Thirty-day outcomes of open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair by proximal clamp level in patients with normal and impaired renal function

Open Conversion with Explantation of Stent Grafts After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

BACKGROUND

Although endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is widely used worldwide, the fact that it is associated with increased rates of reintervention has been considered a problem. This study aimed to analyze the outcomes of primary open AAA repair and open conversion with explantation of stent grafts after EVAR.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we enrolled 1,120 patients (open repair, n = 664; EVAR, n = 456) who underwent AAA repair at Kobe University from 1999 to 2019. Of the 664 patients who underwent open repair, 121 (patients who underwent primary open repair (POR) as a concomitant procedure and patients with ruptured AAA) were excluded from the study. The outcomes of POR were compared with those of open conversion with explantation of stent grafts.

RESULTS

Of the 543 patients who underwent open repair, 513 underwent POR and 30 underwent open conversion with explantation of stent grafts. The operation time for POR was significantly less than that for open conversion with explantation. During surgery, patients who underwent open conversion with explantation required significantly more transfusions of red cell concentrate, fresh frozen plasma, and platelet concentrate than those who underwent POR. Overall, 30 patients who underwent open conversion with explantation required a total of 48 reinterventions before surgery. Hospital mortality rates were 0.7% and 0% in the POR and open conversion with explantation groups, respectively (P = 0.62). Although overall survival at 5 years in the POR group was significantly better than that in the open conversion with explantation group (89.3 ± 1.7% vs. 79.5 ± 9.6%; P = 0.01), there were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding the freedom from aortic event (hospital death, reintervention, and aortic death). According to the multivariate analysis, open conversion with explantation was not an independent risk factor for late death. There were 20 patients who were hesitant to undergo OCE, although we recommended OCE. In a subgroup analysis, the overall mean cost borne by patients who underwent EVAR was approximately 2.3 times higher compared with that borne by patients who underwent POR.

CONCLUSIONS

Although demanding, both early and long-term outcomes of OCE have been favorable in our present study. OCE is highly recommended in patients with persistent sac enlargement after EVAR.

Japanese single-center experience of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair over 20 years: should open or endovascular aneurysm repair be performed first?

PURPOSE

The present study analyzed the outcomes of our experience with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair over 20 years using endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with commercially available devices or open aortic repair (OAR) and reviewed our surgical strategy for AAA.

METHODS

From 1999 to 2019, 1077 patients (659 OAR, 418 EVAR) underwent AAA repair. The OAR and EVAR groups were compared retrospectively, and a propensity matching analysis was performed.

RESULTS

EVAR was first introduced in 2008. Our strategy was changed to an EVAR-first strategy in 2010. Beginning in 2018, this EVAR-first strategy was changed to an OAR-first strategy. After propensity matching, the overall survival in the OAR group was significantly better than that in the EVAR group at 10 years (p = 0.006). Two late deaths due to AAA rupture were identified in the EVAR group, although there were no significant differences between the OAR and EVAR groups with regard to the freedom from AAA-related death at 10 years. The rate of freedom from aortic events at 10 years was significantly higher in the OAR group than in the EVAR group (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The rates of freedom from AAA-related death in both the OAR and EVAR groups were favorable, and the rate of freedom from aortic events was significantly lower in the EVAR group than in the OAR group. Close long-term follow-up after EVAR is mandatory.

The anesthesiologist's perspective on emergency aortic surgery: Preoperative optimization, intraoperative management, and postoperative surveillance

The management of emergencies related to the aorta requires a multidisciplinary approach involving various health care professionals. Despite technological advancements in treatment methods, the risks and mortality rates associated with surgery remain high. In the emergency department, definitive diagnosis is usually obtained through computed tomography angiography, and management focuses on controlling blood pressure and treating symptoms to prevent further deterioration. Preoperative resuscitation is the main focus, followed by intraoperative management aimed at stabilizing the patient's hemodynamics, controlling bleeding, and protecting vital organs. After the operation, factors such as organ protection, transfusion management, pain control, and overall patient care must be taken into account. Endovascular techniques are becoming more common in surgical treatment, but they also present new challenges in terms of complications and outcomes. It is recommended that patients with suspected ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms be transferred to facilities with both open and endovascular treatment options and a track record of successful outcomes to ensure the best patient care and long-term results. To achieve optimal patient outcomes, close collaboration and regular case discussions between health care professionals are necessary, as well as participation in educational programs to promote a culture of teamwork and continuous improvement.

Anaesthesia for vascular emergencies - a state of the art review

In this state-of-the-art review, we discuss the presenting symptoms and management strategies for vascular emergencies. Although vascular emergencies are best treated at a vascular surgical centre, patients may present to any emergency department and may require both immediate management and safe transport to a vascular centre. We describe the surgical and anaesthetic considerations for management of aortic dissection, aortic rupture, carotid endarterectomy, acute limb ischaemia and mesenteric ischaemia. Important issues to consider in aortic dissection are extent of the dissection and surgical need for bypasses in addition to endovascular repair. From an anaesthetist's perspective, aortic dissection requires infrastructure for massive transfusion, smooth management should an endovascular procedure require conversion to an open procedure, haemodynamic manipulation during stent deployment and prevention of spinal cord ischaemia. Principles in management of aortic rupture, whether open or endovascular treatment is chosen, include immediate transfer to a vascular care centre; minimising haemodynamic changes to reduce aortic shear stress; permissive hypotension in the pre-operative period; and initiation of massive transfusion protocol. Carotid endarterectomy for carotid stenosis is managed with general or regional techniques, and anaesthetists must be prepared to manage haemodynamic, neurological and airway issues peri-operatively. Acute limb ischaemia is a result of embolism, thrombosis, dissection or trauma, and may be treated with open repair or embolectomy, under either general or local anaesthesia. Due to hypercoagulability, there may be higher numbers of acutely ischaemic limbs among patients with COVID-19, which is important to consider in the current pandemic. Mesenteric ischaemia is a rare vascular emergency, but it is challenging to diagnose and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Several peri-operative issues are common to all vascular emergencies: acute renal injury; management of transfusion; need for heparinisation and reversal; and challenging postoperative care. Finally, the important development of endovascular techniques for repair in many vascular emergencies has improved care, and the availability of transoesophageal echocardiography has improved monitoring as well as aids in surgical placement of endovascular grafts and for post-procedural evaluation.

Giant Symptomatic Unruptured Juxtarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Herein, we present the case of an 84-year-old male with a 13-cm, symptomatic, unruptured juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. This aneurysm was successfully treated with open surgical repair, which was deemed satisfactory at the 3-year follow-up. Despite a paradigm shift towards endovascular techniques in aortic repair, postgraduate training with a focused exposure to open aortic surgery at high-volume centers is essential for future vascular surgeons to safely perform complex aortic repairs with acceptable mortality and morbidity rates.

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.

Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Affords Fewer Renal Complications than Open Surgical Repair for Juxtarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in Patients with Chronic Renal Insufficiency

OBJECTIVE

Although fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) has been associated with lower morbidity and mortality than open surgical repair (OSR) in juxtarenal aneurysms (JAAA), there is a paucity of data in the literature comparing outcomes of the approaches specifically in patients with chronic renal insufficiency (CRI). We hypothesized that benefits of FEVAR over OSR observed in the general patient population may be diminished in CRI patients due to their heightened vulnerability to renal dysfunction stemming from contrast-induced nephropathy. This study compares 30-day outcomes between FEVAR and OSR for JAAA in patients with non-dialysis dependent CRI.

METHODS

All adults with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min (but not requiring dialysis) undergoing elective, non-ruptured JAAA repairs were identified in the American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement (ACS-NSQIP) Targeted EVAR and AAA databases from 2012-2018. JAAA were identified by recorded proximal aneurysm extent. FEVAR patients were identified in the Targeted EVAR database as those receiving the "Cook Zenith Fenestrated" endograft. OSR cases were defined as those that required proximal clamp positions "above one renal" or "between SMA & renals." Infra-renal or supra-celiac proximal clamp placement, or cases involving concomitant renal/visceral revascularization were excluded. Thirty-day outcomes including mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), pulmonary, and renal complications were compared between FEVAR and OSR groups.

RESULTS

There were 284 patients with CRI who underwent elective repair of JAAA (FEVAR: 89; OSR: 195). FEVAR patients were significantly older than those undergoing OSR (77.3±7.2 vs. 74.2±7.7, P=0.001) and less likely to be smokers (25.8% vs 42.1%; P = 0.009). Other baseline demographic and pre-operative parameters were comparable between the two groups.Multivariable analysis revealed no significant difference between FEVAR and OSR in 30-day mortality (4.5% vs 4.6%; OR=1.22; 95% CI=0.35 - 4.22; P=0.753) or unplanned re-operation (4.5% vs 5.1%; OR=0.78; 95% CI=0.22 - 2.70; P=0.693). Patients undergoing FEVAR had significantly fewer pulmonary complications (3.4% vs 18.5%; OR=0.12; 95% CI=0.03 - 0.42; P<0.001) and renal dysfunction (3.4% vs 11.8%; OR 0.24 95% CI=0.07 - 0.86; P=0.029) compared to OSR. FEVAR was also associated with significantly shorter ICU and hospital lengths of stay (ICU stay: 0 days vs 3 days, P<0.0001; hospital stay: 3 days vs 8 days, P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

For patients with chronic renal insufficiency, FEVAR offered improved perioperative renal morbidity compared to OSR without a corresponding mortality benefit. Future studies will be required to determine long term outcomes of this procedure in this vulnerable population.