Literature DB >> 28259577

Outcomes of fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

Andres Schanzer1, Jessica P Simons2, Julie Flahive2, Jonathan Durgin2, Francesco A Aiello2, Danielle Doucet2, Robert Steppacher2, Louis M Messina2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: More than 80% of infrarenal aortic aneurysms are treated by endovascular repair. However, adoption of fenestrated and branched endovascular repair for complex aortic aneurysms has been limited, despite high morbidity and mortality associated with open repair. There are few published reports of consecutive outcomes, inclusive of all fenestrated and branched endovascular repairs, starting from the inception of a complex aortic aneurysm program. Therefore, we examined a single center's consecutive experience of fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysms.
METHODS: This is a single-center, prospective, observational cohort study evaluating 30-day and 1-year outcomes in all consecutive patients who underwent fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysms (definition: requiring one or more fenestrations or branches). Data were collected prospectively through an Institutional Review Board-approved registry and a physician-sponsored investigational device exemption clinical trial (G130210).
RESULTS: We performed 100 consecutive complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs (November 2010 to March 2016) using 58 (58%) commercially manufactured custom-made devices and 42 (42%) physician-modified devices to treat 4 (4%) common iliac, 42 (42%) juxtarenal, 18 (18%) pararenal, and 36 (36%) thoracoabdominal aneurysms (type I, n = 1; type II, n = 4; type III, n = 12; type IV, n = 18; arch, n = 1). The repairs included 309 fenestrations, branches, and scallops (average of 3.1 branch arteries/case). All patients had 30-day follow-up for 30-day event rates: three (3%) deaths; six (6%) target artery occlusions; five (5%) progressions to dialysis; eight (8%) access complications; one (1%) paraparesis; one (1%) bowel ischemia; and no instances of myocardial infarction, paralysis, or stroke. Of 10 type I or type III endoleaks, 8 resolved (7 with secondary intervention, 1 without intervention). Mean follow-up time was 563 days (interquartile range, 156-862), with three (3%) patients lost to follow-up. On 1-year Kaplan-Meier analysis, survival was 87%, freedom from type I or type III endoleak was 97%, target vessel patency was 92%, and freedom from aortic rupture was 100%. Average lengths of intensive care unit stay and inpatient stay were 1.4 days (standard deviation, 3.3) and 3.6 days (standard deviation, 3.6), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: These results show that complex aortic aneurysms can now be treated with minimally invasive fenestrated and branched endovascular repair. Endovascular technologies will likely continue to play an increasingly important role in the management of patients with complex aortic aneurysm disease.
Copyright © 2017 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28259577     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.12.111

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  17 in total

1.  Deployment of stent graft in an excessively higher position above the renal artery induces a flow channel to the aneurysm in chimney endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Kota Shukuzawa; Taku Akaoka; Mitsuo Umezu; Takao Ohki; Kiyotaka Iwasaki
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2019-01-20       Impact factor: 1.731

2.  The state of complex endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs in the Vascular Quality Initiative.

Authors:  Thomas F X O'Donnell; Virendra I Patel; Sarah E Deery; Chun Li; Nicholas J Swerdlow; Patric Liang; Adam W Beck; Marc L Schermerhorn
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2019-02-02       Impact factor: 4.268

Review 3.  Hybrid thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair: is the future here?

Authors:  Vicente Orozco-Sevilla; Scott A Weldon; Joseph S Coselli
Journal:  J Vis Surg       Date:  2018-03-30

4.  Survival and patient-centered outcome in a disease-based observational cohort study of patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm.

Authors:  P Chulhi Kang; Matthew A Bartek; Sherene Shalhub; Derek P Nathan; Matthew P Sweet
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 4.268

5.  Characterizing endovascular aortic intervention outcomes for nonruptured aortic aneurysms by physician specialty.

Authors:  Andres Guerra; Joe M Feinglass; Matthew C Chia; Ashley K Vavra
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 6.  3D printing in the planning and teaching of endovascular procedures.

Authors:  J Stana; M Grab; R Kargl; N Tsilimparis
Journal:  Radiologie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-09-16

Review 7.  Endovascular Treatment of Various Aortic Pathologies: Review of the Latest Data and Technologies.

Authors:  Koji Maeda; Takao Ohki; Yuji Kanaoka
Journal:  Int J Angiol       Date:  2018-05-07

8.  Arch and access vessel complications in penetrating aortic ulcer managed with thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Authors:  Gabriele Piffaretti; Federico Fontana; Marco Tadiello; Chiara Guttadauro; Filippo Piacentino; Ruth L Bush; Anna Maria Socrate; Matteo Tozzi
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2019-07

9.  Synchrotron radiation computed tomography versus conventional computed tomography for assessment of four types of stent grafts used for endovascular treatment of thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Authors:  Zhonghua Sun; Curtise K C Ng; Cláudia Sá Dos Reis
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2018-07

10.  Hybrid repair versus conventional open repair for thoracic aortic arch aneurysms.

Authors:  Ala Elhelali; Niamh Hynes; Declan Devane; Sherif Sultan; Edel P Kavanagh; Liam Morris; Dave Veerasingam; Fionnuala Jordan
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-06-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.