RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To report the device performance and safety for the Surfacer Inside-Out access catheter system in patients with thoracic central venous obstruction (TCVO) requiring central venous access (CVA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five sites prospectively enrolled 30 patients requiring a tunneled dialysis catheter between February 2017 and September 2018 in the SAVE (Surfacer System to Facilitate Access in Venous Obstructions) registry. Patient demographics, medical history, and type of TCVO were documented at enrollment. Device performance and adverse events were collected during the procedure and upon hospital discharge. Twenty-nine of the 30 patients enrolled required CVA for hemodialysis. Retrospective classification of TCVOs according to SIR reporting standards showed 9 patients (30%) had Type 4 obstructions, 8 (26.7%) had Type 3, 5 (16.7%) had Type 2, and 8 (26.7%) had Type 1 obstruction. RESULTS: Central venous catheters (CVCs) were successfully placed in 29 of 30 patients (96.7%). The procedure was discontinued in 1 patient due to vascular anatomical tortuosity. All 29 patients with successful CVC placement achieved adequate catheter patency and tip positioning. There were no device-related adverse events, catheter malposition, or intra- or postprocedural complications. Mean time from device insertion to removal for the 29 patients who successfully completed the procedure was 24 ± 14.9 (range, 6-70) minutes. Mean fluoroscopy time was 6.8 ± 4.5 (range, 2.2-25.5) minutes. CONCLUSIONS: The Surfacer Inside-Out procedure provided an alternative option to restore right-sided CVA in patients with TCVO.
Asunto(s)
Venas Braquiocefálicas , Cateterismo Venoso Central/instrumentación , Catéteres de Permanencia , Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Venas Yugulares , Diálisis Renal , Vena Subclavia , Enfermedades Vasculares , Vena Cava Superior , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Venas Braquiocefálicas/diagnóstico por imagen , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Constricción Patológica , Diseño de Equipo , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Venas Yugulares/diagnóstico por imagen , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros , América del Sur , Vena Subclavia/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades Vasculares/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades Vasculares/etiología , Vena Cava Superior/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to define the possible anatomical and technical parameter that might predict the occurrence of gutter endoleak or type Ia endoleak (EL Ia) in patients treated with the chimney graft (CG) technique for the brachiocephalic trunk (BCT) and left common carotid artery (LCCA) due to aortic arch pathologies. METHODS: We reviewed our institutional endovascular aortic database of patients, who between 2010 and 2018 had undergone thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with chimney graft technique (ChTEVAR) as a debranching method of the supraaortic arteries. RESULTS: ChTEVAR was performed in 45 patients of whom a chimney in both the LCCA and the BCT was used in 32 patients, only in the LCCA in twelve patients, and only in the BCT in one patient. Eight patients (17.8%) had an EL Ia (based on postoperative computed tomography angiography). No late EL Ia was detected during the follow-up period. All patients with a postoperative EL Ia received 2 CGs with one each for the BCT, and LCCA had either no or a sealing ring distal to the most distal chimney of less than 10 mm versus patients with a longer sealing zone (P = 0.043). Patients with an endoleak did not differ from those without endoleak with respect to stent-graft oversizing, the diameter of the proximal and distal landing zones, or the aortic diameter directly proximal to the pathology. CONCLUSIONS: A sealing ring distal to the most distal chimney of more than 10 mm seems to be associated with a reduced risk of an EL Ia. The relatively few patients and the single-center nature require larger studies to verify the present results.
Asunto(s)
Aorta Torácica/cirugía , Enfermedades de la Aorta/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Prótesis Vascular , Endofuga/etiología , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Anciano , Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagen , Aorta Torácica/fisiopatología , Enfermedades de la Aorta/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades de la Aorta/fisiopatología , Bases de Datos Factuales , Endofuga/diagnóstico por imagen , Endofuga/fisiopatología , Femenino , Alemania , Humanos , Masculino , Diseño de Prótesis , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of image fusion (IF) technology in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) on reducing radiation exposure (dose and time), amount of injected iodinated contrast medium needed, and procedure time. METHODS: We performed a review of our institutional endovascular aortic database of patients who had undergone TEVAR between 2008 and 2016 before and after the installation of a three-dimensional (3D) IF computed tomography system in our hybrid operating room. All patients were operated on using the same radiologic equipment with or without IF. RESULTS: The 146 patients who had undergone elective or emergent TEVAR with preoperative computed tomography angiography done in 1-mm-thick slices were divided into two groups: the IF group (98 patients), in which TEVAR was performed using intraoperative IF with the two-dimensional-3D registration method; and 48 controls without the use of IF. The IF group received a significantly reduced dose of contrast material, with a median of 70 mL (interquartile range [IQR], 50-101 mL) compared with controls receiving 104 mL (IQR, 69-168 mL; P < .001).Patients who underwent hybrid TEVAR had a significantly reduced procedure time under IF guidance (n = 25) compared with controls (n = 11; median, 162 minutes [IQR, 139-199 minutes] vs 213 minutes [IQR, 189-298 minutes]; P = .015). In addition, the intraoperative fluoroscopy time was reduced to 9 minutes (IQR, 6-13 minutes) vs 23 minutes (IQR, 12-45 minutes; P < .005). However, the radiation dose (dose-area product) was similar for the two groups (P = .37).In patients who underwent plain TEVAR (n = 74) without a carotid-subclavian bypass, the IF group needed significantly less contrast material (median, 64 mL [IQR, 43-81 mL]) compared with the control group (median, 98 mL [IQR, 60-180 mL]; P = .003), whereas intraoperative radiation exposition, procedure time, and fluoroscopy time did not statistically significantly differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The IF technology using the two-dimensional-3D registration method was associated with reduced intraoperative contrast material volume in performing TEVAR. IF seemed to shorten the operation and radiation times in the more complicated (hybrid) TEVAR cases. However, a prospective study is needed to look at the dose-area product, fluoroscopy time, and procedure time in a larger cohort of patients.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/cirugía , Aortografía/métodos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada/métodos , Medios de Contraste/administración & dosificación , Procedimientos Endovasculares/métodos , Imagenología Tridimensional/métodos , Tempo Operativo , Radiografía Intervencional/métodos , Cirugía Asistida por Computador/métodos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagen , Aortografía/efectos adversos , Prótesis Vascular , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada/efectos adversos , Medios de Contraste/efectos adversos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Femenino , Fluoroscopía , Humanos , Imagenología Tridimensional/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Imagen Multimodal , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Dosis de Radiación , Exposición a la Radiación/efectos adversos , Exposición a la Radiación/prevención & control , Radiografía Intervencional/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Stents , Cirugía Asistida por Computador/efectos adversos , Cirugía Asistida por Computador/instrumentación , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is becoming the preferred method to treat an aortic aneurysm with its better short-term postoperative mortality and morbidity rates in comparison with the open repair. A main drawback of this method is the need to use a nephrotoxic iodinated contrast medium to visualize the aorta and its side branches. CASE REPORT: An 83-year-old man with an asymptomatic infrarenal aortic aneurysm of a 51-mm diameter accompanied by a 42-mm aneurysm of the left common iliac artery was treated with combined fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) and iliac side branch stent graft (ISBG) under guidance of image fusion (IF) without the intraoperative use of iodinated contrast agent. CONCLUSIONS: Complex EVAR (FEVAR and ISBG) using computed tomography angiography IF is feasible and together with the use of CO2 angiography may help to abstain from need to nephrotoxic contrast medium.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Prótesis Vascular , Dióxido de Carbono/administración & dosificación , Medios de Contraste/administración & dosificación , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Aneurisma Ilíaco/cirugía , Imagen Multimodal/métodos , Stents , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta/diagnóstico por imagen , Aortografía , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada , Humanos , Aneurisma Ilíaco/diagnóstico por imagen , Masculino , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Diseño de Prótesis , Interpretación de Imagen Radiográfica Asistida por Computador , Resultado del Tratamiento , UltrasonografíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To describe a technique for trans-ascending aorta through-and-through guidewire placement for thoracic endograft advancement and deployment. CASE REPORT: A 55-year-old man presented with a symptomatic pseudoaneurysm of the distal aortic arch after aortic coarctation open repair. He had also undergone mechanical aortic valve replacement. Planned were a left-sided carotid-subclavian bypass and a thoracic endovascular aortic repair with a chimney graft to the left common carotid artery. After carotid-subclavian bypass, efforts to retrograde cannulate the aortic arch and advance the thoracic endograft were unsuccessful. Because of the mechanical heart valve, no transapical approach could be used. Access to the ascending aorta was gained through a midline sternotomy. A through-and-through wire was positioned from the ascending aorta to femoral artery, which provided the required stability for advancement of the thoracic endograft. Six-month computed tomography documented patent endografts and carotid-subclavian bypass and no evidence of endoleak. CONCLUSION: A trans-ascending aorta through-and-through guidewire is a feasible adjunct that can be added to the endovascular armamentarium when transcardiac or transbrachial approaches are impossible or ineffective.