Complex Regional Pain Syndrome with Aortic Distress after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair and False Lumen Exclusion with "Candy Plug" Technique

A 41-year-old male presented for pain treated with oxycodone. A zone-2 thoracic endovascular aortic repair with distal PETTICOAT (provisional extension to induce complete attachment) for complicated Type-IIIb aortic dissection was performed 18 months before. Repeated hospitalizations did not show any issues to justify the recurrent pain. The aortic nature of the pain was suspected considering the plug as a pain trigger. Through a left thoracoabdominal incision in the eighth intercostal space, the candy plug was removed. Pain diminished after thoracoabdominal surgery steadily

Cardiac and Aortic Modifications After Endovascular Repair for Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury: A Systematic Review

Objective: Blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) is a devastating condition that commonly occurs in healthy and young patients. Endovascular treatment is the first choice; however, it has also been demonstrated to alter cardiovascular haemodynamics. The aim of this systematic review was to describe the cardiovascular modifications after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for BTAI. Data Sources: PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched for eligible studies reporting on modifications in aortic stiffness, blood pressure, cardiac mass, and aortic size. Review Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was followed. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. Results: A total of 12 studies reporting on 265 patients were included. Severe heterogeneity existed among the included studies with regard to demographics, BTAI grade, endograft specifications, reported outcomes, and the method of evaluation. Regarding aortic stiffness, two studies found a significant increase in pulse wave velocity (PWV) in patients after TEVAR compared with a control group, while one did not find a significant increase in PWV and augmentation index after > 3 years of follow up. Five studies reported an increase in the incidence of post-TEVAR hypertension up to 55% (range 34.8% – 55.0%) vs. baseline. One study found a statistically significant increase in left ventricular mass and left ventricular mass index during follow up. Nine studies report data regarding aortic dilatation or remodelling after TEVAR. One found a 2.4 fold faster growth rate in ascending aortic diameter vs. controls, while other studies described significant changes in aortic size at different locations along the aorta and endograft after TEVAR. Conclusion: This systematic review highlights adverse cardiac and aortic modifications after TEVAR for BTAI. The results stress the need for lifelong surveillance in these patients and the necessity of developing a more compliant endograft to prevent cardiovascular complications in the long term

Sex-Related Differences and Factors Associated with Peri-Procedural and 1 Year Mortality in Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia Patients from the CLIMATE Italian Registry

Background: Identifying sex-related differences/variables associated with 30 day/1 year mortality in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Methods: Multicenter/retrospective/observational study. A database was sent to all the Italian vascular surgeries to collect all the patients operated on for CLTI in 2019. Acute lower-limb ischemia and neuropathic-diabetic foot are not included. Follow-up: One year. Data on demographics/comorbidities, treatments/outcomes, and 30 day/1 year mortality were investigated. Results: Information on 2399 cases (69.8% men) from 36/143 (25.2%) centers. Median (IQR) age: 73 (66-80) and 79 (71-85) years for men/women, respectively (p < 0.0001). Women were more likely to be over 75 (63.2% vs. 40.1%, p = 0.0001). More men smokers (73.7% vs. 42.2%, p < 0.0001), are on hemodialysis (10.1% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.006), affected by diabetes (61.9% vs. 52.8%, p < 0.0001), dyslipidemia (69.3% vs. 61.3%, p < 0.0001), hypertension (91.8% vs. 88.5%, p = 0.011), coronaropathy (43.9% vs. 29.4%, p < 0.0001), bronchopneumopathy (37.1% vs. 25.6%, p < 0.0001), underwent more open/hybrid surgeries (37.9% vs. 28.8%, p < 0.0001), and minor amputations (22% vs. 13.7%, p < 0.0001). More women underwent endovascular revascularizations (61.6% vs. 55.2%, p = 0.004), major amputations (9.6% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.024), and obtained limb-salvage if with limited gangrene (50.8% vs. 44.9%, p = 0.017). Age > 75 (HR = 3.63, p = 0.003) is associated with 30 day mortality. Age > 75 (HR = 2.14, p < 0.0001), nephropathy (HR = 1.54, p < 0.0001), coronaropathy (HR = 1.26, p = 0.036), and infection/necrosis of the foot (dry, HR = 1.42, p = 0.040; wet, HR = 2.04, p < 0.0001) are associated with 1 year mortality. No sex-linked difference in mortality statistics. Conclusion: Women exhibit fewer comorbidities but are struck by CLTI when over 75, a factor associated with short- and mid-term mortality, explaining why mortality does not statistically differ between the sexes

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