Search

Vascular graft and endograft infections (VGEIs) are a feared complication because of their morbidity, cost, and mortality. Despite broad and varying strategies, as well as limited evidence, societal guidelines do exist. The objective of this review was to supplement current guidelines with emerging and multimodal techniques for treatment. An electronic search was performed using PubMed with specific search terms from 2019 to 2022 in which VGEIs were described or analyzed in the carotid, thoracic aorta, abdominal, or lower extremity arteries. A total of 12 studies were collected from the electronic search. Articles describing all of the anatomic areas were present. The incidence of VGEIs depends on the anatomic location, varying from

BACKGROUND: To report technical and clinical 30-day results following treatment with the Zenith Alpha™ abdominal stent graft from the ZEnith alPHa for aneurYsm Repair Registry (ZEPHYR).METHODS: Multicenter, nonrandomized, single arm, core laboratory-controlled, prospective registry collecting data on the Zenith Alpha Abdominal Endovascular Graft being used in subjects with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) from sites in Germany, Belgium, and The Netherlands between December 2016 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were non-ruptured AAAs with a maximum diameter ≥50 mm or enlargement >5 mm over 6 months with an AAA neck length ≥10 mm (site reported). Primary outcome measure was treatment success at 30 days. Treatment success was defined as a combined endpoint consisting of technical and clinical success. Technical success was defined as successful stent graft delivery and deployment as well as successful removal of the delivery system. Clinical success at 30 days was defined as freedom from type I and III endoleak, aneurysm rupture, conversion to open surgery and stent graft occlusion.RESULTS: Three hundred forty-seven subjects were included from 14 sites with a median age of 73.0 years (IQR 68.0-79.0). Thirty-four patients were female (9.8%). The median AAA diameter was 58.3 mm (IQR 55.0-63.5). The median proximal neck diameter was 23.6 mm (IQR 22.0-25.2) with a median proximal neck length of 24.4 mm (IQR 15.0-34.8) and a median infrarenal neck angulation of 24.5° (IQR 15.0-35.0). The right and left common iliac diameter were 16.1 mm (IQR 14.1-19.4) and 16.2 mm (IQR 14.1-19.1), respectively. The treatment success rate at 30 days was 94.8% (N = 329). Technical success was achieved in 333 patients (96.0%). The clinical success rate at 30 days was 98.8% (N = 343). Three patients had limb occlusions at 30 day follow up (0.9%). One patient had a type Ib endoleak (0.3%). Seventy percent of vascular access approaches were percutaneous. The reintervention rate was 1.7% (N = 6) within 30 days. Indications for reinterventions were a false aneurysm at puncture site (N = 1), limb complications (N = 2), stentgraft-associated renal artery occlusions (N = 2), and an external iliac artery thrombosis (N = 1).CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular aneurysm repair using the Zenith Alpha Abdominal Endovascular Graft is effective in the short term. Long term results will be reported in the future.

BACKGROUND: The complications discussed with patients by surgeons prior to surgery vary, because no consensus on major complications exists. Such consensus may improve informed consent and shared decision-making. This study aimed to achieve consensus among vascular surgeons on which complications are considered 'major' and which 'minor,' following surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), carotid artery disease (CAD) and peripheral artery disease (PAD).METHODS: Complications following vascular surgery were extracted from Cochrane reviews, national guidelines, and reporting standards. Vascular surgeons from Europe and North America rated complications as major or minor on five-point Likert scales via an electronic Delphi method. Consensus was reached if ≥ 80% of participants scored 1 or 2 (minor) or 4 or 5 (major).RESULTS: Participants reached consensus on 9-12 major and 6-10 minor complications per disease. Myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure and allergic reactions were considered to be major complications of all three diseases. All other major complications were treatment specific or dependent on disease severity, e.g., spinal cord ischemia, rupture following AAA repair, stroke for CAD or deep wound infection for PAD.CONCLUSION: Vascular surgeons reached international consensus on major and minor complications following AAA, CAD and PAD treatment. This consensus may be helpful in harmonizing the information patients receive and improving standardization of the informed consent procedure. Since major complications differed between diseases, consensus on disease-specific complications to be discussed with patients is necessary.

BACKGROUND: Colonic ischemia remains a severe complication after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair and is associated with a high mortality. With open repair being one of the main risk factors of colonic ischemia, deciding between endovascular or open aneurysm repair should be based on tailor-made medicine. This study aims to identify high-risk patients of colonic ischemia, a risk that can be taken into account while deciding on AAA treatment strategy.METHODS: A nationwide population-based cohort study of 9,433 patients who underwent an AAA operation between 2014 and 2016 was conducted. Potential risk factors were determined by reviewing prior studies and univariate analysis. With logistic regression analysis, independent predictors of intestinal ischemia were established. These variables were used to form a prediction model.RESULTS: Intestinal ischemia occurred in 267 patients (2.8%). Occurrence of intestinal ischemia was seen significantly more in open repair versus endovascular aneurysm repair (7.6% vs. 0.9%; P < 0.001). This difference remained significant after stratification by urgency of the procedure, in both intact open (4.2% vs. 0.4%; P < 0.001) and ruptured open repair (15.0% vs. 6.2%); P < 0.001). Rupture of the AAA was the most important predictor of developing intestinal ischemia (odds ratio [OR], 5.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.4-8.0), followed by having a suprarenal AAA (OR 3.4; CI 1.1-10.6). Associated procedural factors were open repair (OR 2.8; 95% CI 1.9-4.2), blood loss >1L (OR 3.6; 95% CI 1.7-7.5), and prolonged operating time (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.4-2.8). Patient characteristics included having peripheral arterial disease (OR 2.4; 95% CI 1.3-4.4), female gender (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.2-2.4), renal insufficiency (OR 1.7; 1.3-2.2), and pulmonary history (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.2-2.2). Age CONCLUSIONS: One of the main risk factors is open repair. Several other risk factors can contribute to developing colonic ischemia after AAA repair. The proposed prediction model can be used to identify patients at high risk for developing colonic ischemia. With the current trend in AAA repair leaning toward open repair for better long-term results, our prediction model allows a better informed decision can be made in AAA treatment strategy.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to develop a procedure specific assessment tool for open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, gather validity evidence for the tool and establish a pass/fail standard.METHODS: Validity was studied based on the contemporary framework by Messick. Three vascular surgeons experienced in open AAA repair and an expert in assessment and validation within medical education developed the OPEn aortic aneurysm Repair Assessment of Technical Expertise (OPERATE) tool. Vascular surgeons with varying experiences performed open AAA repair in a standardised simulation based setting. All procedures were video recorded with the faces anonymised and scored independently by three experts in a mutual blinded setup. The Angoff standard setting method was used to establish a credible pass/fail score.RESULTS: Sixteen novices and nine experienced open vascular surgeons were enrolled. The OPERATE tool achieved high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha .92) and inter-rater reliability (Cronbach's alpha .95) and was able to differentiate novices and experienced surgeons with mean scores (higher score is better) of 13.4 ± 12 and 25.6 ± 6, respectively (p = .01). The pass/fail score was set high (27.7). One novice passed the test while six experienced surgeons failed.CONCLUSION: Validity evidence was established for the newly developed OPERATE tool and was able to differentiate between novices and experienced surgeons providing a good argument that this tool can be used for both formative and summative assessment in a simulation based environment. The high pass/fail score emphasises the need for novices to train in a simulation based environment up to a certain level of competency before apprenticeship training in the clinical environment under the tutelage of a supervisor. Familiarisation with the simulation equipment must be ensured before performance is assessed as reflected by the low scores in the experienced group's first attempt.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) have a high prevalence of incisional hernia following open repair. The choice of incision and closure technique has a significant impact on this post-operative complication. Multiple techniques exist, as well as various comparative analyses, but clinical consensus is lacking. The objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of AAA laparotomy and closure technique and the risk of incisional hernia development.METHODS: The systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. A literature search of all original research published until January 2019 was made. Outcome measures were surgical approach, closure technique, hernia rates, length of follow up, and method of hernia recognition. Groups were divided according to method of abdominal incision and closure technique. Differences in outcome between closure techniques were expressed as risk ratios with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random effects model.RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included with a cumulative cohort of between 388 and 3 399 patients compared in each group. Abdominal closure with a suture to wound length ratio of more than 4:1 compared with less than 4:1, RR 0.42 (95% CI 0.27-0.65), and abdominal closure with mesh compared with without mesh augmentation, RR 0.24 (95% CI 0.10-0.60) reduced the risk of incisional hernia. There were no significant differences in incisional hernia rate between transverse abdominal incision vs. vertical midline incision, RR 0.57 (95% CI 0.31-1.06) and between midline transperitoneal vs. all retroperitoneal incisions, RR 1.19 (95% CI 0.54-2.61).CONCLUSION: Choice of abdominal closure technique after aneurysm surgery impacts the risk of developing incisional hernia. The use of a supportive mesh significantly reduces the risk of incisional hernia in vertical midline incisions. The same is true if a suture to wound ratio of more than 4:1 is used.

INTRODUCTION: Colon ischaemia (CI) is a significant complication of open (OR) and endovascular (EVAR) repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). With a rapid increase in EVAR uptake, contemporary data demonstrating the differing rates and outcomes of CI between EVAR and OR, particularly in the elective setting, are lacking. The aim was to characterise the risk and consequences of CI in elective AAA repair comparing EVAR with OR.METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was performed using the Cochrane collaboration protocol and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, MedLine, and EMBASE were searched for studies reporting CI rates after elective AAA repair. Ruptured AAAs were excluded from analysis.RESULTS: Thirteen studies reporting specific outcomes of CI after elective AAA repair, containing 162,750 evaluable patients (78,151 EVAR and 84,599 OR) were included. All studies found a higher risk of CI with OR than with EVAR. Three studies performed confounder adjustment with CI rates of 0.5-1% versus 2.1-3.6% (EVAR vs. OR) and combined odds ratio of 2.7 (2.0-3.5) for the development of CI with OR versus EVAR. The majority of cases of CI occurred within 30 days and were associated with variable mortality (0-73%) and re-intervention rates (27-54%). GRADE assessment of evidence strength was very low for all outcomes. There was a high degree of heterogeneity between studies both methodologically and in terms of CI rates, re-intervention, mortality, and time to development of CI.CONCLUSIONS: EVAR is associated with a reduced incidence of CI compared with OR.

Objectives: Diagnosing colonic ischaemia (CI) after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) repair is challenging. This study determined the diagnostic value of sigmoidoscopy in patients suspected of CI after RAAA repair. Methods: This was a retrospective multicentre cohort study. Patients who underwent RAAA repair in three hospitals in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, between 2004 and 2011 (AJAX cohort) were included. Sigmoidoscopies were carried out based on clinical judgment. Endoscopy results were classified as “no ischaemia,” “mild CI,” or “moderate to severe CI.” The surgical diagnosis was classified as “transmural” or “no transmural” CI. The value of sigmoidoscopy was assessed with calculation of positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) with 95% CI for transmural CI. Logistic regression analysis was used to express the association of risk factors with CI as adjusted OR. Results: Transmural CI was diagnosed in 23 of 351 patients (6.6%). Thirteen of sixteen patients (81%) who underwent direct laparotomy for high suspicion of CI indeed had transmural CI. Forty-six patients (13%) underwent sigmoidoscopy. The prevalence of transmural CI was 22% (10/46; 95% CI 12–36%) in these patients. The PPV for transmural CI of “moderate to severe CI” on sigmoidoscopy was 73% (8/11; 95% CI 43–90%). The PPV of “mild CI” on sigmoidoscopy was 11% (2/19; 95% CI 2.9–31%). The NPV of “no ischaemia” on sigmoidoscopy was 100% (95% CI 78–100%). Cardiac comorbidity (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.19–7.97), low first haemoglobin (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.47–0.87), and high vasopressor administration (OR 9.4, 95% CI 1.99–44.46) were independently associated with CI. Conclusions: Sigmoidoscopy increases the likelihood of correctly identifying the presence or absence of transmural CI, especially in patients with a moderate clinical suspicion for CI after RAAA repair.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS In this study the influence of low socioeconomic status (SES) on severity of disease at presentation and survival following vascular surgery was assessed. The present data underline the importance of socioeconomic deprivation as a risk factor for delayed presentation and the prognosis of vascular surgical patients independent of healthcare disparities. Therefore, increasing focus on low SES as a risk factor may improve outcome of socioeconomically deprived patients undergoing vascular surgery. Objective/Background: The association between socioeconomic status (SES), presentation, and outcome after vascular surgery is largely unknown. This study aimed to determine the influence of SES on post-operative survival and severity of disease at presentation among vascular surgery patients in the Dutch setting of equal access to and provision of care. Methods: Patients undergoing surgical treatment for peripheral artery disease (PAD), abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), or carotid artery stenosis between January 2003 and December 2011 were retrospectively included. The association between SES, quantified by household income, disease severity at presentation, and survival was studied using logistic and Cox regression analysis adjusted for demographics, and medical and behavioral risk factors. Results: A total of 1,178 patients were included. Low income was associated with worse post-operative survival in the PAD cohort (n ¼ 324, hazard ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00e1.10, per 5,000 Euro decrease) and the AAA cohort (n ¼ 440, quadratic relation, p ¼ .01). AAA patients in the lowest income quartile were more likely to present with a ruptured aneurysm (odds ratio [OR] 2.12, 95% CI 1.08e4.17). Lowest income quartile PAD patients presented more frequently with symptoms of critical limb ischemia, although no significant association could be established (OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.96e4.26). Conclusions: The increased health hazards observed in this study are caused by patient related factors rather than differences in medical care, considering the equality of care provided by the study setting. Although the exact mechanism driving the association between SES and worse outcome remains elusive, consideration of SES as a risk factor in pre-operative decision making and focus on treatment of known SES related behavioral and psychosocial risk factors may improve the outcome of patients with vascular disease.

Objective: Endograft mural thrombus has been associated with stent graft or limb thrombosis after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aimed to identify clinical and morphologic determinants of endograft mural thrombus accumulation and its influence on thromboembolic events after EVAR. Methods: A prospectively maintained database of patients treated by EVAR at a tertiary institution from 2000 to 2012 was analyzed. Patients treated for degenerative infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms and with available imaging for thrombus analysis were considered. All measurements were performed on three-dimensional center-lumen line computed tomography angiography (CTA) reconstructions. Patients with thrombus accumulation within the endograft's main body with a thickness >2 mm and an extension >25% of the main body's circumference were included in the study group and compared with a control group that included all remaining patients. Clinical and morphologic variables were assessed for association with significant thrombus accumulation within the endograft's main body by multivariate regression analysis. Estimates for freedom from thromboembolic events were obtained by Kaplan-Meier plots. Results: Sixty-eight patients (16.4%) presented with endograft mural thrombus. Median follow-up time was 3.54 years (interquartile range, 1.99-5.47 years). In-graft mural thrombus was identified on 30-day CTA in 22 patients (32.4% of the study group), on 6-month CTA in 8 patients (11.8%), and on 1-year CTA in 17 patients (25%). Intraprosthetic thrombus progressively accumulated during the study period in 40 patients of the study group (55.8%). Overall, 17 patients (4.1%) presented with endograft or limb occlusions, 3 (4.4%) in the thrombus group and 14 (4.1%) in the control group (P = .89). Thirty-one patients (7.5%) received an aortouni-iliac (AUI) endograft. Two endograft occlusions were identified among AUI devices (6.5%; overall, 0.5%). None of these patients showed thrombotic deposits in the main body, nor were any outflow abnormalities identified on the immediately preceding CTA. Estimated freedom from thromboembolic events at 5 years was 95% in both groups (P = .97). Endograft thrombus accumulation was associated with >25% proximal aneurysm neck thrombus coverage at baseline (odds ratio [OR], 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.3), neck length = 30 mm (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.6), AUI (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.8-5.5), or polyester-covered stent grafts (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 2.2-7.3) and with main component "barrel-like" configuration (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.7-28.3). Conclusions: Mural thrombus formation within the main body of the endograft is related to different endograft configurations, main body geometry, and device fabric but appears to have no association with the occurrence of thromboembolic events over time.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although it has become clear that aneurysmal and occlusive arterial disease represent two distinct etiologic entities, it is still unknown whether the two vascular pathologies are prognostically different. We aim to assess the long-term vital prognosis of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysmal disease (AAA) or peripheral artery disease (PAD), focusing on possible differences in survival, prognostic risk profiles and causes of death. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective surgery for isolated AAA or PAD between 2003 and 2011 were retrospectively included. Differences in postoperative survival were determined using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. Prognostic risk profiles were also established with Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: 429 and 338 patients were included in the AAA and PAD groups, respectively. AAA patients were older (71.7 vs. 63.3 years, p < 0.001), yet overall survival following surgery did not differ (HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.87-1.54). Neither was type of vascular disease associated with postoperative cardiovascular nor cancer-related death. However, in comparison with age- and gender-matched general populations, cardiovascular mortality was higher in PAD than AAA patients (48.3% vs. 17.3%). Survival of AAA and PAD patients was negatively affected by age, history of cancer and renal insufficiency. Additional determinants in the PAD group were diabetes and ischemic heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival after surgery for PAD and AAA is similar. However, overall life expectancy is significantly worse among PAD patients. The contribution of cardiovascular disease towards mortality in PAD patients warrants more aggressive secondary prevention to reduce cardiovascular mortality and improve longevity.

[no abstract]

[no abstract]

Objectives\ud \ud New and re-designed stent grafts for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) are released regularly. Manufacturers use data from registries to assess stent graft performance, but little is known about the ability of such registries to detect rates of clinically relevant complications. The aim of this paper was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine pooled failure rates for EVAR stent grafts, to define an acceptable non-inferiority limit for these devices, and then to calculate the number of patients needed for a new device to achieve non-inferiority against published devices.\ud \ud \ud Data sources and review methods\ud \ud MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for studies reporting outcomes of specific EVAR grafts being used for intact infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms, from inception to November 2016. Meta-regression was performed to pool data and calculate the patient numbers needed to detect non-inferiority of a future graft performance. An expert consensus was performed to define adequate standards for device safety.\ud \ud \ud Results\ud \ud One hundred and forty-seven moderate quality papers involving 27,058 patients were included. Multiple outcomes were pooled. Of these, the estimated rate (±standard error) of overall endoleak (excluding Type II) at 2 years was 5.7 ± 0.6%. The pooled re-intervention rate was 11.1 ± 0.7% at 2 years. There were differences in pooled endoleak rates between different stent graft types. Expert consensus defined non-inferiority as better performance than the worst performing 25% of stent grafts. The most popular outcome in the expert consensus was cumulative endoleak rate (excluding Type II). The number of patients who would need to be enrolled in a registry to demonstrate non-inferiority at this level was 525. Only two of 147 included studies achieved this. The second most popular choice in the expert consensus was re-intervention rate; 492 patients are required to demonstrate this.\ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud Five hundred and twenty-five patients need to be entered into a registry to demonstrate non-inferiority to previous stent grafts. Almost all previous publications have captured lower patient numbers. With performance varying between devices, and new devices being introduced regularly, there is an urgent need to capture higher quality long-term data on EVAR stent grafts.

Mycotic abdominal aortic aneurysms (MAAAs) are rare entities accounting for 0.65-2% of aortic aneurysms. Campylobacter fetus has a tropism for vascular tissue and is a rare cause of mycotic aneurysm. We present a 73-year-old male patient with contained rupture of a MAAA caused by C. fetus, successfully treated with endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and antibiotics, which is not previously described for this aetiology. Although open surgery is the gold standard, EVAR is nowadays feasible and potentially represents a durable option, especially in frail patients.

Objective Although evidence has shown that ischemic heart disease (IHD) in vascular surgery patients has a negative impact on the prognosis after surgery, it is unclear whether directed treatment of IHD may influence cause-specific and overall mortality. The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic implication of coronary revascularization (CR) on overall and cause-specific mortality in vascular surgery patients. Methods Patients undergoing surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm, carotid artery stenosis, or peripheral artery disease in a university hospital in The Netherlands between January 2003 and December 2011 were retrospectively included. Survival estimates were obtained by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. Results A total of 1104 patients were included. Adjusted survival analyses showed that IHD significantly increased the risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.87) and cardiovascular death (HR, 1.93; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-2.76). Compared with those without CR, patients previously undergoing CR had similar overall mortality (HR, 1.38 vs 1.62; P = .274) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.83 vs 2.02; P = .656). Nonrevascularized IHD patients were more likely to die of IHD (6.9% vs 35.7%), whereas revascularized IHD patients more frequently died of cardiovascular causes unrelated to IHD (39.1% vs 64.3%; P = .018). Conclusions This study confirms the significance of IHD for postoperative survival of vascular surgery patients. CR was associated with lower IHD-related death rates. However, it failed to provide an overall survival benefit because of an increased rate of cardiovascular mortality unrelated to IHD. Intensification of secondary prevention regimens may be required to prevent this shift toward non-IHD-related death and thereby improve life expectancy.