Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Adjunctive false lumen embolization (FLE) with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with chronic aortic dissection is thought to induce FL thrombosis and favorable aortic remodeling. However, these data are derived from small single-institution experiences and the potential benefit of FLE remains unproven. In this study, we examined perioperative and midterm outcomes of patients with aortic dissection undergoing concomitant TEVAR and FLE.* METHODS: Patients 18 or older who underwent TEVAR for chronic aortic dissection with known FLE status in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative database between January 2010 and February 2020 were included. Ruptured patients and emergent procedures were excluded. Patient characteristics, operative details and outcomes were analyzed by group: TEVAR with or without FLE. Primary outcomes were in-hospital post-operative complications and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included follow-up mean maximum aortic diameter change, rates of false lumen thrombosis, re-intervention rates, and mortality. RESULTS:884 patients were included: 46 had TEVAR/FLE and 838 had TEVAR alone. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of age, gender, comorbidities, prior aortic interventions, mean maximum pre-operative aortic diameter (5.1cm vs. 5.0cm, P=0.43), presentation symptomatology, or intervention indication. FLE was associated with significantly longer procedural times (178min vs. 146min, P=0.0002), increased contrast use (134mL vs. 113mL, P=0.02), and prolonged fluoroscopy time (34min vs. 21min, P<0.0001). However, FLE was not associated with a significant difference in post-operative complications (17.4% vs. 13.8%, P=0.51), length of stay (6.5 vs. 5.7 days, P=0.18), or in-hospital all-cause mortality (0% vs. 1.3%, P=1). In mid-term follow-up (median 15.5months, IQR 2.2-36.2 months), all-cause mortality trended lower, but was not significant (2.2% vs. 7.8%); and Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated no difference in overall survival between groups (P=0.23). By Cox regression analysis, post-operative complications had the strongest independent association with all-cause mortality (HR 2.65, 95% CI 1.56-4.5, P<0.001). In patients with available follow-up imaging and re-intervention status, mean aortic diameter change (n=337, -0.71cm vs. -0.69cm, P=0.64) and re-intervention rates (n=487, 10% vs. 11.4%, P=1) were similar. CONCLUSIONS:Adjunctive FLE, despite increased procedural times, can be performed safely for patients with chronic dissection without significantly higher overall perioperative morbidity or mortality. TEVAR/FLE demonstrates trends for improved survival and increased rates of FL thrombosis in the treated thoracic segment; however, given the lack of evidence to suggest a significant reduction in re-intervention rates or induction of more favorable aortic remodeling compared to TEVAR alone, the overall utility of this technique in practice remains unclear. Further investigation is needed to determine the most appropriate role for FLE in managing chronic aortic dissections.

OBJECTIVE:Over the past two decades, the treatment of popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) has undergone a transformation. While open surgical repair (OR) remains the gold standard for treatment, endovascular repair (ER) has become an attractive alternative in select patient populations. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of open versus endovascular repair of PAAs at a single institution. METHODS:We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients between 1998 and 2017 who underwent repair for PAA. Patient baseline, anatomic, and operative characteristics as well as outcomes were compared between the open and endovascular cohorts. The intervention and treatment were at the discretion of the surgeon. RESULTS:Between 1998 and 2017, a total of 64 patients underwent repair of 73 PAAs at our tertiary care center. Twenty-nine patients with 33 PAAs underwent OR, and 35 patients with 40 PAAs underwent ER. When comparing the 2 cohorts, there were no statistically significant differences in demographic characteristics such as age, gender, or number of run-off vessels. There were significantly more patients in the ER group (21/53%) than the OR group (7/21%) with hyperlipidemia (p=.008) and a prior carotid intervention (6% vs. 0%, p=.029). Overall, the presence of symptoms was similar amongst the two groups; however, patients in the OR group had a significantly higher number of patients presenting with acute ischemia (p=.01). Length of stay (LOS) was significantly shorter in the ER cohort (mean 1.8 days [1-11]) compared to the OR group (5.4 days [2-13]) (p<.0001). There was no significant difference in primary or secondary patency rates between the two groups. In the ER group, good runoff (≥2 vessels) was a positive predictor for primary patency at 1 year (3.36 [1.0-11.25]), however, it was not in the OR group. Post-operative single and/or dual anti-platelet therapy did not affect primary patency in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS:The results of our study demonstrate that ER of PAAs is a safe and durable option with comparable patency rates to OR and a decreased LOS, with good run-off being a positive predictor for primary patency in the ER cohort.

New York City was one of the epicenters of the COVID-19 pandemic. The management of peripheral artery disease (PAD) during this time has been a major challenge for health care systems and medical personnel. This document is based on the experiences of experts from various medical fields involved in the treatment of patients with PAD practicing in hospitals across New York City during the outbreak. The recommendations are based on certain aspects including the COVID-19 infection status as well as the clinical PAD presentation of the patient. Our case-based algorithm aims at guiding the treatment of patients with PAD during the pandemic in a safe and efficient way.

BACKGROUND:With the exponential increase in the use of endovascular techniques in the treatment of peripheral artery disease, our understanding of factors that affect intervention failures continues to grow. We sought to assess the outcomes of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for isolated de novo superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease based on balloon diameter. METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for patients undergoing percutaneous balloon angioplasty for isolated de novo atherosclerotic SFA disease. Based on the diameter of the angioplasty balloon as a surrogate measure of arterial diameter, patients were stratified into two groups: group 1, balloon diameter < 5 mm (354 patients) and group 2, balloon diameter ≥ 5 mm (1,550 patients). The primary patency and major adverse limb event (MALE) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test, based on vessel diameter. multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with the primary patency. RESULTS:From January 2010 through December 2018, a total of 1,904 patients met criteria for analysis, with a mean follow-up of 13.3 ± 4.5 months. The mean balloon diameters were 3.92 ± 0.26 mm and 5.47 ± 0.55 mm in group 1 and 2, respectively (P<.001). The mean length of treatment and distribution of TASC lesions were not statistically different between the groups. Primary patency at 18 months was significantly lower in group 1, compared with group 2 (55% vs 67%; log-rank P<.001). The MALE rate was higher in group 1 than group 2 (33% vs 26%; log-rank P<.001). Among patients with claudication, there was no significant difference in the primary patency (61% vs 68%; log-rank P=.073) and MALE (27% vs 22%; log-rank P=.176) at 18 months between groups 1 and 2, respectively. However, in patients with CLTI, group 1 had significantly lower 18-month primary patency (47% vs 64%; log-rank P<.014) and higher MALE rates (41% vs 35%; log-rank P=.012) than group 2. Cox proportional hazard analysis confirmed that balloon diameter < 5 mm was independently associated with increased risks of primary patency loss (HR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04-1.72; P=.021) and MALE (HR 1.29; 95% CI, 1-1.67; P=.048) at 18-months. CONCLUSIONS:In patients undergoing isolated SFA balloon angioplasty for CLTI, smaller SFA (< 5mm) was associated with worse primary patency and MALE. Using balloon size as a surrogate, our findings suggest that patients with a smaller SFA diameter appear to be at increased risk for treatment failure and warrant closer surveillance. Furthermore, these patients may also be considered for alternative approaches, including open revascularization.

BACKGROUND:Autologous vein is considered the preferred conduit for lower extremity bypass. There is, however, limited literature regarding conduit choice for open popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA) repair. We sought to compare outcomes of PAA repair using vein versus prosthetic conduits. METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative database (2003-2019) was queried for patients with PAAs undergoing elective conventional revascularization originating from the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries. Conduits were categorized as vein or prosthetic. Primary outcomes were primary graft patency, freedom from major adverse limb event (MALE) and MALE-free survival at 2-years. Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank tests was used for estimation and comparison of patency. RESULTS:A total of 1,146 limbs in 1,065 patients underwent elective open revascularization for popliteal artery aneurysm. Vein was used in 921 limbs (80%), and prosthetic in 225 (20%). Patients in the prosthetic cohort had a shorter procedure time, were older, and had a higher prevalence of COPD. Postoperatively, prosthetic patients were more likely to be started and maintained on anticoagulation without increased incidence of hematoma. There was no significant difference in the rate of surgical site infection (2% vs. 2%; P = .946). There was an increased tendency toward more symptomatic patients in the vein cohort although not statistically significant (49% vein vs. 41% prosthetic; P = .096). On a mean follow-up of 13 ± 5 months, the incidence of MALE and MALE-free survival were comparable between the two groups. The 2-year primary and secondary patency rates were similar, 87% and 96% in the vein, and 91% and 95% in the prosthetic groups, respectively. At multivariable analysis, outflow bypass targets to the infrapopliteal arteries (HR 2.05; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.16-3.65; P = .014) and symptomatic aneurysm (HR 1.81; 95% CI, 1.04-3.15; P = .037) were independently associated with loss of primary patency. Conduit type did not make a difference in MALE-free survival, or primary graft patency at 2-years. CONCLUSIONS:Our study demonstrates that conventional open PAA repair with prosthetic conduit yields results comparable to those with vein conduit with regard to primary and secondary patency and major adverse limb events at 2-years for targets to the popliteal artery. However, when the distal target was infrapopliteal, worse outcomes were observed with prosthetic conduit. Our results suggest that vein conduit should be preferentially used for infrapopliteal targets, while prosthetic conduit confers comparable outcomes in a subset of patients who do not have suitable autologous vein conduits.

Introduction and Objectives: Adjunctive false lumen embolization (FLE) with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with chronic aortic dissection is thought to induce FL thrombosis and favorable aortic remodeling. However, evidence is limited and the potential benefit of FLE remains unproven.
Method(s): Patients 18+ who underwent TEVAR for chronic aortic dissection with known FLE status in the SVS VQI database 1/2010-2/2020 were included. Ruptured patients and emergent procedures were excluded. Primary outcomes were in-hospital post-operative complications and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included follow-up maximum aortic diameter change, re-intervention rates, and mortality.
Result(s): 884 patients were included: 46 had TEVAR/FLE and 838 had TEVAR alone. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of age, gender, comorbidities, maximum pre-operative aortic diameter, presentation symptomatology, or intervention indication. FLE was associated with significantly longer procedural times (178min vs. 146min, p=0.0002), increased contrast use (134mL vs. 113mL, p=0.02), and prolonged fluoroscopy time (34min vs. 21min, p<0.0001), but not associated with a significant difference in post-operative complications (17.4% vs. 13.8%, p=0.51), length of stay (6.5 vs. 5.7 days, p=0.18), or in-hospital all-cause mortality (0% vs. 1.3%, p=1). In mid-term follow-up (median 15.5months), all-cause mortality trended lower, but was not significant (2.2% vs. 7.8%); Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated no difference in overall survival between groups (p=0.23). Post-operative complications had the strongest independent association with all-cause mortality (HR 2.65, 95% CI 1.56-4.5, p<0.001). In patients with available follow-up imaging and re-intervention status, mean aortic diameter change (n=337, -0.71cm vs. -0.69cm, p=0.64) and re-intervention rates (n=487, 10% vs. 11.4%, p=1) were similar.
Conclusion(s): Adjunctive FLE can be performed safely in chronic thoracic aortic dissections without significantly higher perioperative morbidity or mortality. However, given lack of reduction in re-intervention rates, induction of significant favorable aortic remodeling, or definitive survival benefit compared to TEVAR alone, FLE utility remains unclear.
Copyright

Background: To date, few studies adequately evaluate the impact of anticoagulation and antiplatelet medications on aortic remodeling for type B thoracic dissection (TBAD) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). As such, we assessed the relationship between chronic anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications and aortic remodeling of patients with TBAD after TEVAR.
Method(s): Records of the Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR registry (2011-2019) were reviewed. Procedures performed for dissection-related pathology were included. Primary outcomes included complete false lumen thrombosis, reintervention-free survival and endoleak at 18 months. Primary outcomes were compared between patients with and without chronic anticoagulants (AC and non-AC). A subgroup analysis was performed to assess the effect of antiplatelet medications (none, single antiplatelet, and dual antiplatelets) in the non-AC group. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of different antithrombotic therapies on primary outcomes.
Result(s): We identified 1507 patients (mean age, 60.7 +/- 12.2 years; 68.3% male) with a mean follow-up of 18.9 +/- 13.7 months. Two hundred one (14%) patients were on anticoagulation therapy at follow-up. There were no differences in the mean preoperative thoracic aortic diameter or the number of endografts used. The status of false lumen thrombosis and endoleaks were available in 648 (43%) and 1023 patients (68%), respectively. At 18 months, the rates of complete false lumen thrombosis (51.3% vs 47.5%; P =.182), reinterventions (9% vs 10.6%; P =.175), all-cause mortality (97.6% vs 96.9%; P =.561), and endoleaks (18.8% vs 22%; P =.397) were similar in the AC and non-AC groups, respectively (Fig). Controlling for covariates with the Cox regression method, AC use was not independently associated with a decreased risk of complete false lumen thrombosis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.16; P =.235) or increased risks of reintervention (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.9-1.24; P =.484) and endoleak (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.83-1.14; P =.725). Within the non-AC group, antiplatelet medications did not affect the rates of complete false lumen thrombosis, reintervention, or endoleak.
Conclusion(s): The use of chronic anticoagulation and antiplatelet medications did not adversely affect the rate of complete false lumen thrombosis and positive aortic remodeling in patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD. Anticoagulation and antiplatelet medications may be safely used in patients who undergo TEVAR for TBAD. [Formula presented]
Copyright

Klippel-Trenaunay syndrome is a rare vascular disorder which includes leg swelling, or lower extremity deep venous reflux/thrombosis as a presenting symptom. May-Thurner syndrome is also a rare pathology involving compression of the left common iliac vein, usually by the right common iliac artery. The incidence of concomitant occurrence of these entities is unknown and not well reported. This case series describes 3 patients who underwent evaluation of symptomatic left lower extremity venous disease. All 3 suffered symptomatic Klippel-Trenaunay initially, and were subsequently diagnosed with concomitant May-Thurner Syndrome. They were successfully treated with left common iliac vein stents with symptomatic improvement.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The natural history of penetrating aortic ulcers (PAU) and intramural hematomas (IMH) of the aorta is not well described. While repair is warranted for rupture, unremitting chest pain or growth, there is no established threshold for treating incidental findings. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) offers an attractive approach in treating these pathologies, however, peri-procedural and post-operative outcomes are not well defined. METHODS:Patients 18 or older identified in the VQI database who underwent TEVAR for PAU and/or IMH between 1/2011-2/2020 were included. We identified 1042 patients, of whom 809 had available follow-up data. Patient demographics and comorbidities were analyzed to identify risk factors for major adverse events (MAE), as well as postoperative and late mortality. RESULTS:The cohort was 54.8% female and 69.9% former smokers with a mean age of 71.1 years. Comorbidities were prevalent with 57.8% classified ASA IV; 89.8% had hypertension, 28.3% chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 17.9% coronary artery disease, and 12.2% congestive heart failure (CHF). Patients were predominately symptomatic (74%) and 44.5% underwent non-elective repair. MAE incidence was 17%. Independent predictors of MAE were history of CAD, non-Caucasian race, emergent procedural indication, ruptured presentation, and deployment of two or more endografts. In-hospital mortality was 4.3%. Seventy-three percent of index hospitalization mortalities were treatment-related. Of 809 patients with follow-up (mean 25.1 months±19 months), all-cause mortality was 10.6%. Predictors of late mortality in follow-up included age greater than 70 years, ruptured presentation, and history of COPD and ESRD. Subset analysis comparing symptomatic (74%) vs. asymptomatic (26%) patients demonstrated the former were frequently female (58.2% vs. 45.3%, p<.001) with a higher incidence of MAE (20.6% vs. 6.9%, p<.001), notably higher in-hospital reintervention rates (5.9% vs. 1.5%, p=.002) and mortality (5.6% vs. 0.7%, log-rank p=.015), and prolonged length of stay (6.9 vs. 3.7 days, p<.0001) despite similar procedural risks. In follow-up, late mortality was higher in the symptomatic cohort (12.2% vs. 6.5%, log-rank p=.025), with all treatment-related mortalities limited to the symptomatic group. CONCLUSIONS:We demonstrate significantly higher morbidity and mortality in symptomatic patients undergoing repair compared to asymptomatic patients, despite similar baseline characteristics. Asymptomatic patients treated with TEVAR had no treatment-related mortality in follow-up, with overall prognosis largely dependent on pre-existing comorbidities. These findings, in conjunction with growing evidence highlighting the risk of disease progression and attendant morbidity associated with these aortic entities, suggest a need for natural history studies and definitive guidelines on the elective repair of IMH and PAU.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Antegrade superficial femoral artery (SFA) access for peripheral artery disease reduces the time, radiation and contrast required with contralateral common femoral access (CFA). Yet, this technique remains underutilized in the treatment of SFA, popliteal and tibial disease, and there remains limited data on the safety and effectiveness of antegrade SFA access in the outpatient setting. METHODS:A retrospective review of lower extremity peripheral arterial interventions in our office-based endovascular suite was conducted from 2013 to 2018. Interventions necessitating CFA access such as iliac, common femoral or deep femoral artery revascularization were excluded (n = 206). In addition, interventions potentially requiring large sheaths not amenable to SFA access (e.g. popliteal aneurysm) were excluded. Relevant demographic and treatment variables including postoperative complications were abstracted. RESULTS:We identified 718 patients, who underwent revascularization of the SFA, popliteal and tibial arteries. Antegrade SFA access was chosen in 448 patients (62.4%) with the remaining 270 patients having retrograde CFA access. Antegrade SFA access was achieved primarily with a 4 French sheath, while a majority of retrograde CFA interventions utilized a 6 French sheath for access (87.7% vs. 69.5%, p <0.001). Significantly less fluoroscopy (9.5 min vs 16.4 min, p <0.001) and contrast (25.4 mL vs. 38.5 mL, p <0.001) were used during SFA access compared with retrograde access. Technical success was achieved in 93.2% with antegrade SFA versus 94.8% retrograde CFA access (p 0.42). The overall rate of complications was low for both cohorts (2.7% vs. 3.7%, p 0.78) and there were no statistical differences in access-site complications (1.1% vs. 1.5%, p 0.94), hematoma (0.7% vs. 1.1%, p 0.84) and pseudoaneurysm (0.4% vs. 0%, p 0.98) between techniques. CONCLUSIONS:Percutaneous antegrade SFA access can be performed safely in the outpatient setting, and remains an effective alternative to retrograde CFA access with significantly less utilization of fluoroscopy and contrast.