Outcome of elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in nonagenarians

ObjectiveCompared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), endovascular repair (EVAR) is associated with decreased perioperative morbidity and mortality in a standard patient population. This study sought to determine if the advantage of EVAR extends to patients aged ≥90 years.MethodsThis was a retrospective review from a prospectively maintained computerized database. Of the 322 patients aged ≥80 treated with EVAR from January 1997 to November 2007, 24 (1.9%) were aged ≥90. Mean age was 91.5 ± 1.5 years (range, 90-95 years), and 83.3% were men. Mean aneurysm size was 6.8 cm (range, 5.2-8.7 cm).ResultsMean procedural blood loss was 490 mL (range, 100-4150 mL), and 20.8% required an intraoperative transfusion. Mean postoperative length of stay was 6.0 days, (median, 4 days; mode, 1 day; range, 1-42 days), with 33.3% of patients discharged on the first postoperative day. Amongst the 24 patients, there were 6 (25.0%) perioperative major adverse events, and 2 patients died, for a perioperative mortality rate of 8.3%. Mean follow-up was 20.5 months (range, 1-49 months). Overall, three patients (12.5%) required a secondary intervention, comprising thrombectomy, angioplasty, and proximal cuff extension. No patients required conversion to open repair. Two patients (8.3%) died of AAA rupture at 507 and 1254 days. Freedom from all-cause mortality was 83.3% at 1 year and 19.3% at 5 years. Freedom from aneurysm-related mortality was 87.5% at 1 year and 73.2% at 5 years. Endoleak occurred in five patients (20.8%), with three type I and two of indeterminate type; of these, two patients with type I endoleak underwent secondary intervention at 153 and 489 days after EVAR, of which one case was successful.ConclusionOur study supports that EVAR in nonagenarians is associated with acceptable procedural success and perioperative morbidity and mortality. The medium-term results suggest that EVAR may be of limited benefit in very carefully selected patients who are aged ≥90 years

Left subclavian artery coverage during thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair does not mandate revascularization

ObjectiveThis study assessed the risk of left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage and the role of revascularization in a large population of patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.MethodsA retrospective multicenter review of 1189 patient records from 2000 to 2010 was performed. Major adverse events evaluated included cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and spinal cord ischemia (SCI). Subgroup analysis was performed for noncovered LSA (group A), covered LSA (group B), and covered/revascularized LSA (group C).ResultsOf 1189 patients, 394 had LSA coverage (33.1%), and 180 of these patients (46%) underwent LSA revascularization. In all patients, emergency operations (9.5% vs 4.3%; P = .001), renal failure (12.7% vs 5.3%; P = .001), hypertension (7% vs 2.3%; P = .01), and number of stents placed (1 = 3.7%, 2 = 7.4%, ≥3 = 10%; P = .005) were predictors of SCI. History of cerebrovascular disease (9.6% vs 3.5%; P = .002), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (9.5% vs 5.4%; P = .01), coronary artery disease (8.5% vs 5.3%; P = .03), smoking (8.9% vs 4.2%) and female gender (5.3% men vs 8.2% women; P = .05) were predictors of CVA. Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference between groups B and C (SCI, 6.3% vs 6.1%; CVA, 6.7% vs 6.1%). LSA revascularization was not protective for SCI (7.5% vs 4.1%; P = .3) or CVA (6.1% vs 6.4%; P = .9). Women who underwent revascularization had an increased incidence of CVA event compared with all other subgroups (group A: 5.6% men, 8.4% women, P = .16; group B: 6.6% men, 5.3% women, P = .9; group C: 2.8% men, 11.9% women, P = .03).ConclusionsLSA coverage does not appear to result in an increased incidence of SCI or CVA event when a strategy of selective revascularization is adopted. Selective LSA revascularization results in similar outcomes among the three cohorts studied. Revascularization in women carries an increased risk of a CVA event and should be reserved for select cases

Management of aneurysms involving branches of the celiac and superior mesenteric arteries: A comparison of surgical and endovascular therapy

ObjectiveAneurysms involving branches of the superior mesenteric and celiac arteries are uncommon and require proper management to prevent rupture and death. This study compares surgical and endovascular treatment of these aneurysms and analyzes outcome.MethodsPatients at the Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York who were treated for aneurysms in the branches of the celiac artery and superior mesenteric artery were identified through a search of the institution’s medical records and endovascular database. Patient demographics, history, clinical presentation, aneurysm characteristics, treatments, and follow-up outcome were retrospectively recorded. Significant differences between patients treated by surgical or endovascular therapy were determined by using Student’s t test and χ 2 analysis.ResultsBetween January 1, 1991, and July 1, 2005, 59 patients with 61 aneurysms were treated at a single institution. Twenty-four patients had surgical repair, and 35 underwent endovascular treatment, which included coil embolization and stent-graft therapy. Splenic (28) and hepatic (22) artery aneurysms predominated. Eighty-nine percent of splenic artery aneurysms were true aneurysms and were treated by endovascular and surgical procedures in near equal numbers (14 and 11, respectively). Pseudoaneurysms were significantly more likely to be treated by endovascular means (P < .01). The technical success rate of endovascular treatment for aneurysms was 89%, and failures were successfully treated by repeat coil embolization in all patients who presented for retreatment. Patients treated by endovascular techniques had a significantly higher incidence of malignancy than patients treated with open surgical techniques (P = .03). Furthermore, patients treated by endovascular means had a shorter in-hospital length of stay (2.4 vs 6.6 days, P < .001).ConclusionEndovascular management of visceral aneurysms is an effective means of treating aneurysms involving branches of the celiac and superior mesenteric arteries and is particularly useful in patients with comorbidities, including cancer. It is associated with a decreased length of stay in the elective setting, and failure of primary treatment can often be successfully managed percutaneously

First experience in human beings with a permanently implantable intrasac pressure transducer for monitoring endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

ObjectivesEndovascular stent graft repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) prevents rupture by excluding the aneurysm sac from systemic arterial pressure. Current surveillance protocols after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) follow secondary markers of sac pressurization, namely, endoleak and sac enlargement. We report the first clinical experience with the use of a permanently implantable, ultrasound-activated remote pressure transducer to measure intrasac pressure after EVAR.MethodsOver 7 months, 14 patients underwent EVAR of an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm with implantation of an ultrasound-activated remote pressure transducer fixed to the outside of the stent graft and exposed to the excluded aortic sac. Twelve patients received modular bifurcated stent grafts, and 2 patients received aortouniiliac devices. Intrasac pressures were measured directly with an intravascular catheter and by the remote sensor at stent-graft deployment. Follow-up sac pressures were measured with a remote sensor and correlated with systemic arterial pressure at every follow-up visit. Mean follow-up was 2.6 ±1.9 months.ResultsExcellent concordance was found between catheter-derived and transducer-derived intrasac pressssure intraoperatively. Pulsatile waveforms were seen in all functioning transducers at each evaluation interval. One implant ceased to function at 2 months of follow-up. In 1 patient a type I endoleak was diagnosed on 1-month computed tomography (CT) scans; 3 type II endoleaks were observed. Those patients with complete exclusion of the aneurysm on CT scans had a significant difference in systemic and sac systolic pressures initially (P < .001) and at 1 month (P < .001). Initial sac diastolic pressures were higher than systemic diastolic pressures (P < .001). The ratio of systemic to sac systolic pressure increased over time in those patients with complete aneurysm exclusion (P < .001). Four of 6 patients with no endoleak and greater than 1-month follow-up had diminution of sac systolic pressure to 40 mm Hg or less by 3 months.ConclusionThis is the first report of a totally implantable chronic pressure transducer to monitor the results of EVAR in human beings. Aneurysm exclusion leads to gradual diminution of sac pressure over several months. Additional clinical follow-up will be necessary to determine whether aneurysm sac pressure monitoring can replace CT in the long-term surveillance of patients after EVAR