Midterm Outcomes of Patients With Complex Aortic Aneurysms Treated Using Mixed and Matched Endoprosthesis From Different Manufacturers.

complex aortic aneurysms endovascular repair fenestrated/branched endografts mixed and matched endoprosthesis

Journal

Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists
ISSN: 1545-1550
Titre abrégé: J Endovasc Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100896915

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
26 Sep 2024
Historique:
medline: 26 9 2024
pubmed: 26 9 2024
entrez: 26 9 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To evaluate outcomes of patients with complex aortic aneurysms (cAAs) undergoing fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (f/b-EVAR) using a combination of endoprostheses from different manufacturers. The study is a 2-center retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained databases of patients with cAAs undergoing f/b-EVAR using a combination of endoprostheses from different manufacturers from 2013 to 2023. Primary endpoints included technical success, major adverse events and reintervention rates. Technical success was defined as implantation of the device without type I or type III endoleak or conversion to open repair. Secondary endpoints included mortality and mid-term device performance. During this time, 353 patients with cAAs underwent f/b-EVARs at both centers. Of these, 80 (22.7%) required use of a combination of devices from 4 different manufacturers for repair. Fifty-one (64%) were treated for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and 29 (36%) for pararenal aneurysms. Majority (74%) were male with a median age of 75 (69, 81) years and aneurysm size of 65 (59, 72) mm. Thirty-five (44%) patients required a proximal thoracic stent graft-W.L. Gore (17), Cook, Medtronic, and Terumo (6), respectively. Seventy-seven (96%) patients required a bifurcated device, including Cook Flex (34), Gore (40), and Medtronic (3). Twelve patients underwent common iliac artery aneurysm repair with a Gore iliac branched endoprosthesis. One hundred fifty-four limbs were implanted: Gore: 68, Cook: 82 and Medtronic: 4. Three hundred fourteen target vessels were incorporated. Median operating room time, estimated blood loss, fluoroscopy time and dose were 209 (186, 278) minutes, 100 (50, 663) mL, 77 (59, 100) minutes, 2385 (1415, 3885) mGy, respectively. Three endoleaks were observed on completion angiography-2 type Ic and 1 type IIIa-all of which resolved at 1 month. Fifteen MAEs were observed in 11 patients at 30 days, including 3 (3.9%) deaths, 7 renal insufficiency, 1 renal failure requiring dialysis, 2 MI and paraplegia, respectively. At a median follow-up of 400 (85, 1132) days, there were 8 reinterventions for endoleaks in 7 patients. The use of mixed devices proximal and distal to f/b-devices built to treat patients with cAAs is safe and has good mid-term results. While not yet formally assessed in randomized clinical trials or endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the practice of utilizing devices from various manufacturers to address complex aortic anatomy is widespread in everyday clinical settings, yet outcomes remain insufficiently documented. To our knowledge, ours is the first manuscript demonstrating that the use of endoprostheses from different manufacturers for treating patients with complex aortic aneurysms is both safe and yields favorable mid-term results. This frequently employed strategy warrants further exploration through meticulously designed clinical trials, aiming to furnish vascular specialists with a well-founded guideline based on robust clinical evidence.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39323323
doi: 10.1177/15266028241283252
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

15266028241283252

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: J.M.—Use of investigational device in an FDA-approved IDE (G220004), Consultation for W.L. Gore and Medtronic; H.H.: none; E.C.: none; J.G.: none; R.M.C.: none; E.S.: none, N.S.: none; M.A.R.: consultation for GE imaging.

Auteurs

Jesse Manunga (J)

Section of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Minneapolis Heart Institute, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Minneapolis Heat Institute Foundation, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Hamza Hanif (H)

University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA.

Ellen Cravero (E)

Minneapolis Heat Institute Foundation, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

JoAnn Goldman (J)

Minneapolis Heat Institute Foundation, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Ross M Clark (RM)

University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA.

Nedaa Skeik (N)

Section of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Minneapolis Heart Institute, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Minneapolis Heat Institute Foundation, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Elliot Stephenson (E)

Section of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Minneapolis Heart Institute, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Minneapolis Heat Institute Foundation, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Kevin M Harris (KM)

Minneapolis Heat Institute Foundation, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Section of Cardiology, Minneapolis Heart Institute, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Muhammad Ali Rana (MA)

University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA.

Classifications MeSH