Outcomes of upper access with surgical exposure of the axillary artery in fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair

New Preloaded System for Renal and Visceral Arteries in Fenestrated Endografting

AIM/BACKGROUND

The New Preloaded System (NPS) for renal/visceral arteries (TVVs) is an emerging technology in fenestrated endografting (FEVAR) that allows TVVs cannulation and stenting through the same access of the endograft main body. However, only few preliminary experiences are currently available in the literature. The aim of this study is to report the outcomes of NPS-FEVAR in juxta/para-renal (J/P-AAAs) and thoracoabdominal (TAAAs) aneurysms repair.

METHODS

This is a prospective (NCT05224219), single-center/observational study of patients submitted to NPS-FEVAR for J/PAAAs and TAAAs between 2019 and 2022 (July). Definitions and outcomes were evaluated according to the current SVS-reporting standard. Technical success (TS) and TS preloaded related, spinal cord ischemia (SCI), and 30-day mortality were assessed as early endpoints. Survival, freedom from reinterventions (FFRs), and freedom from TTVs-instability (FFTVVs-instability) were analyzed during follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 157 F/B-EVAR cases, 74 (47%) NPS-FEVAR were planned and enrolled in the study [48 (65%) J/P-AAAs; 26 (35%) TAAAs]. The main indication for NPS-FEVAR was the presence of a hostile iliac axis (54%-73%) or the necessity of expeditious pelvic/lower-limb reperfusion for SCI prevention in TAAAs (20%-27%). Overall, 292 TVVs were accommodated by 289 fenestrations and 3 branches; 188 of 289 (65%) fenestrations were preloaded. NPS-FEVAR configuration was from "below" and "from below to above" in 28 (38%) and 46 (62%) cases, respectively. TS and TS preloaded system-related was 96% (71/74) and 99% (73/74), respectively. Target visceral vessels patency at the completion angiography was 99% (290/292). Failures were 2 renal arteries loss and 1 massive bleeding from a percutaneous closure system breakage. The latter patient developed postoperative multiorgans failure and died on the fifth postoperative day, causing only 30-day/in-hospital mortality (1.3%). One (1.3%) patient with a JAAA and preoperative bilateral occlusion of the hypogastric arteries suffered SCI. The median follow-up was 14 (IQR: 8) months. The estimated 3-year survival was 91% with no aneurysm-related mortality during follow-up. The estimated 3-year FFR and FFTVVs-instability were 85 and 92%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

New preloaded system FEVAR is a safe and effective option in the treatment of J/PAAAs and TAAAs in the presence of hostile iliac access or to guarantee an expeditious pelvic/lower limb reperfusion, leading to satisfactory results in terms of TS, early and mid-term clinical outcomes.Clinical ImpactNew preloaded system for fenestrated and branched endografting allows to increase the feasibility of the advanced endovascular aortic repair in challenging iliac access, thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair and reduce difficulties in target visceral vessels cannulation.

Complications and Technical Success on Upper Limb Vascular Access for Endovascular Repair of Complex Abdominal and Thoraco-abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Catheterization of target vessels (TV) represented by renal visceral vessels are the crucial aspect during fenestrated and branched endovascular repair. This study aims to assess the efficacy and complications associated with upper limb catheterization during complex aneurysm endovascular surgery repair.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted after Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, involving a search across PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Primary endpoint was represented by 30-day stroke. Secondary endpoints were target vessels' (TVs) technical success, 30-day mortality, and local access-related complications. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Sixteen observational studies encompassing 4,137 patients were included. The 30-day stroke incidence for upper limb access was 1.4% (95% CI 1.0-1.8%), which was slightly higher than lower limb, despite not statistically significant. Mortality varied between 0 and 6.8%, and local access-related complications occurred in 3.2% (95% CI 1.9-4.4%). Technical success in TV catheterization was 99.2% (95% CI 98.4-100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate the safety and efficacy of upper limb access for Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair (f/b-EVAR), with low stroke risk, mortality rates, and minimal local complications. Despite the risk of bias, the findings suggest that upper limb access may be beneficial, especially in bailout situations when femoral access fails, offering valuable insights for clinical decision-making.

Initial Experience of the Covered Endovascular Reconstruction of Iliac Bifurcation Technique

INTRODUCTION

The distal landing zone in iliac arteries represents an important issue during endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR). The aim of this study is to present a case series for landing in the external iliac artery (EIA) during EVAR while preserving blood flow in the internal iliac artery (IIA) with the covered endovascular reconstruction of the iliac bifurcation (CERIB) technique.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients that underwent EVAR either for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) or previous failed EVAR from December 2022 up to September 2023. Indications for treatment were presence of common iliac artery aneurysm (CIAA), short CIA, or endoleak type Ib (ETIb). For the distal sealing zone, we used balloon-expandable covered stent (BXCS). Primary outcomes were technical success and first-month patency rate. Secondary outcomes were endoleak and re-intervention rate.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients being treated with 20 CERIBs were included in the study. Four patients had a previous failed EVAR, while 3 patients were treated urgently for a symptomatic para-renal aneurysm. The indications for treatment were EIb (n=2), short CIA (n=4), CIAA with narrow lumen (n=3), and CIA aneurysm (n=11). Platforms that were used were the Cook Zenith Alpha (n=5), Gore C3 (n=2 and 3 limbs), Endurant IIs (n=2, and 3 limbs), and a t-branch device (n=3). Technical success rate was 100% with no adjunctive procedure. No death or re-intervention was recorded for all patients at postoperative 30-day period and at 6 months for 2 patients. At first-month CTA, patency rate was 100% (20/20), while in 2 patients that had 6-month CTA, the patency was also 100% (2/2). No kinking or stenosis was also noted. Two patients had ETIII after branched EVAR (BEVAR), 2 patients had ETII, and 1 patient had gutter ET in the area of the CERIB.

CONCLUSION

The CERIB technique seems to be effective and safe in the early period. It is suitable with a variety of commercial endograft platforms. It may be a valuable alternative to iliac branch devices when there are anatomical considerations. Longer follow-up is needed to conclude for long-term patency and durability.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The distal landing zone in iliac arteries represents an important issue during EVAR while it is important to preserve blood flow in the internal iliac artery. The covered endovascular reconstruction of the iliac bifurcation (CERIB) technique is a technique for the preservation of internal iliac arteries during EVAR, while it is suitable with a variety of commercial endograft platforms. The CERIB technique seems to be effective and safe in the early period. It may be valuable alternative to iliac branch devices when there are anatomical considerations.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Right and Left Upper Extremity Access in Endovascular Aortic Repair for Patients with Thoracoabdominal and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Traditionally, left-sided upper extremity (LUE) access has been preferred in patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) to manage aortic aneurysms and decrease the risk of cerebrovascular adverse events. Recently, right-sided upper extremity access (RUE) has gained popularity owing to its greater maneuverability and ergonomics. However, synthesized data comparing the safety and efficacy of RUE and LUE accesses are limited. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on various databases from inception to September 2023 to retrieve all studies that compared RUE and LUE access in EVAR. Data on stroke, 30-day mortality, technical success, access-site complications, total time required for fluoroscopy, and contrast agent requirement were extracted, pooled, and analyzed. Forest plots were generated using a random-effects model on review manager by pooling the risk ratios (RRs) and standard mean differences (SMDs). Ten observational studies with a total of 3994 patients were included in our analysis with 1186 patients in the RUE and 2808 patients in the LUE access groups. EVAR using RUE access was associated with a significantly lower amount of contrast agent requirement than the LUE access group [SMD, -0.23; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.45 to -0.02; P = 0.03]. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of the risk of stroke (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.81-3.22; P = 0.17), 30-day mortality (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.50-4.06; P = 0.51), rate of technical success (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95-1.01; P = 0.18), risk of access-site complications (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.72-1.39; P = 0.99), and total time required for fluoroscopy (SMD, 0.07; 95% CI, -0.39 to 0.26; P = 0.69). The use of RUE access in EVAR appears to be comparable to LUE access in terms of the risk of stroke, access-related complications, all-cause mortality, technical success rate, and fluoroscopy duration. The RUE group required a lower volume of contrast agent.

Prospective evaluation of upper extremity access and total transfemoral approach during fenestrated and branched endovascular repair

OBJECTIVE

Total transfemoral (TF) access has been increasingly used during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR). However, it is unclear whether the potential decrease in the risk of cerebrovascular events is offset by increased procedural difficulties and other complications. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of FB-EVAR using a TF vs upper extremity (UE) approach for target artery incorporation.

METHODS

We analyzed the clinical data of consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized clinical trial in two centers to investigate the use of FB-EVAR for treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) between 2013 and 2022. Patients were classified into TF or UE access group with a subset analysis of patients treated using designs with directional branches. End points were technical success, procedural metrics, 30-day cerebrovascular events defined as stroke or transient ischemic attack, and any major adverse events (MAEs).

RESULTS

There were 541 patients (70% males; mean age, 74 ± 8 years) treated by FB-EVAR with 2107 renal-mesenteric TAs incorporated. TF was used in175 patients (32%) and UE in 366 patients (68%) including 146 (83%) TF and 314 (86%) UE access patients who had four or more TAs incorporated. The use of a TF approach increased from 8% between 2013 and 2017 to 31% between 2018 and 2020 and 96% between 2021 and 2022. Compared with UE access patients, TF access patients were more likely to have CAAAs (37% vs 24%; P = .002) as opposed to TAAAs. Technical success rate was 96% in both groups (P = .96). The use of the TF approach was associated with reduced fluoroscopy time and procedural time (each P < .05). The 30-day mortality rate was 0.6% for TF and 1.4% for UE (P = .67). There was no early cerebrovascular event in the TF group, but the incidence was 2.7% for UE patients (P = .035). The incidence of MAEs was also lower in the TF group (9% vs 18%; P = .006). Among 237 patients treated using devices with directional branches, there were no significant differences in outcomes except for a reduced procedural time for TF compared with UE access patients (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

TF access was associated with a decreased incidence of early cerebrovascular events and MAEs compared with UE access for target artery incorporation. Procedural time was decreased in TF access patients irrespective of the type of stent graft design.