Outcomes following fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair for failed open infrarenal aortic repair compared with primary fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Journal of Vascular Surgery Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-21 DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2025.01.030
Emily St. John BS , Winona W. Wu MD , Sai Divya Yadavalli MD , Andrew P. Sanders MD , Sara L. Zettervall MD , Matthew J. Alef MD , Marc L. Schermerhorn MD
{"title":"Outcomes following fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair for failed open infrarenal aortic repair compared with primary fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair","authors":"Emily St. John BS ,&nbsp;Winona W. Wu MD ,&nbsp;Sai Divya Yadavalli MD ,&nbsp;Andrew P. Sanders MD ,&nbsp;Sara L. Zettervall MD ,&nbsp;Matthew J. Alef MD ,&nbsp;Marc L. Schermerhorn MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jvs.2025.01.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Because aneurysmal disease is progressive, proximal disease progression and para-anastomotic aneurysms are complications experienced after open infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. As such, fenestrated or branched endovascular repair (F/BEVAR) may be indicated in these patients. Data describing fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair after prior open surgical repair (OSR) are limited to institutional databases. The aim of our study is to describe the safety and efficacy of fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) in patients with prior OSR compared with primary F/BEVAR using the Vascular Quality Initiative.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Using the VQI complex endovascular AAA module from 2014 to 2022, we identified all single-staged F/BEVAR repair in patients having prior OSR or no prior aortic surgery (primary F/BEVAR). The primary outcomes were perioperative mortality and completion endoleaks. Secondary outcomes were 5-year survival and 1-year sac dynamics. Between the two cohorts, differences in the primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables and χ<sup>2</sup> analysis for categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression were used to examine 5-year mortality.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified 3331 primary F/BEVAR patients and 102 prior OSR patients. Patients with prior OSR were more likely to have peripheral arterial disease (22.0% vs 7.4%), prior smoking (67% vs 56%), and undergo F/BEVAR with medium-/high-volume physicians (74% vs 62%), but less likely to be female (8.8% vs 23.0%) (all <em>P</em> &lt; .05). Patients with prior OSR were also more likely to have a more proximal aneurysm extent (median zone 7 [interquartile range (IQR), zones 6-8] vs zone 8 [IQR, zones 7-8]), larger AAA diameters (62 mm [IQR, 56-66 mm] vs 58 mm [IQR, 55-63 mm]), receive a physician-modified endograft (PMEG) vs commercial custom-made device (36% vs 20% physician-modified endograft), have longer surgery times (240 minutes [IQR, 186-308 minutes] vs 206 minutes [IQR, 155-272 minutes]), and have a higher rate of celiac artery (51% vs 26%) and superior mesenteric artery (86% v 73%) artery involvement (all <em>P</em> &lt; .05). Patients with prior OSR had lower rates of completion endoleaks (25% vs 36%), driven by lower rates of type II leaks (11% vs 20%) despite higher rates of indeterminate leaks (11% vs 5.1%) (all <em>P</em> &lt; .01). There was, however, no difference in perioperative mortality (2% vs 2.9%; <em>P</em> = .78). They had similar 1-year sac dynamics (48% vs 50% regression; 12% vs 8% expansion; <em>P</em> &gt; .5) and 5-year mortality (23% vs 18%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.44 [IQR, 0.89-2.31]; <em>P</em> = .13).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Based on VQI data, F/BEVAR after prior OSR seems to be well-tolerated and safe. Prior OSR patients also had lower rates of completion type II endoleaks and similar sac dynamics and 5-year mortality compared with primary F/BEVAR patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular Surgery","volume":"81 5","pages":"Pages 1014-1022.e1"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0741521425000758","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Because aneurysmal disease is progressive, proximal disease progression and para-anastomotic aneurysms are complications experienced after open infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. As such, fenestrated or branched endovascular repair (F/BEVAR) may be indicated in these patients. Data describing fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair after prior open surgical repair (OSR) are limited to institutional databases. The aim of our study is to describe the safety and efficacy of fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) in patients with prior OSR compared with primary F/BEVAR using the Vascular Quality Initiative.

Methods

Using the VQI complex endovascular AAA module from 2014 to 2022, we identified all single-staged F/BEVAR repair in patients having prior OSR or no prior aortic surgery (primary F/BEVAR). The primary outcomes were perioperative mortality and completion endoleaks. Secondary outcomes were 5-year survival and 1-year sac dynamics. Between the two cohorts, differences in the primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables and χ2 analysis for categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression were used to examine 5-year mortality.

Results

We identified 3331 primary F/BEVAR patients and 102 prior OSR patients. Patients with prior OSR were more likely to have peripheral arterial disease (22.0% vs 7.4%), prior smoking (67% vs 56%), and undergo F/BEVAR with medium-/high-volume physicians (74% vs 62%), but less likely to be female (8.8% vs 23.0%) (all P < .05). Patients with prior OSR were also more likely to have a more proximal aneurysm extent (median zone 7 [interquartile range (IQR), zones 6-8] vs zone 8 [IQR, zones 7-8]), larger AAA diameters (62 mm [IQR, 56-66 mm] vs 58 mm [IQR, 55-63 mm]), receive a physician-modified endograft (PMEG) vs commercial custom-made device (36% vs 20% physician-modified endograft), have longer surgery times (240 minutes [IQR, 186-308 minutes] vs 206 minutes [IQR, 155-272 minutes]), and have a higher rate of celiac artery (51% vs 26%) and superior mesenteric artery (86% v 73%) artery involvement (all P < .05). Patients with prior OSR had lower rates of completion endoleaks (25% vs 36%), driven by lower rates of type II leaks (11% vs 20%) despite higher rates of indeterminate leaks (11% vs 5.1%) (all P < .01). There was, however, no difference in perioperative mortality (2% vs 2.9%; P = .78). They had similar 1-year sac dynamics (48% vs 50% regression; 12% vs 8% expansion; P > .5) and 5-year mortality (23% vs 18%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.44 [IQR, 0.89-2.31]; P = .13).

Conclusions

Based on VQI data, F/BEVAR after prior OSR seems to be well-tolerated and safe. Prior OSR patients also had lower rates of completion type II endoleaks and similar sac dynamics and 5-year mortality compared with primary F/BEVAR patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开窗/支血管内主动脉修复失败与初次开窗/支血管内主动脉修复的结果比较
目的:随着动脉瘤疾病的进展,近端疾病进展和吻合旁动脉瘤是开放式肾下腹主动脉瘤修复术(AAA)后常见的并发症。因此,这些患者可能需要开窗或分支血管内修复(F/BEVAR)。描述先前开放修复后开窗血管内动脉瘤修复的数据仅限于机构数据库。我们研究的目的是利用血管质量倡议来描述开窗/分支血管内动脉瘤修复(F/BEVAR)在先前开放修复(OSR)患者中的安全性和有效性,并与原发性F/BEVAR进行比较。方法:使用VQI复合血管内AAA模块,从2014年至2022年,我们确定了所有有OSR病史或没有主动脉手术史的患者(原发性F/BEVAR)的单期F/BEVAR修复。主要结局是围手术期死亡率和手术完成率。次要结局是5年生存率和1年囊腔动力学。在两个队列之间,使用连续变量的wilcox - rank和检验和分类变量的卡方分析来评估主要和次要结局的差异。采用Kaplan-Meier法和cox回归分析5年死亡率。结果:我们确定了3331例原发性F/BEVAR患者和102例既往OSR患者。既往有OSR的患者更有可能患有外周动脉疾病(22%对7.4%),既往吸烟(67%对56%),接受中/高容量医生的F/BEVAR(74%对62%),但女性(8.8%对23%)(均p0.5)和5年死亡率(23%对18%,HR: 1.44[0.89-2.31];p = 0.13)。结论:基于VQI数据,先前OSR后的F/BEVAR似乎具有良好的耐受性和安全性。与原发F/BEVAR患者相比,先前的开放式修复患者完成II型内漏率和相似的囊动力学和5年死亡率也较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
18.60%
发文量
1469
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Vascular Surgery ® aims to be the premier international journal of medical, endovascular and surgical care of vascular diseases. It is dedicated to the science and art of vascular surgery and aims to improve the management of patients with vascular diseases by publishing relevant papers that report important medical advances, test new hypotheses, and address current controversies. To acheive this goal, the Journal will publish original clinical and laboratory studies, and reports and papers that comment on the social, economic, ethical, legal, and political factors, which relate to these aims. As the official publication of The Society for Vascular Surgery, the Journal will publish, after peer review, selected papers presented at the annual meeting of this organization and affiliated vascular societies, as well as original articles from members and non-members.
期刊最新文献
The society for vascular surgery clinical practice guideline on the management of blunt thoracic aortic injury: A focused update. Reply. The evolving landscape of clopidogrel responsiveness assessment amidst shifting sands and complex realities. Hemoglobin A1c correlated with outcomes in diabetics after revascularization. Best to get it right the first time.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1