Effect Of Fenestration Configuration On Renal Artery Outcomes During Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair.

F/BEVAR complex anatomy aortic aneurysms fenestration gap renal artery fenestrations renal artery instability renal artery primary patency small fenestrations thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

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:
11 Jun 2024
Historique:
received: 24 01 2024
revised: 02 06 2024
accepted: 07 06 2024
medline: 14 6 2024
pubmed: 14 6 2024
entrez: 13 6 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To evaluate the effect of fenestration configuration and fenestration gap on renal artery outcomes during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR). A retrospective multicenter analysis was performed, including patients with complex aortic aneurysms treated with F/BEVAR that incorporated at least one small fenestration to a renal artery. The renal fenestrations were divided into groups 1 (8x6 mm) and 2 (6x6 mm). Primary patency, target vessel instability (TVI), freedom from secondary interventions (SIs), occurrence of type IIIc endoleak, all related to the renal arteries, were analyzed at 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year landmarks. The fenestration gap (FG) distance was analyzed as a modifier, and clustering was addressed at the patient level. Seven hundred and ninety-six patients were included in this study, 71.7% male, with a mean age of 73.3±8.1 years. The mean follow-up was 30.0±20.6 months. Of the 1474 small renal fenestrations analyzed, 47.6% were 8x6, and 52.4% were 6x6mm. At the 30-day landmark, primary patency (99.9% vs 98.0%, p-value <0.001 for groups 1 and 2, respectively), freedom from TVI (99.6% vs 97.1%, p-value <0.001 for groups 1 and 2, respectively), and freedom from SI (99.8% vs 98.4%, p-value = .022 for groups 1 and 2, respectively) were higher in 8x6 compared to 6x6 fenestrations, and the incidence of AKI was similar across the groups (92.6% vs 92.7%, p-value = .953 for groups 1 and 2 respectively). The primary patency at 1 and 5 years was higher in 8x6 fenestrations (1-year: 98.8% vs 96.9%; 5-year: 97.8% vs 95.7%, for groups 1 and 2, respectively, p values = .010 and 0.021 for 1 and 5 year comparisons, respectively). The freedom from SIs was significantly higher among 6x6 fenestrations at 5 years (93.1% vs 96.4%, for groups 1 and 2, respectively, p value = .007). The groups were equally as likely to experience a type Ic endoleak (1.3 % and 1.6% for 8x6 and 6x6mm fenestrations, respectively, p = .689). The 6x6 fenestrations were associated with higher risk of kidney function deterioration (17.8%) when compared with 8x6 fenestrations (7.6%) at 5 years (p <.001). The risk of type IIIc endoleak was significantly higher among 8x6 fenestrations at 5 years (4.9% and 2% for 8x6 and 6x6 mm fenestrations, respectively, p= .005). A FG ≥5 mm negatively impacted the cumulative 5-year freedom from TVI (group 1: FG ≥5 mm = 0.714, FG <5 mm = 0.857, p<.001; group 2: FG ≥5 mm = 0.761, FG <5 mm = 0.929, p<.001) and the cumulative 5-year freedom from type IIIc endoleak (group 1: FG ≥5 mm = 0.759, FG <5 mm = 0.921, p=.034; group 2: FG ≥5 mm = 0.853, FG <5 mm = 0.979, p<.001) in both groups and the cumulative 5-year patency in group 2 (group 1: FG ≥5 mm = 0.963, FG <5 mm = 0.948, p=.572; group 2: FG ≥5 mm = 0.905, FG <5 mm = 0.938, p=.036). Fenestration configuration for the renal arteries impacts outcomes. The 8x6 small fenestrations have better patency at 30-days, 1 year, and 5 years, while 6x6 small fenestrations are associated with lower rates of secondary interventions, primarily due to a lower incidence of type IIIc endoleaks. Fenestration gap ≥ 5 mm at the level of the renal arteries significantly impacts the freedom from TVI, freedom from type IIIc endoleak and 5-year patency independently of the fenestration size or vessel diameter.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38871067
pii: S0741-5214(24)01253-9
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2024.06.009
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Auteurs

Vivian Carla Gomes (VC)

Division of Vascular Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. Electronic address: vivian-carla_da-silva-gomes@med.unc.edu.

F Ezequiel Parodi (FE)

Division of Vascular Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.

Sydney E Browder (SE)

Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.

Fernando Motta (F)

Division of Vascular Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.

Elad Ohana (E)

Division of Vascular Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.

Matthew J Eagleton (MJ)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.

Gustavo S Oderich (GS)

Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, TX.

Bernardo C Mendes (BC)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Emanuel R Tenorio (ER)

Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, TX.

Andrea Vacirca (A)

Vascular Surgery, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Jesse Chait (J)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Tara Bresnahan (T)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.

Mark A Farber (MA)

Division of Vascular Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. Electronic address: mark_farber@med.unc.edu.

Classifications MeSH