New surgical modification of fascial closure following endovascular aortic pathology repair

Effectiveness of fascial closure technique following percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous access and closure is commonly performed for patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). It has proven to be a safe and successful method of closure associated with fewer complications when compared with the traditional open technique. Fascial closure is an alternative technique that can be used for closure reducing the risks associated with the open technique. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and durability of fascial closure for failed percutaneous closure device following EVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Over a 12-month period, 49 patients who had undergone EVAR were identified via our EVAR register. Retrospective analysis of the clinical records was undertaken. We identified all the patients who had fascial closure of the groins following a failed percutaneous closure device. Patients had a computed tomography angiogram one month postoperatively, with duplex imaging and clinic follow-up three months later.

RESULTS

Fascial closure was performed in 14 groins. It failed in three groins and these patients had traditional open repair. Fascial closure was successful in 11 groins (7 patients). Of these seven patients, one was female (6%). The mean age was 80 years (range 68-92 years). Two patients died and one was lost to follow-up. One pseudoaneurysms were seen on computed tomography angiogram, which was managed conservatively and had resolved on follow-up imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Fascial closure is a very good alternative to open repair after failure of the closure device.

Fascia Suture Technique and Suture-mediated Closure Devices: Systematic Review

Background  The aim of the present study is to review the available data on suture-mediated closure devices (SMCDs) and fascia suture technique (FST), which are alternatives for minimizing the invasiveness of percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (p-EVAR) and reduce the complications related to groin dissections. Methods  The Medline, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane library - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for publications regarding SMCD and FST between January 1999 and December 2016. Results  We review 37 original articles, 30 referring to SMCDs (Prostar XL and Proglide), which included 3,992 patients, and 6 articles referring to FST, which include 426 patients. The two techniques are compared only in one article (100 patients). The two types of SMCDs were Prostar and Proglide. In most studies on SMCDs, the reported technical success rates were between 89 and 100%, but the complication rates varied greatly between 0 and 25%. Concerning FST, the technical success rates were also high, ranging between 87 and 99%. However, intraoperative complication rates ranged between 1.2 and 13%, whereas postoperative complication rates varied from 0.9 to 6.2% for the short-term and from 1.9 to 13.6% for the long-term. Conclusions  SMCDs and FST seem to be effective and simple methods for closing common femoral artery (CFA) punctures after p-EVAR. FST can reduce the access closure time and the procedural costs with a quite short learning curve, whereas it can work as a bailout procedure for failed SMCDs suture. The few failures of the SMCDs and FST that may occur due to bleeding or occlusion can easily be managed.