Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic grafts for lower-extremity bypass have limited patency compared with autologous vein grafts. Precuffed expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) grafts alter the geometry of the distal hood to improve patency. This study reports the authors' long-term results on the use of precuffed ePTFE grafts for infrainguinal bypasses in patients with arterial occlusive disease and compares these with results of reversed great saphenous vein grafts (rSVG). METHODS: A retrospective review of billing codes identified 101 polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and 47 rSVG bypasses performed over a 6-year period. Femoral to below-knee popliteal and femoral to tibial bypasses were analyzed. Data collected consisted of risk factors, Rutherford classification, bypass inflow and outflow, runoff vessels, patency, amputation, and death. Primary end points consisted of primary, assisted-primary, and secondary patency along with limb salvage. RESULTS: Mean age of the patients was 76 years in the PTFE group and 69.8 years in the rSVG group. For femoral to below-knee popliteal bypasses, primary patency at 1, 3, and 5 years in the PTFE group was 76.9%, 48.7%, and 43.3%, respectively, compared with 77.1%, 77.1%, and 77.1%, respectively, in the rSVG group (P = 0.225). Secondary patency was 89.2%, 70.9%, and 50.6% in the PTFE group compared with 84.4%, 84.4%, and 84.4% in the rSVG group (P = 0.269). Limb salvage was similar in the PTFE compared with the rSVG group (97.7%, 90.5%, and 79.4% vs. 83.3%, 83.3%, and 83.3%; P = 0.653). For femoral to tibial bypasses, primary patency in the PTFE group at 1, 3, and 5 years was 57.1%, 40.4%, and 22.1%, respectively, compared with 67.4%, 67.4%, and 50.6%, respectively, for the rSVG group (P = 0.246). Secondary patency was 75.5%, 44.9%, and 22.7% in the PTFE group compared with 91.8%, 91.8%, and 52.5% in the rSVG group (P = 0.022). Limb salvage at 1, 3, and 5 years was 79.2%, 55.7%, and 55.7%, respectively, in the PTFE group compared with 96.4%, 96.4%, and 64.3%, respectively, in the rSVG group (P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Precuffed ePTFE grafts demonstrate similar 1-year patency to that of rSVG. However, mid- and long-term patency is reduced compared with saphenous vein grafts (SVG), especially to tibial targets. PTFE grafts to the popliteal demonstrate limb salvage rates similar to those of SVG. In the tibial vessels, limb salvage rates for PTFE grafts are significantly worse compared with SVG.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the risk of left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage and the role of revascularization in a large population of patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter review of 1189 patient records from 2000 to 2010 was performed. Major adverse events evaluated included cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and spinal cord ischemia (SCI). Subgroup analysis was performed for noncovered LSA (group A), covered LSA (group B), and covered/revascularized LSA (group C). RESULTS: Of 1189 patients, 394 had LSA coverage (33.1%), and 180 of these patients (46%) underwent LSA revascularization. In all patients, emergency operations (9.5% vs 4.3%; P = .001), renal failure (12.7% vs 5.3%; P = .001), hypertension (7% vs 2.3%; P = .01), and number of stents placed (1 = 3.7%, 2 = 7.4%, >/=3 = 10%; P = .005) were predictors of SCI. History of cerebrovascular disease (9.6% vs 3.5%; P = .002), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (9.5% vs 5.4%; P = .01), coronary artery disease (8.5% vs 5.3%; P = .03), smoking (8.9% vs 4.2%) and female gender (5.3% men vs 8.2% women; P = .05) were predictors of CVA. Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference between groups B and C (SCI, 6.3% vs 6.1%; CVA, 6.7% vs 6.1%). LSA revascularization was not protective for SCI (7.5% vs 4.1%; P = .3) or CVA (6.1% vs 6.4%; P = .9). Women who underwent revascularization had an increased incidence of CVA event compared with all other subgroups (group A: 5.6% men, 8.4% women, P = .16; group B: 6.6% men, 5.3% women, P = .9; group C: 2.8% men, 11.9% women, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: LSA coverage does not appear to result in an increased incidence of SCI or CVA event when a strategy of selective revascularization is adopted. Selective LSA revascularization results in similar outcomes among the three cohorts studied. Revascularization in women carries an increased risk of a CVA event and should be reserved for select cases.

Management of the left subclavian artery (LSA) during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) continues to be controversial, despite recent guidelines submitted by the Society for Vascular Surgery recommending routine revascularization of the LSA in most circumstances. Up to one third of patients require coverage of the LSA during TEVAR. The LSA provides extensive circulation to the upper extremity, spinal cord, and brain, consequently, sacrifice of this great vessel might not be physiologically tolerated. Studies supporting routine preoperative revascularization of the LSA note increased rates of spinal cord ischemia, strokes, and upper extremity ischemia when the LSA is sacrificed. Other studies supporting a selective revascularization strategy note no difference in neurologic outcomes and recommend expectant management of upper extremity ischemia. In addition, LSA revascularization has associated complications that are avoided by selective revascularization. The purpose of this article is to review and focus the available data in support of routine versus selective LSA revascularization.

A 72-year-old woman with end-stage renal disease was admitted with right upper quadrant pain, hypotension, an elevated bilirubin, and leukocytosis. A computed tomography scan showed a dilated common bile duct and an associated 4.5 cm gastroduodenal artery pseudoaneurysm. The pseudoaneurysm was coil embolized successfully while maintaining dual access from the brachial and femoral arteries using the "body floss" technique. Subsequently, the patient underwent endoscopic treatment for her obstructive jaundice. We report on the technical aspects of this case and review the literature.

OBJECTIVE: This study reviews a single-center experience of endovascular popliteal aneurysm (PAA) repair. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed to identify all endovascular PAA repairs performed between September 2004 and January 2011. RESULTS: We identified 21 patients (mean age, 74 +/- 9 years, 91% men) with PAAs (mean size, 2.89 +/- 1.0 cm) in 26 limbs, of which 38% were symptomatic. All patients underwent endovascular repair with a Viabahn covered stent graft (W. L. Gore & Assoc, Inc, Flagstaff, Ariz). Postoperatively, all patients were maintained on antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel or aspirin, or both. Mean follow-up was 22 +/- 17 months (range, 1-57 months). One patient with one aneurysm was lost to follow-up. Primary and secondary patencies were both 91.2% at 1 year and were 85.5% and 91.2%, respectively, at 2 years. The limb salvage rate was 100%. Four stent graft failures occurred at a mean of 12.3 +/- 11 months. One technical failure due to stent graft infolding required conversion to an open femoral-popliteal bypass. Three additional graft failures occurred in patients with poor (single-vessel) runoff. Compared with patients with two- or three-vessel runoff, the graft failure rate in patients with single-vessel runoff was statistically significant (P = .02). Two of the graft failures were successfully treated with open thrombectomy, and one required a tibial artery bypass for limb salvage. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair of PAAs is feasible and has acceptable midterm patency rates. Poor distal runoff predicted graft failure.

INTRODUCTION:: Iatrogenic arterial injury is an uncommon but recognized complication of posterior spinal surgery. The spectrum of injuries includes vessel perforation leading to hemorrhage, delayed pseudoaneurysm formation, and threatened perforation by screw impingement on arterial vessels. Repair of these injuries traditionally involved open direct vessel repair or graft placement, which can be associated with significant morbidity. METHODS:: We identified five cases of iatrogenic arterial injury during or after posterior spinal surgery between July 2004 and August 2009 and describe the endovascular treatment of these five patients. RESULTS:: In two patients, intraoperative arterial bleeding was encountered during posterior spinal surgery. The posterior wounds were packed, temporarily closed, and the patients were placed supine. Angiography in both patients demonstrated arterial injury necessitating repair. Covered stent grafts were deployed through femoral cutdowns to exclude the areas of injury. In three additional patients, postoperative computed tomography imaging demonstrated pedicle screws abutting or penetrating the thoracic or abdominal aorta. In all three patients, angiography or intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), or both, confirmed indention or perforation of the aorta by the screw. Aortic stent graft cuffs were deployed through femoral cutdowns to cover the area of aortic contact before hardware removal. All five patients did well and were discharged home in good condition. CONCLUSIONS:: Endovascular repair of arterial injuries occurring during posterior spine procedures is feasible and can offer a safe and less invasive alternative to open repair

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has rapidly become a viable and accepted treatment option for atherosclerotic aortic aneurysms as well as a variety of other aortic pathologies including ulcers, dissection, coarctation and disruption. Left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage is often necessary to achieve proximal seal in up to 40% of patients treated with TEVAR. The management of the LSA in this cohort of patients remains controversial. Studies in support of routine pre-operative LSA revascularization show that coverage of the LSA during TEVAR is associated with an increased risk of stroke, paraplegia and arm ischemia. Other studies show that intentional coverage of the LSA without revascularization is not associated with increased morbidity and lends support to those who advocate more selective LSA revascularization during TEVAR (i.e. in those patients with patent LIMA-coronary bypass, dominant or isolated left vertebral artery, or a functioning left upper extremity (LUE) dialysis arteriovenous fistula). This paper is intended to review the literature comparing routine and selective LSA revascularization after TEVAR to determine the best management strategy.