C.N. Antonopoulos

Results of carotid artery stenting with transcervical access

OBJECTIVE Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is usually performed with femoral access; however, this access may be impeded by anatomic limitations. Moreover, many embolic events happen during aortic arch catheterization. To overcome these problems, transcervical access to the carotid artery can be used as an alternative approach for CAS. METHODS An electronic search of the literature using PubMed was performed. All studies reporting the results of CAS using the transcervical approach were retrieved and analyzed. RESULTS The analysis included 12 studies reporting the results of 739 CAS procedures performed in 722 patients (mean age, 75.5 years). Of 533 lesions reported, 235 (44%) were symptomatic, with no data regarding symptomatic status available for 206 lesions. Two techniques were used: direct CAS with transcervical access (filter protected or unprotected) in 250 patients and CAS with transcervical access under reversed flow (with arteriovenous shunt in most cases) in 489 patients. Local anesthesia was used in 464 of 739 procedures (63%), and the remaining were performed under general anesthesia or cervical block. Technical success was 96.3% for 579 procedures with available data (558 successful procedures and 21 failures: inability to cross the lesion, 10; dissection, 5; failure of predilatation, 1; stent thrombosis, 1; patient agitation, 1; and no data, 3). The incidence of conversion to open repair was 3.0% (20 of 579 procedures: 18 carotid endarterectomies and two common carotid-internal carotid bypass grafts). Stroke occurred in eight patients (two fatal) and a fatal myocardial infarction in one patient. The incidence of stroke, myocardial infarction, and death was 1.1%, 0.14%, and 0.41%, respectively. The incidence of stroke was 1.2% (3 of 250) in direct CAS with transcervical access and 1.02% (5 of 489) in CAS under reversed flow (P > .05). Transient ischemic attack occurred in 20 patients (2.7%). Local complications were encountered in 17 of 579 CAS (2.9%), comprising 15 hematomas and two patients with transient laryngeal palsy. CONCLUSIONS CAS with the transcervical approach is a safe procedure with low incidence of stroke and complications. It can be used as an alternative to femoral access in patients with unfavorable aortoiliac or aortic arch anatomy.

Combined open and endovascular treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic pathologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND A combined open-endovascular technique has emerged as an alternative treatment option for thoracoabdominal pathologies. However, reported experiences from various medical centers have been contradictory and heterogeneous. The aim of this study is to assess the mortality rate and various complication rates associated with this approach. METHODS An electronic health database search was performed on all articles published up to March of 2012 describing combined open-endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal pathologies. Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they had ≥10 patients and reported the basic outcome criteria. End points of the meta-analysis were defined as primary technical success, endoprosthesis related complications, 30-day/in-hospital mortality, symptoms of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) and irreversible paraplegia, permanent renal function impairment, and other major complications. RESULTS Fourteen studies were deemed eligible for this meta-analysis with a total of 528 patients (68.0% male, mean age 70.5 years). The mean follow-up period was 34.2 months. The pooled estimate for primary technical success and visceral graft patency was 95.4% and 96.5% respectively. An endoleak developed in 106 (21.1%) patients in whom both stages had been completed. The pooled rate for symptomatic SCI was 7.0% and for irreversible paraplegia 4.4%. The pooled proportion for permanent renal failure was 7.0% and for mesenteric ischemia 4.5%. Prolonged respiratory support and cardiac complications were observed in a pooled rate of 7.8% and 4.6% respectively. The meta-analysis for 30-day/in-hospital mortality revealed a pooled rate of 14.3%. CONCLUSIONS Although the hybrid technique for thoracoabdominal aortic pathology provides a less invasive approach, the technique is still associated with a considerable morbidity and mortality rates. High risk patients unfit to withstand open repair, are equally likely to suffer significant complications with the hybrid procedure. The choice of the optimal treatment strategy for thoracoabdominal pathologies should be carefully made on a patient to patient basis, assessing the clinical fitness and the anatomical suitability of each patient. The hybrid approach should be reserved for high volume centers with accumulated experience and high standards of perioperative management.

A Review of Open and Endovascular Treatment of Superior Vena Cava Syndrome of Benign Aetiology

BACKGROUND The widespread use of central venous catheters, ports, pacemakers, and defibrillators has increased the incidence of benign superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS). This study aimed at reviewing the results of open and endovascular treatment of SVCS. METHOD Medical literature databases were searched for relevant studies. Studies with more than five adult patients, reporting separate results for the SVC were included. Nine studies reported the results of endovascular treatment of SVCS including 136 patients followed up for a mean of 11-48 months. Causes of SVCS were central venous catheters and pacemakers (80.6%), mediastinal fibrosis (13.7%), and other (5.6%). Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and stenting was performed in 73.6%, PTA only in 17.3%, and thrombolysis, PTA, and stenting in 9%. Four studies reported the results of open repair of SVCS including 87 patients followed up between 30 months and 10.9 years. The causes were mediastinal fibrosis (58.4%), catheters and pacemakers (28.5%), and other (13%). Operations performed included a spiral saphenous interposition graft, other vein graft, PTFE graft, and human allograft. Thirteen patients required re-operations (15%) before discharge mainly for graft thrombosis. RESULTS In the endovascular group technical success was 95.6%. Thirty day mortality was 0%. Regression of symptoms was reported in 97.3%. Thirty-two patients (26.9%) underwent 58 secondary procedures. In the open group the 30 day mortality was 0%. Symptom regression was reported in 93.5%. Twenty-four patients (28.4%) underwent a total of 33 secondary procedures. CONCLUSIONS Endovascular is the first line treatment for SVCS caused by intravenous devices, whereas surgery is most often performed for mediastinal fibrosis. Both treatments show good results regarding regression of the symptoms and mid-term primary patency, with a significant incidence of secondary interventions.

Selected Abstract from the February Issue of the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular SurgeryA Review of Open and Endovascular Treatment of Superior Vena Cava Syndrome of Benign Aetiology

Background: The widespread use of central venous catheters, ports, pacemakers, and defibrillators has increased the incidence of benign superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS). This study aimed at reviewing the results of open and endovascular treatment of SVCS. Method: Medical literature databases were searched for relevant studies. Studies with more than five adult patients, reporting separate results for the SVC were included. Nine studies reported the results of endovascular treatment of SVCS including 136 patients followed up for a mean of 11-48 months. Causes of SVCS were central venous catheters and pacemakers (80.6%), mediastinal fibrosis (13.7%), and other (5.6%). Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and stenting was performed in 73.6%, PTA only in 17.3%, and thrombolysis, PTA, and stenting in 9%. Four studies reported the results of open repair of SVCS including 87 patients followed up between 30 months and 10.9 years. The causes were mediastinal fibrosis (58.4%), catheters and pacemakers (28.5%), and other (13%). Operations performed included a spiral saphenous interposition graft, other vein graft, PTFE graft, and human allograft. Thirteen patients required re-operations (15%) before discharge mainly for graft thrombosis. Results: In the endovascular group technical success was 95.6%. Thirty day mortality was 0%. Regression of symptoms was reported in 97.3%. Thirty-two patients (26.9%) underwent 58 secondary procedures. In the open group the 30 day mortality was 0%. Symptom regression was reported in 93.5%. Twenty-four patients (28.4%) underwent a total of 33 secondary procedures. Conclusions: Endovascular is the first line treatment for SVCS caused by intravenous devices, whereas surgery is most often performed for mediastinal fibrosis. Both treatments show good results regarding regression of the symptoms and mid-term primary patency, with a significant incidence of secondary interventions.

Reply: To PMID 23317524.

highlighting the utility of endovascular aneurysm repair in this frail group and the importance of careful patient selection for open repair in patients with any degree of COPD. Furthermore, Cox proportional hazards analysis not only confirmed oxygen dependence was associated with diminished 5-year survival, but also medically managed COPD, again emphasizing the ongoing challenge of selecting patients with COPD for aneurysm repair.

Commentary on 'Design and validation of an error capture tool for quality evaluation in the vascular and endovascular surgical theatre'.

The study by Mason et al. presenting the Imperial College Error CAPture (ICECAP) tool aims to provide vascular surgeons with a valid and reproducible tool for identification and categorization of common errors during vascular and endovascular operations. Despite some methodological limitations that have been properly addressed, six primary categories (communication, equipment, procedure independent pressures, technical, safety awareness and patient related) and 20 sub-categories were determined as the most frequent and important vascular procedural errors. “To err is human”. This famous adage by Alexander Pope was used in a report issued in November 1999 by the U.S. Institute of Medicine in order to increase awareness towards preventable medical errors in hospitals that exceeded deaths by motor-vehicle accidents, breast cancer and AIDS. Among the report’s main conclusions was that the majority of medical errors were not a “bad apple” problem. They did not result from individual recklessness or the actions of a particular group, but mainly by faulty systems, processes and conditions that lead to errors or fail to prevent them. But are errors during surgical operations as complex and multidisciplinary as plane crash errors? Interestingly, ElBardissi et al. successfully adapted and applied in the OR the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS); a universally accepted human error framework that was originally used by the US air force to investigate and analyze human factors and errors in aviation. This model illustrated that the organizational influence (climate, resource management and policies) impact supervisory processes (scheduling, training, and oversight), which in turn establish the preconditions (technological and teamwork related) that produce errors.