Perioperative outcome of fenestrated and branched stent grafting after previous open or endovascular abdominal aortic repair

Aim: To compare the perioperative outcome of patients treated with elective or urgent fenestrated and branched stent grafting (fbEVAR) for pararenal (pAAA) and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) after previous open with previous endovascular abdominal aortic repair. Methods: Single center retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing fbEVAR after previous open (post-open fbEVAR group) or endovascular abdominal aortic repair (post-endo fbEVAR group) between January 2015 and December 2017. Primary outcomes were technical success and in-hospital all-cause mortality. Results: We identified 42 patients undergoing fbEVAR after previous open or endovascular abdominal aortic repair during this period. Twenty-one patients (post-open fbEVAR group) had previous open abdominal aortic repair, 13 with a bifurcated and eight with a tube graft. Of these, two patients presented with pAAA and 19 with TAAA. Twenty-one patients (post-endo fbEVAR group) had previous EVAR. Thirteen patients presented with pAAA, three of them with additional type Ia endoleak, two with stent-graft migration and two with previously failed fEVAR. Eight presented with TAAA. Median interval between previous repair and fbEVAR was 84 months (IQR 60-156) for the post-open fbEVAR group and 72 months (IQR 36-96) for the post-endo fbEVAR group (P=0.746). Eighteen patients (86%) had branched stent grafting in the post-open vs. eleven (52%) in the post-endo group (P<0.01). In two patients in the post-open group, three renal arteries were not catheterized due to severe ostial stenosis, resulting in technical success of 91% in the post-open and 100% in the post-endo fbEVAR group. Four patients (19%) in the post-open fbEVAR group died in hospital, two due to cerebral haemorrhage and two due to pneumonia, and none in the post-endo fbEVAR group (P=0.101). There were five non-stent-graft-related re-interventions, two (10%) in the post-open fbEVAR group and three (14%) in the post-endo fbEVAR group (P=0.844). After 12 months there were four events in the post-endo fbEVAR group: one renal artery stent occluded, one renal artery stent required relining because of disconnection and two type II endoleaks were embolized with coils. There were no re-interventions in the post-open fbEVAR group during 12 months. Conclusion: Fenestrated and branched repair after previous open or endovascular abdominal aortic repair appears safe with high technical success rate. There is no difference in the technical success and in-hospital all-cause mortality rates between fbEVAR after previous open or endovascular abdominal aortic repair

Management of Descending Thoracic Aortic Diseases: Similarities and Differences Among Cardiovascular Guidelines

Cardiovascular societies have developed recommendations regarding the management of thoracic aortic diseases. While improvements in treatment have been observed during the past decade in regard to patient selection, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and associated techniques, and high-volume centralization, the broad expansion of TEVAR has raised considerations about its indications, appropriateness, limitations, and application. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the similarities and differences among current cardiovascular societies’ guidelines for the management of thoracic aortic diseases. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 2009 to May 2020. The initial search identified 990 articles. After exclusion of duplicate or inappropriate articles, the final analysis included 5 articles from cardiovascular societies published between 2010 and 2020. Selected controversial topics were analyzed, including diagnosis, imaging, spinal cord ischemia prevention, and management of the most important thoracic aortic pathologies. The analysis included data concerning the therapeutic approach in acute and chronic type B aortic dissection, penetrating aortic ulcer, intramural hematoma, thoracic aortic aneurysm, and traumatic aortic injury, as well a discussion of inflammatory aneurysms, aortitis, and genetic syndromes. The review presents consistent and controversial recommendations, as well as “gray zone” issues that need further investigation. There was significant overlap and agreement among the 5 societies regarding the management of thoracic aortic diseases. Especially in dissection and aneurysm management, TEVAR has established its role as the treatment of choice. However, robust evidence is still needed in many aspects of the management of thoracic aortic pathologies. © The Author(s) 2021

Evidence-based guideline of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) on imaging infection in vascular grafts.

Consensus on optimal imaging procedure for vascular graft/endograft infection (VGEI) is still lacking and the choice of a diagnostic test is often based on the experience of single centres. This document provides evidence-based recommendations aiming at defining which imaging modality may be preferred in different clinical settings and post-surgical time window. This working group includes 6 nuclear medicine physicians appointed by the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, 4 vascular surgeons, and 2 radiologists. Vascular surgeons formulated 5 clinical questions that were converted into 10 statements and addressed through a systematic analysis of available literature by using PICOs (Population/problem-Intervention/Indicator-Comparator-Outcome) strategy. Each consensus statement was scored for level of evidence and for recommendation grade, according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine criteria. Sixty-six articles, published from January 2000 up to December 2021, were analysed and used for evidence-based recommendations. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) is the first-line imaging modality in suspected VGEI but nuclear medicine modalities are often needed to confirm or exclude the infection. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) with 2-deoxy-2-[ &lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt; F]fluoro-D-glucose ([ &lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt; F]FDG) has very high negative predictive value but it should be performed preferably at least 4 months after surgery to avoid false positive results. Radiolabelled white blood cell (WBC) scintigraphy, given its high diagnostic accuracy, can be performed at any time after surgery. The European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) is a professional no-profit medical association that facilitates communication worldwide between individuals pursuing clinical and research excellence in nuclear medicine. The EANM was founded in 1985. EANM members are physicians, technologists, and scientists specializing in the research and practice of nuclear medicine. The EANM will periodically define new guidelines for nuclear medicine practice to help advance the science of nuclear medicine and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the world. Existing practice guidelines will be reviewed for revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner, if indicated. Each practice guideline, representing a policy statement by the EANM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review. The EANM recognizes that the safe and effective use of diagnostic nuclear medicine imaging requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guideline by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. These guidelines are an educational tool designed to assist practitioners in providing appropriate care for patients. They are not inflexible rules or requirements of practice and are not intended, nor should they be used, to establish a legal standard of care. For these reasons and those set forth below, the EANM suggests caution against the use of the current consensus document in litigation in which the clinical decisions of a practitioner are called into question. The ultimate judgement regarding the propriety of any specific procedure or course of action must be made by the physician or medical physicist in the light of all the circumstances presented. Thus, there is no implication that an approach differing from the consensus document, standing alone, is below the standard of care. To the contrary, a conscientious practitioner may responsibly adopt a course of action different from that set forth in the consensus document when, in the reasonable judgement of the practitioner, such course of action is indicated by the condition of the patient, limitations of available resources, or advances in knowledge or technology subsequent to publication of the consensus document. The practice of medicine includes both the art and the science of the prevention, diagnosis, alleviation, and treatment of disease. The variety and complexity of human conditions make it impossible to always reach the most appropriate diagnosis or to predict with certainty a particular response to treatment. Therefore, it should be recognized that adherence to this consensus document will not ensure an accurate diagnosis or a successful outcome. All that should be expected is that the practitioner will follow a reasonable course of action based on current knowledge, available resources, and the needs of the patient, to deliver effective and safe medical care. The sole purpose of this consensus document is to assist practitioners in achieving this objective

Management of Patients with Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Carotid Artery Disease: Update on Anti-Thrombotic Therapy.

The most common causes of ischaemic stroke are represented by carotid artery atherosclerotic disease (CAAD) and atrial fibrillation. While oral anticoagulants substantially reduce the incidence of thromboembolic stroke (&lt; 1%/year), the rate of ischaemic stroke and other cardiovascular disease events in patients with CAAD remains high, ranging from 8.4 to 18.1 events per 100 patient-years. Similar to any other atherosclerotic disease, anti-thrombotic therapies are proposed for CAAD to reduce stroke and other cardiovascular events. The 2017 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) guidelines recommend for patients with asymptomatic CAAD ≥60% the use of aspirin 75 to 100 mg once daily or clopidogrel 75 mg once daily at the exception of patient at very high bleeding risk. For patients with symptomatic CAAD ≥50%, the use of aspirin 75 to 100 mg once daily or clopidogrel 75 mg once daily is recommended. New perspectives for anti-thrombotic therapy for the treatment of patients with CAAD come from the novel dual pathway strategy combining a low-dose anticoagulant (i.e. rivaroxaban) and aspirin that may help reduce long-term ischaemic complications in patients with CAAD. This review summarizes current evidence and recommendations for the anti-thrombotic management of patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic CAAD or those undergoing carotid revascularization