Comparison of the Endurant Bifurcated Endograft vs. Aortouni-iliac Stent-Grafting in Patients With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Experience From the ENGAGE Registry

Impact of iliac access in elective and non-elective endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is nowadays the establishment treatment for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) both in elective and urgent setting. Despite the large applicability and satisfactory results, the presence of hostile iliac anatomy affects both technical and clinical success. This narrative review aimed to report the impact of iliac access and related adjunctive procedures in patients undergoing EVAR in elective and non-elective setting. Hostile iliac access can be defined in presence of narrowed, tortuous, calcified, or occluded iliac arteries. These iliac characteristics can be graded by the anatomic severity grade score to quantitatively assess anatomic complexity before undergoing treatment. Literature shows that iliac hostility has an impact on device navigability, insertion and perioperative and postoperative results. Overall, it has been correlated to higher rate of access issues, representing up to 30% of the first published EVAR experience. Recent innovations with low-profile endografts have reduced large-bore sheaths related issues. However, iliac-related complications still represent an issue, and several adjunctive endovascular and surgical strategies are nowadays available to overcome these complications during EVAR. In urgent settings iliac hostility can significantly impact on particular time sensitive procedures. Moreover, in case of severe hostility patients might be written off for EVAR repair might be inapplicable, exposing to higher mortality/morbidity risk in this urgent/emergent setting. In conclusion, an accurate anatomical evaluation of iliac arteries during preoperative planning, materials availability, and skilled preparation to face iliac-related issues are crucial to address these challenges.

The impact of aorto-uni-iliac graft configuration on outcomes of endovascular repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular aneurysm repair has improved outcomes for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) compared with open repair. We examined the impact of aorto-uni-iliac (AUI) vs standard bifurcated endograft configuration on outcomes in rAAA.

METHODS

Patients 18 years or older in the Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair for rAAA from January 2011 to April 2020 were included. Patient characteristics were analyzed by graft configuration: AUI or standard bifurcated. Primary and secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, postoperative major adverse events (myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, mesenteric ischemia, lower extremity embolization, dialysis requirement, reoperation, pneumonia, or reintubation), and 1-year mortality. A subset propensity-score matched cohort was also analyzed.

RESULTS

We included 2717 patients: 151 had AUI and 2566 had standard bifurcated repair. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of age, major medical comorbidities, anatomic aortic neck characteristics, or rates of conversion to open repair. Patients who underwent AUI were more commonly female (30% vs 22%, P = .011) and had a history of congestive heart failure (19% vs 12%, P = .013). Perioperatively, patients who underwent AUI had a significantly higher incidence of cardiac arrest (15% vs 7%, P < .001), greater intraoperative blood loss (1.3 L vs 0.6 L, P < .001), longer operative duration (218 minutes vs 138 minutes, P < .0001), higher incidence of major adverse events (46.3% vs 33.3%, P = .001), and prolonged intensive care unit (7 vs 4.7 days, P = .0006) and overall hospital length of stay (11.4 vs 8.1 days, P = .0003). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses demonstrated significant differences in 30-day (31.1% vs 20.2%, log-rank P = .001) and 1-year mortality (41.7% vs 27.7%, log-rank P = .001). The propensity-score matched cohort demonstrated similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

The AUI configuration for rAAA appears to be implemented in a sicker cohort of patients and is associated with worse perioperative and 1-year outcomes compared with a bifurcated graft configuration, which was also seen on propensity-matched analysis. Standard bifurcated graft configuration may be the preferred approach in the management of rAAA unless AUI configuration is mandated by patient anatomy or other extenuating circumstances.

A Systematic Review of the Recruitment and Outcome Reporting by Sex and Race/Ethnicity in Stent Device Development Trials for Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Women and racial/ethnic minority groups have been shown to experience poor outcomes after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). One potential reason is the rare inclusion of these populations in initial phases of device development. The objective of this systematic review is to understand enrollment and outcome reporting by sex and race/ethnicity in industry-funded EVAR device development trials.

METHODS

MEDLINE, PubMed, and Embase were searched from inception to January 2022 without language restrictions using the following terminology: "stent", "graft", "endograft", "device", and "abdominal aortic aneurysm" (AAA).

CLINICALTRIALS

gov was also searched from inception to January 2022 for "AAA." Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data. All phase I-III and postmarket evaluation trials that included patients ≥18 years of age, who underwent EVAR were assessed. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated to estimate representation of participants by sex and race/ethnicity in trials compared with their share of disease burden.

RESULTS

Among the 4,780 retrieved articles, 55 industry-funded trials met inclusion criteria for this review. A total of 51 trials (93%) reported enrollment by sex/gender, and only 7 trials (13%) reported enrollment by race/ethnicity of the participants. A median of 19 (interquartile range [IQR]: 4.5, 51) women participants were recruited compared to 171 (IQR: 57, 311.5) men, and 17 (IQR: 7.5, 21.5) racial/minority patients were recruited compared to 241 (IQR: 123, 463.5) White participants. Women represent 16.6% of the disease population, and the median PPR is 0.62 (IQR: 0.42, 0.88), which has remained constant over time (Figure 1). None of the device trials reported outcomes based on sex/gender or race/ethnicity.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review highlights the disparities in recruitment and outcome reporting based on sex and race/ethnicity in EVAR device development trials. While most trials may be underpowered to study these differences, recent registry studies show differential outcomes based on sex and race/ethnicity of vascular patients. Therefore, it is imperative to include and report outcomes in these participants, starting from the initial device development phases to improve generalizability of device-use and understand sources of variation in device performance.

A Comparison of the Short-Term Outcomes After use of Aorto-Uni-Iliac Versus Bifurcated Endografts for Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

To compare short-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with aorto-uni-iliac (AUI) versus bifurcated (BIFUR) endografts in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA).

METHODS

A total of 26 rAAA patients receiving EVAR with AUI device (14 patients) or the BIFUR graft (12 patients) between January 2016 and December 2020 were enrolled and reviewed. All EVARs for rAAA were performed in an emergency basis. Graft implantation success, short-term survival rates, and major complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

Endograft implantation success was achieved in all patients. AUI group had shorter operative time than BIFUR group (121.77 ± 75.03 vs. 138.45 ± 143.34; P < 0.05). The 24-hr and 30-day survival rates were 85.7% (12/14) and 71.4% (10/14), respectively, whereas BIFUR group have 58.3% and 58.3%. None of the rAAA patients in both groups required reintervention. AUI group exhibited less incidence of compartment syndrome and endoleak compared with those of BIFUR ones.

CONCLUSIONS

The short-term results of EVAR with the AUI configuration graft in patients with rAAAs are encouraging.

Reporting of Complications and Mortality in Relation to Risk Communication in Patients with an Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

High-quality reporting of surgical risks is necessary for evidence-based risk communication in clinical practice. Risk communication is defined as the process of discussing benefits and harms of treatment options with patients. This review addressed the current quality of reporting of complications and mortality in publications on abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment, with a focus on items relevant to risk communication.

DESIGN

A systematic review.

MATERIALS

Randomised clinical trials, comparative observational studies and registries from 2010 onwards were eligible if they reported complications and/or mortality in patients with an asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms who received primary treatment.

METHODS

Quality of reporting was assessed by scoring items relevant to risk communication from the reporting standards of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. Screening, quality assessment and data extraction were independently undertaken by two authors.

RESULTS

Forty-seven publications were included. Nine of 47 publications (19%) provided no definition of complications. In 14 of 47 publications (30%), it was unclear whether the number of adverse events or the number of patients with adverse events were presented. Absolute risk differences were provided in 1 of 32 publications (3.1%) that compared complications between two treatment options. Forty-six of 47 publications reported mortality, of which 42 reported overall mortality rates (91%). Absolute risk differences were given in 2 of the 31 publications (6.5%) that compared mortality between two treatment options.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of reporting of complications and mortality following primary abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment varied considerably. Better adherence to the SVS reporting standards and the CONSORT statement, as well as stating absolute risk differences may improve the quality of reporting and facilitate evidence-based risk communication.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and/or colour duplex ultrasound for surveillance after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is less invasive than open surgery, but may be associated with important complications. Patients receiving EVAR require long-term surveillance to detect abnormalities and direct treatments. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) has been the most common imaging modality adopted for EVAR surveillance, but it is associated with repeated radiation exposure and the risk of contrast-related nephropathy. Colour duplex ultrasound (CDU) and, more recently, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEU) have been suggested as possible, safer, alternatives to CTA.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of imaging strategies, using either CDU or CEU alone or in conjunction with plain radiography, compared with CTA for EVAR surveillance.

DATA SOURCES

Major electronic databases were searched, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Scopus' Articles-in-Press, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and NHS Economic Evaluation Database from 1996 onwards. We also searched for relevant ongoing studies and conference proceedings. The final searches were undertaken in September 2016.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and cohort studies of patients with AAAs who were receiving surveillance using CTA, CDU and CEU with or without plain radiography. Three reviewers were involved in the study selection, data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment. We developed a Markov model based on five surveillance strategies: (1) annual CTA; (2) annual CDU; (3) annual CEU; (4) CDU together with CTA at 1 year, followed by CDU on an annual basis; and (5) CEU together with CTA at 1 year, followed by CEU on an annual basis. All of these strategies also considered plain radiography on an annual basis.

RESULTS

We identified two non-randomised comparative studies and 25 cohort studies of interventions, and nine systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy. Overall, the proportion of patients who required reintervention ranged from 1.1% (mean follow-up of 24 months) to 23.8% (mean follow-up of 32 months). Reintervention was mainly required for patients with thrombosis and types I-III endoleaks. All-cause mortality ranged from 2.7% (mean follow-up of 24 months) to 42% (mean follow-up of 54.8 months). Aneurysm-related mortality occurred in < 1% of the participants. Strategies based on early and mid-term CTA and/or CDU and long-term CDU surveillance were broadly comparable with those based on a combination of CTA and CDU throughout the follow-up period in terms of clinical complications, reinterventions and mortality. The economic evaluation showed that a CDU-based strategy generated lower expected costs and higher quality-adjusted life-year (QALYs) than a CTA-based strategy and has a 63% probability of being cost-effective at a £30,000 willingness-to-pay-per-QALY threshold. A CEU-based strategy generated more QALYs, but at higher costs, and became cost-effective only for high-risk patient groups.

LIMITATIONS

Most studies were rated as being at a high or moderate risk of bias. No studies compared CDU with CEU. Substantial clinical heterogeneity precluded a formal synthesis of results. The economic model was hindered by a lack of suitable data.

CONCLUSIONS

Current surveillance practice is very heterogeneous. CDU may be a safe and cost-effective alternative to CTA, with CTA being reserved for abnormal/inconclusive CDU cases.

FUTURE WORK

Research is needed to validate the safety of modified, more-targeted surveillance protocols based on the use of CDU and CEU. The role of radiography for surveillance after EVAR requires clarification.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016036475.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Endovascular vs. Open Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Background

Patients presenting with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms are most often treated with open repair despite the fact that endovascular aneurysm repair is a less invasive and widely accepted method with clear benefits for elective aortic aneurysm patients. A debate exists regarding the definitive benefit in endovascular repair for patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. The aim of this literature review was to determine if any trends exist in favor of either open or endovascular repair.

Material/Methods

A literature search was performed using PUBMED, OVID, and Google Scholar databases. The search yielded 64 publications.

Results

Out of 64 publications, 25 were retrospective studies, 12 were population-based, 21 were prospective, 5 were the results of RCTs, and 1 was a case-series. Sixty-one studies reported on early mortality and provided data comparing endovascular repair (rEVAR) and open repair (rOR) for ruptured abdominal aneurysm groups. Twenty-nine of these studies reported that rEVAR has a lower early mortality rate. Late mortality after rEVAR compared to that of rOR was reported in 21 studies for a period of 3 to 60 months. Results of 61.9% of the studies found no difference in late mortality rates between these 2 groups. Thirty-nine publications reported on the incidence of complications. Approximately half of these publications support that the rEVAR group has a lower complication rate and the other half found no difference between the groups. Length of hospital stay has been reported to be shorter for rEVAR in most studies. Blood loss and need for transfusion of either red cells or fresh frozen plasma was consistently lower in the rEVAR group.

Conclusions

Differences between the included publications affect the outcomes. Randomized control trials have not been able to provide clear conclusions. rEVAR can now be considered a safe method of treating rAAA, and is at least equal to the well-established rOR method.

Type IIIb Endoleak With the Endurant Stent-Graft

Purpose: To report 2 cases of type IIIb endoleak with the Endurant stent-graft and postulate the cause for the events. Case Report: A type IIIb endoleak was diagnosed at open conversion for a ruptured aneurysm 4 years after implantation of an Endurant stent-graft. In the other case, the endoleak was diagnosed at angiography 4 years after the Endurant stent-graft was implanted; the stent-graft was relined. In both cases the fabric hole was in the body of the stent-graft at the level of the top of the contralateral limb. Conclusion: The cause of the type IIIb endoleaks in these cases was fabric erosion likely due to interaction between the bare metal at the top of the contralateral limb and the fabric of the stent-graft body.

Endovascular conversion into aorto-uniiliac configuration of acute failed endovascular aneurysm repair is associated with better one-year survival rates compared to open conversion

BACKGROUND

Open conversions (OC) due to failed endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) are technically demanding because of preexisting prostheses and advanced aortic disease. This study evaluates the feasibility and outcomes of aorto-uniiliac endografting (AUI) as an alternative treatment option in acute failed EVAR.

METHODS

From March 1995 through February 2012, 26 patients underwent acute conversion of failed EVAR at our tertiary care university center. All data were prospectively entered in our institutional database. Outcomes included 30-day or in-hospital mortality, postoperative complications, and mid-term survival.

RESULTS

During the investigation period, a total of 692 patients received EVAR at our institution, while five of the 26 patients with acute conversion (19.2%) had an initial EVAR at an outlying institution and were referred for treatment. Therefore, our estimated institutional rate of acute conversions was 3% (21 of 692 EVAR). OC were performed in 14 patients (53.8%), while 12 patients underwent AUI (46.2%). An average time of 20.3 months (median: 18.6; interquartile range Q1-Q3: 0.0-38.6) elapsed between the initial EVAR and the acute conversion. All acute AUI conversion procedures were completed successfully. The 30-day mortality following acute conversions was 42.3% and since the use of AUI, it could be reduced to 33.3%. Kaplan-Meier estimates revealed a survival advantage for AUI at one year (p = 0.046), but the benefit was lost by mid-term follow-up (p = 0.103).

CONCLUSIONS

AUI for the treatment of acute failed EVAR represents a feasible and less invasive alternative to OC, and is associated with better one-year survival rates.

In Situ Fenestration Through the Contralateral Iliac Artery to Convert an Aortouni-iliac Into a Bifurcated Endograft

Purpose: To present a technique of in situ fenestration that allows conversion of an aortouni-iliac endograft into a bifurcated endograft, thereby avoiding crossover femorofemoral bypass and its complications. Technique: Following conventional deployment of an aortouni-iliac endograft, in situ fenestration through the contralateral common iliac artery is performed with a transjugular intrahepatic access set. The fabric hole is enlarged using a cutting balloon and a high-pressure noncompliant balloon. Kissing iliac-covered stents are then positioned at the level of the bifurcation to convert the aortouni-iliac endograft into a bifurcated repair. To date, this technique has been successfully used in 4 patients with satisfactory short-term results. Conclusion: This technique represents another application of endograft in situ fenestration. This strategy provides a bifurcated repair in cases where bifurcated stent-grafts are usually precluded, such as a narrow distal aorta, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, or combined aortoiliac occlusive disease.

Midterm Re-interventions and Survival After Endovascular Versus Open Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

OBJECTIVE

To compare the midterm re-intervention and survival rates after EVAR and OR for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAA).

METHODS

Observational cohort study including all consecutive RAAA patients between 2004 and 2011 in 10 hospitals in the Amsterdam ambulance region. The primary end point was re-interventions within 5 years of the primary intervention. The secondary end point was death. The outcomes were estimated by survival analyses, compared using the logrank test, and subsequently adjusted for possible confounders using Cox proportional hazard models. Re-interventions were estimated in all patients and in patients who survived their hospital stay.

RESULTS

Of 467 patients with a RAAA, 73 were treated by EVAR and 394 by OR. Five years after the primary intervention, the rates of freedom from re-intervention were 55% for EVAR (26/73, 95% CI: 41-69%) and 60% for OR (130/394, 95% CI: 55-66%) (p = .96). After adjustment for age, sex, comorbidity, and pre-operative hemodynamic stability, the risk of re-intervention was similar (HR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.65-1.55). The survival rates were 36% for EVAR (45/73, 95% CI: 24-47%) and 38% for OR (235/394, 95% CI: 33-43%) (p = .83). In 297 patients who survived their hospital stay, the rates of freedom from re-intervention were 66% for EVAR (15/54, 95% CI: 52-81%) and 90% for OR (20/243, 95% CI: 86-95%) (p < .01). After adjustment for age and sex, the risk of re-intervention was higher after EVAR (HR 0.27, 95% CI: 0.14-0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Five years after the primary intervention, endovascular and open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm resulted in similar re-intervention and survival rates. However, in patients who survived their hospital stay the re-intervention rate was higher for EVAR than for OR.