Search

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the scrupulous hygiene rules and the restriction of contacts during the lockdown owing to the COVID-19 pandemic affected the rate and severity of surgical site infections (SSI) after vascular exposure in the groin at two Italian University Hospitals.Starting from March 2020, strict hygiene measures for protection of health care workers (HCW) and patients from COVID-19 infection were implemented, and partly lifted in July 2020. The main exposure for analysis purposes was the period in which patients were operated. Accordingly, study subjects were divided into two groups for subsequent comparisons (preCOVID-19 era: March-June 2018-2019 versus COVID-19 era: March-June 2020). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of superficial and/or deep SSI within 30 days after surgery. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definitions were used to classify superficial and deep SSI.A total of 194 consecutive patients who underwent vascular exposure in the groin were retrospectively analyzed. Of those, 60 underwent surgery from April 1, 2018 to June 30 of the same year; 83 from April 1, 2019 to June 30 of the same year; and 51 from April 1, 2020 to June 30 of the same year. The mean age of the study cohort was 75 years and 140 (72%) were males. Patients who were operated in the COVID-19 era were less likely to develop SSI (10% vs. 28%; P = 0.008), including both deep SSI (4% vs. 13%; P = 0.04) and superficial SSI (6% vs. 15%; P = 0.05). After multivariate adjustments, being operated in the COVID-19 era was found to be a negative predictor for development of an SSI (odds ratio [OR] = 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.09-0.76; P 0.001) or deep SSI (OR = 0.21; 95% CI = 0.03-0.98; P 0.001). Operative time was also found as independent predictor for the development of deep SSI (OR = 1.21; 95%CI = 1.21-1.52; P = 0.02). Using binary logistic regression, there were no independent predictors of superficial SSI that could be identified.Vascular exposure in the groin carries a non-negligible risk of SSI. In this study, we provided important insights that are simple and easily viable precautions (such as the universal use of surgical masks both for patients and health care professionals during wound care, the widespread diffusion of hand sanitizers, and the reduction of the number of visitors in the surgical wards) could be promising and safe tools for SSI risk reduction.

The aims of this study were as follows: i) to identify the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients undergoing elective endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm; ii) to assess its association with perioperative morbidity and long-term survival; and iii) to estimate its diagnostic accuracy for prediction of 5-year mortality following the intervention.We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent elective EVAR from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2019. The lean psoas muscle area (LPMA; cmThe study cohort eventually comprised 338 patients who underwent elective EVAR for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm. In the overall population, 154 patients (45.5%) were classified as sarcopenic. At baseline, patients with sarcopenia were older (mean age: 78 ± 5 versus 75 ± 7 y, P 0.001) and had lower proportion of males (73.5% versus 93.5%, P 0.001). At 5 y, the estimated survival rates were 52% versus 74% in sarcopenic and nonsarcopenic patients, respectively (P 0.001). Using multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression, an independent association was identified between sarcopenia and all-cause mortality in the whole cohort (hazard ratio: 2.63, 95% confidence interval: 1.43-3.36, P = 0.009).Sarcopenia, defined as LPMA350 as measured on preoperative computed tomography angiography, can be highly prevalent in patients undergoing elective EVAR. Although the intervention remains safe in the short term, presence of sarcopenia was significantly associated to lower long-term survival irrespective of patients' age or gender.

Objective: Management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing elective fenestrated branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) is not standardised, nor are there any recommendations from current guidelines. By designing an international expert based Delphi consensus, the study aimed to create recommendations on the pre-, intra-, and post-operative management of antithrombotic therapy in patients scheduled for elective F-BEVAR in high volume centres.Methods: Eight facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study topic that were voted on, using a four point Likert scale, by a selected panel of international experts using a three round modified Delphi consensus process. Based on the experts’ responses, only those statements reaching Grade A (full agreement ≥ 75%) or B (overall agreement ≥ 80% and full disagreement < 5%) were included in the final document. The round answers’ consistency was graded using Cohen's k, the intraclass correlation coefficient, and, in case of double re-submission, the Fleiss k.Results: Sixty-seven experts were included in the final analysis and voted the initial 43 statements related to pre- (n = 15), intra- (n = 10), and post-operative (n = 18) management of antithrombotic drugs. At the end of the process, six statements (13%) were rejected, 20 statements (44%) received a Grade B consensus, and 18 statements (40%) reached a Grade A consensus. Most statements (27; 71%) exhibited very high or high consistency grades, and 11 (29%) a fair or poor grading. The intra-operative statements mostly concentrated on threshold for and monitoring of proper heparinisation. The pre- and post-operative statements mainly focused on indications for dual antiplatelet therapy and its management, considering the possible need for cerebrospinal fluid drainage.Conclusion: Based on the elevated strength and high consistency of this international expert based Delphi consensus, most of the statements might guide current clinical management of antithrombotic therapy for elective F-BEVAR. Future studies are needed to clarify the debated issues.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) are the top two leading causes of death after blunt force trauma. Patients presenting with concomitant BTAI and TBI pose a specific challenge with respect to management strategy, because the optimal hemodynamic parameters are conflicting between the two pathologies. Early thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is often performed, even for minimal aortic injuries, to allow for the higher blood pressure parameters required for TBI management. However, the optimal timing of TEVAR for the treatment of BTAI in patients with concomitant TBI remains an active matter of controversy.The Aortic Trauma Foundation international prospective multicenter registry was used to identify all patients who had undergone TEVAR for BTAI in the setting of TBI from 2015 to 2020. The primary outcomes included delayed ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, in-hospital mortality, and aortic-related mortality. The outcomes were examined among patients who had undergone TEVAR at emergent (6 vs ≥6 hours) or urgent (24 vs ≥24 hours) intervals.A total of 100 patients (median age, 43 years; 79% men; median injury severity score, 41) with BTAI (Society for Vascular Surgery BTAI grade 1, 3%; grade 2, 10%; grade 3, 78%; grade 4, 9%) and concomitant TBI who had undergone TEVAR were identified. Emergent repair was performed for 51 patients (51%). Comparing emergent repair (6 hours) to urgent repair (≥6 hours), no difference was found in delayed cerebral ischemic events (2.0% vs 4.1%; P = .614), in-hospital mortality (15.7% vs 22.4%; P = .389), or aortic-related mortality (2.0% vs 2.0%; P = .996) and no patient had experienced delayed hemorrhagic stroke. Likewise, repairs conducted in an urgent (24 hours) setting showed no differences compared with those completed in an emergent (≥24 hours) setting regarding delayed ischemic stroke (2.6% vs 4.3%; P = .548), in-hospital mortality (18.2% vs 21.7%; P = .764), or aortic-related mortality (1.3% vs 4.3%; P = .654), and no patient had experienced delayed hemorrhagic stroke.In contrast to prior retrospective efforts, results from the Aortic Trauma Foundation international prospective multicenter registry have demonstrated that neither emergent nor urgent TEVAR for patients with concomitant BTAI and TBI was associated with delayed stroke, in-hospital mortality, or aortic-related mortality. In these patients, the timing of TEVAR did not have an effect on the outcomes. Therefore, the decision to intervene should be guided by individual patient factors rather than surgical timing.

OBJECTIVE: The effect of body mass index (BMI) on post-operative outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair remains poorly defined. Herein, the association between BMI and mortality following elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open aneurysm repair (OAR) of AAA in a large national quality registry is investigated.METHODS: All elective AAA repairs within the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI; 2010 to September 2021) were reviewed (EVAR, n = 53 426; OAR, n = 9 479). All analyses were conducted separately for EVAR and OAR patients. The primary end points were 30 day mortality and five year survival. Study cohorts were divided into World Health Organisation BMI categories (C1 < 18.5, C2 18.5 ≤ BMI < 25, C3 25 ≤ BMI < 30, C4, 30 ≤ BMI < 35, C5 35 ≤ BMI < 40, C6 ≥ 40). BMI was examined as both a categorical and continuous variable. Logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression were used for risk adjustment.RESULTS: Among EVAR patients, BMI distribution was C1, 1 216 (2%); C2, 14 687 (28%); C3, 20 516 (38%); C4, 11 352 (21%); C5, 3 947 (7%); C6, 1 708 (3%). Class 1, 2, and 6 BMI patients experienced increased 30 day mortality (C1 2.6%; C2 1.3%; C6 1.4% vs. C3 - 5 0.7%; p < .001) and C1 and C2 had correspondingly inferior long term survival (five years: C1 69 ± 3%; C2 79 ± 1% vs. C3 - 6 86 - 88 ± 2%; log rank p < .001). These survival disparities persisted after risk adjustment for multiple confounders. In the OAR cohort, BMI distribution was C1, 280 (3%); C2, 2 862 (30%); C3, 3 587 (38%); C4, 1 940 (21%); C5, 581 (6%); C6, 229 (2%). Crude 30 day mortality rates were increased for both lowest and highest BMI patients (C1 12%, C6 7% vs. C2 - 5 3 - 4%; p < .001); these differences also persisted in long term survival (five years: C1 71 ± 6%, C6 82 ± 6% vs. C2 - 6 85 - 88 ± 3%; log rank p < .001). In risk adjusted analysis, both low and high BMI OAR patients had an increased risk of both 30 day and long term mortality.CONCLUSION: Within the VQI, both the extreme low (< 18.5) and high (≥ 40) BMI groups experienced an increased risk of 30 day mortality after both elective EVAR and OAR. By comparison, while the lowest BMI cohort was significantly associated with decreased long term survival after both procedures, the highest BMI group only experienced diminished long term survival after OAR. Based upon this large real world registry analysis of elective AAA repairs, differential metabolic signatures exist within extreme BMI categories, which may inform peri-operative risk stratification and clinical decision-making.

Supplemental material, sj-pptx-2-jet-10.1177_15266028231179864 for Total Transfemoral Branched Endovascular Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair (TORCH2): Short-term and 1-Year Outcomes From a National Multicenter Registry by D’Oria Mario, Grandi Alessandro, Pratesi Giovanni, Parlani Gianbattista, Giudice Rocco, Gargiulo Mauro, Mangialardi Nicola, Chiesa Roberto, Lepidi Sandro and Bertoglio Luca in Journal of Endovascular Therapy

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the approaches to reno-visceral target vessels (TVs) cannulation during branched-fenestrated endovascular aortic repair, determine the evidence base that links these approaches to clinical outcomes and identify literature gaps. METHODS A scoping review following the PRISMA Protocols Extension for Scoping Reviews was performed. Available full-text studies published in English (PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases; last queried, 31 June 2022) were systematically reviewed and analysed. Data were reported as descriptive narrative or tables, without any statistical analysis nor quality assessment. RESULTS Fourteen retrospective articles were included. Seven articles studied the use of upper extremity access (UEA) during branched-fenestrated endovascular aortic repair, 3 studied the use of steerable sheaths and 4 included both approaches. A left UEA was used in 757 patients (technical success: 99%, stroke rate: 1–3%) and a right UEA in 215 patients (technical success: 92–98%, stroke rate: 0–13%). Seven studies (1066 patients) described a surgical access only (technical success: 80–99%, stroke rate: 0–13%), while 3 studies (146 patients) described a percutaneous access only (technical success: 83–90%, stroke rate: 3%) and lastly 4 studies compared UEA versus use of steerable sheaths from the transfemoral approach (TFA) (UEA: 563 patients, technical success: 95–98%, stroke rate: 1–8%; TFA: 209 patients, technical success: 98–100%, stroke rate: 0–1%). CONCLUSIONS Both UEA and TFA as cannulation approaches were associated with high technical success and low perioperative complications. Currently, there is a paucity of high-quality data to provide definitive indication. Optimal UEA in terms of side (left versus right) and approach (surgical versus percutaneous) needs further study.

This study sought to identify the factors associated with the occurrence of in-hospital serious adverse events after elective endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in older patients within the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment.Consecutive patients ages ≥75 years who received GORE EXCLUDER AAA Endoprosthesis (W.L. GoreAssociates, Inc, Flagstaff, AZ) for elective EVAR. Based on the age at index elective EVAR, patients were categorized into 3 groups for subsequent analyses: those ages 75 to 79, 80 to 84, and ≥85 years. The primary end points for this study were the incidence of serious adverse events and all-cause mortality. In-hospital complications were defined according to the International Organization for Standardization 14155 standard (https://www.iso.org/standard/71690.html) and considered serious adverse events if they led to any of the following: (1) a life-threatening illness or injury, (2) a permanent impairment of a body structure or a body function, (3) in-patient or prolonged hospitalization, or (4) medical or surgical intervention to prevent life-threatening illness or injury or permanent impairment to a body structure or a body function.Overall, 1,333 older patients (ages 75-79: n = 601; 80-84: n = 474; and ≥85: n = 258) underwent elective EVAR in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment data set and were included in the present analysis. In total, 12 patients (0.9%) died perioperatively, and 103 patients (7.7%) experienced ≥1 in-hospital serious adverse event, with 18 patients (1.3%) experiencing1 in-hospital complications. No significant differences were seen between the age groups in the rates of in-hospital serious adverse events (7.3% vs 8.2% vs 7.8%; P = .86). In logistic regression analysis, a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio = 2.014; 95% confidence interval, 1.215-3.340; P = .006) and prior requirement for dialysis (odds ratio = 4.655; 95% confidence interval, 1.087-19.928; P = .038) resulted as predictors for occurrence of in-hospital serious adverse events. In the whole cohort, the 5-year survival was 63% for patients who did not experience any in-hospital serious adverse events compared with 51% for those who experienced any complications (P = .003). Using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, it was found that the occurrence of in-hospital serious adverse events (hazard ratio = 6.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-21.317; P = .003) and being underweight (hazard ratio = 7.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.371-35.783; P = .019) were the only independent predictors of death in ≤30 days from the initial intervention. Although age did not independently affect the risk for all-cause mortality in ≤180 days after the initial intervention, increasing age was associated with a higher risk for long-term death (ie, ≥181 days from index elective EVAR) in the multivariable analysis (ages 75-79: hazard ratio = 0.379; 95% confidence interval, 0.281-0.512; P.001; and 80-84: hazard ratio = 0.562; 95% confidence interval, 0.419-0.754; P.001).After elective EVAR in older patients (ie, ≥75 years), the occurrence of in-hospital serious adverse events appears to increase the risk of death, particularly in ≤180 days after the initial elective EVAR intervention, and might be related to patient baseline characteristics, including history of pulmonary and renal disease.

OBJECTIVE: To report the mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) following a failed previous endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) or previous open aneurysm repair (pOAR).METHODS: Data from consecutive patients who underwent F-BEVAR for pEVAR or pOAR from 2006-2021 from 17 European vascular centres were analyzed. Endpoints included technical success, major adverse events (MAE), 30-day mortality, and 5-year estimates of survival, target vessel primary patency, freedom from reinterventions, type I/III endoleaks, and sac growth >5 mm.SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Treatment of a failed previous abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is a complex undertaking. F-BEVAR is becoming an increasingly attractive option, although comparative data are limited regarding associated risk factors, indications for treatment, and various outcomes.RESULTS: There were 526 patients included, 268 pOAR and 258 pEVAR. Median time from previous repair to F-BEVAR was 7 (IQR, 4-12) years, 5 (3-8) for pEVAR and 10 (6-14) for pOAR, PCONCLUSIONS: Repair of a failed previous EVAR or OAR is safe and feasible with comparable technical success and survival rates. While successful treatment can be achieved, significant rates of reintervention should be anticipated, particularly for issues related to instability of target vessels/bridging stents.

The advent and refinement of complex endovascular techniques in the last two decades has revolutionized the field of vascular surgery. This has allowed an effective minimally invasive treatment of extensive disease involving the pararenal and the thoracoabdominal aorta. Fenestrated-branched EVAR (F/BEVAR) now represents a feasible technical solution to address these complex diseases, moving the proximal sealing zone above the renal-visceral vessels take-off and preserving their patency. The aim of this paper was to provide a narrative review on the peri-operative management of patients undergoing F/BEVAR procedures for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (JAAA), pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (PRAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurism (TAAA). It will focus on how to prevent, diagnose, and manage the complications ensuing from these complex interventions, in order to improve clinical outcomes. Indeed, F/BEVAR remains a technically, physiologically, and mentally demanding procedure. Intraoperative adverse events often require prolonged or additional procedures and complications may significantly impact a patient’s quality of life, health status, and overall cost of care. The presence of standardized preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative pathways of care, together with surgeons and teams with significant experience in aortic surgery, should be considered as crucial points to improve clinical outcomes. Aggressive prevention, prompt diagnosis and timely rescue of any major adverse events following the procedure remain paramount clinical needs.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to present the short-term and 2-year outcomes after use of the Bentley BeGraft as bridging stent-graft (BSG) for reno-visceral target vessel (TV) during fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) from a contemporary multicentric experience. Methods: A retrospective review of all consecutive patients who underwent elective FEVAR at 7 institutions located in Italy from 2015 to 2021 was performed. The main outcomes of interest for this study were technical success and TV instability, defined in accordance with current reporting standards. Patients’ survival was also assessed. Results: Overall, 81 patients received elective FEVAR during the study period. Mean age of patients was 78 years, and 89% were men. Most patients were treated for a juxta-pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) (68%), and 23% had already received an infrarenal aortic reconstruction. Most endografts had 3-vessel or 4-vessel design (27% and 55%, respectively), and a Cook endograft was used in 73% of cases. Overall, 266 Bentley BeGraft were implanted, of which 44 (16.5%) in the celiac trunk, 69 (26%) in the superior mesenteric artery, 79 (29.5%) in the right renal artery, and 74 (28%) in the left renal artery. Technical success was 94%, with 5 instances of technical failure that were recorded and required an additional intraoperative procedure. The early mortality rate was 4%, and acute kidney injury occurred in 14 cases with 1 requiring definitive hemodialysis. Survival at 6, 12, and 24 months in the overall cohort was 98.8%, 95.3%, and 83.4%, respectively. Freedom from TV instability at 6, 12, and 24 months in the overall cohort was 98.4%, 97.9%, and 97.2%, respectively. Events of TV instability included 3 cases of type 1C endoleak and 3 cases of type 3C endoleak, while no events of BSG fracture or thrombosis were noted. Five out of 6 cases of TV instability occurred in renal arteries, and they were all successfully treated by endovascular means. Conclusions: The data from this multicentric study show favorable short-term and 2-year outcomes of the Bentley BeGraft as BSG for reno-visceral TV during FEVAR, with low rates of TV-related endoleak and no stent occlusion up to 2 years. Clinical Impact The data from this multicentric study show satsfactory outcomes up to two years of follow-up for the Bentley BeGraft when used for brdiging reno-visceral vessels during fenestrated endovascular aortic repair. Further research will be needed to identify predictors of stent-related reinterventions and ascertain the long-term durability.

Background: To define proximal neck dilation (PND) after standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR), determining: incidence and risk factors; evidence base that links PND to outcomes of patients; recurring themes or gaps in the literature. Methods: We performed a scoping review and included only full-text English articles with follow-up focusing on PND in patients undergoing EVAR or FEVAR, published between 2000 and 2022. The following PICO question was used to build the search equation: in patients with abdominal-aortic-aneurysm (AAA) (Population) undergoing endovascular repair (Intervention), what are the incidence, risk factors and prognosis of radiologically defined PND (Comparison) on short-term and long-term outcomes (Outcomes)? Results: 15 articles were included after review. Measurement protocols for proximal aortic neck (PAN) varied among individual studies and the definition of PND resulted as heterogeneous. Rate of patients with a PND ranged between 0% and 41%. Large proximal neck (>28 mm) and excessive graft sizing (30%) were predictors for PND. New endografts with low outward radial forces and FEVAR seemed to be protective. Surgical conversion was the definitive option in the case of patients unfit for other endovascular treatments. Conclusions: PND is a frequent finding after EVAR and FEVAR. Excessive graft oversizing and large baseline PAN were predictors of neck enlargement, independently by the type of standard endograft used. FEVAR may be considered protective against complications, together with endografts using low outward radial forces. Lifelong radiological follow-up is mandatory.

The aim of this study was to develop and validate a risk prediction model for "PREdiction of long-term MortalitY for patients with severe asYmptomatic de-novo carotid StEnosis undergoing Carotid EndArterectomy (PREMYData were collected retrospectively from a dedicated database on consecutive patients who underwent elective CEA for severe (70% according to NASCET criteria) asymptomatic carotid stenosis at two Italian University Hospitals from 2008 through 2016. Internal validation of the score was performed after random sampling in a 3:1 fashion. The primary endpoint of the PREMYA total of 901 patients were included in the derivation cohort while the validation cohort included 313 patients. By performing multivariable logistic regression with backward elimination, a parsimonious model was derived A risk score incorporating 8 risk factors was generated and found to be highly predictive of long-term mortality in the derivation (OR, 1.38; 95% CI 1.28 - 1.41; p0.001) and validation (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.21 -1.37, p0.001) cohorts. The discrimination power in ROC curve analysis was C= 0.775 (95% CI 0.74-.80), while the optimism-corrected AUC in bootstrapped samples was 0.761 (P.001). A strong correlation was found between predicted mortality rates and actual mortality rates in the validation cohort (r = 0.71, p0.001).This study describes development, evaluation, and validation of a risk prediction model (PREMY

To assess the prevalence of atherosclerotic carotid artery disease (ACAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and postoperative cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) and evaluate its prognostic impact on postoperative CVAs.A retrospective review of all consecutive patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis (AVS) who underwent TAVI was conducted at a single tertiary university hospital (January 2008-December 2018). Patients with AVS scheduled for TAVI and concomitant carotid stenosis were evaluated for prophylactic carotid revascularization (carotid endarterectomy [CEA] or carotid artery stenting [CAS]).Seven hundred and seventy one consecutive patients (mean age: 80 years, 52% males) were treated by TAVI procedures. Carotid stenosis70% was detected in 69 patients (9%); it was unilateral in 47 (68%) and bilateral in 22 (32%) patients. Prophylactic carotid revascularization was performed before TAVI in 45 patients (31%): in 63.1% of patients (30/47) with unilateral carotid stenosis70% and in 68.1% (15/22) with bilateral carotid stenosis70%. Postoperative CVA following TAVI procedures were recorded in 25 patients (3.2%): 22 cases of stroke (2.8%) and 3 cases of transient ischemic attack (0.4%). At a multiple logistic regression, only bilateral carotid stenosis70% (odds ratio [OR] 1.16, confidence interval [CI] 95% 1.03-1.31; P = 0.0009) was found as independent predictors of periprocedural CVA.In patients with severe symptomatic AVS undergoing TAVI, carotid stenosis was frequently observed. Unilateral carotid stenosis70% did not show a significant association with early CVA following TAVI. However, in the cohort of patients with bilateral carotid stenosis70%, a significant association with postoperative CVA was observed.

Objective: The aim of this multicentric registry was to assess the outcomes of “anteRior versus posteRior divisional bRanches Of the hYpogastric artery as distAl landing zone for iLiac branch devices (R3OYAL).” Methods: The main exposure of interest for the purpose of this study was the internal iliac artery (IIA) divisional branch (anterior vs posterior) that was used as distal landing zone. Early endpoints included technical success and adverse events. Late endpoints included survival, primary/secondary IIA patency, and IIA branch instability. Results: A total of 171 patients were included in the study, of which 50 received bilateral implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs). This resulted in a total of 221 incorporated IIAs included in the final analysis, of which 40 were anterior divisional branches and 181 were posterior divisional branches. Technical success was high in both groups (anterior division: 98% vs posterior division: 100%, P = .18). Occurrence of any adverse event was noted in 14% of patients in both groups ( P = 1.0). The overall rate of freedom from the composite IBD branch instability did not show significant differences between patients receiving distal landing in the anterior or posterior division of the IIA at 3 years (79% vs 87%, log-rank test = .215). The 3-year estimates of IBD patency were significantly lower in patients who received distal landing in the anterior divisional branch than those who received distal landing in the posterior divisional branch (primary patency: 81% vs 96%, log-rank test = .009; secondary patency: 81% vs 97%, log-rank test < .001). Conclusions: The use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the IIA as distal landing zone for IBD implantation shows comparable profiles in terms of immediate technical success, perioperative safety, and side-branch instability up to 3 years. However, IBD patency at 3 years was higher when the distal landing zone was achieved within the posterior divisional branch of the IIA. Clinical Impact The results from this large multicentric registry confirm that use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the internal iliac artery (IIA) as distal landing zone for implantation of iliac branch devices (IBD) shows comparable profiles of safety and feasibility, thereby allowing to extend the indications for endovascular repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms to cases with unsuitable anatomy within the IIA main trunk. Although mid-term rates of device durability and branch instability seem to be similar, the rates of primary and secondary IBD patency at three years was favored when the distal landing zone was achieved in the posterior divisional branch of the IIA.

Introduction The aim of the study was to evaluate the short-term and mid-term technical and clinical outcomes of the Bolton Treo endograft in subjects with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) requiring endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and assess if presence of hostile proximal neck would represent a risk factor for increased failure rates. Methods A retrospective review of all consecutive patients who had undergone elective or non-elective EVAR with the Bolton Treo endograft at five institutions located in the North-East of Italy (January 2016-December 2020) was performed. The main exposure variable for this study was presence of hostile (HAN) or friendly (FAN) aortic neck. Results A total of 137 consecutive patients were treated with the Bolton Treo endograft at participating institutions; of these 63 (46%) presented HAN while 74 (54%) had FAN. At baseline, no significant differences were observed in the distribution of demographics and comorbidities between study groups. Two type Ia endoleaks (EL) were detected at completion angiography, all in patients with HAN but none in patients with FAN (3% vs 0%, p=.04), but no type III EL were identified in the whole cohort. The median duration of follow-up in the study cohort was 30 months (IQR 22-34 months) and was similar between study groups (p=.87). At three-years, survival estimates were 89% and 91% (p=.82) in patients with HAN and FAN, respectively. At three years, patients with HAN had significantly lower freedom from type IA endoleak as compared with patients with FAN (87% vs 94%, p=.02). No significant differences were found between study groups in the three-year estimates of freedom from reinterventions (80% vs 86%, p=.28). Using cox proportional hazards, presence of type II EL (HR 3.15, 95%CI 1.18-8.5, p=.02) and presence of type IA EL (HR 4.22, 95%CI 1.39-12.85, p=.01) were found as independent predictors for reinterventions in univariate analysis, although they were no longer significant in the multivariate model. Freedom from sac increase >5mm at three years were not significantly different between study groups (92% vs 91%, p=.95). Conclusions Within a contemporary multicentric real-world experience, EVAR with the Bolton Treo endograft shows a satisfactory safety profile in the immediate postoperative phase and acceptable outcomes during mid-term follow-up. Presence of HAN is correlated with development of type Ia EL (either early following stent-graft implantation or late after EVAR) which, in turn, may represent a significant factor leading to reinterventions.

Objective: The aim of present study was to evaluate the prognostic effect of the National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) score for patients who had undergone acute carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and assess the clinical and morphologic factors that could predict for worse outcomes. Methods: The data from 183 consecutive patients who had undergone CEA after ischemic stroke were analyzed from January 2015 to January 2021. The patients were divided into two groups using the NIHSS score cutoff of 4. Functional dependence was assessed at hospital discharge and 90 days after discharge. Results: Of the 183 patients, 102 (55.7%) had had a minor stroke (group A; NIHSS score of ≤4) and 81 (44.3%) had had a moderate to major stroke (group B; NIHSS score >4). Groups A and B showed significant differences in their intracranial anatomic features, including the presence of an incomplete circle of Willis (7.8% vs 17.3%; P = .05), cerebral ischemic lesion volume ≥4000 mm3 (5.9% vs 24.7%; P ≤ .001), and a high Alberta stroke program early computed tomography score of 8 to 10 (75.5% vs 44.4%; P ≤ .001). The overall rate of combined perioperative stroke, myocardial infarction, and death was 1.1%, with no strokes recorded during the interval to CEA. Patients in group A had a lower rate of functional dependence at discharge (4.9% vs 35.8%; P ≤ .001) and at 90 days after the index stroke event (2.5% vs 19.6%; P ≤ .001) compared with those in group B. Using multivariate binary logistic regression, an admission NIHSS score >4 was significantly associated with higher odds of functional dependence at discharge (odds ratio, 7.9; 95% confidence interval, 2.7-18.5; P ≤ .001) and at 90 days (odds ratio, 10.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.7-19.3; P = .002). Conclusions: An NIHSS score >4 at admission increased the risk of a higher modified Rankin scale score at both hospital discharge and 90 days after the index stroke event. Acute CEA was safe and feasible for patients with ischemic stroke, even if they had previously undergone intravenous thrombolysis.

Background: Surgical site infection is 1 of the most frightening complications in vascular surgery due to its high morbimortality. The use of intradermal sutures for skin closure might be associated with a reduction in infections incidence. However, the data available in the literature is scarce and primarily built on low-evidence studies. To our knowledge, no multicenter clinical trial has been published to assess if the intradermal suture is associated with a lower surgical site infection incidence than metallic staples in patients who will undergo revascularization surgery requiring a femoral approach. Methods: VASC-INF is a pragmatic, multicenter, multistate (Spain, Italy, and Greece), randomized, open-label, clinical trial assessing the surgical site infection incidence in patients undergoing revascularization surgery requiring a femoral approach. Patients will be randomized on a 1:1 ratio to intradermal suture closure (experimental group) or to metallic staples closure (control group).The primary outcome is the number (percentage) of patients with surgical site infection (superficial and/or deep) associated with a femoral approach up to 28 (±2) days after surgery. Among the secondary outcomes are the number (percentage) of patients with other surgical wound complications; the number (percentage) of patients with surgical site infections who develop sepsis; type of antibiotic therapy used; type of microorganisms' species isolated and to describe the surgical site infection risk factors. Discussion: Intradermal suture closure may be beneficial in patients undergoing revascularization surgery requiring a femoral approach. Our working hypothesis is that intradermal suture closure reduces the incidence of surgical site infection respect to metallic staples closure.

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.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.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.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.

In the last decades, the field of vascular surgery has been revolutionized by the introduction and ever-rising growth of endovascular techniques, mainly owing to their reduced morbidity and mortality rates as compared with conventional open surgical approaches. However, as for the open surgical approach, peri- and post-procedural complications remain just around the corner to restrain the potential benefit of the endovascular treatment for the patients and dampen the mood of vascular specialists. Complications and failures after invasive procedures may still represent one of the most challenging scenarios that physicians will face in their practice. How to prevent, recognize and manage these instances in a prompt and effective manner is an area of never-ending effort for healthcare practitioners. For the above reasons, it is reasonable to say that the “endovascular revolution” has created a new spectrum of complications and failures, and no safety net exists even after minimally invasive endovascular procedures. Despite the abundance of textbooks devoted to endovascular techniques, there is still a paucity of academic resources that specifically address these challenging scenarios. How to address those complications and failures instances is not commonplace even at major scientific meetings and it is not unusual for many operators to share their complications and failures only privately. Furthermore, clinical trials are not ideally suited to answer these many questions, as the incidence and quality of adverse events will continue to change as new treatment modalities come into play. This book, titled “Complications and failures of endovascular surgery. A practical textbook of diagnosis and treatment” addresses the management of a wide range of early complications and late failures resulting from endovascular treatment of vascular pathologies, thereby providing all physicians involved in endovascular interventions with a concise, yet exhaustive, reference that will conveniently help their everyday practice.

Management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing elective fenestrated branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) is not standardised, nor are there any recommendations from current guidelines. By designing an international expert based Delphi consensus, the study aimed to create recommendations on the pre-, intra-, and post-operative management of antithrombotic therapy in patients scheduled for elective F-BEVAR in high volume centres.Eight facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study topic that were voted on, using a four point Likert scale, by a selected panel of international experts using a three round modified Delphi consensus process. Based on the experts' responses, only those statements reaching Grade A (full agreement ≥ 75%) or B (overall agreement ≥ 80% and full disagreement5%) were included in the final document. The round answers' consistency was graded using Cohen's k, the intraclass correlation coefficient, and, in case of double re-submission, the Fleiss k.Sixty-seven experts were included in the final analysis and voted the initial 43 statements related to pre- (n = 15), intra- (n = 10), and post-operative (n = 18) management of antithrombotic drugs. At the end of the process, six statements (13%) were rejected, 20 statements (44%) received a Grade B consensus, and 18 statements (40%) reached a Grade A consensus. Most statements (27; 71%) exhibited very high or high consistency grades, and 11 (29%) a fair or poor grading. The intra-operative statements mostly concentrated on threshold for and monitoring of proper heparinisation. The pre- and post-operative statements mainly focused on indications for dual antiplatelet therapy and its management, considering the possible need for cerebrospinal fluid drainage.Based on the elevated strength and high consistency of this international expert based Delphi consensus, most of the statements might guide current clinical management of antithrombotic therapy for elective F-BEVAR. Future studies are needed to clarify the debated issues.

Summary Background Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence. Methods ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362. Findings Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86–1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91–1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable. Funding UK Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment Programme.

The aim was to report short and midterm outcomes of a cohort of consecutive patients treated by endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for saccular lesion of the abdominal aorta (sl-AA).This was a multicentre, retrospective, financially unsupported physician initiated, observational cohort study that involved tertiary referral from Italian hospitals. For this study, between January 2010 and December 2020, only those patients treated by EVAR for non-infected sl-AA, namely blister/ulcer like projection and/or penetrating aortic ulcer, were analysed. Primary outcomes of interest were overall survival and freedom from aorta related mortality (ARM).The final cohort included 120 of 3 982 eligible aortic lesions. There were 103 (85.8%) males and 17 (14.2%) females. The median age was 76 years (interquartile range [IQR] 69, 80). Rupture on admission was observed in 10 (8.3%) cases. Early (≤ 30 days) death occurred in two (1.7%) patients. There were five (4.2%) complications requiring surgical re-intervention (iliac limb occlusion n = 4; groin haematoma, n = 1). The median duration of follow up was 20 months (IQR 4, 59.5): the estimated overall survival was 85.5% (standard error [SE] 0.035; 95% confidence interval [CI] 77.3 - 91.1) at 12 months, 78.7% (SE 0.044; 95% CI 69.0 - 86.0) at 36 months, and 74% (SE 0.050; 95% CI 63.2 - 82.5) at 60 months. Only one (0.8%) patient required aortic re-intervention during follow up because of a late endograft infection. The estimated freedom from ARM was 96% (SE 0.050; 95% CI 90.3 - 98.2) at 36 and 60 months. Cox's regression analysis identified that death was associated with age70 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1.10; 95% CI 1.04 - 1.17, p = .001), and coronary artery disease (HR 1.14; 95% CI 1.04 - 1.26, p = .006).EVAR for sl-AA proved to be safe and effective. The mortality rate was low for a group of patients known to be at high risk from open repair, and EVAR remained stable with no ARM during midterm follow up, and an acceptably low 0.8% endograft related re-intervention rate.

After successful endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) sac will undergo negative remodeling (i.e., shrinkage) as a measure of successful exclusion. Determinants of shrinkage after EVAR are not fully known. In 84 post-EVAR patients, time course of AAA diameter after repair and occurrence of endoleaks (ELs) have been correlated with clinical history, medications, anthropometric data, vascular anatomy, and matrix metalloprotease (MMP) genetic variants (namely MMP-1 rs1799750, MMP-3 rs35068180, MMP-9 rs2234681, rs917576, rs917577, MMP-12 rs652438, and TIMP1 rs4898). During follow-up, 41 ELs were detected in 37 patients (44%, 10.4 events/100 pt./y), accounting for AAA dilation or reduced shrinkage (P < .001). High-flow ELs (type 1 and/or 3) occurrence was associated with warfarin use, MMP9 rs17577 polymorphism, and unfavorable anatomy, while low-flow type 2 ELs occurred more often in TIMP1 rs4898 non-T carriers. In EL-free patients, AAA diameter decreased for the first three years, (-4, -3 and - 2 mm/year respectively) and remained stable thereafter. Shrinkage between two measurements (n = 120) was associated with smaller AAA diameter at the baseline, peripheral arterial disease (PAD), patients’ older age at intervention, and G-/G- genotype in MMP1 rs1799750 (binary logistic regression, P = .0001). Aneurysmal sac shrinking occurs for few years after EVAR, only in patients without EL, and is related to older age, PAD, smaller aneurysm size and putative lower MMP1 expression while EL occurrence prevents such a remodeling and is mainly related to local-acting factors like unfavorable anatomy, anticoagulation, and MMP9 and TIMP1 genetic polymorphisms.

Summary: Background: The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic interaction between age and sex on peri-operative and follow-up outcomes following elective carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis. Patients and methods: A retrospective review of all patients admitted to a single vascular unit who underwent elective CEA between January, 2015 and December, 2019 was performed. The primary endpoints of the study were overall survival (from index operation) and cumulative stroke rate at thirty days. Results: A total of 383 consecutive patients were included in this study; of these 254 (66.4%) were males. At baseline, males were younger (mean age 73.4±11 vs. 76.3±10 years, p=.01) and with lower proportion of octogenarians (20.4% vs. 28.7%, p=.05). The rate of stroke in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (males vs. females) were as follows: a) whole cohort 1.9% vs. 2% (p=1.00) and 2.7% vs. 1.3% (p=.66), respectively; b) ≥80 years old 3.7% vs. 0% (p=1.00) and 4% vs. 5.9% (p=1.00), respectively; c)

Made available in DSpace on 2022-04-28T19:47:00Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2021-10-01 Introduction: Aortic graft infection remains a considerable clinical challenge, and it is unclear which variables are associated with adverse outcomes among patients undergoing partial resection. Methods: A retrospective, multi-institutional study of patients who underwent partial resection of infected aortic grafts from 2002 to 2014 was performed using a standard database. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, operative, and postoperative variables were recorded. The primary outcome was mortality. Descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis, and Cox regression analysis were performed. Results: One hundred fourteen patients at 22 medical centers in 6 countries underwent partial resection of an infected aortic graft. Seventy percent were men with median age 70 years. Ninety-seven percent had a history of open aortic bypass graft: 88 (77%) patients had infected aortobifemoral bypass, 18 (16%) had infected aortobiiliac bypass, and 1 (0.8%) had an infected thoracic graft. Infection was diagnosed at a median 4.3 years post-implant. All patients underwent partial resection followed by either extra-anatomic (47%) or in situ (53%) vascular reconstruction. Median follow-up period was 17 months (IQR 1, 50 months). Thirty-day mortality was 17.5%. The KM-estimated median survival from time of partial resection was 3.6 years. There was no significant survival difference between those undergoing in situ reconstruction or extra-anatomic bypass (P = 0.6). During follow up, 72% of repairs remained patent and 11% of patients underwent major amputation. On univariate Cox regression analysis, Candida infection was associated with increased risk of mortality (HR 2.4; P = 0.01) as well as aortoenteric fistula (HR 1.9, P = 0.03). Resection of a single graft limb only to resection of abdominal (graft main body) infection was associated with decreased risk of mortality (HR 0.57, P = 0.04), as well as those with American Society of Anesthesiologists classification less than 3 (HR 0.35, P = 0.04). Multivariate analysis did not reveal any factors significantly associated with mortality. Persistent early infection was noted in 26% of patients within 30 days postoperatively, and 39% of patients were found to have any post-repair infection during the follow-up period. Two patients (1.8%) were found to have a late reinfection without early persistent postoperative infection. Patients with any post-repair infection were older (67 vs. 60 years, P = 0.01) and less likely to have patent repairs during follow up (59% vs. 32%, P = 0.01). Patients with aortoenteric fistula had a higher rate of any post-repair infection (63% vs. 29%, P < 0.01) Conclusion: This large multi-center study suggests that patients who have undergone partial resection of infected aortic grafts may be at high risk of death or post-repair infection, especially older patients with abdominal infection not isolated to a single graft limb, or with Candida infection or aortoenteric fistula. Late reinfection correlated strongly with early persistent postoperative infection, raising concern for occult retained infected graft material. University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center University of California Los Angeles SSM Healthcare Semmelweis University Keck School of Medicine University of Southern California University of North Carolina School of Medicine University of Arizona the Indiana University Health Physicians Vascular Surgery Michigan Medicine University of Michigan University Heart Center Hamburg University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf Penn State Heart and Vascular Institute Milton S. Hershey Medical Center Johns Hopkins Hospital The Heart Hospital Baylor Plano the Cardiovascular Surgery Clinic University of Messina National & Kapodistrian University of Athens University of Patras Keio University University of Pennsylvania Vancouver General Hospital & University of British Columbia Mayo Clinic Christiana Health System University of Chicago Harborview Medical Center University of Washington Washington University Stanford University CHU de Poitiers Baylor College of Medicine MedStar Georgetown University Hospital SSM Health St. Louis University Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu-Unesp Beth Israel Deaconness Medical Center Brigham and Women's Hospital St. Joseph's Hospital Massachusetts General Hospital Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Rutgers University Vita-Salute University School of Medicine San Raffaele Scientific Institute Kaiser Permanente University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen Freiburg University of Virginia Medical Center University of Siena Kyung Hee University Gustave Dron Hospital Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Norte Wexner Medical Center Ohio State University Uppsala University University Hospital of Trieste University Hospital of Verona University Hospital of Padova University of Alabama University of California Davis University of Florida Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery Baylor College of Medicine University Hospital University of Missouri Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu-Unesp

Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is the second leading cause of death from blunt trauma. In the present study, we aimed to determine the outcomes of medical management (MM) for BTAI. We hypothesized from the results of several previously reported studies, that patients with a minimal aortic injury (BTAI grades 1 and 2) could safely be treated with definitive MM alone.The Aortic Trauma Foundation international prospective multicenter registry was used to examine the demographics, injury characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with BTAI. We analyzed a subset of patients for whom MM was initiated as definitive therapy.From November 2016 to April 2020, 432 patients (median age, 41 years; 76% male; median injury severity score, 34) with BTAI (Society for Vascular Surgery grade 1, 23.6%; grade 2, 14.4%; grade 3, 51.2%; grade 4, 10.9%) were evaluated. Of the 432 patients, 245 (57%) had received MM in the initial period and 114 (26.4%) had received MM as the planned definitive therapy (grade 1, 59.6%; grade 2, 23.7%; grade 3, 15.8%; grade 4, 0.9%). The most common mechanism of BTAI was a motor vehicle collision (60.4%). Hypotension was present on arrival in 74 patients (17.2%). Continuous titratable infusion of antihypertensive medication was used for 49.1%, followed by intermittent bolus administration (29.8%), with beta-blockers (74.6%) the most common agent used. Treatments were targeted to a goal systolic blood pressure for 83.3%, most often to a target goal systolic blood pressure120 mm Hg (66.3%). The MM goals based on blood pressure control were attained in 64.0% (73 of 114). Twelve patients (10.5%; grade 1, 1; grade 2, 0; grade 3, 10; grade 4, 1) had required subsequent intervention after MM. Eleven patients (9.6%) had undergone thoracic endovascular aortic repair and one (0.9%) had required open repair for a grade 4 injury. The overall in-hospital mortality for patients selected for definitive MM was 7.9%. No aortic-related deaths had occurred in the patients receiving definitive MM.Approximately one in four patients with BTAI will receive MM as definitive therapy. The variation in the pharmacologic therapies used is considerable. MM for patients with minimal aortic injury (BTAI grades 1 and 2) is safe and effective, with a low overall intervention rate and no aortic-related deaths. These findings support the use of definitive MM for grade 2 BTAI.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to present a narrative review on endovascular techniques (ET) for revascularization of the left subclavian artery (LSA) during zone 2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and on risk factors for postoperative stroke following TEVAR procedures. METHODS Non-systematic search of the literature from the PubMed, Ovid and Scopus databases to identify relevant English-language articles fully published in the period 1 January 2010–1 August 2020. RESULTS Current general agreement is that LSA revascularization should be always attempted in the elective setting. Under urgent circumstances, it can be delayed but might be considered during the same session on a case-by-case basis. Three ET are currently available: (i) chimney/snorkels (also known as parallel grafts), (ii) fenestrations or branches and (iii) proximal scallops. The main issue with ET is the potential for increased peri-operative stroke risk owing to increased manipulation within the aortic arch. Also, they are relatively novel and further assessment of their long-term durability is needed. Intra-operative embolism and loss of left vertebral artery perfusion are hypothesized as the main causes of stroke in patients undergoing TEVAR. CONCLUSIONS The overall risk of stroke seems higher without LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR. As LSA revascularization might have a direct effect in preventing posterior stroke, it should be routinely performed in elective cases, while a case-by-case evaluation can be made under urgent circumstances. While ET can provide effective options for LSA revascularization during zone 2 TEVAR, they are novel and need further durability assessment. Stroke after TEVAR is a multifactorial pathological process and preventing TEVAR-related cerebral injury remains a significant unmet clinical need.

N/A

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of the coronavirus 2019 pandemic on elective and acute thoracic aortic surgery in the Netherlands. METHODS The Netherlands Heart Registration database was used to compare the volume of elective and acute surgery on the thoracic aorta in 2019 and 2020, starting from week 11 in both years. A sub-analysis was done to assess the impact of the pandemic on high-volume and low-volume aortic centres. RESULTS During the pandemic, the number of elective thoracic aortic operations declined by 18% [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.82 [0.73–0.91]; P < 0.01]. The decline in volume of elective surgery was significant in both high-volume (IRR 0.82 [0.71–0.94]; P < 0.01) and low-volume aortic centres (IRR 0.81 [0.68–0.98]; P = 0.03). The overall number of acute aortic operations during the pandemic remained similar to that in 2019 (505 vs 499; P = 0.85), but an increased share of these operations occurred at high-volume centres. The number of acute operations performed in high-volume centres increased by 20% (IRR 1.20 [1.01–1.42]; P = 0.04), while the number of acute operations performed in low-volume centres decreased by 17% (IRR 0.83 [0.69–1.00]; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS The coronavirus 2019 pandemic led to a significant decrease in elective thoracic aortic surgery but did not cause a change in the volume of acute thoracic aortic surgery in the Netherlands. Moreover, the pandemic led to a centralization of care for acute thoracic aortic surgery., The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted the delivery of health care around the world.

Objectives The aim of the study is to report the early and mid-term outcomes of late open conversion (LOC) after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) using the “New Aortic Carrefour Technique” (NACT) for preservation of the stent-graft iliac limbs. Late conversions were defined as explants >6 months after previous EVAR. Methods Patients treated for elective or urgent LOC after EVAR with the “New Aortic Carrefour Technique” at a single centre (2009-2019), and with ≥6 months of follow-up, were included. Briefly, after completing the proximal aortic anastomosis, the endograft iliac limbs were truncated and sutured together in order to create a “new aortic-carrefour” (Veraldi’s technique). A Dacron knitted straight graft was therefore sutured to the newly created aortic bifurcation. Outcomes of interest were: immediate technical success, intraoperative characteristics and reinterventions. Results are reported as number (and percentages) or median (and interquartile range, IQR). Results During the study preiod, 433 patients underwent standard EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and 20 underwent LOC. Of these, 9 consecutive patients were deemed suitable and treated with NACT. The indication for conversion was endoleak in 6 (type IA n=1, type II n=4, type III n=1), complete graft thrombosis (n=2), and one case of sac enlargement without any clear signs of endoleak at computed tomography angiogram (CTA). Of these cases, six were treated electively while three were treated in urgent setting including one case of rupture. Median procedure, aortic cross-clamping and distal anastomosis times were 280 minutes (IQR 225-290), 24 minutes (IQR 22-29) and 15 minutes (IQR 14-18), respectively. Median blood loss was 1600 mL (IQR 700-1900) and median hospital stay was 8 days (IQR 7-12). None of the patients died, neither required unplanned re-intervention within 30 days. At a median imaging follow-up of 13 months (IQR 8-43), there were no reinterventions due to residual leaks or technical defects. One patient died during follow-up and recorded cause of deaths was heart failure. Conclusion Use of the NACT with preservation of the original endograft iliac limbs for LOC after EVAR is a safe and feasible technique, which results in low peri-operative morbidity and mortality rate in selected patients. The technique is effective during mid-term follow-up and might represent a valuable tool to expand the armamentarium of vascular surgeons for surgical regrafting after EVAR.