The use of EndoAnchors in endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms with challenging proximal neck: Single-centre experience

Objectives The aim of this study was to present a single-centre experience with EndoAnchors in patients who underwent endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms with challenging proximal neck, both in the prevention and treatment of endograft migration and type Ia endoleaks. Methods We retrospectively analysed 17 consecutive patients treated with EndoAnchors between June 2015 and May 2018 at our institution. EndoAnchors were applied during the initial endovascular aneurysm repair procedure (primary implant) to prevent proximal neck complications in difficult anatomies (nine patients), and in the follow-up after aneurysm exclusion (secondary implant) to correct type Ia endoleak and/or stent-graft migration (eight patients). Results Mean time for anchors implant was 23 min (range 12–41), with a mean of 5 EndoAnchors deployed per patient. Six patients in the secondary implant group required a proximal cuff due to stent-graft migration ≥10 mm. Technical success was achieved in all cases, with no complications related to deployment of the anchors. At a median follow-up of 13 months (range 4–39, interquartile range 9–20), there were no aneurysm-related deaths or aneurysm ruptures, and all patients were free from reinterventions. CT-scan surveillance showed no evidence of type Ia endoleak, anchors dislodgement or stent-graft migration, with a mean reduction of aneurysm diameter of 0.4 mm (range 0–19); there was no sac growth or aortic neck enlargement in any case. Conclusions EndoAnchors can be safely used in the prevention and treatment of type Ia endoleaks in patients with challenging aortic necks, with good results in terms of sac exclusion and diameter reduction in the mid-term follow-up

Prediction of clinical outcome using p16INK4a immunocytochemical expression in low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and high-risk HPV-positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in patients with and without colposcopic evident cervical disease

p16INK4a as a diagnostic marker of a cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2+ (CIN2+) in atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) cytological samples has been analyzed, but has not yet been included in clinical routine practice. One hundred and ninety-one patients with an abnormal Pap test (84 ASC-US and 107 LSILs) who underwent colposcopy were selected for this study. At enrollment, 96 patients (Group 1) had a positive colposcopy and therefore underwent a cervical biopsy, while 95 (Group 2) had a negative colposcopy and were followed up for up to 1 year. Both groups were tested for p16INK4a using immunocytochemical methods, and the p16INK4a results were correlated with histology or follow-up outcome. In Group 1 ASC-US cases, 82% of lesions less than CIN2 were p16INK4a-negative and all CIN2 cases were p16INK4a-positive (p=0.00044). In Group 1 LSIL cases, 71% of lesions less than CIN2 were p16INK4a-negative and 87% of CIN2/3 were p16INK4a-positive (p=0.00033). Seventy-seven percent of Group 2 ASC-US patients with a negative 1-year follow-up (NF-U) were p16INK4a-negative at enrollment, while all patients with positive follow-up (PF-U) were p16INK4a-positive (p=0.00113). In Group 2 LSIL cases, 83% of patients with NF-U were p16INK4a-negative, while 65% of patients with PF-U were p16INK4a-positive at enrollment (p=0.0014). In fact, 39% of the positive p16INK4a LSIL patients had CIN2+ histological lesions. The positive predictive value of p16INK4a for CIN2+ was 50% in ASC-US and 52% in LSIL cases; the negative predictive value was 100 and 94%, respectively. In conclusion, in our patients, a negative p16INK4a appears to be a marker of the absence of CIN3, while a positive p16INK4a can be correlated with the presence of histological CIN2+ found at enrollment or during the subsequent follow-up. Thus, its clinical predictive value is independent from the colposcopic aspect at enrollment

Comparison of aortoiliac repair with iliac branch endoprosthesis versus hypogastric occlusion in aortoiliac aneurysms

BACKGROUND: The CARIBE Study aims to assess the outcome of endovascular repair (EVAR) with iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE) in patients with aorto-iliac aneurysms extending to iliac bifurcation, comparing these results with those of EVAR with hypogastric occlusion pres¬ ent in the recent published literature. METHODS: Patients with aorto-iliac aneurysms anatomically suitable for EVAR with IBE, are included in the study. RESULTS: Primary safety outcome measure are total and aneurysm related death free survival. Efficacy endpoints include: iliac branch patency, aneurysmal sac exclusion and freedom from reinterventions or conversion to open repair. Patient reported outcomes are evaluated with Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ), International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) and quality of life Euro-Qual EQ-5D Questionnaire. CONCLuSIONS: Comparison with recent hystorical literature obtained in patients with EVAR with HA occlusion will offer data useful for correct information of patients affected by aorto-iliac aneurysms

The Indigo System in acute lower-limb malperfusion (INDIAN) registry. Protocol

Background: Acute lower limb ischemia (ALLI) poses a major threat to limb survival. For many years, surgical thromboembolectomy was the mainstay of treatment. Recent years have brought an endovascular revolution to the management of ALLI. It seems that the newly designed endovascular thrombectomy devices may shift treatment recommendations toward endovascular options. This protocol study aims to collect evidence supporting the latest hypothesis. Objective: The devices under investigation are the Penumbra/Indigo Systems (Penumbra Inc). The objective of this clinical investigation is to evaluate, in a controlled setting, the early safety and effectiveness of the devices and to define the optimal technique for the use of these systems in patients with confirmed peripheral acute occlusions. Methods: This study will be an interventional prospective trial of patients with a diagnosis of ALLI treated with Penumbra/Indigo devices. This project is intended to be a national platform where every physician invited to participate could register his or her own data procedure. The primary outcome is the technical success of thromboaspiration with the Indigo System. Assessment of vessel patency will be recorded using the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score classifications before and after use of the device. Clinical success at follow-up is defined as an improvement of Rutherford classification at 1-month follow-up of one class or more as compared to the preprocedure Rutherford classification. Secondary endpoints include the following: (1) safety rate at discharge, defined as the absence of any serious adverse events; (2) primary patency at 1 month, defined as a target lesion without a hemodynamically significant stenosis or reocclusion on duplex ultrasound (>50%) and without target lesion reintervention within 1 month; and (3) limb salvage at 1 month. Results: The study is currently in the recruitment phase and the final patient is expected to be treated by the end of March 2019. A total of 150 patients will be recruited. Analyses will focus on primary and secondary endpoints. Conclusions: These new endovascular thrombectomy devices that are specifically designed for peripheral intervention in this difficult set of patients, as those under investigation in the proposed registry, may offer improved clinical outcomes with lower rates of major systemic and local complications. Following completion of this study, it is expected that the value of the Indigo Thrombectomy System in the treatment of ALLI will be better defined. As a result, a shift of treatment recommendations toward endovascular options may be observed in the near future