The Gore Hybrid Vascular Graft in renovisceral debranching for complex aortic aneurysm repair

Objective This study reports our initial experience with the Gore Hybrid Vascular Graft (GHVG; W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) for staged hybrid open renovisceral debranching and endovascular aneurysm repair in patients affected by thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (PAAAs). Methods Between December 2012 and December 2013, we analyzed outcomes of 13 patients who underwent open surgical debranching of renovisceral vessels for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm and PAAAs. All patients were considered at high risk for conventional surgery. Inclusion criterion was treatment by open surgical debranching of at least one visceral artery (renal artery, superior mesenteric artery [SMA], or celiac trunk [CT]) using the GHVG. In a second step, the aortic stent graft was implanted to exclude the aneurysm. If required, parallel grafts to the remaining visceral arteries were deployed in the same procedure. One patient had a symptomatic descending thoracic aortic aneurysm and another had a ruptured PAAA. Perioperative measured outcomes were immediate technical success rate, mortality, and morbidity. Median follow-up was 24.8 months (range, 0-15; mean, 8.2; standard deviation, 4 months). Results All open surgical debranching of renovisceral vessels were completed as intended. GHVG was used to revascularize 20 visceral vessels in 13 patients with a mean of 1.54 vessels per patient. Six renal arteries (30%; 2 right and 4 left), 9 SMAs (45%), and 5 CTs (25%) were debranched. In nine of 13 (66%) patients, other renovisceral arteries were addressed with chimney/periscope, Viabahn Open Revascularization Technique, and end-to-side anastomosis. Two of 13 patients (15%) died of bowel ischemia. Neither patient had GHVG revascularization to the SMA or CT. Perioperative complications occurred in three patients (23%; 1 renal hematoma, 1 respiratory insufficiency, and 1 small-bowel ischemia related to a SMA GHVG thrombosis). At 24 months, estimated survival was 85%, and estimated primary and secondary patency were 94% and 100%, respectively. Conclusions This limited series extracted from a more consistent hybrid procedure experience showed a mortality rate similar to most recent reports. Technical feasibility and the short-term patency rate of the GHVG for renovisceral debranching during staged hybrid open and endovascular procedures were satisfactory. Use of GHVGs may represent a useful revascularization adjunct to minimize visceral ischemia in these challenging patients

Involvement of the genicular branches in cystic adventitial disease of the popliteal artery as a possible marker of unfavourable early clinical outcome: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Cystic adventitial disease of the popliteal artery is a rare cause of non-atheromatous claudication. It usually requires surgery to improve the distance walked by patients.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We report the case of a 44-year-old Caucasian man with unilateral symptomatic popliteal cysts extending to his genicular branches and associated with multilevel stenosis of his anterior tibial artery. A surgical evacuation of the cysts successfully restored his arterial patency and led to an objective haemodynamic improvement but was associated with early recurrence of symptoms.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We suggest that the involvement of the genicular branches in cystic adventitial disease of the popliteal artery is a possible indicator of extensive adventitial degeneration and unfavourable clinical prognosis.</p

Clinical Outcomes of Second- versus First-Generation Carotid Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Single-cohort studies suggest that second-generation stents (SGS; “mesh stents”) may improve carotid artery stenting (CAS) outcomes by limiting peri- and postprocedural cerebral embolism. SGS differ in the stent frame construction, mesh material, and design, as well as in mesh-to-frame position (inside/outside). Objectives: To compare clinical outcomes of SGS in relation to first-generation stents (FGSs; single-layer) in CAS. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies with FGSs and SGS (PRISMA methodology, 3302 records). Endpoints were 30-day death, stroke, myocardial infarction (DSM), and 12-month ipsilateral stroke (IS) and restenosis (ISR). A random-effect model was applied. Results: Data of 68,422 patients from 112 eligible studies (68.2% men, 44.9% symptomatic) were meta-analyzed. Thirty-day DSM was 1.30% vs. 4.11% (p &lt; 0.01, data for SGS vs. FGS). Among SGS, both Casper/Roadsaver and CGuard reduced 30-day DSM (by 2.78 and 3.03 absolute percent, p = 0.02 and p &lt; 0.001), whereas the Gore stent was neutral. SGSs significantly improved outcomes compared with closed-cell FGS (30-day stroke 0.6% vs. 2.32%, p = 0.014; DSM 1.3% vs. 3.15%, p &lt; 0.01). At 12 months, in relation to FGS, Casper/Roadsaver reduced IS (−3.25%, p &lt; 0.05) but increased ISR (+3.19%, p = 0.04), CGuard showed a reduction in both IS and ISR (−3.13%, −3.63%; p = 0.01, p &lt; 0.01), whereas the Gore stent was neutral. Conclusions: Pooled SGS use was associated with improved short- and long-term clinical results of CAS. Individual SGS types, however, differed significantly in their outcomes, indicating a lack of a “mesh stent” class effect. Findings from this meta-analysis may provide clinically relevant information in anticipation of large-scale randomized trials

Insight from an Italian Delphi Consensus on EVAR feasibility outside the instruction for use: the SAFE EVAR Study

BACKGROUND: The SAfety and FEasibility of standard EVAR outside the instruction for use (SAFE-EVAR) Study was designed to define the attitude of Italian vascular surgeons towards the use of standard endovascular repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) outside the instruction for use (IFU) through a Delphi consensus endorsed by the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (Societa Italiana di Chirurgia Vascolare ed Endovascolare - SICVE). METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 26 statements was developed, validated by an 18 -member Advisory Board, and then sent to 600 Italian vascular surgeons. The Delphi process was structured in three subsequent rounds which took place between April and June 2023. In the first two rounds, respondents could indicate one of the following five degrees of agreement: 1) strongly agree; 2) partially agree; 3) neither agree nor disagree; 4) partially disagree; 5) strongly disagree; while in the third round only three different choices were proposed: 1) agree; 2) neither agree nor disagree; 3) disagree. We considered the consensus reached when &gt;70% of respondents agreed on one of the options. After the conclusion of each round, a report describing the percentage distribution of the answers was sent to all the participants. RESULTS: Two -hundred -forty-four (40.6%) Italian Vascular Surgeons agreed to participate the first round of the Delphi Consensus; the second and the third rounds of the Delphi collected 230 responders (94.3% of the first -round responders). Four statements (15.4%) reached a consensus in the first rounds. Among the 22 remaining statements, one more consensus (3.8%) was achieved in the second round. Finally, seven more statements (26.9%) reached a consensus in the simplified last round. Globally, a consensus was reached for almost half of the proposed statements (46.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The relatively low consensus rate obtained in this Delphi seems to confirm the discrepancy between Guideline recommendations and daily clinical practice. The data collected could represent the source for a possible guidelines' revision and the proposal of specific Good Practice Points in all those aspects with only little evidence available

The sac evolution imaging follow-up after endovascular aortic repair: An international expert opinion-based Delphi consensus study

Objective: Management of follow-up protocols after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) varies significantly between centers and is not standardized according to sac regression. By designing an international expert-based Delphi consensus, the study aimed to create recommendations on follow-up after EVAR according to sac evolution. Methods: Eight facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study topic that were voted, using a 4-point Likert scale, by a selected panel of international experts using a three-round modified Delphi consensus process. Based on the experts’ responses, only those statements reaching a grade A (full agreement $75$80% and full disagreement &lt;5%) were included in the final document. Results: One-hundred and seventy-four participants were included in the final analysis, and each voted the initial 29 statements related to the definition of sac regression (Q1-Q9), EVAR follow-up (Q10-Q14), and the assessment and role of sac regression during follow-up (Q15-Q29). At the end of the process, 2 statements (6.9%) were rejected, 9 statements (31%) received a grade B consensus strength, and 18 (62.1%) reached a grade A consensus strength. Of 27 final statements, 15 (55.6%) were classified as grade I, whereas 12 (44.4%) were classified as grade II. Experts agreed that sac regression should be considered an important indicator of EVAR success and always be assessed during follow-up after EVAR. Conclusions: Based on the elevated strength and high consistency of this international expert-based Delphi consensus, most of the statements might guide the current clinical management of follow-up after EVAR according to the sac regression. Future studies are needed to clarify debated issues. (J Vasc Surg 2024;80:937-45.

Aldosterone Antagonists in Monotherapy Are Protective against Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetic Nephropathy in Rats

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) are the standard clinical therapy of diabetic nephropathy (DN), while aldosterone antagonists are only used as adjuncts. Previously in experimental DN we showed that Na/K ATPase (NKA) is mislocated and angiotensin II leads to superimposed renal progression. Here we investigated the monotherapeutic effect of aldosterone blockers on the progression of DN and renal NKA alteration in comparison to ACEi and ARBs. Streptozotocin-diabetic rats developing DN were treated with aldosterone antagonists; ACEi and ARB. Renal function, morphology, protein level and tubular localization of NKA were analyzed. To evaluate the effect of high glucose per se; HK-2 proximal tubular cells were cultured in normal or high concentration of glucose and treated with the same agents. Aldosterone antagonists were the most effective in ameliorating functional and structural kidney damage and they normalized diabetes induced bradycardia and weight loss. Aldosterone blockers also prevented hyperglycemia and diabetes induced increase in NKA protein level and enzyme mislocation. A monotherapy with aldosterone antagonists might be as, or more effective than ACEi or ARBs in the prevention of STZ-induced DN. Furthermore the alteration of the NKA could represent a novel pathophysiological feature of DN and might serve as an additional target of aldosterone blockers

Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2): a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

Background: Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence. Methods: ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362. Findings: Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86–1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91–1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation: Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable. Funding: UK Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment Programme