The 50th anniversary of abdominal aortic reconstruction

Reasons for and Outcomes of Open Abdominal Aortic Repair in the Endovascular Era

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the treatment of choice for most patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Open aneurysm repair (OAR) is still being used in a number of patients for specific reasons. The aim of the present study was to investigate the reasons and perioperative outcomes of OAR in a high-volume endovascular center.

METHODS

All patients who underwent OAR in a single center institution during the period April 2010 to July 2019 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 222 patients underwent OAR. One hundred and forty-one (63.5%) patients underwent elective surgery, and eighty-one (36.5%) patients were treated acutely. The reasons for the decision to perform OAR instead of EVAR were as follows: anatomical in 89 (40.1%) cases, rupture in unstable patient in 57 (25.7%) cases, AAA with concomitant iliac arterial occlusive disease in 44 (19.8%) cases, previous EVAR with complications in 14 (6.3%) cases, large pararenal aneurysm considered risky to wait for a customized fenestrated stent graft in 7 (3.2%) cases, young patient age in 4 (1.8%) cases, the patient's preference in 3 (1.4%) cases, infected/mycotic AAA in 2 (0.9%) cases, and simultaneous OAR with colon cancer resection (n = 1, 0.5%) and renal transplantation (n = 1, n = 0.5). Thirty-day mortality in elective cases was 5% (7/141) and in acute cases 34.6% (28/81).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that OAR is still used for selected patients despite improvements in EVAR technology. The most common reason for OAR was an unsuitable anatomy for EVAR. Perioperative mortality of OAR both for acute and elective cases as observed in this study is in line with published outcomes of other centers.

Improved Intraoperative Management of Anastomotic Bleeding during Aortic Reconstruction: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

In a randomized controlled trial, the effectiveness of a polymeric surgical sealant (CoSeal) was compared to Gelfoam/thrombin for managing anastomotic bleeding after implantation of Dacron grafts during aortic reconstruction for nonruptured aneurysms. Each treatment was directly applied to the suture line after confirmation of anastomotic bleeding. The proportion of suture line sites that achieved immediate sealing and the proportion sealed within 5 minutes were determined among 37 experimental (59 sites) and 17 control subjects (27 sites). A significantly greater proportion of bleeding suture line sites treated with the polymeric sealant achieved immediate sealing following reestablishment of blood flow compared with control-treated sites [48 of 59 (81%) vs 10 of 27 (37%); P = 0.002]. The difference between treatment groups was maintained after 5 minutes with approximately 85 per cent (50 of 59) of CoSeal sites compared to just over one-half (14 of 27) of control sites demonstrating ultimate sealing ( P = 0.01). There were no adverse events related to the use of the polymeric sealant in this study. These results support the use of this novel sealant for the intraoperative management of anastomotic bleeding during aortic reconstruction procedures.

Collagen- versus gelatine-coated Dacron versus stretch PTFE bifurcation grafts for aortoiliac occlusive disease: long-term results of a prospective, randomized multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

In this prospective randomized multicenter trial, knitted gelatine-coated Dacron, knitted collagen-coated Dacron, and stretch polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) aortic bifurcation grafts were compared for their long-term results.

METHODS

Between 1991 and 1998, 149 patients undergoing elective revascularization for aortoiliac occlusive disease were prospectively randomized at 3 tertiary referral centers of vascular surgery. The patients received either gelatine-coated Dacron (GEL-D) grafts (n = 52), collagen-coated Dacron (COL-D) grafts (n = 49), or stretch PTFE grafts (n = 48).

RESULTS

No intraoperative deaths were recorded. The 30-day mortality was 4%. The mean follow-up time was 97 months. Primary patency rates were 77% for GEL-D, 78% for COL-D, and 79% for PTFE at 8 years. The differences were not different (P >.8). Secondary corrected 8-year patency rates were also not significantly different (P >.5): 91% for GEL-D, 96% for COL-Dm and 90% for PTFE. Five Dacron and 1 PTFE grafts were affected by infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Bifurcation grafts for revascularization of aortoiliac occlusive disease using these 3 materials were comparable in terms of primary and secondary patency and long-term complication rates.

Response of plasma matrix metalloproteinase-9 to conventional abdominal aortic aneurysm repair or endovascular exclusion: implications for endoleak

PURPOSE

Matrix metalloproteinases are enzymes capable of breaking down all of the components of the extracellular matrix and have been implicated in the development of aneurysm formation. Because matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) levels are elevated in aortic aneurysmal tissue and in that patient plasma, we hypothesized that plasma MMP-9 levels should decrease significantly after conventional and endovascular infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair but that plasma MMP-9 levels would remain elevated in patients with endoleaks.

METHODS

A sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to measure plasma levels of MMP-9 in patients with AAA who underwent conventional (n = 26; mean age, 71.5 years) and endovascular (n = 25; mean age, 76.4 years) AAA repair. Levels were drawn before surgery and at 1 month and 3 months after surgery. Eight patients for endovascular repair had endoleaks identified on postoperative computed axial tomographic scans.

RESULTS

No correlation existed between preoperative plasma MMP-9 levels when compared with age, gender, or aneurysm diameter. No significant difference in preoperative plasma MMP-9 levels or AAA diameter was identified between patients with conventional repair compared with endovascular repair. Of the 51 patients, 33 had follow-up samples available for analysis. A significant increase in mean plasma MMP-9 levels was noted 1 month (149.5 +/- 40.1 ng/mL) after conventional AAA repair compared with preoperative levels (83.9 +/- 26.1 ng/mL; P <.05) and remained elevated 3 months after surgery (129.8 +/- 56.6 ng/mL). In those patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm exclusion without endoleak, a significant decrease in mean plasma MMP-9 levels was noted at 3 months (27.4 +/- 5.2 ng/mL) when compared with preoperative values (60.8 +/- 8.8 ng/mL; P <.01). In contrast, patients with endoleak after endovascular exclusion did not have a significant decrease in plasma MMP-9 levels at 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Plasma MMP-9 levels remain elevated for as much as 3 months after conventional AAA repair, whereas successful endovascular exclusion of an AAA results in decreased plasma MMP-9 levels by 3 months. MMP-9 may have clinical value as an enzymatic marker for endoleak after endovascular AAA exclusion.