Search

Objective: The objective of this prospective single centre study was to assess whether branches and fenestrations have different outcomes on renal function in the early phase., Methods: From March 2018 to June 2019, 67 patients who underwent elective fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) procedures were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into two groups according to the renal bridging component configuration (fenestration vs. branch). All of them underwent dynamic renal scintigraphy with 99m Tc diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA), two weeks pre-operatively, and three months and one year post-operatively. The primary end points were peri-procedural technical success, 30 day major adverse events, differences in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) between the branch and fenestration configurations, and variations between the pre-operative and the post-operative dynamic renal scintigraphy., Results: Overall, 135 kidneys were analysed: 63 in the 32 patients treated with fenestrations, and 72 in the 35 patients treated with branches; the mean GFR on baseline scintigraphy was 58.4 ± 30.9 mL/min in the fenestration group, and 65.1 ± 29.2 mL/min in the branch group. Only kidneys associated with a patent fenestration/branch were included in the split GFR final analysis. The mean total GFR at three month scintigraphy decreased by 6.0 ± 2.9 mL/min in the fenestration group and by 23.4 ± 6.4 mL/min in the branch group. The split GFR decreased by 3.5 ± 0.6 mL/min in the fenestration group, and by 15.4 ± 5.4 mL/min in the branch group. The GFR decrease remained stable at one year., Conclusion: In this study, the use of branches for renal arteries during F/BEVAR resulted in a greater decrease in the GFR than in those patients who were treated with fenestrations alone. The scintigraphic alterations were evident at an early phase., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim was to describe the outcomes of the Anaconda™ Fenestrated endograft Italian Registry for complex aortic aneurysms (AAAs), unsuitable for standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR)., Methods: Between 2012 and 2018 patients with a proximal neck unsuitable for standard EVAR, treated with the fenestrated Anaconda™ endograft, were prospectively enrolled in a dedicated database. Endpoints were peri-operative technical success (TS) and evaluation of type Ia/b or 3 endoleaks (T1/3 EL), target visceral vessel (TVV) occlusion, re-interventions, and AAA related mortality at 30 days, six months, and later follow up., Results: One hundred twenty seven patients (74 ± 7 years, American Society Anesthesiology (ASA) II/III/IV: 12/85/30) were included in the study in 49 Italian Vascular Surgery Units (83 juxta/para-renal AAA, 13 type IV thoraco-abdominal AAA, 16 T1aEL post EVAR, and 15 short neck AAA). Configurations with one, two, three, and four fenestrations were used in 5, 56, 39, and 27 cases, respectively, for a total of 342 visceral vessels. One hundred and eight (85%) bifurcated and 19 (15%) tube endografts were implanted. In 35% (44/127) of cases the endograft was repositioned during the procedure, and 37% (128/342) of TVV were cannulated from brachial access. TS was 87% (111/127): five T1EL, six T3EL (between fenestration and vessel stent), and six loss of visceral vessels (one patient with a Type Ia EL had also a TVV loss) occurred. Thirty day mortality was 4% (5/127). Two of the five T1EL resolved spontaneously at 30 days. The overall median follow up was 21 ± 16 months; one T1EL (5%) occurred at six months and one T3EL (4%) at the three year follow up. Another two (3%) TVV occlusions occurred at six months and five (3%) at three years. The re-intervention rate at the 30 days, six months, and three year follow up was 5%, 7%, and 18 ± 5%, respectively., Conclusion: The fenestrated Anaconda™ endograft is effective in the treatment of complex AAA. Some structure properties, such as the re-positionability and the possibility of cannulation from above, are specific characteristics helpful for the treatment of some complex anatomies., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Although the long-term results of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with low-profile devices in patients with hostile iliac anatomies have been published, there are no reported results specifically for narrow aortic bifurcations (NAB). This study investigated the outcomes of EVAR with the INCRAFT device in NAB (<16 mm)., Methods: This multicenter retrospective study involved five vascular surgery centers. From November 2014 until June 2018, 127 patients were treated with the INCRAFT device. The patient population was divided into two groups based on aortic bifurcation diameter. They were designated as the (1) standard aortic bifurcation (SAB) group (>16 mm) and the (2) the NAB group (<16 mm). Primary end points were the differences between the two groups in terms of technical success, survival at 30 days, iliac limb patency, and reinterventions., Results: The SAB group included 96 patients and the NAB group included 31 patients. The mean aortic bifurcation diameter was 25.5 mm in the SAB group and 13.2 mm in the NAB group. It is noteworthy that, in the NAB group, 21.8% of patients had aortic bifurcations with focal calcific lesions (less than one-third of the circumferential length of the bifurcation) and 48.3% showed extensive calcifications (two-thirds of the circumferential length of the bifurcation), for 29.9% of the patients in the NAB group the aortic bifurcation had a circumferential highly calcific lesion (complete occlusion of the circumferential length of the bifurcation). Technical success was 98.9% in the SAB group and 96.7% in the NAB group (P = .1). The need for iliac component stenting was not significantly different between the groups (SAB 2.0% vs NAB 3.2%; P = .07). The 1-year survival was 97.9% and 96.7% in the SAB and NAB groups, respectively, with no aneurysm-related mortality. The mean follow-up was 18.4 months and 15.3 months in the SAB and NAB groups, respectively. The iliac primary patency was 98.9 % in the SAB group and 96.8% in the NAB group (P = .088), and the primary assisted patency was 100% in both groups., Conclusions: EVAR with INCRAFT in NABs showed acceptable results. In this multicenter study, the results were comparable in terms of technical success and iliac patency rate between patients with SABs and NABs., (Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The aim of this work is describing incidence and fate of type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) in a multicentric cohort of patients treated by endovascular aneurysms repair using the Ovation device (Endologix) and comparing them with a group treated using the Excluder (W. L. Gore & Associates)., Methods: This is a retrospective study conducted on 261 patients treated using the Ovation device and 203 using the Excluder. Outcomes were intraprocedural, 30-day, 12-month, and mean time follow-up T2EL incidence and related reinterventions. Patent inferior mesenteric artery (IMA), ≥3 lumbar arteries (LAs), intrasac thrombus volume, the mean diameter of common and external iliac arteries, external iliac artery stenosis (>70%), diameter ≤5 mm, iliac tortuosity ratio ≤0.5, thrombosis, and calcification were noted and considered as potentially influencing outcomes., Results: Patients of the Ovation group presented significantly more thrombosed, calcified, and tortuous iliac vessels than those in the Excluder group. No significant differences were noted in sac thrombosis, IMA, and LA patency. At completion angiography, T2EL was evident in 57 Ovation and 46 Excluder patients (P = 0.832). At 1 month, it was evident in 33 Ovation group and 28 Excluder group patients (P = 0.726). At 12-month and mean time (30.14 months) follow-up, no differences were evident between the 2 groups (P = 0.940 and 0.951, respectively). The log-rank test showed that the rate of T2EL-related reintervention was not different between the 2 groups (P = 0.46). Regarding anatomical characteristics, a statistically significant difference was not observed between patients presenting or not with T2EL (P > 0.05)., Conclusions: Data showed no significant differences in terms of T2EL incidence between the 2 study groups. None of preoperative anatomical features were found to be significantly associated with the appearance of T2EL., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the performance of the chimney (ch) technique in the treatment of type Ia endoleaks after standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR)., Methods: Between January 2008 and December 2014, 517 chEVAR procedures were performed in 13 US and European vascular centers (PERICLES registry). Thirty-nine patients (mean age 76.9±7.1 years; 33 men) were treated for persistent type Ia endoleak and had computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography follow-up at >1 month. Endurant abdominal stent-grafts were used in the 20 cases. Single chimney graft placement was performed in 18 (46%) patients and multiple in 21 (54%). Overall, 70 visceral vessels were targeted for revascularization., Results: Technical success was achieved in 35 (89.7%) cases; 3 persistent type Ia endoleaks and 1 chimney graft occlusion were detected within the first 30 days. Thirty-day mortality was 2.6%. Two other deaths (not aneurysm related) occurred during a mean follow-up of 21.9 months (0.23-71.3). Primary patency of the chimney grafts was 94.3% at 36 months. In a subgroup analysis comparing Endurant to other stent-grafts, no significant differences were observed regarding persistent endoleak [1/20 (5%) vs 2/19 (11%), p=0.6] or reintervention [1/20 (5%) vs 0/19 (0%)]., Conclusion: The present series demonstrates that chEVAR in the treatment of post-EVAR type Ia endoleaks has satisfactory results independent of the abdominal and chimney graft combinations. Midterm results show that chEVAR is an effective method for treating type Ia endoleaks.

Background: Large gutters after chimney procedures are one of the main causes of type I endoleak (EL-I). This study aims to evaluate a new tailored planning named "Over-SIRIX," based on Osirix Imaging Software, to choose the correct main graft oversizing in order to minimize EL-I incidence., Methods: From 2008 to 2015, 34 patients were treated with parallel grafts for aortic arch diseases at our institution. The study included 22 patients with single stent and antegrade flow configuration; they were divided into 2 groups (PRE- and POST-"Over-SIRIX"). "Over-SIRIX" was carried out in the retrospective group (PRE-"Over-SIRIX"), and it was used to plan the endovascular procedure in the prospective group (POST-"Over-SIRIX"). Through the multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) of the preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA), the proximal neck of the chimney grafts was studied. Stent and endograft configurations were drawn in order to minimize the "gutters." To obtain the ideal main graft sizing (I-Size), a formula was used by adding the custom sizing (C-Size) to the disease oversizing (D-Over). The same MPR imaging was evaluated on postoperative CTA to study gutters area and presence of EL-I., Results: The mean I-Size was 41.67 mm that was equivalent to an ideal oversizing of 19.3% (range 10-28%). The gutters area decreased from 7.3 to 1.7 mm 2 (PRE/POST) and EL-I rate from 28.5% to 0% (PRE/POST). Gutters area bigger than 7.5 mm 2 and planning made without "Over-SIRIX" were significantly associated (P < 0.05) to EL-I., Conclusions: "Over-SIRIX" appears to be a feasible method to customize planning during chimney technique, reducing the risk of EL-I which is significantly related to the presence and size of the gutters., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The use of extra-anatomic bypasses for the hybrid repair of thoracic aortic pathologies should consider the risk of vascular graft infection. Graft infections at cervical level are extremely rare and are associated with high mortality and morbidity rates. We report 2 cases of infected extra-anatomic bypasses for supra-aortic vessels debranching treated with a hybrid approach: re-extra-anatomical bypass with the Viabahn Open Revascularization Technique (VORTEC) in the first patient and the EndoVAC approach in the second case. Endovascular techniques may offer bail-out solutions in a hybrid fashion to treat vascular graft infection in patients considered unfeasible for the conventional surgical repair, associated with appropriate antibiotic therapy., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The endovascular debranching with chimney stents provides a minimally invasive alternative to open surgery with readily available devices and has extended the option of endoluminal therapy into the realm of the aortic arch. But a critical observation at the use of this technique at the aortic arch is important and necessary because of the lack of long-term results and long term patency of the stents. Our study aims to review the results of chimney grafts to treat arch lesions., Methods: A systematic health database search was performed in December 2014 according to the Prisma Guidelines. Papers were sought through a meticulous search of the MEDLINE database (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MA) using the Pubmed search engine., Results: Twenty-two articles were eligible for detailed analysis and data extraction. A total of 182 patients underwent chimney techniques during TEVAR (Thoracic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair). A total of 217 chimney grafts were implanted: 36 to the IA, 1 to the RCCA, 91 to the LCCA and 89 to the LSA. The type of stent-graft used for TEVAR was described in 132 patients. The type and name of chimney graft was described in 126 patients. In 53 patients information was limited to the type. Primary technical success, defined as a complete chimney procedure was achieved in 171 patients (98%). In 8 patients it was not clearly reported. The overall stroke rate was 5.3%. The overall endoleak rate, in those papers were it was clearly reported, was 18.4% (31 patients); 23(13,6%) patients developed a type IA endoleak, 1 patient (0.6%) developed type IB endoleak and 7 patients (4.1%) developed a type II endoleak, Conclusion: The total endovascular aortic arch debranching technique represent a good option to treat high-risk patients, because it dramatically reduces the aggressiveness of the procedure in the arch. Many concerns are still present, mainly related to durability and material interaction during time. Long-term follow-up is exceptionally important in light of the interactions of the stents, the thoracic endograft, the aortic arch, and every variation in systolic and diastolic pressure. Actually this technique has acceptable short and mid-term results. Long term data are available just from a very small number of patients and more data from a wider number are needed in order to embrace this method as a safe one.

Background: Although rare, popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) are the most commonly observed peripheral arterial aneurysms. Surgical repair is considered the gold standard, even if with debated results. The aim of our study is to evaluate the outcome of endovascular treatment of PAAs using the Viabahn peripheral endograft (W. L. Gore and Associates, Inc., Flagstaff, AZ) in 2 high-volume Italian centers., Methods: All consecutive PAA patients treated by endovascular procedures between January 2004 and December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. True atherosclerotic aneurysms, symptomatic and asymptomatic, were included in the analysis. All patients were treated by high-skilled vascular surgeons. The outcome measures were graft thrombosis, reintervention rate, and limb salvage at early and long-term follow-up., Results: Fifty-three PAAs were treated. Patients were more frequently male (98.1%) with a mean age of 73.6 ± 7.8 years. Twelve patients (22.6%) were symptomatic and in 8 of them a local fibrinolysis was required before definitive surgery. Mean PAA diameter was 30.9 ± 10.9 mm (range 17-60). Fifty-two patients (98.1%) had at least 1 patent runoff vessel. Technical success was achieved in all patients. Overall, 80 stent grafts were deployed and in 21 patients (39.6%) more than 1 stent graft was deployed. In-hospital mortality rate and 30-day reinterventions were null. At a mean follow-up of 37.4 ± 29.3 months, primary patency, secondary patency, and limb salvage were respectively 73.6%, 92.4%, and 100%., Conclusion: In our limited, retrospective experience, the endovascular treatment of PAA by Viabahn stent graft allowed satisfactory technical and clinical results even at long-term follow-up., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Aim of the study was to report our single-center experience of the ultra-low profile OvationTM Abdominal Stent-Graft System with totally percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR)., Methods: Between December 2010 and March 2013 we electively treated 35 patients (male: 89%, mean age: 73±7 years) with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using bilateral PEVAR with the OvationTM endograft. Most (77%) cases were characterized by challenging femoral artery anatomy. Patients returned for follow-up visits at 1, 3, 6 months and annually thereafter., Results: Technical success was 97.1%. One type Ia endoleak was identified on final angiography, which was treated with an extension cuff. No groin complications were observed, including lymphocele, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, dehiscence, or wound infection. Mean follow-up was 10 months (range 1-24 months). No death was registered. One type Ia endoleak was identified at the 12-month follow-up, which resolved with placement of a Palmaz balloon-expandible stent. No type II, III, or IV endoleaks were identified. No migration, AAA enlargement, AAA rupture, or conversion to open surgery was reported. Two patients (5.7%) developed monolateral iliac limb occlusion at 58 and 72 days of follow-up, respectively. In one case a limb kinking was observed and treated with iliac kissing stent. The other limb occlusion was due to external iliac artery severe stenosis and was treated with thrombolysis and iliac artery stenting., Conclusion: PEVAR with the OvationTM endograft is feasible and safe in patients with unfavorable anatomy.