Medium-term outcomes of fenestrated endovascular repair of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms

Midterm results after FEVAR and open surgery for infrarenal aortic aneurysms with short proximal necks: systematic review with meta-analysis of comparative studies

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to compare short and midterm outcomes between fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and open surgery in repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms with short necks.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus electronic databases were searched for studies referring to fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) or open surgery (OSR) in patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms with neck length <15 mm. The primary endpoint of interest was early mortality. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), bowel ischemia, acute kidney injury (AKI), late mortality and secondary interventions.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Overall, 21 studies were included, with a total of 3084 patients (1157 FEVAR and 1927 OSR). The pooled rate of early mortality following FEVAR was 2.7% (95%CI: 1.6, 4.0; I2=27.7%), compared with 3.7% (95%CI: 1.9, 6.0; I2=78.1%) after OSR. Comparative studies demonstrated no significant differences in 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.79; 95%CI: 0.37, 1.68). A decreased risk of postoperative MACE (OR=0.51; 95%CI: 0.28, 0.95) and bowel ischemia (OR=0.30; 95%CI: 0.11, 0.86) was observed in FEVAR patients although no significant differences were seen regarding AKI (OR=0.62; 95%CI: 0.23, 1.67). Late mortality (OR=1.68; 95%CI: 1.03, 2.74) and reintervention risk (OR=4.17; 95%CI: 2.05, 8.50) were both significantly higher in FEVAR group.

CONCLUSIONS

FEVAR and OSR showed no statistically significant differences in postoperative mortality in the treatment of patients with AAA with short neck length, despite lower morbidity in the former. Oppositely, FEVAR present with greater mortality and reintervention risk in the midterm. Randomized controlled trials are needed to provide secure recommendations towards preferential use of either technique for juxtarenal AAA repair.

Early experience with bridging stent graft deployment without sheath support in branched and fenestrated endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

To assess the early experience with modified version of simplified bare-wire target vessel (SMART) technique, implying delivery of bridging stent grafts without historically established sheath support, and to compare its outcome to standard endovascular aortic repair procedures with fenestrated/branched devices.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 102 consecutive patients treated with fenestrated/branched devices from January 2020 to December 2022 was undertaken. The study population was divided into three groups-a sheath group (SG), SMART group, and nonsheath group (NSG). Primary end points were radiation exposure (dose-area product), fluoroscopy time, dose of contrast agent, operation time, and incidence of intraoperative target vessel (TV) complications and additional procedures. Freedom from secondary TV related reinterventions at the three follow-up phases were defined as secondary end points.

RESULTS

A total of 183 TVs (38.8% visceral arteries [VA]; 56.3% renal arteries [RA]) in the SG, 36 TVs (44.4% VA, 55.6% RA) in the SMART group, and 168 TVs (47.6% VA; 50% RA) in the NSG were accessed. The mean number of fenestrations and bridging stent grafts was equally distributed in all three groups. The SMART group only included cases treated with fenestrated devices. The dose-area product was significantly lower in the SMART (median, 203 Gy × cm2; interquartile range [IQR], 179-365 Gy × cm2) and NSG (median, 340 Gy × cm2; IQR, 220-651 Gy × cm2) groups vs the SG (median, 464 Gy × cm2; IQR, 267-871 Gy × cm2; P = .007). Operation time was also significantly lower in the NSG (median, 265 minutes; IQR, 221-337 minutes) and SMART (median, 292 minutes; IQR, 234-351 minutes) groups vs the SG (median, 326 minutes; IQR, 277-375 minutes; P = .004), respectively. Intraoperative TV-related complications were most frequently observed in the SG (9/183 TVs; P = .008).

CONCLUSIONS

This study reports the outcomes of three currently available TV stenting approaches. Previously reported SMART technique, and its modified version (NSG) proved to be a safe alternative to historically established TV stenting technique with sheath support (SG).

The role of fEVAR, chEVAR and open repair in treatment of juxtarenal aneurysms: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Open repair (OR), fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (fEVAR) and endovascular exclusion using parallel graft (chEVAR) are complementary procedures used for treatment of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (jrAAA). The aim of our study was to assess available literature and analyze dispersion of OR, fEVAR and chEVAR procedures among reported papers related to treatment of jrAAA.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The PubMed database was systematically searched using predefined strategy and key words related to treatment of jrAAA on September 28th, 2019. Studies were assessed for eligibility using the inclusion and exclusion criteria with at least five patients treated with at least one of the procedures while systematic reviews, meta-analysis, reviews, comments, editorials and letters were excluded as well as studies without clear classification of the location of the aneurysm, studies not specifying the number of patients treated with each of the techniques or not discriminated between aortic pathologies (juxtarenal, paravisceral and thoracoabdominal), hybrid procedures, endoanchors or with branched stent-graft.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Overall, 1533 papers were identified while papers that met inclusion criteria were either representing experience of single institution (87 papers) or from multicenter studies (6 papers), national or international registries (18 papers). In the period between January 1977 and December 2017, treatment of 5664 patients with jrAAA was reported in 87 papers as a single institution report. Out of them 2531 (45%) were treated with OR, 2592 (46%) with fEVAR and 541 (9%) with chEVAR. Out of 29 institutions reporting OR, there were 11 (37.9%) with more than 100 treated patients while 21 (41.1%) out of 51 institutions that reported more than 50 jrAAA treated with fEVAR. Only four institutions reported results of all three treatment modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results reported in the literature, regardless of its complexity and costs, fEVAR for jrAAA has been accepted in substantial number of hospitals worldwide, while number of reported procedures is reaching OR.

Bridging stent grafts in fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair: current practice and possible complications

Fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) is associated with a high degree of technical and clinical success. Despite this, studies have also reported high reintervention rates, and these are often related to the bridging stent grafts. Often new devices appear on the market before they have been tested in the bridging stent graft position. This review aims to assess the current literature on bridging stent grafts and discuss complications, illustrated by case reports. Complications reported with bridging stent grafts include; endoleak, kink, fracture, migration, occlusion, stenosis and perforation. Some known risk factors for bridging stent occlusions are renal artery stent grafts vs. SMA and celiac artery stent grafts. Some device specific complications have also been reported such as type IIIc endoleak with the Lifestream stent graft (Bard Peripheral Vascular, Tempe, AZ, USA) fractures and type IIId endoleaks with the 1st generation of Begraft (BentleyInnoMed, Hechingen, Germany). In addition, this review also discusses some newer devices with possible relation to complications such as stenosis and target vessel perforation. In conclusion, bridging stent grafts in fenestrated and branched aortic repair have a good midterm patency. Despite this, remaining issues are often related to the bridging stent grafts. Thorough follow-up and attention are needed, especially when new devices are introduced. The endovascular community should work towards a common global feedback system.