Objective: To evaluate treatment trends and compare outcomes following fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA). Background: FB-EVAR has been increasingly utilized as a less invasive alternative to OSR for treatment of TAAAs. Methods: We studied patients who underwent elective FB-EVAR or OSR of TAAAs (2008-2020), since the initiation of an Advanced Endovascular Aortic Program. Primary endpoints were early major adverse events (MAE) and early and late all-cause mortality. Propensity score overlap weighting analysis was performed to adjust for measured confounders between groups. Results: There were 357 (70.8%) patients treated by FB-EVAR and 147 (29.2%) with OSR. The use of FB-EVAR increased from 16.7% in 2008 to >80% since 2017 ( P <0.001). Incidences of early MAEs were 25.8% and 49.0%, respectively; early mortality rates for FB-EVAR and OSR were 2.5% and 6.8%, respectively. In the weighted cohort, FB-EVAR patients had decreased early MAEs (weight-adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18-0.41; P <0.001) and mortality (aOR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17-0.73; P =0.005) versus OSR patients. Five-year survival estimates were 52.2% (95% CI, 45.2-60.4%) and 78.0% (95% CI, 70.6-86.2%), respectively. In the weighted cohort, there was no significant difference in late survival between groups (weight-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.74-2.39; P =0.34). Conclusions: This study confirmed the change in practice from OSR to FB-EVAR for treatment of TAAAs over the past decade. Incidences of early MAEs and mortality were lower with FB-EVAR, with no significant difference in late survival in the weighted cohort.
Target Artery Outcomes Following Endovascular Versus Open Surgical Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms
Objective: To compare target artery (TA) outcomes after fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Background: Few studies have compared TA outcomes after endovascular incorporation and open reconstruction. Methods: Among consecutive patients who underwent elective OSR or FB-EVAR of TAAAs (2008–2020), we reviewed those who had postoperative imaging studies evaluating TA. Data of FB-EVAR patients were obtained from a prospectively maintained institutional database. TAs included celiac, superior mesenteric, right, and left renal arteries treated during TAAA repairs. The primary endpoint was TA patency (primary and secondary). Results: There were 131 patients (487 TAs) treated by OSR and 350 (1300 TAs) by FB-EVAR. In the OSR group, 440 TAs (90.3%) were reconstructed by bypasses, and 47 (9.7%) by reimplantation. In the FB-EVAR group, 841 TAs (64.7%) were incorporated by fenestrations and 459 (35.3%) by directional branches. Thirty-day TA primary patency rates were not significantly different between FB-EVAR and OSR (99.4%% vs 99.0%, P = 0.36), but the secondary patency rate was higher after FB-EVAR (99.8% vs 99.0%, P = 0.02). Three-year primary patency rates were 95.9% (95% CI: 94.7%–97.2%) and 94.7% (95% CI: 92.2%–97.2%), respectively; secondary patency rates were 98.5% (95% CI: 97.7%–99.2%) and 94.7% (95% CI: 95.7%–99.2%), respectively. There were no significant differences in late primary patency and secondary patency between groups (each P < 0.05). Conclusions: TA primary and secondary patency rates following elective OSR or FB-EVAR were high. Endovascular repair was not associated with loss of primary patency and late secondary patency.
Impact of Shunting Practice Patterns During Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis
Background: We aimed to assess the effect of surgeons’ shunting practice and shunt use on the early outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in recently symptomatic patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study based on a multicenter national prospective database. The Vascular Quality Initiative database (2010–2019) was queried for CEAs performed within 14 days after an ipsilateral stroke or transient ischemic attack. Surgeons were gauged as routine shunters if they shunted in >95% of CEAs, otherwise were classified as selective shunters. In-hospital stroke and death rates were compared between routine and selective shunters, stratifying by type of index event (transient ischemic attack versus stroke) and timing of CEA (≤2 versus >2 days). Results: Thirteen thousand four hundred sixty-nine CEAs were performed after a transient ischemic attack (43%) or stroke (57%), 3186 (24%) by routine shunters, and 10 283 (76%) by selective shunters. Comparing routine and selective shunters, in-hospital stroke (1.9% versus 2.4%; P =0.09) and death (0.4% versus 0.5%; P =0.73) rates were similar. A lower stroke rate (1.5% versus 4.2%; P =0.02) was achieved by routine shunters for CEA performed <2 days after an ischemic stroke. Among selective shunters, a higher stroke rate occurred in case of shunt use (2.9% versus 2.3%; P <0.01), mainly due to cases presenting with stroke (3.5% versus 2.4%; P <0.01) but not transient ischemic attack (1.8% versus 1.5%; P =0.57). Awake anesthesia was adopted in 7.8% of cases by selective shunters and in 0.8% by routine shunters, without impact on the perioperative stroke rate (1.8% versus 2.3%; P =0.349). Conclusions: In this large national cohort, the overall outcomes of CEA were similar between routine and selective shunters. A lower postoperative stroke rate was achieved by routine shunters in CEA performed <2 days after an ischemic stroke. Among selective shunters, intraoperatively indicated shunting determined an increased stroke rate, likely due to intraoperative hypoperfusion. These data may guide the decision regarding timing of CEA and shunting intention in symptomatic patients.