Spondylodiscitis due to transmitted mycotic aortic aneurysm or infected grafts after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR): A retrospective single-centre experience with short-term outcomes

Abstract Purpose To report the challenging therapeutic approach and the clinical outcome of patients with pyogenic spondylodiscitis transmitted due to infected retroperitoneal regions of primary infected mycotic aortic aneurysms (MAAs) or secondary infected aortic stent grafts after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods Between 2012 and 2019, all patients suffering from spondylodiscitis based on a transmitted infection after the EVAR procedure were retrospectively identified. Patient data were analysed regarding the time between primary and secondary EVAR infection and spondylodiscitis detection, potential source of infection, pathogens, antibiotic treatment, complications, recovery from infection, mortality, numeric rating scale (NRS), COBB angle and cage subsidence. Results Fifteen patients with spondylodiscitis transmitted from primary or secondary infected aortic aneurysms after EVAR were included. The median follow-up time was 8 months (range 1–47). Surgery for spondylodiscitis was performed in 12 patients. In 9 patients, the infected graft was treated conservatively. MAAs were treated in 4 patients first with percutaneous aortic stent graft implantation followed by posterior surgery of the infected spinal region in a two-step procedure. Infection recovery was recorded in 11 patients during follow-up. The overall mortality rate was 27% (n = 4). The mean pain intensity improved from an NRS score of 8.4 (3.2–8.3) to 3.1 (1.3–6.7) at the last follow-up. Conclusion EVAR was used predominantly to treat primary infected MAAs. Secondary infected grafts were treated conservatively. Independent of vascular therapy, surgery of the spine led to recovery in most cases. Thus, surgery should be considered for the treatment of EVAR- and MAA-related spondylodiscitis.

Download Full-text

Treatment of complex aortic aneurysms with fenestrated endografts and chimney stent repair: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Vascular ◽

10.1177/1708538115627718 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 25 (1) ◽

pp. 92-100 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Yang Yaoguo ◽

Chen Zhong ◽

Kou Lei ◽

Xiao Yaowen

Keyword(s):

Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

Aortic Aneurysms ◽

Type I ◽

Type I Endoleak ◽

Comprehensive Search ◽

Aneurysm Repair ◽

Related Mortality

Objective We reviewed data pertaining to fenestrated endograft technique and chimney stent repair of complex aortic aneurysm for comparative analysis of the outcomes. Methods A comprehensive search of relevant databases was conducted to identify articles in English, related to the treatment of complex aortic aneurysm with fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and chimney stent repair, published until January 2015. Results A total of 42 relevant studies and 2264 patients with aortic aneurysm undergoing fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and chimney stent repair were included in our review. A total of 4413 vessels were involved in these processes. The cumulative 30-day mortality was 2.4% and 3.2% ( p = 0.459). The follow-up aneurysm-related mortality was 1.4% and 3.2% ( p = 0.018), and target organ dysfunction was 5.0% and 4.0% in fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and chimney stent repair, respectively ( p = 0.27). A total of 156 vessels showed restenosis or occlusion after primary intervention (3.6% and 3.4% in fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and chimney stent repair, respectively, p = 0.792). The cumulative type I endoleak was 2.0% (38/1884) after fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair compared with 3.4% (13/380) after chimney stent repair ( p = 0.092), and the type II endoleak was 5.4% (102/1884) and 5.3% (20/380), respectively ( p = 0.905). Approximately, 1.1% and 1.6% increase in aneurysm was observed following fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and chimney stent repair, respectively ( p = 0.437). The re-intervention frequency was 205 and 19 cases after fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and chimney stent repair, respectively (11.7%, 5.6%, p = 0.001). Conclusions Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and chimney stent repair are safe and effective in treating patients with complex aortic aneurysm. A higher aneurysm-related mortality was observed in chimney stent repair while fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair was associated with a higher re-intervention rate.

Download Full-text

Outcomes of Advanta V12 Covered Stents After Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Journal of Endovascular Therapy ◽

10.1177/15266028211016423 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 152660282110164

Author(s):

Claire van der Riet ◽

Richte C. L. Schuurmann ◽

Eric L. G. Verhoeven ◽

Clark J. Zeebregts ◽

Ignace F. J. Tielliu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

Aortic Aneurysms ◽

Stent Fracture ◽

Covered Stents ◽

Significant Stenosis ◽

Primary Endpoints ◽

Visceral Arteries ◽

Aneurysm Repair ◽

Type 3

Purpose: Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) is a well-established endovascular treatment option for pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms in which balloon-expandable covered stents (BECS) are used to bridge the fenestration to the target vessels. This study presents midterm clinical outcomes and patency rates of the Advanta V12 BECS used as a bridging stent. Methods: All patients treated with FEVAR with at least 1 Advanta V12 BECS were included from 2 large-volume vascular centers between January 2012 and December 2015. Primary endpoints were freedom from all-cause reintervention, and freedom from BECS-associated complications and reintervention. BECS-associated complications included significant stenosis, occlusion, type 3 endoleak, or stent fracture. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality in-hospital and during follow-up. Results: This retrospective study included 194 FEVAR patients with a mean age of 72.2±8.0 years. A total of 457 visceral arteries were stented with an Advanta V12 BECS. Median (interquartile range) follow-up time was 24.6 (1.6, 49.9) months. The FEVAR procedure was technically successful in 93% of the patients. Five patients (3%) died in-hospital. Patient survival was 77% (95% CI 69% to 84%) at 3 years. Freedom from all-cause reintervention was 70% (95% CI 61% to 78%) at 3 years, and 33% of all-cause reinterventions were BECS associated. Complications were seen in 24 of 457 Advanta V12 BECSs: type 3 endoleak in 8 BECSs, significant stenosis in 4 BECSs, occlusion in 6 BECSs, and stent fractures in 3 BECSs. A combination of complications occurred in 3 BECSs: type 3 endoleak and stenosis, stent fracture and stenosis, and stent fracture and occlusion. The freedom from BECS-associated complications for Advanta V12 BECSs was 98% (95% CI 96% to 99%) at 1 year and 92% (95% CI 88% to 95%) at 3 years. The freedom from BECS-associated reinterventions was 98% (95% CI 95% to 100%) at 1 year and 94% (95% CI 91% to 97%) at 3 years. Conclusion: The Advanta V12 BECS used as bridging stent in FEVAR showed low complication and reintervention rates at 3 years. A substantial number of FEVAR patients required a reintervention, but most were not BECS related.

Download Full-text

Early Clinical Outcomes of the Active Seal Technology of the AFX Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm System With the VELA Cuff for Patients With a Conical Proximal Neck

Journal of Endovascular Therapy ◽

10.1177/15266028211070971 ◽

2022 ◽

pp. 152660282110709

Author(s):

Naoki Fujimura ◽

Hideaki Obara ◽

Takaaki Nagano ◽

Yukihisa Ogawa ◽

Taira Kobayashi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

Aortic Aneurysms ◽

Proximal Neck ◽

Landing Zone ◽

The Core ◽

The Mean ◽

Instructions For Use ◽

Lost To Follow Up

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of the Active Seal technology employed in the AFX endovascular aortic aneurysm system (AFX), during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) having a conical proximal neck. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of the EVAR for AAA with a conical proximal neck using the AFX was performed at 17 Japanese hospitals between January 2016 and August 2020. The conical proximal neck was defined as a cone-shaped proximal neck, with more than 10% diameter increase within a 15 mm length at the proximal landing zone. All anatomical analyses were performed in the core laboratory, and cases with parallel walls within the proximal neck adequate for the landing zone were excluded from the study. Results: This study included 53 patients, but only 39 patients (mean age, 76.6 ± 6.7 years; 87.0% males; mean aneurysm diameter, 52.0 ± 8.0 mm) were analyzed after being characterized as having a pure conical neck by the core laboratory. The mean proximal neck diameters at the lower renal artery and proximal edge of the aneurysm were 20.0 ± 2.9 mm and 27.5 ± 4.9 mm, respectively. The mean proximal neck length was 21.5 ± 6.0 mm. Instructions for use violations other than the conical neck were observed in 15 patients (38.5%). The VELA cuff was used in all cases; however, additional proximal cuff was required in 9 more cases (23.1%). The Active Seal technology was able to significantly extend the proximal sealing zone from 21.5 ± 6.0 to 26.0 ± 12.2 mm ( p = .047). Thirty-six patients completed the 12-month follow-up (one patient was lost to follow-up, and 2 patients died from causes unrelated to the aneurysm), and there were no type-1a and 3 endoleaks with only one reintervention (2.6%) related to type 1b endoleak in the 12-month period. Furthermore, there was no significant enlargement of the proximal neck diameter at 12 months (at 1 month: 20.6 ± 3.4 mm and at 12 months: 21.3 ± 3.8 mm; p = .420). Conclusion: The Active Seal technology of the AFX significantly extended the proximal seal zone and no type-1a endoleak and proximal neck dilation was observed in patients with conical proximal neck at 12 months.

Download Full-text

Comparing polymer-filled versus self-expanding endografts in Chinese patients

Asian Cardiovascular and Thoracic Annals ◽

10.1177/0218492318810108 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 26 (9) ◽

pp. 667-676

Author(s):

Yuk Law ◽

Yiu Che Chan ◽

Stephen Wing-Keung Cheng

Keyword(s):

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

Aortic Aneurysms ◽

The Self ◽

Chinese Patients ◽

Type Ii ◽

Mortality And Morbidity ◽

Type Ia ◽

One Year ◽

Aneurysm Repair

Introduction We performed a single-center nonrandomized study on patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair using polymer-filled or other self-expanding endografts. Methods Consecutive patients with asymptomatic infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms who underwent endovascular repair were retrospectively reviewed. They were divided into a polymer-filled ( n = 20) or self-expanding group ( n = 42). Baseline characteristics, operative mortality and morbidity, and follow-up data were compared. Results Aneurysm diameter, neck and iliac morphologies did not differ between the two groups. Technical success was 100%. The 30-day mortality was 0% and 2.4% in the polymer-filled and self-expanding group, respectively. At a mean follow-up of 17 months, the changes in sac size were −2.1 mm and −5.1 mm ( p = 0.144) at one year, and −3.5 mm and −7.7 mm ( p = 0.287) at 2 years in the polymer-filled and self-expanding group, respectively. The polymer-filled group had 7 (35%) type II endoleaks, and the self-expanding group had 1 (2.4%) type Ia and 13 (31%) type II endoleaks. Neck diameter remained stable in the polymer-filled stent-grafts whereas there was progressive neck degeneration in the self-expanding group. The rates of reintervention and overall survival were similar in both groups. The presence of an endoleak was the only predictor of non-regression of the aneurysm (odds ratio = 17.00, 95% confidence interval: 4.46–64.88, p < 0.001). Conclusion Polymer-filled endografts had similar safety, effectiveness, and durability to other self-expanding endografts. The major advantage is the small iliofemoral access. They also have the potential long-term benefit of a more stable neck.

Download Full-text

Endovascular Aneurysm Sealing (EVAS) and Chimney EVAS in the Treatment of Failed Endovascular Aneurysm Repairs

Journal of Endovascular Therapy ◽

10.1177/1526602816675622 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 24 (1) ◽

pp. 115-120 ◽

Cited By ~ 23

Author(s):

Marwan Youssef ◽

Sebastian Zerwes ◽

Rudolf Jakob ◽

Oroa Salem ◽

Fritz Dünschede ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

Multiple Organ ◽

Aortic Aneurysms ◽

Technical Success ◽

Graft Thrombosis ◽

Type Ia ◽

Aneurysm Repair ◽

Chimney Graft ◽

Bifurcated Graft

Purpose: To assess the technical success and clinical outcome of reinterventions using the Nellix Endovascular Aneurysm Sealing (EVAS) System to treat complications after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: Fifteen consecutive patients (mean age 79 years; 14 men) with prior EVAR were treated with EVAS between March 2014 and December 2015 at 2 institutions. The failed prior EVARs included 13 bifurcated endografts, 1 bifurcated graft plus fenestrated cuff, and 1 tube endograft. Endoleaks were the predominant indications: type Ia in 10 and type III in 5 (3 type IIIa and 2 type IIIb). All patients presented with progressive aortic aneurysms (median 7.85-cm diameter; range 6.5–11). Eight patients were treated on an urgent or emergency basis (6 symptomatic aneurysms and 2 contained ruptures). All patients underwent Nellix relining of the failed stent-graft; 10 had chimney (Ch) procedures in combination with EVAS (chEVAS) because the proximal landing zones were inadequate. Results: Technical success was 100%. All endoleaks were successfully sealed, and no additional intervention was required. No further endoleak after EVAS or chEVAS was recorded. Endobag protrusion occurred in 1 case without sequelae. One elderly patient with ruptured aneurysm died from multiple organ failure 2 months postoperatively. One renal artery guidewire injury led to nephrectomy because of active bleeding. No reinterventions, aneurysm-related mortalities, graft thrombosis, endoleaks, or chimney graft occlusions were observed during a median follow-up of 8 months (range 3–24). Conclusion: The present preliminary experience demonstrates that the use of EVAS/chEVAS is feasible for treatment of failed EVAR. This technique may be used as bailout or an alternative treatment when other established methods are infeasible or not available.

Download Full-text

Endovascular versus Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in 15-Years’ Follow-Up of the UK Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Trial 1 (EVAR Trial 1): A Randomized Controlled Trial

50 Landmark Papers Every Vascular and Endovascular Surgeon Should Know ◽

10.1201/9780429434020-11 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 47-49

Author(s):

Juan Carlos Jimenez ◽

Samuel Eric Wilson

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Abdominal Aortic ◽

The Uk ◽

Aneurysm Repair

Download Full-text

Endovascular repair of aortic aneurysm: Preliminary results

Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo ◽

10.2298/sarh0902010d ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 137 (1-2) ◽

pp. 10-17 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lazar Davidovic ◽

Momcilo Colic ◽

Igor Koncar ◽

Dejan Markovic ◽

Dusan Kostic ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Stent Graft ◽

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

Aortic Aneurysms ◽

Endovascular Stent ◽

Stent Grafts ◽

Graft Thrombosis ◽

Abdominal Aortic

Introduction. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been introduced into clinical practice at the beginning of the 90's of the last century. Because of economic, political and social problems during the last 25 years, the introduction of this procedure in Serbia was not possible. Objective. The aim of this study was to present preliminary experiences and results of the Clinic for Vascular Surgery of the Serbian Clinical Centre in Belgrade in endovascular treatment of thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms. Methods. The procedure was performed in 33 patients (3 female and 30 male), aged from 42 to 83 years. Ten patients had a descending thoracic aorta aneurysm (three atherosclerotic, four traumatic - three chronic and one acute as a part of polytrauma, one dissected, two penetrated atherosclerotic ulcers), while 23 patients had the abdominal aortic aneurysm, one ruptured and two isolated iliac artery aneurysms. The indications for EVAR were isthmic aneurismal localisation, aged over 80 years and associated comorbidity (cardiac, pulmonary and cerebrovasular diseases, previous thoracotomy or multiple laparotomies associated with abdominal infection, idiopatic thrombocitopaenia). All of these patients had three or more risk factors. The diagnosis was established using duplex ultrasonography, angiography and MSCT. In the case of thoracic aneurysm, a Medtronic-Valiant? endovascular stent graft was implanted, while for the abdominal aortic aneurysm Medtronic-Talent? endovascular stent grafts with delivery systems were used. In three patients, following EVAR a surgical repair of the femoral artery aneurysm was performed, and in another three patients femoro-femoral cross over bypass followed implantation of aortouniiliac stent graft. Results. During procedure and follow-up period (mean 1.6 years), there were: one death, one conversion, one endoleak type 1, six patients with endoleak type 2 that disappeared during the follow-up period, one early graft thrombosis. No other complications, including aneurysm expansion, collapse, deformity and migration of the endovascular stent grafts, were registered. Conclusion. According to all medical and economic aspects, we recommend EVAR to treat acute traumatic thoracic aortic aneurysm, as well as in elderly and high-risk patients with abdominal or thoracic aneurysms, when open surgery is related to a significantly higher mortality and morbidity.

Download Full-text

Five-year survival after elective open and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Scandinavian Journal of Surgery ◽

10.1177/14574969211048707 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 145749692110487

Author(s):

Jüri Lieberg ◽

Karl G. Kadatski ◽

Mart Kals ◽

Kaido Paapstel ◽

Jaak Kals

Keyword(s):

Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Survival Data ◽

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

National Registry ◽

University Hospital ◽

Current Evidence ◽

Term Survival ◽

All Cause Mortality ◽

Aneurysm Repair

Background and objective: Current evidence suggests short-term survival benefit from endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) in elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) procedures, but this benefit is lost during long-term follow-up. The aim of this study was to compare short- and mid-term all-cause mortality in patients with non-ruptured aneurysm treated by OSR and EVAR; and to assess the rate of complications and reinterventions, as well as to evaluate their impact on survival. Methods: The medical records of the non-ruptured AAA patients undergoing OSR or EVAR between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2019 at Tartu University Hospital, Estonia, were retrospectively reviewed. We gathered survival data from the national registry (mean follow-up period was 3.7 ± 2.3 years). Results: A total of 225 non-ruptured AAA patients were treated operatively out of whom 95 (42.2%) were EVAR and 130 (57.8%) were OSR procedures. The difference in estimated all-cause mortality between the OSR and EVAR groups at day 30 was statistically irrelevant (2.3% vs 0%; p = 0.140), but OSR patients showed statistically significantly higher 5 year survival compared with EVAR patients (75.3% vs 50.0%, p = 0.002). Complication and reintervention rates for the EVAR and OSR groups did not differ statistically (26.3% vs 16.9%, p = 0.122; 10.5% vs 11.5%, p = 0.981, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that greater aneurysm diameter (p = 0.012), EVAR procedure (p = 0.016), male gender (p = 0.023), and cerebrovascular diseases (p = 0.028) were independently positively associated with 5-year mortality. Conclusions: Thirty-day mortality, and complication and reintervention rates for EVAR and OSR after elective AAA repair were similar. Although the EVAR procedure is an independent risk factor for 5-year mortality, higher age and greater proportion of comorbidities among EVAR patients may influence not only the choice of treatment modality, but also prognosis.

Download Full-text

Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Challenging Anatomy: Utility of the Hybrid Endograft

Vascular ◽

10.1258/rsmvasc.12.2.106 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 12 (2) ◽

pp. 106-113 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

William D. Jordan ◽

Thomas C. Naslund ◽

Mark A. Adelman ◽

Gene Simoni ◽

Douglas J. Wirthlin

Keyword(s):

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Aortic Aneurysm ◽

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽

Radiographic Evaluation ◽

Covered Stents ◽

Aneurysm Size ◽

Abdominal Aortic ◽

Aneurysm Repair

Commercially available aortic stent grafts differ in construction and clinical advantage such that creating hybrid endografts by combining components from different manufacturers is sometimes useful. We describe a multicenter experience using hybrid endografts to treat patients with challenging anatomy. Hospital records and office charts were reviewed from four institutions. Hybrid endografts were defined as those with two types of covered stents in continuity to treat an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Indications for hybrid grafts were defined by type of endoleak and whether an endoleak was expected or unexpected as determined by the preoperative radiographic evaluation. Endpoints include intraoperative endoleaks, late endoleaks, change in aneurysm size, and rupture. Hybrid endografts were used to treat AAA (endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR]) in 90 patients, representing 7.9% of the total multicenter experience. In 7 patients (7.8%), a hybrid graft construction as a secondary procedure successfully corrected a type 1 endoleak. In the remaining 83 patients (92.2%), hybrid grafts were created at the time of original EVAR to treat expected challenging anatomy or unexpected endoleaks. Hybrid endografts corrected 88 (97.8%) type 1 endoleaks, but 2 patients (2.2%) persisted with a proximal type 1 leak requiring conversion. During follow-up of 1 to 24 months, computed tomography and ultrasound surveillance, available for 73 patients (81.1%), detected one unresolved distal type 1 (1.1%) and seven type 2 (7.8%) endoleaks. Aneurysm size decreased at least 0.5 cm in 23 of 50 patients (46.0%) at 6 months and in 19 of 31 patients (61.3%) at 12 months. Aneurysm size increased at least 0.5 cm in 4 of 50 patients (8.0%) at 6 months and in 1 of 31 patients (3.2%) at 12 months. There were no ruptures. Hybrid endografts have favorable early and intermediate results in the treatment of AAA. Long-term follow-up will be needed to confirm the absence of significant adverse biomaterial interaction and the effect on AAA exclusion. We advocate the use of hybrid endografts as endovascular therapy for patients whose anatomy may be unsuitable for a single endograft type.

Download Full-text