Intraoperative adverse events and early outcomes of custom-made fenestrated stent grafts and physician-modified stent grafts for complex aortic aneurysms.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal
/ diagnostic imaging
Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic
/ diagnostic imaging
Blood Vessel Prosthesis
Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation
/ adverse effects
Endovascular Procedures
/ adverse effects
Female
Hospital Mortality
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications
/ mortality
Prosthesis Design
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Stents
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Complex abdominal aortic aneurysm
Custom-made stent graft
Early results
Physician-modified stent graft
Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm
Journal
Journal of vascular surgery
ISSN: 1097-6809
Titre abrégé: J Vasc Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8407742
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
received:
07
01
2019
accepted:
20
07
2019
pubmed:
12
11
2019
medline:
3
11
2020
entrez:
12
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Physician-modified fenestrated stent grafts (PMSGs) are a useful option for urgent or semiurgent treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (CAAAs). The aim of this study was to describe in-hospital outcomes of custom-made fenestrated stent grafts (CMSGs) and PMSGs for the treatment of CAAAs and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). In this single-center, retrospective study, all consecutives patients with CAAAs or TAAAs undergoing endovascular repair using Zenith CMSGs (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) or PMSGs between January 2012 and November 2017 were included. End points were intraoperative adverse events, in-hospital mortality, postoperative complications, reinterventions, target vessel patency, and endoleaks. Ninety-seven patients were included (CMSGs, n = 69; PMSGs, n = 28). The PMSG group included more patients assigned to American Society of Anesthesiologists class 4 (n = 14 [50%] vs n = 16 [23%]; P = .006) and more TAAAs (n = 17 [61%] vs n = 10 [15%]; P < .0001). Intraoperative adverse events were recorded in eight (11%) patients in the CMSG group vs six (21%) patients in the PMSG group. No intraoperative death or open conversion occurred. In-hospital mortality rates were of 4% (n = 3) in the CMSG group and 14% in the PMSG group (n = 4). Chronic renal failure was an independent preoperative risk factor of postoperative death or complications (odds ratio, 4.88; 95% confidence interval, 1.65-14.43; P = .004). Rates of postoperative complications were 22% (n = 15) and 25% (n = 7) in the CMSG and PMSG groups. Spinal cord ischemia rates were 4% (n = 3) and 7% (n = 2) in the CMSG and PMSG groups. Reintervention rates were 16% (n = 11) in the CMSG group and 32% (n = 9) in the PMSG group. At discharge, target vessel patency rate in CMSGs was 98% (n = 207/210). All target vessels (n = 98) were patent in the PMSG group. Endoleaks at discharge were observed in 24% of the CMSG group (n = 16) vs 8% of the PMSG group (n = 2). Our study showed clinically relevant differences of several important in-hospital outcomes in the CMSG and PMSG groups. Larger cohorts and longer follow-up are needed to allow direct comparison. PMSGs may offer acceptable in-hospital results in patients requiring urgent interventions when CMSGs are not available or possible.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31708298
pii: S0741-5214(19)32327-4
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.07.102
pmc: PMC7126501
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1834-1842.e1Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
JAMA Surg. 2014 May;149(5):447-9
pubmed: 24671448
J Endovasc Ther. 2017 Dec;24(6):825-832
pubmed: 28874089
J Vasc Surg. 2008 Jan;47(1):6-16
pubmed: 17980540
Semin Vasc Surg. 2012 Sep;25(3):153-60
pubmed: 23062495
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015 May;49(5):524-31
pubmed: 25599593
J Vasc Surg. 2012 Dec;56(6):1535-42
pubmed: 22960024
J Vasc Surg. 2010 Oct;52(4):1022-33, 1033.e15
pubmed: 20888533
Circulation. 2012 Jun 5;125(22):2707-15
pubmed: 22665884
Br J Surg. 2017 Jul;104(8):1020-1027
pubmed: 28401533
J Vasc Surg. 2017 Feb;65(2):294-302
pubmed: 27687323
J Vasc Surg. 2019 Jul;70(1):31-42.e7
pubmed: 30583902
Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther. 2009 Sep;21(3):157-67
pubmed: 19965792
Circulation. 2008 Aug 19;118(8):808-17
pubmed: 18678769
J Vasc Surg. 2018 Jun;67(6):1673-1683
pubmed: 29224942
J Vasc Surg. 2014 Oct;60(4):858-63; discussion 863-4
pubmed: 24835042
J Vasc Surg. 2014 Dec;60(6):1420-8.e1-5
pubmed: 25195145
J Vasc Surg. 2011 Nov;54(5):1522-6
pubmed: 21925826
Ann Surg. 2015 Sep;262(3):546-53; discussion 552-3
pubmed: 26258324
Ann Vasc Surg. 2018 Jan;46:265-273
pubmed: 28739454
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010 May;39(5):529-36
pubmed: 20202868
J Vasc Surg. 2013 Aug;58(2):311-7
pubmed: 23643560
J Vasc Surg. 2014 Nov;60(5):1186-1195
pubmed: 24993949
J Vasc Surg. 2012 Sep;56(3):601-7
pubmed: 22554425
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010 Feb;39(2):171-8
pubmed: 19945316
J Vasc Surg. 2011 Mar;53(3):583-90
pubmed: 21129898
Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther. 2011 Sep;23(3):186-94
pubmed: 21810819
J Vasc Surg. 2002 May;35(5):1048-60
pubmed: 12021727
J Endovasc Ther. 2016 Feb;23(1):98-109
pubmed: 26496957
J Vasc Surg. 2017 May;65(5):1249-1259.e10
pubmed: 27986479
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015 Nov;50(5):583-92
pubmed: 26259766