-
European Journal of Vascular and... Mar 2021To investigate whether a percutaneous approach has better clinical outcomes than surgical access for standard endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Editor's Choice - Percutaneous Access Does Not Confer Superior Clinical Outcomes Over Cutdown Access for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate whether a percutaneous approach has better clinical outcomes than surgical access for standard endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE and Embase were searched using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search interface developed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
REVIEW METHODS
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared percutaneous and cutdown endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) were considered. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using the odds ratio (OR), risk difference, or mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance statistical method was used as appropriate. Trial sequential analysis was performed to quantify the available evidence and control for the risk of type 1 and type 2 error. Risk of bias was assessed with the revised tool developed by Cochrane and the quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE system (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation).
RESULTS
Four RCTs were identified, reporting a total of 368 patients and 530 access sites. Meta-analysis showed no difference in access site complications or infection, post-operative bleeding/haematoma, access related arterial injury, femoral artery occlusion, pseudo-aneurysm, or peri-operative mortality between percutaneous and cutdown EVAR. Seroma/lymphorrhoea was significantly less frequent after percutaneous EVAR (0%) compared with cutdown EVAR (3%; OR 0.18 [95% CI 0.04-0.83]) and the procedure time was significantly shorter (MD -11.53 minutes; 95% CI -15.71-7.34), but hospital length of stay was not different between treatments. Neither the O'Brien-Fleming boundaries nor the futility boundaries were crossed by the cumulative Z curve, and the required information size was not reached for any of the outcomes. All trials were judged to be high risk of bias or have some concerns, and the level of the body of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes.
CONCLUSION
The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of percutaneous EVAR on clinically important outcomes.
Topics: Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Endovascular Procedures; Humans; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 33309488
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2020.11.008 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2020As a result of their low incidence, most of the studies on intracranial aneurysms associated with middle cerebral artery (MCA) anomalies were presented as case reports...
As a result of their low incidence, most of the studies on intracranial aneurysms associated with middle cerebral artery (MCA) anomalies were presented as case reports or small case series. No systematic review on this specific entity has been conducted. A PubMed search of the published studies was performed on April 6th, 2019 for patients who had intracranial aneurysms associated with MCA anomalies. The languages included in this study were English, Chinese, and Japanese. Finally, 58 articles reporting of 67 patients including 1 case in our center were included. The identified patients (37 females, 55.2%) aged from 4 to 81 (49.85 ± 15.22) years old. 50 (50/67, 74.6%) patients presented with hemorrhagic stroke either from the MCA anomalies associated aneurysms or other sources. 63 aneurysms (63/67, 94.0%) were saccular, 3 (4.5%) were dissecting or fusiform, and 1 (1.5%) was pseudoaneurysm. 32 (32/65, 49.2%) patients had other concurrent cerebrovascular anomalies. 56 (83.6%) patients underwent open surgeries, 8 (11.9%) patients underwent endovascular treatment, and 3 (4.5%) patients were conservatively managed. 56 (56/61, 91.8%) patients achieved a good recovery. The pathophysiological genesis of intracranial aneurysms associated with MCA anomalies is still obscure. The inflicted patients tend to have other concurrent cerebrovascular anomalies, which denotes that congenital defect in cerebrovascular development might play a role in this process. Most of the affected patients could experience a good recovery after treatment.
PubMed: 33193002
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.564797 -
Journal of Cardiac Surgery Jan 2021Up to 10% of acute type A aortic dissection (TAAD) patients are deemed unfit for open surgical repair, exposing these patients to high mortality rates. In recent years,...
PURPOSE
Up to 10% of acute type A aortic dissection (TAAD) patients are deemed unfit for open surgical repair, exposing these patients to high mortality rates. In recent years, thoracic endovascular aortic repair has proven to be a promising alternative treatment modality in specific cases. This study presents a comprehensive overview of the current state of catheter-based interventions in the setting of primary TAAD.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted, using MEDLINE and PubMed databases according to PRISMA guidelines, updated until January 2020. Articles were selected if they reported on the endovascular repair of DeBakey Type I and II aortic dissections. The exclusion criteria were retrograde type A dissection, hybrid procedures, and combined outcome reporting of mixed aortic pathologies (e.g., pseudoaneurysm and intramural hematoma).
RESULTS
A total of 31 articles, out of which 19 were case reports and 12 case series, describing a total of 92 patients, were included. The median follow-up was 6 months for case reports and the average follow-up was 14 months for case series. Overall technical success was 95.6% and 30-day mortality of 9%. Stroke and early endoleak rates were 6% and 18%, respectively. Reintervention was required in 14 patients (15%).
CONCLUSION
This review not only demonstrates that endovascular repair in the setting of isolated TAAD is feasible with acceptable outcomes at short-term follow-up, but also underlines a lack of mid-late outcomes and reporting consistency. Studies with longer follow-up and careful consideration of patient selection are required before endovascular interventions can be widely introduced.
Topics: Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Dissection; Endovascular Procedures; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Stents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33169411
DOI: 10.1111/jocs.15192 -
Journal of Craniovertebral Junction &... 2020Perimedullary arteriovenous fistulas (PMAVFs) are uncommon vascular malformations, and they rarely occur at the level of the craniovertebral junction (CVJ). The... (Review)
Review
Perimedullary arteriovenous fistulas (PMAVFs) are uncommon vascular malformations, and they rarely occur at the level of the craniovertebral junction (CVJ). The therapeutic management is challenging and can include observation alone, endovascular occlusion, or surgical exclusion, depending on both patient and malformation characteristics. A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases, searching for the following combined MeSH terms: . We also present an emblematic case of PMAVF at the level of the craniovertebral junction associated to a venous pseudoaneurysm. A total of 31 published studies were identified; 10 were rejected from our review because they did not match our inclusion criteria. Our case was not included in the systematic review. We selected 21 studies for this systematic review with a total of 58 patients, including 20 females (34.5%) and 38 males (65.5%), with a female/male ratio of 1:1.9. Thirty-nine out of 58 patients underwent surgical treatment (67.2%), 15 out of 58 patients were treated with endovascular approach (25.8%), 3 out of 58 patients underwent combined treatment (5.2%), and only 1 patient was managed conservatively (1.7%). An improved outcome was reported in 94.8% of cases (55 out of 58 patients), whereas 3 out of 58 patients (5.2%) were moderately disabled after surgery and endovascular treatment. In literature, hemorrhagic presentation is reported as the most common onset (subarachnoid hemorrhage in 63% and intramedullary hemorrhage in 10%), frequently caused either by venous dilation, due to an ascending drainage pathway into an intracranial vein, or by the higher venous flow rates that can be associated with intracranial drainage. Hiramatsu and Sato stated that arterial feeders from the anterior spinal artery (ASA) and aneurysmal dilations are associated with hemorrhagic presentation. In agreement with the classification by Hiramatsu, we defined the PMAVF of the CVJ as a vascular lesion fed by the radiculomeningeal arteries from the vertebral artery and the spinal pial arteries from the ASA and/or lateral spinal artery. Considering the anatomical characteristics, we referred to our patient as affected by PMAVF, even if it was difficult to precisely localize the arteriovenous shunts because of the complex angioarchitecture of the fine feeding arteries and draining veins, but we presumed that the shunt was located in the point of major difference in vessel size between the feeding arteries and draining veins. PMAVFs of CVJ are rare pathologies of challenging management. The best diagnostic workup and treatment are still controversial: more studies are needed to compare different therapeutic strategies concerning both long-term occlusion rates and outcomes.
PubMed: 33100763
DOI: 10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_106_20 -
The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery Dec 2020Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAIs) is nowadays the gold standard technique in adult patients, replacing...
INTRODUCTION
Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for treatment of blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAIs) is nowadays the gold standard technique in adult patients, replacing gradually the use of open repair (OR). Although randomized controlled trials will never be performed comparing TEVAR to OR for BTAIs management, trauma and vascular societies guidelines today primarily recommend the former for BTAI patients with a suitable anatomy. The aim of this review was to describe past and recent data published in literature regarding pros and cons of TEVAR treatment in BTAI, and to analyze some debated issues and future perspectives.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) were used to obtain and describe selected articles on TEVAR in BTAI.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Young (<50 years) men were the most operated population. The use of TEVAR increased over the years, with a progressive reduction in mortality and overall postoperative complication rates when compared with OR. Lack of information remains about the percentage of urgent cases.
CONCLUSIONS
TEVAR is considered nowadays the treatment of choice in BTAI patients. In case of aortic rupture (grade IV) the treatment is mandatory, while intimal tear (grade I) and intramural hematoma (grade II) can be safely managed with no operative management (NOM). Debate is still ongoing on grade III (pseudoaneurysms). Unfortunately, several aspects remain not yet clarified, including disease classification, type and grade to treat, timing (urgent versus elective), priority of vascular injuries in polytrauma patients, and TEVAR use in pediatrics and young patients.
Topics: Adult; Aorta, Thoracic; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Endovascular Procedures; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Postoperative Complications; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vascular System Injuries; Wounds, Nonpenetrating
PubMed: 32964899
DOI: 10.23736/S0021-9509.20.11580-5 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Feb 2021Vascular closure devices (VCDs) have become a mainstay in endovascular interventions in recent years. On-label use only allows for retrograde interventions originating... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Vascular closure devices (VCDs) have become a mainstay in endovascular interventions in recent years. On-label use only allows for retrograde interventions originating at the common femoral artery (CFA). However, off-label use in antegrade and/or superficial femoral artery (SFA) access has become more common in the treatment of peripheral arterial disease. Despite this, there is a paucity of comparative literature assessing individual VCD safety profiles and relative complication risks of CFA vs SFA applications.
METHODS
MEDLINE and EMBASE systematic searches were performed from inception to October 2019 to identify studies assessing VCD use in antegrade CFA and SFA interventions. Abstract selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Primary outcomes included bleeding-related complications, vessel occlusion or stenosis, embolization, pseudoaneurysm formation, or arteriovenous fistula formation.
RESULTS
Twenty-four unique studies with 4124 vascular closure events via six unique VCDs were included (Angioseal, Exoseal, Femoseal, Glubran 2, Mynx, Starclose; 3698 CFA, 426 SFA). Pooled occurrence of all complications across closure devices used in the CFA and SFA ranged from 0.9% (Mynx) to 7.4% (Starclose) and 0% (Perclose) to 10.1% (Starclose), respectively, depending on VCD type. Clinically meaningful differences were identified between devices with a trend toward significance (P = .08 CFA, P = .07 SFA). Individual devices demonstrated a range of bleeding complication rates from 0.4% (Mynx) to 7.2% (Femoseal) for the CFA site and from 0% (Perclose) to 6.4% (Starclose) for the SFA site (P = .01 and P = .03, respectively). Significant heterogeneity between studies precludes definitive characterization of the device as cause for variations in bleeding complication rates. Pooled complication rates did not differ between the CFA and SFA arms (4.6% vs 5.8%, P = .56). Bleeding complication rates also did not differ between the CFA and SFA arms (3.6% vs 3.6%, P = .98).
CONCLUSIONS
Clinically meaningful differences in overall pooled complications were identified between VCDs with a trend toward significance. Significant differences between VCDs exist with respect to bleeding risk. However, this must be interpreted with caution as these differences could be secondary to interstudy heterogeneity. Finally, no difference was identified between antegrade SFA and CFA VCD use with respect to overall complication and bleeding risks.
Topics: Catheterization, Peripheral; Endovascular Procedures; Femoral Artery; Hemorrhage; Hemostatic Techniques; Humans; Punctures; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Closure Devices
PubMed: 32950629
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.08.133 -
International Journal of Surgery... Nov 2020Current treatment approaches for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) are diversified. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) as an effective and convenient... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of thoracic endovascular aortic repair with open surgical repair and optimal medical therapy for acute type B aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Current treatment approaches for acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) are diversified. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) as an effective and convenient intervention has been adopted extensively. However, the superior efficacy and safety of TEVAR have not yet been well evaluated. This meta-analysis was designed to comprehensively compare the efficacy and safety of TEVAR with open surgical repair and optimal medical therapy for acute type B aortic dissection.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science up to April 1, 2020 was conducted for relevant studies that compared the efficacy of TEVAR and other conventional interventions in the treatment of TBAD. The primary outcomes were early mortality and midterm or long term survival. The secondary outcomes included early complications and other late outcomes. Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted the data independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures provided in Review Manager 5.2.
RESULTS
A total of 18 studies including 12,789 patients were identified. 30-day/in-hospital mortality was significantly lower in TBAD patients with TEVAR than open surgical repair (OSR), with a pooled OR of 0.54 (95% CI 0.43-0.68; P < 0.00001). Compared with optimal medical therapy (OMT), TEVAR experienced lower incidence of long-term death (≥5-yr mortality), with a pooled OR of 0.46 (95% CI 0.24-0.86; P = 0.02). However, no significant difference between TEVAR and OSR or OMT in long-term survival was found. Compared with OSR, lower incidence of cardiac and pulmonary complications as well as shorter length of stay were observed in TEVAR. Compared with OMT, TEVAR showed higher rate of paraplegia or paraparesis, higher complete thrombosis of the false lumen, as well as longer length of ICU stay.
CONCLUSIONS
Our analysis shows that TEVAR may be favorable in reducing 30-day/in-hospital mortality (than OSR) and long-term mortality (than OMT). TEVAR experienced equal efficacy with OSR and OMT in long-term survival. TEVAR showed higher rate of paraplegia or paraparesis, higher complete thrombosis of the false lumen, as well as longer length of ICU stay than OMT; and lower incidence of cardiac and pulmonary complications as well as shorter length of stay than OSR. However, TEVAR indicated similar incidence of other complications and outcomes with OSR and OMT. Further studies especially randomized clinical trials are needed to comprehensively compare the efficacy TEVAR.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aortic Dissection; Aorta, Thoracic; Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic; Endovascular Procedures; Female; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Male; Middle Aged
PubMed: 32927144
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.08.051 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Jul 2020The evidence supporting management decisions of visceral artery aneurysms (VAAs) is sparse. Practice guidelines are needed to help patients and surgeons choose between... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The evidence supporting management decisions of visceral artery aneurysms (VAAs) is sparse. Practice guidelines are needed to help patients and surgeons choose between endovascular and open surgery approaches.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and Scopus for studies of patients with VAAs. Studies were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed when appropriate.
RESULTS
We included 80 observational studies that were mostly noncomparative. Data were available for 2845 aneurysms, comprising 1279 renal artery, 775 splenic artery, 359 hepatic artery, 226 pancreaticoduodenal and gastroduodenal arteries, 95 superior mesenteric artery, 87 celiac artery, 15 jejunal, ileal and colic arteries, and 9 gastric and gastroepiploic arteries. Differences in mortality between open and endovascular approaches were not statistically significant. The endovascular approach was used more often by surgeons. The endovascular approach was associated with shorter hospital stay and lower rates of cardiovascular complications but higher rates of reintervention. Postembolization syndrome rates ranged from 9% (renal) to 38% (splenic). Coil migration ranged from 8% (splenic) to 29% (renal). Otherwise, access site complication were low (<5%). Pseudoaneurysms tended to have higher mortality and reintervention rates.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review provides event rates for outcomes important to patients with VAAs. Despite the low certainty warranted by the evidence, these rates along, with surgical expertise and anatomic feasibility, can help patients and surgeons in shared-decision making.
Topics: Aneurysm; Arteries; Endovascular Procedures; Humans; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Surgical Procedures; Viscera
PubMed: 32553135
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.05.018 -
Annals of Translational Medicine Mar 2020Proximal femoral fracture (PFF), such as intertrochanteric femoral fracture or femur neck fracture, and its management are crucial issues to surgeons. PFF has been...
BACKGROUND
Proximal femoral fracture (PFF), such as intertrochanteric femoral fracture or femur neck fracture, and its management are crucial issues to surgeons. PFF has been dramatically is becoming exponentially prevalent, and it is at high risk of complication and mortality because it is frequently associated with serious trauma and advanced age, especially in patients treated with anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents. Surgical management is essential for the treatment of PFF. Unfortunately, current surgical procedures have been related to accompanied by vascular complications, including laceration, hemorrhage, thrombosis, embolism, intimal flap tear and pseudoaneurysm. Furthermore, these vascular injuries following surgical management of PFF are potentially limb- and life-threatening. Of the complications after operation of PFF, femoral arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is rare, but remains a challenging problem because it is frequently associated with significantly high mortality and morbidity and is very difficult to treat.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines with no language restriction. We searched scientific publications via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane central register of controlled trial, Google Scholar, the KoreaMed and the Research Information Sharing Service database. The goal of this study was to report on the incidence, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, associated complications, morbidity and mortality of femoral AVF caused by PFF and to draw special attention to its prevention and management.
RESULTS
A total of 7 case reports on femoral AVF associated with operation of PFF were identified, and one our case was added to the systematic analysis. Of the 8 cases, 4 were male and 4 were female under the age of 67.87±18.44; 6 (75.0%) survived without any events, 1 (12.5%) survived with a sequela of peroneal nerve impairment, and 1 (12.5%) died of multi-organ failure and hypovolemia.
CONCLUSIONS
The incidence of femoral AVF associated with PFF is extremely low, though it appears to increase with the rising frequency of PFF. With a very few exceptions, complications following internal fixation are potentially limb- and life-threatening. There is still no definite consensus on the standardized diagnostic or therapeutic modalities. Therefore, surgeons should keep in mind that this serious complication requires early diagnosis and prompt treatment, which should not be underestimated. Femoral AVF following operation of PFF should be meticulously managed, because untreated fistulae result in serious unexpected complications including renin-mediated hypertension, high-output heart failure and venous and/or arterial insufficiency. Surgical treatment is still the gold standard for such cases, but in limited cases endovascular procedures using embolization and closure device can be a good treatment option.
PubMed: 32355735
DOI: 10.21037/atm.2020.03.08 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Sep 2020The efficacy and safety of placement of a proximal covered stent graft combined with a distal bare stent are controversial because of the lack of evidence. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The efficacy and safety of placement of a proximal covered stent graft combined with a distal bare stent are controversial because of the lack of evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the outcomes of combined proximal covered stent grafting with distal bare stenting (BS group) and proximal covered stent grafting without distal bare stenting (non-BS group).
METHODS
The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases and key references were searched up to January 26, 2019. Predefined outcomes of interest were mortality, morbidity, and postoperative assessment of aortic remodeling. We pooled risk ratios (RRs) of the outcomes of interest using fixed effects model or random effects model.
RESULTS
Overall, eight observational studies involving 914 patients were included. There were no significant differences in overall aorta-related mortality (RR, 0.54; confidence interval [CI], 0.24-1.24; P = .15), complete thoracic false lumen (FL) thrombosis rate (RR, 1.23; CI, 0.83-1.81; P = .30), or complete abdominal FL thrombosis rate (RR, 1.96; CI, 0.68-5.69; P = .21) between the BS group and the non-BS group. The BS group had a lower rate of partial thoracic FL thrombosis (RR, 0.40; CI, 0.25-0.65; P = .0002), a lower stent graft-induced new entry rate (RR, 0.08; CI, 0.02-0.41; P = .003), and a lower reintervention rate (RR, 0.42; CI, 0.26-0.69; P = .0005).
CONCLUSIONS
Combined proximal covered stent grafting with distal adjunctive bare stenting had the potential to reduce the partial thoracic FL thrombosis rate and the rates of stent graft-induced new entry and reintervention but was not associated with lower aorta-related mortality or the complete FL thrombosis rate. Further research with a stricter methodology is needed.
Topics: Aortic Dissection; Aortic Aneurysm; Blood Vessel Prosthesis; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Endovascular Procedures; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Observational Studies as Topic; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Stents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32304727
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.02.052