Search

Objective: In patients undergoing elective thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage, routine preoperative LSA revascularization is recommended. However, in the current endovascular era, the optimal surgical approach is debated. We compared baseline characteristics, procedural details, and perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing open or endovascular LSA revascularization in the setting of TEVAR., Methods: Adult patients undergoing TEVAR with zone 2 proximal landing and LSA revascularization between 2013 and 2023 were identified in the Vascular Quality Initiative. We excluded patients with traumatic aortic injury, aortic thrombus, or ruptured presentations, and stratified based on revascularization type (open vs any endovascular). Open LSA revascularization included surgical bypass or transposition. Endovascular LSA revascularization included single-branch, fenestration, or parallel stent grafting. Primary outcomes were stroke, spinal cord ischemia (SCI), and perioperative mortality (Pearson's χ 2 test). Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between revascularization type and primary outcomes. Secondarily, we studied other in-hospital complications and 5-year mortality (Kaplan-Meier, multivariable Cox regression). Sensitivity analyses were performed in patients undergoing concomitant LSA revascularization to TEVAR., Results: Of 2489 patients, 1842 (74%) underwent open and 647 (26%) endovascular LSA revascularization. Demographics and comorbidities were similar between open and endovascular cohorts. Compared with open, endovascular revascularization had shorter procedure times (median, 135 minutes vs 174 minutes; P < .001), longer fluoroscopy times (median, 23 minutes vs 16 minutes; P < .001), lower estimated blood loss (median, 100 mL vs 123 mL; P < .001), and less preoperative spinal drain use (40% vs 49%; P < .001). Patients undergoing endovascular revascularization were more likely to present urgently (24% vs 19%) or emergently (7.4% vs 3.4%) (P < .001). Compared with open, endovascular patients experienced lower stroke rates (2.6% vs 4.8%; P = .026; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.50 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25-0.90]), but had comparable SCI (2.9% vs 3.5%; P = .60; aOR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.31-1.22]) and perioperative mortality (3.1% vs 3.3%; P = .94; aOR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.34-1.37]). Compared with open, endovascular LSA revascularization had lower rates of overall composite in-hospital complications (20% vs 27%; P < .001; aOR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.49-0.83]) and shorter overall hospital stay (7 vs 8 days; P < .001). After adjustment, 5-year mortality was similar among groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.64-1.13). Sensitivity analyses supported the primary analysis with similar outcomes., Conclusions: In patients undergoing TEVAR starting in zone 2, endovascular LSA revascularization had lower rates of postoperative stroke and overall composite in-hospital complications, but similar SCI, perioperative mortality, and 5-year mortality rates compared with open LSA revascularization. Future comparative studies are needed to evaluate the mid- to long-term safety of endovascular LSA revascularization and assess differences between specific endovascular techniques., Competing Interests: Disclosures J.H. is or has been proctor or consultant for W. L. Gore & Associates, Terumo Aortic, and Cook Medical. S.T. is consultant and speaker for Medtronic, W. L. Gore & Associates, and Terumo Aortic., (Copyright © 2024 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Clinical practice guidelines have recommended an endovascular-first approach (ENDO) for the management of patients with chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI), whereas an open mesenteric bypass (OMB) is proposed for subjects deemed to be poor ENDO candidates. However, the impact of a previous failed endovascular or open mesenteric reconstruction on a subsequent OMB is unknown. Accordingly, this study was designed to examine the results of a remedial OMB (R-OMB) after a failed ENDO or a primary OMB (P-OMB) for patients with recurrent CMI., Methods: All patients who underwent an OMB from 2002 to 2022 at the University of Florida were reviewed. Outcomes after an R-OMB (ie, history of a failed ENDO or P-OMB) and P-OMB were compared. The primary end point was 30-day mortality, whereas secondary outcomes included complications, reintervention, and survival. The Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate freedom from reintervention and all-cause mortality, whereas multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling identified predictors of death., Results: A total of 145 OMB procedures (R-OMB, n = 48 [33%]; P-OMB, n = 97 [67%]) were analyzed. A majority of R-OMB operations were performed for a failed stent (prior ENDO, n = 39 [81%]; prior OMB, n = 9 [19%]). R-OMB patients were generally younger (66 ± 9 years vs P-OMB, 69 ± 11 years; P = .09) and had lower incidence of smoking exposure (29% vs P-OMB, 48%; P = .07); however, there were no other differences in demographics or comorbidities. R-OMB was associated with less intraoperative transfusion (0.6 units vs P-OMB, 1.4 units; P = .01), but there were no differences in conduit choice or bypass configuration.The overall 30-day mortality and complication rates were 7% (n = 10/145) and 53% (n = 77/145), respectively, with no difference between the groups. Notably, R-OMB had decreased cardiac (6% vs P-OMB, 21%; P < .01) and bleeding complication rates (2% vs P-OMB, 15%; P = .01). The freedom from reintervention (1 and 5 years: R-OMB: 95% ± 4%, 83% ± 9% vs P-OMB: 97% ± 2%, 93% ± 5%, respectively; log-rank P = .21) and survival (1 and 5 years: R-OMB: 82% ± 6%, 68% ± 9% vs P-OMB: 84% ± 4%, 66% ± 7%; P = .91) were similar. Independent predictors of all-cause mortality included new postoperative hemodialysis requirement (hazard ratio [HR], 7.4, 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-17.3; P < .001), pulmonary (HR, 2.7, 95% CI, 1.4-5.3; P = .004) and cardiac (HR, 2.4, 95% CI, 1.1-5.1; P = .04) complications, and female sex (HR, 2.1, 95% CI, 1.03-4.8; P = .04). Notably, R-OMB was not a predictor of death., Conclusions: The perioperative and longer-term outcomes for a remedial OMB after a failed intraluminal stent or previous open bypass appear to be comparable to a P-OMB. These findings support the recently updated clinical practice guideline recommendations for an endovascular-first approach to treating recurrent CMI due to the significant perioperative complication risk of OMB. However, among the subset of patients deemed ineligible for endoluminal reconstruction after failed mesenteric revascularization, R-OMB results appear to be acceptable and highlight the utility of this strategy in selected patients., Competing Interests: Disclosures None., (Copyright © 2024 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can cause permanent neurologic deficits and poor long-term survival. Targeted treatment of new SCI symptoms after TEVAR (rescue therapy [RT]) might improve/resolve neurologic symptoms but few data characterize the association of specific interventions with SCI outcomes. We evaluated the effectiveness of post-TEVAR RT at our tertiary aortic center., Methods: Our institutional TEVAR database was reviewed for SCI incidence and details of RT. This included cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD), medical therapy, and optimization of spinal cord oxygen delivery. SCI outcomes were categorized at discharge as paralysis/paraparesis and temporary/permanent., Results: Nine hundred forty-three TEVAR procedures were performed in 869 patients from 2011 to 2020. Post-TEVAR SCI occurred in 7.8% (n = 74) with permanent paraplegia in 1.5%. Older patient age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and previous abdominal aortic surgery were predictive of SCI. Half (n = 37) of SCI episodes resulted in only temporary paralysis/paraparesis. Rescue postoperative cerebrospinal fluid drains were implanted in 3.7% (n = 35) of procedures and was predicted by higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class, lower serum hemoglobin level, elevated international normalized ratio, bilateral iliac artery occlusion, nonelective procedures, and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer/intramural hematoma indication. The most commonly used RTs were emergent placement of or increased drainage from an existing cerebrospinal fluid drain (87.8%), induced/permissive hypertension (77.0%), corticosteroid bolus (36.5%), and naloxone infusion (33.8%). Neurologic improvement occurred in 68.9% (n = 51/74). New/increased drainage was associated with improved SCI outcome., Conclusions: Permanent paraplegia from post-TEVAR SCI is rare (1.5%). Older patients with comorbidities carry greater post-TEVAR SCI risk. SCI symptoms improved/resolved with CSFD and multimodal RT in 68.9% of patients, but no intervention was independently associated with improvement. TEVAR centers should have robust protocols for timely and safe CSFD placement to augment RT strategies for SCI., (Copyright © 2022 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has had a dynamic impact on abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) care, often supplanting open AAA repair (OAR). Accordingly, US AAA management is often highlighted by disparities in patient selection and guideline compliance. The purpose of this analysis was to define secular trends in AAA care., Methods: The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for all EVARs and OARs (2011-2021). End points included procedure utilization, change in mortality, patient risk profile, Society for Vascular Surgery-endorsed diameter compliance, off-label EVAR use, cross-clamp location, blood loss, in-hospital complications, and post-EVAR surveillance missingness. Linear regression was used without risk adjustment for all end points except for mortality and complications, for which logistic regression with risk adjustment was used., Results: In all, 66 609 EVARs (elective, 85% [n=55 805] and nonelective, 15% [n=9976]) and 13 818 OARs (elective, 70% [n=9706] and nonelective, 30% [n=4081]) were analyzed. Elective EVAR:OAR ratios were increased (0.2 per year [95% CI, 0.01-0.32]), while nonelective ratios were unchanged. Elective diameter threshold noncompliance decreased for OAR (24%→17%; P =0.01) but not EVAR (mean, 37%). Low-risk patients increasingly underwent elective repairs (EVAR, +0.4%per year [95% CI, 0.2-0.6]; OAR, +0.6 points per year [95% CI, 0.2-1.0]). Off-label EVAR frequency was unchanged (mean, 39%) but intraoperative complications decreased (0.5% per year [95% CI, 0.2-0.9]). OAR complexity increased reflecting greater suprarenal cross-clamp rates (0.4% per year [95% CI, 0.1-0.8]) and blood loss (33 mL/y [95% CI, 19-47]). In-hospital complications decreased for elective (0.7% per year [95% CI, 0.4-0.9]) and nonelective EVAR (1.7% per year [95% CI, 1.1-2.3]) but not OAR (mean, 42%). A 30-day mortality was unchanged for both elective OAR (mean, 4%) and EVAR (mean, 1%). Among nonelective OARs, an increase in both 30-day (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.1-1.5]) and 1-year mortality (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.3-1.6]) was observed. Postoperative EVAR surveillance acquisition decreased (67%→49%), while 1-year mortality among patients without imaging was 4-fold greater (9.2% versus imaging, 2.0%; odds ratio, 4.1 [95% CI, 3.8-4.3]; P <0.0001)., Conclusions: There has been an increase in EVAR and a corresponding reduction in OAR across the United States, despite established concerns surrounding guideline adherence, reintervention, follow-up, and cost. Although EVAR morbidity has declined, OAR complication rates remain unchanged and unexpectedly high. Opportunities remain for improving AAA care delivery, patient and procedure selection, guideline compliance, and surveillance., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Scali is the chair of the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative Patient Safety Organization EVAR Registry (unpaid position). The other authors report no conflicts.

Background: The historical size threshold for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is widely accepted to be 5.5 cm for men and 5.0 cm for women. However, contemporary AAA rupture risks may be lower than historical benchmarks, which has implications for when AAAs should be repaired. Our objective was to use contemporary AAA rupture rates to inform optimal size thresholds for AAA repair., Methods: We used a Markov chain analysis to estimate life expectancy for patients with AAA. The primary outcome was AAA-related mortality. We estimated survival using Social Security Administration life tables and published contemporary AAA rupture estimates. For those undergoing repair, we modified survival estimates using data from the Vascular Quality Initiative and Medicare on complications, late rupture, and open conversion. We used this model to estimate the AAA repair size threshold that minimizes AAA-related mortality for 60-year-old average-health men and women. We performed a sensitivity analysis of poor-health patients and 70- and 80-year-old base cases., Results: The annual risk of all-cause mortality under surveillance for a 60-year-old woman presenting with a 5.0 cm AAA using repair thresholds of 5.5 cm, 6.0 cm, 6.5 cm, and 7.0 cm was 1.7%, 2.3%, 2.7%, and 2.8%, respectively. The corresponding risk for a man was 2.3%, 2.9%, 3.3%, and 3.4% for the same repair thresholds, respectively. For a 60-year-old average-health woman, an AAA repair size of 6.1 cm was the optimal threshold to minimize AAA-related mortality. Life expectancy varied by <2 months for repair at sizes from 5.7 cm to 7.1 cm. For a 60-year-old average-health man, an AAA repair size of 6.9 cm was the optimal threshold to minimize AAA-related mortality. Life expectancy varied by <2 months for repair at sizes from 6.0 cm to 7.4 cm. Women in poor health, at various age strata, had optimal AAA repair size thresholds that were >6.5 cm, whereas men in poor health, at all ages, had optimal repair size thresholds that were >8.0 cm., Conclusions: The optimal threshold for AAA repair is more nuanced than a discrete size. Specifically, there appears to be a range of AAA sizes for which repair is reasonable to minmized AAA-related mortality. Notably, they all are greater than current guideline recommendations. These findings would suggest that contemporary AAA size thresholds for repair should be reconsidered., (Copyright © 2024 Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Treatment goals of prophylactic endovascular aortic repair of complex aneurysms involving the renal-mesenteric arteries (complex endovascular aortic repair [cEVAR]) include achieving both technical success and long-term survival benefit. Mortality within the first year after cEVAR likely indicates treatment failure owing to associated costs and procedural complexity. Notably, no validated clinical decision aid tools exist that reliably predict mortality after cEVAR. The purpose of this study was to derive and validate a preoperative prediction model of 1-year mortality after elective cEVAR., Methods: All elective cEVARs including fenestrated, branched, and/or chimney procedures for aortic disease extent confined proximally to Ishimaru landing zones 6 to 9 in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative were identified (January 2012 to August 2023). Patients (n = 4053) were randomly divided into training (n = 3039) and validation (n = 1014) datasets. A logistic regression model for 1-year mortality was created and internally validated by bootstrapping the AUC and calibration intercept and slope, and by using the model to predict 1-year mortality in the validation dataset. Independent predictors were assigned an integer score, based on model beta-coefficients, to generate a simplified scoring system to categorize patient risk., Results: The overall crude 1-year mortality rate after elective cEVAR was 11.3% (n = 456/4053). Independent preoperative predictors of 1-year mortality included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic renal insufficiency (creatinine >1.8 mg/dL or dialysis dependence), hemoglobin <12 g/dL, decreasing body mass index, congestive heart failure, increasing age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥IV, current tobacco use, history of peripheral vascular intervention, and increasing extent of aortic disease. The 1-year mortality rate varied from 4% among the 23% of patients classified as low risk to 23% for the 24% classified as high risk. Performance of the model in validation was comparable with performance in the training data. The internally validated scoring system classified patients roughly into quartiles of risk (low, low/medium, medium/high and high), with 52% of patients categorized as medium/high to high risk, which had corresponding 1-year mortality rates of 11% and 23%, respectively. Aneurysm diameter was below Society for Vascular Surgery recommended treatment thresholds (<5.0 cm in females, <5.5 cm in males) in 17% of patients (n = 679/3961), 41% of whom were categorized as medium/high or high risk. This subgroup had significantly increased in-hospital complication rates (18% vs 12%; P = .02) and 1-year mortality (13% vs 5%; P < .0001) compared with patients in the low- or low/medium-risk groups with guideline-compliant aneurysm diameters (≥5.0 cm in females, ≥5.5 cm in males)., Conclusions: This validated preoperative prediction model for 1-year mortality after cEVAR incorporates physiological, functional, and anatomical variables. This novel and simplified scoring system can effectively discriminate mortality risk and, when applied prospectively, may facilitate improved preoperative decision-making, complex aneurysm care delivery, and resource allocation., Competing Interests: Disclosures None., (Copyright © 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence after thoracic and fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR/FEVAR) is high (up to 6-7%) relative to other vascular procedures; however, the etiology for this discrepancy remains unknown. Notably, patients undergoing TEVAR/FEVAR commonly receive cerebrospinal fluid drains (CSFDs) for neuroprotection, requiring interruption of perioperative anticoagulation and prolonged immobility. We hypothesized that CSFDs are a risk factor for VTE after TEVAR/FEVAR., Methods: Consecutive TEVAR/FEVAR patients at a single center were reviewed (2011-2020). Cerebrospinal fluid drains (CSFDs) were placed based on surgeon preference preoperatively or for spinal cord ischemia (SCI) rescue therapy postoperatively. The primary end-point was VTE occurrence, defined as any new deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) confirmed on imaging within 30 days postoperatively. Routine postoperative VTE screening was not performed. Patients with and without VTE, and subjects with and without CSFDs were compared. Logistic regression was used to explore associations between VTE incidence and CSFD exposure., Results: Eight hundred ninety-seven patients underwent TEVAR/FEVAR and 43% (n = 387) received a CSFD at some point during their care (preoperative: 94% [n = 365/387]; postoperative SCI rescue therapy: 6% [n = 22/387]). CSFD patients were more likely to have previous aortic surgery (44% vs. 37%; P = 0.028) and received more postoperative blood products (780 vs. 405 mL; P = 0.005). The overall VTE incidence was 2.2% (n = 20). 70% (14) patients with VTE had DVT, 50% (10) had PE, and 20% (4) had DVT and PE. Among TEVAR/FEVAR patients with VTE, 65% (n = 13) were symptomatic. Most VTEs (90%, n = 18) were identified inhospital and the median time to diagnosis was 12.5 (interquartile range 7.5-18) days postoperatively. Patients with VTE were more likely to have nonelective surgery (95% vs. 41%; P < 0.001), had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (4.1 vs. 3.7; P < 0.001), required longer intensive care unit admission (24 vs. 12 days; P < 0.001), and received more blood products (1,386 vs. 559 mL; P < 0.001). Venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence was 1.8% in CSFD patients compared to 3.5% in non-CSFD patients (odds ratio 0.70 [95% confidence interval 0.28-1.78, P = 0.300). However, patients receiving CSFDs postoperatively for SCI rescue therapy had significantly greater VTE incidence (9.1% vs. 1.1%; P = 0.044)., Conclusions: CSFD placement was not associated with an increased risk of VTE in patients undergoing TEVAR/FEVAR. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk was greater in patients undergoing nonelective surgery and those with complicated perioperative courses. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk was greater in patients receiving therapeutic CSFDs compared to prophylactic CSFDs, highlighting the importance of careful patient selection for prophylactic CSFD placement., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Saccular-shaped thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) are often treated at smaller diameters compared with fusiform TAAs, despite a lack of strong clinical evidence to support this practice. The aim of this study was to examine differences in presentation, treatment, and outcomes between saccular TAAs and fusiform TAAs in the descending thoracic aorta. We also examined the need for sex-specific treatment thresholds for TAAs., Methods: All Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for degenerative TAAs in the descending thoracic aorta from 2012 through 2022 were reviewed. Patients were stratified by urgency: emergent/urgent vs elective repairs (ruptured/symptomatic). Demographics, comorbidities, anatomical/procedural characteristics, and outcomes for fusiform TAAs and saccular TAAs were compared. Cumulative distribution curves were used to plot the proportion of patients who underwent emergent/urgent repair according to sex-stratified aortic diameter., Results: Among 655 emergent/urgent TEVARs, 37% were performed for saccular TAAs, whereas among 1352 elective TEVARs, 35% had saccular TAA morphology. Compared with fusiform TAAs, saccular TAAs more frequently underwent emergent/urgent (ruptured/symptomatic) TEVAR below the repair threshold in both females (<50 mm: 38% vs 10%; relative risk, 3.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.04-5.70; P < .001), and males (<55 mm: 47% vs 21%; relative risk, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.60-3.18; P < .001). Moreover, among patients with emergent/urgent fusiform TAAs, females presented at smaller diameters compared with males, whereas there was no difference in preoperative aneurysm diameter among patients with saccular TAAs. Regarding outcomes, emergent/urgent treated saccular TAAs had similar postoperative outcomes and 5-year mortality compared with fusiform TAAs. Nevertheless, in the elective cohort, patients with saccular TAAs had similar postoperative mortality compared with those with fusiform TAAs, but a lower rate of postoperative spinal cord ischemia (0.7% vs 3.2%; P = .010). Furthermore, patients with saccular TAAs had a higher rate of 5-year mortality compared with their fusiform counterparts (23% vs 17%; hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.10; P = .010)., Conclusions: Patients with saccular TAAs underwent emergent/urgent TEVAR at smaller diameters than those with fusiform TAAs, supporting current clinical practice guideline recommendations that saccular TAAs warrant treatment at smaller diameters. Furthermore, these data support a sex-specific treatment threshold for patients with fusiform TAAs, but not for those with saccular TAAs. Although there were no differences in outcomes following TEVAR between morphologies in the emergent/urgent cohort, patients with saccular TAAs who were treated electively were associated with higher 5-year mortality compared with those with fusiform TAAs., Competing Interests: Disclosures H.V. reports consultant for Medtronic, WL Gore, Terumo, Endologix, and Philips., (Copyright © 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Traditionally, acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections are managed medically, and acute complicated dissections are managed surgically. Self-pay patients with medically managed acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections may fare worse than their insured counterparts., Methods: In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, demographics, follow-up, and outcomes of patients with acute type B aortic dissections from 2011 to 2020 were analyzed., Results: In total, 159 patients presented with acute type B aortic dissections; 102 were complicated and managed with thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and 57 were uncomplicated and managed medically. A total of 32% (n = 51) were self-pay. Self-pay patients were from areas with worse area deprivation indices (71% vs 63%, P = .024). They more often reported alcohol abuse (28% vs 7%, P < .001), cocaine/methamphetamine use (16% vs 5%, P = .028), and nonadherence to home antihypertensives (35% vs 11%, P < .001). Self-pay patients less often had a primary care physician (65% vs 7%, P < .001) or took antihypertensives before admission (31% vs 58%, P = .003). Self-pay patients frequently required financial assistance at discharge (63%), most often using charity funds (46%). Few patients (7%) qualified for our hospital's financial assistance program, and most (78%) remained uninsured at the first follow-up. Self-pay acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections patients had the lowest rate of follow-up (31% vs 66%, P < .001) and were more likely to represent emergently (75% vs 0%, P = .033) compared to insured acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissections patients. Self-pay patients were more likely to follow up after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute complicated type B aortic dissections (82% vs 31%, P < .001)., Conclusion: Self-pay patients have multiple, interconnected, complex socioeconomic factors that likely influence preadmission risk for dissection and post-discharge adherence to optimal medical management. Further research is needed to clarify treatment strategies in this high-risk group., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the dominant treatment strategy for abdominal aortic aneurysms, encompassing 80% of all repairs in the United States. Endoleaks are ubiquitous and affect 30% of patients treated by EVAR, potentially leading to sac enlargement and increased risk of rupture. The care of EVAR patients requires long-term surveillance by a multidisciplinary team. Accordingly, physicians should be familiar with the fundamentals of endoleak management to achieve optimal outcomes, including timely referral for remediation or providing counseling and reassurance when needed., Observations: PubMed and the Cochrane database were searched for articles published between January 2002 and December 2022 in English, addressing epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of endoleaks after EVAR. Endoleaks can be detected intraoperatively or years later, making lifelong surveillance mandatory. Type I and III have the highest risk of rupture (7.5% at 2 years and 8.9% at 1 year, respectively) and should be treated when identified. Intervention should be considered for other types of endoleak when associated with aneurysm sac growth larger than 5 mm based on current guidelines. Type II endoleaks are the most common, accounting for 50% of all endoleaks. Up to 90% of type II endoleaks resolve spontaneously or are not associated with sac enlargement, requiring only observation. Although the risk of rupture is less than 1%, cases that require reintervention are challenging. Recurrence is common despite endovascular treatment, and rupture can occur without evidence of sac growth. Type IV endoleaks and endotension are uncommon, are typically benign, and primarily should be observed., Conclusions and Relevance: Endoleak management depends on the type and presence of sac expansion. Type I and III endoleaks require intervention. Type II endoleaks should be observed and treated selectively in patients with significant sac expansion. Since endoleaks can appear any time after EVAR, at least 1 contrast-enhanced computed tomographic angiogram or duplex ultrasound by an experienced laboratory is recommended every 5 years.

Background: The longitudinal clinical significance of type II endoleaks (T2ELs) remains controversial. Specifically, the real-world incidence, need for reintervention, and associated mortality referable to T2ELs remain unknown. Moreover, current professional society clinical practice guidelines recommend differing aneurysm sac growth thresholds to prompt intervention. Therefore, the purpose of this analysis was to better quantify the prevalence of early T2ELs after infrarenal endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and determine its association with reintervention and survival., Methods: All elective EVARs from the Vascular Quality Initiative (2010-2020) were examined to identify patients with isolated T2ELs vs no endoleak (NONE) at discharge. Procedures with a type I or III endoleak were excluded. A subgroup analysis was performed on patients surviving beyond the first postoperative year with follow-up data available on endoleaks. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included perioperative mortality and reinterventions. Outcomes were assessed by multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for covariates., Results: We identified 53,697 patients who underwent EVAR. The overall incidence of isolated T2ELs at discharge was 16%. In-hospital mortality was lower for those with isolated T2ELs vs NONE (0.8% vs 1.9%, odds ratio: 0.6, 95% confidence interval: 0.5-0.8, P < .0001). Unadjusted overall survival was marginally higher at 5 years for patients with T2ELs vs NONE (84% vs 82%); however, after risk adjustment, survival was similar (hazard ratio: 0.95, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-1.0). Among 44,345 patients with 1-year follow-up, 66% had data on endoleak status for assessment. Survival was similar regardless of endoleak status (NONE, at discharge only, at follow-up only, or at both time points). Among patients with documented T2ELs during follow-up, 6.1% and 2.5% had abdominal aortic aneurysm sac diameter growth ≥5 mm and ≥10 mm, respectively. Reinterventions occurred in 12%. Rupture (1%) and any open reintervention (4%) were rare among patients with 1-year follow-up. For patients with T2ELs, 5-year survival was similar between those with and without reintervention by 1 year (89% vs 91%, log-rank P = .06)., Conclusions: T2ELs remain common after EVAR within the Vascular Quality Initiative and are not associated with long-term mortality. Reinterventions for T2ELs were not associated with improved overall survival among patients with T2ELs. Although additional data surrounding the appropriate role of reintervention for T2ELs remain necessary, it appears that the natural history of T2ELs is benign., (Copyright © 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of metachronous thoracic aortic aneurysms (M-TAAs) following previous infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair has been associated with higher spinal cord ischemia (SCI) risk compared with TEVAR of primary thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs). However, data on the impact of the type of prior infrarenal aortic repair on outcomes are scarce. In this study, we examined perioperative outcomes and long-term mortality following TEVAR M-TAA compared with primary TEVAR of TAA., Methods: We identified all Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) patients who underwent TEVAR of TAA in the descending thoracic aorta from 2013 to 2022. Only patients undergoing primary TEVAR or TEVAR following infrarenal open (OAR) or endovascular (EVAR) repair were included. We performed univariate analyses to identify differences in baseline and procedural characteristics, and multivariable analyses for perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality using logistic and Cox regression, respectively., Results: We included 1493 patients who underwent primary TEVAR (81%) or TEVAR following prior OAR (9.0%) or prior EVAR (9.7%). Compared with primary TEVAR, patients undergoing TEVAR M-TAA were older, more commonly male, white, and had higher rates of hypertension, smoking, and renal dysfunction. Patients with M-TAA were more likely to be asymptomatic and have larger diameters at presentation but were exposed to greater contrast volume and procedural times relative to primary TEVAR patients. Following risk-adjustment, compared with primary TEVAR, TEVAR after prior EVAR was associated with higher perioperative mortality (9.7% vs 3.9%; odds ratio [OR], 5.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-12; P < .001) and 5-year mortality (40% vs 24%; hazard ratio [HR], 2.1; 95% CI, 1.4-3.1; P = .001). Specifically, among octogenarians (n = 375; 25%), the perioperative and 5-year mortality differences were even more pronounced (perioperative mortality: 17% vs 8.4%; OR, 6.7; 95% CI, 2.2-21; P = .001; 5-year mortality: 50% vs 27%; HR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-5.7; P = .010). However, in-hospital complications, including SCI (2.6% vs 2.8%; OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.33-3.3; P = .77), were not notably different. In contrast, TEVAR after previous OAR was associated with comparable perioperative mortality (4.4% vs 3.9%; OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.32-3.8; P = .73), 5-year mortality (28% vs 24%; HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.80-2.1; P = .54), and in-hospital complications, including SCI (2.6% vs 0.7%; OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.01-1.1; P = .16)., Conclusions: Patients undergoing TEVAR of M-TAAs after prior EVAR, particularly octogenarians, have higher perioperative and 5-year mortality and therefore, represent a high-risk group. Future efforts should strive to discern the underlying factors leading to these poorer outcomes; meanwhile, these findings emphasize the need for careful patient selection and appropriate preoperative counseling in these high-risk individuals., (Copyright © 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Endovascular treatment is not recommended for aortic pathologies in patients with connective tissue diseases (CTDs) other than in redo operations and as bridging procedures in emergencies. However, recent developments in endovascular technology may challenge this dogma., Objective: To assess the midterm outcomes of endovascular aortic repair in patients with CTD., Design, Setting, and Participants: For this descriptive retrospective study, data on demographics, interventions, and short-term and midterm outcomes were collected from 18 aortic centers in Europe, Asia, North America, and New Zealand. Patients with CTD who had undergone endovascular aortic repair from 2005 to 2020 were included. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to November 2022., Exposure: All principal endovascular aortic repairs, including redo surgery and complex repairs of the aortic arch and visceral aorta., Main Outcomes and Measures: Short-term and midterm survival, rates of secondary procedures, and conversion to open repair., Results: In total, 171 patients were included: 142 with Marfan syndrome, 17 with Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 12 with vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (vEDS). Median (IQR) age was 49.9 years (37.9-59.0), and 107 patients (62.6%) were male. One hundred fifty-two (88.9%) were treated for aortic dissections and 19 (11.1%) for degenerative aneurysms. One hundred thirty-six patients (79.5%) had undergone open aortic surgery before the index endovascular repair. In 74 patients (43.3%), arch and/or visceral branches were included in the repair. Primary technical success was achieved in 168 patients (98.2%), and 30-day mortality was 2.9% (5 patients). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 96.2% and 80.6% for Marfan syndrome, 93.8% and 85.2% for Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 75.0% and 43.8% for vEDS, respectively. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 4.7 years (1.9-9.2), 91 patients (53.2%) had undergone secondary procedures, of which 14 (8.2%) were open conversions., Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that endovascular aortic interventions, including redo procedures and complex repairs of the aortic arch and visceral aorta, in patients with CTD had a high rate of early technical success, low perioperative mortality, and a midterm survival rate comparable with reports of open aortic surgery in patients with CTD. The rate of secondary procedures was high, but few patients required conversion to open repair. Improvements in devices and techniques, as well as ongoing follow-up, may result in endovascular treatment for patients with CTD being included in guideline recommendations.

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., (Copyright © 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) can be associated with dismal outcomes but there are limited real-world data to further define the impact of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) on outcomes nationally in this subset of patients. We sought to characterize national patterns of inpatient treatment of CLTI and compare outcomes in patients without ESKD., Methods: The National Inpatient Sample was queried from 2015-2018 for all hospital admissions including treatment for CLTI. Mixed-effects linear and logistic regression models were used to estimate the effect of ESKD on outcomes and treatment choice., Results: We identified 11 652 hospital admissions with CLTI alone and 2705 with CLTI + ESKD. Hospital admissions with CLTI + ESKD patients included patients who were younger (66 vs 69 years, P < .0001), less likely to be white (39% vs 63%, P < .0001), and more likely to reside in lower income large metropolitan areas. Admissions for CLTI + ESKD patients had a lower likelihood of open arterial reconstruction (OR .40, P < .0001) and a higher likelihood of endovascular revascularization or major limb amputation (OR 1.70, P < .0001). Admissions for CLTI + ESKD also had a 4.5- and 1.5-fold higher odds of in-hospital death and complications. These findings were associated with a longer LOS ( P < .0001), increased probability of discharge to rehabilitation facility (50% vs 41%, P < .0001), and greater hospital charges (median, $107 K vs $85 K, P < .0001)., Conclusions: Compared to hospital admissions for patients without ESKD, admissions for patients with CLTI + ESKD demonstrated distinctive demographic characteristics, a lower likelihood of open revascularization and a higher likelihood of endovascular revascularization and major limb amputation. Chronic limb-threatening ischemia + ESKD hospital admissions showed worse overall outcomes and greater resource utilization compared to CLTI admissions without ESKD.

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., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the dominant treatment strategy for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms but has been especially preferred for octogenarian (age ≥80 years) patients because of concerns surrounding comorbidity severity and physiologic frailty. However, EVAR failure resulting in subsequent open conversion (EVAR-c) has been increasingly reported in older patients, although a paucity of literature focusing on the outcomes in this subgroup is available. The purpose of the present analysis was to evaluate our experience with EVAR-c for octogenarians (age ≥80 years) compared with that for younger patients (age <80 years)., Methods: A retrospective review of all nonmycotic EVAR-c procedures (2002-2020) at a single high-volume academic hospital with a dedicated aorta center (available at: https://www.uf-health-aortic-disease-center) was performed. A total of 162 patients were categorized into octogenarian (age ≥80 years; n = 43) and nonoctogenarian (age <80 years; n = 119) cohorts and compared. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. The secondary end points included complications, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. Cox regression was used to determine the effects of selected covariates on mortality risk. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival., Results: No differences in the preadmission EVAR reintervention rates were present (octogenarians, 42%; nonoctogenarians, 43%; P = 1.00) although the interval to the first reintervention was longer for the octogenarians (41 months) than for the nonoctogenarians (15 months; P = .01). In addition, the time to EVAR-c was significantly longer for the octogenarian patients (61 months) than for the nonoctogenarian patients (39 months; P < .01). No difference in rupture presentation was evident (14% vs 10%; P = .6). However, elective EVAR-c occurred less frequently for octogenarians (42%) than for nonoctogenarians (59%; P = .07). The abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter was significantly larger for elective octogenarian EVAR-c (7.8 ± 1.9 cm) than for nonoctogenarian EVAR-c (7.0 ± 1.5 cm; P = .02), and the presence of a type Ia endoleak was the most common indication overall (58%; n = 91). A trend toward greater 30-day mortality was evident for octogenarian patients (16%) compared with nonoctogenarian patients (7%; P = .06). Similarly, the 90-day mortality was greater for the octogenarian patients (26%) than for the nonoctogenarian patients (10%; P = .02). However, the incidence of any complication (56% vs 49%; P = .5), readmission rate (12% vs 6%; P = .3), unplanned reoperation rate (10% vs 5%; P = .5), and length of stay (11 days vs 9 days; P = .3) were not significantly different between the two groups. Age ≥80 years was predictive of short-term mortality after nonelective but not after elective surgery. However, increasing comorbidities, nonelective admission, and renal or mesenteric revascularization showed the strongest association with mortality risk. Survival at 1 and 3 years was not different between the two groups when comparing all patients after the first 90 days postoperatively., Conclusions: Although the unadjusted perioperative mortality was greater for octogenarian patients, the risk-adjusted elective outcomes were comparable to those for younger EVAR-c patients when treated at a high-volume aortic surgery center. This finding underscores the importance of appropriate patient selection and modulation of operative complexity when feasible to achieve optimal results. Providers caring for octogenarian patients with EVAR failure should consider timely elective referral to high-volume aorta centers to reduce resource usage and the frequency of nonelective presentations., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Sex, racial, and ethnic disparities in postoperative outcomes following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair have been described, but differences in long-term outcomes are poorly understood. Our aim was to identify differences in 5-year outcomes and imaging surveillance after elective endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) by sex, race, and ethnicity and to explore potential mechanisms underlying these differences., Methods: We identified patients undergoing elective EVAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2003 to 2017 with linkage to Medicare claims through 2018 for long-term outcomes. Our primary outcome was 5-year aneurysm rupture. Secondary outcomes were 5-year reintervention and mortality and 2-year loss-to-imaging follow-up (defined as no aortic imaging from 6 to 24 months after EVAR). We used Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses to evaluate these outcomes by sex/race/ethnicity and constructed multivariable models to explore potential contributing factors., Results: Among 16,040 patients, 11,764 (73%) were White males, 2891 (18%) were White females, 417 (2.6%) were Black males, 175 (1.1%) were Black females, 141 (0.9%) were Asian males, 34 (0.2%) were Asian females, 277 (1.7%) were Hispanic males, and 60 (0.4%) were Hispanic females. At 5 years, rupture rates were highest in Black females at 6.4% and lowest in white males at 2.3%. Compared with White males, rupture rates were higher in White females (hazard ratio [HR], 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.0), Black females (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.0-6.0), and Asian females (HR, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.3-21). White females also had higher mortality (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.2-1.3) and loss-to-imaging-follow-up (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3), whereas Black females had higher mortality (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8) and reintervention (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-2.8). Among other groups, Black males had higher reintervention (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.8), and both Black and Hispanic males had higher loss-to-imaging-follow-up (Black: HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7; Hispanic: HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.8). In adjusted analyses, White, Black, and Asian females remained at significantly higher risk for 5-year rupture after accounting for procedure year, clinical and anatomic characteristics, surgeon and hospital volume, and loss-to-imaging follow-up., Conclusions: Compared with White male patients, Black females had higher 5-year aneurysm rupture, reintervention, and mortality after elective EVAR, whereas White females had higher rupture, mortality and loss-to-imaging-follow-up. Asian females also had higher rupture, and Black males had higher reintervention and loss-to-imaging-follow-up. These populations may benefit from improved preoperative counseling and clinical outreach after EVAR. A larger-scale investigation of current practice patterns and their impact on sex, racial, and ethnic disparities in late outcomes after EVAR is needed to identify tangible targets for improvement., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endovascular aneurysm repair conversion (EVAR-c) is increasingly reported and known to be technically complex and physiologically demanding. It has been proposed that pragmatic anthropomorphic measures such as psoas muscle area (PMA) may reliably quantify levels of preoperative frailty and be used to inform point of care clinical decision-making and patient discussions for a variety of complex operations. To date, there is mixed data supporting use of PMA as a prognostic factor in fenestrated endovascular and open abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) repairs; however, no literature exists evaluating the impact of preoperative PMA on EVAR-c results. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to review our EVAR-c experience and evaluate the association of PMA with perioperative and long-term mortality outcomes., Methods: A retrospective single-center review of all AAA repairs was performed (2002-2019) and EVAR-c procedures were subsequently analyzed (n = 153). Cross-sectional PMA at the mid-body of the L3 vertebrae was measured. The lowest PMA tertile was used as a threshold value to designate patients as having "low" PMA (n = 51) and this cohort was subsequently compared to subjects with "normal" PMA (n = 102). Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate covariate association with all-cause mortality., Results: Patients with low PMA were older (77 vs. 72 years; P = 0.002), more likely to be female (27% vs. 5%; P < 0.001), and had reduced body mass index (26 vs. 29 kg/m 2 ; P = 0.002). Time to conversion, total number of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) reinterventions prior to conversion and elective EVAR-c presentation incidence were similar; however, patients with low PMA had larger aneurysms (8.3 vs. 7.5 cm; P = 0.01) and increased post-EVAR sac growth (2.3 vs. 1 cm; P = 0.005). Unadjusted inpatient mortality was significantly greater for low PMA patients (16% vs. normal PMA, 5%, P = 0.02). Similarly, the total number of complications was higher among low PMA subjects (1.5 ± 1.9 vs. normal PMA, 0.9 ± 1.5; P = 0.02). Although frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events and new onset inpatient hemodialysis were similar, low PMA patients had a more than four-fold increased likelihood of having persistent requirement of hemodialysis at discharge (18% vs. 4%,P = 0.01). The low PMA group had decreased survival at 1 and 5 years, respectively (77 ± 5%, 65 ± 6% vs. normal PMA, 86 ± 3%, 82% ± 5%; log-rank P = 0.03). Low PMA was an independent predictor of mortality with every 100 mm 2 increase in PMA being associated with a 15% reduction in mortality (hazard ratio: 0.85,95% confidence interval:, 0.74-0.97; P = 0.02)., Conclusions: Among EVAR-c patients, subjects with low preoperative PMA had higher rates of postoperative complications and worse overall survival. PMA assessments may be a useful adjunct to supplement traditional risk-stratification strategies when patients are being considered for EVAR-c., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Sex-based differences in outcomes for patients undergoing degenerative aortic aneurysm repair have been well described, with female patients having worse early and long-term outcomes compared with male patients. However, differences between men and women after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of acute complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD) have not been well characterized. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to assess the sex-based differences in clinical presentation, time to repair, morbidity, and mortality for patients undergoing TEVAR for TBAD., Methods: All TEVAR procedures performed for acute complicated TBAD from a single academic medical center from August 2005 to January 2020 were analyzed. The clinical presentation, time to repair, and outcomes were compared by sex. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. The secondary outcomes were in-hospital complications, reintervention, aorta-related death, and out of hospital survival. The predictors of mortality, including sex, were determined using multivariable logistic regression., Results: A total of 159 patients (38 women [24%]) were included in the analysis. No sex-based differences were found in clinical presentation or comorbidity prevalence between the female and male patients. The female patients had had a longer overall time from initial symptom onset to TEVAR (female patients: median, 3.5 days [interquartile range (IQR), 1-10 days]; male patients: median, 1 day [IQR, 1-3]; P = .007). However, no differences were found in the time to repair after admission to the academic medical center (female patients: median, 1 day [IQR, 0-5 days]; male patients: median, 1 day [IQR, 0-3]; P = .176). No differences were found in the unadjusted aortic-related, in-hospital, or 30-day death between the female and male patients. Similarly, the risk-adjusted analysis revealed that sex was not associated with adverse outcomes. The 1- and 5-year freedom from aortic-related mortality were 82% ± 4% and 87% ± 6% and 79% ± 4% and 80% ± 8% for the men and women, respectively., Conclusions: We found no differences between the female and male patients with acute complicated TBAD who had undergone TEVAR in the clinical presentation or comorbidities. The female patients had undergone TEVAR after a longer duration of symptoms, but this was not associated with sex-based differences in early or late morbidity or mortality., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The long-term survival differences between endovascular repair (EVAR) and open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) and specifically the impact of age on these differences remain a topic of debate. Therefore, we compared the long-term mortality between EVARand open abdominal aneurysm repair for patients of different ages., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data from patients undergoing elective EVAR or open repair for infrarenal AAAs within the Vascular Quality Initiative multinational clinical registry (2003-2021). The primary outcome was long-term all-cause mortality comparing EVAR and open repair for patients aged less than 65 years, between 65 and 79 years, and those aged 80 and older. In addition, we investigated the interaction between repair modality and 10-year hazard of mortality for sex, aneurysm diameter, and several preoperative comorbid conditions within each age category. To account for the nonrandom assignment of treatment, we used propensity scores and inverse probability weighted Cox proportional hazard analysis., Results: We identified 48,074 patients undergoing elective infrarenal abdominal aneurysm repair (89% EVAR) within the study period, including 7940 patients aged less than 65, 29,555 aged between 65 and 79, and 10,579 aged 80 years or more. EVAR was associated with a higher propensity score-adjusted long-term hazard of mortality compared with open repair in the cohort aged less than 65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.86; P = .026). The mortality was similar in the age cohort between 65 and 79 (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79-1.10; P = .43), whereas EVAR was associated with a lower hazard of mortality in the cohort aged 80 years or more (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46-0.86; P = .004). In patients aged less than 65 years, the hazard of mortality was higher with EVAR compared with open repair in those with female sex (HR, 4.40; 95% CI, 1.75-11.0), an aneurysm diameter of more than 65 mm (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.11-4.34), and an absence of coronary artery disease (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.83-1.91), congestive heart failure (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.03-1.92), and renal dysfunction (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.04-2.05). In the patient cohort aged 80 and older, a lower hazard of mortality for EVAR versus open repair was observed for male patients or those with small aneurysms or certain comorbidities., Conclusions: In a selected group of young patients with a substantial life expectancy, the long-term mortality is higher with EVAR compared with open repair for infrarenal AAAs. Long-term mortality with EVAR is similar in the middle cohort and lower in the elderly cohort compared with open repair., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) can choose open repair or endovascular repair (EVAR). While EVAR is less invasive, it requires lifelong surveillance and more frequent aneurysm-related reinterventions than open repair. A decision aid may help patients receive their preferred type of AAA repair., Objective: To determine the effect of a decision aid on agreement between patient preference for AAA repair type and the repair type they receive., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cluster randomized trial, 235 patients were randomized at 22 VA vascular surgery clinics. All patients had AAAs greater than 5.0 cm in diameter and were candidates for both open repair and EVAR. Data were collected from August 2017 to December 2020, and data were analyzed from December 2020 to June 2021., Interventions: Presurgical consultation using a decision aid vs usual care., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had agreement between their preference and their repair type, measured using χ2 analyses, κ statistics, and adjusted odds ratios., Results: Of 235 included patients, 234 (99.6%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 73 (5.9) years. A total of 126 patients were enrolled in the decision aid group, and 109 were enrolled in the control group. Within 2 years after enrollment, 192 (81.7%) underwent repair. Patients were similar between the decision aid and control groups by age, sex, aneurysm size, iliac artery involvement, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score. Patients preferred EVAR over open repair in both groups (96 of 122 [79%] in the decision aid group; 81 of 106 [76%] in the control group; P = .60). Patients in the decision aid group were more likely to receive their preferred repair type than patients in the control group (95% agreement [93 of 98] vs 86% agreement [81 of 94]; P = .03), and κ statistics were higher in the decision aid group (κ = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60-0.95) compared with the control group (κ = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32-0.74). Adjusted models confirmed this association (odds ratio of agreement in the decision aid group relative to control group, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.10-7.70)., Conclusions and Relevance: Patients exposed to a decision aid were more likely to receive their preferred AAA repair type, suggesting that decision aids can help better align patient preferences and treatments in major cardiovascular procedures., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03115346.

Objective: The widespread application of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has ushered in an era of requisite postoperative surveillance and the potential need for reintervention. The national prevalence and results of EVAR conversion to open repair, however, remain poorly defined. The purpose of this analysis was to define the incidence of open conversion and its associated outcomes., Methods: The SVS Vascular Quality Initiative EVAR registry linked to Medicare claims via Vascular Implants Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network was queried for open conversions after initial EVAR procedures from 2003 to 2016. Cumulative conversion incidence within up to 5 years after EVAR and outcomes after open intervention were determined. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify independent predictors of conversion and mortality., Results: Among 15,937 EVAR patients, 309 (1.9%) underwent an open conversion: 43% (n = 132) early (<30 days) and 57% (n = 177) late (>30 days). The longitudinally observed rate of conversion was constant over time, as well as by geographic region. Independent predictors of conversion included female sex (hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; P < .001), aneurysm diameter or more than 6.0 cm at the time of index EVAR (HR, 1.74; P < .001), nonelective repair (compared with elective presentation: HR, 1.72; P < .001), and aortouni-iliac repairs (HR, 2.19; P < .001). In contrast, adjunctive operative procedures such as endo-anchors or cuff extensions (HR, 0.62; P = .06) were protective against long-term conversion. Both early (HR, 1.6; P < .001) and late (HR, 1.26; P = .07) open conversions were associated with significant 30-day (total cohort, 15%) and 1-year mortality (total cohort, 25%). Patients undergoing open conversion experienced high rates of 30-day readmission (42%) and cardiac (45%), renal (32%), and pulmonary (30%) complications., Conclusions: This large, registry-based analysis is among the first to document the incidence and outcomes for open conversion after EVAR in a national cohort with long-term follow-up. Importantly, women, patients with large aneurysms, and complex anatomy, as well as urgent or emergent EVARs are at an increased risk for open conversion. It seems that more conversions are performed in the early postoperative period, despite perceptions that conversion is a delayed phenomenon. In all instances, conversion is associated with significant morbidity and mortality and highlights the importance of appropriate patient selection at the time of index EVAR., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Statin therapy has been associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients undergoing treatment for vascular disease. Current guidelines do not address statin therapy in isolated abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in the absence of other atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This study aims to elucidate effects of statin therapy, either as monotherapy or combined with antiplatelet agents, on the long-term mortality of patients with and without ASCVD who undergo elective AAA repair., Methods: A retrospective review was performed on all AAA patients treated electively with endovascular (EVAR) and open aortic repair (OAR) in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative from 2003-2020. Long-term mortality was evaluated based on the presence of statin and antiplatelet medication use at discharge stratified by those with and without a history of ASCVD. Unadjusted survival was estimated by Kaplan Meier methodology. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to determine mortality risk after adjusting for key factors., Results: A total of 47,012 AAA repairs were selected for analysis: 80.7% EVAR (N = 40,153) and 19.3% OAR (N = 6,859). EVAR patients on combined statin/antiplatelet (AP) therapy had significantly better survival irrespective of whether they had known ASCVD. In the presence of ASCVD, EVAR patients on statin alone had improved survival compared to those not on a statin (10.9 ± 0.5 vs. 10.5 ± 0.4 years, Log Rank < 0.001), with survival being even greater among those receiving combined statin/AP therapy (12.2 ± 0.2 vs. 10.5 ± 0.4 years, Log Rank < 0.001). In the absence of ASCVD, EVAR patients on statin alone also had better mean survival compared to patients not on a statin (8.7 ± 0.5 vs. 8.4 ± 0.4 years, Log Rank<.001), with higher survival among statin/AP therapy patients (9.4 ± 0.2 years vs. 8.7 ± 0.5 years, Log Rank < 0.001). Comparison of adjusted survival via Cox multivariable regression demonstrated a protective effect of statins (HR = 0.737, P = 0.04, vs. no medication) and combined statin/AP therapy (HR = 0.659, P = 0.001, vs no medication) in patients with ASCVD history. A similar protective effect (statin: HR 0.826, P = 0.05. Combination statin/AP: HR 0.726, P < 0.001, vs. no medication) was identified in patients without ASCVD history. Within the OAR cohort, statin therapy was not associated with improved survival among patients without ASCVD; however, combined statin/AP therapy had a protective effect for patients with a known ASCVD diagnosis. Based on KM analysis, OAR patients with ASCVD on combined statin/AP therapy had significantly higher mean survival compared to isolated statin therapy (12.7 ± 0.2 vs. 10.3 ± 0.65 years) and no medical therapy (10.5 ± 0.8 years, Log Rank < 0.001). In KM analysis, OAR patients without known ASCVD indications (N = 3591) had no significant survival differences based on the presence of combined statin/AP therapy (8.4 ± .07 vs. 8.5 ± .11 years, Log Rank = 0 638)., Conclusion: Isolated statin therapy and combined statin/AP therapy showed significant survival benefit in all EVAR and OAR patients with ASCVD indications, as well as among EVAR patients without a known ASCVD diagnosis. OAR patients without ASCVD did not have a significant survival benefit from statin therapy, but low numbers in this group may have confounded the findings. Combined statin/AP therapy appears to have significant post-repair survival benefits even in isolated AAA without ASCVD, as demonstrated in post-EVAR patients in this study. Expansion of statin use recommendations within aneurysm treatment guidelines may be warranted., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: Chimney endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (CHEVAR) has predominantly been described as an alternative technique for the management of urgent presentations of degenerative pararenal aortic aneurysms (dPAAs). However, the role of CHEVAR in the treatment of asymptomatic patients remains unknown. The aim of current multinational study was to evaluate the outcomes of elective CHEVAR of dPAAs., Material and Methods: Retrospective analysis of 267 consecutive dPAA patients treated with elective CHEVAR at 13 European and US centers from 2008 to 2014. Primary endpoints were 30 days and out of hospital CHEVAR-related mortality. Secondary endpoints included persistent type Ia endoleak or endotension, angiographically confirmed occlusion and/or high-grade chimney graft (CG) or involved splanchnic vessel stenosis identified at index procedure and/or during follow-up, as well as CHEVAR-related re-intervention., Results: Mean follow-up time was 25.5±13.3 months. The 442 visceral vessels were involved and mean number of CGs per patient was 1.63±0.7. 436 targeted vessels were successfully cannulated. The aortic graft intentionally covered 6 renal arteries and immediate technical success was 98.6%. The 30 days mortality was 1.9% (n=5), while the in-hospital complication rate was 10.1% (n=27) including 3 strokes, 1 permanent dialysis, and 1 intestinal ischemia. No 30 day type Ia endoleaks were detected and 3.2% of CGs (n=14, including the intentionally covered) had evidence of occlusion and/or stenosis. The overall CHEVAR-related mortality was 2.2% (n=6). Freedom from primary and secondary type Ia endoleak/endotension rates at 3 years was 93.0% and 98.0%, respectively. Primary and secondary CG patency was 87.0% and 89.0%. Primary and secondary endovascular freedom from any endpoint at 3 years was 81.0% and 94.0% respectively., Conclusion: Elective use of CHEVAR in the management of dPAAs seems to be durable. These results are comparable to published outcomes with other total endovascular strategies, which justifies an expanded role for CHEVAR in the treatment of asymptomatic patients presenting with dPAAs.

Background: There is mounting controversy surrounding the appropriate use of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in contemporary practice. Persistent debate hinges on durability, cost, and survival. Accordingly, guidelines have attempted to clarify appropriate EVAR indications. The purpose of this analysis was to examine trends in EVAR practice throughout the United States and measure compliance with Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) clinical practice diameter guidelines (CPGs)., Methods: We analyzed all elective repairs in the SVS Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) EVAR registry from 2015 to 2019 (n = 25,112) and included patients with aneurysms confined to the infrarenal abdominal aorta. Center and surgeon variation with CPG diameter compliance was examined. Using a previously validated logistic regression model for risk adjustment, patients were stratified into predicted 1-year mortality risk tertiles and comparisons were made between patients meeting diameter guidelines (men ≥5.5;women ≥5.0 cm) and those who did not., Results: Non-diameter-compliant EVAR occurred in 38.5% (n = 9675; diameter compliant, 61.5% [n = 15,437]). There was significant variation in CPG diameter compliance when stratified by VQI participating centers (range, 21%-95%; median, 61%; P < .001). This observation was amplified when categorized at the surgeon level (range, 0-100%; median, 63%; P < .0001). Notably, 82% of VQI surgeons (n = 852 of 1048) were non-diameter-compliant in more than 20% of their repairs. Moreover, among the 38.5% of patients failing to meet CPG diameter thresholds, 22.4% (n = 2171) were at high physiologic risk as determined by the validated SVS-VQI 1-year mortality calculator. Notably, the 1-year survival for the high-physiologic risk patients receiving non-guideline-compliant EVAR was worse compared with low- to intermediate-risk patients who were treated within recommended CPGs (92 ± 2% vs 97 ± 1%; log-rank P < .0001)., Conclusions: A significant percentage of current US EVAR practice fails to adhere to the SVS diameter guidelines, as highlighted by the tremendous variation among VQI centers and surgeons. Furthermore, as noted by the 22% of patients undergoing noncompliant repair deemed to be at high physiologic risk, patient selection for EVAR seems to be suboptimal. Surprisingly, these findings are observed among the majority of VQI surgeons performing EVAR. In light of issues surrounding durability and cost, efforts to constrain observed deviation from recommended therapeutic size threshold guidelines would likely serve to improve abdominal aortic aneurysm care throughout the United States., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Compliance with Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) clinical practice guideline (CPG)-diameter thresholds is variable for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). To evaluate the implications and appropriateness of repairs that are noncompliant with current guidelines, we investigated the long-term outcomes, adherence to imaging follow-up, and associated health care costs in patients undergoing EVAR for AAA who do or do not meet recommended diameter thresholds., Methods: All patients receiving elective EVAR from 2003 to 2016 in the SVS Vascular Quality Initiative with linked Medicare claims were reviewed. Weekend procedures and isolated iliac aneurysms, as well as symptomatic and ruptured presentations, were excluded. Diameter thresholds for noncompliant repairs were defined as: men <55 mm; women <50 mm who did not have an iliac diameter ≥30 mm. We evaluated adherence to postoperative imaging surveillance, reimbursement amounts, reintervention, rupture, and all-cause mortality. We defined an EVAR quality metric as performance of the index procedure with freedom from conversion to open repair, 5-year rupture-free survival, and adherence to minimum imaging surveillance (at least one computed tomography scan documented between 6 and 24 months postoperatively)., Results: Among 19,018 elective EVARs, 35% did not meet CPG diameter thresholds (26% within 5 mm of threshold). The rate of noncompliant repairs increased over time (24% in 2003 vs 36% in 2016; P < .001). Patients undergoing noncompliant repairs were younger, less likely to have multiple comorbidities, and more likely to receive EVAR with adherence to instructions for use criteria (89% vs 79%; P < .001). Patients undergoing noncompliant repairs had greater 5-year freedom from reintervention (86% vs 81%; P < .001), rupture-free survival (94% vs 92%; P = .01), and overall survival rates (71% vs 61%; P < .001) compared with repairs that complied with CPG diameter thresholds. Although noncompliant repairs had higher rates of 1-year imaging surveillance, overall differences were modest (68% vs 65%; P = .003). Importantly, for the entire cohort, follow-up imaging surveillance decreased over time (93% in 2003 vs 63% in 2014; P < .001). Notably, although noncompliant repairs had higher rates of achieving the composite quality metric compared with compliant repairs (43% vs 38%; P < .001), failure occurred with a significant majority of all repairs., Conclusions: Compliance with SVS-endorsed CPG diameter thresholds for elective EVAR is poor, and rates of noncompliance are increasing. Noncompliant repairs appear to be offered more commonly to patients with fewer comorbidities and favorable anatomy, and these repairs are associated with improved rates of reintervention, rupture, and survival compared with procedures meeting CPG diameter thresholds. Importantly, noncompliant repairs fail to meet minimum quality standards in a majority of cases, which underscores the need for further policies to improve the overall quality and appropriateness of AAA care delivery nationally., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Although endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) reintervention is common, conversion to open repair (EVAR-c) occurs less frequently but can be associated with significant technical complexity and perioperative risk. There is a paucity of data highlighting the evolution of periprocedural results surrounding EVAR-c and change in practice patterns, especially for referral centers that increasingly manage EVAR failures. The purpose of this analysis was to perform a temporal analysis of our EVAR-c experience and describe changes in patient selection, operative details, and outcomes., Methods: A retrospective single-center review of all open abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs was performed (2002-2019), and EVAR-c procedures were subsequently analyzed. EVAR-c patients (n = 184) were categorized into two different eras (2002-2009, n = 21; 2010-2019, n = 163) for comparison. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used for risk-adjusted comparisons., Results: A significant increase in EVAR-c as an indication for any type of open aneurysm repair was detected (9% to 27%; P < .001). Among EVAR-c patients, no change in age or individual comorbidities was evident (mean age, 71 ± 9 years); however, the proportion of female patients (P = .01) and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification >3 declined (P = .05). There was no difference in prevalence (50% vs 43%; P = .6) or number (median, 1.5 [interquartile range (IQR), 0-5]) of preadmission EVAR reinterventions; however, time to reintervention decreased (median, 23 [IQR, 6-34] months vs 0 [IQR, 0-22] months; P = .005). In contrast, time to EVAR-c significantly increased (median, 16 [IQR, 9-39] months vs 48 [IQR, 20-83] months; P = .008). No difference in frequency of nonelective presentation (mean, 52%; P = .9] or indication was identified, but a trend toward increasing mycotic EVAR-c was observed (5% vs 15%; P = .09). Use of retroperitoneal exposure (14% vs 77%; P < .0001), suprarenal cross-clamp application (6286%; P = .04), and visceral-ischemia time (median, 0 [IQR, 0-11] minutes vs 5 [IQR, 0-20] minutes; P = .05) all increased. In contrast, estimated blood loss (P trend = .03) and procedure time (P = .008) decreased. The unadjusted elective 30-day mortality rate improved but did not reach statistical significance (elective, 10% vs 5%; P = .5) with no change for non-elective operations (18% vs 16%; P = .9). However, a significantly decreased risk of complications was evident (odds ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, .8-.9; P = .01). One- and 3-year survival was similar over time., Conclusions: EVAR-c is now a common indication for open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Patients frequently present nonelectively and at increasingly later intervals after their index EVAR. Despite increasing technical complexity, decreased complication risk and comparable survival can be anticipated when patients are managed at a high-volume aortic referral center., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Accurate and contemporary prognostic risk prediction is essential to inform clinical decision-making surrounding abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) care. Therefore, we validated and compared three different in-hospital mortality risk scores in one administrative and two quality improvement registries., Methods: We included patients who had undergone elective AAA repair from 2012 to 2015 in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI; excluding the New England region), and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) datasets to validate three risk scores: Medicare, the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE), and Glasgow Aneurysm Score (GAS). The receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) of all risk scores was calculated, and their discrimination was compared within a dataset using the Delong test and between datasets using a Z test. We constructed graphic calibration curves for the Medicare and VSGNE risk scores and compared the calibration using an integrated calibration index, which indicates the weighted average of the absolute difference between the calibration curve and the diagonal line of perfect calibration., Results: We identified a total of 25,461 NIS, 18,588 VQI, and 8051 NSQIP patients who had undergone elective open or endovascular AAA repair. Overall, the Medicare risk score was more likely to overestimate mortality in the quality improvement registries and the VSGNE risk score underestimated mortality in all the databases. After endovascular AAA repair, the Medicare risk score had a higher AUC in the NIS than in the GAS (P < .001) but not compared with the VSGNE risk score (P = .54). The VSGNE risk score was associated with a significantly higher receiver operating characteristic AUC compared with the Medicare (P < .001) and GAS (P < .001) risk scores in the VQI registry. Also, the VSGNE risk score showed improved calibration compared with the Medicare risk score across all three databases (P < .001 for all). After open repair, the Medicare risk score showed improved calibration compared with the VSGNE risk score in the NIS (P < .001). However, in the VQI registry, the VSGNE risk score compared with the Medicare risk score had significantly better discrimination (P = .008) and calibration (P < .001)., Conclusions: Overall, the VSGNE risk score performed best in the quality improvement registries but underestimated mortality. However, the Medicare risk score demonstrated better calibration in the administrative dataset after open repair. Although the VSGNE risk score appeared to perform better in the quality improvement registries, its overly optimistic mortality estimates and its reliance on detailed anatomic and clinical variables reduces its broader applicability to other databases., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a dreaded complication of thoracic and complex endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR/cEVAR). Controversy exists surrounding cerebrospinal fluid drain (CSFD) use, especially preoperative prophylactic placement, owing to concerns regarding catheter-related complications. However, these risks are balanced by the widely accepted benefits of CSFDs during open repair to prevent and/or rescue patients with SCI. The importance of this issue is underscored by the paucity of data on CSFD practice patterns, limiting the development of practice guidelines. Therefore, the purpose of the present analysis was to evaluate the differences between patients who developed SCI despite preoperative CSFD placement and those treated with therapeutic postoperative CSFD placement., Methods: All elective TEVAR/cEVAR procedures for degenerative aneurysm pathology in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative from 2014 to 2019 were analyzed. CSFD use over time, the factors associated with preoperative prophylactic vs postoperative therapeutic CSFD placement in patients with SCI (transient or permanent), and outcomes were evaluated. Survival differences were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: A total of 3406 TEVAR/cEVAR procedures met the inclusion criteria, with an overall SCI rate of 2.3% (n = 88). The SCI rate decreased from 4.55% in 2014 to 1.43% in 2018. Prophylactic preoperative CSFD use was similar over time (2014, 30%; vs 2018, 27%; P = .8). After further exclusions to evaluate CSFD use in those who had developed SCI, 72 patients were available for analysis, 48 with SCI and prophylactic CSFD placement and 24 with SCI and therapeutic CSFD placement. Specific to SCI, the patient demographics and comorbidities were not significantly different between the prophylactic and therapeutic groups, with the exception of previous aortic surgery, which was more common in the prophylactic CSFD cohort (46% vs 23%; P < .001). The SCI outcome was significantly worse for the therapeutic group because 79% had documented permanent paraplegia at discharge compared with 54% of the prophylactic group (P = .04). SCI patients receiving a postoperative therapeutic CSFD had had worse survival than those with a preoperative prophylactic CSFD (50% ± 10% vs 71% ± 9%; log-rank P = .1; Wilcoxon P = .05)., Conclusions: Prophylactic CSFD use with TEVAR/cEVAR remained stable during the study period. Of the SCI patients, postoperative therapeutic CSFD placement was associated with worse sustained neurologic outcomes and overall survival compared with preoperative prophylactic CSFD placement. These findings highlight the need for a randomized clinical trial to examine prophylactic vs therapeutic CSFD placement in association with TEVAR/cEVAR., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Outcomes for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair vary over time and by healthcare system, country, and surgeon. The aim of this study was to analyse peri-operative mortality for intact AAA repair in 11 countries over time and compare outcomes by gender, age, and geographical location., Methods: Prospective data on primary repair of intact AAA were collected from 11 countries through the International Consortium of Vascular Registries (ICVR) and analysed for two time periods, 2010 - 2013 and 2014 - 2016. The primary outcome was peri-operative mortality after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for differences in patient characteristics., Results: A total of 103 715 patients were included. The percentage of patients undergoing EVAR increased from 63.6% to 71.2% (p < .001) over the study period. This proportion varied by country from 35% in Hungary to 81% in the United States. Overall peri-operative mortality decreased from 2.1% to 1.6 % (p < .001). Mortality also declined significantly over time for both OSR 4.2% to 3.6 % (p = .002) and EVAR 1.0% to 0.7% (p = .002). Mortality was significantly higher for female than male patients (3.0% vs. 1.6% p < .001). The percentage of patients > 80 years old undergoing AAA repair remained constant at 23.6% (p = .91). Peri-operative mortality was higher for patients > 80 years than for those < 80 years old (2.7% vs. 1.6% p < .001). Forty-six per cent (n = 275) of all EVAR deaths occurred in the over 80s., Conclusion: The proportion of AAA repairs performed using EVAR has increased over time. Peri-operative mortality continues to decline for both OSR and EVAR. Outcomes however were significantly worse for both women and those aged over 80, so efforts should be focused on these patient groups to further reduce elective AAA mortality rates., (Copyright © 2021 European Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Traditional open surgical repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) has historically resulted in 30-day mortality rates ranging from 6% to 20%, depending on the Crawford anatomic extent. Although short-term survival is important, long-term survival is essential for patients to benefit from these often elective and potentially morbid procedures. The aneurysm extent affects the long-term survival after open repair; however, effect on endovascular repair is unknown and could influence the decision process for repair. We evaluated the association between aneurysm extent and survival and identified patient and perioperative factors associated with mortality after endovascular repair., Methods: A retrospective cohort of patients treated for TAAAs recorded in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative thoracic and complex endovascular aneurysm repair registry were evaluated. All patients treated for asymptomatic degenerative aneurysms from 2010 to 2019 were included. Crawford extent I to V was defined according to the proximal and distal landing zones documented in the registry. Patients without extension into the visceral aorta were used for comparison and categorized as having extent 0a or 0b, depending on the distal landing zone in the thoracic aorta. Kaplan-Meier plots were used to estimate survival, and Cox proportional hazard regression models were created to identify the predictors of mortality., Results: From 2010 to 2019, 15,333 patients were entered into the registry, of whom 2062 met the inclusion criteria. The Crawford extent was 0a for 379, 0b for 848, I for 81, II for 98, III for 130, IV for 454, and V for 72. Three groups were created in accordance with the similar outcomes noted on a preliminary analysis: (1) extent 0a and 0b; (2) extent I, II, and III; and (3) extent IV and V. The mean survival time for the extent 0a and 0b group was 70.7 ± 1.43 months and was 48.6 ± 1.65 months for the extent I, II, and III group and 57.6 ± 1.24 months for the extent IV and V group. The corresponding 1-year mortality was 8.4%, 18.4%, and 7.8%. Cox regression analysis identified the following preoperative factors were associated with mortality: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio [OR], 1.70; P < .001), Crawford extent I to III (OR, 1.64; P = .015), preexisting chronic kidney disease (OR, 1.37; P = .024), and age per year (OR, 1.03; P < .001). A number of postoperative factors were also associated with mortality., Conclusions: Similar to open TAAA repair, patients with more extensive aortic disease treated with endovascular repair had worse 1-year and long-term survival. The extent of aortic disease and anticipated postoperative survival should factor prominently into the surgical decision-making process for elective endovascular TAAA repair., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The efficacy of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of chronic type B aortic dissection (cTBAD) is controversial. Only limited evidence describes temporal anatomic changes after TEVAR for cTBAD and their relationship to outcomes. We sought to investigate early aortic remodeling events after TEVAR for cTBAD with thoracic aneurysm and determine the association with reintervention and survival., Methods: Records from 95 cTBAD patients undergoing TEVAR from 2005 to 2017 were reviewed. Using 3-dimensional centerline analysis, anatomic phenotyping of the thoracoabdominal aorta was performed. Reverse aortic remodeling (RAR) was defined by a ≥5-mm reduction in maximal thoracic aortic diameter. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated freedom from reintervention and survival., Results: Visceral segment dissection involvement was present in 89% of patients (n = 85), and the mean preoperative thoracic diameter was 63 mm (SD, 10). Complete thoracic false lumen thrombosis occurred in 71% of patients (n = 67), whereas abdominal false lumen thrombosis was documented in 60% (n = 57) by 6 months. RAR occurred in 41%. Aortic reintervention rate was 39% (n = 37). The 1- and 3-year freedom from reintervention was significantly higher in subjects experiencing early RAR (log-rank P = .02), but reintervention did not impact overall survival (log-rank P = .9). Similarly, overall survival was similar between patients with or without RAR (log-rank P = .4)., Conclusions: Early RAR is associated with decreased rates of reintervention; however, overall survival is not impacted by these changes. TEVAR for cTBAD results in a high rate of reintervention, which mandates vigilant surveillance protocols., (Copyright © 2021 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Vascular surgical groin wound infection (VS-GWI) has multiple causes and frequently is manifested as a limb- or life-threatening problem, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. For patients undergoing operative extirpation, in situ repair, extra-anatomic bypass, or ligation can be used; however, limited data exist describing comparative results of the different operative choices or conduit subtypes. Therefore, we sought to describe our experience with management of VS-GWI and to detail outcomes of the different strategies., Methods: Patients (2003-2017) undergoing surgical treatment of VS-GWI (Szilagyi grade III) secondary to primary infectious arteritis or infected pseudoaneurysm after percutaneous intervention as well as previous prosthetic graft placement were reviewed. The primary end point was major adverse limb events (MALEs; major amputation, graft occlusion, or unplanned reintervention). Secondary end points included 30-day mortality, wound healing, amputation-free survival (AFS), and all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to determine relative risk of end points; Kaplan-Meier methodology was employed to estimate freedom from outcomes., Results: There were 149 patients (age, 65 ± 11 years; body mass index, 27 ± 6 kg/m 2 ; 70% male; 32% diabetes) identified, of whom 120 (81%) had unilateral and 29 (19%) had bilateral VS-GWI. Indications included infected prosthetic bypass (88% [n = 131]; infrainguinal, 107; suprainguinal, 24) and primary infectious femoral artery complications (12% [n = 18]). A majority underwent single-stage operations (87% [n = 129]). In situ reconstruction occurred in 87% (n = 129); 9% (n = 13) underwent ligation, and 6% (n = 7) received extra-anatomic revascularization. Autogenous conduit was used most commonly (68% [n = 101/149]; 88% single stage), of which 81% (n = 80) were femoral vein. The remaining patients received cadaveric (15% [n = 23]; 87% single stage) or prosthetic (8% [n=12]; 67% single stage) grafts. Adjunctive myocutaneous flap was used in 37% (n = 54). Length of stay was 19 ± 15 days and 30-day mortality was 7% (n = 10), with no difference between conduit repair types. All femoral wounds healed (mean follow-up, 17 ± 11 months); however, 33% (n = 49) underwent reoperation (unplanned graft reintervention, 33%; graft occlusion, 16%; wound débridement, 15%; major amputation, 11%). Reinfection occurred in 17% (n = 27), with no difference between groups. MALE rate was 22% (n = 33; most were arterial reinterventions, 19%), with no difference in single-stage vs multistage, in situ vs extra-anatomic, or autogenous vs nonautogenous conduit strategies Predictors of MALE included younger age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.6 per decade; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.5; P = .02) and lower body mass index (<25 kg/m 2 ; HR, 1.6 per BMI category; 95% CI, 1.1-2.5; P = .02). Overall, 1- and 3-year freedom from MALE, AFS, and survival were as follows: MALE, 74% ± 5% and 63% ± 6%; AFS, 68% ± 4% and 58% ± 5%; survival, 78% ± 3% and 70% ± 4%. Autogenous conduit use was associated with better survival (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.8; 1-year: 83% ± 4% vs nonautogenous, 78% ± 4%; 3-year: 68% ± 8% vs 53% ± 9%; log-rank, P = .006)., Conclusions: An individualized approach to operative strategy and conduit choice leads to comparable outcomes in this challenging group of patients. VS-GWI can be safely managed with in situ, autogenous reconstruction in a majority of patients with acceptable mortality, excellent wound healing rates, and improved overall survival. However, a significant proportion of patients experience reinfection and MALEs, the preponderance of which are arterial reintervention, mandating need for close follow-up and graft surveillance., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Previous publications have clearly established a correlation between timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and complications after treatment of complicated acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD). However, the temporal association of TEVAR with morbidity after uncomplicated presentations is poorly understood and has not previously been examined using real-world national data. Therefore, the objective of this analysis was to determine whether TEVAR timing of uncomplicated ATBAD (UATBAD) is associated with postoperative complications., Methods: The Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR and complex endovascular aneurysm repair registry was analyzed from 2010 to 2019. Procedures performed for non-dissection-related disease as well as for ATBAD with malperfusion or rupture were excluded. Because of inherent differences between timing cohorts, propensity score matching was performed to ensure like comparisons. Univariate and multivariable analysis after matching was used to determine differences between timing groups (symptom onset to TEVAR: acute, 1-14 days; subacute, 15-90 days) for postoperative mortality, in-hospital complications, and reintervention., Results: A total of 688 cases meeting inclusion criteria were identified. After matching 187 patients in each of the 1- to 14-day and 15- to 90-day treatment groups, there were no statistically significant differences between groups. On univariate analysis, the 1- to 14-day treatment group had a higher proportion of cases requiring reintervention within 30 days (15.3%) compared with UATBAD patients undergoing TEVAR within 15 to 90 days (5.2%; P = .02). There was also a difference (P = .007) at 1 year, with 33.8% of the 1- to 14-day UATBAD patients undergoing reintervention compared with 14.5% for the 15- to 90-day group. There were no statistically significant differences on multivariable analysis for long-term survival, complications, or long-term reintervention. There was a trend toward significance (P = .08) with the 1- to 14-day group having 2.3 times the odds of requiring an in-hospital reintervention compared with the 15- to 90-day group., Conclusions: Timing of TEVAR for UATBAD does not appear to predict mortality or postoperative complications. However, there is a strong association between repair within 1 to 14 days and higher risk of reintervention. This may in part be related to the 1- to 14-day group's representing an inherently higher anatomic or physiologic risk population that cannot be entirely accounted for with propensity analysis. The role of optimal timing to intervention should be incorporated into future study design of TEVAR trials for UATBAD., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Aberrant subclavian artery (ASA), a well-described aortic arch anomaly, is frequently associated with dysphagia and development of Kommerell diverticulum (KD) with aneurysmal degeneration. Historically, open repair has been performed, which can be associated with significant morbidity. More recently, hybrid approaches using different arch vessel revascularization techniques in combination with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (hybrid TEVAR) have been described, but there is a paucity of literature describing outcomes. The objective of this analysis was to describe our experience with management of complicated ASAs using hybrid TEVAR, further adding to the literature describing approaches to and outcomes of hybrid ASA repair., Methods: A retrospective, single-institution review was performed of all patients treated for ASA complications using hybrid TEVAR (2002-2018). The primary end point was technical success, defined as absence of type I or type III endoleak intraoperatively and within 30 days postoperatively. Secondary end points included complications, reintervention, and survival. Centerline measurement of KD diameters (maximum diameter = opposing aortic outer wall to diverticulum apex) was employed. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate secondary end points., Results: Eighteen patients (1.4% of 1240 total TEVAR procedures; male, 67%; age, 59 ± 13 years) were identified (left-sided arch and right ASA, 94% [n = 17]; right-sided arch and left ASA, n = 1 [6%]; retroesophageal location and associated KD, 100%); median preoperative KD diameter was 60 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 37-108 mm). Operative indications included diverticulum diameter (61%), dysphagia (17%), rupture (11%), rapid expansion (6%), and endoleak after TEVAR (6%). All procedures used some combination of supraclavicular revascularization and TEVAR (staged, 50% [n = 9]), whereas partial open arch reconstruction was used in 17% (n = 3). There were no perioperative deaths or spinal cord ischemic events. Major complications occurred in 22% (n = 4): nondisabling stroke, one; arm ischemia, one; upper extremity neuropathy, one; and iatrogenic descending thoracic aortic dissection, one. Technical success was 83%, but 44% (n = 8) had an endoleak (type I, n = 3; type II, n = 5 [intercostal, n = 2; aneurysmal subclavian artery origin, n = 3]) during follow-up (median, 4 months; IQR, 1-15 months). Two endoleaks resolved spontaneously, three were treated, and three were observed (1-year freedom from reintervention, 75% ± 10%). Median KD diameter decreased by 7 mm (IQR, 1-12 mm), and 78% (n = 14) experienced diameter reduction or stability in follow-up. The 1- and 3-year survival was 93% ± 6% and 84% ± 10%, respectively., Conclusions: Hybrid open brachiocephalic artery revascularization with TEVAR appears to be safe and reasonably effective in management of ASA complications as evidenced by a low perioperative complication risk and reasonable positive aortic remodeling. However, endoleak rates raise significant concerns about durability. Therefore, if this technique is employed, the mandatory need for surveillance and high rate of reintervention should be emphasized preoperatively. This analysis represents a relatively large series of a hybrid TEVAR technique to treat ASA complications, but greater patient numbers and longer follow-up are needed to further establish the role of this procedure., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has evolved and is now firmly established as a mainstay of therapy for acute complicated type B aortic dissection (acTBAD). However, several important issues remain unresolved including the optimal timing, sizing, graft selection, coverage length and utilization of adjunctive therapies to address false lumen perfusion. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to provide a contemporary perspective on the management and results for TEVAR of acTBAD., Methods: All TEVAR patients (N.=159) with acTBAD from a single high-volume, academic medical center were analyzed. Comparative results across time-dependent cohorts (2005-2009 [N.=43] vs. 2010-2014 [N.=56] vs. 2015-2020 [N.=60]) are presented., Results: 30-day mortality was 13%(N.=21) with a trend towards improvement over time (2005-2009, 18% vs. 2010-2020, 12%; P=0.1). Similarly, incidence of postoperative complications also declined: 2005-2009, 70% vs. 2010-2020, 36%(P-trend=0.08). One and 2-year freedom from aorta-related reintervention was 78±7% and 73±9% and did not differ across cohorts (log-rank P=0.5). Respective one and 5-year survival was 75±3% and 64±7%, but significantly improved with time (log-rank P<0.001). The corresponding one and five-year freedom from aorta-related mortality was 82±4% and 78±7% but did not change during the study interval (log-rank P=0.3)., Conclusions: Outcomes for TEVAR of acTBAD continue to improve over time. This time-dependent analysis delineates how results have changed due to increasing experience, technologic evolution, and maturation of the peer reviewed evidence. These results along with the evidence-based review provided herein, provide an update on the management and results of TEVAR of acTBAD while highlighting specific controversies unique to the management of this challenging clinical problem.

Background: The indications for and technology surrounding thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) have undergone significant evolution with increasing adoption. The purpose of this report is to evaluate pathology-specific incidence, timing, and types of secondary aortic intervention (SAI) after TEVAR and their impact on survival., Methods: A single-center retrospective review was made of all TEVAR and SAI performed from 2004 to 2018. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable logistic regression were used to estimate freedom from SAI and survival, and to identify SAI predictors., Results: Of 1037 patients (mean age 65.4 ± 15.1 years), 155 (14.9%) underwent 212 SAIs (median 5 months; interquartile range, 1.5 to 18) with 37 (3.6%) requiring more than one SAI. The primary aortic pathology at index TEVAR significantly (P = .0001) affected the incidence of SAI: chronic dissection, 26.5%; postsurgical anastomotic pseudoaneurysm, 19.4%; degenerative aneurysm, 15.3%; and acute dissection, 11.2%. The most common indications for SAI were endoleaks (44.8%), disease progression or remote aortic procedure (23.1%), and persistent false lumen flow (9.9%). After exclusion of 30-day mortality events, patients who did not undergo a SAI had better survival compared with patients having SAI: no SAI 1 year 88.8% ± 1.1%, 5 years 75.2% ± 1.7%, and 10 years, 66.5% ± 2.3%; SAI 1 year 91.7% ± 2.4%, 5 years 61.9% ± 4.9%, and 10 years 33.5% ± 8.4% (log rank P = .004)., Conclusions: Secondary aortic intervention after TEVAR is not uncommon, particularly among patients with chronic dissection pathology. Patients surviving their index hospitalization who undergo SAI have worse long-term survival. The varying incidence of SAI by indication identifies the need for pathology-specified patient selection, surveillance strategies after TEVAR, and better device design that addresses the limitations of TEVAR, particularly in dealing with dissection-related indications., (Copyright © 2020 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a dreaded complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). There are limited national data describing the incidence and influence of in-hospital SCI recovery on survival. Moreover, no robust preoperative SCI risk assessment models currently exist. The purpose of this analysis was to analyze the Vascular Quality Initiative to determine the national incidence, survival association, and preoperative predictors of SCI after TEVAR., Methods: All Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR procedures (June 2014-June 2019) were reviewed. The primary end point was development of in-hospital SCI, defined as any new neurologic deficit or paralysis not attributable to intracranial disease. Secondary end points were disease-specific SCI rates and long-term out-of-hospital survival. Functional outcomes (transient vs permanent SCI) were independently determined by treating physicians. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards methodology were used to assess the association of SCI with survival. A logistic regression model of candidate preoperative SCI predictors was created, and bootstrapped backward elimination (retaining predictors with ≥50% selection frequency) was used for model reduction. Model fit and performance statistics were validated by adjustment for Efron's optimism., Results: The overall rate of SCI was 3.7% (n = 422/11,473; transient, 1.6% [n = 179]; permanent, 2.1% [n = 243]). Patients who developed any SCI had significantly lower Kaplan-Meier survival estimate compared with those without SCI (1-year survival: SCI, 65%; no SCI, 87%; P < .0001), and patients with permanent SCI had notably worse survival than patients with transient SCI (1-year survival: permanent SCI, 54%; transient SCI, 80%; P < .0001). Disease-specific incidence of any SCI was as follows: aneurysm, 3.4%; dissection, 5.3%; aneurysm from dissection, 4.1%; trauma, 1.1%; penetrating ulceration, 2.4%; intramural hematoma, 5.7%; penetrating ulceration and intramural hematoma, 4.3%; and aortic thrombus, 4.8%. Several factors were selected on multivariable analysis as the most robust preoperative predictors of any SCI, including distal landing zone 5 to zone 10, nonelective case, creatinine concentration >1.38 mg/dL, smoking history, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, adjunctive procedure, nonwhite race, and preoperative hypertension (area under the curve = 0.72; Nagelkerke R 2  = 0.06)., Conclusions: SCI is a devastating complication after TEVAR that is associated with worse overall survival, particularly when no functional recovery occurs by hospital discharge. Disease-specific, real-world benchmarks for SCI rates are provided that may inform quality initiatives focused on reducing this complication. Importantly, this analysis is the first description of a preoperative prediction model derived from national data for determining SCI risk after TEVAR. These predictors should be used to identify high-risk patients to balance the risk of SCI and its associated increased short-term mortality with the risk of the underlying disease. Furthermore, all available adjunctive measures should be implemented in these high-risk patients to reduce risk of SCI., (Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: To review the sex differences among symptomatic and asymptomatic patients treated with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in the Southeastern Vascular Study Group (SEVSG), a regional quality group of the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI)., Methods: All cases reported by the SEVSG members of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients were included in this retrospective review of CEA and CAS. Primary end point was 3-year survival difference between male and female patients. Secondary end points included in-hospital myocardial infarction (MI), transient ischemic attack (TIA)/stroke, and mortality differences between symptomatic and asymptomatic male and female patients. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to assess 3-year survival differences., Results: There were 8,303 CEA and 1,876 CAS procedures performed in 29 centers from January 2011 to December 2018. From those, 4,650 (56.0%) and 938 (50.1%) were asymptomatic CEA and CAS, respectively. There were 2,760 (59.4%) male patients in the asymptomatic CEA and 597 (63.9%) in the asymptomatic CAS groups. After CEA, the rates of in-hospital MI (P = 0.034), TIA/stroke (P < 0.001), and death (P < 0.001) were significantly higher in symptomatic patients. MIs were more frequent in females with asymptomatic disease (P = 0.041). After CAS, the rate of TIA/stroke was higher in symptomatic patients (P = 0.030). There were no differences according to sex in the CAS group. On follow-up, asymptomatic male patients treated with CAS had a higher 3-year all-cause mortality compared with their female counterparts (7.0% vs. 1.8%; P = 0.015). On multivariable Cox regression analysis, male sex (HR = 2.63 [95% CI = 1.058-6.536]; P = 0.038) and lower hemoglobin levels (HR = 0.72 [95% CI = 0.597-0.857]; P < 0.001) were predictors of death in asymptomatic male patients treated with CAS., Conclusions: In our SEVSG region, postoperative MIs, TIA/stroke, and deaths were higher in symptomatic CEA patients. MIs were more frequent in asymptomatic CEA females. Postoperative TIA/stroke was more frequent in symptomatic CAS patients. After CAS, asymptomatic male patients had higher 3-year all-cause mortality than female patients. On multivariable Cox regression analysis, male sex and lower hemoglobin levels were predictors of death in these asymptomatic male patients treated with CAS. Long-term mortality risk in asymptomatic males should be considered before offering CAS. Further national VQI analysis of our asymptomatic and symptomatic male and female patients treated with CEA and CAS would be warranted., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Open repair of extent II and III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) is associated with substantial morbidity. Alternative strategies, such as hybrid operations combining proximal thoracic endovascular aortic repair with either staged open distal TAAA repair or visceral debranching (hybrid), as well as fenestrated/branched endografts (FEVAR), have been increasingly reported; however, benefits of these approaches compared with direct open surgery remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of these three different strategies in the management of extent II/III TAAA., Methods: All extent II/III TAAA repairs (2002-2018) for nonmycotic, degenerative aneurysm or chronic dissection at a single institution were reviewed. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. Secondary end points included incidence of spinal cord ischemia (SCI), complications, unplanned re-operation, 90-day readmission, and out-of-hospital survival. To mitigate impact of covariate imbalance and selection bias, intergroup comparisons were made using inverse probability weighted-propensity analysis. Cox regression was used to estimate survival while cumulative incidence was used to determine reoperation risk., Results: One hundred ninety-eight patients (FEVAR, 92; hybrid, 40; open, 66) underwent repair. In unadjusted analysis, compared with hybrid/open patients, FEVAR patients were significantly older with more cardiovascular risk factors, but less likely to have a connective tissue disorder or dissection-related indication. Unadjusted 30-day mortality and complication rates were: 30-day mortality, FEVAR 4%, hybrid 13%, open 12% (P = .01); and complications, FEVAR 36%, hybrid 33%, open 50% (P = .11). Permanent SCI was not different among groups (FEVAR 3%, hybrid 3%, open 6%; P = .64). In adjusted analysis, 30-day mortality risk was greater for open vs FEVAR (hazard ratio, 3.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-9.2; P = .01) with no difference for hybrid vs open/FEVAR. There was significantly lower risk of any SCI for open vs FEVAR (hazard ratio, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.96; P = .04); however, no difference in risk of permanent SCI was detected among the three groups. There was no difference in complications or unplanned reoperation, but open patients had the greatest risk of unplanned 90-day readmission. There was a time-varying effect on survival probability, with open repair having a significant survival disadvantage in the first 1 to 6 months after the procedure compared with hybrid/FEVAR patients (Cox model P = .03), but no difference in survival at 1 and 5 years (1- and 5-year survival: FEVAR, 86 ± 3%, 55 ± 8%; hybrid, 86 ± 5%, 60 ± 11%; open 69 ± 7%, 59 ± 8%; Cox-model P = .10)., Conclusions: Extent II/III TAAA repair, regardless of operative strategy, is associated with significant morbidity risk. FEVAR is associated with the lowest 30-day mortality risk compared with hybrid and open repair when estimates are adjusted for preoperative risk factors. These data support greater adoption of FEVAR as first-line therapy to treat complex TAAA disease in anatomically suitable patients who present electively., (Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

For patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), randomized trials have found endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality than open surgical repair (OSR). However, OSR has fewer long-term aneurysm-related complications, such as endoleak or late rupture. Patients treated with EVAR and OSR have similar survival rates within two years after surgery, and OSR does not require intensive surveillance. Few have examined if patient preferences are aligned with the type of treatment they receive for their AAA. Although many assume that patients may universally prefer the less-invasive nature of EVAR, our preliminary work suggests that patients who value the lower risk of late complications may prefer OSR. In this study, called The PReferences for Open Versus Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (PROVE-AAA) trial, we describe a cluster-randomized trial to test if a decision aid can better align patients' preferences and their treatment type for AAA. Patients enrolled in the study are candidates for either endovascular or open repair and are followed up at VA hospitals by vascular surgery teams who regularly perform both types of repair. In Aim 1, we will determine patients' preferences for endovascular or open repair and identify domains associated with each repair type. In Aim 2, we will assess alignment between patients' preferences and the repair type elected and then compare the impact of a decision aid on this alignment between the intervention and control groups. This study will help us to accomplish two goals. First, we will better understand the factors that affect patient preference when choosing between EVAR and OSR. Second, we will better understand if a decision aid can help patients be more likely to receive the treatment strategy they prefer for their AAA. Study enrollment began on June 1, 2017. Between June 1, 2017 and November 1, 2018, we have enrolled 178 of a total goal of 240 veterans from 20 VA medical centers and their vascular surgery teams across the country. We anticipate completing enrollment in PROVE-AAA in June 2019, and study analyses will be performed thereafter., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The prevailing evidence calls for using chimney/snorkel endovascular repair (ch-EVAR) with one or two chimney grafts. No studies up to now focus on its applicability and results for the treatment of suprarenal aortic pathologies (SRAP). Hence, we evaluated the clinical and radiologic results of ch-EVAR treatment for SRAP placing three or more chimney grafts within the PERICLES Registry., Methods: Data from 517 patients suffering complex aortic pathologies treated by ch-EVAR between 2008 and 2014 at 13 European and U.S. centers were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed., Results: Sixty-seven ch-EVAR-treated patients (12.9% of the entire PERICLES cohort) presented SRAP (83.5% elective, 16.5% urgent). The majority of patients (95.5%) received three chimney grafts; four patients received four chimney grafts. The Endurant device was the most commonly used (35.8%) followed by the Zenith abdominal endograft (19.4%). Overall, 204 chimney grafts were placed (56.7% covered self-expandable, 40.3% covered balloon-expandable stents, and 10.4% bare metal balloon-expandable stents). At a median follow-up of 24 months (range, 0.1-67.0 days), 30-day mortality was 6.1% (4 patients), and the overall mortality was 16.4% (11 patients). Overall survival was 87.4% (range, 79.5%-96.0%) at 1 year, 81.8% (range, 72.2%-92.2%) at 2 years and thereafter. Type IA endoleak was noted in nine patients (13.4%) intraoperatively and successfully treated in seven cases (97.1% technical success). Aneurysm sac diameter significantly decreased from 70.5 ± 19.3 mm to 66.9 ± 20.6 mm (P < .001) at last follow-up. Ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack were noted in two patients (2.9%). Chimney occlusion was detected in six renal arteries (9.5%) and two superior mesenteric arteries (3.2%). No patients required chronic hemodialysis. All occluded superior mesenteric artery grafts were successfully rescued using endovascular approaches., Conclusions: The midterm use of ch-EVAR for the treatment SRAP seems to be safe, highlighting its applicability for the treatment of rupture threatening pathologies and seal zone lengthening as in type IA endoleaks after EVAR. However, the incidence of type IA endoleaks, chimney graft occlusions, and ischemic stroke rates is higher compared with the prevailing single chimney evidence. Longer follow-up with more cases is needed to establish the exact performance of this treatment in SRAP., (Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Perioperative complications in elderly patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) occur frequently. Although perioperative mortality has been well-described in the elderly patient population, factors associated with in-hospital complications and their impact on long-term survival remain poorly characterized., Methods: We identified all patients undergoing elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA within the Vascular Quality Initiative registry (2003-2018) and compared in-hospital complication rates between elderly (age ≥75) and nonelderly patients (<75). We used logistic regression to identify independent factors associated with in-hospital complications, whereas Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine associations between complications and long-term survival. To assess the effect of complications on early and late survival, we stratified survival periods into the first 30 days after discharge, and between 1 and 6 months, 7 and 12 months, and 1 and 8 years after the index procedure. To investigate the implications of in-hospital morbidity on long-term outcomes, we estimated the adjusted population-attributable fractions of individual complications on both perioperative and long-term survival., Results: We identified 17,156 elderly patients and 19,922 nonelderly patients. Elderly patients experienced higher complication rates compared with nonelderly patients (17% vs 10%; P < .001). The factors with the strongest associations with morbidity in elderly patients were anemia (odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-2.6), female gender (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7-2.1), and large AAA diameter (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.6-1.9). Patients with any in-hospital complication had lower unadjusted survival estimates than patients without complications at 1 year (83% vs 95%; P < .001), 5 years (66% vs 80%; P < .001), and 8 years (60% vs 72%; P < .001). After risk adjustment, in-hospital complications were independently associated with higher mortality, although the association attenuated over time (first month after discharge: hazard ratio [HR], 5.9; 95% CI, 3.9-9.1; 1-6 months after the procedure: HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.7-2.7; P < .001; 7-12 months after the procedure: HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9; 1-8 years after the procedure: HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.01-1.3). Of all deaths occurring within 8 years after procedure, 9.5% were independently associated with in-hospital complications. Complications with the greatest impact on long-term mortality were renal dysfunction (2.4%), blood transfusion (3.4%), and reintubations (2.4%)., Conclusions: Elderly patients are at higher risk for in-hospital complications after EVAR. These in-hospital complications have a significant impact on both short- and long-term survival. To further improve the delivery of EVAR care nationally, quality improvement efforts should be focused on preventing postoperative morbidity in elderly patients, as well as refining out of hospital surveillance strategies for subjects who experience in-hospital complications to improve overall survival., (Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Branched stent grafts represent a viable option for left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularisation in patients treated by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for Zone 2 lesions. This study investigated the haemodynamic performance of different LSA branched stent graft configurations as potential determinants of thrombotic and stroke risks., Methods: A three dimensional aortic arch geometry extracted from post-operative computed tomography images of a TEVAR patient using a single LSA branched aortic endograft was modified in silico to obtain ten potential LSA branched stent graft configurations: five down facing (0-5 - 10 mm aortic protrusion with 10-12 mm internal diameter), four curved (30-60° with antegrade/retrograde orientation), and one LSA orifice misalignment. The 0 mm down facing stent graft was considered base configuration. Computational fluid dynamic analyses were performed to identify differences in pressure, energy, and wall shear stress (WSS) based parameters., Results: Total pressure drop and energy loss variations among configurations were not greater than 5 mmHg (6% of mean arterial pressure) and 5.7 mW (0.7% of cardiac power), respectively. Protrusions up to 5 mm created clinically insignificant flow disturbances. However, stent graft protrusions further into the aortic lumen created more complex haemodynamics, characterised by larger energy loss and more prominent flow recirculation. Protrusion greater than 5 mm into the lumen was associated with larger areas of elevated maximum WSS (>20 Pa) along the outer surface of the branched stent graft., Conclusion: Arterial haemodynamic characteristics are affected by LSA branched stent graft configurations, with pressure drops and energy losses likely to be clinically insignificant. The length of the stent graft protrusion into the aortic lumen generated the largest haemodynamic variations in the aortic system. Protrusions up to 5 mm have smaller risk of potential thrombus generation. Conversely, larger protrusions into the aortic lumen showed more disturbed haemodynamics, suggesting a greater risk of potential thrombus formation, which may be clinically important over time., (Copyright © 2019 European Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) is increasingly used to manage pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic disease (TAAA). Device-related reintervention after F/BEVAR is common, but little is known about its impact on postoperative mortality. The purpose of this analysis was to describe secondary intervention (SI) after F/BEVAR and determine the impact of these procedures on patient survival., Methods: A single-center review was done on all consecutive F/BEVARs performed from 2010 to 2016. Primary end points were incidence of secondary aortic, branch, and/or access vessel‒related SI, and survival. SI was categorized as minor endovascular (branch restenting, access vessel treatment, or percutaneous coil embolization), major endovascular (new aortic graft placement), or open (bleeding, access vessel, and/or aortic). Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate freedom from SI and survival. Multivariable analysis was used to identify predictors of SI., Results: A total of 308 F/BEVAR procedures were performed (75% physician-modified, 18% custom, 7% Zfen), with 1022 vessels revascularized (celiac, 228; superior mesenteric artery [SMA], 263; renal, 525). There were 117 (39%) extent I-III TAAA, 132 (44%) extent IV TAAA/4-vessel pararenal, and 54 (18%) <4-vessel pararenal repairs performed. Any type of SI occurred in 24% (74) of patients during the mean follow-up of 20 ± 21 months. The majority of reinterventions were endovascular (minor, 53% [n = 39]; major, 32% [n = 24]), whereas 12% (n = 9) were open and 3% (n = 2) hybrid. Primary indication for SI included: 22 (29%) with branch-related endoleaks (1C or III); 15 (22%) with proximal or distal aortic degeneration; 8 (12%) with branch vessel thrombosis/stenosis; 10 (11%) with aortic device type III endoleak/loss of overlap; 4 (6%) with postoperative mesenteric or renal bleeding events; 5 (5%) with type II endoleak; 3 (5%) with access vessel complication; and 2 (3%) with graft infection. Most SIs were elective (65%; n = 48) with the remainder occurring emergently (24%; n = 18) or for symptoms/urgently (11%; n = 8). Compared with endovascular remediation, open SI was more likely to be emergent (89%, 8 of 9; P = .001). Freedom from SI was 80 ± 3% and 64 ± 4% at 1 and 3 years, respectively. One- and 5-year survival with or without SI was: 1 year, 88 ± 4% vs 81 ± 3%; 5 years, 76 ± 5% vs 59 ± 4% (log rank test, P = .06). There was no survival difference based on type of SI (log rank test, P = .3). Extent I-III TAAA (HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.98-3.3; P = .06) and history of cerebrovascular disease (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.97-2.6; P = .07) were predictive of SI., Conclusions: SIs after F/BEVAR most frequently involve branch vessel or aortic device remediation procedures; however, they do not negatively impact out-of-hospital survival. These results further highlight the crucial role of imaging surveillance after F/BEVAR to maintain durability. Discussions with patients, periprocedural planning, and the next generation of device design must focus on issues surrounding the risk of device-related SI events., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Most would agree that at least 1-year survival is necessary after intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair to appropriately justify the cost and risk of the procedure. No validated clinical decision instruments exist to predict survival after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) beyond the perioperative period. The purpose of this analysis was to create a preoperative prediction model for 1-year mortality after EVAR for intact AAA in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative., Methods: All intact EVARs in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative from 2011 to 2015 were randomly divided into training (n = 17,836) and validation (n = 2500) data sets, and 31 preoperative candidate predictors were identified. A logistic regression model for 1-year mortality was created, and bootstrapped stepwise variable elimination was used to reduce this model to a best subset of predictors. Penalized maximum likelihood estimation was used to correct for potential overfitting. The final model was internally validated by bootstrapping the area under the curve (AUC) and the calibration slope and intercept, and its performance when applied to the training and validation data sets was compared., Results: After elective and nonelective (symptomatic, intact) EVAR, 1-year mortality was 5.5% (n = 900/16,411) and 11.4% (n = 162/1425), respectively. The mean probability of 1-year mortality was 6.0% (n = 1062) in the training set and 5.7% (n = 143) in the validation cohort (P = .12). Significant preoperative predictors of 1-year mortality included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, age, preoperative renal insufficiency (creatinine concentration ≥1.8 mg/dL or on hemodialysis), ejection fraction <50%, transfer status, body mass index <24 kg/m 2 , preoperative beta-blocker exposure, larger AAA diameter, and lower admission hemoglobin level. Preoperative statin use was found to be protective. The bias-corrected AUC was 0.759 (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit P value of 0.36; calibration intercept, -0.003; slope, 0.999). When applied to the validation data set, the model had AUC of 0.724 (95% confidence interval, 0.676-0.768; calibration intercept, 0.0009; slope, 0.970), which was in excellent agreement with the original data set bias-corrected AUC. Notably, ∼27.5% (n = 4902) had four or more risk factors with a predicted 1-year post-EVAR mortality risk of 10% to 22% despite that 33.2% of these patients had AAA diameters below recommended treatment guideline minimum thresholds., Conclusions: This validated preoperative prediction model for 1-year mortality identifies patients less likely to benefit from EVAR. Appropriateness of intact AAA EVAR care delivery can be improved by use of this clinical decision aid to determine which high-risk patients have lower probability of mortality within the first postoperative year relative to their predicted annualized rupture risk., (Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)