Dataset Information

Microsurgical and Endovascular Management of Congenital Iliac Aneurysms in the Neonatal Period: Two Cases and a Literature Review.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Congenital aneurysms of major arteries are very rare diagnoses and prognosis can be poor if treatment is not initiated rapidly. This is the presentation of two cases of infants with congenital iliac aneurysms who underwent treatment in the neonatal period. The report then proceeds with a literature review of paediatric iliac aneurysms.

Report

Case 1: A female neonate was diagnosed antenatally with right common iliac (CIA) and internal iliac (IIA) artery aneurysms. Embolisation on day of life (DOL) eight was impossible because of partial thrombosis. The infant was subsequently observed for several months and the aneurysm was injected percutaneously with thrombin on DOL 78. A small residual aneurysm was coil embolised at five months of age. Satisfactory results were observed at one year follow up. Case 2: A female neonate was diagnosed antenatally on routine third trimester ultrasound with voluminous, bilateral CIA aneurysms. The patient underwent surgery on DOL 9 for aneurysm resection and microsurgical vascular reconstruction. The intervention was successful with triphasic flow through the anastomoses on colour Doppler ultrasound at six week follow up.

Discussion

Ten cases of congenital iliac aneurysms have been reported previously, with just two diagnosed in the neonatal period and eight undergoing surgical intervention. Definitive management to avoid aneurysm rupture or thrombosis should be timed carefully, and sometimes delayed with watchful waiting, to maximise success and minimise complications. Surgery is the key treatment modality, but endovascular intervention can be considered in selected cases. Congenital iliac aneurysms should be addressed at the safest time for the patient. Following resection, primary microvascular anastomosis is the ideal reconstructive technique, but other options for neonates have been described. Endovascular treatment should be considered for anatomically amenable saccular aneurysms.

SUBMITTER: Iyer H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8424503 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionEndovascular aneurysm repair has improved outcomes for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) compared with open repair. We examined the impact of aorto-uni-iliac (AUI) vs standard bifurcated endograft configuration on outcomes in rAAA.MethodsPatients 18 years or older in the Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair for rAAA from January 2011 to April 2020 were included. Patient characteristics were analyzed by graft configuration: AUI or standard bifurcated. Primary and secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, postoperative major adverse events (myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, mesenteric ischemia, lower extremity embolization, dialysis requirement, reoperation, pneumonia, or reintubation), and 1-year mortality. A subset propensity-score matched cohort was also analyzed.ResultsWe included 2717 patients: 151 had AUI and 2566 had standard bifurcated repair. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of age, major medical comorbidities, anatomic aortic neck characteristics, or rates of conversion to open repair. Patients who underwent AUI were more commonly female (30% vs 22%, P = .011) and had a history of congestive heart failure (19% vs 12%, P = .013). Perioperatively, patients who underwent AUI had a significantly higher incidence of cardiac arrest (15% vs 7%, P < .001), greater intraoperative blood loss (1.3 L vs 0.6 L, P < .001), longer operative duration (218 minutes vs 138 minutes, P < .0001), higher incidence of major adverse events (46.3% vs 33.3%, P = .001), and prolonged intensive care unit (7 vs 4.7 days, P = .0006) and overall hospital length of stay (11.4 vs 8.1 days, P = .0003). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses demonstrated significant differences in 30-day (31.1% vs 20.2%, log-rank P = .001) and 1-year mortality (41.7% vs 27.7%, log-rank P = .001). The propensity-score matched cohort demonstrated similar results.ConclusionsThe AUI configuration for rAAA appears to be implemented in a sicker cohort of patients and is associated with worse perioperative and 1-year outcomes compared with a bifurcated graft configuration, which was also seen on propensity-matched analysis. Standard bifurcated graft configuration may be the preferred approach in the management of rAAA unless AUI configuration is mandated by patient anatomy or other extenuating circumstances.

Project description:BackgroundThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become an alternative to open repair for the treatment of ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms (rTAAs). The aim of this study was to assess national trends in the use of TEVAR for the treatment of rTAA and to determine its impact on perioperative outcomes.MethodsPatients admitted with an rTAA between 1993 and 2012 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample. Patients were grouped in accordance with their treatment: TEVAR, open repair, or nonoperative treatment. The primary outcomes were treatment trends over time and in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and length of stay. Trend analyses were performed using the Cochran-Armitage test for trend, and adjusted mortality risks were established using multivariable logistic regression analysis.ResultsA total of 12,399 patients were included, with 1622 (13%) undergoing TEVAR, 2808 (23%) undergoing open repair, and 7969 (64%) not undergoing surgical treatment. TEVAR has been increasingly used from 2% of total admissions in 2003-2004 to 43% in 2011-2012 (P < .001). Concurrently, there was a decline in the proportion of patients undergoing open repair (29% to 12%; P < .001) and nonoperative treatment (69% to 45%; P < .001). The proportion of patients undergoing surgical repair has increased for all age groups since 1993-1994 (P < .001 for all) but was most pronounced among those aged 80 years with a 7.5-fold increase. After TEVAR was introduced, procedural mortality decreased from 36% in 2003-2004 to 27% in 2011-2012 (P < .001); mortality among those undergoing nonoperative treatment remained stable between 63% and 60% (P = .167). Overall mortality after rTAA admission decreased from 55% to 42% (P < .001). Since 2005, mortality for open repair was 33% and 22% for TEVAR (P < .001). In adjusted analysis, open repair was associated with a twofold higher mortality than TEVAR (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-2.5).ConclusionsTEVAR has replaced open repair as primary surgical treatment for rTAA. The introduction of endovascular treatment appears to have broadened the eligibility of patients for surgical treatment, particularly among the elderly. Mortality after rTAA admission has declined since the introduction of TEVAR, which is the result of improved operative mortality as well as the increased proportion of patients undergoing surgical repair.