| 1. |
- Bath, Jonathan, et al.
(författare)
-
Contemporary outcomes after treatment of aberrant subclavian artery and Kommerell's diverticulum
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 0741-5214 .- 1097-6809. ; 77:5, s. 1339-1348.e6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: Aberrant subclavian artery (ASA) and Kommerell's diverticulum (KD) are rare vascular anomalies that may be associated with lifestyle-limiting and life-threatening complications. The aim of this study is to report contemporary outcomes after invasive treatment of ASA/KD using a large international dataset.Methods: Patients who underwent treatment for ASA/KD (2000-2020) were identified through the Vascular Low Frequency Disease Consortium, a multi-institutional collaboration to investigate uncommon vascular disorders. We report the early and mid-term clinical outcomes including stroke and mortality, technical success, and other operative outcomes including reintervention rates, patency, and endoleak.Results: Overall, 285 patients were identified during the study period. The mean patient age was 57 years; 47% were female and 68% presented with symptoms. A right-sided arch was present in 23%. The mean KD diameter was 47.4 mm (range, 13.0-108.0 mm). The most common indication for treatment was symptoms (59%), followed by aneurysm size (38%). The most common symptom reported was dysphagia (44%). A ruptured KD was treated in 4.2% of cases, with a mean diameter of 43.9 mm (range, 18.0-100.0 mm). An open procedure was performed in 101 cases (36%); the most common approach was ASA ligation with subclavian transposition. An endovascular or hybrid approach was performed in 184 patients (64%); the most common approach was thoracic endograft and carotid-subclavian bypass. A staged operative strategy was employed more often than single setting repair (55% vs 45%). Compared with endovascular or hybrid approach, those in the open procedure group were more likely to be younger (49 years vs 61 years; P < .0001), female (64% vs 36%; P < .0001), and symptomatic (85% vs 59%; P < .0001). Complete or partial symptomatic relief at 1 year after intervention was 82.6%. There was no association between modality of treatment and symptom relief (open 87.2% vs endovascular or hybrid approach 78.9%; P = .13). After the intervention, 11 subclavian occlusions (4.5%) occurred; 3 were successfully thrombectomized resulting in a primary and secondary patency of 95% and 96%, respectively, at a median follow-up of 39 months. Among the 33 reinterventions (12%), the majority were performed for endoleak (36%), and more reinterventions occurred in the endovascular or hybrid approach than open procedure group (15% vs 6%; P = .02). The overall survival rate was 87.3% at a median follow-up of 41 months. The 30-day stroke and death rates were 4.2% and 4.9%, respectively. Urgent or emergent presentation was independently associated with increased risk of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 19.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3-116.6), overall mortality (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.2-11.2) and intraoperative complications (OR, 8.3; 95% CI, 2.8-25.1). Females had a higher risk of reintervention (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.0-6.5). At an aneurysm size of 44.4 mm, receiver operator characteristic curve analysis suggested that 60% of patients would have symptoms.Conclusions: Treatment of ASA/KD can be performed safely with low rates of mortality, stroke and reintervention and high rates of symptomatic relief, regardless of the repair strategy. Symptomatic and urgent operations were associated with worse outcomes in general, and female gender was associated with a higher likelihood of reintervention. Given the worse overall outcomes when symptomatic and the inherent risk of rupture, consideration of repair at 40 mm is reasonable in most patients. ASA/KD can be repaired in asymptomatic patients with excellent outcomes and young healthy patients may be considered better candidates for open approaches versus endovascular or hybrid modalities, given the lower likelihood of reintervention and lower early mortality rate.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bissacco, Daniele, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of the Reproducibility of Ultrasound Calliper Placement Methods in Abdominal Aortic Diameter Measurements : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies
- 2023
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 66:5, s. 620-631
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To assess which ultrasound (US) method of maximum anteroposterior (AP) abdominal aortic diameter measurement can be considered most reproducible.DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched (PROSPERO ID: 276694). Eligible studies reported intra- and or interobserver agreement according to Bland-Altman analysis (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) for abdominal aortic diameter AP US evaluations with an outer to outer (OTO), inner to inner (ITI), and or leading edge to leading edge (LELE) calliper placement.REVIEW METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies statement was followed. The QUADAS-2 tool and QUADAS-C extension were used for risk of bias assessment and the GRADE framework to rate the certainty of evidence. Pooled estimates (fixed effects meta-analysis, after a test of homogeneity of means) for each US method were compared with pairwise one sided t tests. Sensitivity analyses (for studies published in 2010 or later) and meta-regression were also performed.RESULTS: 21 studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Twelve were eligible for quantitative analysis. Studies showed heterogeneity in the US model and transducer used, sex of participants, and observer professions, expertise, and training. Included studies shared a common mean for each US method (OTO: p = 1.0, ITI: p = 1.0, and LELE: p = 1.0). A pooled estimate of interobserver reproducibility for each US method was obtained, combining the mean ± SD (Bland-Altman analysis) from each study: OTO: 0.182 ± 0.440; ITI: 0.170 ± 0.554; and LELE: 0.437 ± 0.419. There were no statistically significant differences between the methods (OTO vs. ITI: p = .52, OTO vs. LELE: p = .069, ITI vs. LELE: p = .17). Considering studies published in 2010 and later, the pooled estimate for LELE was the smallest, without statistically significant differences between the methods. Despite the low risk of bias, the certainty of the evidence for both meta-analysed outcomes remained low.CONCLUSION: The interobserver reproducibility for OTO and ITI was 2.5 times smaller (indicating better reproducibility) than LELE; however, without statistically significant differences between the methods and low GRADE evidence certainty. Additional data are needed to validate these findings, while inherent differences between the methods need to be emphasised.
|
|
| 3. |
- Budtz-Lilly, Jacob, et al.
(författare)
-
European Multicentric Experience With Fenestrated-branched ENDOvascular Stent Grafting After Previous FAILed Infrarenal Aortic Repair The EU-FBENDO-FAIL Registry
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of Surgery. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 278:2, s. E389-E395
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective:To report the mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) following a failed previous endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) or previous open aneurysm repair (pOAR).Methods:Data from consecutive patients who underwent F-BEVAR for pEVAR or pOAR from 2006 to 2021 from 17 European vascular centers were analyzed. Endpoints included technical success, major adverse events, 30-day mortality, and 5-year estimates of survival, target vessel primary patency, freedom from reinterventions, type I/III endoleaks, and sac growth >5 mm.Background:Treatment of a failed previous abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is a complex undertaking. F-BEVAR is becoming an increasingly attractive option, although comparative data are limited regarding associated risk factors, indications for treatment, and various outcomes.Results:There were 526 patients included, 268 pOAR and 258 pEVAR. The median time from previous repair to F-BEVAR was 7 (interquartile range, 4-12) years, 5 (3-8) for pEVAR, and 10 (6-14) for pOAR, P<0.001. Predominant indication for treatment was type Ia endoleak for pEVAR and progression of the disease for pOAR. Technical success was 92.8%, pOAR (92.2%), and pEVAR (93.4%), P=0.58. The 30-day mortality was 6.5% overall, 6.7% for pOAR, and 6.2% for pEVAR, P=0.81. There were 1853 treated target vessels with 5-year estimates of primary patency of 94.4%, pEVAR (95.2%), and pOAR (94.4%), P=0.03. Five-year estimates for freedom from type I/III endoleaks were similar between groups; freedom from reintervention was lower for pEVAR (38.3%) than for pOAR (56.0%), P=0.004. The most common indication for reinterventions was for type I/III endoleaks (37.5%).Conclusions:Repair of a failed pEVAR or pOARis safe and feasible with comparable technical success and survival rates. While successful treatment can be achieved, significant rates of reintervention should be anticipated, particularly for issues related to instability of target vessels/bridging stents.
|
|
| 4. |
- Burdess, Anne, et al.
(författare)
-
Early Experience With a Novel Dissection-Specific Stent-Graft to Prevent Distal Stent-Graft-Induced New Entry Tears After Thoracic Endovascular Repair of Chronic Type B Aortic Dissections
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Annals of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0890-5096 .- 1615-5947. ; 81, s. 36-47
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The aim was to report short and mid-term outcomes of a novel, investigational, dissection-specific stent-graft (DSSG), specifically designed to address the features of chronic type B aortic dissection (CTBAD) and reduce the risk of distal stent-graft-induced new entry tears (dSINE).Materials and Methods: A retrospective single center cohort study of all patients undergoing TEVAR with the DSSG for CTBAD from January 1, 2017 to January 31, 2020. The DSSG, which is a modified stent-graft based on the Cook Zenith Alpha Thoracic platform, has no proximal barbs, and a customized longer body length with substantial taper. The second and third distal Z-stents are sited internally to avoid any contact of the metal skeleton with the dissection membrane and have reduced radial force, while the most distal stent was removed creating a distal 30 mm unsupported Dacron graft.Results: Sixteen patients (13 males, 3 females) with a median age of 66 years (range 31–79 years) underwent elective TEVAR of CTBAD using the DSSG. Six patients (38%) had an underlying connective tissue disorder. The median tapering was 10 mm (range 4 mm–21 mm) and median length 270 mm (range 210–380 mm). Technical success was achieved in all but one case (96%). One patient died within 30 days, due to retrograde type A dissection with cardiac tamponade. The 30-day rate of stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and re-interventions was 0%. After median imaging follow-up time of 17 months (range 1–31 months), one patient developed a dSINE 4 months after the index procedure. After median survival follow-up of 23 months (range 2–35 months), one late death occurred due to traumatic brain injury, while no aortic-related death occurred during follow-up. Complete false lumen (FL) thrombosis was achieved in 9 patients while the remaining 6 showed partial FL thrombosis. No instances of diameter increase at the level oftreated aortic segment were noted with serial measurements showing either stable (n = 7) or decreased (n = 8) maximal transverse diameter.Conclusions: Use of a novel DSSG with low radial force for TEVAR in the setting of CTBAD is safe and feasible. This early real-world experience shows promising mid-term effectiveness with low rates of dSINE or unplanned re-interventions and satisfactory aortic remodeling during follow-up. Longer follow-up is needed, however, before any firm conclusions can be drawn.
|
|
| 5. |
- D'Oria, Mario, et al.
(författare)
-
A scoping review of the rationale and evidence for cost-effectiveness analysis of fenestrated-branched endovascular repair for intact complex aortic aneurysms
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Vascular Surgery. - : MOSBY-ELSEVIER. - 0741-5214 .- 1097-6809. ; 72:5, s. 1772-1782
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Cost-effectiveness analysis of new interventions is increasingly required by policymakers. For intact complex aortic aneurysms (CAAs), fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/B-EVAR) offers a minimally invasive alternative option for patients who are physically ineligible for open surgical repair (OSR). Thus, F/B-EVAR is increasingly used, but whether it represents a cost-effective treatment option remains unknown.Methods: A scoping review of the literature was conducted from the PubMed, Ovid Embase, and Scopus databases. They were searched to identify relevant English-language articles published from inception to December 31, 2019. All costs in the identified literature were transformed to U.S. dollar values by the following exchange rate: 1 GBP = 1.3 USD; 1 EUR = 1.1 USD.Results: At this literature search, no randomized clinical trials assessing cost-effectiveness of F/B-EVAR vs OSR for intact CAAs were found. Also, no health economic evaluation studies were found regarding use of F/B-EVAR in patients unfit for OSR. A Markov model analysis based on seven observational center- or registry-based studies published from 2006 to 2014 found that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for F/B-EVAR vs OSR was $96,954/quality-adjusted life-year. In the multicenter French Medical and Economical Evaluation of Fenestrated and Branched Stent-grafts to Treat Complex Aortic Aneurysms (WINDOW) registry (2010-2012), F/B-EVAR had a higher cost than OSR for a similar clinical outcome and was therefore economically dominated. At 2 years, costs were higher with F/B-EVAR for juxtarenal/pararenal aneurysms and infradiaphragmatic thoracoabdominal aneurysms but similar for supradiaphragmatic thoracoabdominal aneurysms. The higher costs were related to a $24,278 cost difference of the initial admission (95% of the difference at 2 years) due to stent graft costs. Both these studies, however, included a highly varying center experience with complex endovascular aortic repair, and their retrospective design is subject to selection bias for chosen treatment, which could affect the studied outcome. In contrast, in amore recent U.S. database analysis (879 thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs, 45% OSRs), the unadjusted total hospitalization cost of OSR was significantly higher compared with F/B-EVAR (median, $44,355 vs $36,612; P = .004). In-hospital mortality as well as major complications were two to three times higher after OSR, indicating that endovascular repair might be the economically dominant strategy.Conclusions: The literature regarding cost-effectiveness analysis of F/B-EVAR for intact CAAs is scarce and ambiguous. Based on the limited nonrandomized available evidence, stent grafts are the main driver for F/B-EVAR expenses, whereas cost-effectiveness in relation to OSR may vary by health care setting and selection of patients.
|
|
| 6. |
- D'Oria, Mario, et al.
(författare)
-
An International Expert-Based CONsensus on Indications and Techniques for aoRtic balloOn occLusion in the Management of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms (CONTROL-RAAA)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Endovascular Therapy. - : Sage Publications. - 1526-6028 .- 1545-1550.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To report on the recommendations of an expert-based consensus on the indications, timing, and techniques of aortic balloon occlusion (ABO) in the management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA).METHODS: Eleven facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study issues that were voted on using a 4-point Likert scale with open-comment fields, by a selected panel of international experts (vascular surgeons and interventional radiologists) using a 3-round modified Delphi consensus procedure (study period: January-April 2023). Based on the experts' responses, only the statements reaching grade A (full agreement ≥75%) or B (overall agreement ≥80% and full disagreement <5%) were included in the final study report. The consistency of each round's answers was also graded using Cohen's kappa, the intraclass correlation coefficient, and, in case of double resubmission, Fleiss kappa.RESULTS: Sixty-three experts were included in the final analysis and voted on 25 statements related to indication and timing (n=6), and techniques (n=19) of ABO in the setting of rAAA. Femoral sheath or ABO should be preferably placed in the operating room, via a percutaneous transfemoral access, on a stiff wire (grade B, consistency I), ABO placement should be suprarenal and last less than 30 minutes (grade B, consistency II), postoperative peripheral vascular status (grade A, consistency II) and laboratory testing every 6 to 12 hours (grade B, consistency) should be assessed to detect complications. Formal training for ABO should be implemented (grade B, consistency I). Most of the statements in this international expert-based Delphi consensus study might guide current choices for indications, timing, and techniques of ABO in the management of rAAA. Clinical practice guidelines should incorporate dedicated statements that can guide clinicians in decision-making.CONCLUSIONS: At arrival and during both open or endovascular procedures for rAAA, selective use of intra-aortic balloon occlusion is recommended, and it should be performed preferably by the treating physician in aortic pathology.CLINICAL IMPACT: This is the first consensus study of international vascular experts aimed at defining the indications, timing, and techniques of optimal use of ABO in the clinical setting of rAAA. Aortic occlusion by endovascular means (or ABO) is a quick procedure in properly trained hands that may play an important role as a temporizing measure until the definitive aortic repair is achieved, whether by endovascular or open means. Since data on its use in hemodynamically unstable patients are limited in the literature, owing to practical challenges in the performance of well-conducted prospective studies, understanding real-world use by experts is of importance in addressing critical issues and identifying main gaps in knowledge.
|
|
| 7. |
- D'Oria, Mario, et al.
(författare)
-
Association Between Hospital Volume and Failure to Rescue After Open or Endovascular Repair of Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in the VASCUNET and International Consortium of Vascular Registries
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Annals of Surgery. - : Wolters Kluwer. - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 274:5, s. 452-459
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To investigate the association between hospital volume and failure to rescue (FtR), after open repair (OAR), and endovascular repair (EVAR) of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) among centers participating in the VASCUNET and International Consortium of Vascular Registries.Summary of Background Data: FtR (ie, in-hospital death following major complications) is a composite end-point representing the inability to treat complications effectively and prevent death.Methods: Using data from 8 vascular registries, complication and mortality rates after intact AAA repair were examined (n = 60,273; EVAR-43,668; OAR-16,605). A restricted analysis using pooled data from 4 countries (Australia, Hungary, New Zealand, and USA) reporting data on all postoperative complications (bleeding, stroke, cardiac, respiratory, renal, colonic ischemia) was performed to identify risk-adjusted association between hospital volume and FtR.Results: The most frequently reported complications were cardiac (EVAR-3.0%, OAR-8.9%) and respiratory (EVAR-1.0%, OAR-5.7%). In adjusted analysis, 4.3% of EVARs and 18.5% of OARs had at least 1 complication. The overall FtR rate was 10.3% after EVAR and 15.7% after OAR. Subjects treated in the highest volume centers (Q4) had 46% and 80% lower odds of FtR after EVAR (OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.34-0.87; P = 0.04) and OAR (OR = 0.22; 95% CI = 0.11-0.44; P < 0.001) when compared to lowest volume centers (Q1), respectively. Colonic ischemia had the highest risk of FtR for both procedures (adjusted predicted risks, EVAR: 27%, 95% CI 14%-45%; OAR: 30%, 95% CI 17%-46%).Conclusions: In this multi-national dataset, FtR rate after intact AAA repair with EVAR and OAR is significantly associated with hospital volume. Hospitals in the top volume quartiles achieve the lowest mortality after a complication has occurred.
|
|
| 8. |
- D'Oria, Mario, et al.
(författare)
-
Center volume and failure to rescue after open or endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 0741-5214 .- 1097-6809. ; 76:6, s. 1565-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The correlation between center volume and elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair outcomes is well established; however, these effects for either endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or open aneurysm repair (OAR) of ruptured AAA (rAAA) remains unclear. Notably, the capacity to either avert or manage complications associated with postoperative mortality is an important cause of outcome disparities after elective procedures; however, there is a paucity of data surrounding nonelective presentations. Therefore, the purpose of this analysis was to describe the association between annual center volume, complications, and failure to rescue (FtR) after EVAR and OAR of rAAA.Methods: All consecutive endovascular and open rAAA repairs from 2010 to 2020 in the Vascular Quality Initiative were examined. Annual center volume (procedures/year per center) was grouped into quartiles: EVAR-Q1 (<14), 3.4%; Q2 (14-23), 12.8%; Q3 (24-37), 24.7%; and Q4 (>38), 59.1%; OAR-Q1 (<3), 5.4%; Q2 (4-6), 12.8%; Q3 (7-10), 22.7%; and Q4 (>10), 59.1%. The primary end point was FtR, defined as in-hospital death after experiencing one of six major complications (cardiac, renal, respiratory, stroke, bleeding, colonic ischemia). Risk-adjusted analyses for intergroup comparisons were completed using multivariable logistic regression.Results: The unadjusted in-hospital death rate was 16.5% and 28.9% for EVAR and OAR, respectively. Complications occurred in 45% of EVAR (n = 1439/3188) and 70% of OAR (n = 1366/1961) patients with corresponding FtR rates of 14% (EVAR) and 26% (OAR). For OAR, Q4-centers had a 43% lower FtR risk (odds ratio [OR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-0.9; P =.017) compared with Q1 centers. Centers performing fewer than five OARs/year had a 43% lower risk (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7; P <.001) of FtR and this decreased 4% for each additional five procedures performed annually (95% CI, 0.93-0.991; P =.013). However, there was no significant relationship between center volume and FtR after EVAR. The risk of FtR was strongly associated with a greater number of complications for both procedures (OR multiplied by 6.5 for EVAR and 1.5 for OAR for each additional complication; P <.0001). Among OAR patients with a single recorded complication, return to the operating room for bleeding had highest risk of in-hospital mortality (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.1-4.8; P =.034), whereas no specific type of complication increased FtR risk after EVAR.Conclusions: FtR occurs commonly after EVAR and OAR of rAAA within Vascular Quality Initiative centers. Importantly, increasing center volume was associated with decreased FtR risk after OAR, but not EVAR. Complication pattern and frequency predicted FtR after either repair strategy. For stable patients, especially those deemed anatomically ineligible for EVAR, these findings emphasize the need to improve the coordination of regional referral networks that centralize rAAAs to high-volume centers. Moreover, hospitals that treat rAAA should invest in resources that develop protocols targeting specific complications to mitigate risk of preventable postoperative death.
|
|
| 9. |
- D'Oria, Mario, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of early and mid-term outcomes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair in patients with or without prior infrarenal repair
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Endovascular Therapy. - : Sage Publications. - 1526-6028 .- 1545-1550. ; 29:4, s. 544-554
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare short- and mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (F-BEVAR) of pararenal (PRAA)/thoracoabdominal (TAAA) aortic aneurysms in patients with or without prior endovascular/open (EVAR/OAR) infrarenal aortic repair.Methods: Data from consecutive F-BEVAR (2010-2019) at two high-volume aortic centers were retrospectively reviewed. Primary endpoints were technical success, 30-day mortality, and overall survival. Secondary endpoints included 30-day major adverse events (MAE), freedom from type I/III endoleaks, reinterventions, sac expansion, and target vessel (TV) primary patency.Results: A total of 222 consecutive patients were included for analysis; of these 58 (26.1%) had prior infrarenal repair (EVAR=33, OAR=25) and 164 (73.9%) had native PRAA/TAAA. At baseline, patients with prior infrarenal repair were older (mean age=75.1 vs 71.6 years, p=.005) and the proportion of females was lower (8.6% vs 29.3%, p=.002). Technical success was 97.8% (n=217) in the entire cohort, without any significant differences between study groups (94.8% vs 98.8%, p=.08). At 30 days, there were no significant differences between patients with prior infrarenal repair as compared with those without in rate of MAE (44.8% vs 54.9%, p=.59). The 5-year estimate of survival for those who underwent native aortic repair was 61.6%, versus 61.3% for those who had a previous repair (p=.67). The 5-year freedom from endoleaks I/III estimates were significantly lower in patients who had prior infrarenal repair as compared with patients undergoing treatment of native aneurysms (57.1% vs 66.1%, p=.03), mainly owing to TV-related endoleaks (ie, type IC and/or IIIC endoleaks). No significant differences were found between study groups in rates of reinterventions and TV primary patency. Five-year estimates of freedom from sac increase >5mm were significantly lower in patients who received F-BEVAR after previous infrarenal repair as compared with those who underwent treatment of native aneurysms (48.6% vs 77.5%, p=.002).Conclusions: F-BEVAR is equally safe and feasible for treatment of patients with prior infrarenal repair as compared with those undergoing treatment for native aneurysms. Increased rates of TV-related endoleaks were observed which could lead to lower freedom from aneurysm sac shrinkage during follow-up. Nevertheless, the 5-year rates of reinterventions and TV patency were similar, thereby indicating that overall effectiveness of treatment remained satisfactory at mid-term.
|
|
| 10. |
- D'Oria, Mario, et al.
(författare)
-
Frequency and type of interval adverse events during the waiting time to complex aortic endovascular repair.
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0741-5214 .- 1097-6809. ; 75:6, s. 1821-1828.e1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: Aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency and type of adverse events that may occurs during the waiting time to complex aortic endovascular repair.METHODS: This is a retrospective study of all elective patients with complex aortic aneurysms (including pararenal/suprarenal, thoracoabdominal, or aortic arch aneurysms) that required a custom-made device (CMD) from Cook Medical at a tertiary referral vascular center (Nov 2010 - May 2020). The waiting time was defined as interval between date of stent-graft order and date of procedure or cancellation date. Interval adverse events were defined as any event that occurred during waiting time which led to either mortality, aneurysm rupture, or cancellation of the planned procedure.RESULTS: A total of 235 patients (mean age 72 years, 25% females) had a CMD graft ordered (201 planned as single-stage procedures). The median waiting time until surgery was 106 days (IQR:77-146) in the whole cohort and 101 days (IQR:77-140) among single-stage procedures. The planned procedure was carried out electively in 219 (93%), with an overall thirty-day elective mortality of 2% (N=5). There were 16 interval adverse events during waiting time. Of these, 10 were aneurysm ruptures and six were cancellations of the procedure owing to non-aneurysm-related deaths (3% of the entire cohort). A total of 10 interval deaths were registered (4.2%), four were aneurysm-related. Risk of rupture during waiting time (Kaplan-Meier) was 6.1% (SD 2.3) at 180 days. The median time from stent-graft order to aneurysm rupture was 101 days (IQR: 54-200 days). Out of the 10 aneurysm ruptures that occurred, six underwent emergent repair with 0% mortality at thirty-days (one open repair, one T-Branch, one physician-modified endograft, two cases in which the CMD was already available, one case in which a different CMD was available).CONCLUSIONS: The median waiting time from stent-graft order to implantation was about fifteen weeks. During this time, a substantial proportion may suffer from adverse events, either related to aneurysm rupture or underlying comorbidity. Rupture risk during waiting time exceeded the risk of perioperative mortality; efforts to decrease this can therefore significantly improve outcome. A combination of different techniques may play a vital role to reduce the mortality in case of interval ruptures.
|
|
