Search

Background: Abdominal penetrating aortic ulcer (aPAU) is defined as an ulceration of the aortic intima and media lamina, even with rupture of the internal elastic lamina. Recently, there have been an increasing number of publications on endovascular treatment for aPAU. This review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment and provide clinicians with the latest evidence-based medical data. Methods: 3 academic databases (Embase, PubMed, and Scopus) were systematically searched for literature reporting on aPAU from 1986 (the earliest appearance of the concept of aPAU) to September 1, 2021, and related data were collected and evaluated. A fixed/random effects model was used to construct the forest plots. Funnel plots and linear regression tests were used to assess the publication bias. Results: 6 articles including 121 patients were included in the analysis. The average age was 71.4 years, with 72.7% of males and 85.6% with hypertension. Saccular aneurysms (SA) were the most prevalent complication (35.5%). Endovascular treatment had a perioperative mortality rate of.24% (95% CI,.00-2.70). The technical success rate was 99.15% (95% CI, 96.49-100). The type-II endoleak rate was 5.69% (95% CI,.00-12.13). The 1-year survival rate was 95.69% (95% CI, 90.49-100). The revascularization rate was 7.20% (95% CI,.07-14.32). Endovascular treatments for aPAU would lead to a high rate of technical success, few complications, and satisfactory 1-year survival. Conclusions: aPAU are a common disease that mainly affects elderly males with hypertension and hyperlipidemia. Endovascular treatment is required when an ulcer progresses rapidly or manifests symptoms. Endovascular treatment is associated with high technical success, low complication, and satisfactory 1-year survival. Further investigation into the long-term results of endovascular treatment is necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endovascular treatment (EVT) is an alternative method to treat spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery (SIDSMA). Although its short-term results are promising, few mid-term results have been reported. This study reports the five year follow up of EVT for SIDSMA. A total of 128 consecutive patients with SIDSMA admitted to the study hospital between 2011 and 2016 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Their demographic information, clinical findings, EVT outcomes, and follow up results were analysed. Conservative treatment and pre-operative preparation were given immediately after admission, then digital subtraction angiography was performed. Stents were deployed in 112 out of 128 patients. The 16 patients who did not receive stents then continued conservative treatment. Peri-procedural complications occurred in three patients, including one death and two pseudoaneurysms at puncture sites. Mean follow up was 29.7 months (range 6–60 months) in patients with stents and 31.4 months (range 14–45 months) in patients without stents. During follow up, the overall complete remodelling rate in the stent group was 88.3%. Most took place within three months of stenting. The cumulative primary stent patency rate was 99.1%, and the cumulative event free survival rate was 99.0%, 95.8%, and 95.8% at one, three, and five years in patients with stents, compared with 62.5% at both one and three years in patents without stents (p <.001). EVT for SIDSMA is clinically successful. The event free survival rate, primary patency, and complete remodelling are satisfactory during mid-term follow up. Endovascular treatment is an effective approach for SIDSMA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both bypass surgery and endovascular treatment are well-recognized interventions for the treatment of peripheral artery disease; however, the effect of failed endovascular treatment on subsequent surgeries remains controversial. A systematic review was conducted to compare the outcomes of primary bypass and bypass surgery after endovascular treatment. Three academic databases (Embase, PubMed, and Scopus) were searched from their inception to August 2022. Two independent investigators searched for studies that reported the outcomes of primary bypass surgery and bypass surgery after endovascular treatment in patients with peripheral artery disease. Abstracts and full-text studies were screened independently using duplicate data abstraction. Dichotomous outcome measures were reported using a random-effects model to generate a summary odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Seventeen retrospective observational studies were selected from 3911 articles and included 8064 patients, 6252 of whom underwent primary bypass surgery and 1812 underwent bypass surgery after endovascular treatment. The mean age was 69.0 years and 61.2% (n = 4938) were male. For perioperative outcomes, the 30-day results showed no difference in mortality (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.53-1.10), or amputation (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.67-1.20). For short- to mid-term outcomes, primary patency did not differ at 6 months (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.19), 1 year (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.97-1.30), or 2 years (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.85-1.61) follow-up. Amputation-free survival did not differ at 6 months (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.30), 1 year (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.89-1.32), 2 years (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.93-1.50), or 3 years (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.84-1.40) of follow-up. No significant difference was found in overall survival or second patency. This meta-analysis of retrospective, nonrandomized, observational studies suggests that prior endovascular treatment of lower extremity arterial disease does not result in worse perioperative, short-term, or mid-term clinical outcomes of subsequent infrainguinal bypass surgery compared with patients without prior endovascular treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]