivariate regression analysis, age (CI. 1.02-1.14; p=0.006) and ever tobacco use (CI. 1.02-6.12, P=0.045) were associated with the long-term mortality. Freedom from re-intervention was 96% (SE 1.1%), 93% (SE 1.8%), 85.5% (SE 5%) at 2, 5 and 9 years of follow-up. Limb occlusion was a common complication (n/n; 30% of re-intervention), particularly within the first 2 postoperative years. Six patients presented with rupture and were treated with open conversion. EVAR cases with supra-renal fixation graft presented lower rates of ETIa (CI. 76-87.27, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Elective standard EVAR is associated with good long-term survival showing low aneurysm-related mortality. Common risk factors such as advanced age and smoking are associated to higher mortality. The procedure presents low re-intervention rates, while limb occlusion is a complication presented within the first 2 postoperative years.

A Canadian multicenter experience describing outcomes after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair stent graft explantation

BACKGROUND

Most studies describing the outcomes after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) explantation have been from single, high-volume, centers. We performed a multicenter cross-Canadian study of outcomes after EVAR stent graft explantation. Our objectives were to describe the outcomes after late open conversion and EVAR graft explantation at various Canadian centers and the techniques and outcomes stratified by the indication for explant.

METHODS

The Canadian Vascular Surgery Research Group performed a retrospective multicenter study of all cases of EVAR graft explantation at participating centers from 2003 to 2018. Data were collected using a standardized, secure, online platform (RedCap [Research Electronic Data Capture]). Univariate statistical analysis was used to compare the techniques and outcomes stratified the indication for graft explantation.

RESULTS

Patient data from 111 EVAR explants collected from 13 participating centers were analyzed. The mean age at explantation was 74 years, the average aneurysm size was 7.5 cm, and 28% had had at least one instructions for use violation at EVAR. The average time between EVAR and explantation was 42.5 months. The most common indication for explantation was endoleak (n = 66; type Ia, 46; type Ib, 2; type II, 9; type III, 2; type V, 7), followed by infection in 20 patients; rupture in 18 patients (due to type Ia endoleak in 10 patients, type Ib in 1, type II in 1, type III in 2, and type V in 1), and graft thrombosis in 7 patients. The overall 30-day mortality was 11%, and 45% of the patients had experienced at least one major perioperative complication. Mortality was significantly greater for patients with rupture (33.3%) and those with infection (15%) compared with patients undergoing elective explantation for endoleak (4.5%; P = .003). The average center volume during the previous 15 years was 8 cases with a wide range (2-19 cases). A trend was seen toward greater mortality for patients treated at centers with fewer than eight cases compared with those with eight or more cases (19% vs 9%). However, the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .23). Overall, 41% of patients had undergone at least one attempt at endovascular salvage before explantation, with the highest proportion among patients who had undergone EVAR explantation for endoleak (51%). Only 22% of patients with rupture had undergone an attempt at endovascular salvage before explantation.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of EVAR graft explantation has increasing in Canada. Patients who had undergone elective explantation for endoleak had lower mortality than those treated for either infection or rupture. Thus, patients with an indication for explanation should be offered surgery before symptoms or rupture has occurred. A trend was seen toward greater mortality for patients treated at centers with lower volumes.

Open repair of type III endoleak with preservation of the endograft for a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular aneurysm repair

Abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is rare, but remains a significant limitation of endovascular technology. Preservation of the endograft during open conversion of a post-EVAR rupture has been shown to be associated with improved perioperative outcomes. An interposition Dacron graft with felt pledgets is a novel bail-out option for the open reconstruction of a type III endoleak with total endograft preservation. This technique is useful in high-risk patients presenting with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after EVAR and no clear source of endoleak.

Strategy to avoid open surgical conversion after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm

Purpose

Open surgical conversion (OSC) is the last treatment option for patients with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR)failure. We investigated the underlying causes of EVAR failure requiring OSC and attempted to determine strategies to avoid OSC after EVAR.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the database of patients who underwent OSC after EVAR from 2005 to 2018 in a single institution. Twenty-six OSCs were performed in 24 patients (median age, 74.5 years; 79.2% of males) who had undergone standard EVAR. We investigated pre-, intra-, and postoperative computed tomography or angiographic images and outcomes of the OSCs.

Results

Two main indications for OSC were persistent endoleak (50.0%) and endograft infection (EI) (38.5%). All 13 patients who underwent OSC due to endoleaks received EVAR outside of indications for use. Among 10 patients who underwent OSC due to EI, we found overlooked infection sources in 7 (70.0%) at the time of EVAR or during the surveillance period. OSC was performed at a median of 31.8 months (interquartile range, 9.4-69.8) after EVAR as an emergency (15.4%) or elective (84.6%) surgery. Aortic endograft was removed in 84.6% of cases (totally, 57.7%; partially, 26.9%), whereas it was preserved in 4 cases (15.4%). After 26 OSCs, 2 early deaths (7.7%) and 2 aortoenteric fistulae (7.7%) developed as major complications.

Conclusion

OSC after EVAR was associated with relatively higher perioperative morbidity and mortality. To avoid OSC after EVAR, we recommend careful assessment of coexisting infection sources and avoidance of EVAR for patients with especially unfavorable anatomy for EVAR, particularly the in proximal neck.

EVAR: Open Surgical Repair Options for Persistent Type Ia Endoleaks

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a disease of the elderly which may result in aneurysm rupture if not treated in a timely manner. The incidence of AAA has increased in part due to patient and physician education, ultrasound screening, and liberal use of computed tomography imaging in conjunction with an aging population. Endovascular aneurysm repair has become the preferred treatment for surgeons and interventionalists. When endografts are placed outside of device-specific instructions for use, the risk of endoleak development is significantly increased. Open surgical repair of Type Ia endoleaks is recommended when endovascular options have been exhausted. Open surgical repair of Type Ia endoleaks provides acceptable perioperative morbidity and mortality rates, long-term durability, and low reintervention rates when performed in the elective setting.

A Case of Collapsed Stent Graft, Severe Lower Limb Ischemia, and Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Due to Type B Acute Aortic Dissection 3 Years after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

We report a case of stent graft occlusion, severe lower extremity ischemia, and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm due to type B acute aortic dissection 3 years after endovascular aneurysm repair. He admitted our hospital because of abrupt back pain and dysesthesia of bilateral lower limb. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan showed type B acute aortic dissection and occlusion of the stent graft due to dynamic compression by the false lumen. Emergent right axillo-bifemoral bypass operation was done for his critical limb ischemia. Immediately after the successful operation, he fell into shock vital and dissecting abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture was revealed by CT scan. We performed the stump occlusion of the infrarenal abdominal aorta and the bilateral common iliac arteries by abdominal midline incision. Postoperative myonephropathicmetabolic syndrome due to the left ischemia resulted in amputation of his left lower leg for lifesaving. While EVAR cases are increasing, various its complications come to be reported. We consider that this case report might be cautious about the indication of EVAR for the younger generation. (This is a translation of Jpn J Vasc Surg 2019; 28: 367–371.)

Predictive Factor of the Possibility for Aortic Side Branches Coil Embolization during Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Objective: Coil embolization of aortic side branches has been additionally performed to prevent type II endoleak during EVAR in our institute. In this study, we evaluated the predictive factors of the possibility for coil embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and lumbar artery (LA) during EVAR.

Methods: Seventy-four EVAR patients during June 2015 and April 2019 were included in the study. The coil embolization procedural time for one vessel is limited to 10 min. Aortic side branches were selected with 4 Fr Shepherd hook type catheter (Medikit, Tokyo, Japan) and were embolized with Interlock (Boston Scientific, MA, USA) via microcatheter. As predictive factors, internal diameter of aortic side branches and the aortic diameter perpendicular to the origin of LA (aortic diameter) were evaluated.

Results: Coil embolization was tried for 52 patent IMAs and all IMAs except two IMAs with ostial stenosis were successfully coil embolized (96.2%). Totally 190 LAs were patent and coil embolization was tried for 144 LAs. Among 144 LAs, 106 LAs (73.6%) were successfully coil embolized and the diameter was significantly longer (2.30±0.51 mm vs. 2.04±0.41 mm, p=0.007) and aortic dimeter was significantly shorter (30.0±8.1 mm vs. 40.5±11.6 mm, p<0.001) in successfully embolized LAs. Cut off value of successful LA coil embolization was 2.06 mm for internal diameter and 36.1 mm for aortic diameter by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Successful coil embolization rate for LAs with internal diameter longer than 2.0 mm and aortic diameter less than 36.2 mm was 90% (72 among 80 LAs).

Conclusion: Coil embolization during EVAR for IMA was highly successful, if there was no calcified ostial stenosis. LA embolization was feasible especially for LAs with internal diameter ≥2.0 mm and aortic diameter ≤36.1 mm. This information would be useful to select the target vessel for aortic side branches coil embolization during EVAR. (This is a translation of Jpn J Vasc Surg 2019; 28: 389–396.)

Lessons Learned from Open Surgical Conversion after Failed Previous EVAR

BACKGROUND

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Overall outcome after endovascular aneurysm repair with a first-generation stent graft (Vanguard): A 20-year single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

The problems with first-generation stent grafts for endovascular aneurysm repair are well known, but their long-term outcome remains to be established. The purpose of the study was to characterize the outcome of patients treated for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with a first-generation stent graft, Vanguard (Boston Scientific, Natick, Mass), in a single academic center with a follow-up of up to 20 years.

METHODS

There were 48 AAA patients electively treated with a Vanguard stent graft between February 1997 and November 1999. The patients were monitored annually until the end of 2018. The outcomes were overall survival and the number of graft-related complications and reinterventions.

RESULTS

The mean age was 70 years (range, 54-85 years), and the mean follow-up was 107 months (range, 6-262 months). All stent grafts were successfully implanted, but 90% of the patients encountered graft-related complications during follow-up. The most common complications were endoleaks (type I, 27%; type II, 29%; type III, 31%), stent fracture (46%), graft thrombosis (31%), and migration (40%). A total of 40 (83%) patients required a secondary procedure during long-term follow-up. The endovascular method for treating the complication was successful in 73 (87%) of 84 cases. There were no primary conversions, but 10 patients (21%) required a late conversion. In five cases, the complications required relining with a newer device. There were four AAA ruptures (8.3%), two of them fatal. The cumulative overall survival rates were 94%, 69%, 33%, 15%, and 13% at 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, and 20 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the Vanguard, a first-generation stent graft, was associated with multiple graft-related complications. However, these complications could mainly be treated by endovascular means. The Vanguard stent graft is a good example of how new technology can cause unpredictable problems that can magnify the workload and endanger the patient's well-being even decades after the initial procedure.

Consecutive failing proximal landing zones

We report the case of a 77-year-old man who presented with successive aortic aneurysms during a 12-year period. He was first treated in 2006 for an abdominal aortic aneurysm with a bifurcated endograft, then in 2016 for a tender type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm with a proximal aortic cuff with in situ laser fenestrations. He presented in 2018 with a 9-cm distal thoracic aorta aneurysm managed by an off-the-shelf t-Branch endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). The perioperative course was uneventful, and 6-month follow-up computed tomography scan has shown freedom from endoleaks and branch patency. This case illustrates that apparently “healthy” aortic necks can degenerate after endovascular aneurysm repair.

Outcomes of Late Open Conversion after Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair

Objective: To review our experience with a late open conversion as a final option for an endograft infection and aneurysm expansion after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), especially in endoleaks for which radiological intervention is impossible. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 13 late open conversions out of 513 consecutive patients treated by EVAR were analyzed. Indications for an open conversion were aneurysm enlargement, including all endoleaks, endograft migration, and endograft infection. The patients' data on demographics, operative details, and outcomes were reviewed. Results: Indications for a late open conversion included endoleaks, infection, and migration in 61.5%, 30.8%, and 7.7% of patients, respectively. The median interval from the initial EVAR was 32.4 months. Complete endograft explantation was performed in four patients with an endograft infection. In endoleak cases, the endograft was partially preserved and a neo-neck was used. Sacotomy and branch ligation were performed in one case. One major operative complication was an aortic injury during infrarenal aortic cross-clamping in an endograft migration case. There was no operative mortality. Conclusion: A late open conversion after EVAR is valuable as a final option. The aortic cross-clamp site, especially in endograft migration cases, should be carefully considered. To avoid aneurysm-related events, graft replacement is recommended, if possible.

Techniques and future perspectives for the prevention and treatment of endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

The presence of endoleaks remains one of the main drawbacks of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms leading to the increase of the size of the aneurysmal sac and in most of the cases to repeated interventions. A variety of devices and percutaneous techniques have been developed so far to prevent and treat this phenomenon, including sealing of the aneurysmal sac, endovascular embolisation, and direct sac puncture. The aim of this review is to analyse the indications, the effectiveness, and the future perspectives for the prevention and treatment of endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms.