Dataset Information

Novel open technique for repair of endograft migration.

ABSTRACT: Widespread adoption of endovascular aneurysm repair has led to increased incidence of late complications, such as endograft migration. Treatment options have to be tailored to the patient's health, quality of proximal aorta, and extent of migration. Complete or partial endograft removal is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We describe a case in which open repair with endograft preservation was employed, with the additional benefit of a sutured proximal anastomosis.

SUBMITTER: Gao Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6529646 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Novel open technique for repair of endograft migration.

Gao Yue Y Miserlis Dimitrios D Garg Nitin N Pipinos Iraklis I

Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques 20190428 2

Widespread adoption of endovascular aneurysm repair has led to increased incidence of late complications, such as endograft migration. Treatment options have to be tailored to the patient's health, quality of proximal aorta, and extent of migration. Complete or partial endograft removal is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We describe a case in which open repair with endograft preservation was employed, with the additional benefit of a sutured proximal anastomosis. ...[more]

PMID: 31193434

Similar Datasets

Project description:In endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), proximal type 1A endoleaks can occur as a result of hostile neck anatomy or over- or undersizing of the endograft. As the current standard is based on the diameter or average of the short and long axes in a central lumen reconstruction image, it can falter in irregularly shaped aortic necks. An alternative method is circumference-based, therefore minimizing the measurement error. In this study we aimed to assess the degree of discrepancy between both methods and the association of this discrepancy with the occurrence of endoleak type 1A.All patients with early (<30 days post-operative) endoleak type 1A after elective EVAR at our center between 2004 and 2016 were identified for a retrospective case-control study. Control patients were matched based on hostile neck anatomy, such as calcification, thrombus, reverse taper, and ?-angulation. The aortic neck diameter was measured using the traditional, diameter-based method as well as an alternative method, based on the circumference of the aortic neck.In 482 EVAR patients, 18 early endoleak type 1A cases were found (3.9%). After exclusion, 12 cases remained and 48 matching controls were found. No significant differences were found between the two measuring methods at any level below the renal arteries. The inter-observer variability was significant for the D(mean) (0.4 ± 1.69 mm, P = .02) and was larger than the D(circ) method (-0.1 ± 1.03 mm, P = .35). In only four out of 12 cases the endograft size was 10-20% larger than the D(mean) and D(circ) measurements. The differences between the diameter of the D(mean) and D(circ) and the chosen endograft were smaller for the case group (-8 ± 25.6% and -7 ± 24%) than for the control group. (-12.4 ± 12.4% and -11 ± 10.7%).The difference between the D(mean) and D(circ) methods for aortic neck measurement was not large enough to play a significant role in the incidence of endoleak type 1A. Inadequate oversizing and considerable ?-angulation of the aortic neck may have been the cause of endoleak type 1A in this population. Robust and well-investigated sizing methods are paramount for accurate endograft sizing and prevention of endoleak type 1A. Therefore the lack of studies in this field and a sizeable inter-observer variability do not justify the widespread reliance on the traditional diameter-based methods for endograft sizing.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Open surgical repair for acute aortic pathologies involving the visceral vessels is associated with morbidity and mortality rates of 40% to 70% and 30% to 60%, respectively. Due to these poor outcomes, the application of fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) has been expanded in this setting; however, durability remains unknown. The purpose of this analysis was to describe outcomes after F/B-EVAR for acute aortic disease. METHODS:A single center retrospective review of all F/B-EVARs for acute aortic disease was completed. Primary end points included mortality and reintervention-free survival. Secondary end points were patency and freedom from endoleak, as well as change in aneurysm diameter and estimated glomerular filtration rate. Life-tables were used to estimate end points, while mixed statistical models were used to determine aneurysm diameter change. RESULTS:Thirty-seven patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 67 ± 10 years; 75% male) underwent F/B-EVAR for acute aortic disease, and median follow-up time was 10.3 months (range, 0.5-31.4 months). Indications included thoracoabdominal aneurysm (65%; n = 24), pararenal aneurysm (17%; n = 6), postsurgical anastomotic pseudoaneurysm (8%; n = 3), dissection (5%; n = 2), and penetrating ulcer (5%; n = 2). Mean preoperative aneurysm diameter was 7.3 ± 1.8 cm. All patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists class IV or IV-E, and 38% (n = 14) had history of aortic repair. There were 105 visceral vessels revascularized (celiac, 26; superior mesenteric artery, 29; renal, 50) and 24 (65%) patients underwent three- or four-vessel repair. Technical success was 92% (n = 34), with no intraoperative deaths and one conversion (3%). Median length of stay was 6 days (range, 2-60 days), and postoperative morbidity was 41% (n = 15; spinal cord ischemia, 14% [8% permanent]; pulmonary, 14%; renal, 14%; extremity ischemia, 8%; stroke, 5%; cardiac, 3%; bleeding, 3%) with 30-day mortality of 19% (n = 7; in-hospital, 8%; n = 3). Endoleak was detected at some point in follow-up in 27% (n = 10), and a majority were type II (n = 7). Six (16%) patients underwent reintervention, and no late conversions occurred. Postoperative imaging was available in 27 (73%), and one celiac fenestration lost patency at 12 months. One-year branch vessel patency and freedom from reintervention was 98% ± 6% and 70% ± 9%, respectively. Estimated 1- and 4-year survival were 70% ± 8% and 67% ± 8%, respectively. During follow-up, aortic diameter decreased 0.5 cm (95% confidence interval, 1.1-0.2; P = .1) while estimated glomerular filtration rate decreased by 2 mL/min/1.73 m(2). CONCLUSIONS:F/B-EVAR can be performed to treat a variety of symptomatic and/or ruptured paravisceral aortic pathologies. Perioperative morbidity and mortality can be significant; however, it is less than literature-based outcomes of open repair. Short-term fenestrated/branched graft patency is excellent, but reintervention is frequent, highlighting the need for diligent follow-up. Patients surviving the initial hospitalization for F/B-EVAR of acute aortic disease can anticipate good long-term survival.

Dataset Information

Novel open technique for repair of endograft migration.

Publications

Novel open technique for repair of endograft migration.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets