Huang, Ying

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.