Aortoesophageal fistula after thoracic endovascular aortic repair and transthoracic embolization

Endografts are more commonly being used to treat thoracic aortic aneurysms and other vascular lesions. Endoleaks are a potential complication of this treatment modality and can be associated with aneurysmal sac expansion and rupture. This case report presents a patient who developed a type IA endoleak after endograft repair of a descending thoracic aneurysm. The endoleak was successfully treated through computed tomographic-guided transthoracic embolization, although the patient experienced lower extremity paraparesis postprocedurally. The patient's endovascular repair was complicated by the development of an aortoesophageal fistula and endograft infection necessitating operative débridement and endograft explantation.     

继发性腹主动脉瘤肠瘘的诊治分析

目的总结继发性腹主动脉瘤肠瘘的诊治经验,提高治疗效果。 方法回顾性分析本院2000年1月至2014年12月接诊的6例腹主动脉瘤开放及腔内修复术后继发肠瘘患者的资料。2例初次手术方式为腹主动脉瘤切除+人工血管置换,4例为腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术。本次均以反复发热就诊,发热距初次手术中位时间11个月（1~27个月）,2例伴有"预兆性消化道出血"。再次手术前确诊3例,其中2例放弃治疗。4例患者经充分准备后施行腋动脉-双侧股动脉人工血管旁路、移植物取出及肠修补,其中1例伴有主动脉膀胱瘘的患者同时行膀胱修补。 结果肠瘘位于十二指肠水平段2例,空肠上中段4例。4例接受再次手术的患者均痊愈出院,随访3~48个月,1例人工血管旁路闭塞但无下肢严重缺血,无其他严重并发症。 结论继发性腹主动脉瘤肠瘘是腹主动脉瘤术后罕见的严重并发症,经充分的抗炎准备后建立解剖外旁路并及时移除植入物是有效的治疗手段。     

Endovascular repair of a chronic aortocaval fistula using a thoracic aortic endoprosthesis

Penetrating abdominal trauma with injury to the aorta and vena cava usually requires emergent intervention and is frequently lethal. Formation of a chronic aortocaval fistula (ACF) is an uncommon late complication of these injuries. We report a case of an ACF presenting 17 years after a gunshot wound to the abdomen, with progressive congestive heart failure as the presenting symptom. The ACF was successfully treated with an endoprosthesis designed for the thoracic aorta.     

Anesthetic management of aortocaval fistula repair associated with aortic valve replacement, severe aortic regurgitation, and bacterial endocarditis

We report a case of an adult male who had received a gunshot to the abdomen 12 years earlier. He presented with manifestations of high-output congestive heart failure (CHF), aortic regurgitation (AR), and pulmonary septic embolism. Further investigation revealed an aortocaval fistula (ACF). Following endovascular repair of the ACF, we observed an immediate rise in systemic vascular resistance (SVR), decrease in central venous pressure (CVP), increase in regurgitant flow across the aortic valve, and decrease in central mixed venous oxygenation. A combination of vasodilators and vasopressors was used to maintain hemodynamics. Milrinone infusion was necessary after cardiopulmonary bypass to maintain cardiac output. Even though local anesthesia and light sedation were used for ACF closure, the hemodynamics changed dramatically throughout the procedure. ACF closure under local anesthesia and sedation is preferred because the hemodynamics alterations under local anesthesia are less severe. The rise in SVR and regurgitant flow across aortic valve is less dramatic. As a result, hemodynamic management and separation from cardiopulmonary bypass are easier.     

Inflammatory infrarenal aortic aneurysm with aortocaval fistula

This is a report of an open repair of an inflammatory infrarenal aneurysm with a large rupture into the vena cava. Preoperative imaging with contrast-enhanced computed tomography revealed the presence of the fistula and was an important aid in pre- and perioperative planning.     

胸主动脉腔内修复术后截瘫发生的危险因素及处理

目的:探讨胸主动脉腔内修复术(TEVAR)后截瘫发生的危险因素及处理。方法:回顾性分析2011年5月—2015年5月593例行TEVAR手术的Stanford B型主动脉夹层患者资料,分析术后截瘫发生的危险因素并总结处理方法。结果:593例患者中,9例(1.5%)发生TEVAR术后截瘫。单变量分析结果显示,糖尿病、高血压、吸烟、围术期低血压和左锁骨下动脉封堵可能与TEVAR术后截瘫有关(均P0.05);多变量Logistic回归分析结果显示,围术期低血压是TEVAR术后截瘫的独立危险因素(P0.05)。所有截瘫患者经脑脊液引流、激素冲击、适当升压、抗凝、扩血管、营养神经、降颅压联合治疗后,神经系统功能均完全恢复。结论:围术期低血压是TEVAR后截瘫发生的重要危险因素。截瘫发生后早期采取相应保守治疗手段提高脊髓灌注可以有效改善预后。     

腹主动脉瘤腔内治疗并发症内漏的诊治

目的 探讨血管内技术治疗腹主动脉瘤时特有并发症内漏的诊断与处理方法。方法 对已施行腔内治疗37例腹主动脉瘤患者进行回顾性分析,讨论部分患者并发内漏的原因、诊断、处理、结果及预后。结果 37例支架型血管放置完成后,13例发现存在不同程度的内漏,其中I型6例,Ⅱ型3例,Ⅲ型2例,Ⅳ型1例,不明原因1例,1期经相关技术处理后I型、Ⅲ型内漏完全消失。手术结束时原发性内漏发生率13．5％（5／37）。随诊发现原发性内漏3例自愈,2例转化为持续性内漏;另发现2例继发性内漏发生率13．5％（5／37）。随诊发现原发性内漏3例自愈,2例转化为持续性内漏;另发现2例继发发现人漏。本组患者晚期内漏发生率10．8％（4／37）。结论 引起漏血的原因可能与瘤颈形态、长度、成角、钙化、移植物选择、分支血管血液倒流等因素有关。强调术中发现并一期处理,术后应密切随访。增强CT、血管超声和MRA检查是术检后检测内漏的主要手段。对漏血量及瘤体有增大趋势的内漏应积极处理。     

Endograft migration after thoracic endovascular aortic repair

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence, timing, and potential risk factors of late endograft migration after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted of 123 patients receiving TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs), dissections, penetrating aortic ulcer, intramural hematoma, or traumatic transection between January 2005 and December 2015 with a minimum imaging-based follow-up of 6 months. Imaging analysis was performed by three independent readers. Migration was defined according to the reporting standards as a stent graft shift of >10 mm relative to a primary anatomic landmark or any displacement that led to symptoms or required therapy. A standardized measurement protocol in accordance with the reporting guidelines was used. Median follow-up was 3 years (range, 0.5-10 years).ResultsMigration occurred in nine (7.3%) patients and took place at the proximal landing zone (n = 1), overlapping zone (n = 4), or distal landing zone (n = 5), resulting in type I or type III endoleaks in 44% (n = 4/9) of the cases. All cases of migration with endoleaks underwent reintervention; 75% (n = 3/4) of the migration associated with endoleaks could have been identified on previous imaging before an endoleak occurred. Freedom from migration was 99.1% after 1 year, 94.0% after 3 years, and 86.1% after 5 years. Aortic elongation and TAA were identified as predisposing factors for migration (P = .003 and P = .01, respectively). No influence of the proximal landing zone (zone 0-4), type of aortic arch (I-III), or type of endograft on the incidence of migration was found.ConclusionsGraft migration after TEVAR occurs in a relevant proportion of patients, predominantly in patients with TAA and aortic elongation. Follow-up imaging of these patients should be specifically evaluated regarding the occurrence of migration.     

Secondary procedures after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence, distribution, and indications of secondary procedures after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EAR). METHODS: At a single institution, 179 patients underwent EAR with four different endografts (AneuRx, n = 117; Zenith, n = 49; Ancure, n = 12; and Talent, n = 1). The vascular section database was queried for patients who needed secondary procedures after the original EAR. The mean time from EAR to the termination of the study was 27.0 +/- 16.7 months. Type I or III endoleaks were treated aggressively. Type II endoleaks were treated only in the presence of aneurysm expansion. RESULTS: Thirty-five (35/179; 19.6%) secondary procedures were performed in 32 patients. Indications for secondary procedures included 14 limb occlusions or stenoses (40.0%), 13 endoleaks (37.1%), six endograft migrations (17.1%), one delayed aneurysm rupture (2.8%), and one device malfunction (2.8%). Seven of the 10 early (<90 days) limb failures (70%) occurred within the first 60 patients. At that time, a protocol with aggressive external iliac artery evaluation was adopted. In the next 125 patients, the rate of early limb occlusion or stenosis was 2.4% (P =.025, with Fisher exact test). Distribution of secondary procedures included 23 endoluminal interventions (65.7%; angioplasty +/- stent placement, thrombolysis, endocuff placement, embolization), eight traditional peripheral procedures (22.9%; femoral-femoral bypass, thrombectomy), two laparoscopic interventions (5.7%; inferior mesenteric artery ligation), and two laparotomies (5.7%; delayed conversions). Interventions for limb occlusion or stenosis occurred earliest (3.5 +/- 5.4 months; P <.05, with analysis of variance), followed by treatment of endoleaks (14.3 +/- 12.9 months) and migration (27.5 +/- 10.4 months). The one delayed rupture occurred at 15.3 months. CONCLUSION: Secondary procedures after EAR are common. Reinterventions can be grouped temporally on the basis of indication. Treatment for limb ischemia is predominately early (>/=3 months), whereas treatment for endoleaks occurs at approximately 1 year and interventions for migration predominate after 2 years.     

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular repair

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to present the experience with aneurysm rupture after deployment of Guidant/EVT (Guidant) endografts and review previously reported cases with other devices. METHODS: Records from Guidant/EVT clinical trials and postmarket approval databases from February 1993 to August 2000 were analyzed to identify patients with rupture and to extract pertinent data. Previously reported cases were obtained with a Medline search. RESULTS: Seven ruptures were found with Guidant/EVT devices. Five of these occurred among the 686 patients in US Food and Drug Administration protocols (group I) who were followed for a mean of 41.8 +/- 21.9 months and limited to the subgroup of 93 first generation tube endografts. Two ruptures occurred in group II (3260 patients after market approval with limited follow-up), specifically in the subgroup of 166 patients who underwent treatment with second generation tube grafts. No ruptures were found in patients with bifurcation or unilateral iliac implants followed for a mean of 37.5 months. All ruptures were caused by distal aortic type I endoleaks on the basis of attachment system fractures (first generation devices only), aortic neck dilatations, persistent primary endoleaks, migration, overlooked imaging abnormalities, refused reintervention, and poor patient selection. The mortality rate was 57% (4/7) overall and was 50% for surgical repair (3/6). A literature search identified 40 additional ruptures related to other devices, for a total of 47. All 44 that were documented with adequate data were caused by endoleaks (26 type I, 2 type II, 11 type III, and 5 source not reported). Other contributing factors were graft module separation and graft wall deterioration. The overall mortality rate for the combined series was 50%, with an operative mortality rate of 41%. CONCLUSION: Postendograft AAA rupture is infrequent, although the true incidence rate is unclear because of inadequate follow-up of individual device designs. Tube endografts should be limited to the rare patient with ideal anatomy, no other alternatives, and at high risk for standard open repair. Prevention of aneurysm rupture requires long-term surveillance with attention to subtle imaging abnormalities and the establishment of reliable follow-up protocols for specific devices. The outcome of postendograft aneurysm rupture is similar to that of rupture without prior endograft therapy.