Mésnard, Thomas

Purpose: Familial history of aortic disease has been associated with increased risk of aneurysm-related complications after standard endovascular aortic repair. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for complex aortic aneurysms in patients with or without familial aortic aneurysms (FAAs). Materials and Methods: We reviewed the clinical data of consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective non-randomized study to investigate outcomes after FB-EVAR for treatment of complex aortic aneurysms between 2013 and 2022. Familial aortic aneurysm was defined as occurrence of an aortic aneurysm or dissections in a first- or second-degree relative and compared with patients with sporadic aortic aneurysms (SAAs). Endpoints included procedural metrics, 30-day mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), mid-term patient survival, freedom from reintervention and endoleak, and aneurysm sac shrinkage. Results: There were 499 patients treated with FB-EVAR (70% males, mean age was 74±7.7 years) including 66 (13%) patients with FAAs and 434 (87%) with SAAs. Both groups had similar demographics, clinical characteristics, aneurysm extent, and prior history of aortic dissection or aortic repair. Patients with FAAs had longer fluoroscopy time (82 vs 71 minutes) and radiation exposure (1856 vs 1213 mGy; each p<0.05), with no difference in technical success (FAA, 94% vs SAA, 97%; p=0.51). There was no difference in 30-day mortality (1.5% vs 0.9%; p=1.00) and MAEs (23% vs 18%; p=0.44) among patients with FAA and SAA, respectively. Median follow-up was 28 months. At 3 years, patient survival, freedom from secondary interventions, and cumulative incidence of sac shrinkage were 76±2.5%, 74±2.5%, and 32±2.6% for all patients, respectively, with no difference between FAA and SAA groups. Conclusion: Fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair was performed with high technical success, low mortality, and low incidence of MAEs regardless of the presence of FAA. There was no difference in mid-term patient survival, secondary interventions, and sac changes among patients with or without family history of aortic disease. Clinical Impact This study demonstrates that fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) can be performed with high technical success and comparable early and mid-term outcomes in patients with or without a familial history of aortic aneurysm, after exclusion of genetically triggered aortic diseases. These findings challenge the assumption that family history alone should preclude complex endovascular repair. Clinically, this supports broader use of FB-EVAR in carefully selected patients with familial aortic disease, emphasizing anatomical suitability rather than pedigree alone. The innovation lies in validating FB-EVAR as a safe alternative to open repair for this understudied population, informing patient selection, counseling, and surveillance strategies.

Objective: Target vessel stenosis or occlusion is a common indication for secondary intervention after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair requiring long-term imaging surveillance including duplex ultrasound (DUS). This study aimed to describe and compare longitudinal changes in peak systolic velocity (PSV) measurements for renal and mesenteric arteries targeted by directional branches (DBs) or reinforced fenestrations (RFs). Methods: Patients enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized study (2013-2020) had DUS of celiac axis, superior mesenteric artery, and renal arteries (RAs) obtained preoperatively, at 6 to 8 weeks, 6 months, and annually. Vessels with preprocedural stenosis were excluded. Outcomes were variations in PSV over time for target vessels incorporated by DBs or RFs, differences in balloon-expandable stent-grafts (BESGs) and self-expandable stent-grafts (SESGs), PSV measurements prior to secondary interventions related to vessel stenosis, and a predictive value of PSV for stenosis requiring secondary intervention. Results: A total of 419 patients (292 male, mean age 74 ± 8 years old) were enrolled, with 1,311 target vessels analyzed preoperatively, including 607 mesenteric and 704 RAs. Over a median follow-up of 23 months (interquartile range [IQR], 7-36), PSV measurements decreased in the first 6 to 8 weeks after DB incorporation, remained stable, followed by a nonsignificant increase at 5 years. PSV increased in the first 6 months using RFs with postoperative velocities significantly higher ( P < .05) for RFs compared to DBs. Branched mesenteric vessels stented with BESGs had higher velocities than SESGs ( P < .05). Of the 23 target vessels treated by secondary intervention for stenosis, 19 (83%) had velocities above the thresholds for native, nonstented vessels. Furthermore, in RAs (n = 20) PSV effectively predicted clinically relevant stenosis, AUC was 0.98, with a 231 cm/s threshold offering 84% sensitivity with 100% specificity. Conclusion: Longitudinal follow-up shows that velocity changes vary depending on the type of incorporation, vessel, and bridging stent. For DBs, PSV decreased initially, stabilized, and showed a nonsignificant increase at 5 years. In contrast, PSV increased with RFs and remained higher than DBs. Despite these variations, velocities remained below established thresholds for clinically significant stenosis in nonstented vessels. Criteria for in-stent stenosis may differ, and PSV alone should not be the sole indicator for reintervention. Clinical Impact This study provides new insight into duplex ultrasound (DUS) surveillance after fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FB-EVAR). Peak systolic velocity (PSV) trends differed between fenestrations and branches, and stent type influenced flow dynamics. Importantly, most vessels with secondary interventions had elevated PSVs, but many others exceeded native stenosis thresholds without clinical consequence. Despite these variations, velocities remained below established thresholds for clinically significant stenosis in non-stented vessels. Criteria for in-stent stenosis may differ, and PSV alone should not be the sole indicator for reintervention.The reported PSV measurements served as a benchmark for DUS surveillance following FB-EVAR.

Objective: To assess patient radiation exposure as reflected by cumulative air kerma (CAK) and dose area product (DAP) during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR). Background: Patient radiation exposure during FB-EVAR has been reported inconsistently. Methods: Data from 2,111 patients enrolled in 10 physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies (2012-2022) were analyzed from the United States Aortic Research Consortium database. Procedures were performed using seven fixed imaging systems (A to G). Patients were classified into three groups by imaging era: 2012-2015 (Group 1), 2016-2018 (Group 2), and 2019-2022 (Group 3). Primary endpoints were CAK and DAP risk factors, assessed using linear mixed-effect models. Secondary endpoints were diagnostic reference levels (DRL) for FB-EVAR. Results: Of the 2,111 patients (71% males; mean 74±9 years years-old) treated by FB-EVAR; 263 (12%) were in Group 1, 541 (26%) in Group 2, and 1,307 (62%) in Group 3. Use of ≥4 vessel stent-graft designs increased from 69% (Group 1) to 79% (Group 3) ( P <0.001). Median CAK decreased from 3,644 mGy (Group 1) to 1,753 mGy (Group 3), and DAP from 441 Gy.cm² to 208 Gy.cm² ( P <0.001). Higher BMI, iliac branch device (IBD) use, and longer fluoroscopy time (FT) were associated with increased CAK and DAP, while experienced operators and systems D, F, and G were protective ( P <0.05). DRLs for Group 3 were 2,800 mGy (CAK) and 340 Gy.cm² (DAP). Conclusions: Radiation exposure during FB-EVAR significantly decreased over time. Higher BMI, IBD use, and FT were linked to increased exposure, while experienced operator and System D, F or G were protective. Trial registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT02043691 NCT00583817 NCT00483249 NCT01937949 NCT02050113 NCT02323581 NCT01874197 NCT01654133 NCT02266719.

Objective: To describe outcomes after elective and non-elective fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Background: FB-EVAR has been increasingly utilized to treat TAAAs; however, outcomes after non-elective versus elective repair are not well described. Methods: Clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing FB-EVAR for TAAAs at 24 centers (2006–2021) were reviewed. Endpoints including early mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), all-cause mortality, and aortic-related mortality (ARM), were analyzed and compared in patients who had non-elective versus elective repair. Results: A total of 2603 patients (69% males; mean age 72±10 year old) underwent FB-EVAR for TAAAs. Elective repair was performed in 2187 patients (84%) and non-elective repair in 416 patients [16%; 268 (64%) symptomatic, 148 (36%) ruptured]. Non-elective FB-EVAR was associated with higher early mortality (17% vs 5%, P<0.001) and rates of MAEs (34% vs 20%, P<0.001). Median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range, 7–37 months). Survival and cumulative incidence of ARM at 3 years were both lower for non-elective versus elective patients (50±4% vs 70±1% and 21±3% vs 7±1%, P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, non-elective repair was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.92; 95% CI] 1.50–2.44; P<0.001) and ARM (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.63–3.62; P<0.001). Conclusions: Non-elective FB-EVAR of symptomatic or ruptured TAAAs is feasible, but carries higher incidence of early MAEs and increased all-cause mortality and ARM than elective repair. Long-term follow-up is warranted to justify the treatment.