-
Journal of Vascular Surgery May 2024Despite open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms being considered as a durable solution, disease progression and para-anastomotic aneurysms may require... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Despite open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms being considered as a durable solution, disease progression and para-anastomotic aneurysms may require further repair, and fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) may be applied to address these pathologies. The aim of this systematic review was to assess technical success, mortality, and morbidity (acute kidney injury, spinal cord ischemia) at 30 days, and mortality and reintervention rates during the available follow-up, in patients managed with F/BEVAR after previous OSR.
METHODS
The PRISMA statement was followed, and the study was pre-registered to the PROSPERO (CRD42022363214). The English literature was searched, via Ovid, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, through November 30, 2022. Observational studies and case series with ≥5 patients (2000-2022), reporting on F/BEVAR outcomes after OSR, were considered eligible. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and GRADE were used to assess the risk of bias and quality of evidence. The primary outcome was technical success, mortality, and morbidity at 30 days. Data on the outcomes of interest were synthesized using proportional meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The initial search yielded 1694 articles. Eight retrospective studies (476 patients) were considered eligible. In 78.3% of cases, disease progression set the indication for reintervention. Technical success was estimated at 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89%-98%; I = 0%; 95% prediction interval [PI], 79%-99%). Thirty-day mortality was 2% (95% CI, 1%-9%; I = 0%; 95% PI, 0%-28%). The estimated spinal cord ischemia and acute kidney injury rates were 3% (95% CI, 1%-9%; I = 0%; 95% PI, 0%-30%) and 6% (95% CI, 2%-15%; I = 0%; 95% PI, 1%-40%), respectively. During follow-up, overall mortality was 5% (95% CI, 2%-12%; I = 34%; 95% PI, 0%-45%) and aorta-related mortality was 1% (95% CI, 0%-2%; I = 0%; 95% PI, 0%-3%). The rate of reinterventions was 16% (95% CI, 9%-26%; I = 22%; 95% PI, 3%-50%).
CONCLUSIONS
According to the available literature, F/BEVAR after OSR may be performed with high technical success and low mortality and morbidity during the perioperative period. Follow-up aortic-related mortality was 1%, whereas the reintervention rates were within the standard range following F/BEVAR.
Topics: Humans; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Retrospective Studies; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Endovascular Procedures; Aortic Aneurysm; Acute Kidney Injury; Disease Progression; Spinal Cord Ischemia; Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic
PubMed: 37757916
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2023.09.026 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Apr 2024The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes after semi-conversion (open conversion with graft preservation) after failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes after semi-conversion (open conversion with graft preservation) after failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and semi-conversion failure. Secondary outcomes were 30-day major systemic complications, endoleak recurrence, reinterventions, and overall survival.
METHODS
The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023421153). All studies reporting the outcomes of semi-conversions for failed EVAR were eligible for inclusion. Quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool. A random effects meta-regression of proportions was conducted using the double arcsine-Tukey transformation, given the frequent zero event rate in the primary outcome. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I statistic.
RESULTS
Eight studies were included in the review after full text screening. A total of 196 patients underwent semi-conversion at a mean time from EVAR of 47.4 months, 68.9% in an elective setting. Mean age at conversion was 78.1 years, and the main indication was isolated endoleak type II (70.1% of cases). Aortic clamping was not necessary in 92.3% of semi-conversions; the aortic sac was opened in 96.1% of cases; in 93.3% of cases, ligation/suture of one or more culprit arteries were performed; and aortic neck banding was executed in 29.2%. At 30 days from surgery, the pooled mortality and the major systemic complications rates were 5.3% (I = 24.9%) and 13.4% (I = 54.3%), respectively. At follow-up, endoleak recurred after 12.6% semi-conversions (I = 83.2%), and the rate of reinterventions was 7% (I = 50.1%); the semi-conversion failure rate was 5.5% (I = 54.1%), and the overall survival was 84.6% (I = 33.3%).
CONCLUSIONS
Semi-conversions have acceptable 30-day mortality rates, but the early and mid-term risks of complications, reinterventions, ruptures, and infections are not negligible. This procedure might be an alternative to complete or partial graft explant in patients whom aortic cross-clamping is not ideal.
Topics: Humans; Endoleak; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Endovascular Aneurysm Repair; Treatment Outcome; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Endovascular Procedures; Aorta, Abdominal; Risk Factors; Retrospective Studies; Blood Vessel Prosthesis
PubMed: 37619915
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2023.08.113 -
The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery Aug 2023The covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation (CERAB) technique was introduced as a more anatomical and physiological configuration of stents to overcome...
INTRODUCTION
The covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation (CERAB) technique was introduced as a more anatomical and physiological configuration of stents to overcome the limits of standard endovascular technique with kissing stenting in terms of patency and reintervention rates in the treatment of complex aorto-iliac occlusive disease in particular when the aortic bifurcation is involved. The purpose of this systematic review is to report the evolution of this technique during recent years.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Data were retrieved from retrospective studies and case series excluding letters, editorial, and reviews conducted from 2000 to September 2022.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
The literature analysis provided data on the evolution of CERAB technique and the current evidence about clinical results.
CONCLUSIONS
Since its introduction in 2009, CERAB technique has grown as a safe and effective endovascular therapeutic option for aorto-iliac occlusive disease. Data from prospective multicenter registries with dedicated stent grafts and comparative trials are needed to validate the technique.
Topics: Humans; Retrospective Studies; Prospective Studies; Aorta, Abdominal; Stents; Endovascular Procedures; Iliac Artery; Arterial Occlusive Diseases; Treatment Outcome; Aortic Diseases; Vascular Patency; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37401818
DOI: 10.23736/S0021-9509.23.12705-4 -
BMJ Military Health Jul 2023Haemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially survivable death on the battlefield. Despite overall improvement in battlefield mortality, there has been no improvement...
INTRODUCTION
Haemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially survivable death on the battlefield. Despite overall improvement in battlefield mortality, there has been no improvement in survival following non-compressible torso haemorrhage (NCTH). The abdominal aortic junctional tourniquet-stabilised (AAJT-S) is a potential solution that may address this gap in improving combat mortality. This systematic review examines the evidence base for the safety and utility of the AAJT-S for prehospital haemorrhage control in the combat setting.
METHODS
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Embase (inception to February 2022) was performed using exhaustive terms, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline. The search was limited to English-language publications in peer-reviewed journals; grey literature was not included. Human, animal and experimental studies were included. Papers were reviewed by all authors to determine inclusion. Each study was assessed for level of evidence and bias.
RESULTS
14 studies met the inclusion criteria: 7 controlled swine studies (total n=166), 5 healthy human volunteer cases series (total n=251), 1 human case report and 1 mannikin study. The AAJT-S was demonstrated to be effective at cessation of blood flow when tolerated in healthy human and animal studies. It was easy to apply by minimally trained individuals. Complications were observed in animal studies, most frequently ischaemia-reperfusion injury, which was dependent on application duration. There were no randomised controlled trials, and the overall evidence base supporting the AAJT-S was low.
CONCLUSIONS
There are limited data of safety and effectiveness of the AAJT-S. However, there is a requirement for a far-forward solution to improve NCTH outcomes, the AAJT-S is an attractive option and high-quality evidence is unlikely to be reported in the near future. Therefore, if this is implemented into clinical practice without a solid evidence base it will need a robust governance and surveillance process, similar to resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta, with regular audit of use.
PubMed: 37400126
DOI: 10.1136/military-2023-002451 -
Emergency Medicine Australasia : EMA Oct 2023Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is becoming ubiquitous in emergency medicine. POCUS for abdominal aortic aneurysm is well established in practice. The thoracic aorta... (Review)
Review
Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is becoming ubiquitous in emergency medicine. POCUS for abdominal aortic aneurysm is well established in practice. The thoracic aorta can also be assessed by POCUS for dissection and aneurysm and transthoracic echocardiography is endorsed by international guidelines as an initial test for thoracic aortic pathologies. A systematic search of Ovid Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Web of Science from January 2000 to August 2022 identified four studies evaluating diagnostic accuracy of emergency physician POCUS for thoracic aortic dissection (TAD) and five studies for thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA). Study designs were heterogeneous including differing diagnostic criteria for aortic pathology. Convenience recruitment was frequent in prospective studies. Sensitivity and specificity ranges for studies of TAD were 41-91% and 94-100%, respectively when an intimal flap was seen. Sensitivity and specificity ranges for studies of thoracic aorta dilation >40 mm were 50-100% and 93-100%, respectively; for >45 mm ranges were 64-65% and 95-99%. Literature review identified that POCUS is specific for TAD and TAA. POCUS reduces the time to diagnosis of thoracic aortic pathology; however, it remains insensitive and cannot be recommended as a stand-alone rule-out test. We suggest that detection of thoracic aorta dilation >40 mm by POCUS at any site increases the suspicion of serious aortic pathology. Studies incorporating algorithmic use of POCUS, Aortic Dissection Detection Risk Score and D-dimer as decision tools are promising and may improve current ED practices. Further research is warranted in this rapidly evolving field.
Topics: Humans; Point-of-Care Systems; Prospective Studies; Ultrasonography; Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic; Aortic Dissection; Physicians
PubMed: 37364927
DOI: 10.1111/1742-6723.14262 -
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma,... Jun 2023Civilian public mass shootings (CPMSs) are a major public health issue and in recent years several events have occurred worldwide. The aim of this systematic review was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Civilian public mass shootings (CPMSs) are a major public health issue and in recent years several events have occurred worldwide. The aim of this systematic review was to characterize injuries and mortality after CPMSs focusing on in-hospital management of hemorrhage and vascular injuries.
METHOD
A systematic review of all published literature was undertaken in Medline, Embase and Web of Science January 1st, 1968, to February 22nd, 2021, according to the PRISMA guidelines. Literature was eligible for inclusion if the CPMS included three or more people shot, injured or killed, had vascular injuries or hemorrhage.
RESULTS
The search identified 2884 studies; 34 were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. There were 2039 wounded in 45 CPMS events. The dominating anatomic injury location per event was the extremity followed by abdomen and chest. The median number of operations and operated patients per event was 22 (5-101) and 10.5 (4-138), respectively. A total of 899 deaths were reported with a median mortality rate of 36.1% per event (15.9-71.4%) Thirty-eight percent (13/34) of all studies reported on vascular injuries. Vascular injuries ranged from 8 to 29%; extremity vascular injury the most frequent. Specific vascular injuries included thoracic aorta 18% (42/232), carotid arteries 6% (14/232), and abdominal aorta 5% (12/232). Vascular injuries were involved in 8.3%-10% of all deaths.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review showed an overall high mortality after CPMS with injuries mainly located to the extremities, thorax and abdomen. About one quarter of deaths was related to hemorrhage involving central large vessel injuries. Further understanding of these injuries, and structured and uniform reporting of injuries and treatment protocols may help improve evaluation and management in the future. Level of Evidence Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.
Topics: Humans; Hemorrhage; Retrospective Studies; Vascular System Injuries; Wounds, Gunshot
PubMed: 37337265
DOI: 10.1186/s13049-023-01093-x -
European Journal of Vascular and... Nov 2023To assess which ultrasound (US) method of maximum anteroposterior (AP) abdominal aortic diameter measurement can be considered most reproducible. (Review)
Review
Editor's Choice - Comparison of the Reproducibility of Ultrasound Calliper Placement Methods in Abdominal Aortic Diameter Measurements: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies.
OBJECTIVE
To assess which ultrasound (US) method of maximum anteroposterior (AP) abdominal aortic diameter measurement can be considered most reproducible.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched (PROSPERO ID: 276694). Eligible studies reported intra- and or interobserver agreement according to Bland-Altman analysis (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) for abdominal aortic diameter AP US evaluations with an outer to outer (OTO), inner to inner (ITI), and or leading edge to leading edge (LELE) calliper placement.
REVIEW METHODS
The Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies statement was followed. The QUADAS-2 tool and QUADAS-C extension were used for risk of bias assessment and the GRADE framework to rate the certainty of evidence. Pooled estimates (fixed effects meta-analysis, after a test of homogeneity of means) for each US method were compared with pairwise one sided t tests. Sensitivity analyses (for studies published in 2010 or later) and meta-regression were also performed.
RESULTS
21 studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Twelve were eligible for quantitative analysis. Studies showed heterogeneity in the US model and transducer used, sex of participants, and observer professions, expertise, and training. Included studies shared a common mean for each US method (OTO: p = 1.0, ITI: p = 1.0, and LELE: p = 1.0). A pooled estimate of interobserver reproducibility for each US method was obtained, combining the mean ± SD (Bland-Altman analysis) from each study: OTO: 0.182 ± 0.440; ITI: 0.170 ± 0.554; and LELE: 0.437 ± 0.419. There were no statistically significant differences between the methods (OTO vs. ITI: p = .52, OTO vs. LELE: p = .069, ITI vs. LELE: p = .17). Considering studies published in 2010 and later, the pooled estimate for LELE was the smallest, without statistically significant differences between the methods. Despite the low risk of bias, the certainty of the evidence for both meta-analysed outcomes remained low.
CONCLUSION
The interobserver reproducibility for OTO and ITI was 2.5 times smaller (indicating better reproducibility) than LELE; however, without statistically significant differences between the methods and low GRADE evidence certainty. Additional data are needed to validate these findings, while inherent differences between the methods need to be emphasised.
PubMed: 37331424
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.06.010 -
Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Nov 2023Abdominal penetrating aortic ulcer (aPAU) is defined as an ulceration of the aortic intima and media lamina, even with rupture of the internal elastic lamina. Recently,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Abdominal penetrating aortic ulcer (aPAU) is defined as an ulceration of the aortic intima and media lamina, even with rupture of the internal elastic lamina. Recently, there have been an increasing number of publications on endovascular treatment for aPAU. This review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment and provide clinicians with the latest evidence-based medical data.
METHODS
3 academic databases (Embase, PubMed, and Scopus) were systematically searched for literature reporting on aPAU from 1986 (the earliest appearance of the concept of aPAU) to September 1, 2021, and related data were collected and evaluated. A fixed/random effects model was used to construct the forest plots. Funnel plots and linear regression tests were used to assess the publication bias.
RESULTS
6 articles including 121 patients were included in the analysis. The average age was 71.4 years, with 72.7% of males and 85.6% with hypertension. Saccular aneurysms (SA) were the most prevalent complication (35.5%). Endovascular treatment had a perioperative mortality rate of .24% (95% CI, .00-2.70). The technical success rate was 99.15% (95% CI, 96.49-100). The type-II endoleak rate was 5.69% (95% CI, .00-12.13). The 1-year survival rate was 95.69% (95% CI, 90.49-100). The revascularization rate was 7.20% (95% CI, .07-14.32). Endovascular treatments for aPAU would lead to a high rate of technical success, few complications, and satisfactory 1-year survival.
CONCLUSIONS
aPAU are a common disease that mainly affects elderly males with hypertension and hyperlipidemia. Endovascular treatment is required when an ulcer progresses rapidly or manifests symptoms. Endovascular treatment is associated with high technical success, low complication, and satisfactory 1-year survival. Further investigation into the long-term results of endovascular treatment is necessary.
Topics: Male; Humans; Aged; Penetrating Atherosclerotic Ulcer; Treatment Outcome; Endovascular Procedures; Aorta; Hypertension; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Ulcer; Risk Factors; Blood Vessel Prosthesis
PubMed: 37267067
DOI: 10.1177/15385744231180678 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2023Aortic aneurysms occur when the aorta, the body's largest artery, grows in size, and can occur in the thoracic or abdominal aorta. The approaches to repair aortic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Aortic aneurysms occur when the aorta, the body's largest artery, grows in size, and can occur in the thoracic or abdominal aorta. The approaches to repair aortic aneurysms include directly exposing the aorta and replacing the diseased segment via open repair, or endovascular repair. Endovascular repair uses fluoroscopic-guidance to access the aorta and deliver a device to exclude the aneurysmal aortic segment without requiring a large surgical incision. Endovascular repair can be performed under a general anesthetic, during which the unconscious patient is paralyzed and reliant on an anesthetic machine to maintain the airway and provide oxygen to the lungs, or a loco-regional anesethetic, for which medications are administered to provide the person with sufficient sedation and pain control without requiring a general anesthetic. While people undergoing general anesthesia are more likely to remain still during surgery and have a well-controlled airway in the event of unanticipated complications, loco-regional anesthesia is associated with fewer postoperative complications in some studies. It remains unclear which anesthetic technique is associated with better outcomes following the endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of general anesthesia compared to loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was 11 March 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for all randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of general anesthesia compared to loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay. Our secondary outcomes were: incidence of endoleaks, requirement for re-intervention, incidence of myocardial infarction, quality of life, incidence of respiratory complications, incidence of pulmonary embolism, incidence of deep vein thrombosis, and length of procedure. We planned to use GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We found no studies, published or ongoing, that met our inclusion criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not identify any randomized controlled trials that compared general versus loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. There is currently insufficient high-quality evidence to determine the benefits or harms of either anesthetic approach during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Well-designed prospective randomized trials with relevant clinical outcomes are needed to adequately address this.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics, General; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Endovascular Procedures; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life
PubMed: 37052421
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013182.pub2 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Mar 2023Studies on the mortality of blunt abdominal aortic injury (BAAI) are rare and have yielded inconsistent results. In the present study, we aimed to quantitatively analyse... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Studies on the mortality of blunt abdominal aortic injury (BAAI) are rare and have yielded inconsistent results. In the present study, we aimed to quantitatively analyse the retrieved data to more accurately determine the hospital mortality of BAAI.
METHODS
The Excerpta Medica Database, PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify relevant publications without date restrictions. The overall hospital mortality (OHM) of BAAI patients was set as the primary outcome measure. English publications with data that met the selection criteria were included. The quality of all included studies was assessed by the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist and the American Agency for Health Care Quality and Research's cross-sectional study quality evaluation items. After data extraction, a meta-analysis of the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation of data was performed using the Metaprop command in Stata 16 software. Heterogeneity was assessed and reported as a percentage using the I index value and as a P value using the Cochrane Q test. Various methods were used to determine the sources of heterogeneity and to analyse the sensitivity of the computation model.
RESULTS
Of the 2147 references screened, 5 studies that involved 1593 patients met the selection criteria and were included. There were no low-quality references after assessment. One study that only included 16 juvenile BAAI patients was excluded from the meta-analysis of the primary outcome measure due to high heterogeneity. Due to the low heterogeneity (I = 47.6%, P = 0.126 for Q test) that was observed after using the random effects model, the fixed model was subsequently used to pool the effect sizes of the remaining four studies, thus yielding an OHM of 28.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 26.5-31.1%]. The stability of the model was verified by sensitivity analysis, and Egger's test (P = 0.339) indicated a low level of publication bias. In addition, we also performed meta-analyses and obtained a pooled hospital mortality of operation (13.5%, 95% CI 8.0-20.0%), a pooled hospital mortality of non-operation (28.4%, 95% CI 25.9-31.0%), and a pooled rate of aortic rupture (12.2%, 95% CI 7.0-18.5%) of BAAI.
CONCLUSIONS
The present study indicated that BAAI has an OHM of 28.8%, indicating that this disease deserves more attention and research.
Topics: Humans; United States; Hospital Mortality; Cross-Sectional Studies; Aorta, Abdominal; Wounds, Nonpenetrating
PubMed: 36991444
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00492-w