| 1. |
- Budtz-Lilly, Jacob, et al.
(author)
-
European Multicentric Experience With Fenestrated-branched ENDOvascular Stent Grafting After Previous FAILed Infrarenal Aortic Repair The EU-FBENDO-FAIL Registry
- 2023
-
In: Annals of Surgery. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 278:2, s. E389-E395
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 2. |
- DOria, Mario, et al.
(author)
-
Robustness of Longitudinal Safety and Efficacy After Paclitaxel-Based Endovascular Therapy for Treatment of Femoro-Popliteal Artery Occlusive Disease : An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
- 2024
-
In: Annals of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0890-5096 .- 1615-5947. ; 101, s. 164-178
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background:The aims of this study were: i) to assess fragility indices (FIs) of individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared paclitaxel-based drug-coated balloons (DCBs) or drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus standard endovascular devices, and ii) to meta-analyze mid-term and long-term safety and efficacy outcomes from available RCT data while also estimating the FI of pooled results.Methods:This systematic review has been registered in the PROSPERO public database (CRD42022304326 http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). A query of PubMed (Medline), EMBASE (Excerpta Medical Database), Scopus, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) databases was performed to identify eligible RCTs. Rates of primary patency (PP) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) were assessed as efficacy outcomes, while lower limb amputation (LLA) consisting of major amputation that is. below or above the knee and all-cause mortality were estimated as safety outcomes. All outcomes were pooled with a random effects model to account for any clinical and study design heterogeneity. The analyses were performed by dividing the RCTs according to their maximal follow-up length (mid-term was defined as results up to 2-3 years, while long-term was defined as results up to 4-5 years). For each individual outcome, the FI and reverse fragility index (RFI) were calculated according to whether the outcome results were statistically significant or not, respectively. The fragility quotient (FQ) and reverse fragility quotient (RFQ), which are the FI or RFI divided by the sample size, were also calculated.Results:A total of 2,337 patients were included in the systematic review and meta -analysis. There were 2 RCTs examining DES devices and 14 RCTs evaluating different DCBs. For efficacy outcomes, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy increased the PP rate and reduced the TLR rate at mid-term, with a calculated pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.66 for patency (95% CI, 1.55-1.86; P < 0.001), with a corresponding number needed -totreat (NNT) of 3 patients (95% CI, 2.9-3.8) and RR of 0.44 for TLR (95% CI, 0.35-0.54; P = 0.027), respectively. Similarly, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy both increased PP and decreased TLR rates at long-term, with calculated pooled RR values of 1.73 (95% CI, 1.12-2.61; P = 0.004) and 0.53 (95% CI, 0.45-0.62; P = 0.82), respectively. For safety outcomes, there was evidence that paclitaxel-based endovascular therapy increased all -cause mortality at mid-term, with a calculated pooled RR of 2.05 (95% CI, 1.21-3.24). However, there was no difference between treatment arms in LLA at mid-term (95% CI, 0.1-2.7; P = 0.68). Similarly, neither all -cause mortality nor LLA at long-term differed between treatment arms, with a calculated pooled RR of 0.66, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.31-3.42) and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.305.21; P = 0.22), respectively. The pooled estimates of PP at mid-term were robust (FI = 28 and FQ = 1.9%) as were pooled rates of TLR (FI = 18 and FQ = 0.9%). However, when safety outcomes were analyzed, the robustness of the meta -analysis decreased significantly. In fact, the relationship between the use of paclitaxel-coated devices and all -cause mortality at mid-term showed very low robustness (FI = 4 and FQ = 0.2%). At 5 years, only the benefit of paclitaxel-based devices to reduce TLR remained robust, with an FI of 32 and an FQ of 3.1%.Conclusions:The data supporting clinical efficacy endpoints of RCTs that examined paclitaxelbased devices in the treatment of femoral-popliteal arterial occlusive disease were robust; however, the pooled safety endpoints were highly fragile and prone to bias due to loss of patient follow-up in the original studies. These findings should be considered in the ongoing debate concerning the safety of paclitaxel-based devices.
|
|
| 3. |
- Janko, Matthew, et al.
(author)
-
Contemporary Outcomes After Partial Resection of Infected Aortic Grafts
- 2021
-
In: Annals of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0890-5096 .- 1615-5947. ; 76, s. 202-210
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: Aortic graft infection remains a considerable clinical challenge, and it is unclear which variables are associated with adverse outcomes among patients undergoing partial resection.METHODS: A retrospective, multi-institutional study of patients who underwent partial resection of infected aortic grafts from 2002 to 2014 was performed using a standard database. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, operative, and postoperative variables were recorded. The primary outcome was mortality. Descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis, and Cox regression analysis were performed.RESULTS: One hundred fourteen patients at 22 medical centers in 6 countries underwent partial resection of an infected aortic graft. Seventy percent were men with median age 70 years. Ninety-seven percent had a history of open aortic bypass graft: 88 (77%) patients had infected aortobifemoral bypass, 18 (16%) had infected aortobiiliac bypass, and 1 (0.8%) had an infected thoracic graft. Infection was diagnosed at a median 4.3 years post-implant. All patients underwent partial resection followed by either extra-anatomic (47%) or in situ (53%) vascular reconstruction. Median follow-up period was 17 months (IQR 1, 50 months). Thirty-day mortality was 17.5%. The KM-estimated median survival from time of partial resection was 3.6 years. There was no significant survival difference between those undergoing in situ reconstruction or extra-anatomic bypass (P = 0.6). During follow up, 72% of repairs remained patent and 11% of patients underwent major amputation. On univariate Cox regression analysis, Candida infection was associated with increased risk of mortality (HR 2.4; P = 0.01) as well as aortoenteric fistula (HR 1.9, P = 0.03). Resection of a single graft limb only to resection of abdominal (graft main body) infection was associated with decreased risk of mortality (HR 0.57, P = 0.04), as well as those with American Society of Anesthesiologists classification less than 3 (HR 0.35, P = 0.04). Multivariate analysis did not reveal any factors significantly associated with mortality. Persistent early infection was noted in 26% of patients within 30 days postoperatively, and 39% of patients were found to have any post-repair infection during the follow-up period. Two patients (1.8%) were found to have a late reinfection without early persistent postoperative infection. Patients with any post-repair infection were older (67 vs. 60 years, P = 0.01) and less likely to have patent repairs during follow up (59% vs. 32%, P = 0.01). Patients with aortoenteric fistula had a higher rate of any post-repair infection (63% vs. 29%, P < 0.01)CONCLUSION: This large multi-center study suggests that patients who have undergone partial resection of infected aortic grafts may be at high risk of death or post-repair infection, especially older patients with abdominal infection not isolated to a single graft limb, or with Candida infection or aortoenteric fistula. Late reinfection correlated strongly with early persistent postoperative infection, raising concern for occult retained infected graft material.
|
|
| 4. |
- Mastrorilli, Davide, et al.
(author)
-
Early and Late Outcomes of Ultrasound-Guided Direct Transabdominal Embolization of Isolated Type 2 Endoleaks after Endovascular Aortic Repair
- 2020
-
In: Annals of Vascular Surgery. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 0890-5096 .- 1615-5947. ; 68, s. 252-260
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The aim of this study is to report the early and late outcomes of ultrasound-guided direct transabdominal embolization (UGDTE) of isolated type 2 endoleak (T2EL) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).Methods: Forty-two consecutive T2EL patients were treated between February 2000 and September 2017 by UGDTE after previous EVAR. During the study period, UGDTE was the firs-line technique implemented for treatment of T2EL. All procedures were carried out using the same predefined technique. Aneurysm sac size change from the index treatment, freedom from recurrent endoleak after treatment, demographics, risk factors, and procedural factors were analyzed with univariate analysis.Results: During the study interval, 612 patients underwent standard EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment and 111 (18.2%) developed an isolated T2EL. Of these, 42 (6.8%) consecutive patients were deemed suitable and treated with UDGT. Median imaging follow-up duration was 18.7 months. Median fluoroscopic and procedure times were 7 and 58 minutes, respectively. The rate of immediate technical success was 100%. Ten patients (23.8%) underwent reintervention for recurrent T2EL. Freedom from reintervention for T2EL at 1, 2, and 4 years was 81%, 78%, and 71%. No aneurysm-related mortality occurred during the follow-up period.Conclusions: The use of UGDTE for treatment of isolated T2EL after EVAR is a safe and feasible technique when performed by experienced operators, resulting in high technical success and low complication rates in selected patients. Although being effective in obtaining T2EL exclusion, up to one-third of the patients may require repeat intervention during long-term follow-up. Therefore, lifelong surveillance after the procedure is recommended.
|
|
| 5. |
- Mezzetto, Luca, et al.
(author)
-
Scoping review of radiologic assessment and prognostic impact of skeletal muscle sarcopenia in patients undergoing endovascular repair for aortic disease
- 2022
-
In: Journal of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0741-5214 .- 1097-6809. ; 76:5, s. 1407-1416
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: The primary objectives of our scoping review were to evaluate the methods used by research groups to assess the incidence of sarcopenia in patients with aortic disease and the extent of the evidence base that links sarcopenia to the survival of patients undergoing elective endovascular aortic repair and to identify the recurring themes or gaps in the literature to guide future research. Methods: A scoping review in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalyses) protocols extension for scoping reviews was performed. The available studies included those fully reported in English (last query, April 30, 2022). The following PICO question was used to build the search equation: "in patients with aortic disease [population] undergoing endovascular repair [intervention], what was the prevalence and prognosis of radiologically defined sarcopenia [comparison] on the short- and long-term outcomes?" Results: A total of 31 studies were considered relevant, and 18 were included in the present scoping review. In brief, 12 studies had focused on standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), 2 on thoracic EVAR, and 4 on complex EVAR. All but two studies were retrospective in design, and only one study had included patients from a multicenter database. Sarcopenia had generally been defined using the computed tomography angiography (CTA) findings of the cross-sectional area of the psoas muscle at L3 or L4, sometimes with normalization against the height. Overall, despite the heterogeneity in the methods used for its definition, sarcopenia was highly prevalent (range, 12.5%-67.6%). The patients with sarcopenia had had higher rates of mortality (ratio ranged from 2.28 [95% confidence interval, 1.35-3.84] to 6.34 [95% confidence interval, 3.37-10.0]) and adverse events (41% vs 16%; P = .020). Conclusions: Sarcopenia, as identified using computed tomography angiography-based measurements of the skeletal muscle mass, was prevalent among patients undergoing elective EVAR, thoracic EVAR, or complex EVAR. The presence of sarcopenia has been shown to have a negative prognostic impact, increasing the operative risk and has been linked to poorer long-term survival.
|
|
| 6. |
- Xodo, Andrea, et al.
(author)
-
Peri-Operative Management of Patients Undergoing Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Repair for Juxtarenal, Pararenal and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms : Preventing, Recognizing and Treating Complications to Improve Clinical Outcomes
- 2022
-
In: Journal of Personalized Medicine. - : MDPI AG. - 2075-4426. ; 12:7
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The advent and refinement of complex endovascular techniques in the last two decades has revolutionized the field of vascular surgery. This has allowed an effective minimally invasive treatment of extensive disease involving the pararenal and the thoracoabdominal aorta. Fenestrated-branched EVAR (F/BEVAR) now represents a feasible technical solution to address these complex diseases, moving the proximal sealing zone above the renal-visceral vessels take-off and preserving their patency. The aim of this paper was to provide a narrative review on the peri-operative management of patients undergoing F/BEVAR procedures for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (JAAA), pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (PRAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurism (TAAA). It will focus on how to prevent, diagnose, and manage the complications ensuing from these complex interventions, in order to improve clinical outcomes. Indeed, F/BEVAR remains a technically, physiologically, and mentally demanding procedure. Intraoperative adverse events often require prolonged or additional procedures and complications may significantly impact a patient's quality of life, health status, and overall cost of care. The presence of standardized preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative pathways of care, together with surgeons and teams with significant experience in aortic surgery, should be considered as crucial points to improve clinical outcomes. Aggressive prevention, prompt diagnosis and timely rescue of any major adverse events following the procedure remain paramount clinical needs.
|
|
