Effect of aortic angulation on the outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair

Editor's Choice - Outcomes of Off the Shelf Outer Branched Versus Inner Branched Endografts in the Treatment of Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in the B.R.I.O. (BRanched Inner - Outer) Study Group

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare two commercially available off the shelf branched endografts for thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair, namely the E-nside (Artivion) and Zenith t-Branch (Cook Medical) devices.

METHODS

This multicentre retrospective study (2020 - 2023) included patients treated by branched endovascular aortic repair (BEVAR) for TAAA using the inner branched E-nside or the outer branched t-Branch. Endpoints were 30 day technical success and major adverse events (MAEs) as well as one year freedom from target vessel instability and main endograft instability.

RESULTS

The study included 163 patients: 79 (307 target vessels) treated with E-nside and 84 (325 target vessels) with t-branch. Aneurysm extent was I - III in 91 patients (55.8%; 47% of E-nside and 66% of t-Branch) and IV in 72 patients (44.2%; 53% of E-nside and 34% of t-Branch) (p = .011). An adjunctive proximal thoracic endograft was used in 43% of E-nside vs. 69% of t-Branch (p < .001), with less frequent thoracic endografting (14% vs. 76%; p < .001) and shorter length of coverage (p = .024) in extent IV TAAA treated by E-nside. E-nside cases had shorter renal artery bridging lengths (66 ± 17 mm vs. 76 ± 20 mm; p < .010) and less frequent use of a distal bifurcated endograft (53% vs. 80%; p < .001). Comparing 30 day results, the mortality rate was 1% vs. 2% (p = .62), any MAE occurred in 18% vs. 21% (p = .55), the stroke rate was 3% vs. 0% (p = .23), and the elective spinal cord ischaemia rate was 5% vs. 8% (p = .40) for E-nside and t-Branch, respectively. At one year, freedom from target vessel instability was 96 ± 3% for E-nside and 95 ± 3% for t-Branch (p = .58), and freedom from endograft instability was 98 ± 2% vs. 97 ± 3% (p = .46), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Both off the shelf devices provided excellent early and one year results. The E-nside may require shorter thoracic aortic coverage and bridging length for the renal arteries, and less frequent implantation of a concomitant proximal thoracic or distal abdominal bifurcated endograft. However, these aspects did not determine significant differences in clinical outcomes.

Outcomes of off-the-shelf preloaded inner branch device for urgent endovascular thoraco-abdominal aortic repair in the ItaliaN Branched Registry of E-nside EnDograft

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to report the outcomes of endovascular urgent thoracoabdominal aortic (TAAA) repair, using an off-the-shelf preloaded inner branch device (E-nside; Artivion).

METHODS

Data from a physician-initiated national multicenter registry, including patients treated with E-nside endograft (INBREED) were prospectively collected (2020-2024); only urgent cases were included in this study. Primary outcomes were technical success and mortality at 30 days. Secondary outcomes were spinal cord ischemia rate, stroke rate, major adverse events (MAE) as also branch instability at 12 months.

RESULTS

Of 185 patients enrolled in the INBREED, 64 (34.5%) were treated in a urgent setting and were included in the study. Reason for urgent repair was presence of aneurysm-related symptoms in 31 patients (48.4%), a contained rupture in eight (12.5%), and a large aneurysm >80 mm in 25 (39.1%). Extent of repair was I to III in 32 patients (50%) and IV in 32 (50%); 18 (28%) had a narrow (<25 mm) paravisceral aortic lumen. An adjunctive proximal thoracic endograft was deployed in 29 patients (45.3%); a distal bifurcated abdominal endograft was used in 33 (51.5%). Two hundred forty-nine target vessels (97.2%) were successfully incorporated through an inner branch from an upper arm (81.2%) or femoral (18.8%) access. A balloon expandable stent was used in 184 (75.7%) target vessels, a self-expandable stent in 59 (24.3%). Mean time for target vessel bridging was 39.9 ± 28.4 minutes per target vessel. Thirty-day cumulative major adverse event (MAE) rate was 28%, and mortality occurred in five patients (9.1%). There was one postoperative stroke (1.6%), and the spinal cord ischemia (SCI) rate was 8% (n = 5). For the 249 target vessels successfully incorporated through an inner branch, 1-year freedom from target vessel instability was 93% ± 3% after 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

The E-nside represents a valid solution for the urgent treatment of TAAAs, including symptomatic and ruptured TAAAs, as well as large asymptomatic TAAAs that cannot wait for a custom-made device. The preloaded inner branches and available proximal and distal graft diameters might be useful in urgent settings and provided satisfactory early and 1-year results, in terms of both endograft and target vessel stability. Further studies are required to assess the clinical role of E-nside for urgent TAAA repair.

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.

Clinical Impact and Determinants of Fenestration to Target Vessel Misalignment in Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE

This single centre, retrospective study (2014 - 2022) on juxta-, pararenal, or thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms treated by fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) was conducted to investigate the clinical impact and determinants of fenestration to target vessel misalignment in FEVAR.

METHODS

Pre-operative supracoeliac, pararenal, and infrarenal aortic angles were measured on three dimensional computed tomography angiography (CTA) reconstructions. Two components of misalignment were measured on the first post-operative CTA: horizontal misalignment (angle between the fenestration and the target vessel ostium on perpendicular CTA cuts) and vertical misalignment (vertical distance between the fenestration and the target vessel at its origin). Endpoints were freedom from target vessel instability (TVI) and alignment change over time.

RESULTS

Of 65 patients treated by FEVAR, 60 (202 target arteries) with juxta-, pararenal (80%), or thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (20%) were included. Mean horizontal misalignment was 9 ± 12° (median 5°; IQR 0 - 16) and mean vertical misalignment was 0.7 ± 1 mm (median 0 mm, IQR 0 - 1). Freedom from TVI was 92% (95% CI 88 - 98) at 36 months. Horizontal misalignment > 15° was significantly associated with TVI (HR 5.19; 95% CI 1.54 - 17.48; p = .008); vertical misalignment did not significantly impact TVI (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.56 - 1.73; p = .97). By multivariable analysis, pararenal aortic angle (OR 1.01 per increased degree of angulation; 95% CI 1.00 - 1.02; p = .044), bridging distance > 5 mm (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02 - 1.11; p = .003), and use of higher profile endografts in tortuous iliac access (OR 7.55; 95% CI 4.55 - 1.11; p = .003) were associated with clinically significant misalignment. Bridging distance > 5 mm (OR 2.00; 95% CI 1.02 - 11.29; p = .044), degree of baseline misalignment (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01 - 1.08; p = .036), and persistence of any primary endoleak for > 6 months (OR 5.85; 95% CI 1.23 - 29.1; p = .023) were associated with misalignment increase during follow up.

CONCLUSION

Horizontal misalignment > 15° is associated with worsened target vessel outcomes. This may occur as a result of excessive iliac access tortuosity, high pararenal aortic angulation, and bridging distance > 5 mm.

Fate of primary determinate and indeterminate target vessel endoleaks after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of primary determinate and indeterminate target vessel endoleaks (TVELs) after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR).

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective study (2014-2023) on F-BEVAR for thoracoabdominal (TAAAs) or pararenal aortic aneurysms (PRAAs). TVELs were classified as "primary" if present at the first postoperative computed tomography angiogram. Endoleaks were defined "determinate" (dELs) if the cause (type Ic or IIIc) and implicated target vessel were identifiable and "indeterminate" (iELs) if contrast enhancement was detectable at the level of fenestrations/branches without any evident source. Endoleaks involving multiple inflows (type II and target vessels) were defined as "complex" (cELs). Endpoints were endoleak spontaneous resolution, 1-year aneurysm sac failure to regress (>5 mm diameter decrease), and 4-year endoleak-related secondary interventions. Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox regression were used for the analysis.

RESULTS

There were 142 patients with JRAAs/PRAAs (n = 85; 60%) or TAAAs (n = 57; 40%), with 513 target arteries incorporated through a fenestration (n = 294; 57%) or directional branch (n = 219; 43%). Fifty-nine primary TVELs (12%) were identified in 35 patients (25%), a dEL in 20 patients (14%) and iEL in 15 (11%); 22 (15%) had a determinate or indeterminate cEL. Overall spontaneous resolution rate was 75% (95% confidence interval [CI], 51%-87%) at 4 years. cELs (odds ratio [OR], 5.00; 95% CI, 1.10-49.4; P < .001) and iELs after BEVAR (OR, 9.43; 95% CI, 3.41-56.4; P = .002) were more likely to persist >6 months, and persistent forms were associated with sac failure to regress at 1 year (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.03-12.59; P = .040). Overall freedom from endoleak-related reinterventions was 85% (95% CI, 79%-92%) at 4 years, 92% (95% CI, 87%-97%) for those without primary TVELs and 62% (95% CI, 46%-84%) for those with any primary TVEL (P < .001). In particular, cELs (hazard ratio, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.4-18.81; P = .020) were associated with an increased need for reintervention. In case a secondary intervention was needed, iEL or cEL had an increased risk for multiple secondary procedures (hazard ratio, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.22-10.34; P = .034).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary TVELs are frequent after F-BEVAR, and a clear characterization of the endoleak source by computed tomography angiogram is not possible in 40% of patients. Most primary TVELs spontaneously resolve, but during follow-up, patients with any primary TVEL experience a worsened freedom from endoleak-related reinterventions that is mostly driven by persistence of cELs and post-BEVAR iELs. Multiple secondary procedures may be required in case of iELs or cELs.

Effect of narrow paravisceral aorta on target vessel instability after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of narrow paravisceral aorta (NPA) on target vessel instability (TVI) after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective study (2014-2023) of patients treated by fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) or pararenal aortic aneurysms. The paravisceral aorta was defined as the aortic segment limited by the diaphragmatic hiatus proximally and the emergence of lower renal artery distally, and was considered "narrow" in case of a minimum inner diameter of <25 mm. The minimum aortic diameter, location, longitudinal extension, angulation, calcification, and thrombus thickness of NPA were evaluated at the preoperative computed tomography angiogram. End points were 30-day technical success and freedom from TVI.

RESULTS

There were 142 patients with JRAA/pararenal aortic aneurysm (n = 85 [59%]) and extent IV (n = 24 [17%]) or extent I-III (n = 33 [23%]) TAAA, with 513 target arteries successfully incorporated through a fenestration (n = 294 [57%]) or directional branch (n = 219 [43%]). A NPA was present in 95 patients (70%), 73 (86%) treated by fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) and 22 (39%) by branched endovascular aortic repair (BEVAR). The overall 30-day mortality was 2% and technical success was 99%, without differences between NPA and non-NPA (P = .99). Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from TVI at 4 years was 82%, 81% (95% CI, 75-95) in patients with a NPA and 80% (95% CI, 68-94) and in those without NPA (P = .220). The result was maintained for both FEVAR (NPA: 81% [95% CI, 62-88]; non-NPA: 76% [95% CI, 60-99]; P = .870) and BEVAR (NPA: 77% [95% CI, 69-99]; non-NPA: 80% [95% confidence interval (CI) 66-99]; P = .100). After multivariate analysis, the concomitant presence of a NPA <20 mm and angulation of >30° was significantly associated with TVI in FEVAR (HR, 3.21; 95% CI, 1.03-48.70; P = .036), being the result mostly driven by target vessel occlusion. In BEVAR, a NPA diameter of <25 mm was not associated with TVI (HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 0.59-5.23; P = .948); after multivariate analysis, the use of outer branches in case of a NPA longitudinal extension of >25 mm (hazard ratio [HR], 3.02; 95% CI, 1.01-36.33; P = .040) and NPA severe calcification (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.00-22.42; P = .048) were associated with a higher chance for TVI.

CONCLUSIONS

FEVAR and BEVAR are both feasible in cases of NPA and provide satisfactory target vessels durability. The use of outer branches should be avoided in cases with an inner aortic diameter of <25 mm with a longitudinal extension of >25 mm or moderate to severe NPA calcifications. In FEVAR, bridging stent patency may be negatively influenced by NPA of <20 mm in association with aortic angulation of >30°.

Editor's Choice - Early Outcomes of a Novel Off the Shelf Preloaded Inner Branch Endograft for the Treatment of Complex Aortic Pathologies in the ItaliaN Branched Registry of E-nside EnDograft (INBREED)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the early outcomes of a novel off the shelf pre-loaded inner branched thoraco-abdominal endograft (E-nside) in the treatment of aortic pathologies.

METHODS

Data from a physician initiated national multicentre registry on patients treated with the E-nside endograft, were prospectively collected and analysed. Pre-operative clinical and anatomical characteristics, procedural data, and early outcomes (90 days) were recorded in a dedicated electronic data capture system. The primary endpoint was technical success. Secondary endpoints were early mortality (90 days), procedural metrics, target vessel patency, endoleak rate, and major adverse events (MAEs) at 90 days.

RESULTS

In total, 116 patients from 31 Italian centres were included. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) patient age was 73 ± 8 years and 76 (65.5%) were male. Aortic pathologies included degenerative aneurysm in 98 (84.5%), post-dissection aneurysm in five (4.3%), pseudoaneurysm in six (5.2%), penetrating aortic ulcer or intramural haematoma in four (3.4%), and subacute dissection in three (2.6%). Mean ± SD aneurysm diameter was 66 ± 17 mm; aneurysm extent was Crawford I - III in 55 (50.4%), IV in 21 (19.2%), pararenal in 29 (26.7%), and juxtarenal in four (3.7%). The procedure setting was urgent in 25 (21.5%) patients. Median procedural time was 240 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 195, 303), with a median contrast volume of 175 mL (IQR 120, 235). The endograft's technical success rate was 98.2% and the 90 day mortality rate was 5.2% (n = 6; 2.1% for elective repair and 16% for urgent repair). The 90-days cumulative MAE rate was 24.1% (n = 28). At 90 days, there were 10 (2.3%) target vessel related events (nine occlusions and one type IC endoleak) and one type 1A endoleak requiring re-intervention.

CONCLUSION

In this real life, non-sponsored registry, the E-nside endograft was used for the treatment of a broad spectrum of aortic pathologies, including urgent cases and different anatomies. The results showed excellent technical implantation safety and efficacy, as well as early outcomes. Longer term follow up is needed to better define the clinical role of this novel endograft.

Patient selection and anatomical considerations for zone 0 endovascular aneurysm arch repair

Endovascular aortic arch repair has been widely used in select patients who are considered high risk for open surgical repair and have suitable anatomy. The anatomical challenges of placement of stent-grafts in the ascending aorta are many, including the curved configuration, short landing zone, proximity to the aortic valve and coronary arteries and need to incorporate the supra-aortic trunks. Stent-graft designs with fenestrations and/or directional branches are applicable to patients who have suitable landing zones in the aorta and supra-aortic trunks, adequate access and absence of significant atheromatous debris. These devices include single and multibranch concepts, which are used in combination or not with cervical debranching procedures. This article summarizes the most commonly used anatomical criterion with currently utilized arch branch stent-grafts.

Geometrical Determinants Of Target Vessel Instability In Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE

To investigate geometrical determinants of target vessels instability in fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR), using a computed tomography angiogram (CTA) post-implantation analysis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed single-center data on consecutive patients undergoing FEVAR (2014-2021). Geometrical analysis consisted in the assessment of bridging stent lengths and diameters, stent conformation, and graft misalignment. Bridging stent length was categorized in three components: protrusion length (PL) into the main endograft, bridging length (BL) between the fenestration and the origin of the target vessel, and sealing length (SL) of apposition in the target vessel. The conformation was measured as "flare ratio" (ratio of maximum to minimum bridging stent diameter within the PL). "Horizontal misalignment" was measured as the angle between the fenestration and the target vessel ostium on CTA axial cuts. The primary endpoint was freedom from target vessel instability; secondary endpoints were target vessels primary patency and freedom from related endoleaks. Time-dependent outcomes were estimated as Kaplan-Meier curves; Cox proportional hazards were used to identify predictors of target vessel instability.

RESULTS

There were 46 patients (juxta/pararenal: n=34, 74%; thoracoabdominal: n=11, 26%), with 147 target arteries incorporated through a bridging stent. Freedom from target vessel instability was 87% (95%CI 80-94) at 42 months. Primary patency was 98% (95%CI 96-100) and freedom from endoleak was 85% (95%CI 76-93). PL (HR 1.08, 95%CI 0.22-5.28; P=.923), SL (HR 0.95, 95%CI 0.87-1.03; P=.238) and flare ratio (HR 4.66, 95%CI 0.57-37.7; P=.149) were not associated with target vessel instability. By multivariate analysis, a BL>5 mm (HR 4.98, 95%CI 1.13-21.85; P=.033) was significantly associated with instability. Patients with a BL≥5 mm had a significantly higher degree of horizontal misalignment (21±12° vs 9±13°; P=.011).

CONCLUSION

An optimal geometrical conformation between the bridging stent and the main endograft at the level of target vessels is warranted to improve the mid-term outcomes of FEVAR. A BL >5mm was associated with a higher risk of target vessel instability, likely as a result of a less accurate endograft alignment. The sizing and planning of FEVAR should be performed in order to maintain a BL< 5mm.