Two-year evaluation of fenestrated and parallel branch endografts for the treatment of juxtarenal, suprarenal, and thoracoabdominal aneurysms at a single institution

Monocentric Evaluation of Physician-Modified Fenestrations or Parallel Endografts for Complex Aortic Diseases

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the demographic and anatomic characteristics, as well as perioperative and follow-up results of fenestration and parallel techniques for the endovascular repair of complex aortic diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 67 consecutive patients underwent endovascular treatment for complex aortic diseases including abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), thoracoabdominal aneurysm (TAAA), aortic dissection, or prior endovascular repair with either fenestrated and parallel endovascular aortic repair (f-EVAR or ch-EVAR) at a single institute from 2013 to 2021. Choices of intervention were made by the disease' emergency, patients' general condition, the anatomic characteristics, as well as following the recommendation from the devices' guidelines. Patients' clinical demographics, aortic disease characteristics, perioperative details, and disease courses were discussed. Short- and mid-term follow-up results were obtained and analyzed. Endpoints were aneurysm-related and unrelated mortality, branch instability, and renal function deterioration.

RESULTS

Totally, 34 and 27 patients received f-EVAR and ch-EVAR, while 6 patients received a combination of both. Fenestrated endovascular aortic repair was conducted mainly in AAA affecting visceral branches and TAAA, whereas ch-EVAR was normally utilized for infrarenal AAA. Regarding the average number of reconstructed arteries per patient, there was a significant difference among f-EVAR, ch-EVAR, and the combination group (mean = 2.3 ± 0.9, 1.4 ± 0.6, 3.5 ± 0.5, p<0.001). Primary technical success was achieved in 28 (82.4%), 22 (81.5%), and 3 (50.0%) patients for each group. Besides operational time (5.77 ± 2.58, 4.47 ± 1.44, p=0.033), no significant difference was observed for blood transfusion, intensive care unit (ICU) or hospital stay, blood creatinine level, 30-day complications, or follow-up complications between patients undergoing f-EVAR or ch-EVAR. Patients receiving combination of both techniques had a higher rate of blood transfusion (p=0.044), longer operational time (p=0.008) or hospital stay (p=0.017), as well as more stent occlusion (p=0.001), endoleak (p=0.004) at short-term and a higher rate of endoleak (p=0.023) at mid-term follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study demonstrated that f-EVAR and ch-EVAR techniques had acceptable perioperative and follow-up results and should be considered viable alternatives when encountering complex aortic diseases.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study sought to investigate the baseline and pathological characteristics, as well as perioperative and follow-up results of f-EVAR and ch-EVAR at a single Chinese institution. F-EVAR (mostly physician-modified f-EVAR) was applied in patients with a wide range of etiologies and disease types, while ch-EVAR was preferred for AAA in older patients with an average higher ASA grade. Our experience suggested acceptable safety and efficacy both for techniques, and no significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding any short or mid-term adverse events.

Two-Year Results on Real-World Fenestrated or Branched Endovascular Repair for Complex Aortic Abdominal Aneurysm in France

PURPOSE

To describe and compare mid-term outcomes from 2 real-world data collection efforts on fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (fbEVAR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in France and to evaluate the potential of health care databases for long-term post-market surveillance (PMS) and continued reimbursement approval.

METHODS

Two real-world studies were conducted in France: a retrospective health care database study (SNDS) and a prospective clinical study. In the SNDS study, data from implantation and/or hospital stays occurring during follow-up were extracted for all patients treated with the study devices from April 2012 to December 2018. In the clinical study, high-risk patients undergoing fbEVAR with the study devices were enrolled consecutively at 15 sites in France from December 2016 to November 2018.

RESULTS

Data from 1073 patients were extracted from SNDS and compared with analogous variables from 186 patients in the clinical study. Most demographic details were similar between studies (SNDS vs clinical: mean age, 71.9 vs 71.8 years; men, 91.0% vs 89.8%), as was 30-day mortality (SNDS: 5.5%, clinical: 4.3%). Patients received custom-made fenestrated or branched devices (SNDS: 80.7%, clinical: 96.2%) or CE-marked Zenith Fenestrated devices (SNDS: 19.3%, clinical: 3.8%). Initial or technical success was above 94% for both studies. Two-year freedom from all-cause mortality was 80.0% (SNDS) and 85.1% (clinical study). Two-year freedom from aneurysm-related mortality was 93.8% (SNDS) and 94.6% (clinical study). Detailed imaging outcomes were not captured within SNDS; however, information on secondary procedures to restore patency was available and used as a surrogate measure for secondary interventions. Two-year freedom from secondary interventions was 73% for the SNDS study. In the clinical study, at 2 years, aneurysm stability or shrinkage was observed in 92.3% of patients, freedom from target vessel primary patency loss was above 95% for all visceral target vessels, and freedom from secondary interventions was 79.1%.

CONCLUSION

Real-world outcomes from the SNDS and clinical study suggest positive mid-term outcomes in high-risk populations following fbEVAR for complex AAAs. The similarities between these studies suggest that the use of health care databases may be an alternative to prospective clinical studies for long-term follow-up and PMS.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Positive results following endovascular repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms are observed from data extracted from both the French health care database and a post-market clinical study despite initial high-risk patient status and diverse center experience. These outcomes parallel more rigorously designed studies and suggest that with careful study design, real-world data collections have high translatable value to add to the clinical understanding of fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (fbEVAR).

Urgent and emergent repair of complex aortic aneurysms using an off-the-shelf branched device

Introduction

Endovascular repair using off-the-shelf endografts is a viable solution in patients with ruptured or symptomatic complex aortic aneurysms. This analysis aimed to present the peri-operative and follow-up outcomes in urgent and emergent cases managed with the t-Branch multibranched thoracoabdominal endograft.

Methods

Prospectively collected data from all consecutive urgent and emergent cases managed in two aortic centers between January 1st, 2014, to November 30th, 2022, using the t-Branch device (Cook Medical Inc., Bjaeverskov, Denmark) were analyzed. Patients presenting with ruptured aortic complex aneurysms were characterized as emergent and patients with aneurysms >90 mm of diameter, or symptomatic aneurysms were characterized as urgent. Technical success, 30-day mortality, major adverse events (MAE) and spinal cord ischemia (SCI) rates were assessed.

Results

225 patients (36.5% females, 72.5 ± 2.8 years) were included; 73.0% were urgent. The mean aneurysm diameter was 109 ± 3.9 mm and 44.4% were type I-III TAAAs. Females (p = .03), para-renal aneurysms (p = .02) and ASA score IV (p < .001) were more common in emergent cases. Technical success was 97.8%. Thirty-day mortality and MAE rates were 17.8% and 30.6%, respectively. SCI rate was 14.7%, (4.8% paraplegia rate) with 22.2% of patients receiving prophylactic cerebrospinal drainage. Thirty-day mortality (13.3% vs. 26.7%, p = .04) and MAE (26.0% vs. 43.0%, p = .02) were more common among emergent cases while technical success (97.6% vs. 98.3%, p = .9), and SCI (13.3% vs. 18.3%, p = .4) were similar. Survival at 12-months was 83.5% (SE 5.9%) for the urgent and 77.1% (SE 8.2%) for the emergent group (log rank, p = 0.96).

Conclusion

T-Branch represents an effective and safe solution for the management of urgent and emergent cases with complex aortic aneurysms, with high technical success, promising early mortality and SCI rates.

Emergent endovascular treatment options for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm

For a long time, parallel grafting, physician-modified endografts, and, more recently, in situ fenestration were the only go-to endovascular options for ruptured thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, offered mixed results, and depended mainly on the operator's and center's experience. As custom-made devices have become an established endovascular treatment option for elective thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, they are not a viable option in the emergency setting, as endograft production can take up to 4 months. The development of off-the-shelf (OTS) multibranched devices with a standardized configuration has allowed the treatment of ruptured thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm with emergent branched endovascular procedures. The Zenith t-Branch device (Cook Medical) was the first readily available graft outside the United States to receive the CE mark (in 2012) and is currently the most studied device for those indications. A new device, the E-nside thoracoabdominal branch endoprosthesis OTS multibranched endograft (Artivion), has been made commercially available, and the GORE EXCLUDER thoracoabdominal branch endoprosthesis OTS multibranched endograft (W. L. Gore and Associates) is expected to be released in 2023. Due to the lack of guidelines on ruptured thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, this review summarizes the available treatment options (ie, parallel grafts, physician-modified endografts, in situ fenestrations, and OTS multibranched devices), compares the indications and contraindications, and points out the evidence gaps that should be filled in the next decade.

Thoracoabdominal Aortic Disease and Repair: JACC Focus Seminar, Part 3

Thoracoabdominal aortic disease is a rare but life-threatening condition that requires expert multidisciplinary collaborative management. Intervention is indicated in patients with symptomatic aneurysms or when an aneurysm reaches a certain threshold of diameter or rate of expansion. The strategies for spinal cord and end-organ protection have evolved over several decades, resulting in improved outcomes after repair. Open repair, although invasive, provides definitive and durable repair. Endovascular approaches are rapidly evolving, and the results with fenestrated and branched endografts are promising. Both open repair and endovascular repair require highly specialized expertise, and outcomes are best when repair is undertaken in an elective setting by a dedicated team. Patients with degenerative thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and chronic dissections should be followed up closely and referred for elective repair when indicated.

Laboratory "In-vitro" Evaluation of the Parallel Stent Graft Association for the Iliac Sandwich Technique

OBJECTIVES

The Iliac Sandwich is an off-label technique that uses parallel stent grafts to treat aortoiliac aneurysms. The purpose of this experimental study is to evaluate the conformability and juxtaposition of stent grafts combinations used in this technique through in-vitro mechanical evaluation, computed tomography (CT) analyses, and a controlled pulsatile flow system.

METHODS

The combinations of two Viabahn® ("V-V") or Viabahn® and Excluder® iliac extension ("V-E") were analysed using CT imaging with measurement of the gutter area by two independent analysts before and after balloon angioplasty. In a second phase, the parallel stent combinations were also evaluated using CT imaging after being implanted in the aortic aneurysm model with a pulsatile flow system with controlled temperature, viscosity, and density.

RESULTS

The "V-E" group had a better conformability when compared to the "V-V" group, ensuring smaller gutter areas (0.0064 cm² ± 0.01 vs. 0.0228 cm² ± 0.03, p < 0.001). Post dilatation with two non-compliant balloons resulted in enlargement of the gutter area (Area A, p 0.065; Area B, p 0.071). Conversely, post dilatation with a non-compliant balloon for the internal iliac component and a compliant balloon for the external iliac device reduced the gutter area (Area A, p 0.008; Area B, p 0.010).

CONCLUSION

The combination of Viabahn® and Excluder® iliac extension device ("V-E") had a smaller gutter area compared to two Viabahn® parallel stents for the Iliac Sandwich Technique. Post dilatation using a non-compliant balloon for the internal iliac device and a compliant balloon for the external iliac provided superior conformability and juxtaposition.

Editor's Choice - Comparison of Open, Standard, and Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair Treatments for Juxtarenal/Short Neck Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with adverse morphology of the aneurysm neck are "complex". Techniques employed to repair complex aneurysms include open surgical repair (OSR) and a number of on label endovascular techniques such as fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with adjuncts (including chimneys and endo-anchors), as well as off label use of standard EVAR. The aim was to conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) of published comparative outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

An electronic search was performed in Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). These databases were interrogated using the PubMed interface and the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search (HDAS) interface developed by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence.

REVIEW METHODS

Online databases were interrogated up to April 2020. Studies were included if they compared outcomes between at least two methods of repair for complex aneurysms (those with at least one adverse neck feature: absent/short neck, conicality, angulation, calcification, large diameter, and thrombus). The primary outcome measure was peri-operative death. Pre-registration was done in PROSPERO (CRD42020177482).

RESULTS

The search identified 24 observational studies and 7854 patients who underwent OSR, FEVAR, off label EVAR, or chimney EVAR. No comparative studies included EVAR with endo-anchors. NMA was performed on 23 studies that reported outcomes of aneurysms with short/absent infrarenal neck. Compared with OSR, off label EVAR (relative risk [RR] 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.01 - 0.41) and FEVAR (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.32-0.94) were associated with lower peri-operative mortality. This difference was not seen at the midterm follow up (30 months). Compared with OSR, FEVAR was associated with a lower peri-operative myocardial infarction (MI) rate (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 - 0.62) but a higher midterm re-intervention rate (hazard ratio 1.65, 95% CI 1.04 - 2.66). All studies had a "moderate" or "high" risk of bias. Confidence in the network findings (GRADE) was generally "low".

CONCLUSION

This NMA demonstrated a peri-operative survival benefit for off label EVAR and FEVAR compared with OSR, potentially due to reduced risk of MI. FEVAR carries a greater midterm re-intervention risk than OSR, with potential implications for cost effectiveness. There is paucity of comparative data for cases with adverse neck features other than short length.

Endovascular treatment of complicated aortic aneurysms using a modified flow-diverting strategy: Mid- to long-term outcome from a multicenter cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Frequently reported adverse events following flow-diverting stents' treatment of aortic aneurysms indicate further refinements of this technique are required. This study aims at evaluating the clinical efficacy of an improved flow-diverting strategy.

METHODS

A modified flow-diverting procedure was utilized in selected patients, in which stent-grafts were used to cover the non-branched segment of the aneurysmal lesion while flow-diverting multilayered bare metal stents were applied to cover the reno-visceral segment. The safety and efficacy of this joint procedure were assessed by regular follow-up.

RESULTS

We screened 497 patients and included 67 cases (mean age: 67.07 ± 12.14 years; 53 males) between February 2012 and March 2018. The median number of stent-grafts and bare metal stents used in the procedure were 1 (range: 1 to 3) and 3 (range: 2 to 4), respectively. During a mean follow-up period of 34.54 ± 20.28 months, aneurysm maximum diameter decreased from 64.79 ± 10.31 to 59.32 ± 10.20 mm (p = 0.002), while sac thrombosis ratio increased from 26.01±10.99% to 98.46±4.84% (p<0.001). Aneurysm-related death or conversion to open repair was documented in three patients. The majority side-branches (198/201) remained patent during follow-up. Overall clinical success rate reached 91.04% (61/67).

CONCLUSIONS

The joint procedure is characterized by significant aneurysm thrombosis along with high aneurysm stabilization/shrinkage and side-branches' patency rate. It might represent a potential improvement of the flow-diverting strategy in treating complex aortic lesions, yet large-scale, prospective, and randomized trials are anticipated to draw a robust conclusion.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The joint procedure could potentially exclude complex aortic aneurysms from circulation while maintaining the collateral branches.

Chimney endovascular aneurysm repair (ChEVAR) for hostile neck complex aneurysm

OBJECTIVE

Recent guidelines recognize the role of chimney endovascular aneurysm repair (ChEVAR) in the treatment of complex aortic disorders. The optimal configuration and number of visceral vessels that can be incorporated is still controversial. We aim to review outcomes from a multi-institutional decade-long experience with ChEVAR.

METHODS

Patients undergoing ChEVAR with multiple (≥2) chimney branches were selected from a prospectively maintained database at the two academic university hospitals. All patients were poorly suited for fenestrated or branched endograft repair (F/BEVAR) and deemed poor-risk for open surgery.

RESULTS

Forty-nine multiple ChEVAR were performed in 44 men and 5 women, with complete outcome data at a mean follow-up of 18 months. Overall, 2 patients died during follow-up (4%) with no aneurysm-related mortality and two ruptures after ChEVAR (4.1%) due to a type Ib endoleak from iliac limb pullout and persistent gutter-flow, both repaired with endovascular means. No stroke or spinal cord ischemia was noted during the follow-up period. Reintervention was undertaken in eight patients (16.3%) with five reinterventions for persistent gutter-flow and four chimney graft-associated. Three-vessel ChEVAR was performed in 16 patients, with two-vessel ChEVAR in 33 patients for a total of 114 chimney branches (mean 2.3 chimneys per patient). There were 21 superior mesenteric artery (SMA), 45 right renal, 46 left renal artery (LRA), and two accessory LRA chimneys placed. Antegrade configuration of chimney branches was chosen in 43 patients (88%). There were no significant differences between three-vessel and two-vessel ChEVAR upon univariate analysis in aneurysm size (65.6 vs 60.5 mm; p = 0.059), iliac diameter (7.3 vs 7.1 mm; p = 0.85), or endograft oversizing (30 vs 32.5%; p = 0.43). Three-vessel ChEVAR was associated with a larger aneurysm neck diameter (28.4 vs 25.0 mm; p = 0.021), shorter native infrarenal neck (0.5 vs 3.37 mm; p = 0.002) as well as longer seal zone (36.33 vs 22.67 mm; p = 0.005) compared with two-vessel ChEVAR. At follow-up, there were no significant differences in gutter area between three-vessel and two-vessel ChEVAR (18.9 vs 15.7 mm³; p = 0.73) nor the rate of persistent gutter-flow (12.5 vs 9.1%; p = 0.71).

CONCLUSION

Reintervention to multiple chimney grafts and for persistent gutter-flow is higher compared to single chimneys and demands close surveillance. However, based upon this combined transantlantic experience, we believe multiple ChEVAR provides a reasonable and safe option for complex aortic aneurysm repair when open or custom endografts are not available or indicated based on their Instructions For use, even when triple chimney grafts are required. The optimal configuration for multiple ChEVAR still warrants further study, although theoretical preliminary advantages may exist for a combination of antegrade and retrograde chimneys.

Total abdominal debranching hybrid thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair versus chimneys and snorkels

Open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair remains a surgical challenge. Hybrid and total endovascular repair have emerged as alternatives in treating TAAA. Total endovascular TAAA repair may be best performed with branched/fenestrated stent grafts. However, these technologies are not yet widely available. Thus, currently total endovascular TAAA repair using the chimney/snorkel techniques is considered a viable option in many centers.

In this article, we briefly review 2 readily available techniques with off-the-shelf devices, hybrid procedure using total abdominal debranching, and total endovascular repair using chimney/snorkel procedures. The hybrid TAAA repair avoids thoracotomy but requires laparotomy and carries high morbidity and mortality (eg, operative mortality, 4%-26% and renal failure, 4%-26%), comparable to traditional open repair. The staged hybrid approach has been proposed to minimize the invasiveness of the procedure, whereas the associated risk of interval aortic deaths is not negligible. Total endovascular repair reduces the morbidity and mortality after TAAA repair (eg, operative mortality, 3%-20% and renal failure, 0%-20%). However, it is technically demanding and the risks of future reinterventions—and need for repetitive surveillance—is inevitable (eg, immediate type I endoleak, 7%-16% and 1-year branch patency, 93%-98%). Currently, there are not enough data to determine which less-invasive option for open repair in patients with TAAA is superior. These alternatives should complement each other and be applied to carefully selected populations as a part of the overall toolbox in treating TAAA.

A risk-adjusted and anatomically stratified cohort comparison study of open surgery, endovascular techniques and medical management for juxtarenal aortic aneurysms-the UK COMPlex AneurySm Study (UK-COMPASS): a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

In one-third of all abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), the aneurysm neck is short (juxtarenal) or shows other adverse anatomical features rendering operations more complex, hazardous and expensive. Surgical options include open surgical repair and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) techniques including fenestrated EVAR, EVAR with adjuncts (chimneys/endoanchors) and off-label standard EVAR. The aim of the UK COMPlex AneurySm Study (UK-COMPASS) is to answer the research question identified by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) Programme: 'What is the clinical and cost-effectiveness of strategies for the management of juxtarenal AAA, including fenestrated endovascular repair?'

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

UK-COMPASS is a cohort study comparing clinical and cost-effectiveness of different strategies used to manage complex AAAs with stratification of physiological fitness and anatomical complexity, with statistical correction for baseline risk and indication biases. There are two data streams. First, a stream of routinely collected data from Hospital Episode Statistics and National Vascular Registry (NVR). Preoperative CT scans of all patients who underwent elective AAA repair in England between 1 November 2017 and 31 October 2019 are subjected to Corelab analysis to accurately identify and include every complex aneurysm treated. Second, a site-reported data stream regarding quality of life and treatment costs from prospectively recruited patients across England. Site recruitment also includes patients with complex aneurysms larger than 55 mm diameter in whom an operation is deferred (medical management). The primary outcome measure is perioperative all-cause mortality. Follow-up will be to a median of 5 years.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has received full regulatory approvals from a Research Ethics Committee, the Confidentiality Advisory Group and the Health Research Authority. Data sharing agreements are in place with National Health Service Digital and the NVR. Dissemination will be via NIHR HTA reporting, peer-reviewed journals and conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN85731188.

Impact of target visceral vessel anatomical configuration on early complications following endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

Impact of target visceral vessel anatomical configuration on early complicatins following endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms Objectives: Fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (fEVAR-bEVAR) is a viable treatment option for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms but target visceral stent (TVS) endoleak and thrombosis remain a limiting factor. This study aims to evaluate TVS anatomy impact on one-year risk of thrombosis and endoleak.

METHODS

Patients treated with fEVAR-bEVAR for thoracoabdominal aneurysms between 2008-2020 in our centre were enrolled. We recorded comorbidities, operative details, one-month postoperative CT scan (anatomical reference), and TVS behaviour: thrombosis and endoleak at one-year follow-up. For each TVS, different points were identified using a centre-lumen-line: (A) TVS origin, (B) end of branch/fenestration, (C) visceral vessel entry, (D) end of TVS, (E) 1-cm distally. We analyzed TVS tortuosity ((centre-lumen-line/straight distance)-1, in %), image vector analysis of each segment in 2D (antero-posterior, left-right) and 3D (craneo-caudal displacement), and centre-lumen-line analysis (bending in ABC and CDE). Three independent observers performed a blind analysis, and anatomical differences between bEVAR/fEVAR, and cases with/without 1-year thrombosis and TVS endoleak, were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves (Log-Rank test), and T-Test/Wilcoxon signed-ranks test respectively.

RESULTS

54 patients (72±713 years mean age; 182 TVS: 50 branches, 132 fenestrations) met the inclusion criteria. bEVAR cases had longer stents, with more caudal 3D angulation and greater ABC angulated segment. After excluding bEVAR cases (low case number), 97 fEVAR TVS were analyzed. Five thrombosis and seven endoleaks were observed. While anatomical configuration showed no association to thrombosis, it was related to endoleak: these cases presented more tortuous stents (5.97%±0.10, 21.40%±0,22, P=.011), with more angulated centre-lumen-line at ABC segment (5.69°±15.77°, 7.18°±7.77°, P=.012), and more upward-pointing stents in the origin of the stent (AB: 89.07°±24.46°, 109.09°±16.56°, P=.012; BC: 87.86°±21.10°, 113.11°±22.23°, P=.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomical configuration of the TVS is associated with stent type I-III endoleak, but not thrombosis, at one-year following fEVAR. Cases with endoleak presented more tortuous stents, with a more angulated exit from the endograft and upward-pointing of the origin of the stent.

Preoperative functional status predicts 2-year mortality in patients undergoing fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) is a minimally invasive alternative for patients at high risk of open repair of complex aortic aneurysms. Nearly all investigative study protocols evaluating F/BEVAR have required a predicted life expectancy of >2 years for study inclusion. However, accurate risk models for predicting 2-year survival in this patient population are lacking. We sought to identify the preoperative predictors of 2-year survival for patients undergoing F/BEVAR.

METHODS

The prospectively collected data for all consecutive F/BEVAR procedures, performed in an institutional review board-approved registry and/or a physician-sponsored investigational device exemption (IDE) trial (IDE no. G130210), were reviewed (November 2010 to February 2019). We assessed 44 preoperative patient characteristics, including comorbidities, preoperative functional status, aneurysm morphologies, and repair techniques. Preoperative functional status was defined as totally dependent (any impairment in activities of daily living or residing in a skilled nursing facility), partially dependent (any impairment in instrumental activities of daily living), or independent (no impairment in activities of daily living or instrumental activities of daily living). Using the results of univariate analysis (P < .2), a Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to identify the independent predictors of 2-year all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

For the 256 consecutive patients who had undergone F/BEVAR (6 common iliac [2.3%], 94 juxtarenal [41%], 35 pararenal [14%], 119 thoracoabdominal [47%], and 2 arch [0.8%] aneurysms), the 2-year mortality was 18%. On Cox modeling, the only independent preoperative predictor contributing to 2-year mortality was functional status (totally dependent: hazard ratio [HR], 5.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-16; P = .0024; partially dependent: HR, 4.5; 95% CI, 2.4-8.7; P < .0000019). A history of an implanted anti-arrhythmic device was protective (HR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.99; P = .0495). Factors such as age, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, aneurysm extent, and previous aortic surgery, were not significant. The 2-year mortality for the independent (n = 176; 69%), partially dependent (n = 69; 27%), and totally dependent (n = 10; 3.9%) groups was 11%, 33%, and 40%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients undergoing F/BEVAR, decreased preoperative functional status was the strongest predictor of 2-year mortality, with totally dependent patients experiencing poor survival. The traditional risk factors were not independently significant, perhaps reflecting the high prevalence of severe chronic illness in these high-risk patients participating in an IDE trial. For the independent patients, the 2-year F/BEVAR survival rate was 89%, equivalent to patient survival after infrarenal EVAR. Therefore, for independent patients, it would be reasonable to expand the indication for F/BEVAR to low-risk patients.

Total Endovascular Repair of Complex Thoracoabdominal/Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with a Four-Branched Off-the-Shelf G-Branch™ Stent Graft

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of a novel off-the-shelf endograft (G-Branch™; Lifetech Scientific, Shenzhen, China) for the treatment of patients with complex thoracoabdominal/abdominal aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

Three patients (1 with a suprarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm and 2 with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms) were treated with the G-Branch endograft involving 2 proximal inner branches for the celiac axis and superior mesenteric artery and 2 distal side directional branches for the bilateral renal arteries.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in all 3 patients, and no postoperative complications occurred. At 6-month follow-up, no adverse events occurred, and all the target vessels were patent.

CONCLUSIONS

The newly developed G-Branch device allows the achievement of total endovascular revascularization of the visceral and renal arteries. Use of this device is feasible and effective. Long-term follow-up and a larger clinical trial are necessary to evaluate its reliability and durability.