Early and Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair Using In Situ Laser Fenestration

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to present single-center outcomes in patients treated with in situ laser fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair (LFTEVAR) for various aortic arch pathologies and assess the impact of increasing experience.

METHODS

The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was followed. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected single aortic center data was conducted, including baseline information and peri- and post-operative outcomes of consecutive patients managed with LFTEVAR for aortic arch pathologies. Patients were enrolled from April 1, 2017 to January 31, 2023. The cohort was dichotomized to compare early (2017-2019) and late experience (2020-2023). Primary outcomes were peri-operative mortality and cerebrovascular morbidity.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were included (63.3% males, mean age 69.8±9.6 years); 21.4% presented with aortic ruptures. Aortic aneurysm involving the aortic arch was the most frequent pathology (53.3%). Forty target vessels (TVs) were revascularized, including 19 left subclavian arteries (47.5%) and 17 left common carotid arteries (42.5%). Double fenestrations were performed in 10 patients. The proximal landing zone was Ishimaru zone 0 in 5 patients (16.7%) and zone 1 in 13 patients (43.3%). Technical success was 93%. No spinal cord ischemia was recorded, and 3 patients (10%) suffered a post-operative stroke, of which 1 was major (3.3%). The median follow-up was 12 months (range=1-48 months). Thirty-day and follow-up mortality rates were 13.5% and 15.3%, respectively. Target vessel instability was 10%, of which 3.8% required reintervention. There was no statistically significant difference in outcomes between the early and late experience groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair of the aortic arch performed in experienced aortic centers is associated with low early mortality and stroke rates. It is a safe and effective therapeutic option in patients considered unfit for open repair.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Custom-made devices for arch pathologies requiring urgent repair are not an option because of manufacturing delays. Off-the-shelf devices with single branch arch prostheses, and outside IFU techniques such as parallel-grafts and surgeon-modified endografts have been proposed in this setting. Another off-the-shelf alternative is in situ laser fenestration thoracic endovascular repair (LFTEVAR), which addresses many limitations of the other off-the-shelf options. Our study reports the outcomes of 30 patients treated with LFTEVAR, showing that it is a viable therapeutic option in patients considered unfit for open repair acknowledging that sufficient experience with complex endovascular aortic repair is mandatory to achieve acceptable outcomes in these high-risk patients with challenging aortic anatomies.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Complex Aortic Aneurysm Surgery

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID on total case load and peri-operative outcomes in patients undergoing open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular repair (ER) of complex aortic aneurysms (cAAs).

METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis of prospective data of patients managed with elective cAA ER or OSR from January 2018 to December 2021 was conducted. A comparative analysis on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the case volume and on the 30-day outcomes was assessed using time periods, before (2018-2019) and during the pandemic (2020-2021).

RESULTS

During the 4-year study period, 255 patients with cAA were managed with ER and 576 with OSR. The pandemic did not reduce the cAA ER volume (p=0.12), but a statistically significant reduction in OSR case load was recorded (p=0.04). Following OSR, hospital length of stay (11.1 vs 10.3 days), and early mortality (6.94% vs 4.63%), were similar before and during the pandemic. In the ER cohort, baseline characteristics, early mortality (3.6% vs 4.1%, p=0.976), and morbidity (10% vs 14%, p=0.44), were comparable during the 2 periods. For ER cases, the hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay both decreased significantly (8±8-6±7 days, p<0.001 and 2±4 vs 1±6 days p=0.01, respectively) during the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

Resource pressures drove modifications in clinical practice to reduce the length of hospitalization, without compromising the clinical outcomes, in patients undergoing ER of cAA. This modification was not effective in patients undergoing OSR that resulted in a significant decrease of this activity.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The pandemic did not reduce complex endovascular repair (ER) volume (p=0.12) while a significant reduction in open surgical repair (OSR) case load was recorded (p=0.04). For the endovascular cohort, early mortality (p=0.976) and morbidity (p=0.44) remained stable, while the hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay decreased (p<0.001 and p=0.01, respectively) during the pandemic.

Spinal cord ischemia rates and prophylactic spinal drainage in patients treated with fenestrated/branched endovascular repair for thoracoabdominal aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a devastating complication after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair. The benefit of prophylactic cerebrospinal fluid drainage (pCSFD) to prevent SCI is still under investigation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the SCI rate and the impact of pCSFD following complex endovascular repair (fenestrated or branched endovascular repair [F/BEVAR]) for type I to IV TAAA.

METHODS

The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was followed. A single-center retrospective study was conducted, including all consecutive patients, managed for TAAA type I to IV using F/BEVAR, between January 1, 2018, and November 1, 2022, for degenerative and post-dissection aneurysms. Patients with juxta- or pararenal aneurysms were excluded, as well as cases managed urgently for aortic rupture or acute dissection. After 2020, pCSFD in type I to III TAAAs was abandoned and replaced by therapeutic CSFD (tCSFD), performed only in patients presenting SCI. The primary outcome was the perioperative SCI rate for the entire cohort and the role of pCSFD for type I to III TAAAs.

RESULTS

In total, 198 patients were included (mean age, 71.1±3.4 years; 81.8% males), including 50.5% with type I to III TAAA. The primary technical success was 94.9%. The perioperative mortality was 2.5%. and the major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) rate was 10.6%; 4.5% presented SCI of any type (2.5% paraplegia). When comparing the SCI group with the remaining cohort, patients with SCI presented higher MACE (66.7% vs 7.9%; P < .001) rate and longer intensive care unit stay (3.5 vs 1 day; P = .002). Following type I to III repair, similar SCI, paraplegia, and paraplegia with no recovery rates were reported in the pCSFD and tCSFD groups (7.3% vs 5.1%; P = .66; 4.8% vs 3.3%; P = .72; and 2% vs 0%; P = .37).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of SCI after TAAA I to IV endovascular repair was low. SCI was associated with significantly increased MACE and intensive care unit stay. The prophylactic use of CSFD in type I to III TAAAs was not associated with lower SCI rates and may not be justified routinely.

The Elevator Technique: A New Bailout Maneuver to Achieve Target Vessel Patency During Challenging BEVAR

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study is to describe a new bailout maneuver for use during branched endovascular thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair (BEVAR) while dealing with challenging target vessel cannulation.

TECHNIQUE

A 54-year-old woman underwent urgent BEVAR with a low-profile T-branch device to exclude a type 2 thoracoabdominal aneurysm (TAAA). The endovascular procedure was challenging because the left renal artery ostium was covered by the endograft fabric, compounded by diseased target vessels. A novel bailout maneuver is described. After angioplasty of the left renal artery (LRA), the LRA remained precannulated and a low-profile T-branch was implanted. The 3 proximal branches (superior mesenteric artery, inferior mesenteric artery, and the right renal artery) were connected to their respective target vessels swiftly with a steerable sheath from a femoral approach. Access to the left renal artery was not achieved because it was obstructed by the fully deployed endograft. We subsequently stented the LRA over the "pre-positioned buddy wire," using a balloon-expandable covered stent protruding inside the aneurysm lumen. The proximal stent was then flared and lifted upward using an 8.5 Fr steerable sheath, which made cannulation and stenting of the LRA through the side-branch from above finally achievable.

CONCLUSION

The elevator technique described in this article will help achieve technical success in challenging BEVAR cases.

CLINICAL IMPACT

We describe in this technical note the "elevator technique" that will complement the "Snare-Ride" and "Balloon Anchoring" techniques over a buddy wire positioned in a target vessel, to provide successful bailout options for challenging TV cannulations during BEVAR.After failed access to the renal artery through the renal branch, a covered stent was implanted in the renal artery over the buddy wire with 10 mm protruding into the aortic lumen. This stent was then flared, prior to advancing a curved steerable sheath into the stent, which shaped it with a superior-facing funneled aortic segment. This maneuver resulted in the renal stent facing its corresponding branch, finally easy to access from the endograft lumen.

Early Outcomes on Triple-Branch Arch Device With Retrograde Left Common Carotid Branch: A Case Series

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular aortic arch repair using multibranch devices has been applied in patients considered at high risk for open repair. The aim of this case series was to report the early outcomes in patients managed with a new design 3 branch arch custom-made device, including a retrograde left common carotid artery (LCCA) branch.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Of CaSe Series in Surgery (PROCESS) guidelines were followed. All consecutive patients undergoing endovascular repair of an aortic arch lesion with a custom-made triple-branch device, including a retrograde LCCA branch (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA), between October 27, 2022, and February 28, 2023, were included. The presence of an arch aneurysm (degenerative or post-dissection) with diameter ≥55 mm and high risk for a conventional open repair set the indication for treatment. The primary outcomes were technical success and mortality at 30 days. Early morbidity and reinterventions were considered as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Eight elective patients (87.5% men, mean age 72.3±27.0 years) were included. Five of them (62.5%) had undergone a previous ascending aorta repair of an acute type A aortic dissection. All patients were asymptomatic, except one, with left recurrent laryngeal nerve compression. The mean maximum aortic diameter was 70.4±21.0 mm. Percutaneous femoral and axillary access was used in all cases except three in which a cut down for right carotid access was performed. Technical success was 100%. Femoral access to the LCCA and implantation of the bridging stent was performed without technical challenges. No death nor cerebrovascular event was recorded during the 30 day follow-up. Five patients (62.5%) presented major complications, 3 related to access needing reintervention and the remaining related to congestive heart failure (CHF), which were managed successfully with medical treatment. Follow-up (range 1-4 month) was uneventful, except for one patient who presented a secondary type Ia endoleak.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our early experience, the presence of a retrograde branch facilitated the revascularization of the LCCA through femoral access, decreasing the risk of cerebrovascular morbidity. Further analyses with longer follow-up are needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the device.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Data arising mainly from the retrograde branch for the revascularization of the LSA are encouraging from a variety of devices. The premiminary experience with a triple-branched arch device, with a retrograde branche for the LSA but also for the LCCA, was associated with no 30 day mortality and 100% technical success.The device's design allowed swift catheterization and completion of the LCCA revascularization using femoral access exclusively.

Midterm Outcomes of Antegrade In Situ Laser Fenestration of Polyester Endografts for Urgent Treatment of Aortic Pathologies Involving the Visceral and Renal Arteries

OBJECTIVE

Aortic endografting and antegrade in situ laser fenestration of visceral arteries (LFEVAR) may be considered as an alternative to open surgery for the emergency repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) in fragile patients. The aim of this article was to evaluate the midterm results of LFEVAR performed with polyester endografts.

METHODS

From August 2015 to December 2020, all consecutive LFEVAR performed for non-deferrable treatment of complex AAA were analysed. Polyester endografts were deployed and subsequently fenestrated using an atherectomy laser probe; the fenestrations were enlarged using cutting and semicompliant balloons before implantation of balloon expandable bridging stents into the target vessels. Prospectively collected midterm survival, patency, and re-intervention rates were analysed.

RESULTS

Forty four procedures were performed for 11 type 1a endoleaks, five thoraco-abdominal aneurysms, 20 pararenal aneurysms, four segmental renal artery (RA) preservations, three anastomotic aneurysms, and one aortic dissection. One hundred and eight laser fenestrations were performed (26 for the superior mesenteric artery [SMA], 13 for the coeliac trunk, 33 and 31 for the right and left RA, respectively). The median ischaemia duration was 7, 48, 48, and 45 minutes, respectively. The technical success rate was 97%, with no open surgical conversions. The 30 day mortality was 4.5% (n = 2). No spinal cord ischaemia events were observed nor early stent related complications. Kaplan-Meier overall survival at two years was 73%, the aortic related re-intervention free survival was 70%, and the stent related re-intervention free survival was 90.6%. Four target vessel thromboses were detected, of which three were rescued. Three type IIIc endoleaks, one RA false aneurysm, and one SMA stenosis, required re-intervention during a median follow up of 24.7 months.

CONCLUSION

Antegrade LFEVAR is feasible, safe, and provides satisfactory early and midterm outcomes for non-deferrable treatment of aortic pathologies involving the visceral segment. Long term data are mandatory to confirm the usefulness of this promising off label technique.

Systematic Review on In Situ Laser Fenestrated Repair for the Endovascular Management of Aortic Arch Pathologies

Background: In situ laser-fenestrated thoracic aortic endovascular repair (FTEVAR) has emerged as a valuable alternative for aortic arch management. This review assessed the early and follow-up outcomes of in situ laser-FTEVAR in aortic arch pathologies. Methods: The PRISMA statement was followed. The English literature was searched, via Ovid, until 15 October 2022. Observational studies, published after 2000, reporting on early and follow-up outcomes for the in situ laser-FTEVAR were eligible. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. Primary outcomes were the technical success, stroke, and mortality at 30-days, and the secondary were the mortality and reintervention during follow-up. Results: Six retrospective studies from 591 and 247 patients were included. Fifty-nine (23.9%) patients were managed for aortic arch aneurysms and 146 (59.1%) for dissections; 22.6% of them for type A. Technical success was at 98% (range 90–100%). Eight patients died (3.2%) and 11 cases presented any type of stroke (4.5%) during the 30-day follow-up. The mean follow-up was 15 months (1–40 months). Ten deaths were reported (4.2%); one was aortic-related (10%). Thirteen re-interventions (6.0%) were performed. Conclusions: In situ laser-FTEVAR for aortic arch repair may be performed with high technical success and low 30-day and midterm follow-up mortality, stroke, and re-intervention rates when applied in well selected patients and performed by experienced teams.

In Situ Fenestrated Thoracic Endovascular Repair Using the Upstream Peripheral Go BackTM Re-Entry Catheter

PURPOSE

The aim is to present a case of in situ fenestrated thoracic endovascular repair, using a re-entry peripheral catheter, needing urgent repair due to recurrent episodes of hemoptysis because of an aorto-bronchial fistula after previous thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).

TECHNIQUE

A 74-year-old male with a previous TEVAR presented with hemoptysis, fever, and cachexia. An aorto-bronchial fistula and type Ia endoleak were depicted on computed tomography angiography (CTA). Due to the patient's frail general condition, a proximal TEVAR extension was planned, prior to thoracotomy for debridement, and long-term antibiotics. An in situ fenestrated TEVAR was performed to provide proximal sealing and revascularize the left common carotid and subclavian arteries. For fenestration creation, an Upstream Peripheral Go Back catheter (Bentley, Hechingen, Germany) was used. The Go Back catheter has been approved as a re-entry tool for complex peripheral arterial revascularization. In this case, both fenestrations were successfully created. Proximal seal and target vessel patency were confirmed on CTA. Thoracotomy confirmed aortic exclusion. A wedge lobectomy was performed in combination with pediculated omentectomy to exclude the exposed endograft.

CONCLUSION

In urgent cases, where custom-made thoracic devices are unavailable, in situ fenestrations with the Go Back catheter are an alternative to laser fenestrations.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Fenestrations are often required in acute TEVAR to achieve a proximal seal in the arch. In situ fenestrations with the Go Back catheter are an alternative to laser fenestrations and PMEGs in this setting.

A review: Single and multi-branch devices for the treatment of aortic arch pathologies with proximal sealing in Ishimaru Zone 0

Recently published experience has shown that endovascular management of the aortic arch, including sealing in the proximal zones, can be a viable option for patients considered unfit for conventional open repair. Endograft designs vary and include single or multibranch devices, with or without the addition of surgical debranching. Initial reports show that both techniques can be performed with high technical success and acceptable perioperative morbidity and mortality rates in high volume centers. Single branch devices, available off-the-shelf, may provide a treatment option for emergent presentations where patients cannot wait for the design and manufacture of a customized endograft. Double or triple branched endografts are now increasingly implanted in high-volume aortic centers. The purpose of this review is to describe the single and multibranched endovascular devices currently available for aortic arch repair, their associated published outcomes, and to discuss their relative advantages and disadvantages.

Midterm Outcomes of BeGraft Stent Grafts Used as Bridging Stents in Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (fEVAR) is established for the treatment of juxtarenal, pararenal, and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Bridging stents are used to connect the main body of the stent graft to the aortic branch vessels. Complications related to the bridging stents compromise the durability of the repair and require urgent re-intervention. Here we present the midterm results of the BeGraft stent graft system used for fEVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

All consecutive patients treated with fEVAR and the current BeGraft Peripheral Stent Graft between November 2015 and September 2016 were included.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine consecutive patients (38 men) were enrolled and 101 BeGraft second-generation stent grafts were implanted. The median aneurysm diameter was 60 mm (54.5-67.0 mm). Aneurysms were juxtarenal and pararenal (19/39, 48.1%), type 4 TAAA (3/39, 7.7%), type 1, 2, and 3 TAAA (7/39, 17.8%), type 5 TAAA (4/39, 10.2%), and 15.4% (6/39) had a type I endoleak following a previous EVAR. Fifty-five BeGrafts were implanted in mesenteric arteries (22 in coeliac trunks, 31 in the superior mesenteric artery, and 2 in a hepatic or splenic artery) and 46 into renal arteries (24 right and 22 left). The renal artery diameters were 5, 6, 7, and 8 mm in 9, 7, 26, and 4 patients, respectively. Mesenteric arteries were exclusively stented with 9 and 10 mm diameter devices. The median follow-up was 33 months (IQ25 17-IQ75 36). During follow-up, 11 patients died (28%) from non-aneurysm-related causes. The overall patency rates for bridging stents were 98% and 97% at 1 and 2 years, respectively, with a freedom from secondary procedure rate on BeGraft stent grafts of 96% (97/101). All events occurred on stents implanted in renal arteries.

CONCLUSION

Early favorable outcomes are confirmed during longer term follow-up. Vigilant surveillance is required.

Consecutive failing proximal landing zones

We report the case of a 77-year-old man who presented with successive aortic aneurysms during a 12-year period. He was first treated in 2006 for an abdominal aortic aneurysm with a bifurcated endograft, then in 2016 for a tender type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm with a proximal aortic cuff with in situ laser fenestrations. He presented in 2018 with a 9-cm distal thoracic aorta aneurysm managed by an off-the-shelf t-Branch endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). The perioperative course was uneventful, and 6-month follow-up computed tomography scan has shown freedom from endoleaks and branch patency. This case illustrates that apparently “healthy” aortic necks can degenerate after endovascular aneurysm repair.