Search

Background: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) represents a valid treatment modality for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs). This study aimed to present rAAA outcomes treated by EVAR using the Endurant endograft. Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis of consecutive patients treated with standard EVAR (sEVAR) or parallel graft (PG)-EVAR for infra- or juxta/para-renal rAAA using the Endurant endograft (1 January 2008–31 December 2023) was undertaken. The primary outcomes were technical success, mortality, and reintervention. Follow-up outcomes, including survival and freedom from reintervention, were assessed using Kaplan–Meier estimates. Results: Eighty-eight patients were included (87.5% sEVAR and 12.5% PG-EVAR). The mean aneurysm diameter was 73.3 ± 19.3 mm (71.4 ± 22.2 mm sEVAR and 81.7 ± 33.0 mm PG-EVAR). Among 77 patients receiving sEVAR, 26 (33.8%) received an aorto-uni-iliac device. All PG-EVAR patients were managed with bifurcated devices, one receiving a single PG, seven double PGS, and three triple PGs. Technical success was 98.8% (100.0% sEVAR and 90.9% PG-EVAR). The 30-day mortality was 47.2% (50.7% sEVAR and 27.3% PG-EVAR), with nine (10.2%) deaths recorded on the table. The mean time of follow-up was 13 ± 9 months. After excluding 30-day deaths, the estimated survival was 75.5% (standard error (SE) 6.9%) at 24 months. The estimated freedom from reintervention was 89.7% (SE 5.7%) at 24 months. Only one endoleak type Ia event was recorded during follow-up. Conclusions: Endurant showed high technical success rates and low rates of endoleak type Ia events and reinterventions, despite the emergent setting of repair. rAAA is still a highly fatal condition within 30 days, with an acceptable mid-term survival of 30-day survivors at 75.5%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: COVID-19 associated arterial thrombosis has been attributed to multiple inflammation and coagulation mechanisms. The aim of this study was to report the experience of a tertiary center on COVID-19 patients managed for acute peripheral arterial thrombosis. Methods: A single-center case series was conducted, including retrospectively collected data from all COVID-19 patients presenting arterial thrombosis, from March 2020 to February 2022. Intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU cases were included. The primary outcomes were mortality, successful revascularization, and amputation at 30 days. Results: Twenty patients presented peripheral arterial thrombosis (90% males, mean age 65 years (16–82 years)). Eighteen were diagnosed with the Delta variant and none was previously vaccinated. All cases presented acute lower limb ischemia; in 20% with bilateral involvement. Nine patients were hospitalized in the ward while 11 in the ICU. From the non-ICU cases, five presented Rutherford IIb and four cases, Rutherford's IIa ischemia. Six cases underwent revascularization (67%). Two of them were finally amputated (33%) and two died during hospitalization (33%). Two revascularizations were considered successful (33%). The ICU group presented mainly with Rutherford's III ischemia (54.5%). The mortality in the ICU cohort was 72.7%. Only one patient underwent successful revascularization and two were amputated in this subgroup. Early mortality was 50% for the total cohort while the type of management was not related to mortality. Conclusions: Covid-19 related arterial thrombosis in non-vaccinated population is associated with 50% early mortality; increased up to 72% in the ICU patients. The amputation rate was 20% while only 40% of the revascularizations were considered successful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been a debate about whether maximum diameter can be solely used to assess the natural history of abdominal aortic aneurysm. The aim of the present review is to collect all the available evidence on the role of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) volume in the natural history of AAAs, including small untreated AAAs and AAAs treated by EVAR. The current literature appears to reinforce the role of volume as a supplementary measure for evaluating the natural history of AAA, in both intact AAAs and after EVAR. The clinical impact of AAA volume measurements remains unclear. Several studies show that volumetric analysis can assess changes in AAAs and predict successful endoluminal exclusion after EVAR more accurately than diameter. However, most studies lack strict standardized measurement criteria and well-defined outcome definitions. It remains unclear whether volumetry could replace diameter assessment in defining the risk of rupture of AAAs and identifying clinically relevant sac growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Currently there is no robust evidence which type of bridging stent graft provides better outcomes after branched endovascular aortic repair (BEVAR). Self-expanding (SESG) and balloon-expandable (BESG) stent grafts are both commonly used to connect branches to their respective target vessels (TV). The aim of the current review was to evaluate the impact of the type of bridging stent grafts on TV outcomes during the mid-term follow-up after BEVAR. Materials and Methods: The study protocol was registered to the PROSPERO (CRD42021274766). A search of the English literature was conducted, using PubMed and EMBASE databases via Ovid and Cochrane database via CENTRAL, from inception to June 30, 2021, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Only comparative studies on BEVAR reporting TV outcomes related to BESG vs SESG were considered eligible. Individual studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. The primary outcomes were primary patency, freedom from endoleak, TV instability, and re-intervention between BESG and SESG, used as bridging stents in branches. The outcomes were summarized as odds ratio along with their 95% confidence intervals (CI), through a paired meta-analysis. Results: Five out of 609 articles published from 2016 to 2020 were included in the analysis. In total, 1406 TV were revascularized, 547 (38.9 %) with BESGs and 859 with SESGs. The overall pooled primary patency (odds ratio [OR], 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29–1.09; p=.256, I2=4.24%) and freedom from branch-related endoleak (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.17–1.48; p<.122, I2=0.18%) did not differ between the stent types during the available follow-up (17 months, range = 12–35 months). In 4 studies (619 TV), SESG required fewer secondary interventions (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.23–1.83; p=.009, I2=0%) and TV instability rate was lower (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.33–1.65; p=.003, I2=0%) compared with BESG during the available follow-up. Conclusion: BESG and SESG seem to perform similarly in terms of primary patency and branch-related endoleak during the mid-term follow-up. Current data from retrospective studies suggest that overall TV instability and re-intervention rates are favorable for SESG as bridging stent grafts in BEVAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]