Strategies and outcomes for aortic endograft explantation

Aortoenteric Fistulas Following Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Review

BackgroundSecondary aortoenteric fistulas (SAEF) following endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is an extremely rare event but life threatening. Our review offers comprehensive knowledge on pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment options.AimTo summarize the current literature regarding pathophysiology, clinical, diagnostic and therapeutic approach of aortoenteric fistulas secondary to EVAR.MethodsWe performed a literature search in Pubmed/MEDLINE to identify the literature published about SAEF after EVAR. Cases were summarized in a table and prevalences. Other relevant literature was included in the results sections.ResultsA total of 35 reports (single cases and small series) with 45 patients were included. SAEF after EVAR can result from infection, inflammation, or mechanical factors. Clinical presentation is often non-specific, ranging from a gastrointestinal herald bleed to hemorrhagic shock, or malaise and general infection-related symptoms. Cross-sectional imaging plays a critical role in diagnosing SAEF. The treatment approach involves a multidisciplinary team approach and requires broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics, endovascular intervention for urgent hemorrhage control, and open surgical intervention for definitive repair. Long-term antimicrobial therapy is essential to avoid reinfection.ConclusionsSAEF following EVAR represents a complex, life-threatening condition with limited evidence-based management strategies. Given the growing prevalence of endovascular procedures, comprehensive knowledge of SAEF is crucial for all health care providers to improve early diagnosis and outcomes.

Retroperitoneal vs transperitoneal approach for nonruptured open conversion after endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Several studies comparing the transperitoneal (TP) and retroperitoneal (RP) approach for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair suggest that the RP approach may result in lower rates of perioperative mortality and morbidity. However, data comparing these approaches for open conversion are lacking. This study aims to evaluate the association between the type of approach and outcomes following open conversion after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

We included all patients who underwent open conversion after EVAR between 2010 and 2022 in the Vascular Quality Initiative. Patients presenting with rupture were excluded. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality. The secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and 5-year mortality. Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for factors with statistical or clinical significance. Logistic regression was used to assess perioperative mortality and complications in the weighted cohort. The 5-year mortality was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression.

RESULTS

We identified 660 patients (39% RP) who underwent open conversion after EVAR. Compared with TP, RP patients were older (75 years [interquartile range, 70-79 years] vs 73.5 years [interquartile range, 68-79 years]; P < .001), and more frequently had prior myocardial infarction (33% vs 22%; P = .002). Compared with the TP approach, the RP approach was used less frequently in cases of associated iliac aneurysm (19% vs 27%; P = .026), but more frequently with associated renal bypass (7.8% vs 1.7%; P < .001) and by high-volume physicians (highest quintile, >7 AAA annually: 41% vs 17%; P < .001) and in high-volume centers (highest quintile, >35 AAA annually: 36% vs 20%; P < .001). RP patients, compared with TP patients, were less likely to have external iliac or femoral distal anastomosis (8.2% vs 21%; P < .001), and an infrarenal clamp (25% vs 36%; P < .001). Unadjusted perioperative mortality was not significantly different between approaches (RP vs TP: 3.8% vs 7.5%; P = .077). After risk adjustment, RP patients had similar odds of perioperative mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-1.10; P = .082), and lower odds of intestinal ischemia (aOR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.86; P = .028) and in-hospital reintervention (aOR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.85; P = .015). No significant differences were found in the other perioperative complications or 5-year mortality (aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.47-1.32; P = .37).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the RP approach may be associated with a lower adjusted odds of perioperative complications compared with the TP approach. The RP approach should be considered for open conversion after EVAR when feasible.

When Endovascular Interventions for Endoleaks Fail

In the appropriate patient population, endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has become the standard of care for abdominal aortic aneurysms. While the initial success rates of EVAR are very high, reinterventions occur in a significant minority of patients, most of which consist of the repair of endoleaks. When indicated, such procedures are typically performed via endovascular or percutaneous approaches; however, in certain patients, these minimally invasive repairs fail. In these patients, surgical techniques can be used to treat the endoleaks. This article describes the open surgical techniques used in the repair of endoleaks where standard endovascular techniques fail.

Biodesign: Engineering an aortic endograft explantation tool

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) graft failure can be as high as 16% to 30% owing to endoleak, graft migration, or infection, often necessitating explantation, leading to potential morbidity (31%) and mortality (6.3%). Graft prongs frequently tear through the endothelium during explantation, leading to endothelial damage and subsequent fatal bleeding. The current standard of care involves different suboptimal techniques such as the syringe technique in which a cylinder is improvised by cutting a syringe in half and pushed over the graft hooks in a rotating motion, until covered for manual explantation. Because there is no commercially available product to address this shortcoming in graft explantation, we engage in the biodesign process to produce a functional explantation device. We designed and prototyped multiple potential solutions to remove EVAR endografts safely. Silicone tubing with EVAR endografts deployed in the lumen were used to simulate a grafted aorta and test each prototype. Prototypes were compared in their ability to meet design criteria including decrease in graft diameter, prevention of arterial dissection, ease of use, and decrease in procedure time. After determining the single best prototype, surgeon feedback was elicited to iteratively improve the original design. The most effective design uses a tapered lumenal geometry that decreases the EVAR graft diameter and uses stainless steel beads to prevent shear stress to the simulated aorta. A distal grip allows for easy single hand manipulation of the device, while a latching mechanism allows for smooth placement and removal over the endograft. After rigorous prototyping, our device proved feasible and effective for safe EVAR explantation, allowing this procedure to be performed safely.

A Retrospective Analysis of Late Open Conversions Following Failed Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Background

The incidence of late open surgical conversions (OSCs) has recently increased. Vascular surgeons face additional technical challenges in late conversion surgery of failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) due to the presence of a previously deployed endograft. Based on our institutional experience, this study aimed to delineate methods to improve late open conversion outcomes, proposing solutions for technical challenges.

Methods

All preoperative OSC data on failed EVARs operated in our Cardiovascular Surgery Clinic between January 2017 and January 2024 were evaluated retrospectively. Study endpoints included early (30-day or in-hospital) and late follow-up outcomes. Early outcomes included perioperative mortality and morbidities, intensive care unit (ICU) period, and length of hospital stay (LOS). The main outcome of interest during follow-up was overall survival.

Results

Sixteen patients in our hospital, comprising eight elective and eight emergency procedures, underwent OSCs following EVAR. The difference between the 30-day mortality rates for the elective and urgent late conversions was significant (p < 0.001). Of these patients, 15 were male, with a mean age of 70.8 years (range: 62-80). Preoperative cardiac shock status and low hematocrit level (<20%) were independent mortality factors (p < 0.001). The ICU period was 8.7 ± 5.3 days (2-20 days) on average, and LOS was 17.3 ± 8.4 (6-29 days) days on average. The mean time to open surgical conversion in this cohort was 44.4 ± 16.8 months. The 5-year overall survival rate was 43.75%.

Conclusions

The incidence of open surgical conversion is notably growing. Emergent open surgical conversions exhibit poorer mortality outcomes compared to elective procedures. Further data are essential to evaluate the ramifications of expanding the use of EVAR beyond the instructions for use (IFU) guidelines. The procedures involving patients who challenge the IFU criteria should be conducted at experienced centers and require close monitoring. Open surgical repair (OSR) as the initial treatment opportunity could be an alternative strategy for improving outcomes in this patient cohort.

Explantation of an ALTO abdominal stent graft

Explantation of traditional infrarenal aortic endografts has been previously described, and explanation of aortic endografts with standard suprarenal fixation at our center has been well defined. However, to the best of our knowledge, no cases have been reported on explantation of endografts with polymer rings present to facilitate the proximal seal. By obtaining full thoracoabdominal exposure with supraceliac clamping and opening the entire aorta along the graft, we were able to successfully explant the ALTO stent graft with polymer rings. (J Vasc Surg 2024;XX:XX-X.).

Ultrasound elastography to quantify average percent pressure-normalized strain reduction associated with different aortic endografts in 3D-printed hydrogel phantoms

Objective

Strain has become a viable index for evaluating abdominal aortic aneurysm stability after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). In addition, literature has shown that healthy aortic tissue requires a degree of strain to maintain homeostasis. This has led to the hypothesis that too much strain reduction conferred by a high degree of graft oversizing is detrimental to the aneurysm neck in the seal zone of abdominal aortic aneurysms after EVAR. We investigated this in a laboratory experiment by examining the effects that graft oversizing has on the pressure-normalized strain (ε ρ + ¯ /pulse pressure [PP]) reduction using four different infrarenal EVAR endografts and our ultrasound elastography technique. Approximate graft oversizing percentages were 20% (30 mm phantom-graft combinations), 30% (28 mm phantom-graft combinations), and 50% (24 mm phantom-graft combinations).

Methods

Axisymmetric, 10% by mass polyvinyl alcohol phantoms were connected to a flow simulator. Ultrasound elastography was performed before and after implantation with the four different endografts: (1) 36 mm polyester/stainless steel, (2) 36 mm polyester/electropolished nitinol, (3) 35 mm polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)/nitinol, and (4) 36 mm nitinol/polyester/platinum-iridium. Five ultrasound cine loops were taken of each phantom-graft combination. They were analyzed over two different cardiac cycles (end-diastole to end-diastole), yielding a total of 10 maximum mean principal strain (ε ρ + ¯ ) values.ε ρ + ¯ was divided by pulse pressure to yield pressure-normalized strain (ε ρ + ¯ /PP). An analysis of variance was performed for graft comparisons. We calculated the average percentε ρ + ¯ /PP reduction by manufacturer and percent oversizing. These values were used for linear regression analysis.

Results

Results from one-way analysis of variance showed a significant difference inε ρ + ¯ /PP between the empty phantom condition and all oversizing conditions for all graft manufacturers (F(3, 56) = 106.7 [graft A], 132.7 [graft B], 106.5 [graft C], 105.7 [graft D], P < .0001 for grafts A-D). There was a significant difference when comparing the 50% condition with the 30% and 20% conditions across all manufacturers by post hoc analysis (P < .0001). No significant difference was found when comparing the 20% and 30% oversizing conditions for any of the manufacturers or when comparingε ρ + ¯ /PP values across the manufacturers according to percent oversize. Linear regression demonstrated a significant positive correlation between the percent graft oversize and the all-graft average percentε ρ + ¯ /PP reduction (R 2  = 0.84, P < .0001).

Conclusions

This brief report suggests that a 10% increase in graft oversizing leads to an approximate 5.9% reduction inε ρ + ¯ /PP on average. Applied clinically, this increase may result in increased stiffness in axisymmetric vessels after EVAR. Further research is needed to determine if this is clinically significant.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Comparative outcomes of physician-modified fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in the setting of prior failed endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysms involving renal-mesenteric arteries, especially in the setting of prior failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) typically requires fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) with a custom-made device (CMD). CMDs are limited to select centers, and physician-modified endografts are an alternative treatment platform. Currently, there is no data on the outcomes of physician-modified F/BEVAR (PM-F/BEVAR) in the setting of failed prior EVAR. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of PM-F/BEVAR in patients with prior failed EVAR.

METHODS

A prospective database of consecutive patients treated at a single center with PM-F/BEVAR between March 2021 and November 2022 was retrospectively reviewed. The cohort was stratified by presence of a failed EVAR (type Ia endoleak or aneurysm development proximal to a prior EVAR) prior to PM-F/BEVAR. Demographics, operative details, and postoperative complications were compared between the groups using univariate analysis. One-year survival and freedom from reintervention were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients underwent PM-F/BEVAR during the study period; 27 (26%) were in the setting of prior EVAR. Patients with prior failed EVAR had similar age (75.2 ± 7.7 vs 71.5 ± 8.8 years; P = .058), male gender (n = 24 ; 89% vs n = 57 ; 75%; P = .130), and comorbid conditions except higher incidence of moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 7 ; 26% vs n = 7 ; 9%; P = .047). Overall, aneurysm diameter was 65.5 ± 13.9 mm with aneurysms categorized as juxta-/pararenal in 43% and thoracoabdominal in 57%, with no differences between the groups. Twelve patients (14%) presented with symptomatic/ruptured aneurysms. The average number of target arteries incorporated per patient was 3.8. Four different aortic devices were modified with a greater proportion of Terumo TREO devices used in the failed EVAR group (P = .03). There was no difference in procedure time, radiation dose, or iodinated contrast use between groups. Overall technical success was 99%. Rates of 30-day mortality (n = 0 ; 0% vs n = 3 ; 4%; P = .565) and major adverse events (n = 6 ; 22% vs n = 16 ; 21%; P = 1.0) were similar between groups. For the overall cohort, rates of type 1 or 3 endoleak, branch vessel stenosis/occlusion, and reintervention were 2%, 1%, and 8%, respectively, with no difference between groups. One-year survival (failed EVAR 94% vs no EVAR 82%; P = .756) was similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PM-F/BEVAR is a safe and effective treatment for patients with aneurysms involving the renal-mesenteric arteries in the setting of prior failed EVAR where additional technical challenges may be present. Additional follow-up is warranted to demonstrate long-term efficacy, but early results are encouraging and similar to those using CMDs.

Surgical Treatment of Sac Enlargement Due to Type II Endoleaks Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

An aneurysm sac enlargement caused by type II endoleak (T2EL) following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms may cause serious complications such as rupture. Consequently, methods that preoperatively prevent or postoperatively treat T2EL have been employed. When significant aneurysm enlargement occurs due to persistent T2EL, embolization is first performed through several access points. However, although these endovascular reinterventions have a high technical success rate and are safe, their effectiveness remains questionable. When such endovascular procedures fail to stabilize sac enlargement, open surgical conversion (OSC) becomes the last-resort treatment option. We review several strategies of OSC for the repair of T2EL following EVAR. Among the three main OSC procedures, namely, complete endograft removal, partial endograft removal, and complete endograft preservation, partial endograft removal under infrarenal clamping was considered the most appropriate owing to its less invasiveness and durability.

Explant of the Aortic Endograft: Today's Solutions, Tomorrow's Problems

Type 2 endoleaks remain the Achilles heel of abdominal aortic endografting. They drive imaging costs and repeat intervention. We believe that after two endovascular interventions, patients should be considered for either graft explantation or graft salvage through an open abdominal exploration. Graft explantation has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality but remains necessary in the face of non-correctible type 1a endoleaks, graft failure, or graft infection. In the majority of cases AAA expansion due to persistent type 2 endoleak is the culprit. In this situation, open repair, with oversewing of the lumbar or inferior mesenteric arteries, can be accomplished providing the seal zones and component overall zones are adequate. This approach does not require aortic clamping. We provide detailed descriptions and videos to facilitate the surgeon in performing these complex procedures.

Two decades of experience in explantation and graft preserving strategies following primary endovascular aneurysm repair and lessons learned

Objectives

We aim to scrutinize our evolving re-intervention strategies following primary endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) - EVAR GORE SalvAge Fabric Technique (ARAFAT), aortic sac double breasting with endograft preservation, and stent-graft explantation.

Methods

We performed 1,555 aortic interventions over the study period, including 910 EVARs. Factors associated with the need for reintervention and the likelihood of chronic fabric fatigue failure (CFFF) were investigated. Using conventional and innovative diagnostic modalities with Prone contrASt enHanced computed tomography Angiography (PASHA), 136 endoleaks (ELs) were identified (15 type I, 98 type II; 18 type III; 5 type IV).

Results

Forty-four (4.84%) patients underwent re-intervention post-primary EVAR; 18 ARAFATs, 12 double breastings, and 14 explantations. Choice of re-intervention was based on patient fitness and mode of failure. Mean EL detection duration following primary EVAR was 53.3 ± 6.82 months, while mean time to re-intervention was 70.20 ± 6.98 months. The mean sac size before the primary EVAR and re-intervention was 6.00 ± 1.75 cm and 7.51 ± 1.94 cm, respectively. Polyester (61.40%) was the most commonly employed stent-graft material. Use of more than three modular stent-graft components (3.42 ± 1.31, p = 0.846); with the proximal stent-graft diameter of 31.6 ± 3.80 cm (p = 0.651) and the use of iliac limbs more than 17 mm (p = 0.364), all added together are contributing factors. We had one peri-operative mortality following explantation due to sepsis-induced multiorgan failure.

Conclusions

Our re-intervention strategies matured from stent graft explantation to graft preservation with endovascular relining of the stent-graft. Graft preservation with aortic sacotomy and double breasting were used to manage concealed ELs due to aortic hygroma.

Five-year outcomes of the Bi- versus Trimodular EndurantTM stent-graft in 100 patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Recent studies on the Endurant™ endografts mainly compared outcomes of the bimodular stent-graft to other manufacturer's endografts or reported results for cases outside manufacturer's instructions for use (IFU), while data on the experience of standard endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) inside manufacturer's IFU comparing the bi- with the trimodular device is limited.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria were: 1) infrarenal aneurysms (>50 mm diameter) treated by Endurant^TM II (END II) or Endurant^TM IIs (END IIs) stent-graft inside manufacturer's IFU; 2) available CTA with 1 mm reconstruction of the entire aorta prior to intervention. Endpoints comparing the devices included technical success, 30-day mortality, rate of complications (bleeding with conversion to open repair, stent-graft stenosis/occlusion, acute distal embolism, infection or postprocedural necessity of dialysis), endoleaks and reinterventions (5-year follow-up). Aneurysm sac diameters were compared between baseline preinterventional CTA and last post-interventional CTA.

RESULTS

One hundred patients (90% male, mean age 74 years) treated with END II (N.=66) or END IIs (N.=34) were included. Technical success was 99%. One procedure-related active bleeding occurred ending up in surgical conversion (END II N.=1). 30d mortality was 0%. No initial type I/III endoleaks were present. Re-interventions were required in 19/100 (19%) of patients (END II N.=10; END IIs N.=9, P=0.17). The outcome of EVAR including technical success, 30d mortality, rate of complications, endoleaks and re-interventions showed no significant differences comparing END II/IIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Five-year outcomes of EVAR show consistently safe and effective results for either END II or IIs device.

The failing endograft-A systematic review of aortic graft explants and associated outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The prominent use of endovascular stent grafts in the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms is associated with increased descriptions of late complications such as graft infection and endoleaks, which can confer significant morbidity and mortality. Failed endovascular management of late complications often requires open conversion and graft explantation. This systematic review sought to highlight the peri- and post-operative course of patients undergoing aortic graft explants to inform readers of the associated morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing this procedure.

METHODS

The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of the PubMed, Google Scholar and Ovid MEDLINE databases from January 1995 to April 2021 was performed with a combination of MeSH terms pertaining to endovascular aneurysm repair and open conversion. Articles were screened and included based on pre-determined selection criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 818 studies were identified, with 41 meeting inclusion criteria. These studies examined a total of 1324 patients, 84.3% of whom were male with a mean age of 74 years at explantation. Mean time to graft explantation was 36 months, with a mean aneurysm size of 66 mm. The majority of aortic explants were performed for persistent endoleaks (68%), and 10% for infection. There was high morbidity with the procedure, with high rates of post-operative complications (mean, 37%) and 30-day mortality (11%). The most common complications included renal (15%), respiratory (12%) and cardiac (9%). Most explanted grafts were first-generation endografts. Morbidity and mortality rates were reduced in patients undergoing elective explants compared to emergent procedures (3.3% compared to 43.4%).

CONCLUSION

Aortic graft explant remains a highly co-morbid procedure, with high rates of peri- and post-operative complications and mortality. The number of explant procedures reported over the past 25 years has increased, reflecting the prominent use of EVAR in the management of AAAs. Whilst remaining a highly co-morbid procedure, patients undergoing elective explants had markedly reduced rates of mortality and morbidity compared to emergent explants. Thus, clinical focus should be on identifying patients who require graft explantation early to perform these procedures in an elective setting.

Aortic graft explants - A single institution analysis of incidence and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Explantation of both endovascular endovascular aneurysm repair and open aortic grafts is a procedure associated with high peri-operative risk, and the current study sought to determine the outcomes and trends over time in these patients.

METHODS

This study examined data from all patients undergoing explant of an aortic graft (both open and endovascular) between January 2004 and December 2020 at a single centre. Variables analysed included comorbidities, duration to and indication for explantation, type of revascularization, in-hospital complications and mortality, duration of hospital and ICU stay, and out-patient mortality.

RESULTS

Of 688 open and 1352 EVARs performed, 46 patients underwent 48 explants. Five were open grafts and 43 were endografts, equating to an explant rate of 0.73% of open and 3.18% EVARs. Average time to explant was 70 months, with patients presenting electively having a significantly longer duration to representation than those presenting emergently (51 vs 44 months, p=0.003). Indication for explant was endoleak in 70%, infection in 23%, and occlusion in 6%. Of the endoleaks, 61% of were Type 1, 22% Type II, 11% Type IV, and 6% Type V. On representation, 17 patients (35%) were symptomatic. Overall mortality rate was 8.3%, with a trend for higher mortality in emergent than elective presentations (11.8 vs 6.5%, p=0.55). There was no change in explant rate over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Elective aortic graft explantation is associated with low mortality, despite its complexity and patient comorbidities. Patients presenting with symptoms suffered higher mortality and a longer post-operative course, suggesting that aortic graft explantation should be considered sooner rather than later, rather than persisting with repeated endovascular management.

Very Late Aortic Endograft Infection With Listeria monocytogenes in an Elderly Man

Endograft infection with Listeria monocytogenes is a rare, potentially devastating complication of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. To our knowledge, only 8 cases have been reported. We describe the case of a 72-year-old man who presented with L. monocytogenes endograft infection and a 19-cm degenerative aneurysm 9 years after having undergone endovascular repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm. The infection was successfully treated with open surgical excision of the infected aortoiliac endograft and its replacement with a rifampin-soaked, bifurcated Dacron graft.

A Canadian multicenter experience describing outcomes after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair stent graft explantation

BACKGROUND

Most studies describing the outcomes after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) explantation have been from single, high-volume, centers. We performed a multicenter cross-Canadian study of outcomes after EVAR stent graft explantation. Our objectives were to describe the outcomes after late open conversion and EVAR graft explantation at various Canadian centers and the techniques and outcomes stratified by the indication for explant.

METHODS

The Canadian Vascular Surgery Research Group performed a retrospective multicenter study of all cases of EVAR graft explantation at participating centers from 2003 to 2018. Data were collected using a standardized, secure, online platform (RedCap [Research Electronic Data Capture]). Univariate statistical analysis was used to compare the techniques and outcomes stratified the indication for graft explantation.

RESULTS

Patient data from 111 EVAR explants collected from 13 participating centers were analyzed. The mean age at explantation was 74 years, the average aneurysm size was 7.5 cm, and 28% had had at least one instructions for use violation at EVAR. The average time between EVAR and explantation was 42.5 months. The most common indication for explantation was endoleak (n = 66; type Ia, 46; type Ib, 2; type II, 9; type III, 2; type V, 7), followed by infection in 20 patients; rupture in 18 patients (due to type Ia endoleak in 10 patients, type Ib in 1, type II in 1, type III in 2, and type V in 1), and graft thrombosis in 7 patients. The overall 30-day mortality was 11%, and 45% of the patients had experienced at least one major perioperative complication. Mortality was significantly greater for patients with rupture (33.3%) and those with infection (15%) compared with patients undergoing elective explantation for endoleak (4.5%; P = .003). The average center volume during the previous 15 years was 8 cases with a wide range (2-19 cases). A trend was seen toward greater mortality for patients treated at centers with fewer than eight cases compared with those with eight or more cases (19% vs 9%). However, the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .23). Overall, 41% of patients had undergone at least one attempt at endovascular salvage before explantation, with the highest proportion among patients who had undergone EVAR explantation for endoleak (51%). Only 22% of patients with rupture had undergone an attempt at endovascular salvage before explantation.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of EVAR graft explantation has increasing in Canada. Patients who had undergone elective explantation for endoleak had lower mortality than those treated for either infection or rupture. Thus, patients with an indication for explanation should be offered surgery before symptoms or rupture has occurred. A trend was seen toward greater mortality for patients treated at centers with lower volumes.

Lessons Learned from Open Surgical Conversion after Failed Previous EVAR

BACKGROUND

Delayed open conversion (OpC) after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is becoming increasingly common worldwide. We reviewed our experience to characterize the perioperative spectrum of OpC repairs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained institutional database to identify patients who underwent late OpC after failed EVAR was performed. Patient and aneurysm baseline characteristics, mechanism of failure, perioperative details, including type of repair/complications/survival, and late outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

From January 2003 to January 2020, 38 male patients (mean age, 75 ± 7 years; range, 60-90) required late OpC. Interval time from initial EVAR to OpC was 63.6 ± 33.8 months (range, 17-120). Mean diameter of the aneurysms was 82.2 ± 22.1 mm before OpC compared with 62.9 ± 13 mm before endograft implantation. Mechanisms of failure were type Ia, Ib, II, and III endoleaks in 14 (36.8%), 9 (23.7%), 4 (10.5%), and 1 (2.6%) patient(s), respectively; infection in 3 (7.9%), leg ischemia in 2 (5.3%), and multiple causes in 5 (13.2%) patients. We observed 4 (10.5%) asymptomatic, 16 (42.1%) symptomatic, and 18 (47.3%) ruptured aneurysms. Four patients (10.5%) had stable contained ruptures, whereas the remaining 13 (34.2%) and 1 additional patient (2.6%) with aortoenteric fistula presented with hemorrhagic shock (class ≥II). Total endograft explantation, endograft preservation, or proximal/distal partial graft removal was performed in 16 (42.1%), 10 (26.3%), and 2 (5.2%)/9 (23.7%) of patients, respectively. Technical success was 100%, excluding an early postaortic clamping death. Overall, 30-day mortality was 21.1% (8 of 38) and significantly higher in patients with hemorrhagic shock or hemodynamic instability at presentation (P = 0.04 and P = 0.009, respectively) and in patients who had endografts with hooks/barbs or experiencing higher postoperative complication rate (P = 0.02 and P = 0.006, respectively). By definition, procedure success was 81.1%. Mean follow-up was 37.6 ± 39.8 months. By the end of the study, we recorded 11 deaths (2 were aneurysm related).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high technical success, OpC has a significant mortality in patients presenting with hemorrhagic shock and had active fixation endografts or experiencing high complication rate. Many other confounding factors may play a role.

Elective late open conversion after endovascular aneurysm repair is associated with comparable outcomes to primary open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Three of four patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm are now treated with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The incidence of secondary procedures and surgical conversions is increasing for a population theoretically unfit for open surgery. The indications and outcomes of late open surgical conversions after EVAR in a high-volume tertiary vascular unit are reported.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study includes all patients who underwent a late open conversion between January 1996 and July 2018. Data were collected from records on patient demographics, operative indications, surgical strategy, perioperative outcomes, and medium-term survival.

RESULTS

Sixty-two consecutive patients (88.7% male) with a mean age of 77.5 years are included. The median duration since index EVAR was 38.5 months; 65% of stent grafts requiring late open conversion had suprarenal fixation. Indications included 22.6% type IA, 16.1% type IB, and 45.2% type II endoleaks; 12.9% graft thrombosis; and 14.5% endoprosthesis infection. Complete endograft explantation was performed in 37.1% of patients and a partial explantation in 54.8%, whereas 8.1% of stent grafts were wholly preserved in situ. Overall 30-day mortality was 12.9% (n = 8) in the cohort and 2.7% for elective patients. The all-cause morbidity rate was 40.1%, and the median length of hospital stay was 9 days. After follow-up of 28.4 months (range, 1.8-187.3 months), all-cause survival was 58.8%. Avoidance of aortic clamping (P = .006) and elective procedures (P = .019) were associated with a significant reduction in the length of hospital stay. Moreover, the 30-day mortality (P = .002), occurrence of postoperative renal dysfunction (P = .004), and intestinal ischemia (P = .017) were increased in the emergency setting. Excluding cases with rupture or infection, survival estimates were 97%, 97%, and 71% at 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Technically more complex than primary open surgery, late open conversion is a procedure that generates an acceptable perioperative risk when it is performed in a high-volume aortic surgical center. Elective open conversion is associated with excellent early and late outcomes. Endograft preservation strategies decrease perioperative morbidity.

Technical approach and outcomes of failed infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repairs rescued with fenestrated and branched endografts

Background

Endovascular rescue of failed infrarenal repair (EVAR) has emerged as an attractive option to stent graft explantation. The procedure, however, is underutilized due to limited devices accessibility and the challenges associated with their implantation in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to report our outcomes and discuss our approach to rescuing previously failed infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repairs (EVAR) with fenestrated/branched endografts (f/b-EVAR).

Methods

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of consecutive patients with failed EVAR rescued with f/b-EVAR at our institution from November 2013 to March 2019 was conducted. The study primary end point was technical success; defined as the implantation of the device with no type I a/b or type III endoleak or conversion to open repair. Secondary endpoints included major adverse events (MAEs), graft patency and reintervention rates.

Results

During this time, 202 patients with complex aortic aneurysms were treated with f/b-EVAR. Of these, 19 patients (Male: 17, mean age 79 ± 7 years) underwent repair for failed EVAR. The median time from failed repair to f/b-EVAR was 48 (30, 60) months. Treatment failure was attributed to stent graft migration in 9 (47.4%) patients, disease progression in 5 (26.3%), short initial neck in 3 (15.8%) and unable to be determined in 2 (10.5%). Three patients were treated urgently with surgeon modified stent graft. Technical success was achieved in 18 patients (95%), including two who had undergone emergent repair for rupture. Seventy-two targeted vessels (97.3%) were successfully incorporated. Sixteen (84.2%) patients required a thoracoabdominal repair to achieve a durable seal. Major adverse events (MAEs) occurred in 3 patients (15.7%) including paralysis and death in one (5.3%), compartment syndrome and temporary dialysis in another and laparotomy with snorkeling of one renal and bypass of the other in the third patient. Median (IQR) hospital length of stay was 3 (2, 4) days. Late reintervention, primary target vessel patency and primary assisted patency rates were 5.3%, 98.6% and 100%, respectively.

Conclusion

Implantation of f/b-EVAR in patients with failed previous EVAR is a challenging undertaking that can be performed safely with a high technical success and low reintervention rates.