Multicenter experience of upper extremity access in complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Purpose: Upper extremity access (UEA) for antegrade cannulation of aortic side branches is a relevant part of endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysms and can be achieved using several techniques, sites, and sides. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different UEA strategies in a multicenter registry of complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: In six aortic centers in the Netherlands, all endovascular aortic procedures from 2006 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who received UEA during complex EVAR were included. The primary outcome was a composite end point of any access complication, excluding minor hematomas. Secondary outcomes were access characteristics, access complications considered individually, access reinterventions, and incidence of ischemic cerebrovascular events. Results: A total of 417 patients underwent 437 UEA for 303 fenestrated/branched EVARs and 114 chimney EVARs. Twenty patients had bilateral, 295 left-sided, and 102 right-sided UEA. A total of 413 approaches were performed surgically and 24 percutaneously. Distal brachial access (DBA) was used in 89 cases, medial brachial access (MBA) in 149, proximal brachial access (PBA) in 140, and axillary access (AA) in 59 cases. No significant differences regarding the composite end point of access complications were seen (DBA: 11.3% vs MBA: 6.7% vs PBA: 13.6% vs AA: 10.2%; P =.29). Postoperative neuropathy occurred most after PBA (DBA: 1.1% vs MBA: 1.3% vs PBA: 9.3% vs AA: 5.1%; P =.003). There were no differences in cerebrovascular complications between access sides (right: 5.9% vs left: 4.1% vs bilateral: 5%; P =.75). Significantly more overall access complications were seen after a percutaneous approach (29.2% vs 6.8%; P =.002). In multivariate analysis, the risk for access complications after an open approach was decreased by male sex (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10-0.72; P =.009), whereas an increase in age per year (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.004-1.179; P =.039) and diabetes mellitus type 2 (OR: 3.70; 95% CI: 1.20-11.41; P =.023) increased the risk. Conclusions: Between the four access localizations, there were no differences in overall access complications. Female sex, diabetes mellitus type 2, and aging increased the risk for access complications after a surgical approach. Furthermore, a percutaneous UEA resulted in higher complication rates than a surgical approach

Meta-analysis of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in combination with intra-aortic balloon pump vs. extracorporeal membrane oxygenation only in patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction

BackgroundIncidence and mortality of cardiogenic shock (CS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain high despite substantial therapy improvements in acute percutaneous coronary intervention over the last decades. Unloading the left ventricle in patients with Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) can be performed by using an intra-aortic balloon pumps’ (IABP) afterload reduction, which might be especially beneficial in AMI patients with CS.ObjectiveThe objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO treatment on the mortality of patients with CS due to AMI.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed using EMBASE, COCHRANE, and MEDLINE databases. Studies comparing the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO on mortality of patients with AMI were included. Meta-analyses were performed to analyze the effect of the chosen treatment on 30-day/in-hospital mortality.ResultsTwelve studies were identified by the literature search, including a total of 5,063 patients, 81.5% were male and the mean age was 65.9 years. One thousand one hundred and thirty-six patients received treatment with VA-ECMO in combination with IABP and 2,964 patients received VA-ECMO treatment only. The performed meta-analysis showed decreased mortality at 30-days/in-hospital after VA-ECMO + IABP compared to VA-ECMO only for patients with cardiogenic shock after AMI (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.30–0.44, P≤0.001). Combination of VA-ECMO + IABP was associated with higher rates of weaning success (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16–0.53, P < 0.001) without an increase of vascular access complications (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.35–2.08, P = 0.72).ConclusionIn this meta-analysis, combination therapy of VA-ECMO + IABP was superior to VA-ECMO only therapy in patients with CS due to AMI. In the absence of randomized data, these results are hypothesis generating only

FEI Helios NanoLab 400S FIB-SEM

The FEI Helios NanoLab400S FIB-SEM is one of the world's most advanced DualBeamTM focused ion beam (FIB) platforms for transmission electron microscopy (TEM) sample preparation, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) imaging and analysis in semiconductor failure analysis, process development and process control. The FEI Helios NanoLab400S FIB-SEM combines an ElstarTM electron column for high-resolution and high-contrast imaging with a high-performance SidewinderM ion column for fast and precise cross sectioning. The FEI Helios NanoLab M 400S is optimised for high throughput high-resolution S/TEM sample preparation, SEM imaging and energy dispersive X-ray analysis. Its exclusive FlipStageTM and in situ STEM detector can flip from sample preparation to STEM imaging in seconds without breaking vacuum or exposing the sample to the environment. Platinum gas chemistry is the preferred metal deposition when a high deposition rate and precision of the deposition are required. Carbon deposition can be chosen as well. The system additionally allows for spatially resolved compositional analysis using the attached EDAX Genesis XM 4i X-ray microanalysis system

Meta-Analysis of Stroke and Mortality Rates in Patients Undergoing Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Background During the past decade, the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was extended beyond treatment-naive patients and implemented for treatment of degenerated surgical bioprosthetic valves. Selection criteria for either valve-in-valve (viv) TAVR or redo surgical aortic valve replacement are not well established, and decision making on the operative approach still remains challenging for the interdisciplinary heart team. Methods and Results This review was intended to analyze all studies on viv-TAVR focusing on short- and mid-term stroke and mortality rates compared with redo surgical aortic valve replacement or native TAVR procedures. A structured literature search and review process led to 1667 potentially relevant studies on July 1, 2020. Finally, 23 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for qualitative analysis. All references were case series either with or without propensity score matching and registry analyses. Quantitative synthesis of data from 8509 patients revealed that viv-TAVR is associated with mean 30-day stroke and mortality rates of 2.2% and 4.2%, respectively. Pooled data analysis showed no significant differences in 30-day stroke rate, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality between viv-TAVR and comparator treatment (native TAVR [n=11 804 patients] or redo surgical aortic valve replacement [n=498 patients]). Conclusions This review is the first one comparing the risk for stroke and mortality rates in viv-TAVR procedures with native TAVR approach and contributes substantial data for the clinical routine. Moreover, this systematic review is the most comprehensive analysis on ischemic cerebrovascular events and early mortality in patients undergoing viv-TAVR. In this era with increasing numbers of bioprosthetic valves used in younger patients, viv-TAVR is a suitable option for the treatment of degenerated bioprostheses

A Stopped Pilot Study of the ProGlide Closure Device After Transbrachial Endovascular Interventions

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of the suture-mediated ProGlide device in closure of the brachial artery after endovascular interventions. Materials and Methods: From 2016 to 2017, a pilot study was performed using the ProGlide to achieve hemostasis after percutaneous access of distal brachial arteries >4 mm in diameter. In an interim analysis, the results were compared to a matched control group taken from a 60-patient historical cohort who underwent brachial artery access and manual compression to achieve hemostasis between 2014 and 2017. The primary outcome was access-related reintervention and the secondary outcome was the incidence of access-site complications. Results: Seven patients (mean age 67.9 years; 6 men) were enrolled in the study before it was stopped in 2017. Four patients experienced 6 access-site complications (neuropathy, hematoma, occlusion, and pseudoaneurysm). These resulted in 3 access-related reinterventions: surgical evacuation of a hematoma, thrombectomy of the occluded brachial artery, and surgical repair of the pseudoaneurysm. In the interim comparison to the 19 matched patients (mean age 61.9 years; 6 men), the ProGlide group had proportionally more patients experiencing access-related complications (57% vs 16% for manual compression, p=0.035) and resultant reinterventions (43% vs 11%, p=0.064). Based on this data the trial was stopped. Conclusion: Considering this experience, it is not advisable to use the ProGlide in transbrachial endovascular interventions due to the high incidence of complications and access-related reinterventions

Transradial Approach for Aortoiliac and Femoropopliteal Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

10.1177/1526602818792854JOURNAL OF ENDOVASCULAR THERAPY255599-60

Cerebrovascular Complications After Upper Extremity Access for Complex Aortic Interventions:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose The purpose of this study was to review the risk of developing cerebrovascular complications from upper extremity access during endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysms. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. An electronic search of the public domains Medline (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), Web of Science and Cochrane Library was performed to identify studies related to the treatment of aortic aneurysms involving upper extremity access. Meta-analysis was used to compare the rate of cerebrovascular event after left, right and bilateral upper extremity access. Results are presented as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Thirteen studies including 1276 patients with complex endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysms using upper extremity access were included in the systematic review. Left upper extremity access (UEA) was used in 1028 procedures, right access in 148 and bilateral access in 100 procedures. The rate of cerebrovascular complications for patients treated through left UEA was 1.7%, through right UEA 4% and through bilateral UEA 5%. In the meta-analysis, we included seven studies involving 645 patients treated with a left upper extremity access, 87 patients through a right and 100 patients through a bilateral upper extremity access. Patients, who underwent right-sided (RR 5.01, 95% CI 1.51-16.58, P = 0.008) or bilateral UEA (RR 4.57, 95% CI 1.23-17.04, P = 0.02), had a significantly increased risk of cerebrovascular events compared to those who had a left-sided approach. Conclusion Left upper extremity access is associated with a significantly lower rate of cerebrovascular complications as compared to right or bilateral upper extremity access.</p