Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE: To evaluate the midterm outcomes of chimney and/or periscope grafts (CPGs) in patients presenting type I endoleak after a previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: Between June 2002 and April 2014, 24 consecutive patients (mean age 73.9+/-9.2 years; 23 men) presenting a type I endoleak were addressed with CPGs to extend the proximal and/or distal landing zone and to maintain side branch perfusion. Indication for treatment was a type Ia endoleak in 23 (96%) patients and a type Ib endoleak in one. Median interval from the previous EVAR to endoleak treatment with CPGs was 52.2+/-48.9 months (range 0.2-179). All patients had proximal/distal landing zones precluding any standard endovascular reintervention. Measured outcomes included technical success and perioperative mortality and morbidity. Technical success was defined as a procedure completed as intended, with no secondary procedures within 30 days. Midterm outcomes included survival, CPG patency, endoleaks, and freedom from reintervention. RESULTS: Technical success was 96%; a single patient required an additional procedure to seal a recurrent type Ia endoleak. Intraoperative revascularization of all 55 target vessels (2.3/patient) with CPGs was successful. One (4%) patient died within 30 days. Estimated survival at 12, 24, and 36 months was 83%; estimated CPG patency at the same intervals was 94%. Over a mean follow-up of 23.4+/-29 months, 6 (25%) reinterventions were performed; of these, 4 were secondary to type I endoleak. Aneurysm diameters reduced from 88.3+/-26 to 85.5+/-33 mm (p=0.49) over the mean follow-up. CONCLUSION: The CPG technique is a safe and effective tool for treatment of type I endoleak after previous EVAR. The CPG technique is feasible even in nonelective patients, with excellent outcomes in terms of patency. Close imaging follow-up is warranted to rule out recurrent or de novo endoleaks.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to report long-term results of early endovascular aortic aneurysm repair after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of all patients presenting with abdominal aortic aneurysm and coronary artery disease treated during the same hospitalization by endovascular aortic aneurysm repair performed soon after PCI. Primary outcomes were perioperative mortality, perioperative complications, survival after treatment, and freedom from reintervention. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients were included, and all completed both procedures. No deaths or abdominal aortic aneurysm ruptures occurred between the PCI and the aortic intervention. Perioperative mortality was 5% as one patient died of mesenteric ischemia after endovascular aneurysm repair. Major cardiovascular vascular complications occurred in four patients (20%) and included non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (one) and access vessel complication (three). Mean follow-up was 94 (range, 1-164; standard deviation, 47) months. Estimated survival at 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years was 90%, 90%, 90%, and 60%, respectively. A reoperation was required in six patients. Estimated freedom from reintervention at 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years was 83%, 83%, 78%, and 72%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that early endovascular aneurysm repair performed within a week after PCI may be a reasonable approach in patients with large or symptomatic aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Controlled limb reperfusion has been shown to prevent the deleterious effects of ischemia-reperfusion (IR) syndrome following revascularisation of acute limb ischemia (ALI). To reduce the production of cell-toxic oxygen free radicals, we have established a new initially oxygen-free, hypothermic, heparin-coated perfusion and hemofiltration system and report on our first results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective single center study, controlled limb reperfusion was applied in 36 patients (64.7+/-15 years) with ALI of category IIA to III (33.7+/-20.7 hours ischemic time). 52.8% had central (aortic and bifurcation) and 47.2% had peripheral (common iliac artery and distal) vascular occlusions. The common femoral artery and vein were cannulated, and a hypothermic (22 degrees C), initially oxygen-free, potassium-free ringer's solution was perfused using a heparin-coated extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and hemofiltration system with low-dose heparinization. 30-day mortality, clinical recovery of neurological dysfunction, limb amputation and fasciotomy rate were analysed. Laboratory parameters associated with ischemia and IR injury were determined. RESULTS: Average perfusion time was 94+/-35 minutes. 30-day mortality was 27.8%. 55.5% of patients showed complete recovery of motor and sensory dysfunction. 27.8% developed a compartment syndrome and required fasciotomy. Lower leg amputation was necessary in 11.1%. Lactate levels were reduced in ischemic limbs by 25.3% within 60 minutes (P<.05). Preoperative negative base excess of -1.96+/-0.96 mmol/L was equalized after 12 hours (P<.05) while pH stayed balanced at 7.4. Serum potassium stayed within normal limits throughout 24 hours and therefore, systemic hyperkalemia was prevented, and imminent metabolic acidosis was corrected. CONCLUSION: An initially oxygen-free, hypothermic, heparin-coated ECMO counteracts local and systemic effects of IR injury. Reduced mortality and morbidity might result from this new treatment, although this could not be conclusively proven in our study. A prospective, randomized controlled trial is needed to prove superiority of this new concept.

Several guidelines recommend carotid endarterectomy for patients with severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis to reduce the risk of a future cerebrovascular event, as long as the perioperative stroke/death rate is <3%. Based on improvements in best medical treatment, it was argued that currently best medical treatment alone should comprise the treatment-of-choice for asymptomatic carotid stenosis patients and that no intervention is warranted in these individuals. While it is true that best medical treatment should be used for the management of all asymptomatic carotid stenosis patients, emerging evidence suggests that best medical treatment alone may not prevent disease progression and the development of symptoms in some asymptomatic carotid stenosis patient subgroups. This article analyzes the results of two recent independent studies demonstrating that medical therapy alone may not be adequate for stroke prevention in some asymptomatic carotid stenosis patient subgroups. These results suggest that besides best medical treatment, additional carotid endarterectomy should be considered for specific asymptomatic carotid stenosis patients.

During the last decade, new information and reports have been published regularly describing endovascular and open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms, but despite this, disagreement persists over which therapy is best. At the root of the problem is the discrepancy between the findings of multiple well-performed observational studies and a smaller number of randomized controlled trials. Our debaters do an excellent job of summarizing the current status of the world literature and describing their conflicting interpretations.

According to the 2011, as well as the 2014 updated American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Guidelines, carotid artery stenting (CAS) is indicated as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the management of symptomatic carotid patients. According to these recommendations, CAS is preferred over CEA in symptomatic patients with specific technical, anatomic or physiologic characteristics that render these individuals at "high risk" for surgery (e.g. contralateral carotid occlusion, previous neck irradiation, recurrent carotid stenosis, etc.). This article will present emerging data suggesting that most of these criteria do not comprise contraindications for CEA. In fact, CEA is associated with similar (or even better) outcomes compared with CAS in many such "high-risk" patients. Based on these results, the indications of CAS in symptomatic patients may need to be reconsidered.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The most common and significant morbidity and mortality of vascular surgical procedures remain coronary artery disease, arrhythmia, and heart failure. Cardiac evaluation and medical optimization provide the groundwork for best medical practice in an otherwise high-risk surgical population. The goal of this study is to review the most current literature and guidelines for evaluating patients prior to vascular surgical interventions. From this, we have made our own recommendations regarding both the preoperative and perioperative management of vascular surgical patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Risk stratification using a modified Lee index may be best to assess perioperative cardiac risk. Coronary revascularization should be reserved for those patients with significant coronary disease irrespective of symptoms. beta-blockers, statins, and antiplatelet agents should be considered for all patients with peripheral vascular disease. SUMMARY: The preoperative management of vascular surgical patients requires a complete understanding of the patient's medical history as it relates to their perioperative cardiac risk. Overwhelming data support the use of medical therapy as adjunct to minimize or prevent the risk of future cardiovascular events. As vascular surgery transitions to the outpatient setting, further studies will be required to better elucidate cardiac evaluation in this patient population.