Impact of onlay fusion and cone beam computed tomography on radiation exposure and technical assessment of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair

Emanuel R. Tenorio, Gustavo Oderich, Giuliano A. Sandri, Pinar Ozbek, Jussi M. Kärkkäinen, Thanila A. Macedo, Terri J Vrtiska, Stephen Cha

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of advanced imaging applications and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) on radiation exposure of the patient and operator and detection of technical problems during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) for treatment of pararenal aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Methods: We reviewed the clinical data of 386 consecutives patients (289 male; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) treated by F-BEVAR for 196 pararenal aneurysms and 190 TAAAs (mean, 3.4 ± 0.9 targeted vessels/patient) between 2007 and 2017. Radiation exposure (cumulative air kerma) was analyzed in three fixed imaging systems used between 2007 and 2011 (system 1), 2012 and 2016 (system 2), and 2016 and 2017 (system 3). Onlay fusion and CBCT were available with systems 2 and 3, whereas digital zoom with fusion overlay was used with system 3. Operator effective dose was measured per month using a radiation dosimeter badge. Computed tomography angiography and CBCT were analyzed for findings requiring immediate revision or secondary interventions. End points were patient radiation exposure; operator effective dose; procedure technical success; and 30-day rates of mortality, major adverse events, and secondary interventions. Results: F-BEVAR was performed using system 1 in 98 patients, system 2 in 198 patients, and system 3 in 90 patients. Use of onlay fusion/CBCT was 0% with system 1, 42% with system 2, and 98% with system 3. Procedures performed with onlay fusion/CBCT had significantly (P <.05) higher technical success (99.4% vs 98.8%) and lower contrast material volume (155 ± 58 mL vs 172 ± 80 mL), fluoroscopy time (83 ± 34 minutes vs 94 ± 49 minutes), and cumulative air kerma (2561 ± 1920 mGy vs 3767 ± 2307 mGy). Despite higher case volume and increasing complexity during the experience, operator effective dose decreased to 9 ± 4 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 3 compared with 26 ± 3 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 1 and 20 ± 2 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 2 (P =.001). Among 219 patients who had no CBCT, 18 (8%) had computed tomography angiography findings that prompted secondary interventions before dismissal. Conversely, among 167 patients who had CBCT, 14 patients (8%) had intraoperative CBCT findings requiring immediate revision, with no additional secondary interventions. Patients treated with onlay fusion/CBCT had significantly (P <.05) lower mortality (4% vs 1%), major adverse events (43% vs 19%), and secondary interventions (10% vs 4%) at 30 days. Conclusions: Radiation exposure and operator effective dose significantly decreased with evolution of F-BEVAR experience and use of advanced imaging applications such as onlay fusion and CBCT. CBCT allowed immediate assessment and identified intraoperative technical problems, leading to immediate revision and avoiding early secondary interventions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Inlays
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm
Aneurysm
Radiation Exposure
Air
Mortality
Fluoroscopy
Contrast Media

Keywords

  • Cone beam computer tomography (CBCT)
  • Fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (F-BEVAR)
  • Radiation exposure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Impact of onlay fusion and cone beam computed tomography on radiation exposure and technical assessment of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair. / Tenorio, Emanuel R.; Oderich, Gustavo; Sandri, Giuliano A.; Ozbek, Pinar; Kärkkäinen, Jussi M.; Macedo, Thanila A.; Vrtiska, Terri J; Cha, Stephen.

In: Journal of Vascular Surgery, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{77832b3e363740a3823d59bd73996d02,
title = "Impact of onlay fusion and cone beam computed tomography on radiation exposure and technical assessment of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair",
abstract = "Objective: The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of advanced imaging applications and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) on radiation exposure of the patient and operator and detection of technical problems during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) for treatment of pararenal aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Methods: We reviewed the clinical data of 386 consecutives patients (289 male; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) treated by F-BEVAR for 196 pararenal aneurysms and 190 TAAAs (mean, 3.4 ± 0.9 targeted vessels/patient) between 2007 and 2017. Radiation exposure (cumulative air kerma) was analyzed in three fixed imaging systems used between 2007 and 2011 (system 1), 2012 and 2016 (system 2), and 2016 and 2017 (system 3). Onlay fusion and CBCT were available with systems 2 and 3, whereas digital zoom with fusion overlay was used with system 3. Operator effective dose was measured per month using a radiation dosimeter badge. Computed tomography angiography and CBCT were analyzed for findings requiring immediate revision or secondary interventions. End points were patient radiation exposure; operator effective dose; procedure technical success; and 30-day rates of mortality, major adverse events, and secondary interventions. Results: F-BEVAR was performed using system 1 in 98 patients, system 2 in 198 patients, and system 3 in 90 patients. Use of onlay fusion/CBCT was 0{\%} with system 1, 42{\%} with system 2, and 98{\%} with system 3. Procedures performed with onlay fusion/CBCT had significantly (P <.05) higher technical success (99.4{\%} vs 98.8{\%}) and lower contrast material volume (155 ± 58 mL vs 172 ± 80 mL), fluoroscopy time (83 ± 34 minutes vs 94 ± 49 minutes), and cumulative air kerma (2561 ± 1920 mGy vs 3767 ± 2307 mGy). Despite higher case volume and increasing complexity during the experience, operator effective dose decreased to 9 ± 4 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 3 compared with 26 ± 3 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 1 and 20 ± 2 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 2 (P =.001). Among 219 patients who had no CBCT, 18 (8{\%}) had computed tomography angiography findings that prompted secondary interventions before dismissal. Conversely, among 167 patients who had CBCT, 14 patients (8{\%}) had intraoperative CBCT findings requiring immediate revision, with no additional secondary interventions. Patients treated with onlay fusion/CBCT had significantly (P <.05) lower mortality (4{\%} vs 1{\%}), major adverse events (43{\%} vs 19{\%}), and secondary interventions (10{\%} vs 4{\%}) at 30 days. Conclusions: Radiation exposure and operator effective dose significantly decreased with evolution of F-BEVAR experience and use of advanced imaging applications such as onlay fusion and CBCT. CBCT allowed immediate assessment and identified intraoperative technical problems, leading to immediate revision and avoiding early secondary interventions.",
keywords = "Cone beam computer tomography (CBCT), Fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (F-BEVAR), Radiation exposure",
author = "Tenorio, {Emanuel R.} and Gustavo Oderich and Sandri, {Giuliano A.} and Pinar Ozbek and K{\"a}rkk{\"a}inen, {Jussi M.} and Macedo, {Thanila A.} and Vrtiska, {Terri J} and Stephen Cha",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jvs.2018.07.040",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Vascular Surgery",
issn = "0741-5214",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Impact of onlay fusion and cone beam computed tomography on radiation exposure and technical assessment of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair

AU - Tenorio, Emanuel R.

AU - Oderich, Gustavo

AU - Sandri, Giuliano A.

AU - Ozbek, Pinar

AU - Kärkkäinen, Jussi M.

AU - Macedo, Thanila A.

AU - Vrtiska, Terri J

AU - Cha, Stephen

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Objective: The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of advanced imaging applications and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) on radiation exposure of the patient and operator and detection of technical problems during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) for treatment of pararenal aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Methods: We reviewed the clinical data of 386 consecutives patients (289 male; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) treated by F-BEVAR for 196 pararenal aneurysms and 190 TAAAs (mean, 3.4 ± 0.9 targeted vessels/patient) between 2007 and 2017. Radiation exposure (cumulative air kerma) was analyzed in three fixed imaging systems used between 2007 and 2011 (system 1), 2012 and 2016 (system 2), and 2016 and 2017 (system 3). Onlay fusion and CBCT were available with systems 2 and 3, whereas digital zoom with fusion overlay was used with system 3. Operator effective dose was measured per month using a radiation dosimeter badge. Computed tomography angiography and CBCT were analyzed for findings requiring immediate revision or secondary interventions. End points were patient radiation exposure; operator effective dose; procedure technical success; and 30-day rates of mortality, major adverse events, and secondary interventions. Results: F-BEVAR was performed using system 1 in 98 patients, system 2 in 198 patients, and system 3 in 90 patients. Use of onlay fusion/CBCT was 0% with system 1, 42% with system 2, and 98% with system 3. Procedures performed with onlay fusion/CBCT had significantly (P <.05) higher technical success (99.4% vs 98.8%) and lower contrast material volume (155 ± 58 mL vs 172 ± 80 mL), fluoroscopy time (83 ± 34 minutes vs 94 ± 49 minutes), and cumulative air kerma (2561 ± 1920 mGy vs 3767 ± 2307 mGy). Despite higher case volume and increasing complexity during the experience, operator effective dose decreased to 9 ± 4 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 3 compared with 26 ± 3 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 1 and 20 ± 2 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 2 (P =.001). Among 219 patients who had no CBCT, 18 (8%) had computed tomography angiography findings that prompted secondary interventions before dismissal. Conversely, among 167 patients who had CBCT, 14 patients (8%) had intraoperative CBCT findings requiring immediate revision, with no additional secondary interventions. Patients treated with onlay fusion/CBCT had significantly (P <.05) lower mortality (4% vs 1%), major adverse events (43% vs 19%), and secondary interventions (10% vs 4%) at 30 days. Conclusions: Radiation exposure and operator effective dose significantly decreased with evolution of F-BEVAR experience and use of advanced imaging applications such as onlay fusion and CBCT. CBCT allowed immediate assessment and identified intraoperative technical problems, leading to immediate revision and avoiding early secondary interventions.

AB - Objective: The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of advanced imaging applications and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) on radiation exposure of the patient and operator and detection of technical problems during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) for treatment of pararenal aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Methods: We reviewed the clinical data of 386 consecutives patients (289 male; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) treated by F-BEVAR for 196 pararenal aneurysms and 190 TAAAs (mean, 3.4 ± 0.9 targeted vessels/patient) between 2007 and 2017. Radiation exposure (cumulative air kerma) was analyzed in three fixed imaging systems used between 2007 and 2011 (system 1), 2012 and 2016 (system 2), and 2016 and 2017 (system 3). Onlay fusion and CBCT were available with systems 2 and 3, whereas digital zoom with fusion overlay was used with system 3. Operator effective dose was measured per month using a radiation dosimeter badge. Computed tomography angiography and CBCT were analyzed for findings requiring immediate revision or secondary interventions. End points were patient radiation exposure; operator effective dose; procedure technical success; and 30-day rates of mortality, major adverse events, and secondary interventions. Results: F-BEVAR was performed using system 1 in 98 patients, system 2 in 198 patients, and system 3 in 90 patients. Use of onlay fusion/CBCT was 0% with system 1, 42% with system 2, and 98% with system 3. Procedures performed with onlay fusion/CBCT had significantly (P <.05) higher technical success (99.4% vs 98.8%) and lower contrast material volume (155 ± 58 mL vs 172 ± 80 mL), fluoroscopy time (83 ± 34 minutes vs 94 ± 49 minutes), and cumulative air kerma (2561 ± 1920 mGy vs 3767 ± 2307 mGy). Despite higher case volume and increasing complexity during the experience, operator effective dose decreased to 9 ± 4 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 3 compared with 26 ± 3 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 1 and 20 ± 2 × 10−2 mSv/case with system 2 (P =.001). Among 219 patients who had no CBCT, 18 (8%) had computed tomography angiography findings that prompted secondary interventions before dismissal. Conversely, among 167 patients who had CBCT, 14 patients (8%) had intraoperative CBCT findings requiring immediate revision, with no additional secondary interventions. Patients treated with onlay fusion/CBCT had significantly (P <.05) lower mortality (4% vs 1%), major adverse events (43% vs 19%), and secondary interventions (10% vs 4%) at 30 days. Conclusions: Radiation exposure and operator effective dose significantly decreased with evolution of F-BEVAR experience and use of advanced imaging applications such as onlay fusion and CBCT. CBCT allowed immediate assessment and identified intraoperative technical problems, leading to immediate revision and avoiding early secondary interventions.

KW - Cone beam computer tomography (CBCT)

KW - Fenestrated-branched endovascular repair (F-BEVAR)

KW - Radiation exposure

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057798606&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057798606&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.07.040

DO - 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.07.040

M3 - Article

C2 - 30527938

AN - SCOPUS:85057798606

JO - Journal of Vascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Vascular Surgery

SN - 0741-5214

ER -