Evolution from physician-modified to company-manufactured fenestrated-branched endografts to treat pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms
Gustavo S Oderich, Mauricio S Ribeiro, Giuliano A Sandri, Emanuel R Tenorio, Janet M Hofer, Bernardo C Mendes, Julia Chini, Stephen Cha, Gustavo S Oderich, Mauricio S Ribeiro, Giuliano A Sandri, Emanuel R Tenorio, Janet M Hofer, Bernardo C Mendes, Julia Chini, Stephen Cha
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to review treatment trends and outcomes of patients who underwent fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) of pararenal aneurysms (PRAs) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) using physician-modified endografts (PMEGs) or company-manufactured devices (CMDs).
Methods: We reviewed the clinical data of 316 consecutive patients (242 male patients; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) who underwent F-BEVAR between 2007 and 2016. F-BEVAR was performed under two prospective investigational device exemption protocols since 2013. End points were mortality, major adverse events (MAEs), patient survival, reintervention, branch instability, aneurysm-related mortality, renal function deterioration, and target vessel patency.
Results: There were 145 patients (46%) treated by PMEGs (84 PRAs, 26 extent IV and 35 extent I-III TAAAs) and 171 patients (54%) who had CMDs (88 PRAs, 42 extent IV and 41 extent I-III TAAAs). Choice of endograft evolved from PMEGs in 131 patients (83%) treated in the first half of experience to CMDs in 144 patients (91%) treated in the second half of experience (P < .001). Patients treated by PMEGs had significantly (P < .05) larger aneurysms, more chronic pulmonary and kidney disease, and higher comorbidity severity scores. A total of 1081 renal-mesenteric arteries were targeted in both groups. Technical success was lower for PMEGs (98% vs 99.5%; P = .02). Thirty-day mortality was 5.5% for PMEGs (PRAs, 1.2%; extent IV 3.8% and extent I-III, 17.1%) and 0% for CMDs (P = .0018). Patients treated by PMEGs had significantly more (P < .001) MAEs (48% vs 23%) and longer hospital stay (9 ± 10 days vs 6 ± 6 days; P = .001). Mean follow-up was significantly longer for patients treated by PMEGs (38 ± 26 months vs 14 ± 12 months; P < .001). At 3 years, patient survival (68% ± 4% vs 67% ± 8%; P = .11), freedom from reintervention (68% ± 4% vs 68% ± 8%; P = .17), primary (94% ± 2% vs 92% ± 2%; P = .64) and secondary target vessel patency (98% ± 1% vs 98% ± 1%; P = .89), and freedom from renal function deterioration (75% ± 4% vs 65% ± 6%; P = .24) were similar for patients treated by PMEGs or CMDs, respectively.
Conclusions: Choice of F-BEVAR evolved from PMEGs to almost exclusively CMDs under physician-sponsored investigational device exemption protocols. PMEG patients had more comorbidities and larger aneurysms. CMDs were performed with higher technical success, no mortality, and fewer MAEs.
Keywords: Company-manufactured device; Fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair; Physician-modified endografts.
Copyright © 2018 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Source: PubMed