Search

Complicated acute nonA-nonB dissection with malperfusion is associated with a high in-hospital mortality up to 67%. Therefore, rapid identification and treatment are critical for clinical outcomes. We report the urgent treatment of a complicated subacute aortic dissection treated with a physician-modified-endograft (PMEG) fenestrated-TEVAR (f-TEVAR) for the left common carotid artery (LCCA).A 49-year-old male patient with acute non-A non-B aortic dissection with complete true lumen collapse and associated mesenteric and renal ischemia, was referred to another vascular center for abdominal pain and received exclusively medical treatment. After 15 days of persistent pain, the patient self-referred to our center and was treated with endovascular repair. The proximal entry tear was located at the level of the left subclavian artery: a PMEG f-TEVAR was performed with fenestration for LCCA in conjunction with carotid-subclavian bypass. In addition, spot stenting of the left renal artery was performed to resolve renal malperfusion. The final angiography showed satisfactory result. The patient soon reported significant pain relief. Follow-up at 30-days was satisfactory, with no need for further intervention.A physician-modified fenestrated-TEVAR can be used in emergency setting to treat acute non-A-non-B aortic dissection in conjunction with multiorgan malperfusion, with satisfactory results even after initial delayed treatment.

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to report early outcomes of patients with non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (NDD-CKD) after revascularization for critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). METHODS Perioperative data of patients from the CRITISCH (critical limb ischemia) Registry, who also had NDD-CKD (stages 3 and 4), were compared to their counterparts with normal renal function (NRF) or mild renal insufficiency (stages 1 and 2). Patient characteristics and type of first-line treatment were assessed. Amputation-free survival was the primary composite endpoint. Secondary endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE) and hemodynamic failure of revascularization. Multivariable logistic regression determined risk factors for the endpoints. RESULTS 424 patients with NDD-CKD were identified. Endovascular revascularization (ER) was performed in 251 patients (59.2%). Eighty-six patients (20.3%) underwent bypass surgery (BS) and 29 patients (6.8%) femoral artery patchplasty (FAP). Conservative treatment (CT) was offered to 46 patients (10.9%); 12 patients (2.8%) underwent primary major amputation (PMA). Logistic regression analysis showed an increased early risk for amputation/death (OR=1.92, 95% CI: 1.09-3.40), death (OR=5.53, 95% CI: 1.92-15.90) and hemodynamic failure of the revascularization (OR=1.80, 95% CI: 1.19-2.72) compared to patients with NRF. Patients with NDD-CKD also seem to carry a higher risk for MACCE (OR=1.82, 95% CI: 0.99-3.36). NDD-CKD was not a risk factor for limb loss alone (OR=1.05, 95% CI: 0.49-2.22). CONCLUSIONS NDD-CKD was an independent risk factor for early postoperative mortality, morbidity and reduced patency, but not for limb loss. Robust follow-up is necessary to monitor for such events, as well as to prevent readmission.

Introduction Endovascular repair of infra-renal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) has become treatment of choice. However, individuals undergoing EVAR have a high re-intervention rate. The aim of this study is to evaluate the current endovascular treatment modalities of endoleak type Ia (ET Ia) treatment after EVAR and their outcome. Evidence acquisition A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched with PRISMA methodology for studies reporting on endovascular treatment of ET Ia after EVAR. Studies presenting treatment of intra-operative ET Ia were excluded. Evidence synthesis Two international registries, fourteen non-randomized retrospective and twelve case-report studies were included reporting on 356 patients. Reported endovascular techniques included fenestrated-, branched-, chimney EVAR, endovascular sealing (EVAS), endoanchors, embolization techniques, cuff and/or "giant" Palmaz stents. Technical success rate ranged from 90% to 100%, with intra-operative mortality rate of 0%. During early period, persistence of ET Ia was 3.4% (9/262) and the re-intervention rate was 3.5% (8/227). The 30-day mortality rate was 2% (7/356). Mean follow-up was 22.4 months±18. Presence of ET Ia was 5.9% (21/356), and the reintervention rate was 5.1% (18/349). The mortality rate was 13% (26/203), while the primary patency rate of TVs ranged from 94.3% to 100%. Conclusions A multitude of techniques for endovascular repair for ET Ia exists. No strong evidence supports one specific technique. The early and mid-term outcomes are encouraging in terms of ET Ia resolution, mortality and morbidity rates.

Anatomical changes after endovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are thoroughly studied as they could affect the long-term postoperative outcome. The aim of the present study was to review the literature and summarize the recent data regarding the aortic remodeling and its clinical significance. A continuous aortic neck expansion is observed after EVAR and is more rapid at the first month and during the third postoperative year. This aortic neck dilation is not influenced by the type of proximal stent-graft fixation, is comparable to open surgical aneurysm repair and is most probably related with the natural progression of aneurismal disease. Aortic neck angulation reduces significantly immediately after EVAR and then continues to reduce slowly and gradually. Neck angulations ≥60° have a greater reduction compared to neck angulations

Endovascular strategies have been increasingly used for the treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection (cTBAD) offering better outcomes in terms of mortality and morbidity compared to open surgical repair. Aortic remodeling after standard TEVAR is less likely in cTBAD due to rigidity of the dissection membrane. Another limitation of endovascular therapy is continued retrograde false lumen perfusion with back-flow from distal entry tears. Treatment strategies in cTBAD should aim at false lumen thrombosis. There are many approaches to achieve this goal of false lumen thrombosis, but concepts as open surgery or fenestrated and branched endovascular repair are limited by either high technical and logistic demands to the surgeon or high rates of mortality and morbidity. False lumen embolization techniques offer less invasive treatment strategies with promising early results. The main strategies for false lumen embolization include the "cork in the bottle neck" technique, the Candy-Plug technique or the Knickerbocker-technique. This article describes technical aspects and early results of these new endovascular techniques of false lumen embolization in chronic aortic dissection.

Introduction This study evaluates the current experience on endovascular repair of the aortic arch pathologies, the feasibility and safety of the procedure. Evidence acquisition A systematic review was performed. MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Cochrane databases were searched with PRISMA methodology for published studies reporting on endovascular repair of aortic arch pathologies from 2000 to 2018. Evidence synthesis Thirteen non-randomized retrospective studies (either single or multicenter), two multicenter Registries and one multicenter non-randomized interventional study were included in the systematic review. The total number of patients who underwent total endovascular repair of the aortic arch pathology with either fenestrated, branched, or a combination of those devices or chimney technique was 952 patients (73%; 634/872 males, mean age ranging from 51 to 78 years). The technical success rate was 96.7% (921/952), while the 30-day mortality rate was 3.3% (32/952). The most common adverse events were endoleak type I (13.5%; 35/259), stroke (5.1%; 49/952), spinal cord ischemia (1.4%; 14/952) and retrograde dissection (1%; 8/952). During the follow-up period (mean ranging: 16.9 to 41.4 months; median ranging: 9 to 44.8 months) the total number of deaths was 31 (4.4%; 31/693). The total loss of supra-aortic vessel patency rate was 1.7% (14/803) and a re-intervention was needed in 50 patients (9%; 50/559; 11 open conversion). Conclusions Endovascular repair of aortic arch pathologies is a feasible treatment option with good early and reasonable mid-term outcomes. This treatment modality approaches a level of maturity and may be considered as a solid alternative method of treatment.

Acute aortic thrombosis (AAT) is a rare life threatening event that leads to a sudden occlusion of the aorta. The mortality and morbidity of AAT is still high despite modern surgical techniques. Usually it is the result of a large saddle embolus to the aortic bifurcation, in situ thrombosis of an atherosclerotic aorta or acute occlusion of an abdominal aortic aneurysm. Clinical symptoms depend on the level of the aortic occlusion and can be mistaken for a stroke or similar neurological disease. The combination of age and advanced cardiac disease seems to be significant risks factors for AAT. In patients who have no cardiac or vascular disease this catastrophic event is very rare and is mostly due to hypercoagulable disorders. Revascularization of the ischemic organ/limb as soon as possible is the major aim in the therapy of AAT to avoid further ischemic damage. Surgical reperfusion is the first line approach. If the accepting clinic has no facilities for an immediate surgical intervention it is of primary importance that these patients should be referred to an appropriate center for further management. Paradox seems the fact that most of the patients die as a consequence of reperfusion injury/postperfusion syndrome that occurs after revascularization of acute ischemic limbs.

Endovascular repair has become the treatment of choice for thoracic and abdominal aortic pathologies in the last decades, and is associated with excellent results in terms of perioperative, mid- and long-term morbidity and mortality. Access vessels play a central role in these procedures since access-related issues can increase the rates of technical failures and determine clinical complications for the patient. Therefore, accurate preoperative clinical evaluation and review of the preoperative images are mandatory. In this review, we report on the access-related issues that can be encountered during EVAR and TEVAR, and present solutions and strategies to minimize access-related adverse outcomes.