Impact of previous open aortic repair on the outcome of thoracoabdominal fenestrated and branched endografts

Efficacy and Safety of Endovascular Fenestrated and Branched Grafts Versus Open Surgery in Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: An Updated Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression

OBJECTIVE

To provide an updated systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression of efficacy and safety of fenestrated/branched endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) compared with open repair.

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of TAAAs may be a promising alternative to open surgery by reducing invasiveness and expanding the eligible population, but evidence remains limited.

METHODS

We applied "Prepared Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis" guidelines to retrieve, quantitatively pool, and critically evaluate the efficacy and safety (including 30-day mortality, reintervention, spinal cord injury [SCI], and renal injury) of both approaches. Original studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library until April 20, 2022, excluding papers reporting <10 patients. Pooled proportions and means were determined using a random-effect model. Heterogeneity between studies was evaluated with I2 statistics.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. Endovascular cohort patients were older and had higher rates of comorbidities. Endovascular repair was associated with similar proportions of mortality (0.07, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.06-0.08) compared with open repair (0.09, 95% CI: 0.08-0.12; P = 0.22), higher proportions of reintervention (0.19, 95% CI: 0.13-0.26 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.04-0.10; P < 0.01), similar proportions of transient SCI (0.07, 95% CI: 0.05-0.09 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.05-0.08; P = 0.28), lower proportions of permanent SCI (0.04, 95% CI: 0.03-0.05 vs 0.06, 95% CI: 0.05-0.07; P < 0.01), and renal injury (0.08, 95% CI: 0.06-0.10 vs 0.13, 95% CI: 0.09-0.17; P = 0.02). Results were affected by high heterogeneity and potential publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite these limitations and the lack of randomized trials, this meta-analysis suggests that endovascular TAAA repair could be a safer alternative to the open approach.

Technical Aspects and Outcome of Multi-Staged and Single-Staged Thoracoabdominal Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair

PURPOSE

In some cases of endovascular thoracoabdominal or juxtarenal aortic aneurysm repair, a thoracic endograft in combination with a fenestrated renovisceral device may be needed in order to create a sufficient proximal landing zone. This study aimed to evaluate the technical aspects and postoperative morbidity of a single- or 2-stage approach.

METHODS

Eighty-seven consecutive patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in combination with elective fenestrated repair (fenestrated endovascular aortic repair [FEVAR]; fenestrated Anaconda device) from 2015 to 2022 were included in this retrospective bicentric study. Underlying pathologies, aortic morphology, technical details, and postoperative morbidity were recorded.

RESULTS

Single-staged ("1S," n=61) and 2-staged ("2S," n=26) interventions were compared. Indications were thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAAs) (Crawford I-IV) (n=56, 64%) and juxtarenal aneurysms (n=31, 36%). In 2S, the proportion of TAAA was higher than in 1S (2S: 77%, 1S: 59%; p=0.001). In 2S, the covered length of the descending aorta was longer (1S: 128±60 mm, 2S: 202±64 mm; p=0.003). Temporary aneurysm sack perfusion (TASP) was established in 11 (18%) of 1S and 1 (4%) of 2S patients (p=0.079), as well as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage catheter in 48 (79%) of 1S and 19 (73%) of 2S. The rate of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) and the severity of SCI were not different in both groups, with a total of 3 cases of persisting paraplegia. The rate of access complications was higher in 2S (n=6, 23%) than in 1S (n=4, 7%; p=0.027). Postoperative 30 day morbidity did not significantly differ in both groups and neither did 30 day mortality (4.6% in 1S vs 3.8% in 2S; p=0.083).

CONCLUSION

The combination of TEVAR and FEVAR using a fenestrated endograft is feasible and safe. Aortic morphology does not change significantly after endovascular repair. A single-staged strategy is feasible with excellent results, especially in Crawford IV, Crawford V, or juxtarenal aneurysms. Two-staged repair is recommended in cases with long aortic coverage and a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class. Follow-up data are needed to evaluate the long-term stability of the TEVAR/FEVAR interconnection.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Our study has revealed the safety and efficacy of the combination of TEVAR and FEVAR in the treatment of TAAAs and juxtarenal aneurysms with compromised supravisceral landing zones. A single-staged concept is not necessary in all cases. Staged procedures may reduce postoperative morbidity in cases with long aortic coverage and higher ASA class.

Outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair in patients with or without prior history of abdominal endovascular or open surgical repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of complex abdominal (CAAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) in patients with or without prior history of abdominal open surgical (OSR) or endovascular aortic repair (EVAR).

METHODS

The clinical data of consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective, non-randomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR for treatment of CAAAs and TAAAs was reviewed. Clinical outcomes were analyzed in patients with no previous aortic repair (Controls), prior EVAR (Group 1), and prior abdominal OSR (Group 2), including 30-day mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), patient survival and freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), secondary interventions, any type II endoleak, sac enlargement (≥5 mm), and new-onset permanent dialysis.

RESULTS

There were 506 patients (69% male; mean age, 72 ± 9 years) treated by FB-EVAR, including 380 controls, 54 patients in Group 1 (EVAR), and 72 patients in Group 2 (abdominal OSR). FB-EVAR was performed on average 7 ± 4 and 12 ± 6 years after the index EVAR and abdominal OSR, respectively (P < .001). All three groups had similar clinical characteristics, except for less coronary artery disease in controls and more TAAAs and branch stent graft designs in Group 2 (P < .05). Aneurysm extent was CAAA in 144 patients (28%) and TAAA in 362 patients (72%). Overall technical success, mortality, and MAE rate were 96%, 1%, and 14%, respectively, with no difference between groups. Mean follow up was 30 ± 21 months. Patient survival was significantly lower in Group 2 (P = .03), but there was no difference in freedom from ARM and secondary interventions at 5 years between groups. Group 1 patients had lower freedom from any type II endoleak (P = .02) and sac enlargement (P < .001), whereas Group 2 patients had lower freedom from new-onset permanent dialysis (P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

FB-EVAR was performed with high technical success, low mortality, and similar risk of MAEs, regardless of prior history of abdominal aortic repair. Patient survival was significantly lower in patients who had previous abdominal OSR, but freedom from ARM and secondary interventions were similar among groups. Patients with prior EVAR had lower freedom from type II endoleak and sac enlargement. Patients with prior OSR had lower freedom from new-onset dialysis.

Mid-Term Results of Fenestrated Endovascular Repair after Prior Open Aortic Reconstruction

This study aims to assess the mid-term results of fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) for the treatment of proximal aortic pathology after previous open surgical repair (OSR). All patients with a previous history of OSR of an abdominal aortic aneurysm undergoing a FEVAR procedure between October 2010 and November 2021 were included. The endpoints of the study were technical success, mortality, target vessel patency and reinterventions during follow-up. Thirty-five patients (34 male, mean age 72.9 ± 7 years) were included. The median interval from the primary surgery to the FEVAR procedure was 136 months (range 47–261). The indication for treatment was a para-anastomotic aneurysm in 18 (51%) patients and a true aneurysm due to progression of disease in 17 (49%) patients. Technical success was achieved in 33 (94%) patients. There was one (3%) early death due to postoperative bleeding from a renal artery. Estimated survival at 12, 24 and 36 months was 89.1% ± 6%, 84.4% ± 7.3% and 84.4% ± 7.3%, respectively. There was no aneurysm-related mortality. One (3%) target vessel occluded during follow-up and three (9%) patients underwent late reinterventions. In conclusion, FEVAR is a safe and effective alternative for the endovascular treatment of para-anastomotic aneurysms/pseudoaneurysms after OSR showing high technical success, low mortality and morbidity, and good mid-term outcomes.

Temporary Reperfusion of the Aneurysm Sac as a Prevention of Spinal Cord Ischemia After Endovascular Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is still a feared complication for patients suffering from thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) who undergo endovascular treatment. The aims of this work are to review the available literature on different reperfusion methods of the aneurysm sac, and to analyze whether the different reperfusion methods, also in combination with other factors, are effective in reducing SCI risk and if the impact varies with the patient's age.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE library was searched for studies published until November 2020 concerning TAAA, endovascular repair, and SCI preventive measures. Systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. Primary outcome consisted of correlation between endovascular repair techniques (type A: single step; type B: staged approach with reperfusion branches; type C: staged sequential approach with positioning of the thoracic component). A logistic-weighted regression for each event (SCI, transient, and permanent) was then performed with type of treatment, age, and interaction between them as input factors. Finally, another logistic-weighted regression was performed to analyze the other relevant factors for which observations are available together with the endovascular technique.

RESULTS

Data from 53 studies with a total of 3095 patients were analyzed. Type A, type B, and type C endovascular strategies were adopted in 75%, 13%, and 12% of studied patients, respectively. Data showed that both type B and type C treatments are associated with lower risk of SCI, with a higher reduction of type C with respect to type B, although this positive trend is limited for elder patients. Moreover, a greater aortic diameter, a reduced aneurysm extent, and the absence of cerebrospinal fluid drainage positioning contribute to lower the risk of SCI. Concerning permanent SCI, both type B and type C are effective in reducing percentages for all ages, with type C treatment more beneficial for younger patients and type B for elder ones.

CONCLUSION

According to the anatomy and the endovascular repair feasibility criteria, staged endovascular treatment appears to offer relevant advantages over single-step treatment in reducing the risk of SCI, regardless of the reperfusion method adopted.

Role of historical and procedural staging during elective fenestrated and branched endovascular treatment of extensive thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Procedural staging is often performed to reduce the incidence of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) during endovascular treatment of extensive thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). However, its role in the case of previous thoracic or infrarenal aortic repair (historical staging) has been controversial. In the present study, we evaluated the SCI rates when procedural staging was routinely used and studied its potential benefits when previous aortic repairs had already been performed.

METHODS

The data from patients treated electively with fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair for extent I, II, III, and V TAAAs were retrieved from a multicenter registry (four high-volume national teaching hospitals) and analyzed. The primary endpoint was the rate of SCI and its association with preoperative and postoperative variables, including historical staging, procedural staging, and an impaired collateral network (subclavian or hypogastric stenosis >75% per occlusion). Variables were defined in accordance with the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. A logistic regression model with stepwise selection was used to identify the predictors of SCI.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients (76% male; median age, 73 years) were analyzed. Of the 240 patients, 43 (18%) had presented with an impaired collateral network, 136 (57%) had had historical staging, and 157 (65%) had received procedural staging. Preoperative spinal fluid cerebrospinal drainage was performed in 130 patients (54%). Permanent grade 3 SCI was observed in 13 patients (5%) and was negatively affected by both an impaired collateral network (odds ratio [OR], 17.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-176; P = .016) and the presence of bilateral iliac occlusive disease (OR, 10.1; 95% CI, 1.1-98.3; P = .046). Both historical (OR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.001-0.46; P = .014) and procedural (OR, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.02-0.7; P = .019) staging mitigated the permanent SCI rates. The need for postoperative transfusions (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8; P = .014) and the occurrence of postoperative renal complications (OR, 6.5; 95% CI, 1.2-35.0; P < .001) were associated with the development of SCI. Among the patients with historical staging, no further benefit from procedural staging was observed (SCI with procedural staging, 1%; vs no staging, 2%; P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with extensive TAAAs treated with fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair, both historical and planned procedural staging were associated with reduced permanent SCI rates. However, no additional benefit was observed when procedural staging was performed in patients with historical staging and an intact collateral network. The protective role of preoperative cerebrospinal fluid drainage placement requires further investigation.

Comparison of Early and Mid-Term Outcomes After Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair in Patients With or Without Prior Infrarenal Repair

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare short- and mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (F-BEVAR) of pararenal (PRAA)/thoracoabdominal (TAAA) aortic aneurysms in patients with or without prior endovascular/open (EVAR/OAR) infrarenal aortic repair.

METHODS

Data from consecutive F-BEVAR (2010-2019) at two high-volume aortic centers were retrospectively reviewed. Primary endpoints were technical success, 30-day mortality, and overall survival. Secondary endpoints included 30-day major adverse events (MAE), freedom from type I/III endoleaks, reinterventions, sac expansion, and target vessel (TV) primary patency.

RESULTS

A total of 222 consecutive patients were included for analysis; of these 58 (26.1%) had prior infrarenal repair (EVAR=33, OAR=25) and 164 (73.9%) had native PRAA/TAAA. At baseline, patients with prior infrarenal repair were older (mean age=75.1 vs 71.6 years, p=.005) and the proportion of females was lower (8.6% vs 29.3%, p=.002). Technical success was 97.8% (n=217) in the entire cohort, without any significant differences between study groups (94.8% vs 98.8%, p=.08). At 30 days, there were no significant differences between patients with prior infrarenal repair as compared with those without in rate of MAE (44.8% vs 54.9%, p=.59). The 5-year estimate of survival for those who underwent native aortic repair was 61.6%, versus 61.3% for those who had a previous repair (p=.67). The 5-year freedom from endoleaks I/III estimates were significantly lower in patients who had prior infrarenal repair as compared with patients undergoing treatment of native aneurysms (57.1% vs 66.1%, p=.03), mainly owing to TV-related endoleaks (ie, type IC and/or IIIC endoleaks). No significant differences were found between study groups in rates of reinterventions and TV primary patency. Five-year estimates of freedom from sac increase >5mm were significantly lower in patients who received F-BEVAR after previous infrarenal repair as compared with those who underwent treatment of native aneurysms (48.6% vs 77.5%, p=.002).

CONCLUSIONS

F-BEVAR is equally safe and feasible for treatment of patients with prior infrarenal repair as compared with those undergoing treatment for native aneurysms. Increased rates of TV-related endoleaks were observed which could lead to lower freedom from aneurysm sac shrinkage during follow-up. Nevertheless, the 5-year rates of reinterventions and TV patency were similar, thereby indicating that overall effectiveness of treatment remained satisfactory at mid-term.

Multi-staged endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms by fenestrated and branched endografts

AIM

To report outcomes of a multi-staged approach for endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) by fenestrated/branched endografting (F/B-EVAR).

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2020 (June), patients undergoing F/B-EVAR for TAAAs were collected. Data of cases managed by a multi-staged approach, to reduce the incidence of spinal cord ischemia (SCI), were retrospectively analyzed and reported in a cohort study. Thirty-day mortality and SCI were assessed as study's outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-seven patients underwent TAAAs repair by F/B-EVAR. A multi-staged approach was applied in 73(53%) cases, more frequently for Crawford's extent I-III (60/78) compared with IV (13/59) (P: <.0001). A complete TAAAs exclusion was achieved in 2, 3 or 4 steps in 64(88%), 8(11%) and 1(1%) cases, respectively, within the same hospitalization in 68(93%) cases. The mean time between first and last step was 16±8days, with a mean hospital stay of 21±12days. In 3(4%) cases the complete TAAA repair was not achieved due to inter-steps mortality (2) or permanent paraplegia (1). There were no cases of aortic rupture or target visceral vessels occlusions between the different steps. Seven (10%) patients suffered postoperative SCI with 2(4%) cases of permanent paraplegia. In 5/7 cases SCI occurred after the first stage; in 3/5 cases TAAAs exclusion was successfully completed with total SCI recovery. The 30-day mortality was 4% (3/73).

CONCLUSION

A multi-staged endovascular repair with F/B-EVAR can be safely performed for TAAAs repair. The majority of cases can be treated within a single, long hospitalization. The cost/effectiveness of the prolonged in-hospital time should be evaluated.

Platelet Depletion after Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Endovascular Repair is Associated with Clinically Relevant Hemorrhagic Complications

BACKGROUND

Thoraco-abdominal endovascular aortic repair (TA-EVAR) can be associated with platelet depletion (PD); the present study aims to evaluate PD incidence after TA-EVAR and to investigate its possible predictors and its influence on hemorrhagic complications and mortality.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all TA-EVAR from 2010 to 2021 was performed to identify patients with PD, (reduction > 60%). Spontaneous hemorrhages considered were: intracranial or any hemorrhages requiring surgery. Risk factors for PD, correlation with hemorrhagic complications and 30-day mortality were investigated by uni/multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 158 TA-EVAR were considered, 35(22%) female, 86(54%) extended thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) (Crawford type I, II, III), 79(50%) staged procedure, 31(20%) urgent treatment (symptomatic/ruptured). PD was identified in 42 (27%) patients and correlated to female sex, thrombus-free aortic lumen > 50mm, urgent treatment, extensive TAAA, blood transfusion >3 units and staged procedure at the univariate analysis. The multivariate analysis confirmed a significant correlation between PD and thrombus-free aortic lumen > 50mm, urgent treatment, blood transfusion > 3 units and staged procedure (odds ratio [OR]: 2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-7.0), P = 0.04, OR 3.2 (95% CI 1.01-8.6), P= 0.03, OR 3.16 (95% CI 1.23-7.7), P = 0.03 and OR 2.71 (95% CI 1.2-6.2), P= 0.04, respectively). Overall, 13 hemorrhagic complications occurred (8 intracranial and 5 peripheral); PD was associated with higher risk of hemorrhagic complications (9/42 - 21% vs. 4/116 - 3%, OR: 7.6 [95% CI: 2.2-26.3], P= 0.001) and a higher risk of 30-day mortality in elective cases 4/25 - 16% vs. 3/101 - 3%, OR: 6.2 (95% CI: 1.3-29.8), P= 0.03.

CONCLUSIONS

PD is a relatively common event after TA-EVAR and is associated with thrombus-free aortic lumen > 50mm, urgent treatment, blood transfusion > 3 units and staged procedure. Hemorrhagic complications and mortality are increased under these circumstances.

Pre and postoperative predictors of clinical outcome of fenestrated and branched endovascular repair for complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms in an Italian multicenter registry

OBJECTIVE

Complex aortic aneurysms (juxtarenal j-AAA, pararenal p-AAAs, thoracoabdominal TAAAs) are treated with increasing frequency through fenestrated and branched endovascular repair (F/B-EVAR), however the outcome of these procedures is usually reported separately by single experiences and wider overviews are not frequent. The aim of this study was therefore to report an Italian experience analyzing the results obtained in 4 academic centers in order to evaluate predictors of outcome.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2019, all consecutive patients undergoing F/B-EVAR in 4 Italian university centers were prospectively recorded and retrospectively analyzed. Preoperative comorbidities and postoperative complications were classified according with the SVS-reporting standard. Postoperative complications and 30-day / in-hospital mortality were assessed as early outcomes. Survival, freedom from reinterventions (FFRs) and target visceral vessels (TVVs) patency were assessed as follow-up outcomes by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Risk factors for 30-day / in-hospital mortality and spinal cord ischemia (SCI) were determined by multivariate analysis. Risk factors for follow-up mortality and reinterventions were evaluated by Cox-regression model.

RESULTS

Five hundred and ninety-six patients underwent F/B-EVAR for 124(21%) j-AAAs, 121(20%) p-AAAs and 351(59%) TAAAs. Elective and urgent procedures were performed in 520(87%) and 76(13%) cases, respectively. Postoperative cardiac, pulmonary and renal complications were reported in 41(7%), 50(8%) and 80(13%) patients, respectively. Seven (1%) bowel ischemia and 23(4%) cerebrovascular complications occurred. Forty-seven (8%) patients suffered SCI with 17(3%) cases of permanent paraplegia. Crawford's extent I-II-III TAAAs (OR:13.41; 95%CI:1.77-101.65; P=.012) and postoperative renal complications (OR:3.84; 95%CI:1.70-8.69; P=.001) independently predicted SCI. Thirty-two (5%) patients died in the perioperative period. Preoperative chronic renal failure (OR:7.81; 95%CI:7.81-26.31; P=.001), postoperative bowel ischemia (OR:26.97; 95%CI:3.37-215.5; P=.002), cardiac (OR:5.77; 95%CI:1.41-23.64; P=<.001),cerebrovascular (OR:28.63; 95%CI:5.20-157.5; P:<.001) complications and SCI (OR:5.99; 95%CI:1.12-32.5; P=.036) were independently correlated with 30-day/hospital mortality. The mean follow-up was 25+7months. Freedom from TVVs occlusion and FFR were 96% and 92% at 1 year and 93% and 85% at 3 years, respectively. TAAAs (HR:3.16; 95%CI:1.68-5.92; P=<.001), post dissection TAAAs (HR:2.20; 95%CI:1.30-4.90; P=.05) and postoperative bowel ischemia (HR:11.98; 95%CI:1.53-93.31; P=.018) were independent predictors of reinterventions. Survival was 88% and 78% at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Preoperative chronic renal failure (HR:2.39; 95%CI:1.59-3.59; P=<.001), urgent repair (HR:1.80; 95%CI:1.03-3.20; P=.039), TAAAs (HR:2.01; 95%CI:1.13-3.56; P=.017),postoperative bowel ischemia (HR:5.55; 95%CI:2.11-14.59; P=.001), cardiac (HR:3.89; 95%CI:2.25-6.71; P=<.001) and pulmonary (HR:1.97; 95%CI:1.56-3.35; P=.013) complications were independent predictors of mortality during follow up.

CONCLUSION

F/B-EVAR is associated with satisfactory mid-term outcomes in a nationwide experience. A variety of risk factors should be considered in FB-EVAR indication and post-operative patients management in order to reduce the risk of postoperative complications and improve mid-term outcome.

Reinterventions after fenestrated and branched endografting for degenerative aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Fenestrated/branched endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (F/B-EVAR) is widely accepted technique to treat juxta/pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (J/P-AAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) for patients at high-surgical risk. However, the follow-up results should be carefully evaluated, especially in terms of the reintervention rate. The aim of the present study was, therefore, to evaluate the early and mid-term reinterventions after FB-EVAR for J/P-AAAs and TAAAs and their effects on follow-up survival.

METHODS

From 2006 to 2019, all consecutive patients who had undergone F/B-EVAR for J/P-AAAs or TAAAs were prospectively enrolled. Cases requiring reinterventions were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with aortic dissection were excluded from the present analysis. Reinterventions were classified as follows: access related, aortoiliac related, or target visceral vessel (TVV) related. Freedom from reintervention and survival were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine the risk factors.

RESULTS

Overall, 221 F/B-EVAR procedures were performed for 111 J/P-AAAs (50.3%) and 110 TAAAs (49.7%) in an elective (182; 82%) or urgent (39; 18%) setting. The median follow-up was 27 months (interquartile range, 13 months). Overall, 41 patients had undergone 52 reinterventions (single, 30 [14%]; multiple, 11 [5%]; access related, 17 [33%]; aortoiliac related, 6 [12%]; TVV related, 29 [55%]). Of the 52 reinterventions, 32 (62%) and 20 (38%) had occurred within and after 30 days, respectively. Eight reinterventions (15%) had been were performed in an urgent setting. Endovascular and open reinterventions were performed in 32 (62%) and 20 (38%) cases, respectively. Open reinterventions were frequently access related (access, 16; no access, 4; P ≤ .001). Technical success was 95% (39 patients); failures consisted of one splenic artery rupture and one renal artery loss. Patients undergoing reintervention had more frequently undergone a primary urgent F/B-EVAR (urgent, 12 of 39 [31%]; elective, 29 of 182 [16%]; P < .001) and had had TAAAs (TAAAs, 34 of 41 [83%]; J/P-AAAs, 7 of 41 [17%]; P < .001). The patients with TAAAs had had a greater incidence of TVV-related reintervention (TAAAs, 26 of 28 [93%]; J/P-AAAs, 2 of 28 [7%]; P < .001) and multiple reinterventions (TAAAs, 9 of 11 [82%]; J/P-AAAs, 2 of 11 [18%]; P = .03) compared with those with J/P-AAAs. Survival at 3 years was 75%. Freedom from reintervention was 81% at 3 years. Patients who had undergone reinterventions had lower 3-year survival (reintervention, 61%; no reintervention, 77%; P = .02). Preoperative chronic renal failure (hazard ratio [HR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.6; P = .02), TAAAs (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-4.8; P = .03), and urgent primary F/B-EVAR procedures (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-4.9; P = .01) were independent predictors of late mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Reinterventions after F/B-EVAR are not uncommon and were related to TVVs in only one half of cases. Most of them can be performed in an elective setting using endovascular techniques. The technical success rate was excellent. Reinterventions were more frequent after TAAAs and urgent F/B-EVAR procedures and had a significant effect on overall survival in these situations.

Meta-analysis of outcomes after intentional coverage of celiac artery in thoracic endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to demonstrate the clinical outcomes of intentional coverage of the celiac artery (CA) during thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR).

METHODS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies reporting coverage of CA during TEVAR. The methodologic quality of the included studies was assessed using the Moga score and Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A random effects model was used to pool the estimates. A meta-analysis was performed with investigation of the following outcomes: visceral ischemia, spinal cord ischemia (SCI), stroke, endoleak, reintervention, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies with 171 patients were included. The summary estimate rate of visceral ischemia events was 4.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9-8.9%; I² = 4.1%). The incidence of stroke and SCI was 0.2% (95% CI, 0%-3.4%; I² = 0%) and 3% (95% CI, 0.3%-7.4%; I² = 6.1%). The rate of endoleak during the follow-up period was 24.1% (95% CI, 14.3%-35.1%; I² = 20.0%). The reintervention rate was 13.6% (95% CI, 4.4%-25.7%; I² = 66.0%). The 30-day and 1-year mortality were 2.9% (95% CI, 0.3%-7.2%; I² = 6.2%) and 15.2% (95% CI, 7.8%-23.9%; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Among the patients with complex thoracic aortic pathologies deemed at high risk for open reconstruction, TEVAR with intentional coverage of the CA is a safe and feasible option to extend the distal sealing zone with acceptable rates of visceral ischemia, SCI, type II endoleak from the CA, and 30-day mortality.

Geometrical Evaluation of Aortic Sac Remodeling During Two-Step Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Endovascular Repair

BACKGROUND

The present study evaluates aneurysmal sac remodeling and the loss of the intercostal arteries after the first step of staged treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). The purpose of this approach is to keep the aneurysmal sac temporarily perfused to induce progressive thrombosis of the aneurysm while simultaneously allowing the spinal cord to establish adequate perfusion thereby promoting the development of collateral circulation.

METHODS

All patients with type II or type III TAAAs, having undergone 2-step endovascular treatment with at least a 2-branch endoprosthesis at our institution between April 2017 and May 2019, were retrospectively evaluated. Thirty-day mortality and spinal cord ischemia was assessed. The mean number of the intercostal and lumbar arteries, coverage length between the left subclavian artery and the stent graft proximal landing zone, total volume of the aneurysmal sac, lumen volume, and thrombosis volume were measured by preoperative and first-step postoperative computed tomography angiography. Patients were also grouped based on the chosen endoprosthesis (group A: double-branch aneurysmal sac reperfusion; group B: single-branch aneurysmal sac reperfusion).

RESULTS

Eleven patients (mean age: 76.5 years; range: 61-86) were considered. No 30-day mortality was observed after the first-step procedure, and 1 patient died after second-step treatment. No permanent paraplegia was observed after either the first or second endovascular steps. The lumen volume significantly decreased (27%; P < 0.001) after first-step endovascular treatment although there was a significant increase in aneurysm thrombosis (34% to 54%). The mean number of the intercostal arteries decreased from 19.7 to 9.3 (P < 0.001) after first-step endovascular treatment. Volume variations and percentage of intercostal loss did not significantly differ between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although aneurysm volume continued to increase after first-step treatment, two-step endovascular treatment is a feasible alternative to reduce the risk of severe ischemia in patients with extended TAAAs.

Acute Kidney Injury after Complex Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Background:

Complex endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm carries higher perioperative morbidity than standard infrarenal endovascular repair.

Objective:

This study reviews the incidence and associated factors of acute kidney injury in complex aortic endovascular repair of juxtarenal, pararenal, and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

Methods:

A literature review was performed for all studies on the endovascular repair of juxtarenal, pararenal, and thoracoabdominal aneurysms that evaluated rates of acute kidney injury as an outcome. Outcomes were further analyzed by the level of anatomic complexity and method of repair.

Results:

52 studies met inclusion criteria, with a total of 5454 individuals undergoing repair from 2004 to 2017. The overall rate of acute kidney injury ranged widely from 0 to 41%, with a rate of hemodialysis from 0 to 19% (temporary) and 0 to 14% (permanent). Increasing anatomic complexity was associated with higher rates of acute kidney injury. Mode of endovascular repair, learning curve effect, and preoperative chronic renal insufficiency did not demonstrate any associations with the outcome.

Conclusion:

Published rates of acute kidney injury in complex aortic aneurysm repair vary widely with few definitively associated factors other than increasing anatomic complexity and operative time. Further study is needed for the identification of predictors related to postoperative acute kidney injury.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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