Comparison of endovascular aneurysm repair with open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1), 30-day operative mortality results: randomised controlled trial

Lowest reported dose area product of 2.4 Gy∗cm2 for ultra-low-dose endovascular aortic aneurysm repair of a standard infrarenal aortic aneurysm

This is a report of successful treatment of an abdominal aortic aneurysm via standard endovascular aortic repair with an ultra-low dose (ULD) of 2.4 Gy∗cm2 using the latest imaging software in a hybrid operating room. To the best of our knowledge, no case has yet been reported achieving a successful outcome with such ULD values to date. The key factors to achieving an ULD regarding the dose area product comprise the right technology, procedural standardization, and team education and training. This case highlights the potential for reducing the radiation dose routinely for patients and staff alike, especially for operating room staff with daily radiation exposure.

Endograft Anaconda in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis

BACKGOUND

The number of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs (EVARs) has surpassed the number of open surgical repair of AAAs worldwide with a great variety of endografts being available. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of studies reporting patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) subjected to EVAR with the Anaconda endograft.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of multiple electronic databases for studies including patients with infrarenal AAA who were subjected to elective EVAR with Anaconda endograft exclusively. We conducted a proportional meta-analysis cumulating the results of the included studies. The endpoints were first month overall mortality, first and second-year survival after EVAR, AAA-related deaths, incidence of endoleaks, endograft migration, endograft occlusion, open conversion, and primary and secondary technical success. The mean value for each separate studied factor was calculated, and the respective percentage or incidence was extracted so that it can be compared to endograft outcome studies in the literature. We assessed the methodologic quality of studies by using the Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool.

RESULTS

Seven observational studies were found including 954 patients (males 91.9%, mean age 73.38 ± 6.97 years). The mean transverse diameter of AAAs was 56.83 ± 9.97 mm. The mean proximal aortic neck diameter and length were 23.06 ± 3.33 mm and 24.14 ± 12.16 mm, respectively. Increased aortic neck calcification and aortic neck thrombus were present in 12.5% of patients. The 30-day overall mortality post-EVAR was 1.3%, 1 and 2-year survival rates were 95.9% and 91.4%, respectively. The mean follow-up period in the studies was 46.59 ± 15.5 months. AAA-related mortality was 1.3%. Primary technical success was 97.9% and secondary success was 99.3%. Open conversion was required in 3.4% of all patients (0.6% during the primary operation [Prim. Op]). The most common endoleak was type II, reported in 17.4% of all patients. Early type Ia endoleak was reported in 1.5% of patients and late type Ia in 1.7%. Overall, 2 endoleaks type III and 1 type IV were reported. Endograft migration occurred in 1.7% of patients. Main body and/or one/both iliac legs thrombotic occlusion was found totally in 7.6% of patients (5 main body occlusions and 64 iliac leg occlusions).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of Anaconda endograft in electively treated patients with infrarenal AAAs presented good results with high technical success and low postoperative and mid-term complications, except for an increased incidence of stent-graft thrombosis, which seems to be the "Achilles heel" of the device.

Impact of the Patency of Inferior Mesenteric Artery on 7-Year Outcomes After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

The impact of preoperative patent inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) on late outcomes following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the specific influence of IMA patency on 7-year outcomes after EVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, 556 EVARs performed for true abdominal aortic aneurysm cases between January 2006 and December 2019 at our institution were reviewed. Endovascular aneurysm repairs performed using a commercially available device with no type I or type III endoleak (EL) during follow-up and with follow-up ≥12 months were included. A total of 336 patients were enrolled in this study. The cohort was divided into the patent IMA group and the occluded IMA group according to preoperative IMA status. The late outcomes, including aneurysm sac enlargement, reintervention, and mortality rates, were compared between both groups using propensity-score-matched data.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 86 patients were included in each group. The median follow-up period was 56 months (interquartile range: 32-94 months). The incidence of type II EL at discharge was 50% in the patent IMA group and 19% in the occluded IMA group (p<0.001). The type II EL from IMA and lumbar arteries was significantly higher in the patent IMA group than in the occluded IMA group (p<0.001 and p=0.002). The rate of freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement with type II EL was significantly higher in the occluded IMA group than in the patent IMA group (94% vs 69% at 7 years; p<0.001). The rate of freedom from reintervention was significantly higher in the occluded IMA group than in the patent IMA group (90% vs 74% at 7 years; p=0.007). Abdominal aortic aneurysm-related death and all-cause mortality did not significantly differ between groups (p=0.32 and p=0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Inferior mesenteric artery patency could affect late reintervention and aneurysm sac enlargement but did not have a significant impact on mortality. Preoperative assessment and embolization of IMA might be an important factor for improvement in late EVAR outcomes.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The preoperative patency of the inferior mesenteric artery was significantly associated with a higher incidence of sac enlargement and reintervention with type II endoleak following endovascular aneurysm repair, even after adjustment for patient background. Preoperative assessment and embolization of inferior mesenteric artery might be an important factor for improvement in late EVAR outcomes.

Indication and outcome of late open conversion after abdominal endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

During 2004 and 2020, 443 consecutive EVARs were performed, and 28 patients required open surgical conversion, with an additional 3 referred from other hospitals (N=31). The median age was 75 (range 58-93); 94% were male. Conversion was performed after a median time of 55 months (range 16 - 209). Twenty patients underwent elective and 11 emergency conversion. Indications for open conversion were graft migration respectively disease progression with endoleak type Ia and/ or Ib in 52 % (16/31) and sac expansion due to endoleak type II in 26 % (8/31). Of the 31 patients, 17 (55%) had at least one previous endovascular re-intervention. All patients met the device-specific instructions for use for each implanted endograft. In-hospital intervention rate was 16 % (5/31). 30-day mortality rate was 3% (1/31) with one patient died due to multi-organ failure after rupture with complete endograft replacement. Five patients (16%) died during follow-up. Mid-term follow-up was 47.5 months (range 24 -203) with estimated cumulative survival rates of 97%, 89%, and 84%, at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

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

National registry insights on genetic aortopathies and thoracic endovascular aortic interventions

OBJECTIVE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with genetic aortopathies (GA) is controversial, given concerns of durability. We describe characteristics and outcomes after TEVAR in patients with GA.

METHODS

All patients undergoing TEVAR between 2010 and 2023 in the Vascular Quality Iniatitive were identified and categorized as having a GA or not. Demographics, baseline, and procedural characteristics were compared among groups. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the independent association of GA with postoperative outcomes. Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate 5-year survival and 2-year reinterventions.

RESULTS

Of 19,340 patients, 304 (1.6%) had GA (87% Marfan syndrome, 9% Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 4% vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome). Compared with patients without GA, patients with GA were younger (50 years [interquartile range, 37-72 years] vs 70 years [interquartile range, 61-77 years]), more often presented with acute dissection (28% vs 18%), postdissection aneurysm (48% vs 17%), had a symptomatic presentation (50% vs 39%), and were less likely to have degenerative aneurysms (18% vs 47%) or penetrating aortic ulcer (and intramural hematoma) (3% vs 13%) (all P < .001). Patients with GA were more likely to have prior repair of the ascending aorta/arch (open, 56% vs 11% [P < .001]; endovascular, 5.6% vs 2.1% [P = .017]) or the descending thoracic aorta (open, 12% vs 2% [P = .007]; endovascular, 8.2% vs 3.6% [P = .011]). No significant differences were found in prior abdominal suprarenal repairs; however, patients with GA had more prior open infrarenal repairs (5.3% vs 3.2%), but fewer prior endovascular infrarenal repairs (3.3% vs 5.5%) (all P < .05). After adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and disease characteristics, patients with GA had similar odds of perioperative mortality (4.6% vs 7.0%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-1.9; P = .75), any in-hospital complication (26% vs 23%; aOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.92-1.6; P = .14), or in-hospital reintervention (13% vs 8.3%; aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.84-1.80; P = .25) compared with patients without GA. However, patients with GA had a higher likelihood of postoperative vasopressors (33% vs 27%; aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9; P = .006) and transfusion (25% vs 23%; aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.03-1.9; P = .006). The 2-year reintervention rates were higher in patients with GA (25% vs 13%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.4-2.9; P < .001), but 5-year survival was similar (81% vs 74%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.70-1.50; P = .1).

CONCLUSIONS

TEVAR for patients with GA seemed to be safe initially, with similar odds for in-hospital complications, in-hospital reinterventions, and perioperative mortality, as well as similar hazards for 5-year mortality compared with patients without GA. However, patients with GA had higher 2-year reintervention rates. Future studies should assess long-term durability after TEVAR compared with the recommended open repair to appropriately weigh the risks and benefits of endovascular treatment in patients with GA.

Propensity score analysis demonstrates no long term survival benefit from contemporary endovascular aneurysm repair compared to open in Aotearoa New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines for AAA management are based on landmark trials comparing EVAR and open aneurysm repair (OAR) conducted more than 20 years ago. Important advancements have been made in peri-operative care but the impact of EVAR and OAR on long-term patient survival has not been well reported using contemporary data. The objective of this study was to compare the short and long-term outcomes of OAR and EVAR in the recent era.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included all patients undergoing intact AAA repair in NZ from 1st of January 2011 until 31st of December 2019. Data was collected from national administrative and clinical vascular databases and matched using unique identifiers. Time-to-event survival analyses was conducted using cox proportional hazard models to adjust for confounders and propensity score matching were used.

RESULTS

Two thousand two hundred and ninety-seven patients had an intact AAA repair with a median (IQR) age of 75 (69-80) years; 494 (21.2%) patients were females and 1206 (53%) underwent EVAR. The 30-day mortality for OAR and EVAR was 4.8% and 1.2%. The median (IQR) follow up was 5.2 (2.3-9.2) years. After propensity matching for co-variates, the study cohort consisted of 835 patients in each matched group. Patients undergoing EVAR had a higher overall mortality (HR 1.48 (95% CI: 1.26-1.74) after adjusting for confounders compared to OAR.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of survival following EVAR and OAR in the current era demonstrates that patients that underwent EVAR had a lower 30-day mortality. However, in the long-term after adjusting for confounders OAR had a better overall survival.

Systematic review of risk factors and outcomes of post-implantation syndrome following endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

Post implantation syndrome (PIS) is an early systemic inflammatory response following endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). The response is variable in patients and the clinical significance of PIS upon outcomes is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and prognostic implication of PIS.

METHODS

Systematic literature review and analysis was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines of PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible English-language studies regarding PIS after infrarenal EVAR were included, after removing duplicates.

RESULTS

After screening, 31 studies were included. A total of 2847 patients were reviewed, with mean age of 70.7 years, of which 2012 (90.4%) were male, with a pooled mean follow-up of 26.1 months. PIS was reported in 25.3% of cases, with mean aneurysm diameter of 56.4 cm. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts were utilized in 794 patients (27.9%) with polyester in 1839 (64.6%). White blood cell count, C-reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, and IL-10 levels were all significantly elevated postoperatively. Thirty-day outcomes included type I endoleak rate of 0.8%, type II endoleak rate of 1.7%, reintervention rate of 0.35%, and mortality rate of 0.25%. Subgroup pooled analysis of patients with PIS (n = 309) vs No-PIS (n = 691) revealed that polyester (n = 642), rather than PTFE (n = 234) grafts, were associated with a higher rate of PIS (94.8% vs 3.7%; P = .0001), White blood cell count was higher in the PIS group both preoperatively (7.61 vs 6.76 × 109/L; P = .04) and postoperatively (15.0 vs 9.8 × 109/L; P = .0007) and IL-6 levels were higher in the PIS group postoperatively (98.6 vs 25.2 pg/mL; P = .02). Aneurysm diameter and amount of chronic or new thrombus within the aneurysm sac was not identified as a risk factor for PIS. Pooled outcomes of patients with PIS vs No-PIS demonstrated a significantly higher rate of 30-day mortality (0.6% vs 0%; P = .03) and major adverse cardiac events (5.8% vs 0.43%; P < .0001) without any differences seen in reintervention or 30-day type I or type II endoleaks.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review suggests that polyester grafts are strongly associated with PIS compared with PTFE. Interestingly, this report is suggestive of an association between 30-day mortality and major adverse cardiac events and PIS. Given these clinical sequelae, consideration for use of PTFE over polyester grafts to reduce the incidence of PIS may be a simple step to improve overall outcome. Further, exploration of the relationship between inflammatory mediators associated with PIS and mortality and cardiac complications may engender deeper understanding of risks, leading to eventual mitigation of harm for patients experiencing PIS.

Creation of a Shared Medical Decision Support Tool for the Management of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Patients with unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) at the surgical threshold may benefit from aneurysmal exclusion either by open surgery or endovascular repair. A patient decision aid (PtDA) could be useful to help patients and their surgeons choose between the 2 techniques. The aim of this study was to develop a shared medical decision support tool, in french language, for the surgical treatment of AAA.

METHODS

Following the steps recommended by the International Patient Decision Aids Standards, we carried out a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with patients and vascular surgeons and focus group with patients to identify their main points of interest. After analyzing the interviews using grounded theory with independent double coding, the verbatims were discussed at a steering committee, at the end of which a prototype of the tool was created.

RESULTS

Four surgeons and 14 patients were interviewed. No new codes emerged from the last 2 interviews. At the end of the steering committee meeting, the information selected for inclusion in the PtDA tool were the definition of an AAA, a description of the 2 surgical techniques (approach, duration of operation), the main complications, the peri-operative mortality rate, and postoperative follow-up (length of hospital stay, monitoring frequency, and risk of re-intervention). It had to be produced on a synthetic paper format, with 6 illustrations and a simple vocabulary.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a PtDA tool for use in a sharing decision making process with the patient during consultation with the vascular surgeon and the general practitioner. Further studies are needed to validate the tool and to test it in clinical practice.

Risk factors for elective and urgent open conversion after EVAR-a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the standard procedure for treating infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Various associated complications can lead to open conversion (OC). Thorough follow-up after the procedure is mandatory for the early detection of complications. Persisting perfusion of the aneurysm, a so-called endoleak (EL), paired with structural instability because of aortic wall atrophy and impaired cell functionality induced by EVAR, results in a high risk for aortic rupture.

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to detect the risk factors for elective and urgent OC as a result of EVAR-induced pathophysiological changes inside the aortic wall.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Retrospective data analysis was performed on all open aortic repairs from January 2016 to December 2020.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Fifty patients were identified as treated by OC for failure of an infrarenal EVAR. The patients were divided into two subgroups, here depending on the urgency of surgery. Statistical analysis of patient characteristics and outcomes was performed.

RESULTS

The most common indications for OC were various types of EL (74%), resulting in an aortic rupture in 15 patients. Patients with insufficient or absent follow-up were treated more frequently in an emergency setting (16% vs. 63%). The mortality rate was higher in cases of emergency OC (3% vs. 26%).

CONCLUSIONS

Particularly in cases of insufficient or absent follow-up, complications such as EL pose an enormous risk for fatal aortic rupture.

Large-Diameter Fenestrated Endograft Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Is Not Associated With Medium-Term Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Recent data suggests that infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) endovascular repair (EVAR) with large diameter grafts (LGs) may have a higher risk of endoleak and reintervention. However, this has not been studied extensively for fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (fEVAR). We, therefore, sought to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing fEVAR with large-diameter endografts.

METHODS

Patients from the national Vascular Quality Initiative registry who underwent fEVAR for intact juxtarenal AAA were identified. Patients with genetic causes for aneurysms, those with prior aortic surgery, and those undergoing repair for symptomatic or ruptured aneurysms were excluded. Rates of endoleaks and reintervention at periprocedural and long-term follow-up timepoints (9-22 mo) were analyzed in grafts 32 mm or larger (LG) and were compared to those smaller than 32 mm (small diameter graft).

RESULTS

A total of 693 patients (22.8% LG) were identified. Overall, demographic variables were comparable except LG exhibited a more frequent history of coronary artery disease (32.9% versus 25.4%, P = 0.037). There were no significant differences in the rates of endoleak at procedural completion. Overall survival at 5 y was no different. The rate of reintervention at 1 y was also no different (log-rank P = 0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

While graft size appears to have an association with outcomes in infrarenal aneurysm repair, the same does not appear to be true for fEVAR. Further studies should evaluate the long-term outcomes associated with LG which could alter the approach to repair of AAA with large neck diameters traditionally treated with standard infrarenal EVAR.

The ARIA trial protocol: a randomised controlled trial to assess the clinical, technical, and cost-effectiveness of a cloud-based, ARtificially Intelligent image fusion system in comparison to standard treatment to guide endovascular Aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular repair of aortic aneurysmal disease is established due to perceived advantages in patient survival, reduced postoperative complications, and shorter hospital lengths of stay. High spatial and contrast resolution 3D CT angiography images are used to plan the procedures and inform device selection and manufacture, but in standard care, the surgery is performed using image-guidance from 2D X-ray fluoroscopy with injection of nephrotoxic contrast material to visualise the blood vessels. This study aims to assess the benefit to patients, practitioners, and the health service of a novel image fusion medical device (Cydar EV), which allows this high-resolution 3D information to be available to operators at the time of surgery.

METHODS

The trial is a multi-centre, open label, two-armed randomised controlled clinical trial of 340 patient, randomised 1:1 to either standard treatment in endovascular aneurysm repair or treatment using Cydar EV, a CE-marked medical device comprising of cloud computing, augmented intelligence, and computer vision. The primary outcome is procedural time, with secondary outcomes of procedural efficiency, technical effectiveness, patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of AAA or TAAA suitable for endovascular repair and able to provide written informed consent will be invited to participate.

DISCUSSION

This trial is the first randomised controlled trial evaluating advanced image fusion technology in endovascular aortic surgery and is well placed to evaluate the effect of this technology on patient outcomes and cost to the NHS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN13832085. Dec. 3, 2021.

Side branch embolization before endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair to prevent type II endoleak: A prospective multicenter study

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pre-emptive transcatheter arterial embolization (P-TAE) of aortic side branches to prevent type II endoleak in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, single-arm trial enrolled 100 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm from nine hospitals between 2018 and 2021. There were 85 men and 15 women, with a mean age of 79.6 ± 6.0 (standard deviation) years (range: 65-97 years). P-TAE was attempted for patent aortic side branches, including the inferior mesenteric artery, lumbar arteries, and other branches. The primary endpoint was late type II endoleak incidence at 6 months post-repair. Secondary endpoints included changes in aneurysmal sac diameter at 6- and 12 months, complications, re-intervention, and aneurysm-related mortality. Aneurysm sac changes at 6- and 12 months was compared between the late and no-late type II endoleak groups.

RESULTS

Coil embolization was successful in 80.9% (321/397) of patent aortic side branches, including 86.3% of the inferior mesenteric arteries, 80.3% of lumbar arteries, and 55.6% of other branches without severe adverse events. Late type II endoleak incidence at 6 months was 8.9% (8/90; 95% confidence interval: 3.9-16.8%). Aneurysm sac shrinkage > 5 mm was observed in 41.1% (37/90) and 55.3% (47/85) of the patients at 6- and 12-months post-EVAR, respectively. Patients with late type II endoleak had less aneurysm sac shrinkage than those without type II endoleak at 12 months (-0.2 mm vs. -6.0 mm; P = 0.040). No patients required re-intervention for type II endoleak, and no aneurysm-related mortalities occurred.

CONCLUSION

P-TAE is safe and effective in preventing type II endoleak, leading to early sac shrinkage at 12 months following EVAR.

Ten-year single-center outcomes following endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm using the INCRAFT device

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to report the long-term outcomes beyond 10 years of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms using the low-profile INCRAFT device.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing EVAR using the INCRAFT device as part of the regulatory trial between 2012 and 2013. Primary endpoint was aneurysm-related death. Secondary endpoints were all-cause death, reintervention, late open conversion, and aneurysm status (shrinkage, stable, and growth).

RESULTS

Thirty patients with a mean age of 71.8 ± 7.7 years were included in this study. The median aneurysm diameter at EVAR was 54.5 mm (interquartile range, 53-56.8 mm). All abdominal aortic aneurysms in this study were treated following the device's instructions for use. At index EVAR, the INCRAFT device was successfully implanted in all patients using a percutaneous approach under local anesthesia. No patients experienced major adverse events or procedure-related complications 30 days after EVAR. During the median follow-up of 125 months (interquartile range, 98-131 months) with follow-up rates of 100% at 5 years and 96.7% at 10 years, aneurysm-related mortality was 0%, and freedom from all-cause mortality was 82.9% at 5 years and 75.3% at 10 years. Reintervention was required in 10 patients with 15 procedures. Sac growth was observed in 11 patients (36.7%), six of whom eventually required late open conversion; five of these patients underwent open aneurysmorrhaphy with stent graft preservation, and one underwent open surgical repair with endograft explantation. Late rupture was identified in one case, where type Ia endoleak led to rupture at 69 months, and open repair was successfully performed. Freedom from reintervention was 89.0% at 5 years but declined to 60.9% at 10 years; freedom from late open conversion was 100% at 5 years but declined to 70.8% at 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term outcomes of the INCRAFT stent graft showed no aneurysm-related deaths. However, sac growth occurred persistently throughout the follow-up period, resulting in a relatively high rate of reinterventions in the later periods, which highlights the importance of lifelong postoperative surveillance and appropriate reinterventions when indicated.

Outcomes of Late Partial Conversion With Graft Replacement for Sac Enlargement After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

Outcomes of late open conversion with graft replacement for enlargement after endovascular aortic repair remain unclear. Here, we report the outcomes of graft replacement after endovascular aortic repair.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fourteen patients who underwent graft replacement after endovascular aneurysm repair between November 2016 and October 2022 were included. Graft replacement was indicated in cases of rupture and enlargement of the aneurysm sac and when reintervention with endovascular therapy could not be performed.

RESULTS

The mean age at graft replacement was 80 ± 7 years. The follow-up period from endovascular aortic repair to graft replacement was 73 ± 41 months. The endoleaks that caused enlargement of the aneurysm sac were type I in 8 patients and type II in 6 patients. Ruptures were observed in 5 patients. One patient had paraplegia as a postoperative complication, and 2 patients died within 30 days. Morbidity and mortality were observed in cases of rupture, and no morbidity or mortality was observed in any elective surgery cases.

CONCLUSION

Late open conversion with graft replacement after endovascular aortic repair is a feasible elective surgery. However, morbidity and mortality have been observed in cases of rupture.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In elective surgery, postoperative outcomes are good for late open conversion with graft replacement after endovascular aortic repair. On the other hand, morbidity and mortality were observed in case of rupture. Therefore, it is important to perform elective surgical reintervention at the appropriate time.

Safety of preoperative branch embolization in patients undergoing evar

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the safety of pre-endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) embolization of aortic side branches - the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed. A search of MEDLINE and DIMENSION databases identified 9 studies published from 2011 to 2021 that satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These studies were analyzed to detect the incidence of embolization-related complications. A total of 482 patients underwent preoperative aortic side branch embolization, 30 (6.2%) of whom suffered some kind of minor complication. The only major complication observed was ischemic colitis in 4 (0.82%) patients, two (0.41%) of whom died after bowel resection surgery. Regarding these findings, aortic side branch embolization seems to be a safe procedure, with very low percentages of both minor and major complications.

Myocardial Injury after Non-Cardiac Surgery in Patients Who Underwent Open Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) has been known to be associated with mortality in various surgical patients; however, its prognostic role in abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) open repair remains underexplored. This study aimed to investigate the role of MINS as a predictor of mortality in patients who underwent AAA open repair.

METHODS

This retrospective study investigated 352 patients who underwent open repair for non-ruptured AAA. The predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortalities were investigated using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

MINS was diagnosed in 41% of the patients after AAA open repair in this study. MINS was an independent risk factor of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 10.440, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.278-85.274, p = 0.029) and 1-year mortality (OR: 5.189, 95% CI: 1.357-19.844, p = 0.016). Kaplan-Meier survival curves demonstrated significantly lower overall survival rates in patients with MINS compared to those without MINS (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that MINS is a common complication after AAA open repair and is an independent risk factor of 30-day and 1-year mortalities. Patients with MINS have lower overall survival rates than those without MINS.

A Single-Institution Case Series of Total Endovascular Relining for Type 3 Endoleaks in Traditional Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) Grafts with Raised Bifurcations

BACKGROUND

The endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms can be performed with a wide variety of devices. Many of these grafts elevate the aortic bifurcation which can limit future repairs if the graft material fails thereby creating a type III endoleak to aorto-uniliac grafts. Many manufacturers have grafts susceptible to this, but we have seen this in the Medtronic AneuRx graft. Our goal is to provide technical details and outcomes regarding a novel technique to reline these grafts while maintaining inline flow to the iliac arteries.

METHODS

This was a single-institution review of patients who had endoleaks requiring intervention after a previously placed graft with an elevated aortic bifurcation. Primary outcomes included technical success defined as placement of all planned devices, resolution of type III endoleak, aneurysm size at follow-up, and requirement of reintervention. Secondary outcomes included 30-day complications, aneurysm-related mortality, and all-cause mortality. Technical details of the operation include back-table deployment of an Ovation device, modification of the deployment system tether and pre-emptive placement of an up and over 0.014″ wire. The wire is placed up and over and hung outside the contralateral gate. Once the main body is introduced above the old graft, the 0.014" is snared from the contralateral side and externalized. The main body is then able to be seated at the bifurcation as the limb is not fully deployed and then device deployment is completed per instructions for use.

RESULTS

Our study consists of 4 individuals, 3 of which had an abdominal aortic aneurysm initially managed with an AneuRx endovascular aneurysm repair and 1 with a combination of Gore and Cook grafts. All 4 patients were male with an average age of 84.5 years at time of reline. All patients had at least 10 years between initial surgery and reline at our institution. Primary outcomes revealed no type 1 or 3 endoleaks at follow-up, technical success was 100% and 1 patient required reintervention for aneurysm growth and type 2 endoleak. In terms of our secondary outcomes, there was 1 postoperative complication which was cardiac dysfunction secondary to demand ischemia, aneurysm-related mortality was 0% and all-cause mortality was 25% at average follow-up of 2.44 years.

CONCLUSIONS

As individuals continue to age, there are more patients who would benefit from less invasive reinterventions following endovascular aneurysm repair. Whether this is due to aortic degeneration, stent migration, or stent material damage is not always known. In this study, we present an endovascular approach to treating type III endoleak patients with a previous graft and elevated aortic bifurcation using Ovation stent grafts and found no evidence of type 1 or 3 endoleaks on follow-up imaging. This approach may allow patients with type III endoleak the option of a minimally invasive, percutaneous approach where they previously would not have had one.

Factors Related to Limb Occlusion After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair (EVAR)

BACKGROUND

Limb occlusion is a potentially serious consequence of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR). This case-control study identifies factors that predispose to limb occlusion.

METHODS

A consecutive series of patients from 2 centers undergoing EVAR over an 11-year period 2007-2017 were identified retrospectively. Patient records were interrogated allowing collations of demographics, intraoperative and perioperative data and surveillance data. The preoperative computed tomography angiogram was analyzed to determine EVAR relevant anatomical data. The primary outcome was occlusion of the iliac limb of the implanted EVAR. Raw data are presented as percentages, with comparative data analyzed using Mann-Whitney U-test and binomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 787 patients (702 males; median age 78 years, range 53-94 years old) were analyzed. Fifty patients reached the primary outcome, resulting in an overall limb occlusion rate of 6.35%. Factors predictive of limb occlusion were oversizing by >10% native vessel diameter, with oversizing of >20% in 50% of those that occluded. External iliac artery landing zone (12/50 limb occlusions) 24% and postoperative kinking (5/50 limb occlusions) 10% were also more common in those that occluded. Fifty randomly selected controls with similar baseline characteristics were studied. Oversizing of the iliac endograft was found to be significantly greater in the limb occlusion group compared to the controls (P < 0.001) which remained significant on regression analysis. There was no correlation with iliac tortuosity. The Cook stent graft had a 9% limb occlusion rate across sites. Medtronic and Vascutek endografts had 2.4% and 2.5% limb occlusion rates respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Oversizing of iliac limbs by >20% could be a contributing factor to limb occlusion after EVAR and judicious oversizing should be used.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Impact of Previous Open Abdominal Surgery on Open Abdominal Aortic Repair: A Study from the NSQIP Database

BACKGROUND

While endovascular aneurysm repair has become a first-line strategy in many centers, open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is still the best option for certain patients. A significant number of patients who are offered OSR for AAA have been previously submitted to other open abdominal surgeries (PAS). It is unclear, however, how this may impact their outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is an association between PAS and outcomes of OSR of AAA.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study based on clinical data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, including all patients undergoing elective OSR for AAA between 2011 and 2017. Excluded were patients with missing data on prior abdominal surgery, supramesenteric clamping, or urgent repairs. Patients with prior abdominal surgery (PAS) and patients without prior abdominal surgeries (nonPAS) were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes were operating time, ischemic colitis, postoperative complications, and lengths of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Of the 2034 patients included, 27% had previous open abdominal surgery and 73% did not. Overall, the median age was 71(interquartile range 65-76), 72% of patients were male, 44% were smokers, and the average body mass index was 27 kg/m2. Univariate analysis showed no difference in postoperative 30-day mortality (4.0% PAS vs. 4.1% nonPAS, P = 0.91) or overall postoperative complication rates (33% PAS vs. 29% nonPAS, P = 0.07). Previous open abdominal surgery was significantly associated with longer operating times (P = 0.032) and an almost doubled rate of ischemic colitis (4.7% PAS vs. 2.6% nonPAS, P = 0.02). Postoperative intensive care unit and hospitalization were also significantly longer in patients with prior abdominal surgery (P = 0.005 and P = 0.014, respectively). Finally, there were significantly less patients discharged home, as opposed to institutionalized care (75.7% PAS down from 82.4% nonPAS, P = 0.001). Despite these initial univariate analysis results, on multivariate analysis, PAS actually did not prove to be a statistically significant independent risk factor for 30-day mortality, ischemic colitis, or longer operating times.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that patients who have undergone PAS may have some disadvantages in OSR of AAA. However, these negative trends do not go so far as to statistically significantly identify PAS as an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality, ischemic colitis, or longer operating times. As such, we suggest that a history of previous open abdominal surgery, in and of its own, should not exclude patients from consideration for open aortic abdominal aneurysm repair.

Underestimation of Occupational Radiation Exposure During Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

ABSTRACT

During interventional procedures of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), the dosimeter was conventionally placed on chest facing toward the surgical table, instead of the main source of scatter radiation. Purpose of this study is to evaluate the underestimation of occupational radiation exposure. Phantom experiments were performed in a hybrid operating room equipped with an interventional angiography system. Electric personal dosimeters were placed at the level of eyes, chest, abdomen, and gonad of three positions, representing the principal operator (PO), assistant operator (AO), and sterile nurse (SN). Personal dose equivalent was measured with two different orientations of radiation detection, facing the table and facing the phantom, respectively. In addition to fluoroscopy, the dose produced by digital subtraction angiography was also measured to estimate the radiation exposure of routine EVAR. In this study, staff doses of 26 EVAR cases were also collected in our hospital to correlate the estimated dose. Our results show that the facing-phantom dose normalized by dose area product of patient is significantly higher than the facing-table dose when the latter is regularly seen in clinical practice. This underestimation could be even worse at a more distant position (e.g., AO and SN) as the incident angle of scatter radiation is larger. Besides, the estimated dose is highly correlated with the on-site measured dose (R 2 ~ 0.8) at chest and gonad of the PO.

Assessing the robustness of positive vascular surgery randomized controlled trials using their fragility index

OBJECTIVE

The fragility index (FI) measures the robustness of statistically significant findings in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by quantifying the minimum number of event conversions required to reverse a dichotomous outcome's statistical significance. In vascular surgery, many clinical guidelines and critical decision-making points are informed by a handful of key RCTs, especially regarding open surgical versus endovascular treatment. The objective of this study is to evaluate the FI of RCTs with statistically significant primary outcomes that compared open vs endovascular surgery in vascular surgery.

METHODS

In this meta-epidemiological study and systematic review, MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for RCTs comparing open versus endovascular treatments for abdominal aortic aneurysms, carotid artery stenosis, and peripheral arterial disease to December 2022. RCTs with statistically significant primary outcomes were included. Data screening and extraction were conducted in duplicate. The FI was calculated by adding an event to the group with the smaller number of events while subtracting a nonevent to the same group until Fisher's exact test produced a nonstatistically significant result. The primary outcome was the FI and proportion of outcomes where the loss to follow-up was greater than the FI. The secondary outcomes assessed the relationship of the FI to disease state, presence of commercial funding, and study design.

RESULTS

Overall, 5133 articles were captured in the initial search with 21 RCTs reporting 23 different primary outcomes being included in the final analysis. The median FI (first quartile, third quartile) was 3 (3, 20) with 16 outcomes (70%) reporting a loss to follow-up greater than its FI. Mann-Whitney U test revealed that commercially funded RCTs and composite outcomes had greater FIs (median, 20.0 [5.5, 24.5] vs median, 3.0 [2.0, 5.5], P = .035; median, 21 [8, 38] vs median, 3.0 [2.0, 8.5], P = .01, respectively). The FI did not vary between disease states (P = .285) or between index and follow-up trials (P = .147). There were significant correlations between the FI and P values (Pearson r = 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.96), and the number of events (r = 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

A small number of event conversions (median, 3) are needed to alter the statistical significance of primary outcomes in vascular surgery RCTs evaluating open surgical and endovascular treatments. Most studies had loss to follow-up greater than its FI, which can call into question trial results, and commercially funded studies had a greater FI. The FI and these findings should be considered in future trial design in vascular surgery.

Incidence of endoleak type IA in patients undergoing chimney endovascular aortic repair (ChEVAR) vs. standard endovascular repair

Objectives

Almost half of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) procedures are performed in hostile anatomy, increasing the risk of procedure related complications such as type IA endoleaks, which may be prevented with the chimney technique in EVAR (ChEVAR). Our aim is to describe the differential characteristics between EVAR in favorable anatomy and ChEVAR in hostile necks.

Materials and methods

A cohort of patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) that were treated with EVAR or ChEVAR were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of type IA endoleak. Secondary outcomes were the rate of chimney occlusion, reintervention, migration, rupture, acute limb ischemia, sac growth, and aneurysm-related mortality during the follow-up period.

Results

. With a median follow-up of 11.5 months, 79 patients were treated with EVAR and 21 with ChEVAR. The overall age was 76.49 ± 7.32 years old, and 82% were male. The ChEVAR cohort had a higher prevalence of tobacco use than the EVAR cohort (38.1% vs. 17.7%, p = 0.041), and a shorter neck (7.88 mm ± 5.73 vs 36.28 mm ± 13.73, p<0.001). There were no differences in type IA endoleak incidence between the groups (a single endoleak type IA in the EVAR group, p = 0.309). One patient experienced an asymptomatic chimney occlusion in the ChEVAR group, and another patient required a reintervention due to chimney occlusion. Sac regression and reinterventions were not different between groups. There were no migration, rupture, acute limb ischemia, or aneurysm-related mortality events.

Conclusions

. In patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms, ChEVAR in hostile necks had similar event rates to EVAR in favorable necks.

Current Medicare reimbursement for complex endovascular aortic repair is inadequate based on results from a multi-institutional cost analysis

OBJECTIVE

Complex endovascular juxta-, para- and suprarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (comEVAR) is frequently accomplished with commercially available fenestrated (FEVAR) devices or off-label use of aortoiliac devices with parallel branch stents (chEVAR). We sought to evaluate the implantable vascular device costs incurred with these procedures as compared with standard Medicare reimbursement to determine the financial viability of comEVAR in the modern era.

METHODS

Five geographically distinct institutions with high-volume, complex aortic centers were included. Implantable aortoiliac and branch stent device cost data from 25 consecutive, recent, comEVAR in the treatment of juxta-, para-, and suprarenal aortic aneurysms at each center were analyzed. Cases of rupture, thoracic aneurysms, reinterventions, and physician-modified EVAR were excluded, as were ancillary costs from nonimplantable equipment. Data from all institutions were combined and stratified into an overall cost group and two, individual cost groups: FEVAR or chEVAR. These groups were compared, and each respective group was then compared with weighted Medicare reimbursement for Diagnosis-Related Group codes 268/269. Median device costs were obtained from an independent purchasing consortium of >3000 medical centers, yielding true median cost-to-institution data rather than speculative, administrative projections or estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 125 cases were analyzed: 70 FEVAR and 53 chEVAR. Two cases of combined FEVAR/chEVAR were included in total cost analysis, but excluded from direct FEVAR vs chEVAR comparison. Median Medicare reimbursement was calculated as $35,755 per case. Combined average implantable device cost for all analyzed cases was $28,470 per case, or 80% of the median reimbursement ($28,470/$35,755). Average FEVAR device cost per case ($26,499) was significantly lower than average chEVAR cost per case ($32,122; P < .002). Device cost was 74% ($26,499/$35,755) of total reimbursement for FEVAR and 90% ($32,122/$35,755) for chEVAR.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this multi-institutional analysis show that implantable device cost alone represents the vast majority of weighted total Medicare reimbursement per case with comEVAR, and that chEVAR is significantly more costly than FEVAR. Inadequate Medicare reimbursement for these cases puts high-volume, high-complexity aortic centers at a distinct financial disadvantage. In the interest of optimizing patient care, these data suggest a reconsideration of previously established, outdated, Diagnosis-Related Group coding and Medicare reimbursement for comEVAR.

Multimodal Prehabilitation for Patients Undergoing Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Surgery: A Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Elective treatment options for aortic abdominal aneurysms include open repair or the less-invasive endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Recovery from EVAR is generally considered easier and faster than open repair. Despite this, EVAR remains a major procedure, and average return to preoperative quality of life is at least 3 months. The purpose of this study is to determine the safety and feasibility of multimodal prehabilitation, a multidisciplinary preoperative optimization intervention, in patients undergoing EVAR and its impact on perioperative functional capacity and quality of life.

METHODS

Candidates for EVAR with an infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysm <7.5cm were invited to participate in a 6-week multimodal prehabilitation program that included (1) supervised and home-based exercise, (2) nutritional support, (3) psychosocial support, and (4) smoking cessation. Functional capacity and quality of life were assessed at baseline, before surgery and 6 weeks postoperatively. Recruitment rate, safety, and compliance were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients were included, 17 males (70%) and 7 females (30%). No adverse events occurred during the program. Compliance to each component of the program (median [Q1-Q3]) was 66% [67] for supervised training, 100% [67] for home-based training, and 100% [100] for nutrition. The multimodal prehabilitation program elicited a significant increase in functional capacity and quality of life preoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Multimodal prehabilitation for patients awaiting EVAR is feasible and safe. Multimodal prehabilitation improves both functional capacity and quality of life preoperatively. Further research is needed to assess the impact of multimodal prehabilitation on postoperative quality of life and functional capacity.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Multimodal prehabilitation is safe and feasible in patients awaiting endovascular aneurysm repair. The importance of this finding is that multimodal prehabilitation can be safely delivered preoperatively in patients awaiting EVAR. Although further research is needed, multimodal prehabilitation seems to improve preoperative functional capacity and quality of life. This could have an impact for the future implementation of prehabilitation interventions in order to increase functional reserve and quality of life preoperatively so that this high-risk population can cope better with the surgical stress and return to their normal life faster postoperatively.

Reinterventions after TEVAR

Thoracic cardiovascular aortic repair is an alternative procedure to open surgery for degenerative thoracic aortic aneurysm and thoracic aortic dissection. The advancements in graft design and imaging techniques have expanded its utility. However, the long-term patency of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) graft is still a concern. This review delves into the literature on re-intervention following TEVAR, highlighting factors that influence the re-intervention rate.

The financial burden associated with endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal and pararenal aortic aneurysms using physician-modified fenestrated-branched endografts

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND

Endovascular thoracoabdominal and pararenal aortic aneurysm repair is more complex and requires more devices than infrarenal aneurysm repair. It is unclear if current reimbursement covers the cost of delivering this more advanced form of vascular care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the economics of fenestrated-branched (FB-EVAR) physician-modified endograft (PMEG) repairs.

METHODS

We obtained technical and professional cost and revenue data for four consecutive fiscal years (July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2021) at our quaternary referral institution. Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent PMEG FB-EVAR in a uniform fashion by a single surgeon for thoracoabdominal/pararenal aortic aneurysms. Patients in industry-sponsored clinical trials or receiving Cook Zenith Fenestrated grafts were excluded. Financial data were analyzed for the index operation. Technical costs were divided into direct costs that included devices and billable supplies and indirect costs including overhead.

RESULTS

62 patients (79% male, mean age: 74 years, 66% thoracoabdominal aneurysms) met inclusion criteria. The mean aneurysm size was 6.0 cm, the mean total operating time was 219 minutes, and the median hospital length of stay was 2 days. PMEGs were created with a mean number of 3.7 fenestrations, using a mean of 8.6 implantable devices per case. The average technical cost per case was $71,198, and the average technical reimbursement was $57,642, providing a net negative technical margin of $13,556 per case. Of this cohort, 31 patients (50%) were insured by Medicare remunerated under diagnosis-related group code 268/269. Their respective average technical reimbursement was $41,293, with a mean negative margin of $22,989 per case, with similar findings for professional costs. The primary driver of technical cost was implantable devices, accounting for 77% of total technical cost per case over the study period. The total operating margin, including technical and professional cost and revenue, for the cohort during the study period was negative $1,560,422.

CONCLUSIONS

PMEG FB-EVAR for pararenal/thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms produces a substantially negative operating margin for the index operation driven largely by device costs. Device cost alone already exceeds total technical revenue and presents an opportunity for cost reduction. In addition, increased reimbursement for FB-EVAR, especially among Medicare beneficiaries, will be important to facilitate patient access to such innovative technology.

The Comparison of Endovascular and Open Surgical Treatment for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Terms of Safety and Efficacy on the Basis of a Single-Center 30-Year Experience

OBJECTIVE

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is a critical condition with a high mortality rate. Over the years, endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has evolved as a viable treatment option in addition to open repair (OR). The primary objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of EVAR and OR for the treatment of rAAA based on a comprehensive analysis of our single-centre 30-year experience.

METHODS

Patients treated for rAAA at the Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany from 1 January 1993 to 31 December 2022 were included. Relevant information was retrieved from archived medical records. Patient survival and surgery-related complications were analysed.

RESULTS

None of the patient-specific markers, emergency department-associated parameters, and co-morbidities were associated with patient survival. The 30-day and in-hospital mortality was higher in the OR group vs. in the EVAR group (50% vs. 8.7% and 57.1% vs. 13%, respectively). OR was associated with more frequent occurrence of more severe complications when compared to EVAR. Overall patient survival was 56 ± 5% at 12 months post-surgery (52 ± 6% for OR vs. 73 ± 11% for EVAR, respectively) (p < 0.05). Patients ≥70 years of age showed poorer survival in the OR group, with a 12-month survival of 42 ± 7% vs. 70 ± 10% for patients <70 years of age (p < 0.05). In the EVAR group, this age-related survival advantage was not found (12-month survival: ≥70 years: 67 ± 14%, <70 years: 86 ± 13%). Gender-specific survival was similar regardless of the applied method of care.

CONCLUSION

OR was associated with more severe complications in our study. EVAR initially outperformed OR for rAAA regarding patient survival while re-interventions following EVAR negatively affect survival in the long-term. Elderly patients should be treated with EVAR. Gender does not seem to have a significant impact on survival.

Possible implications of device-specific variability in post-endovascular aneurysm repair sac regression and endoleaks for surveillance categorization

OBJECTIVE

Significant sac regression during early surveillance has been shown to best predict reintervention-free long-term surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Furthermore, a persistent endoleak has been related to a worse outcome. Individualized surveillance algorithms based on these findings have been suggested. There are no studies comparing the performance of different stent grafts regarding sac regression, the presence of type II endoleaks, and their possible implications for individualized surveillance. The objective of this study was to evaluate device-specific differences and how these may affect patient categorization for surveillance.

METHODS

Patients were treated electively with standard EVAR between 2005 and 2015 using three different devices (Zenith by Cook, Excluder by Gore, and Endurant by Medtronic). The data were reviewed retrospectively until 2020. Patients' computed tomography angiographies (CTAs) at 30 days and at 2 years were analyzed for freedom from endoleaks and for sac regression of ≥5 mm. Reinterventions during long-term surveillance were counted. Patients were categorized according to the presence of any endoleak and sac regression at 30 days and 2 years, and the probability of reintervention-free long-term surveillance was evaluated based on these findings.

RESULTS

A total of 435 patients were treated for an abdominal aortic aneurysm with EVAR during the study period. At 30 days, 80.0% (n = 339) of the patients were free from endoleaks, and at 2 years, 78.9% (n = 273) were free from endoleaks. There was a significant difference in endoleak rate at 30 days and 2 years between the devices (P < .001 and P = .001). There was no significant difference in sac regression between the devices at 2 years (P = .096). The categorization at 30 days based on endoleak status had a sensitivity of 44.9%, specificity of 87.4%, and negative predictive value of 84.1% for finding a reintervention-requiring complication during long-term follow-up. The corresponding figures at 2 years were 63.3%, 91.4%, and 89.4%, respectively. The combination of freedom from endoleaks and sac regression of ≥5 mm in the 2-year CTA best predicted an uneventful long-term surveillance. Patients who met this criterion had a 95.6% probability (negative predictive value) of having a reintervention-free long-term surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant differences in the prevalence of endoleaks between devices at 30 days and 2 years, but there is no difference in sac regression. Patients with sac regression of ≥5 mm and no endoleaks in the 2-year CTA can be safely categorized for infrequent surveillance regardless of the stent graft model that has initially been used.

Conservative Treatment of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Although nonsurgical management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is still used among a significant number of patients, survival after conservative treatment is extremely rare. We report a case of an 86-year-old female who presented with an rAAA that was confirmed clinically and radiologically via computed tomography angiography. Although the patient was not deemed a candidate for surgery owing to significant comorbidities and poor baseline function, she survived the episode with no surgical intervention. Given the growing aging and frail population, it is vital to explore this further, with the aim of improving both mortality and advanced care planning in the nonsurgical management of rAAA.

Brazilian Society for Angiology and Vascular Surgery guidelines on abdominal aortic aneurysm

The Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, through the Guidelines Project, presents new Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Guidelines, on the subject of care for abdominal aortic aneurysm patients. Its development prioritized descriptive guidelines, using the EMBASE, LILACS, and PubMed databases. References include randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and cohort studies. Quality of evidence was evaluated by a pair of coordinators, aided by the RoB 2 Cochrane tool and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale forms. The subjects include juxtarenal aneurysms, infected aneurysms, and new therapeutic techniques, especially endovascular procedures. The current version of the guidelines include important recommendations for the primary topics involving diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up for abdominal aortic aneurysm patients, providing an objective guide for medical practice, based on scientific evidence and widely available throughout Brazil.

Long-Term Outcomes of Open Versus Endovascular Treatment for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data

BACKGROUND

The advent of endovascular techniques has revolutionized the care of patients with uncomplicated abdominal aortic aneurysms. This analysis compares the overall survival and the freedom from reintervention rate between open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular repair (EVAR) in patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies including patients who underwent either OSR or EVAR for uncomplicated AAA. All randomized controlled trials and propensity-score-matched cohort studies reporting on the outcomes of interest were considered eligible for inclusion. The systematic search of the literature was performed by 2 independent investigators in accordance with the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. We conducted 1-stage and 2-stage meta-analyses with Kaplan-Meier-derived time-to-event data and meta-analysis with a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies met our eligibility criteria, incorporating 13 409 and 13 450 patients in the OSR and EVAR arms, respectively. Patients who underwent open repair had improved overall survival rates compared with those who underwent EVAR (hazard ratio [HR]=0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.88-0.98, p=0.004) during a mean follow-up of 53.8 (SD=29.8) months and this was validated by the 2-stage meta-analysis (HR=0.89, 95% CI=0.8-0.99, p=0.03, I2=62.25%). Splitting timepoint analysis suggested that EVAR offers better survival outcome compared with OSR in the first 11 months following elective intervention (HR=1.37, 95% CI=1.22-1.54, p<0.0001), while OSR offers a significant survival advantage after the 11-month timepoint and up to 180 months (HR=0.84, 95% CI=0.8-0.89, p<0.0001). Similarly, freedom from reintervention was found to be significantly better in EVAR patients (HR=1.28, 95% CI=1.14-1.44, p<0.0001) within the first 30 days. After the first month postrepair, however, OSR demonstrated higher freedom-from-reintervention rates compared with EVAR that remained significant for up to 168 months during follow-up (HR=0.73, 95% CI=0.66-0.79, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the first-year survival advantage of EVAR in patients undergoing elective AAA repair, OSR was associated with a late survival benefit and decreased risk for reintervention in long-term follow-up.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Open surgical repair for uncomplicated abdominal aortic aneurysm offers better long-term outcomes in terms of survival and freedom from reintervention rate compared to the endovascular approach but in the first year it carries a higher risk of mortality. The novelty of our study lies that instead of comparing study-level effect estimates, we analyzed reconstructed individual patient-level data. This offered us the opportunity to perform our analyses with mathematically robust and flexible survival models, which was proved to be crucial since there was evidence of different hazard over time. Our findings underline the need for additional investigation to clarify the significance of open surgical repair when compared to the latest endovascular devices and techniques within the evolving era of minimally invasive procedures.

Impact of Patent Lumbar Arteries on Aneurysm Sac Enlargement with Type II Endoleak after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the impact of the number of patent lumbar arteries (LAs) on sac enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort single centre registry study. Between January 2006 and December 2019, 336 EVARs were reviewed using a commercially available device excluding type I or type III endoleaks during a follow up of ≥ 12 months. Patients were divided into four groups based on the pre-operative patency of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and high (≥ 4) or low (≤ 3) number of patent LAs: Group 1, patent IMA and high number of patent LAs; Group 2, patent IMA and low number of patent LAs; Group 3, occluded IMA and a high number of patent LAs; Group 4, occluded IMA and low number of patent LAs.

RESULTS

Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 included 124, 104, 45, and 63 patients, respectively. The median follow up duration was 65.1 months. Significant differences in the incidence of overall type II endoleak (T2EL) at discharge between Group 1 and Group 2 (59.7% vs. 36.5%, p < .001) and between Group 3 and Group 4 (33.3% vs. 4.8%, p < .001) were observed. In patients with a pre-operatively patent IMA, the rate of freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement was significantly lower in Group 1 than in Group 2 (69.0% vs. 81.7% five years after EVAR, p < .001). In patients with a pre-operatively occluded IMA, the freedom rate from aneurysm sac enlargement was not significantly different between Groups 3 and Group 4 (95.0% vs. 100% five years after EVAR, p = .075).

CONCLUSION

A high number of patent LAs seemed to have a significant role in sac enlargement with T2EL when the IMA was patent pre-operatively, whereas a high number of patent LAs seemed to have limited influence on sac enlargement when the IMA was occluded pre-operatively.

Predictors of Five-Year Survival after EVAR: 10-Year Experience of Single-Center Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR) is the main therapeutic option for repairing abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). We aimed to determine the long-term outcomes of patients who underwent EVAR at our center.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, patients who underwent EVAR for intact isolated AAA at Tehran Heart Center between 2007 and 2017 were included. Clinical outcomes and the frequency of mortality were analyzed for follow-up periods. We calculated the 5-year survival rate and its predictors for our patients using Kaplan-Meier estimation.

RESULTS

We included the data of all patients (154 patients, mean age = 70.7 [± 8.0] years, 96.1% men) who successfully underwent EVAR at our center. The most common risk factors were coronary artery disease (70.1%), hypertension (68.2%), smoking (64.9%), and dyslipidemia (39.6%). There was no mortality during the procedure. The median follow-up was 65.5 months. An average decrease of 9.07 mm (95% confidence interval: 6.9-11.2) occurred in the size of the AAA. During follow-up, 12 patients developed some complications, 49 died, and 7 did not complete the follow-up. The 5-year survival rate was 75% (3.9%). The independent predictors for 5-year survival were age (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.06, P = 0.002) and anemia (HR = 1.91, P = 0.029). Despite not being statistically significant, dyslipidemia (HR = 0.573, P = 0.078) and long intensive care unit/cardiac care unit stays (HR = 1.08, P = 0.070) were borderline mortality predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

This study depicted an acceptable survival rate for patients who underwent EVAR at our center. Age and anemia, 2 modifiable predictors of 5-year survival, can probably prolong the survival rate of patients, which requires evaluation later.

Japanese single-center experience of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair over 20 years: should open or endovascular aneurysm repair be performed first?

PURPOSE

The present study analyzed the outcomes of our experience with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair over 20 years using endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with commercially available devices or open aortic repair (OAR) and reviewed our surgical strategy for AAA.

METHODS

From 1999 to 2019, 1077 patients (659 OAR, 418 EVAR) underwent AAA repair. The OAR and EVAR groups were compared retrospectively, and a propensity matching analysis was performed.

RESULTS

EVAR was first introduced in 2008. Our strategy was changed to an EVAR-first strategy in 2010. Beginning in 2018, this EVAR-first strategy was changed to an OAR-first strategy. After propensity matching, the overall survival in the OAR group was significantly better than that in the EVAR group at 10 years (p = 0.006). Two late deaths due to AAA rupture were identified in the EVAR group, although there were no significant differences between the OAR and EVAR groups with regard to the freedom from AAA-related death at 10 years. The rate of freedom from aortic events at 10 years was significantly higher in the OAR group than in the EVAR group (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The rates of freedom from AAA-related death in both the OAR and EVAR groups were favorable, and the rate of freedom from aortic events was significantly lower in the EVAR group than in the OAR group. Close long-term follow-up after EVAR is mandatory.

Early- and Mid-Term Results of Abdominal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using an Aortic Cuff Prior to the Main Body to Prevent Type II Endoleaks

PURPOSE

Postoperatively persistent type II endoleaks (T2ELs) in abdominal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are known risk factors for long-term aneurysm enlargement. Therefore, various measures have been proposed to prevent T2ELs. Notably, the Kilt technique, which can be used in patients with dumbbell-shaped morphology, employs an aortic cuff deployed in the distal seal zone before the main body. Although previous studies have successfully applied this technique for preventing T2ELs, the mid- and long-term outcomes remain unclear. This study aimed to report the early- to mid-term outcomes in cases where an aortic cuff technique was used to prevent T2ELs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective single-center study analyzed 9 patients (mean age, 79 years; range, 69-88 years; 8 men) with abdominal aortic aneurysms. All patients underwent EVAR using an aortic cuff to prevent T2ELs. The primary end points were technical success (successful deployment) and clinical success (no T2ELs). Secondary end points included morbidity, reintervention, and aortic remodeling during follow-up.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 100%. There were no intraprocedural or postoperative complications. No deaths or reinterventions occurred. Postoperative computed tomography showed no endoleaks in 6 patients, while T2ELs from the lumbar artery outside the aortic cuff deployment range were noted in 3 patients. However, no T2ELs were observed in the artery in the aortic cuff deployment range in any patient. The average number of successfully occluded arteries was 4.2 (range, 2-8). All patients had follow-up >6 (mean, 18.6; range, 6-36) months. Aneurysm sac shrinkage occurred in 5 patients during the follow-up period, whereas aneurysm size was stable in 3 patients. In contrast, only 1 patient showed transient dilation of the aneurysm sac enlargement; however, this dilation remained unchanged even after 1.5 years.

CONCLUSION

The aortic cuff technique is a favorable endovascular method for preventing T2ELs in EVAR. The present study showed that a single aortic cuff could easily and reliably occlude arteries branched from the aneurysm sac.

Proximal Instructions for Use Violations in Elective Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative: Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is often attempted in patients with marginal anatomy. These patients' midterm outcomes are available in the Vascular Quality Initiative for analysis.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in the Vascular Quality Initiative from patients who underwent elective infrarenal EVAR between 2011 and 2018. Each EVAR was identified as either on- or off-instructions for use (IFU) based on aortic neck criteria. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess associations between aneurysm sac enlargement, reintervention, and type Ia endoleak with IFU status. Kaplan-Meier time-to-event models estimated reintervention, aneurysm sac enlargement, and overall survival.

RESULTS

We identified 5,488 patients with at least 1 follow-up recorded. Those treated off-IFU included 1,236 patients ([23%] mean follow-up 401 days) compared with 4,252 (77%) treated on-IFU (mean follow-up 406 days). There was no evidence of significant differences in crude 30-day survival (96% vs 97%; p = 0.28) or estimated 2-year survival (97% vs 97%; log-rank p = 0.28). Crude type Ia endoleak frequency was greater in patients treated off IFU (2% vs 1%; p = 0.03). Off-IFU EVAR was associated with type Ia endoleak on multivariable regression model (odds ratio 1.84 [95% CI 1.23 to 2.76]; p = 0.003). Patients treated off IFU vs on IFU experienced had increased risk of reintervention within 2 years (7% vs 5%; log-rank p = 0.02), a finding consistent with results from the Cox modeling (hazard ratio 1.38 [95% CI 1.06 to 1.81]; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated off IFU were at greater risk for type Ia endoleak and reintervention, although they had similar 2-year survival compared with those treated on IFU. Patients with anatomy outside IFU should be considered for open surgery or complex endovascular repair to reduce the probability for revision.

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

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

Pre-operative Aortic Anatomic Features as Predictors of Clinical Outcomes Following Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Retrospective Cohort Study

ARTICLE REMOVED.

Management of Endoleaks After Elective Infrarenal Aortic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: A Review

Importance

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the dominant treatment strategy for abdominal aortic aneurysms, encompassing 80% of all repairs in the United States. Endoleaks are ubiquitous and affect 30% of patients treated by EVAR, potentially leading to sac enlargement and increased risk of rupture. The care of EVAR patients requires long-term surveillance by a multidisciplinary team. Accordingly, physicians should be familiar with the fundamentals of endoleak management to achieve optimal outcomes, including timely referral for remediation or providing counseling and reassurance when needed.

Observations

PubMed and the Cochrane database were searched for articles published between January 2002 and December 2022 in English, addressing epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of endoleaks after EVAR. Endoleaks can be detected intraoperatively or years later, making lifelong surveillance mandatory. Type I and III have the highest risk of rupture (7.5% at 2 years and 8.9% at 1 year, respectively) and should be treated when identified. Intervention should be considered for other types of endoleak when associated with aneurysm sac growth larger than 5 mm based on current guidelines. Type II endoleaks are the most common, accounting for 50% of all endoleaks. Up to 90% of type II endoleaks resolve spontaneously or are not associated with sac enlargement, requiring only observation. Although the risk of rupture is less than 1%, cases that require reintervention are challenging. Recurrence is common despite endovascular treatment, and rupture can occur without evidence of sac growth. Type IV endoleaks and endotension are uncommon, are typically benign, and primarily should be observed.

Conclusions and Relevance

Endoleak management depends on the type and presence of sac expansion. Type I and III endoleaks require intervention. Type II endoleaks should be observed and treated selectively in patients with significant sac expansion. Since endoleaks can appear any time after EVAR, at least 1 contrast-enhanced computed tomographic angiogram or duplex ultrasound by an experienced laboratory is recommended every 5 years.

Long-term Mortality and Reintervention After Endovascular and Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repairs in Australia, Germany, and the United States

OBJECTIVE

To examine long-term outcomes after endovascular (EVAR) and open repairs (OAR) for intact abdominal aortic aneurysms in Australia, Germany, and the United States, using a unified study design.

BACKGROUND

Similarities and differences in long-term outcomes after EVAR versus OAR across countries remained unclear, given differences in designs across existing studies.

METHODS

We identified patients aged >65 years undergoing intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs during 2010-2017/2018. We compared long-term patient mortality and reintervention after EVAR and OAR using Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox regressions. Propensity score matching was performed within each country to adjust for differences in baseline patient characteristics between procedure groups.

RESULTS

We included 3311, 4909, and 145363 patients from Australia, Germany, and the United States, respectively. The median patient age was 76 to 77 years, and most patients were males (77%-84%). Patient mortality was lower after EVAR than OAR within the first 60 days and became similar at 3-year follow-up (Australia 14.7% vs 16.5%, Germany 18.2% vs 19.7%, United States: 24.4% vs 24.4%). At the end of follow-up, patient mortality after EVAR was higher than OAR in Australia [ hazard ratio (HR) 95% CI: 1.21 (0.96-1.54)] but similar to OAR in Germany [HR 95% CI: 0.92 (0.80-1.07)] and the United States [HR 95% CI: 1.02 (0.99-1.05)]. The risk of reintervention after EVAR was more than twice that after OAR in Australia [HR 95% CI: 2.60 (1.09-6.15)], Germany [HR 95% CI: 4.79 (2.56-8.98)], and the United States [HR 95% CI: 2.67 (2.38-3.00)]. The difference in reintervention risk appeared early in German and United States patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This multinational study demonstrated important similarities in long-term outcomes after EVAR versus OAR across 3 countries. Variation in long-term mortality and reintervention comparisons indicates possible differences in patient profiles, surveillance, and best medical therapy across countries.

Myths and methodologies: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing for surgical risk stratification in patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm; balancing risk over benefit

The extent to which patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) should exercise remains unclear, given theoretical concerns over the perceived risk of blood pressure-induced rupture, which is often catastrophic. This is especially pertinent during cardiopulmonary exercise testing, when patients are required to perform incremental exercise to symptom-limited exhaustion for the determination of cardiorespiratory fitness. This multimodal metric is being used increasingly as a complementary diagnostic tool to inform risk stratification and subsequent management of patients undergoing AAA surgery. In this review, we bring together a multidisciplinary group of physiologists, exercise scientists, anaesthetists, radiologists and surgeons to challenge the enduring 'myth' that AAA patients should be fearful of and avoid rigorous exercise. On the contrary, by appraising fundamental vascular mechanobiological forces associated with exercise, in conjunction with 'methodological' recommendations for risk mitigation specific to this patient population, we highlight that the benefits conferred by cardiopulmonary exercise testing and exercise training across the continuum of intensity far outweigh the short-term risks posed by potential AAA rupture.

Early and Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair With Zenith Alpha Abdominal Stent-Graft: Results From a Multicenter Retrospective Tuscany Registry

PURPOSE

Zenith Alpha Abdominal (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) is one of the new-generation low-profile stent-grafts with demonstrated satisfactory early and midterm clinical outcomes for endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The aim was to evaluate early and midterm results of this device in the framework of a multicenter regional retrospective registry, with the analysis of morphological factors affecting outcomes, including different limb configurations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2016 and November 2021, 202 patients with AAA underwent elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with implantation of a Zenith Alpha Abdominal in 7 centers. Early (30 day) outcomes in terms of technical and clinical success were assessed. Estimated 5 year outcomes were evaluated in terms of survival, freedom from type I/III endoleak, freedom from surgical conversion, freedom from limb graft occlusion, freedom from any device-related reintervention, and graft infection evaluation by life-table analysis (Kaplan-Meier test). A comparative analysis between different limb configurations (Zenith Spiral Z AAA iliac legs, codes ZISL vs ZSLE) was performed in terms of limb graft occlusion.

RESULTS

The 30 day technical and clinical success rates were 97.5% and 99.5%, respectively. Median follow-up period was 25.5 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 12-43.25). The 5 year survival rate was 73.6%. The estimated 5 year outcomes in terms of freedom from type I/III endoleak, freedom from surgical conversion, freedom from limb graft occlusion, freedom from any device-related reintervention, and freedom from graft infection were 88.6% (95% CI [confidence interval]: 83.4%-93.1%), 95.8% (95% CI: 92.7%-97.1%), 93.6% (95% CI: 90.2%-96.8%), 87% (95% CI: 83.3%-91.6%), and 97.7% (95% CI: 95.1%-98.9%), respectively. About limb configuration, no differences were found in terms of 5 year freedom from limb graft occlusion (ZSLE 93.4% [95% CI: 89.8%-95.5%] vs ZISL 94.3% [95% CI: 90.1%-95.9%], p=0.342; log-rank 0.903).

CONCLUSION

Zenith Alpha Abdominal in elective EVAR offered satisfactory early and 5 year outcomes with low complication rates. Limb graft occlusion continued to be an issue. Limb configuration did not affect outcomes.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The authors describe satisfactory early and 5 year outcomes of Zenith Alpha Abdominal in elective endovascular aortic repair in the framework of a multicenter regional retrospective registry. At 5 years freedom from type I endoleak was 88.6%, and rate of endograft infections and conversions to open repair were very low. in the present study. Hot topic about about Zenith stent-graft still remains the limb graft occlusion with a 30-day overall rate of 2%, and estimated 5-year freedom from limb graft occlusion of 93.6%. Limb graft configuration did not affect limb graft occlusion rate. A standardized protocol including iliac stenting should be adopted to reduce kimb graft occlusion.

A radiomics model for predicting the outcome of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair based on machine learning

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop a radiomics model to predict the outcome of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), based on machine learning (ML) algorithms.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 711 patients with infra-renal AAA who underwent elective EVAR procedures between January 2016 and December 2019 at our single center. The radiomics features of AAA were extracted using Pyradiomics. Pearson correlation analysis, analysis of variance (ANOVA), least absolute shrinkage, and selection operator (LASSO) regression were applied to determine the predictors for EVAR-related severe adverse events (SAEs). Eighty percent of patients were classified as the training set and the remaining 20 percent of patients were classified as the test set. The selected features were used to build a radiomics model in training set using different ML algorithms. The performance of each model was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC) from the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve in the test set.

RESULTS

A total of 493 patients were enrolled in this study, the mean follow-up time was 32 months. During the follow-up, 156 (31.6%) patients experienced EVAR-related SAEs. A total of 1223 radiomics features were extracted from each patient, of which 30 radiomics features were finally identified. The quantitative performance assessment and the ROC curves indicated that the logistics regression (LR) model had better predictive value than others, with accuracy, 0.86; AUC, 0.93; and F1 score, 0.91. The Rad-score waterfall plot showed that the overall amount of error was small both in the training set and in the test set. Calibration curve showed that the calibration degree of the training set and the test set were good (p > 0.05). Decision curve analysis (threshold 0.32) demonstrated that the model had good clinical applicability.

CONCLUSION

Our radiomics model could be used as an efficient and adjunctive tool to predict the outcome after EVAR.

High incidence of type 2 endoleak and low associated adverse events in the Vascular Quality Initiative linked to Medicare claims

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 endoleak (T2EL) is the most common adverse finding on postoperative surveillance after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). A low rate of aneurysm-related mortality with T2EL has been established. However, the optimal management strategy and the efficacy of reintervention remain controversial. This study used data from the Vascular Quality Initiative linked to Medicare claims (VQI-Medicare) to evaluate T2LE in a real-world cohort.

METHODS

This retrospective review of EVAR procedures in VQI-Medicare included patients undergoing their first EVAR procedure between 2015 and 2017. Patients with an endoleak other than T2EL on completion angiogram and those without VQI imaging follow-up were excluded. Patients without Medicare part A or part B enrollment at the time of the procedure or without 1-year complete Medicare follow-up data were also excluded. The exposure variable was T2EL, defined as any branch vessel flow detected within the first postoperative year. Outcomes of interest were mortality, reintervention, T2EL-related reintervention, post-EVAR imaging, and T2EL behavior including spontaneous resolution, aneurysm sac regression, and resolution after reintervention. The association of prophylactic branch vessel embolization (PBE) with T2EL resolution and aneurysm sac regression was also evaluated.

RESULTS

In a final cohort of 5534 patients, 1372 (24.7%) had an identified T2EL and 4162 (75.2%) did not. The median age of patients with and without T2EL was 77 and 75 years, respectively. There were no differences in mortality, imaging, reintervention, or T2EL-related reintervention at 3 years after the procedure for patients with T2EL. The aneurysm sac diameter decreased by 4 mm (range: 9-0 mm decrease) in the total cohort. Patients with inferior mesenteric artery-based T2EL had the smallest decrease in aneurysm diameter (median 1 mm decrease compared with 1.5 mm for accessory renal artery-based T2EL, 2 mm for multiple feeding vessel-based T2EL, and 4 mm for lumbar artery-based T2EL; P < .001). Spontaneous resolution occurred in 73.7% of patients (n = 809). T2ELs with evidence of multiple feeding vessels were associated with the lowest rate of spontaneous resolution (n = 51, 54.9%), compared with those with a single identified feeding vessel of inferior mesenteric artery (n = 99, 60.0%), lumbar artery (n = 655, 77.7%), or accessory renal artery (n = 31, 79.5%) (P < .001). PBE was performed in 84 patients. Patients who underwent PBE and were without detectable T2EL after EVAR had the greatest rate of sac regression at follow-up (7 mm decrease) compared with baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

T2EL after EVAR is associated with high rates of spontaneous resolution, low rates of aneurysm sac growth, and no evidence of increased early mortality or reintervention. PBE in conjunction with EVAR may be indicated in some circumstances.

Status of diagnosis and therapy of abdominal aortic aneurysms

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are characterized by localized dilation of the abdominal aorta. They are associated with several serious consequences, including compression of adjacent abdominal organs, pain, treatment-related financial expenditure. The main complication of AAA is aortic rupture, which is responsible for about 200,000 deaths per year worldwide. An increasing number of researchers are dedicating their efforts to study AAA, resulting in significant progress in this field. Despite the commendable progress made thus far, there remains a lack of established methods to effectively decelerate the dilation of aneurysms. Therefore, further studies are imperative to expand our understanding and enhance our knowledge concerning AAAs. Although numerous factors are known to be associated with the occurrence and progression of AAA, the exact pathway of development remains unclear. While asymptomatic at most times, AAA features a highly unpredictable disease course, which could culminate in the highly deadly rupture of the aneurysmal aorta. Current guidelines recommend watchful waiting and lifestyle adjustment for smaller, slow-growing aneurysms, while elective/prophylactic surgical repairs including open repair and endovascular aneurysm repair are recommended for larger aneurysms that have grown beyond certain thresholds (55 mm for males and 50 mm for females). The latter is a minimally invasive procedure and is widely believed to be suited for patients with a poor general condition. However, several concerns have recently been raised regarding the postoperative complications and possible loss of associated survival benefits on it. In this review, we aimed to highlight the current status of diagnosis and treatment of AAA by an in-depth analysis of the findings from literatures.

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Percutaneous treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm and aortic valve stenosis with 'staged' EVAR and TAVR: a case series

Symptomatic aortic valve stenosis (AS) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are critical clinical conditions, increasingly more prevalent with aging of the population. Calcific aortic stenosis is the most common structural cardiac disease in the elderly population, and medical management of severe aortic stenosis of the elderly population is associated with poor outcomes as compared to surgical treatment. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a treatment of choice in inoperable, often elderly, patients with symptomatic severe AS and in intermediate-to-high surgical risk patients. It is not yet clarified the incidence of AAA and its impact on procedural and clinical outcomes among patients undergoing TAVR. It is known that after AS resolution with aortic valve replacement or TAVR there is an increase in blood pressure that increases the risk of dissection or abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture if AAA repair is delayed. The purpose of this report is to describe the anatomical details and technical and procedural considerations when proposing totally endovascular strategies dedicated to the treatment of patients with AS and AAA.

Pre-Operative Four Dimensional Flow Sensitive Magnetic Resonance Imaging Assessment of Aortic Side Branches as a Method to Predict Risk of Type II Endoleak Resulting in Sac Enlargement After EVAR

OBJECTIVE

To predict sac enlargement with type II endoleak (ELII) before endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using four dimensional flow sensitive magnetic resonance imaging (4D flow MRI).

METHODS

A single centre retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was conducted. Patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) who underwent EVAR between 2013 and 2019 were included. Aortic branches occluded pre-EVAR, and patients with endoleaks other than ELII were excluded. The aortic branch diameter, peak flow velocity (PFVe), and amplitude of the dynamics of flow volume (AFV) were measured in each aortic branch pre-EVAR. Total flow volume per minute (TFV/min), defined as the sum of AFV/min, was calculated in each case. According to computed tomography findings one year post-EVAR, the aortic branches and patients were divided into patent vessel and occluded vessel groups and sac expanding and non-expanding groups. PFVe, AFV/min, and TFV/min were analysed via receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

The patent aortic branches pre-EVAR (69 inferior mesenteric arteries [IMAs]; 249 lumbar arteries [LAs]) of 100 patients were included. Patent IMAs (n = 14) and occluded IMAs (n = 55), patent LAs (n = 23) and occluded LAs (n = 226), and expanding (n = 9) and non-expanding (n = 91) groups were compared, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed in branch diameters (IMA; patent, 2.5 ± 0.8 mm, occluded, 2.5 ± 0.8 mm, p < .78 and LA; patent, 1.5 ± 0.3 mm, occluded, 1.5 ± 0.4 mm, p < .35). PFVe (IMA; patent, 262.6 mm2/sec, occluded, 183.4 mm2/sec and LA; patent, 142.6 mm2/sec, occluded, 47.7 mm2/sec) and AFV/min (IMA; patent, 8.4 mL, occluded, 5.2 mL and LA; patent, 4.2 mL, occluded, 1.4 mL) were higher in the patent vessel group (p < .050). TFV/min was statistically significantly higher in the expanding group (24.1 mL/min) than in the non-expanding group (7.0 mL/min) (p < .010).

CONCLUSION

Pre-EVAR haemodynamic analyses using 4D flow MRI were useful to detect aortic branches responsible for ELII and to predict AAA cases with sac enlargement. This analysis suggests a new strategy for pre-EVAR aortic branch embolisation.