Panneton, Jean M.

Objective: Endoleaks are critical complications of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study sought to determine the frequency and nature of intraoperative endoleaks and their impact on postoperative endoleak-related events. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients who underwent EVAR at our institution. The impact of intraoperative endoleaks on postoperative endoleak rates and endoleak-related reintervention rates were assessed. Results: From December 18, 1996, to May 21, 2003, 241 patients underwent EVAR. An endoleak was observed during 126 (52.3%) procedures. Type I endoleaks were observed in 63 (26.1%) cases: 35 proximal and 31 distal endoleaks (3 cases at both attachments). Angioplasty, additional cuff placement, or stenting corrected 59 (89.4%) of these endoleaks. A total of 71 type II intraoperative endoleaks (29.5%) and 8 type IV endoleaks (3.3%) were observed without any attempted corrective maneuvers. Ten type III endoleaks (4.2%) occurred but all resolved with angioplasty or additional cuff placement. In all, 86 (35.7%) endoleaks persisted on completion angiogram. Patients with a type I or type II intraoperative endoleak were more likely to have an endoleak at 1.5 years (31.4% vs. 21.6%, P = .018). Reinterventions were required more often after an intraoperative type I endoleak (10% vs. 4%, P = .003). Patients with intraoperative endoleaks demonstrated a trend toward less postoperative aneurysm diameter reduction at 2 years (43.8% vs. 74.5%, P = .104). Conclusion: The presence of a type I or a type II endoleak during EVAR significantly increases the likelihood of a postoperative endoleak and should prompt a high degree of suspicion during follow-up.

The coexistence of urologic malignancy (UM) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is rare. Simultaneous treatment may increase morbidity, whereas staged operations delay necessary treatment. We reviewed our experience to develop guidelines for evaluation and management. Clinical data of all patients diagnosed between 1980 and 1998 with both AAA and UM, who also had staged or simultaneous surgical treatment were reviewed. Four thousand forty-seven patients underwent AAA repair during the study period at our institution. Of these, 18 (0.44%) patients, 16 men and two women (mean age: 74 years, range: 61 to 92) had UM. UM was discovered incidentally in nine patients with AAA with computed tomography (CT) scan (7) and ultrasonography (2). In one patient with AAA, hematuria raised the suspicion of UM. Eight patients were diagnosed with AAA during evaluation of UM by CT scan or ultrasound (7) or during laparotomy (1). Initial signs and symptoms included abdominal pain (33%), gross hematuria (33%), and urinary tract infections (17%), although 33% were asymptomatic. The AAA was symptomatic at first examination in three (17%) patients, 14 (78%) patients had hypertension, and two (11%) had renal insufficiency (overall mean serum creatinine: 1.6, range: 0.8 to 3.7). Mean AAA diameter was 5.8 cm (range: 3.8 to 8 cm). Aortography documented significant contralateral renal artery disease in two patients. Twelve patients underwent simultaneous AAA repair and resection of UM; the operations were staged in six (AAA repair first in 2, nephrectomy first in 4). One patient required emergent repair of a ruptured AAA three days after nephrectomy. UM was treated with nephrectomy in 17 patients, and with bilateral ureterectomy and cystectomy in one. A straight aortic graft was implanted in seven patients, a bifurcated graft in ten, and one had extra-anatomic reconstruction. Two patients required reconstruction of the contralateral renal artery. The 30-day mortality rate was 0% after staged and 6% after simultaneous repair (p= >0.1). Major perioperative complications occurred more frequently after simultaneous (42%) than after staged repair (33%), although the difference was not significant (p= >0.1). Two patients developed postoperative renal failure. Seventeen patients were followed for an average of 3.9 years (14 days to 10.8 years). Three (17%) patients died of recurrent cancer at 1, 10.7, and 10.8 years after surgery. Patients with resectable UM have satisfactory long-term survival, which justifies aggressive treatment of concomitant AAA. Aortography in these patients is suggested to exclude contralateral renal artery disease. Complications were frequent, but simultaneous repair did not increase morbidity or mortality significantly. The risk of AAA rupture after nephrectomy, need to correct contralateral renal artery disease at the time of nephrectomy, and disadvantage of delaying treatment of UM are compelling reasons to favor simultaneous treatment of AAA and UM.

As endografting technology advances, anatomical constraints limiting access and deployment have become less of a burden. While unsuitable candidates for endografting exist, these patients are becoming less frequent. To broaden the applicability of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), we have modified the bifurcated AneuRx™ device into a unilimb modular prosthesis, by placing an aortic extender cuff across the flow divider, thus excluding its contralateral limb. This technique was used with success in 3 groups of patients: with occlusion of 1 iliac artery, with a nontraversable iliac stenosis, or with a small calcific aortic bifurcation. In these patients, anatomy can make it difficult, if not impossible, to place a bifurcated stent graft. Whether as a planned preoperative procedure or as a ‘bail-out’ maneuver, this procedure has been successful in avoiding open surgical conversion.

Previous results following subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery were reported to be worse in post-thrombotic syndrome than in limbs with primary valvular incompetence. This report comprises a larger patient cohort with longer follow-up. The goal of this study was to determine if subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery is justified in patients with postthrombotic venous insufficiency. The clinical data of 91 consecutive patients who underwent subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery with or without superficial reflux ablation over a 7-year period from May 1993 to June 2000 were retrospectively analyzed. Fifty-four females and 37 males (median age, 53 years; range, 20-77) underwent 103 subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery procedures. Forty-two limbs were classified as C6 (active ulcer), 34 as C5 (healed ulcer), and 24 as C4 (lipodermatosclerosis). Thirty procedures were performed in post-thrombotic limbs. Concomitant superficial reflux ablation was performed in 74 limbs (72%); saphenous vein stripping had been previously performed in 29 (28%). Deep venous incompetence was present in 89% of limbs; 13% had venous outflow obstruction on plethysmography. Cumulative ulcer healing in post-thrombotic limbs was not significantly different from limbs with primary valvular incompetence; 30-, 60-, and 90-day healing rates were 44%, 72%, and 72% vs 39%, 70%, and 87%, respectively (p = 0.35). On univariate analysis, the presence of ulcer greater than 2 cm in diameter was associated with delayed ulcer healing (p = 0.02). Cumulative ulcer recurrence in all limbs was 4%, 20%, and 27% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Ulcer recurrence in post-thrombotic limbs was higher than in limbs with primary valvular incompetence at 1, 3, and 5 years; 16%, 47%, and 56% vs 0%, 8%, and 15%, respectively (p = 0.001). Recurrent ulcers were small, superficial, and easier to heal. Clinical improvement was significant even in post-thrombotic limbs; median clinical score decreased from 9.5 to 3 (p=0.001), and median outcome score was +2 (mean 1.9; range, -I to 3). Median clinical score in patients with primary valvular incompetence improved from 6 to 1.5 (p = 0.0001). Subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery with superficial reflux ablation promoted ulcer healing, improved clinical outcome, and resulted in a low long-term ulcer recurrence rate in limbs with primary valvular incompetence. Despite good clinical outcome in post-thrombotic limbs, ulcer recurrence was high. These results imply that the role of subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery with superficial reflux ablation in patients with post-thrombotic limbs continues to be controversial.

In situ lesser saphenous vein (LSV) graft has been advocated in cases where the greater saphenous vein is not available and the target arteries are confined to the lower leg. This is often the case of diabetic patients, whose occlusive disease pattern typically affects the tibioperoneal vessels, sparing the femoropopliteal segment. The in situ technique offers the potential advantages of decreasing surgical trauma to the vein and its vasa vasorum, better size-matching between vein and artery at the anastomoses, and improving hemodynamics. The authors reviewed the use of in situ LSV graft with attention to its indications and technical requirements. A 73-and a 76-year-old man presented with critical limb ischemia. Both had a history of diabetes, chronic renal failure, and previous use of the greater saphenous veins for coronary or peripheral bypasses. Both had good femoropopliteal inflow and tibioperoneal disease with single runoff through the distal peroneal and common plantar arteries, respectively. Venous mapping showed diminutive veins, with exception of an adequate ipsilateral lesser saphenous vein. The patients were placed in prone position for a posterior approach. The lesser saphenous veins were exposed through a longitudinal incision. Proximal anastomosis was based on the popliteal artery, exposed through the same incision. A successful in situ lesser saphenous vein bypass was performed by using the common plantar and the distal peroneal artery as target vessels. Both bypasses were patent at 24 and 18-months' follow-up, respectively. Selection criteria for in situ LSV bypass are patent femoral arteries; accessible target vessels in prone position through a medial, posterior, or lateral approach; and adequate LSV in diameter and length. In the authors' experience, in situ LSV bypass is a safe and simple option that offers successful distal revascularization.

The purpose of this study was to examine the technical aspects of intraoperative duplex ultrasound (DUS) following carotid endarterectomy (CEA), suggest criteria to differentiate significant lesions requiring immediate surgical revision from normal or benign defects, and evaluate how frequently intraoperative DUS provides useful or unsuspected information. A retrospective study was performed on all patients who had both CEA and intraoperative carotid DUS between January 1,1990. and January 1,1995. A total of 155 DUS examinations were performed in 149 patients. Findings were grouped into three categories: normal; minor/insignificant lesions; and hemodynamically significant lesions based on the presence or absence of elevated peak systolic velocities, visible stenosis/thrombus, or intimal flap/dissection. Postoperative status was correlated with intraoperative DUS findings. Ninety-one (59%) examinations performed on 87 patients produced normal findings. Forty-seven (30%) examinations performed on 45 patients showed minor abnormalities consisting of insignificant residual plaque, residual external carotid artery stenoses, small intimal flaps, elevated velocities with no associated anatomic lesion, or an arterial kink. Fourteen patients (9%) had significant findings requiring immediate surgical revision. These consisted of large intimal flaps or dissection in six patients, marked residual plaque and significant stenosis in five patients, thrombus in two patients, and a kink in one patient. Three additional patients ( 2 %) had significant findings but were not revised for various reasons. No significant difference was identified in morbidity or mortality rates between those patients with normal findings, those patients with minor technical defects, and those patients with significant abnormalities undergoing immediate surgical revision. However, two of three patients who had significant abnormalities within the common carotid artery that were not revised suffered perioperative ipsilateral strokes. Intraoperative DUS is a safe and accurate method to assess the technical adequacy of CEA. Intraoperative DUS showed significant lesions in 11% of patients. Identification and immediate repair of significant technical defects may decrease perioperative complication rate and long-term restenosis rate.

Strict morphologic criteria must be used for patient selection to achieve durable success with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). The goal of this study was to assess morphologic suitability (MS) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) for 2 currently approved bifurcated stent grafts and identify reasons for exclusion from EVAR. The authors reviewed the electronic charts of 1,795 consecutive patients who were diagnosed as having AAA between January 1999 and July 2001 at their institution. Three hundred and twenty patients had an AAA with a diameter of =5.0 cm, measured on computed tomography (CT). The records of 301 patients, 254 men, 47 women, with a mean age of 74 years were available for review, and these patients constituted the study cohort. Criteria used for MS included a proximal neck length =15 mm; neck diameter between 18 and 26 mm; neck angulation =60°; common or external iliac artery (CIA or EIA) diameters of 7–16 mm and 8–13 mm, respectively, for AneuRx (Medtronic Ave, Santa Rosa, CA) and Ancure (Guidant Cardiac and Vascular Division, Menlo Park, CA) bifurcated grafts. AAAs were suitable for AneuRx device in 14% of patients (43 of 301; 95% CI = 11–19%) and for Ancure in 5% (16 of 301; 95% CI = 3.1–9%). The main reason for exclusion was an inadequate proximal aortic neck (73%). The neck was too short in 49.5%, too wide in 64% and badly angulated in 12% of the patients. Iliac artery morphology precluded EVAR with AneuRx and Ancure devices in 52% and 80%. Both CIAs were too wide for EVAR in 43% and 77%, respectively. When iliac artery diameter =20 mm was accepted, iliac suitability for AneuRx increased from 49% to 70% and overall suitability increased from 14% to 20%. When more permissive criteria were used for MS (neck length =10 mm, neck diameter =30 mm, CIA =20), 39% of patients became candidates for EVAR. More than three fourths of the patients with an AAA =5.0 cm in size, seen in a tertiary referral center, are morphologically not suitable for EVAR using 2 currently approved bifurcated endografts. The main reasons for exclusion are a short or wide proximal aortic neck. Considerable changes in size of the devices and in proximal attachment techniques have to occur before most AAAs will be suitable for EVAR.