Accuracy and feasibility in building a personalized 3D printed femoral pseudoaneurysm model for endovascular training

BACKGROUND

The use of three-dimensional(3D) printing is broadly across many medical specialties. It is an innovative, and rapidly growing technology to produce custom anatomical models and medical conditions models for medical teaching, surgical planning, and patient education. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and feasibility of 3D printing in creating a superficial femoral artery pseudoaneurysm model based on CT scans for endovascular training.

METHODS

A case of a left superficial femoral artery pseudoaneurysm was selected, and the 3D model was created using DICOM files imported into Materialise Mimics 22.0 and Materialise 3-Matic software, then printed using vat polymerization technology. Two 3D-printed models were created, and a series of comparisons were conducted between the 3D segmented images from CT scans and these two 3D-printed models. Ten comparisons involving internal diameters and angles of the specific anatomical location were measured.

RESULTS

The study found that the absolute mean difference in diameter between the 3D segmented images and the 3D printed models was 0.179±0.145 mm and 0.216±0.143mm, respectively, with no significant difference between the two sets of models. Additionally, the absolute mean difference in angle was 0.99±0.65° and 1.00±0.91°, respectively, and the absolute mean difference in angle between the two sets of data was not significant. Bland-Altman analysis confirmed a high correlation in dimension measurements between the 3D-printed models and segmented images. Furthermore, the accuracy of a 3D-printed femoral pseudoaneurysm model was further tested through the simulation of a superficial femoral artery pseudoaneurysm coiling procedure using the Philips Azurion7 in the angiography room.

CONCLUSIONS

3D printing is a reliable technique for producing a high accuracy 3D anatomical model that closely resemble a patient's anatomy based on CT images. Additionally, 3D printing is a feasible and viable option for use in endovascular training and medical education. In general, 3D printing is an encouraging technology with diverse possibilities in medicine, including surgical planning, medical education, and medical device advancement.

A single center study of the efficacy and safety of Pro-Glide used for closure in thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with previous groin intervention

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Pro-Glide, a suture-mediated vascular closure device, regarding technical success and complications in patients who had undergone aortic intervention and had previous groin intervention (PGI).

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-five patients who underwent percutaneous thoracic endovascular aortic repair via the femoral artery and were closed with the Pro-Glide device were analyzed retrospectively. PGI was defined as a history of open surgical access to the femoral artery or wide sheath (>18 F) placement due to endovascular or valvular intervention. The patients were divided into two groups 38 cases with PGI and 97 cases without PGI.

RESULTS

The overall success rate of closure of the femoral artery with Pro-Glide was not statistically significant between the two groups (93.8% vs 92.1%, p = .711). Sheath sizes were compared between the groups and PGI (+) group had significantly higher sheath sizes compared to PGI (-) group (24.3 ± 1.1 F vs 23.8 ± 1.0 F, p = .011). Three patients in the PGI (+) group and six patients in the PGI (-) group experienced technical failure of the percutaneous femoral approach. Femoral complications were seen after the procedures in four patients in the PGI (+) group and four in the PGI (-) group. The PGI (+) group had a higher complication rate when compared to the PGI (-) group; however, this was not statistically significant (p = .181).

CONCLUSION

The present study was conducted on a significantly larger sample compared to previous studies and the findings suggest that the Pro-Glide vascular closure device is a safe option for patients with a history of PGI and may not be considered as a contraindication.

Analysis of Determinants for Suture-mediated Closure Device Failure During EVAR Procedures

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for elective and emergency infrarenal aortic pathologies is the primary approach for treatment nowadays. During such procedure, the suture-mediated closure device (SMCD) (Perclose ProGlideTM, Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA) is commonly used. This study aimed to identify potential contributors for SMCD failure in a patient cohort of elective and emergency EVAR.

METHODS

Archived medical records from patients who underwent EVAR for aortic pathologies in elective and emergency setting at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany were included. Patient's co-morbidities, access vessel morphologies and hemostasis-related blood parameters were evaluated on their association with SMCD failure applying different statistical methods.

RESULTS

A total of 71 patients (139 femoral accesses) was included. The mean age was 73.5 ± 8.4 years. Overall SMCD failure rate was 4.3%, 4.1% for elective and 5.9% for emergency cases, respectively. Total procedure time was longer for the SMCD failure group (323 ± 117.8 min vs 171 ± 43.7 min). The calcification status of the common femoral artery (CFA), the diameter of the aortic bifurcation, and dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) on the medication plan prior to the procedure were associated with SMCD failure. Univariate binary logistic regression analysis nominated several potentially relevant predictors for SMCD failure who underwent subsequent multivariable binary logistic regression analysis. Here, DAPT on the medication plan was identified as being promising in predicting SMCD failure (OR 30.5), while anterior plaque formation in the CFA maintained as only statistically relevant determinant (OR 44.9).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the CFA calcification status to be associated with SMCD failure. Although discontinued prior to endovascular treatment, DAPT was also found to be associated with SMCD failure. Our results may advocate to perform obligatory platelet testing prior to EVAR to maximize patient safety.

The Characteristics and Results of Endovascular Devices in Trauma (CREDiT) study: Multi-institutional results

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular techniques are increasingly used to repair major traumatic vascular injuries, but most endovascular implants are not designed/approved for trauma-specific indications. No inventory guidelines exist for the devices used in these procedures. We aimed to describe the use and characteristics of endovascular implants used for repair of vascular injuries to allow for better inventory management.

METHODS

This CREDiT study is a six-year retrospective cohort analysis of endovascular procedures performed for repair of traumatic arterial injuries at five participating US trauma centers. For each treated vessel, procedural and device details were recorded and outcomes assessed with the aim of defining the range of implants and sizes used for these interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 94 cases were identified; 58 (61%) were descending thoracic aorta, 14 (15%) axillosubclavian, 5 carotid, 4 abdominal aortic, 4 common iliac, 7 femoropopliteal, and 1 renal. Vascular surgeons performed 54% of cases, trauma surgeons 17%, IR/CT Surgery 29%. Systemic heparin was administered in 68% and procedures were performed a median of 9 h after arrival (IQR 3-24 h). Primary arterial access was femoral in 93% of cases, 49% were bilateral. Brachial/radial access was used primarily in 6 cases, and secondary to femoral in 9. The most common implant was self-expanding stent graft; 18% used >1 stent. Implants ranged in diameter and length based on vessel size. Five of 94 implants underwent reintervention (1 open surgery) at a median of 4d postop (range 2-60d). Two occlusions and 1 stenosis were present at follow-up at a median of 1 month (range 0-72 m).

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular reconstruction of injured arteries requires a broad range of implant types, diameters, and lengths which should be readily available in trauma centers. Stent occlusions/stenoses are rare and can typically be managed by endovascular means.

The effect of percutaneouS vs. cutdoWn accEss in patients after Endovascular aorTic repair (SWEET): Study protocol for a single-blind, single-center, randomized controlled trial

Background

Endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) have become the first-line treatment for aortic diseases, but current evidence is uncertain regarding whether a percutaneous approach has better outcomes than cutdown access, especially for patient-centered outcomes (PCOs). This study is designed to compare these outcomes of percutaneous access vs. cutdown access after endovascular aortic repair.

Method

The SWEET study is a randomized, controlled, single-blind, single-center non-inferiority trial with two parallel groups in two cohorts respectively. After eligibility screening, subjects who meet the inclusion criteria will be divided into Cohort EVAR or Cohort TEVAR according to clinic interviews. And then participants in two cohorts will be randomly allocated to either intervention groups receiving percutaneous access endovascular repair or controlled groups receiving cutdown access endovascular repair separately. Primary clinician-reported outcome (ClinRO) is access-related complication, and primary patient-centered outcome (PCO) is time back to normal life. Follow-up will be conducted at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months postoperatively.

Discussion

The choice of either percutaneous or cutdown access may not greatly affect the success of EVAR or TEVAR procedures, but can influence the quality of life and patient-centered experience. Given the very low evidence for ClinROs and few data for PCOs, comparison of the percutaneous vs. cutdown access EVAR and TEVAR is essential for both patient-centered care and clinical decision making in endovascular aortic repair.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100053161 (registered on 13th November, 2021).

Assessment of Quality of Life after Endovascular and Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Retrospective Single-Center Study

Postoperative quality of life is an important outcome parameter after treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. The aim of this retrospective single-center study was to assess and compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients after open repair (OR) or endovascular treatment (EVAR), and furthermore to investigate the effect of incisional hernia (IH) formation on HRQoL. Patients who underwent OR or EVAR for treatment of an abdominal aortic aneurysm between 2008 and 2016 at a University Medical Center were included. HRQoL was assessed using the SF-36 questionnaire. The incidence of IH was recorded from patient files and by telephone contact. SF-36 scores of 83 patients (OR: n = 36; EVAR: n = 47) were obtained. The mean follow-up period was 7.1 years. When comparing HRQoL between OR and EVAR, patients in both groups scored higher in one of the eight categories of the SF36 questionnaires. The incidence of IH after OR was 30.6%. In patients with postoperative IH, HRQoL was significantly reduced in the dimensions “physical functioning”, “role physical” and “role emotional” of the SF-36. Based on this data, it can be concluded that neither OR nor EVAR supply a significant advantage regarding HRQoL. In contrast, the occurrence of IH has a relevant impact on the HRQoL of patients after OR.

Percutaneous proximal axillary artery versus femoral artery access for endovascular interventions

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study is to describe and illustrate the technique of ultrasound-guided percutaneous proximal axillary artery (PAA) access, and secondarily to evaluate the versatility and safety of this approach in peripheral, visceral, and aortic endovascular interventions.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective review of all peripheral, visceral, and aortic endovascular cases using percutaneous PAA access from February 2019 to March 2021 compared with a sample of an equivalent number of consecutive cases completed via percutaneous common femoral artery (CFA) access during the same time period. Access entry success, minor and major access site complications within 30 days, major adverse events within 30 days, demographics, and procedural details were analyzed using standard statistical analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 115 accesses-59 PAA and 56 CFA-were reviewed during the study period. Group demographics were not significantly different. Access entry success was achieved in 58 (98.3%) and 56 (100%) of PAA and CFA accesses, respectively, with no statistically significant difference. There were no significant differences in minor access-site complications (13.6% vs 5.4%; P = .21) major access site complications (3.4% vs 7.1%; P = .43), or major adverse events (6.8% vs 5.4%). between the PAA and CFA groups. With respect to versatility, PAA cases had a significantly greater mean number of vessels intervened on per procedure compared with CFA access (2.59 ± 1.31 vs 1.95 ± 0.98; P < .01). A wide range of target vessels were intervened on in both groups. PAA cases had significantly more bilateral lower leg interventions (28.8% vs 12.5%; P = .04). PAA access had a significantly longer mean procedure time (103.2 minutes vs 58.63 minutes; P < .001) and fluoroscopy time (18.21 minutes vs 12.87 minutes; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The PAA is a feasible, versatile, and safe percutaneous access option for endovascular intervention. The in-line trajectory from this site facilitates visceral, renal, aortic, and bilateral lower extremity interventions with ease. Outcomes, complications, and major adverse events are similar to those of conventional CFA access in the short term.

Mid-term follow-up of percutaneous access for standard and complex EVAR using the ProGlide device

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair is an established treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm which requires arterial access via the groin. Most centres perform percutaneous ultrasound-guided access into the common femoral artery for delivery of the stent graft. The profile of endovascular devices necessitates large sheath sizes, therefore formal closure of the arterial puncture site is required. Various percutaneous devices are available, with data lacking on efficacy and mid-term safety profile. We present outcomes from a single centre with the Perclose ProGlide™ (Abbott Vascular Devices, CA, USA) suture-mediated system, using the well described "pre-close" technique.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Data were collected from operative records and electronic medical records. Patients undergoing standard (EVAR) or complex (F/B-EVAR) aneurysm repair between March 2015 and September 2019 were included. Complications were recorded per-patient and per-groin procedure.

RESULTS

266 patients were included; 182 (68.4%) standard infrarenal EVAR, 84 (31.6%) F/B-EVAR. There were a total of 484 groin procedures performed. Intraoperative Perclose ProGlide™ success was 98.1% (per patient) or 99.0% (per groin procedure). 30-day groin complication rate was 6.1% (per patient) or 3.1% (per groin procedure). There were no pre- or peri-operative factors which predicted the occurrence of groin complications. The rate of groin complications was not related to sheath size.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data support the use of percutaneous access with a pre-close technique for a variety of endovascular aneurysm repair procedures with both large- and small-bore access. The Perclose ProGlide™ system provides excellent mid-term complication-free and reintervention-free outcomes for groin procedures.

Endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms

Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms has been the subject of rigorous scientific scrutiny. Prevalence studies have directed the formation of screening programmes, and observational studies and randomised controlled trials have defined aneurysm growth and treatment thresholds. Pre-emptive intervention with traditional open surgical repair has been the bedrock of improving long-term outcome and survival in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms but it is associated with a significant procedural morbidity and mortality. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has substantially reduced these early complications and has been associated with promising results in both elective and emergency aneurysm repair. However, the technique has brought its own unique complications, endoleaks. An endoleak is the presence of blood flow within the aneurysm sac but outside the EVAR graft. Although in randomised control trials EVAR was associated with a reduced early mortality compared with open repair, its longer-term morbidity and mortality was higher because endoleak development is associated with a higher risk of rupture. These endoleak complications have necessitated the development of postoperative imaging surveillance and re-intervention. These contrasting benefits and risks inform the selection of the mode of repair and are heavily influenced by individual patient factors. An improved strategy to predict endoleak development could further help direct treatment choice for patients and improve both early and late outcomes. This article reviews current EVAR practice, recent updates in clinical practice guidelines and the potential future developments to facilitate the selection of mode of aneurysm repair.Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04577716.

Editor's Choice - Percutaneous Access Does Not Confer Superior Clinical Outcomes Over Cutdown Access for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether a percutaneous approach has better clinical outcomes than surgical access for standard endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE and Embase were searched using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search interface developed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared percutaneous and cutdown endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) were considered. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using the odds ratio (OR), risk difference, or mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance statistical method was used as appropriate. Trial sequential analysis was performed to quantify the available evidence and control for the risk of type 1 and type 2 error. Risk of bias was assessed with the revised tool developed by Cochrane and the quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE system (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation).

RESULTS

Four RCTs were identified, reporting a total of 368 patients and 530 access sites. Meta-analysis showed no difference in access site complications or infection, post-operative bleeding/haematoma, access related arterial injury, femoral artery occlusion, pseudo-aneurysm, or peri-operative mortality between percutaneous and cutdown EVAR. Seroma/lymphorrhoea was significantly less frequent after percutaneous EVAR (0%) compared with cutdown EVAR (3%; OR 0.18 [95% CI 0.04-0.83]) and the procedure time was significantly shorter (MD -11.53 minutes; 95% CI -15.71-7.34), but hospital length of stay was not different between treatments. Neither the O'Brien-Fleming boundaries nor the futility boundaries were crossed by the cumulative Z curve, and the required information size was not reached for any of the outcomes. All trials were judged to be high risk of bias or have some concerns, and the level of the body of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of percutaneous EVAR on clinically important outcomes.

The Role of Simulators in Interdisciplinary Medical Work

This article reports from a project introducing a virtual reality simulator with patient-specific input for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) into a surgical environment at a university hospital in Norway during 2016–2019. The project includes acquisition of the simulator, training of personnel, and a mapping of the effects. We followed the process, adopting ethnographic methods including participation in the operating room, simulated patient-specific rehearsals, preparations of the rehearsals, meetings with the simulator company, scientific meetings and scientific work related to the clinical trials (the second author led the clinical trial), in addition to open-ended interviews with vascular surgeons and interventional radiologists. We used the concepts of boundary work and sensework as conceptual lenses through which we studied the introduction of the simulator and how it influenced the nature of work and the professional relationship between the vascular surgeons and the interventional radiologists. We found that the simulator facilitated professional integration, at the same time as it served as a material resource for professional identity development. This study is the first to our knowledge that investigates the role of simulators for professional identity and relationship among surgeons and radiologists. Further studies of simulators in similar and different social contexts may contribute to deeper and more generic understanding of the way simulators influence our working life.

Comparison between PeRcutanEous and surgical femoral aCcess for endovascuLar aOrtic repair in patientS with typE III aortic Dissection (PRECLOSE Trial)

OBJECTIVES

Aortic dissections are cardiovascular events with high mortality and morbidity rates. Management might be either with medical or interventional approach. Recently, thoracic endovascular intervention (TEVAR) becomes the first treatment of choice because of its better results and lower rates of complications in patients with type III aortic dissections. The intervention might be performed via femoral artery either with percutaneous or with surgical approach. Because of large sheath insertion to femoral artery, Pre-close technique is described in literature. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the outcomes and safety of 'Pre-close technique' to surgical approach in patients with type III aortic dissections who underwent TEVAR with femoral access ≥22 F.

METHODS

A total of 96 patients whom had type III aortic dissection and was performed TEVAR were retrospectively included in the study. Fifty-six patients had TEVAR with percutaneous approach and these patients are named as P-TEVAR group, and 40 patients had TEVAR with surgical approach and these patients are named as S-TEVAR group. Pre- and post-procedural data with complications and procedural data during TEVAR were evaluated for both groups and compared in between.

RESULTS

The main finding was that there was no significant difference between S-TEVAR and P-TEVAR groups in terms of complications and technical success. Operating room time was significantly decreased in P-TEVAR group (P < 0.001). Overall success rate for femoral approach in patients with Pre-close technique was 94.6% and was 100% for surgical approach. P-TEVAR group had post-operative complications in three patients and S-TEVAR group had in four patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Total percutaneous approach with Pre-close technique using Pro-Glide device is a safe and feasible method of femoral access in patients with type III aortic dissections.

Percutaneous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Current Status and Future Trends

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a common, safe, and effective method of treating abdominal aortic aneurysms. Traditionally treated via surgical cutdown over the common femoral arteries, many recent studies demonstrate percutaneous access techniques to avoid the surgical cutdown. Developing familiarity with these percutaneous techniques, including risks, complications, adjuncts, and alternative accesses, can help improve the outcomes and availability of EVAR. As these techniques become increasingly common, it is not unlikely that they can be practiced safely in select patients in an outpatient setting.

Clinical efficacy and safety of the PRO-glide device as a sUture-mediated ClosurE in Thoracic EndoVascular Aortic Repair in patients with previous groin intervention (from the PRODUCE-TEVAR Trial)

BACKGROUND

While the percutaneous approach is increasingly preferred, suture-mediated closure devices have been put into clinical practice to close the femoral artery during procedures requiring a large-sized introducer. However, scar in the groin is considered a contraindication or an exclusion criterion for percutaneous procedures. The aim of our study was to investigate the outcomes and safety of Pro-Glide device as suture-mediated closure device in patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair with percutaneous femoral access ≥22 F who had previous groin intervention.

METHODS

A total of 73 patients who underwent endovascular repair with percutaneous femoral access were retrospectively included in the study. Previous groin intervention was defined as history of open surgical access or large sheath insertion (>18 F) to femoral artery because of endovascular or valvular intervention. Patients were divided into two groups as who had previous groin intervention PGI (+) and had not PGI (-).

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients [60 male (82.2%)] were included in the study. Seventeen patients had PGI, and 56 did not. When groups were compared in terms of sheath sizes, a significantly higher sheath sizes were used in PGI (+) patients (24.5 ± 1.1 F vs. 23.8 ± 0.9 F, p = 0.005). The overall success rate in the femoral approach with pre-close technique was statistically insignificant between two groups (94.1% vs. 96.4%, p = 0.55). One patient in PGI (+) group and two patients in PGI (-) had technical failure for percutaneous femoral approach. One patient (5.9%) in PGI (+) group and one patient (1.8%) in PGI (-) group had femoral complications after the procedures; however, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of complications (5.9% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

Pro-Glide device may be a safe and less invasive method for femoral access in patients with PGI and might not be considered as a contraindication for patients with history of PGI.

Large-bore arterial access in the era of structural cardiovascular disease

Over the last two decades, the medical community witnessed an outstanding and accelerated development on minimally invasive therapies. The definition of what constitutes large bore access is subject to discussion, however within the field it is generally accepted to reflect a catheter diameter exceeding 8-French. We sought in this review to explore the evolution, characteristics and vascular compatibility of the current commercially available devices, analyze the devices along with access site-specific complications rates and finally review the present methods for percutaneous vascular closure.

Access Type for Endovascular Repair in Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Does Not Affect Major Morbidity or Mortality

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on access type when treating ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Our study's objective was to evaluate if the type of access in ruptured AAAs affected outcomes.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried from 2009 to 2018 for all ruptured AAAs treated with an index EVAR. Procedures were grouped by access type: percutaneous, open, and failed percutaneous that converted to open access. Patients with iliac access, both percutaneous and open access, and concurrent bypass were excluded. Baseline characteristics, procedure details, and outcomes were collected. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed.

RESULTS

There were 1,206 ruptured AAAs identified-739 (61.3%) was performed by percutaneous access, 416 (34.5%) by open access, and 51 (4.2%) by failed percutaneous that converted to open access. Percutaneous access, compared with open access and failed percutaneous access, respectively, had the shortest operative time (min, median) (111 vs. 138 vs. 180, P < 0.001) and was most often performed under local anesthesia (16.7% vs. 5% vs. 9.8%, P < 0.001). The amount of contrast used was similar between the approaches. Univariable analysis comparing percutaneous access, open access, and failed percutaneous access showed differences in 30-day mortality (19.9% vs. 24.8% vs. 39.2%, P = 0.002), postoperative complications (33.7% vs. 40.2% vs. 54%, P = 0.003), and cardiac complications (18.2% vs. 19.8% vs. 34.7%, P = 0.018). However, multivariable analysis did not show access type to have a significant effect on cardiac complications, pulmonary complications, any complications, return to the operating room, or perioperative mortality. Open access was independently associated with a prolonged length of stay (means ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.33, P = 0.012). Factors independently associated with failed percutaneous were prior bypass (odds ratio (OR) 9.77, 95% CI 2.44-39.16, P = 0.001) and altered mental status (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.17-5.15, P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Access type for ruptured AAAs was not independently associated with major morbidity or mortality but did have a differential effect on length of stay. Access during these emergent procedures should be based on surgeon preference and experience.

Outcomes of Open Versus Percutaneous Access for Patients Enrolled in the GREAT Registry

BACKGROUND

Arterial access and device delivery in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) have evolved from open femoral or iliac artery exposure to selective percutaneous arterial access. Although regional application of percutaneous access for these 2 procedures varies widely, the use of this technique continues to increase. Currently, differences in the use of percutaneous access between EVAR and TEVAR have not been well explored. The Gore Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) registry collected relevant data for evaluation of these issues and the comparative results between open and percutaneous approaches in regard to complication rates and length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

This study was performed via a retrospective review of patients from the GREAT registry (Clinicaltrials.gov no. NCT01658787). The primary variable of this study was access site complications including postoperative hematoma, vessel dissection, and pseudoaneurysm. Patients were categorized by abdominal (EVAR) and thoracic (TEVAR) aortic procedures using percutaneous-only, cutdown-only, and combined vascular access techniques for a total of 6 groups. Standard statistical methodology was used to perform single-variable and multivariable analysis of a variety of covariates including LOS, geographical location of procedure, procedural success rate, and access sheath size.

RESULTS

Of 4,781 patients from the GREAT registry, 3,837 (80.3%) underwent EVAR and 944 (19.7%) underwent TEVAR with percutaneous-only access techniques being used in 2,017 (42.2%) and cutdown-only in 2,446 (51.2%). There was variable application of percutaneous access by geographic region with Australia and New Zealand using this technique more frequently and Brazil using percutaneous access the least. No significant difference in the rate of access site complications was detected between the 6 groups of patients in the study; however, significantly lower rates of access site complications were associated with percutaneous-only compared with both cutdown-only and combined techniques (P = 0.03). In addition, associated with significantly higher rates of access site complications was longer LOS (P < 0.01). Average LOS was 5.2 days and was higher in the TEVAR group (10.1 days) than that in EVAR (4.0 days, P < 0.05). Increased sheath size does not appear to increase the risk of access site complication.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference found in the complication rate between percutaneous and cutdown access techniques. This analysis demonstrates that percutaneous-only access is safe, has low complication rates, and has lower LOS compared with open access or combined access techniques.

Development of novel patient selection criteria for a short stay endovascular aneurysm repair pathway: Improving patient selection for short stay endovascular aneurysm repair

Objectives

A short-stay endovascular aneurysm repair (SS-EVAR) pathway for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms offers the potential to improve service efficiency and patient satisfaction by reducing the hospital length of stay. This study aimed to determine whether the implementation of a novel set of patient selection criteria for a theoretical SS-EVAR pathway could facilitate an expansion of the proportion of suitable patients, whilst maintaining patient safety and limiting unplanned emergency readmissions.

Methods

Two SS-EVAR selection criteria (low and high risk) were generated based upon patient pre-operative comorbidities. The low risk criteria essentially selected fit and healthy individuals, whereas the high risk criteria included patients with a range of comorbidities that could still theoretically enable enrolment onto a SS-EVAR pathway. A retrospective analysis, whereby both criteria were applied to all elective EVARs recorded in the National Vascular Registry between 2013 and 2016 at a single tertiary vascular unit was performed. Rates and timings of postoperative complications, reinterventions and unplanned readmissions for patients meeting each criteria were assessed.

Results

In total, 188 patients were included (92% male, mean age 75.4 ± 7.2 years). Twenty-nine patients (15%) met the low risk criteria. Two (7%) of these experienced an inpatient complication which were both detected within 24 h of operation (including one who required reintervention), and no patients in this group had an unplanned readmission within 30 days. One-hundred and ten patients (59%) met our high risk criteria and 19 (17%) experienced an inpatient complication, with 4 (4%) of these occurring beyond 24 h post-EVAR (three urinary problems and one acute on chronic kidney injury). Six (6%) of these patients required a reintervention; however, all of these complications were detected within 24 h. Two (2%) high risk cohort patients required unplanned readmission within 30 days for a femoral pseudoaneurysm and musculoskeletal back pain.

Conclusions

With high risk patient selection criteria and appropriate post-operative safeguards, up to 60% of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms patients could be safely enrolled onto a next-day discharge SS-EVAR pathway with minimal readmissions, thus allowing more effective resource utilisation.

Factors Associated with Wound Complications after Open Femoral Artery Exposure for Elective Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

We identified factors that would lead to wound complications after open femoral exposure for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (oEVAR). Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset (2005-2014), we examined the patients who underwent oEVAR. Patients were stratified on whether they developed postoperative wound complications. Comparisons were made between group with wound complications and those without and adjusted analyses performed to identify variables that independently increased the risk of wound complications. There were 14,868 patients in the study cohort and 2.6% (384 patients) developed wound complications after EVAR. Among those with wound complications, 94% (360 patients) of patients had superficial and deep surgical site infection. Patients who had wound complication were likely to be younger (72.6 vs. 73.7 years old ( p  = 0.02), functionally dependent (5.4 vs. 2.5%) ( p  < 0.05), smoker (3 vs. 2.4%, p =0.03), female (4 vs. 2.2%), with significantly higher body mass index (31 vs. 28), and more commonly had diabetes (4 vs. 2.4%, p  < 0.001) or renal failure (12 vs. 3%, p  < 0.001). Although perioperative survival was similar, patients who had wound complications had significantly longer hospital length of stay (LOS) (7.3 ± 12 vs. 3.4 ± 5 days, p  < 0.001). Up to 3% patients developed wound complications after open femoral exposure during EVAR with significantly higher LOS and therefore cost utilization.

Reduced length of stay and 30-day readmission rate on an inpatient vascular surgery service

As the cost of care for patients with specific diagnoses becomes fixed, hospitals must develop systems to reduce length of stay and optimize the use of hospital resources while maintaining a high quality of care. The goal of this study is to evaluate the implementation and efficacy of a system designed to reduce average length of stay on a vascular surgery service. To effectively reduce the average length of stay in our center, we restructured patient rounds, implemented multidisciplinary rounds, introduced clinical pathways to postoperative care, and expanded outpatient management of postoperative patients. A total of 1697 adult vascular surgery patients discharged while under the medical direction of a vascular surgeon between July 1, 2013, and June 30, 2016, were included in the study. Improving communication with critical staff and using procedural space outside of the main operating rooms led to a 2.8-day reduction in the length of stay (10.8 vs 8.0, P < .001). There was a trend toward a reduction in the 30-day readmission rate (12% vs 10%, respectively; P = .01) and no significant difference in the case-mix index as a measure of illness severity (2.5 vs 2.4, respectively; P = .15). Length of stay reductions were heterogeneous among the types of vascular diseases studied, with greater improvements seen in patients undergoing lower extremity amputation, lower extremity angiogram, and endovascular aneurysm repair for nonruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. Less pronounced differences were observed in patients undergoing carotid artery endarterectomy or stenting and lower extremity bypasses. In conclusion, restructuring team rounds and instituting a multidisciplinary approach to discharge planning produced significant reductions in length of stay without a deleterious effect on patient care which may impact hospital profitability.

Long-Term Evaluation of Percutaneous Groin Access for EVAR

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Global Post-Market Clinical Follow-up of the Treovance Stent-Graft for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: One-Year Results From the RATIONALE Registry

PURPOSE:

To evaluate the safety and performance of the Treovance stent-graft.

METHODS:

The global, multicenter RATIONALE registry ( ClinicalTrials.gov; identifier NCT03449875) prospectively enrolled 202 patients (mean age 73.0±7.8 years; 187 men) with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) suitable for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using the Treovance. The composite primary safety endpoint was site-reported all-cause mortality and major morbidity. The primary efficacy outcome was clinical success. Further outcomes evaluated included technical success; stent-graft migration, patency, and integrity; endoleak; and aneurysm size changes.

RESULTS:

Technical success was 96% (194/202); 8 patients had unresolved type I endoleaks at the end of the procedure. There was no 30-day mortality and 1% major morbidity (1 myocardial infarction and 1 bowel ischemia). Clinical success at 1 year was confirmed in 194 (96%) patients; 6 of 8 patients had new/persistent endoleaks and 2 had aneurysm expansion without identified endoleak. A total of 8 (4%) reinterventions were required during the mean 13.7±3.1 months of follow-up (median 12.8). At 1 year, the Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from reintervention was 95.6% (95% CI 91.4% to 97.8%). Other estimates were 95.5% (95% CI 91.7% to 97.6%) for freedom from endoleak type I/III and 97.4% (95% CI 94.2% to 98.9%) for freedom from aneurysm expansion. Thirteen (6.4%) patients died; no death was aneurysm related.

CONCLUSION:

The RATIONALE registry showed favorable safety and clinical performance of the Treovance stent-graft for the treatment of infrarenal AAAs in a real-world setting.

Loco-regional versus general anaesthesia for elective endovascular aneurysm repair – results of a cohort study and a meta-analysis

Abstract. Background: The aim of this study was to investigate whether patients undergoing elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with loco-regional anaesthetic techniques have better outcomes than those treated with general anaesthesia (GA). Patients and methods: We retrospectively evaluated outcomes of EVAR performed with regional anaesthesia (RA) or GA over a five-year period. Furthermore, we searched electronic bibliographic sources (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL) to identify studies comparing different anaesthetic methods in EVAR. We defined perioperative mortality and morbidity as well as length of hospital stay (LOS) as the primary outcome measures. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effects models. Results are reported as the odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) and 95 % confidence interval (CI). Results: Three hundred and fifty-five patients underwent standard EVAR over the study period (RA, 215 patients; GA 140 patients). Patients in both groups had comparable baseline demographics and clinical characteristics. Perioperative mortality was significantly lower in the RA group (0.5 % vs. 4.3 %, P = 0.017). No difference was found in perioperative morbidity (P = 0.370), LOS (P = 0.146), postoperative destination (P = 0.799), reoperation (P = 0.355) or readmission within 30 days (P = 0.846). Meta-analysis of data on 15,472 patients from 15 observational studies found a significantly lower perioperative mortality (OR 0.70, 95 % CI 0.52–0.95, P = 0.02) and morbidity (OR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.55–0.96, P = 0.02) in patients treated with loco-regional anaesthetic techniques compared to those treated with GA. Our sub-group analysis demonstrated that both local anaesthesia (LA) (P = 0.003) and RA (P < 0.0001) were associated with a significantly shorter LOS compared to GA. Conclusions: Local and/or regional anaesthetic techniques may be advantageous over GA in elective EVAR, as indicated by reduced perioperative mortality and morbidity and a shorter hospital stay. Considering the current level of evidence, LA or RA should be considered in selected patients. Further clinical research is required to provide high level evidence on the optimal anaesthetic technique in EVAR.

Successful percutaneous access for endovascular aneurysm repair is significantly cheaper than femoral cutdown in a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Because of its minimally invasive nature, percutaneous femoral access for endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) is currently undergoing rapid popularization. Compared with surgical cutdown for femoral access (cEVAR), it offers the advantage of faster recovery after surgery as well as a reduction in wound complications. Despite proposed advantages, the method is largely considered uneconomical because of its reliance on costly closure devices.

METHODS

There were 50 patients undergoing EVAR who were enrolled in this randomized prospective single-center trial. Each patient randomly received percutaneous access in one groin and surgical access in the other. The primary end points were access duration and cost. Secondary end points were wound complications and the postoperative pain levels.

RESULTS

Surgery was performed per protocol in 44 patients. Mean access times for pEVAR and cEVAR were 11.5 ± 3.4 minutes and 24.8 ± 12.1 minutes (P < .001), respectively. Total access costs were €559.65 ± €112.69 for pEVAR and €674.85 ± €289.55 for cEVAR (P = .016). Eight complications in six patients were attributed to cutdown, none to pEVAR (P = .02). The percutaneously accessed groin was significantly less painful at day 1 and day 5 after surgery (P < .001). An intention-to-treat analysis (N = 50 patients) included six cases of pEVAR conversion due to technical failure in three patients (6%) and change of the operative strategy in another three patients (eg, aortouni-iliac stent graft followed by crossover bypass). The intention-to-treat analysis showed shorter mean overall access time for pEVAR (pEVAR, 14.65 ± 10.20 minutes; cEVAR, 25.12 ± 11.77 minutes; P < .001) and no cost difference between the two methods (pEVAR, €651.29 ± €313.49; cEVAR, €625.53 ± €238.29; P = .65).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm proposed potential benefits attributable to the minimally invasive nature of pEVAR while demonstrating cost-effectiveness despite the additional cost of closure devices. Taking into account pEVAR failures still does not increase pEVAR costs over cEVAR. Further considering reduced postoperative pain and wound complications, the technique deserves consideration in suitable patients.

Common Femoral Artery Caliber Changes after Percutaneous versus Surgical Access in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in the Asian Population

BACKGROUND

Western studies showed vascular caliber changes post-endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aims to evaluate for postoperative changes of the common femoral artery inner diameter (CFA ID) in the Asian population.

METHODS

From January 2011 to June 2016, 202 patients who underwent EVAR were reviewed. CFA IDs were evaluated at 3 fixed levels on computed tomography (CT) aortograms. Preoperative and postoperative measurements were compared. Per-groin analysis was carried out after division into percutaneous access endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) and surgical access endovascular aneurysm repair (SEVAR) groups. Independent sample t-test compared for differences in overall CFA ID changes between PEVAR and SEVAR groups. Paired sample t-test evaluated CFA ID changes in each group. P value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty patients were included, with 200 groins subsequently analyzed. The PEVAR and SEVAR groups have no significant demographic differences, except in sheath size and duration of CT aortogram follow-up. No significant differences in overall CFA ID changes comparing PEVAR and SEVAR groups (-0.12 ± 1.05 mm, -0.10 ± 0.81 mm, P = 0.36). No significant overall CFA ID changes in both PEVAR (7.92 ± 1.23 mm, 7.80 ± 1.38 mm, P = 0.34) and SEVAR groups (7.47 ± 1.44 mm, 7.36 ± 1.64 mm, P = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in CFA caliber changes comparing PEVAR and SEVAR. No significant CFA caliber changes in either group.

Early and midterm outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for acute and chronic complicated type B aortic dissection

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in the current era has been chosen as a dominant and minimally invasive treatment for complicated aorta dissection. This study aimed to assess safety and feasibility of TEVAR in acute and chronic type B aortic dissection.Between January 2011 and December 2013, 85 patients with complicated type B aortic dissection undergoing TEVAR were divided into acute aortic dissection (AAD) (n = 60) group and chronic aortic dissection (CAD) group (n = 25). Computed tomography was used to evaluate postoperative changes in maximal aortic diameter and true and false lumen diameters at 3 levels during a mean follow-up period of 26.4 ± 15.6 months.The technical success rate was 100%. In-hospital and 30-day rates of death were 3.3% in acute group and 0 in chronic group. Postdischarge rates of type I leak, type II leak, and retrograde type A dissection were 6.7%, 5.2%, and 3.4% (acute) and 0%, 4.0%, and 4.0% (chronic), respectively. The maximal aorta diameter remained stable in all the 3 levels in both acute and chronic group. The cumulative freedom from all-cause mortality at 3 years was similar in acute and chronic groups (89.5% vs 95.5%, P = .308). The cumulative freedom from aortic-related mortality was also not significantly different in the acute and chronic groups (92.8% vs 95.2%, P = .531). In the thoracic aorta, TEVAR treatment resulted in a significant increase in true lumen (TL) diameter and decrease in false lumen (FL). However, in the abdominal aorta, TEVAR did not lead to significant change in TL and FL diameters. The rates of complete thrombosis thoracic false lumens were better than that in the abdominal false lumen.TEVAR was a safe and effect therapy for complicated acute and chronic type B dissection with low early and mid-term mortality and morbidity.

Safety and Efficacy of Totally Percutaneous Access Compared With Open Femoral Exposure for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of percutaneous (PEVAR) vs open femoral access (OFA) techniques for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: A systematic review of English-language articles (Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases) between January 1999 and August 2016 returned 11 studies including 1650 patients with 2500 groin accesses eligible for the meta-analysis. Data extracted from each study were synthesized to evaluate technical success rates, procedure time, and complications for the 2 access approaches. Data are presented as the odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The quality of individual studies was evaluated based on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: The mean technical success rate in the PEVAR group was 94.5% (785/831). The overall OR was 0.38 (95% CI 0.12 to 1.18, p=0.09), indicating no significant difference between the methods. The procedure time in PEVAR was shorter than OFA (mean difference −24.52, 95% CI −46.45 to −22.60, p<0.001). Overall, the total complication rate was 15.3% in the OFA group vs 7.8% in the PEVAR group (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.73, p<0.001). The meta-analysis identified significant differences between groups for all complications (p<0.001) and the following individual adverse events: wound infection (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.81, p=0.02), pseudoaneurysm (OR 8.07, 95% CI 1.54 to 42.32, p=0.01), seroma (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.55, p=0.008), and lymphocele or lymph leak (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.92, p=0.04). Conclusion: PEVAR had a similar technical success rate, shorter procedure time, and lower complication rate compared with OFA. Thus, percutaneous access appears to be the preferential approach for EVAR. However, larger and randomized studies are needed to draw definitive conclusions.

Predilation technique with balloon angioplasty to facilitate percutaneous groin access of large size sheath through scar tissue

Purpose

Percutaneous remote access for endovascular aortic repair is an advantageous alternative to open access. Previous surgery in the femoral region and the presence of synthetic vascular grafts in the femoral/iliac arteries represent major limitations to percutaneous remote access. The aim of this study was to evaluate an original technique used for enabling percutaneous remote access for thoracic or abdominal endovascular aortic repair in patients with scar tissue and/or a vascular graft in the groin.

Methods

Twenty-five consecutive patients with a thoracic (11/25; 44%) or an aortic aneurysm (14/25; 66%) and with a synthetic vascular graft in the groin (16/25; 64%) or a redo groin access (9/25; 36%) were managed through the percutaneous remote access. In all patients, a percutaneous transluminal angioplasty balloon was used to predilate the scar tissue and the femoral artery or the synthetic vascular graft after preclosing (ProGlide®; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). In 10 patients, requiring a 20 Fr sheath, a 6 mm percutaneous transluminal angioplasty balloon was used; and in the remaining 15, requiring a 24 Fr sheath, an 8 mm percutaneous transluminal angioplasty balloon. Preclosing was exclusively performed using ProGlide®. Mean follow-up was 15 months.

Results

In all cases, stent-graft deployment was successful. There was one surgical conversion (4%; 1/25) due to bleeding from a femoral anastomosis. Two cases required additional percutaneous maneuvers (postclosing with another system in one patient and endoluminal shielding with stent-graft in the other patient). No pseudoaneurysm or access complication occurred during the follow-up.

Conclusions

Percutaneous access in redo groins with scar tissue and/or synthetic vascular graft using ultrasound-guided punction, preclosing with ProGlide® system and predilation with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty balloon to introduce large size sheath as used for endovascular aortic repair showed to be feasible, safe and with few local complications.