Search

Summary: Background: Peripheral artery disease presents an increasing healthcare burden worldwide. Day-case angioplasty in a secondary care setting can be a safe and effective means of meeting the growing demand for lower limb revascularisation. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of a day-case-based angioplasty service in a UK district general hospital. Patients and methods: Consecutive patients undergoing endovascular revascularisation between August 2018–February 2020 were analysed retrospectively. All patients were discussed at a multi-disciplinary (diabetic foot) team meeting following a day case algorithm. Patient and procedural characteristics, technical success, peri-procedural complications, and 30-day outcome of day-case angioplasties were compared with those requiring overnight stay or were hospitalized. Results: Fifty-seven percent of 138 patients were diabetic, mean age 75 ± 12 years, 95% had critical limb ischaemia (Fontaine III 12%, IV 83%), and baseline ankle brachial pressure index [ABPI] 0.40 ± 0.30. Sixty-three patients (45%) were treated as planned day cases, 21 (15%) required overnight admission for social indications. Fifteen (11%) were planned admissions with the need for sequential debridement procedures, and 39 (28%) were already hospitalised at the time of referral to the vascular service. The overall technical success was 92% and not successful procedures mainly occurred in patients > 80 years. The ABPI increased at the initial follow-up to 0.84 ± 0.18. Fifty-three percent required treatment of > 1 level, 80% included recanalisations of chronic total occlusions, and average total lesion length was 133 ± 90 mm. Closure devices were employed in all cases. There were no major peri-procedural complications. A single minor access-site related bleeding episode (0.8%) occurred, requiring 24 h observation in hospital. While significantly more wounds had closed in out-patients, the mortality, major amputation and target lesion revascularization did not differ between groups. Conclusions: Safe and effective day-case-based angioplasty can be provided in a secondary care setting for patients with critical limb ischaemia needing complex multi-level procedures.

An aberrant right subclavian artery (ARSA) arising from a left-sided aortic arch is the fourth most common aortic arch anomaly. Aneurysmal dilatation of the ARSA requires treatment because of the associated risk of rupture. We present a case where supra-aortic bypass of the arch vessels was performed to facilitate exclusion of the aneurysm by a thoracic aortic stent graft.

Introduction The effectiveness of percutaneous access with large vessel closure (pEVR) in non-selective groups of patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVR) remains unclear. This study aims to identify factors that predict success in pEVR, performed using percutaneous access and the Prostar XL (Abbott Vascular, Redwood City, Calif) closure device. Method Consecutive patients who underwent pEVR between April 2010 and March 2011 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Procedural and postoperative outcomes were compared with consecutive patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair using standard open femoral access between April 2008 and March 2009. To determine the predictors of technical success of pEVR, the association between clinical, anatomical and procedural variables with technical success, were examined in a multiple logistic regression model. Results pEVR was attempted in 186 common femoral arteries (CFAs) with a technical success rate of 95.2% (177/186). Conventional open femoral access in the historic control group was performed in 208 CFAs. pEVR was associated with a reduced operation length (131 min [105–152] versus 150 min [124–195], p ≤0.001) and length of stay (2 days [2–5] versus 4 days [2–7], p = 0.01) in patients undergoing infrarenal EVR. In secondary analysis of outcomes following percutaneous access in 91 CFAs, pre-operative renal failure, CFA depth (min and max), CFA diameter (min and max) and operator experience predicted success of percutaneous access in univariate analysis. Operator experience was the only independent predictor of technical success ( p = 0.05) after adjustment for all confounding variables. Conclusion pEVR using the Prostar XL device is effective in the majority of patients. In this study there were benefits in terms of reduced postoperative complications, shorter procedures and decreased lengths of stay. Operator experience is a predictor of technical success for pEVR, irrespective of clinical and morphological characteristics at baseline.

The effect of suprarenal fixation of endovascular grafts on renal and visceral artery function remains undefined. This study aimed to determine renal and visceral artery complications following suprarenal fixation during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVR). Prospectively collected data from 112 patients who received suprarenal fixation (group SF) and 36 patients who received infrarenal fixation (group IF) in a single institution from December 1997 to April 2005 were reviewed retrospectively. Median follow-up was 26 months (range 0.1–101 months). Stent struts extended to or above the level of 106 (94.6%) right renal arteries, 104 (92.9%) left renal arteries, 49 (43.8%) superior mesenteric arteries (SMA), and 7 (6.3%) celiac arteries in group SF. This group had 2 (1.8%) unintentional main renal artery occlusions, of which 1 was successfully treated at the first procedure with a renal stent. There was 1 (0.9%) SMA occlusion which resulted in bowel infarction and death. Group IF had no renal or visceral artery complications. There were no late-onset occlusions or infarcts. There was no significant difference in median serum creatinine between groups SF and IF at 1 month (p = 0.18) and 6 months to 12 months (p = 0.22) follow-up. The change in serum creatinine over time was also not significantly different within each group (SF, p = 0.09; IF, p = 0.38). In this study, suprarenal fixation was associated with a very small incidence of immediate renal and visceral artery occlusion. There did not appear to be any medium-term sequelae of suprarenal fixation.

The principal anatomic contraindication to endovascular aneurysm repair (EVR) is an unfavorable proximal aortic neck. With increasing experience, a greater proportion of patients with unfavorable neck anatomy are being offered EVR. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes in patients with challenging proximal aortic neck anatomy.Prospectively collected data from 147 consecutive patients who underwent EVR between December 1997 and April 2005 were supplemented with a retrospective review of medical records and radiological images. Unfavorable anatomic features were defined as neck diameter28 mm, angulation60 degrees, circumferential thrombus50%, and length10 mm. Eighty-seven patients with 0 adverse features (good necks) were compared with 60 patients with one or more adverse features (hostile necks).Comparing the good neck with the hostile neck group, there were no significant differences in the incidence of primary technical success (p = 0.15), intraoperative adjunctive procedures (p = 0.22), early proximal type I endoleak (30 days) (p = 1.0), late proximal type I endoleak (30 days) (p = 0.57), distal type I endoleak (p = 0.40), type III endoleak (p = 0.51), secondary interventions (p = 1.0), aneurysm sac expansion (p = 0.44), or 30 day mortality (p = 0.70). The good neck group had a significantly increased incidence of type II endoleak (p = 0.023). By multivariate analysis, the incidence of intraoperative adjunctive procedures was significantly increased in the presence of severe angulation (p = 0.041, OR 3.08, 95% CI 1.05-9.04).Patients with severely hostile proximal aortic neck anatomy may be treated with EVR, although severely angulated necks require additional intraoperative procedures. Early outcomes are encouraging and suggest that indications for EVR may be expanded to include patients with hostile neck anatomy.

Background Junctional vascular trauma such as that at the thoracic outlet poses particular challenges in surgical management. The use of endovascular techniques for such injuries is attractive as repair may be facilitated without the need for thoracotomy; however, the utility of such techniques is currently based on opinion, small retrospective series, and literature reviews of narrative and not systematic quality. The objective of this study is to provide a complete and systematic analysis of the literature pertaining to open surgery (OS) and endovascular management (EM) of thoracic outlet vascular injuries. Methods An electronic search using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index, and LILACS databases was performed for articles published from 1947 to November 2011. The review conformed to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement standards. Prospective studies and retrospective cohorts of more than 10 patients were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Results One prospective noncomparative study and 73 retrospective series met the inclusion criteria. There were no randomized studies. All studies were at high risk of bias. Fifteen studies described outcomes for both OS and EM (549 patients). The majority of these studies described EM for traumatic arteriovenous fistulas or false aneurysms in stable patients. Direct comparison between OS and EM was possible in only three studies (comprising 23 OS and 25 EM patients), which showed no difference in all-cause mortality (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-4.05), but a shorter operating time with EM (mean difference = 58.34 minutes; 95% CI, 17.82-98.85). These three series included successful EM of unstable patients and those with vessel transection. There were 55 studies describing only OS (2057 patients) with a pooled mortality rate of 12.4% (95% CI, 9.9%-15.2%). Four studies described only EM (101 patients) with a pooled mortality rate of 26% (95% CI, 8%-51%), but these represented a distinct subgroup of cases (mainly iatrogenic injuries in older patients). Conclusions The current evidence is weak and fails to show superiority of one modality over the other. EM is currently used primarily in highly selected cases, but there are reports of a broader applicability in trauma. High-quality randomized studies or large-scale registry data are needed to further comment on the relative merits or disadvantages of EM in comparison to OS.

In 40 patients with superficial femoral artery disease we prospectively evaluated the effect of angioplasty ( n = 20) or femoropopliteal bypass ( n = 20) on the ankle-brachial pressure index (ABI) using the Doppler ultrasound probe. The ABI was measured as a baseline 1 day before the procedure, 1 day after the procedure and 30 days later. In the angioplasty group the baseline ABI was 0.57 (0.11), increasing to 0.74 (0.26) 1 day postangioplasly and increasing further to 0.88 (0.26) after 30 days. The increase in ABI over 30 days was significantly greater than the increase over 1 day. In the femoropopliteal bypass group the baseline ABI was lower at 0.46 (0.17). However 1 day postoperatively it had increased to 0.92 (0.2) with almost no further increase at 30 days [0.95 (0.17)]. We concluded that by contrast to a surgical bypass where there was a large improvement in the ABI over the first day, the ABI following angioplasty continued to improve significantly beyond the first day.