Search

Purpose: To evaluate the technical success and complication rates of vascular closure devices (VCDs) in the axillary artery. Materials and Methods: MEDLINE and Embase were searched independently by two reviewers to identify observational studies from inception through October 2021. The following outcomes were meta-analyzed: technical success, hematoma, dissection, pseudoaneurysm, infection, and local neurological complications. Complications were also graded as mild, moderate, and severe. A logistic regression evaluating the influence of sheath size for the outcome of technical success rate was performed using individual patient–level data. Results: Of 1496 unique records, 20 observational studies were included, totaling 915 unique arterial access sites. Pooled estimates were as follows: technical success 84.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78%–89.7%, I2=60.4%), hematoma 7.9% (95% CI: 5.8%–10.6%, I2=0%), dissection 3.1% (95% CI: 1.3%–7.3%, I2=0%), pseudoaneurysm 2.7% (95% CI: 1.3%–5.7%, I2=0%), infection <1% (95% CI: 0%–5.7%, I2=20.5%), and local neurological complications 2.7% (95% CI: 1.7%–4.4%, I2=0%). There was a significant negative association between sheath size and technical success rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.87 per 1 French (Fr) increase in sheath size, 95% CI: 0.80–0.94, p=0.0005). Larger sheath sizes were associated with a greater number of access-site complications (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.21 per 1 Fr increase sheath size, 95% CI: 1.04–1.40, p=0.013). Conclusions: Off-label use of VCDs in the axillary artery provides an 85% successful closure rate and variable complication rate, depending on the primary procedure and sheath size. Larger sheaths were associated with a lower technical success and greater rate of access-related complications. Clinical Impact: Safe arterial access is the foundation for arterial intervention. While the common femoral artery is a well established access site, alternative arterial access sites capable of larger sheath sizes are needed in the modern endovascular era. This article provides the largest synthesis to date on the use of vascular closure devices for percutaneous axillary artery access in endovascular intervention. It should serve clinicians with added confidence around this approach in terms of providing a reference for technical success and complications. Clinically, this data is relevant for patient consent purposes as well as for practice quality improvement in setting safety standards for this access site. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical cases referring to the EACTS/STS Guidelines for diagnosing and treating acute and chronic syndromes of the aortic organ aim to assist physicians in selecting the best management strategies for individual patients with a given condition. These expert opinions consider the impact on patient outcomes as well as the risk–benefit ratio of different diagnostic or therapeutic methods. These cases serve as a vital tool to aid physicians in making decisions in their daily practice. However, in essence, although these recommendations serve as a valuable resource to guide clinical practice, their application should be tailored to the needs of the individual patient. Each patient's case is unique, presenting its own set of variables and circumstances. This editorial is a tool designed to support, but not supersede, the decision-making process of physicians, based on their knowledge, expertise and understanding of their patients' individual situations. Furthermore, these clinical cases are based on the EACTS/STS Guidelines for diagnosing and treating acute and chronic syndromes of the aortic organ but should not be interpreted as legally binding documents. The legal responsibilities of healthcare professionals remain firmly grounded in applicable laws and regulations, and the guidelines and the clinical cases presented in this document do not alter these obligations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Acute aortic dissection is a rare but frequently fatal aortic catastrophe with high morbidity and mortality. Especially in pregnant patients, acute dissection is often misdiagnosed putting two lives on the line. Due to its scarcity, only case reports have been reported. The aim of this study is to analyze the time of aortic dissection during the course of pregnancy and the outcome of emergency surgery in pregnant women with and without hereditary connective tissue disorder. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all acute aortic dissections (type A and B) who underwent emergency aortic surgery at our institution between 1994 and 2022 and identified 13 patients with acute aortic dissection during pregnancy or directly postpartum. Mann–Whitney U and Fisher's exact tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: Of the 13 included patients, 5 had a genetic syndrome. These patients were significantly younger at the time of dissection and at an earlier stage of pregnancy (second trimester). Even though operative and in-house mortality was zero, we lost one patient on postoperative day 14 due to rupture of the aortic root after transfer to another hospital. Survival of neonates was 77% including two aborted pregnancies. Conclusions: Surgical treatment of acute aortic dissection during pregnancy can be performed with excellent operative mortality for the mothers and satisfying survival of their neonates. In patients with genetic syndrome, dissection occurs during the early second trimester, whereas non-syndromic patients experience acute dissection in the late third trimester. Long-term follow-up is essential for timely re-intervention, if needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to analyse the indications, surgical extent and results of treatment, as well as determine the risk factors for adverse outcomes after redo arch surgery. METHODS Between January 1996 and December 2022, 120 patients underwent aortic arch reoperations after primary proximal aortic surgery. We retrospectively analysed perioperative data, as well as early and mid-term outcomes in these patients. RESULTS Indications for arch reintervention included new aortic aneurysm in 34 patients (28.3%), expanding post-dissection aneurysm in 36 (30.0%), aortic graft infection in 39 (32.5%) and new aortic dissection in 9 cases. Two patients underwent reoperation due to iatrogenic complications. Thirty-one patients (25.8%) had concomitant endocarditis. In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were 11.7% and 15.0%, respectively. Stroke was observed in 11 (9.2%) and paraplegia in 1 patient. Prior surgery due to aneurysm [odds ratio 4.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4–17.3] and critical preoperative state (odds ratio 5.9; 95% CI 1.5–23.7) were independent predictors of 30-day mortality. Overall 1- and 5-year survival was 65.8 ± 8.8% and 51.2 ± 10.6%, respectively. Diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio 2.4; 95% CI 1.0–5.1) and peripheral arterial disease (hazard ratio 4.7; 95% CI 1.1–14.3) were independent predictors of late death. The cumulative incidence of reoperations was 12.6% (95% CI 6.7–20.4%) at 5 years. Accounting for mortality as a competing event, connective tissue disorders (subdistribution hazard ratio 4.5; 95% CI 1.6–15.7) and interval between primary and redo surgery (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.04; 95% CI 1.02–1.06) were independent predictors of reoperations after redo arch surgery. CONCLUSIONS Despite being technically demanding, aortic arch reoperations are feasible and can be performed with acceptable results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES The Bentall procedure is the gold standard for patients with combined aortic root dilation and valve dysfunction. Over the past decade, fast-track (FT) perioperative anaesthetic management protocols have progressively evolved. We reviewed our results for selected patients undergoing Bentall surgery under an FT protocol. METHODS We retrospectively analysed a consecutive cohort of patients who underwent elective Bentall procedures at our institution between 2000 and 2018. Complex aortic root repair (i.e. David and Ross procedure, redo surgery, major concomitant procedures, emergency repair for acute dissections) was excluded. Patients who underwent conventional perioperative treatment and those treated according to our institutional FT concept were compared following 1:1 propensity score matching. RESULTS Of 772 patients who fit the in- and exclusion criteria, 565 were treated conventionally post-surgery, while 207 were treated using the FT protocol. Propensity score matching resulted in 197 pairs, with no differences in baseline characteristics after matching. In-house mortality, 30-day mortality and overall all-cause long-term mortality were comparable between the FT and the conventionally treated cohort. Postoperative anaesthetic care unit/intensive care unit length-of-stay (6.2 vs 20.6 h, P  = 0.03) and postoperative ventilation times (158.9 vs 465.5 min, P  < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the FT cohort. There were no differences in rates of postoperative adverse events. CONCLUSIONS In centres with experienced anaesthesiologists, perioperative FT management is non-inferior to conventionally treated patients undergoing elective Bentall procedures without compromising patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]