Safety and effectiveness of total percutaneous access for fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Complications and Technical Success on Upper Limb Vascular Access for Endovascular Repair of Complex Abdominal and Thoraco-abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Catheterization of target vessels (TV) represented by renal visceral vessels are the crucial aspect during fenestrated and branched endovascular repair. This study aims to assess the efficacy and complications associated with upper limb catheterization during complex aneurysm endovascular surgery repair.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted after Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, involving a search across PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Primary endpoint was represented by 30-day stroke. Secondary endpoints were target vessels' (TVs) technical success, 30-day mortality, and local access-related complications. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Sixteen observational studies encompassing 4,137 patients were included. The 30-day stroke incidence for upper limb access was 1.4% (95% CI 1.0-1.8%), which was slightly higher than lower limb, despite not statistically significant. Mortality varied between 0 and 6.8%, and local access-related complications occurred in 3.2% (95% CI 1.9-4.4%). Technical success in TV catheterization was 99.2% (95% CI 98.4-100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate the safety and efficacy of upper limb access for Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair (f/b-EVAR), with low stroke risk, mortality rates, and minimal local complications. Despite the risk of bias, the findings suggest that upper limb access may be beneficial, especially in bailout situations when femoral access fails, offering valuable insights for clinical decision-making.

Intraoperative cell salvage technique in patients undergoing complex endovascular aortic repair

Complex endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) requires the use of multiple small sheath cannulation inside a large sheath. Because the large sheath is not designed for multiple small sheath cannulation, large amounts of blood loss can be encountered in complex EVARs. Cell Saver can be used effectively in complex EVARs using a modified draping technique, allowing for increased cell salvage and autogenous transfusions as needed.

An In-Vitro Comparison of Steady State Leakage Rates through Introducer Sheaths Used for Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (fEVAR) involves deploying a covered stent into the aorta followed by multiple visceral stents through fenestrations in the main body of graft. The most commonly used large sheaths for cannulation of visceral vessels are the Gore DrySeal Flex, Cook Performer Check-Flo, and Medtronic Sentrant. None of these sheaths were designed for the insertion of multiple sheaths, and so a slow but steady leakage of blood occurs during the procedure. The aim of this paper is to assess in an in vitro setting which large bore sheath has the best valve for use when multiple smaller sheaths are inserted through it.

METHODS

Three large bore introducer sheaths (LBISs) were used for this study, The Gore DrySeal Flex LBIS, Medtronic Sentrant LBIS and Cook Performer Check-Flo LBIS. A test rig was constructed, made of an 18-liter fluid reservoir mounted vertically and receiving a constant supply of water from a domestic water supply which flowed into the reservoir and out of an overflow. The reservoir was connected to the LBIS by a vertical plastic pipe with an internal diameter of 40 mm and an isolation valve. The LBIS was connected to the isolation valve by inserting the LBIS up a flexible silicone tube connected to the isolation valve. The LBIS was subject to a constant column/pressure of water and fluid leakage from the LBIS was collected in a plastic pot/tray placed underneath the LBIS. The leakage rates through each LBIS were determined for the following smaller diameter sheath combinations inserted through the valve, one 6 French Sheath, two 6 French Sheaths, two 6 French Sheaths and one 7 French Sheath. This was done to closely mimic a fEVAR procedure in vitro. The procedure was to insert different sheath combinations through the nonreturn valves in the LBIS and measure the volume of fluid that leaked through the valves. The leaked fluid was weighed, and the weight was converted to volume using the density of water (1 g/ml).

RESULTS

The average (mean) leakage rates for each LBIS and each sheath combination showed that leakage rates when only one sheath was inserted were very low. For all 3 LBIS's tested, the leakage rates increased dramatically when multiple sheaths were inserted. The Medtronic LBIS leaked the most, followed by Cook, followed by Gore. For the Cook LBIS, the leakage rates exhibited with 2 × 6 French sheaths were approx. 106 times greater than those for the Gore LBIS and 5 times greater for the 2 × 6 French +1 × 7 French sheath combination. A similar comparison for the Medtronic LBIS versus the Gore LBIS yields factors of 132 and 8.

CONCLUSIONS

Leakage rates increase significantly when multiple sheaths are inserted and the Gore LBIS demonstrates significantly lower leakage than both the Cook and Medtronic during procedures that require simultaneous, multiple insertions of smaller sheaths. Although the Gore Dryseal has by far the lowest leakage rate when 3 small diameter sheaths are inserted (just under 1 ml/s), depending on the duration of the procedure this could still result in significant blood loss.

Long-term outcomes of staged iliofemoral endoconduits prior to complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Adverse iliofemoral anatomy may preclude complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). In our practice, staged iliofemoral endoconduits (ECs) are planned prior to complex EVAR to improve vascular access and decrease operative time while allowing the stented vessel to heal. This study describes the long-term results of iliofemoral ECs prior to complex EVAR.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2023, 59 patients (44% male; median age, 75 ± 6 years) underwent ECs before complex EVAR using self-expanding covered stents (Viabahn). For common femoral artery (CFA) disease, ECs were delivered percutaneously from contralateral femoral access and extended into the CFA to preserve the future access site for stent graft delivery. Internal iliac artery patency was maintained when feasible. During complex EVAR, the EC extended into the CFA was directly accessed and sequentially dilated until it could accommodate the endograft. Technical success was defined as successful access, closure, and delivery of the endograft during complex EVAR. Endpoints were vascular injury or EC disruption, secondary interventions, and EC patency.

RESULTS

Unilateral EC was performed in 45 patients (76%). ECs were extended into the CFA in 21 patients (35%). Median diameters of the native common iliac, external iliac, and CFA were 7 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 6-8 mm), 6 mm (IQR, 5-7 mm), and 6 mm (IQR, 6-7 mm), respectively. Internal iliac artery was inadvertently excluded in 10 patients (17%). Six patients (10%) had an intraoperative vascular injury during the EC procedure, and six patients (10%) had EC disruption during complex EVAR, including five EC collapses requiring re-stenting and one EC fracture requiring open cut-down and reconstruction with patch angioplasty. In 23 patients (39%), 22 Fr OD devices were used; 20 Fr were used in 22 patients (37%), and 18 Fr in 14 patients (24%). Technical success for accessing EC was 89%. There was no difference in major adverse events at 30 days between the iliac ECs and iliofemoral ECs. Primary patency by Kaplan-Meier estimates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 97.5%, 89%, and 82%, respectively. There was no difference in primary patency between iliac and iliofemoral ECs. Six secondary interventions (10%) were required. The mean follow-up was 34 ± 27 months; no limb loss or amputations occurred during the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

ECs improve vascular access, and their use prior to complex EVAR is associated with low rates of vascular injury, high technical success, and optimal long-term patency. Complex EVAR procedures can be performed percutaneously by accessing the EC directly under ultrasound guidance and using sequential dilation to avoid EC disruption.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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.

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.

Effect of Blood Loss and Transfusion Requirements on Clinical Outcomes of Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of blood loss and transfusion requirements on clinical outcomes of patients treated by fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) for pararenal (PRA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs).

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data of 370 consecutive patients (277 male, mean age 74 ± 10 years) treated by F-BEVAR between 2007 and 2017. Outcomes were estimated blood loss (EBL), use of intraoperative blood salvage (IOBS), transfusion of packed red blood cells (PRBCs), mortality, and major adverse events (MAEs).

RESULTS

There were 189 patients (51%) treated for PRAs and 181 patients (49%) treated for TAAAs. IOBS was used in 194 patients (52%) and transfusion of PRBCs was needed in 137 (37%). Thirty-day mortality was 2.2% (8/370) and MAEs occurred in 123 patients (33%), including 74 patients (20%) who had EBL > 1L. EBL > 1L and transfusion of PRBCs were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in patients treated in the first half of clinical experience and in those with larger aneurysms, iliofemoral conduits, bilateral open surgical femoral access and Extent I-III TAAAs. Use of DrySeal^® sheaths (WL Gore, Flagstaff AZ) was associated with significantly lower (P < .05) EBL volume and with less transfusion of PRBCs. On multivariate analysis PRBCs > 1L, male gender and the last half of clinical experience were associated with MAEs/mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

F-BEVAR was associated with significantly higher volume of blood loss and transfusion requirements in patients treated in the early experience and in those who had iliofemoral conduits, open femoral surgical exposure or Extent I-III TAAAs.

Outcomes of routine use of percutaneous access with large-bore introducer sheaths (>21F outer diameter) during endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of percutaneous femoral access with large-bore sheaths (>21F outer diameter) mainly employed for thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic endovascular treatment and to stratify the outcomes on the basis of the introducer size.

METHODS

Between December 2015 and December 2018, all consecutive patients who received endovascular repair through a percutaneous approach with a suture-mediated vascular closure device (VCD) and the preclose technique were included in a retrospective single-center study called Totally Percutaneous Approach to Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Aneurysms (PEVAR-PRO). The morphologic characteristics of the access vessels and patients' demographics were recorded, and 30-day closure success was defined as the primary end point. Analysis of the closure success comparing large-bore sheaths vs small-bore sheaths (≤21F outer diameter) was performed after 1:1 propensity score matching of preoperative confounding variables.

RESULTS

The closure success rate of the entire study cohort was 94% (622 femoral accesses in 360 patients; median age, 74 years; 84% male). Univariate analysis identified eight different factors associated with failure, but only two remained significant on multivariate analysis: diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-6.2; P = .011) and common femoral artery stenosis >50% (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.3-13.7; P = .019). After propensity score matching (1:1, 172 femoral accesses per group), closure success rate was not significantly different between large-bore and small-bore sheaths (90.7% vs 93.0%; P = .43). Multivariate analysis of the large-sheath group identified two factors associated with failure: small (<9 mm) femoral arteries (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.5-31.6; P = .13) and access vessel calcifications involving more than one-third of the circumference (OR, 7.9; 95% CI, 2.1-29.4; P = .002). Neither previous femoral cutdown (44 accesses [23%]) nor percutaneous closure with VCDs (38 accesses [20%]) affected the closure success rate in the large-sheath group. Closure failure did not significantly increase the need for postoperative blood transfusions or hospital length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Off-label use of VCDs and the preclose technique for percutaneous approach with large-bore sheaths needed for complex aortic endovascular procedures is safe and feasible. Closure success rate is not significantly different from that obtained with on-label application of VCDs with smaller sheaths.

A Stopped Pilot Study of the ProGlide Closure Device After Transbrachial Endovascular Interventions

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of the suture-mediated ProGlide device in closure of the brachial artery after endovascular interventions. Materials and Methods: From 2016 to 2017, a pilot study was performed using the ProGlide to achieve hemostasis after percutaneous access of distal brachial arteries >4 mm in diameter. In an interim analysis, the results were compared to a matched control group taken from a 60-patient historical cohort who underwent brachial artery access and manual compression to achieve hemostasis between 2014 and 2017. The primary outcome was access-related reintervention and the secondary outcome was the incidence of access-site complications. Results: Seven patients (mean age 67.9 years; 6 men) were enrolled in the study before it was stopped in 2017. Four patients experienced 6 access-site complications (neuropathy, hematoma, occlusion, and pseudoaneurysm). These resulted in 3 access-related reinterventions: surgical evacuation of a hematoma, thrombectomy of the occluded brachial artery, and surgical repair of the pseudoaneurysm. In the interim comparison to the 19 matched patients (mean age 61.9 years; 6 men), the ProGlide group had proportionally more patients experiencing access-related complications (57% vs 16% for manual compression, p=0.035) and resultant reinterventions (43% vs 11%, p=0.064). Based on this data the trial was stopped. Conclusion: Considering this experience, it is not advisable to use the ProGlide in transbrachial endovascular interventions due to the high incidence of complications and access-related reinterventions.

Long-Term Evaluation of Percutaneous Groin Access for EVAR

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Complications and Reinterventions After Fenestrated and Branched EVAR in Patients with Paravisceral and Thoracoabdominal Aneurysms

The application of endovascular strategies to treat aneurysms involving the abdominal and thoracoabdominal aorta has evolved significantly since the inception of endovascular aneurysm repair. Advances in endograft technology and operator experience have enabled the management of a wider spectrum of challenging aortic anatomy. Fenestrated endovascular and branched endovascular aneurysm repair represent two technical innovations, which have expanded endovascular treatment options to include patients with paravisceral and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Although similar in many ways to standard aortic endografts, fenestrated and branched endografts have specific short- and long-term complications due to their unique modular endograft design and their sophisticated deployment mechanisms. This article aims to examine the commonly encountered complications with these devices and the endovascular reintervention strategies.