A single-centre experience of 200 consecutive unselected patients in percutaneous EVAR

Investigating the effects of percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm on the lumen size of the common femoral artery

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) is the definitive therapy of choice for abdominal aortic aneurysms worldwide. However, current literature regarding the anatomic changes in the common femoral artery (CFA) post-PEVAR is sparse and contradictory, and a significant proportion of these studies did not control for the potential confounding effects of ethnicity. Thus, this study aims to investigate the anatomical effects of PEVAR on the CFA using an Asian study cohort.

METHODS

Between January 2019 and September 2023, the records of 113 patients who received PEVAR were reviewed. Groins with previous surgical interventions were excluded. The most proximate pre- and postoperative CT angiography of patients receiving PEVAR via the Perclose ProGlide™ Suture-Mediated Closure System were retrospectively analysed for changes in both the CFA inner luminal diameter (ID) and outer diameter (OD), the latter also encompassing the arterial walls. Access site complications within 3 months post-PEVAR were also recorded per patient.

RESULTS

One hundred seventeen groins from 60 patients were included in this study, with 1 report of pseudoaneurysm. The CFA ID exhibited a 0.167 mm decrease (p-value = 0.0403), while the OD decreased by 0.247 mm (p-value = 0.0107). This trend persisted when the data was separately analysed with the common cardiovascular risk factors of diabetes mellitus, hypertension and hyperlipidaemia.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in the CFA diameters post-PEVAR. However, the percentage changes were below established flow-limiting values, as reflected by the single access site complication reported. Hence, our findings give confidence in the safety profile of this procedure, even with the reported smaller baseline CFA lumen size in Asians. Moving forward, similar longer-term studies should be considered to characterise any late postoperative effects.

Optimizing Femoral Access in Emergency EVAR with a Decision-Making Algorithm

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the preferred approach over open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) due to its minimally invasive nature. The common femoral artery (CFA) is the main access vessel for EVAR, with both surgical exposure and percutaneous access being utilized. However, in emergent cases, percutaneous access can be challenging and may result in complications such as bleeding or dissection thrombosis, leading to the need for surgical conversion. This study aimed to share experiences in implementing a decision-making algorithm to reduce surgical conversions due to percutaneous access failures. A total of 74 aortic patients treated with EVAR in emergency settings were included in this retrospective study. This study focused on various outcomes such as perioperative mortality, morbidity, procedure time, surgical exposure time, and surgical conversion rate. After the implementation of the decision-making algorithm, decreases in surgical conversions and operating time were observed. Percutaneous access was found to be more challenging in cases with specific anatomical characteristics of the CFA, such as severe atherosclerosis or smaller vessel diameter. This study highlighted the importance of carefully assessing patient anatomical features and utilizing a decision-making algorithm to optimize outcomes in EVAR procedures. Further research is needed to continue improving practices for managing aortic aneurysms and reducing complications in femoral artery access approaches.

The Safety and Effectiveness of the Prostar XL Closure Device Compared to Open Groin Cutdown for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of percutaneous femoral closure with the Prostar XL for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) to those of open femoral cutdown, and to evaluate factors which may predict the failure of percutaneous closure.

METHODS

Patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm between 2005 and 2013 were included. Patient characteristics, anatomic femoral artery measurements, and postoperative complications were recorded retrospectively. Operator experience was defined with a cut-off point of >30 Prostar XL closures performed. Comparisons were made per access site.

RESULTS

A total of 443 access sites were included, with percutaneous closure used in 257 cases (58.0%) and open cutdown in 186 cases (42.0%). The complication rate was 2.7% for the percutaneous and 4.3% for the open cutdown group (P = .482). No significant differences between groups were found with respect to 30-day mortality, wound infections, thrombosis, seromas, or bleeding complications. Fourteen failures (5.4%) of percutaneous closure occurred. The success rates were similar for experienced and unexperienced operators (94.2% vs 95.5%, P = .768). Renal insufficiency was more common in the failed than in the successful percutaneous closure group (64.3% vs 24.7%, P = .003). Common femoral artery calcification or diameter, BMI, sheath size, or operator experience did not predict failure. No further complications were seen in follow-up CT at 1-3 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

The use of the Prostar XL is safe compared to open cutdown. The success rate is 94.6%. Operator experience, sheath size, obesity, or femoral artery diameter or calcification do not appear to predict a failure of percutaneous closure. Complications seem to occur perioperatively, and late complications are rare.

Fascia Suture Technique and Suture-mediated Closure Devices: Systematic Review

Background  The aim of the present study is to review the available data on suture-mediated closure devices (SMCDs) and fascia suture technique (FST), which are alternatives for minimizing the invasiveness of percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (p-EVAR) and reduce the complications related to groin dissections. Methods  The Medline, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane library - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for publications regarding SMCD and FST between January 1999 and December 2016. Results  We review 37 original articles, 30 referring to SMCDs (Prostar XL and Proglide), which included 3,992 patients, and 6 articles referring to FST, which include 426 patients. The two techniques are compared only in one article (100 patients). The two types of SMCDs were Prostar and Proglide. In most studies on SMCDs, the reported technical success rates were between 89 and 100%, but the complication rates varied greatly between 0 and 25%. Concerning FST, the technical success rates were also high, ranging between 87 and 99%. However, intraoperative complication rates ranged between 1.2 and 13%, whereas postoperative complication rates varied from 0.9 to 6.2% for the short-term and from 1.9 to 13.6% for the long-term. Conclusions  SMCDs and FST seem to be effective and simple methods for closing common femoral artery (CFA) punctures after p-EVAR. FST can reduce the access closure time and the procedural costs with a quite short learning curve, whereas it can work as a bailout procedure for failed SMCDs suture. The few failures of the SMCDs and FST that may occur due to bleeding or occlusion can easily be managed.

Totally Percutaneous Access Using Perclose Proglide for Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Diseases

Objective

To evaluate our experience following the introduction of a percutaneous program for endovascular treatment of aortic diseases using Perclose Proglide® assessing efficacy, complications and identification of potential risk factors that could predict failure or major access site complications.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study during a two-year period was performed. All the patients submitted to totally percutaneous endovascular repair (PEVAR) of aortic diseases and transcatheter aortic valve implantation since we started the total percutaneous approach with the preclosure technique from November 2013 to December 2015 were included in the study. The primary endpoint was major ipsilateral access complication, defined according to PEVAR trial.

Results

In a cohort of 123 patients, immediate technical success was obtained in 121 (98.37%) patients, with only two (0.82%) cases in 242 vascular access sites that required intervention immediately after the procedure. Pairwise comparisons revealed increased major access complication among patients with >50% common femoral artery (CFA) calcification vs. none (P=0.004) and > 50% CFA calcification vs. < 50% CFA calcification (P=0.002). Small artery diameter (<6.5 mm) also increased major access complication compared to bigger diameters (> 6.5 mm) (P=0.027).

Conclusion

The preclosure technique with two Perclose Proglide® for PEVAR is safe and effective. Complications occur more often in patients with unfavorable access site anatomy and the success rate can be improved with proper patient selection.

Percutaneous versus femoral cutdown access for endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Prior studies suggest that percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (pEVAR) offers significant operative and postoperative benefits compared with femoral cutdown (cEVAR). National data on this topic, however, are limited. We compared patient selection and outcomes for elective pEVAR and cEVAR.

METHODS

We identified all patients undergoing either pEVAR (bilateral percutaneous access, whether successful or not) or cEVAR (at least one planned groin cutdown) for abdominal aortic aneurysms from January 2011 to December 2013 in the Targeted Vascular data set from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Emergent cases, ruptures, cases with an iliac conduit, and cases with a preoperative wound infection were excluded. Groups were compared by χ(2) test or t-test or the Mann-Whitney test where appropriate.

RESULTS

We identified 4112 patients undergoing elective EVAR, 3004 cEVAR patients (73%) and 1108 pEVAR patients (27%). Of all EVAR patients, 26% had bilateral percutaneous access; 1.0% had attempted percutaneous access converted to cutdown (4% of pEVARs); and the remainder had a planned cutdown, 63.9% bilateral and 9.1% unilateral. There were no significant differences in age, gender, aneurysm diameter, or prior open abdominal surgery. Patients undergoing cEVAR were less likely to have congestive heart failure (1.5% vs 2.4%; P = .04) but more likely to undergo any concomitant procedure during surgery (32% vs 26%; P < .01) than patients undergoing pEVAR. Postoperatively, pEVAR patients had shorter operative time (mean, 135 vs 152 minutes; P < .01), shorter length of stay (median, 1 day vs 2 days; P < .01), and fewer wound complications (2.1% vs 1.0%; P = .02). On multivariable analysis, the only predictor of percutaneous access failure was performance of any concomitant procedure (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-4.0; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, one in four patients treated at Targeted Vascular National Surgical Quality Improvement Program centers are getting pEVAR, which is associated with a high success rate, shorter operation time, shorter length of stay, and fewer wound complications compared with cEVAR.