Outcomes of a novel upper extremity preloaded delivery system for fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms

Aleem K. Mirza, Emanuel R. Tenorio, Jussi M. Kärkkäinen, Keouna Pather, Jarin Kratzberg, Bernardo C. Mendes, Randall R. DeMartino, Gustavo S. Oderich

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) using a novel low profile (LP) device with upper extremity preloaded guidewire system (PGS) and compare procedural metrics and outcomes with a standard multibranch stent graft (t-Branch; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). Methods: We reviewed the clinical data of 232 consecutive patients treated by fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair for TAAA and enrolled in a prospective nonrandomized trial between 2014 and 2017. Patients who had repair using t-Branch or patient-specific TAAA devices using upper extremity LP-PGS were included. End points were technical success, operative and fluoroscopic time, patient radiation exposure, time from arterial access to complete device deployment, total contrast volume, and 30-day rates of major adverse events (MAEs) and mortality. Results: There were 54 patients, including 33 males (67%) and 21 females (33%), with a mean age of 73 ± 9 years old. Forty-nine patients (91%) had extent I-III and five patients (9%) had extent IV TAAAs. Device design was t-Branch in 24 patients (44%) and LP-PGS in 30 patients (56%). A total of 206 renal-mesenteric arteries were incorporated with no difference between groups (mean, 3.8 ± 0.6 target vessels/patient; P =.92). Patients treated by t-Branch device had larger mean aneurysm diameter (79 ± 16 vs 66 ± 10 mm; P =.0006). All patients had transbrachial approach. Technical success was achieved in all patients in both groups. Patients treated by LP-PGS devices had lower radiation dose (1250 ± 849 vs 3154 ± 2421 mGy; P =.003) and shorter operating time for complete device deployment (105 ± 42 vs 123 ± 34 minutes; P =.043). There was no difference in mean operative time (252 ± 69 vs 273 ± 56 minutes; P =.23), fluoroscopy time (82 ± 29 vs 96 ± 35 minutes; P =.08) or contrast volume (163 ± 59 vs 197 ± 75 mL; P =.07) comparing LP-PGS and t-Branch respectively. There was no 30-day or in-hospital mortality. There were no differences in MAEs, which occurred in 18 patients (33%) in both groups (P >.05). Conclusions: Endovascular TAAA repair using the standard or LP-PGS multibranch stent graft was associated with high technical success, no mortality, and a low rate of MAEs in this study. Patients treated by upper extremity LP-PGS had shorter time to complete device deployment, suggesting decreased technical demand with preloaded systems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of vascular surgery
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2020

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair
  • Low profile
  • Preloaded guidewire system
  • Upper extremity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this