RESUMEN
We present the case of an 87-year-old man with a ruptured right internal iliac artery aneurysm with hemoperitoneum. The right internal iliac artery aneurysm appeared to fill from the retrograde profunda femoris artery in the setting of a previously repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm with aorta-bi-iliac bypass with ligation of the bilateral internal iliac arteries. Abdominal computed tomography revealed an aneurysm of the right internal iliac artery measuring 8.9 cm, with filling through the collateral vessels. Open repair was performed, leading to complete exclusion of the aneurysm with no perioperative complications.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Aortobifemoral bypass (ABF) remains an important treatment modality in the revascularization of aortoiliac occlusive disease. Despite ABF being performed for decades, questions remain regarding the preferred technique for the proximal anastomosis, specifically whether an end-to-end (EE) or an end-to-side (ES) configuration is superior. The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes of ABF based on proximal configuration. METHODS: We queried the Vascular Quality Initiative registry for ABF procedures performed between 2009 and 2020. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to compare perioperative and 1-year outcomes between EE and ES configurations. RESULTS: Of the 6,782 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 60.0 [54-66 years]) who underwent ABF, 3,524 (52%) had an EE proximal anastomosis and 3,258 (48%) had an ES proximal anastomosis. Postoperatively, the ES cohort had a higher frequency of extubation in the operating room (80.3% vs. 77.4%; P < 0.01), lower change in renal function (8.8% vs. 11.5%; P < 0.01), and lower use of vasopressors (15.6% vs. 19.1%; P < 0.01), but higher rates of unanticipated return to the operating room (10.2% vs. 8.7%; P = 0.037) compared with the EE configuration. At 1-year follow-up, the ES cohort had a significantly lower primary graft patency rate (87.5% vs. 90.2%; P < 0.01) and higher rates of graft revision (4.8% vs. 3.1%; P < 0.01) and claudication symptoms (11.6% vs. 9.9%; P < 0.01). The ES configuration was significantly associated with a higher rate of 1-year major limb amputations in univariate (1.6% vs. 0.9%; P < 0.01) and multivariate (odds ratio, 1.95, confidence interval, 1.18-3.23, P=<0.01) analyses. CONCLUSIONS: While the ES cohort seemed to have less physiologic insult immediately postoperatively, the EE configuration appeared to have improved 1-year outcomes. To our knowledge, this study is one of the largest population-based studies comparing the outcomes of the proximal anastomotic configurations. Longer-term follow-up is needed to determine which configuration is optimal.
Asunto(s)
Claudicación Intermitente , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Vasculares , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Vasculares/efectos adversos , Anastomosis Quirúrgica , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Arteria Femoral/diagnóstico por imagen , Arteria Femoral/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Strategies for the most effective treatment for peripheral arterial disease (PAD) remain controversial among clinicians. Several trials have shown improved primary patency of femoropopliteal interventions with the utilization of paclitaxel-coated balloons or stents compared to conventional balloons or stents. However, a 2018 meta-analysis suggested an increased mortality risk for patients receiving drug-coated balloons or stents (DCBS), resulting in an international pause in the use of DCBS. A 2021 meta-analysis by the same group suggested an increased risk of major amputation following DCBS use in peripheral arterial revascularization procedures. Here we report our long-term institutional outcomes comparing uncoated devices to DCBS. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent peripheral arterial angioplasty, stenting, atherectomy, or a combination between 2011 and 2020 within a regional healthcare system was performed. Univariate, multivariate, and survival analyses were performed using standard statistical methods to assess the primary end points of overall survival, 5-year survival, and amputation-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 2,717 patients were identified, of whom 1,965 were treated with conventional uncoated devices and 752 were treated with DCBS. A univariate analysis showed that patients treated with non-DCBS had higher rates of overall mortality, major amputations, and mortality at 1, 3, and 5 years. A multivariable analysis demonstrated that the use of conventional devices, age, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack, warfarin use, and atrial fibrillation all significantly increased the risk of 5-year mortality, overall mortality, and combined mortality and/or amputation. CONCLUSIONS: DCBS are not associated with increased mortality or worse amputation-free survival in this real-world cohort of patients treated for PAD. Our data suggest that mortality is more closely linked with pre-existing patient comorbidities rather than device selection at the time of revascularization.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia de Balón , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Humanos , Paclitaxel/efectos adversos , Arteria Poplítea , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/terapia , Arteria Femoral/cirugíaRESUMEN
This report describes a single center experience with laser fenestration of the inferior vena cava for the treatment of type 2 endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Our technique is reviewed, and clinical data after treatment are reported. Twelve patients underwent transcaval embolization via laser fenestration. Technical success was achieved in all cases (100%) with no postoperative complications. At a median follow-up of 12.9 months, no patient demonstrated a persistent endoleak and there were no cases of aortocaval fistula. Transcaval embolization, via laser fenestration, provides an additional strategy for the management of type 2 endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) with large (28 mm to 34 mm) and wide diameter (> 35 mm) necks remains a challenge in patients who are high-risk candidates for open repair. While several case reports describe the use of a thoracic stent graft in conjunction with a traditional modular bifurcated stent graft, most patients do not have the aortic length to accommodate such a configuration. We present our experience utilizing a distal unibody bifurcated aortic stent graft (Endologix, Irvine, CA) in conjunction with a proximal thoracic aortic stent graft (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) to treat wide-necked non-ruptured AAAs in patients who were otherwise poor candidates for open or fenestrated repair. METHODS: A single center retrospective review of patients treated with a combination of a distal unibody bifurcated aortic stent graft and a proximal thoracic aortic stent graft extension from 2013 to 2019 was performed. Demographics, perioperative details and long-term outcomes were collected and summarized. Standard statistical methods were utilized. RESULTS: We identified 7 patients who underwent this procedure during the study interval. Of these, all 7 (100%) were male with an average age of 69.1 ± 5.1 years. Average Charlson Comorbidity Index was 5.0. Average pre-operative maximum aortic and neck diameters were 57.9 mm (± 5.8) and 37.4 mm (± 4.5) respectively. All patients underwent repair with a distal 28 mm diameter unibody bifurcated aortic stent graft and proximal extension with a thoracic aortic stent graft that ranged from 40 to 46 mm in diameter. Technical success was achieved in all 7 patients. There were no perioperative mortalities or aorta-related deaths. Follow up was a mean of 1.98 years with a mean survival of 4.75 years (± 0.86). One patient required an aneurysm-related intervention for a late type III endoleak. CONCLUSION: The combined use of thoracic and abdominal aortic stent grafts is a safe and effective endovascular method to treat high-risk surgical candidates with wide-necked AAAs.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Prótesis Vascular , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Stents , Anciano , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Endofuga/etiología , Endofuga/terapia , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Diseño de Prótesis , Retratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study sought to define duplex ultrasound (DUS) velocity criteria predicting ≥70% stenosis in superior mesenteric artery (SMA) stents by correlating in-stent peak systolic velocity (PSV) with computed tomographic angiography (CTA) measurements of percent stenosis. METHODS: A retrospective review of 109 patients undergoing SMA stenting between 2003 and 2018 was conducted at a single institution. Thirty-seven surveillance duplex ultrasound studies were found to have a CTA performed within 30 days of study completion. Bare metal (nâ¯=â¯20) and covered stents (nâ¯=â¯17) were included. Velocities were paired to in-stent restenosis (ISR) measured by mean vessel diameter reduction on SMA centerline reconstructions from CTA. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was generated and logistic regression models for ≥70% ISR probability were used to define velocity criteria in the stented SMA. RESULTS: At a PSV of 300 cm/sec, the sensitivity is 100% and specificity 80% for a ≥70% in-stent SMA stenosis. At a PSV of 400 cm/sec, the sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) is 63% and the specificity and negative predictive value (NPV) is 90%. A PSV of 450 cm/sec was consistent with the highest specificity (100%) and PPV (100%) but lower sensitivity (50%) and NPV (87.9%). One patient with a PSV of 441 cm/sec on surveillance DUS died from complications of acute-on-chronic mesenteric ischemia. CONCLUSIONS: A PSV of 400 cm/sec on mesenteric DUS can predict ≥70% ISR with high sensitivity and should be considered as a diagnostic threshold for SMA in-stent restenosis.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Arteria Mesentérica Superior/diagnóstico por imagen , Isquemia Mesentérica/terapia , Oclusión Vascular Mesentérica/terapia , Stents , Ultrasonografía Doppler Dúplex , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Velocidad del Flujo Sanguíneo , Enfermedad Crónica , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Arteria Mesentérica Superior/fisiopatología , Isquemia Mesentérica/diagnóstico por imagen , Isquemia Mesentérica/fisiopatología , Oclusión Vascular Mesentérica/diagnóstico por imagen , Oclusión Vascular Mesentérica/fisiopatología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Recurrencia , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Circulación Esplácnica , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Grado de Desobstrucción VascularRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Mesenteric angioplasty and stenting (MAS) has surpassed open revascularization as the treatment of choice for mesenteric ischemia. Despite the lower perioperative mortality associated with MAS, the need for reintervention is not infrequent. The purpose of this study was to review the outcomes of patients treated for mesenteric artery in-stent restenosis (MAISR). METHODS: Clinical data from a single center between 2004 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Standard statistical analysis including Kaplan-Meier estimate for time-dependent outcomes, χ2 test for categorical variables, and two-sample t-test for continuous variables was performed. Primary end points included stent patency and reintervention rate. Secondary end points included mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: During the study period, 91 patients underwent primary MAS. In total, 113 mesenteric vessels were treated with 20 covered stents and 93 bare-metal stents. Overall primary patency was 69% at 2 years. At 2 years, primary patency was 83% for covered stents compared with 65% for bare-metal stents (P = .17). Of these 91 primary MAS patients, 27 (30%) were treated for MAISR (32 vessels). Two covered stent patients developed significant restenosis (11%) compared with 25 (34%) bare-metal stent patients (P = .02). The mean age of patients requiring reintervention was 69 years (36% male), with the majority having a history of tobacco use (85%), hypertension (75%), and hyperlipidemia (78%). Fourteen reintervention patients (52%) presented with recurrent symptoms, 10 (37%) had asymptomatic restenosis, and 3 (11%) developed intestinal ischemia. Twelve patients (44%) underwent reintervention with balloon angioplasty alone and 15 (56%) underwent repeated stent placement. Of the 15 patients who had repeated stent placement, 7 patients had covered stents placed. The 30-day mortality rate after reintervention for mesenteric stent restenosis was 0%. Postoperative complications occurred in 15% of patients (myocardial infarction, 4%; reversible kidney injury, 4%; and bowel ischemia requiring surgical exploration, 7%). There was no difference in the perioperative morbidity in comparing symptomatic and asymptomatic patients undergoing reintervention. Mean follow-up after mesenteric reintervention was 31 months, with one-third of patients (n = 9) requiring another reintervention because of either recurrence of symptoms or asymptomatic high-grade restenosis. Assisted primary patency at 2 years was 92% after reintervention with balloon angioplasty and 87% for repeated stent placement, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (P = .66). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of MAISR is associated with low mortality and acceptable morbidity. The initial use of covered stents may reduce the need for reintervention.
Asunto(s)
Angioplastia/instrumentación , Aterosclerosis/terapia , Isquemia Mesentérica/terapia , Oclusión Vascular Mesentérica/terapia , Stents , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Angioplastia/efectos adversos , Angioplastia/mortalidad , Aterosclerosis/diagnóstico por imagen , Aterosclerosis/mortalidad , Aterosclerosis/fisiopatología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Isquemia Mesentérica/diagnóstico por imagen , Isquemia Mesentérica/mortalidad , Isquemia Mesentérica/fisiopatología , Oclusión Vascular Mesentérica/diagnóstico por imagen , Oclusión Vascular Mesentérica/mortalidad , Oclusión Vascular Mesentérica/fisiopatología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Diseño de Prótesis , Recurrencia , Retratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Circulación Esplácnica , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Grado de Desobstrucción VascularRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The hybrid procedure of femoral endarterectomy and iliac artery stenting (FEIS) has been used as an alternative to traditional open surgical repair of iliofemoral arterial occlusive disease, but whether the severity of the iliac disease component affects long-term results is not well understood. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing FEIS at Geisinger Health System from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2013, for the treatment of symptomatic iliofemoral atherosclerotic occlusive disease. The cohort was stratified according to the severity of the iliac occlusive disease component into patients with mild iliac disease (group 1) and patients with severe iliac disease (group 2). RESULTS: Between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2013, 99 patients underwent 111 total FEIS procedures. The mean age of the cohort was 67.4 years. Men composed 61% of patients. Indications for surgery were claudication (41%), ischemic rest pain (36%), and tissue loss (23%). At 5 years of follow-up, there was no difference in primary patency (73% in group 1 vs 68% in group 2 [P = .67]) and limb salvage (90% in group 1 vs 92% in group 2 [P = .51]). There was a trend toward higher overall mortality in group 2 patients vs group 1 patients (53% vs 81%; P = .08), but this did not reach statistical significance. Univariate analysis did not identify any device-related or anatomic factors predictive of patency. CONCLUSIONS: When combined iliofemoral arterial occlusive disease is treated with FEIS, the severity of the iliac disease component does not affect long-term patency or limb salvage.