Successful Secondary Endovascular Intervention in Pediatric Patients with Venous Thromboembolic Events

Background In the past, pediatric patients with venous thromboembolic events (VTE) were treated with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) which was successful in around 70% of the cases. However, anticoagulation alone might not restore patency in all patients, and advanced therapeutic options to prevent postthrombotic syndrome are needed. During recent years, endovascular interventions have become a treatment option for pediatric patients with persistent thrombotic occlusion, not only in life- or limb-threatening VTE. Methods We evaluated 12 consecutive patients (11–17 years) with newly diagnosed VTE being treated at our department during the last 4 years (2017–2020). In case follow-up examination showed persistent venoocclusion under anticoagulation, patients received secondary interventional therapy like recanalization, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with or without catheter-directed thrombolysis, and stenting. Patients with no clinical signs of venoocclusion or regredient thrombosis in imaging examination received anticoagulation alone. Results Six of 12 (50%) patients underwent catheter intervention. Median time from diagnosis to intervention was 4 months (0–12 months). Reintervention was necessary in one (8%) case and complete recanalization failed in one (8%) case. There were no major bleeding events or other major postinterventional complications, no acute or late local recurrence, and all patients reported clinical improvement after the procedure. Conclusion If endovascular intervention is used in teenage patients with persistent symptomatic VTE, reduction of postthrombotic symptoms is possible, even if intervention is performed secondary to failure of anticoagulation. Multidisciplinary treatment decisions can be based on the clinical course and follow-up imaging.

Criteria for Endovascular Intervention in Type B Aortic Dissection

Background The use of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for the management of uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (un-TBAD) remains controversial. There is a lack of consensus over whether pre-emptive TEVAR should be carried out in patients with un-TBAD at risk of progression to complicated TBAD. We present a review of current evidence and seek to suggest criteria where endovascular intervention in un-TBAD may prove beneficial relative to pharmacotherapy alone. Methods and Materials PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched using terms including: type B aortic dissection, risk factors, medical therapy, TEVAR, false lumen expansion, and mortality. Papers were selected based on title and abstract. Results Optimal medical therapy remains the mainstay treatment for patients with un-TBAD, however patients with un-TBAD present with varying degrees of disease progression risk. Factors such as age, aortic morphology, history of connective tissue disorders, false lumen thrombosis, and aortic branch involvement may potentiate progression from un-TBAD to complicated TBAD. Short- and long-term outcomes associated with TEVAR for TBAD remain promising. Conclusion Pre-emptive TEVAR may be beneficial in patients with un-TBAD presenting with the above factors, however further prospective research into the optimal timing for TEVAR in un-TBAD is required.

Short-term outcomes of endovascular therapy for chronic lower extremity arterial disease

Background: Chronic lower extremity arterial disease, mostly caused by atherosclerotic etiology, has been increasing in recent years. Currently, there has been a shift in the treatment chronic lower extremity arterial disease from open surgical treatment to endovascular intervention. According to the TASC classification, surgical treatment is preferred for patients with complex lesions of TASC C, D but recent studies have shown that endovascular intervention has had good results for high-grade lesions. Objective: To determine the efficacy, short-term results of endovascular intervention in patients with symptomatic lower extremity artery disease Methods: From January to December 2021, the cross sectional, descriptive study was carried out on 38 patients with lower limb artery disease, treated by endovascular intervetion in Interventional Department, Hanoi Heart hospital. All patients were evaluated by clinical symptoms, ankle- brachial index and lesion characteristic before and after the intervention to determine the initial success Results: Majority of lesions belong to TASC II C and D (78,9%). Injured arteries can be isolated in the aortoiliac (21,1%), femoropopliteal (21,1%), below-knee artery (21,1%) or combine aortoiliac and femoropopliteal (10,5%), femoropopliteal and BTK (15,8%). The ankle- brachial index before and after the intervention respectively 0,57 and 0.83 (p<0,001). The technical successful rate was 94,7%. Balloon angioplasty and stent placement were in 21 patients (55,3%) and balloon angioplasty in 17 patients (44,7%). Post-procedural complications included stent thrombosis (2.6%), amputation (2.6%), pseudoaneurysm at the puncture site (2.6%). Conclusion: Endovascular intervention is a safe, effective, minimally invasive method in the treatment of chronic lower extremity arterial disease

A Single-Center Study on the Outcomes of Target Limb Revascularization in Femoropopliteal Lesions Treated With Drug Coated Balloons and Bare Metal Stents

Purpose: Multiple randomized controlled trials have shown that both drug coated balloons (DCBs) and bare metal stents (BMSs) significantly reduce restenosis in femoropopliteal lesions compared with plain balloon angioplasty. However, few studies have directly compared DCB and BMS treatments. Therefore, the goal of our study was to determine if the rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR) differs between DCB and BMS treatment at our center. Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of femoropopliteal interventions at a single center from 2009 to 2017. The intervention, patient and lesion characteristics, and TLR events were recorded. Exclusion criteria were loss of follow-up, death, bail-out stenting, and amputation within 60 days of treatment. Freedom from TLR was analyzed over a 3 year period with Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Cox hazard ratios were calculated to account for patient and lesion characteristics. Results: A total of 322 lesions (234 patients) treated with DCBs and 225 lesions (194 patients) treated with BMSs were included in this study. There were significant differences in baseline patient and lesion characteristics between groups—a greater proportion of women, patients with dyslipidemia, and lesions with popliteal involvement were treated with DCBs. There was no difference in the freedom from TLR between DCBs and BMSs. Accounting for patient and lesion characteristics, there was still no difference between DCBs and BMSs on the hazard of TLR. While our analysis did not detect a difference in the rate of TLR, there was a significant difference in the type of TLR. Compared with DCBs, a greater proportion of lesions initially treated with BMSs were retreated via surgical bypass rather than endovascular intervention, suggesting that lesions treated with DCBs may be more amenable to future endovascular intervention. Conclusion: Our retrospective analysis showed no difference in the rate of TLR between lesions treated with DCBs and BMSs. However, DCBs were more often used in complicated lesions involving popliteal arteries and may also allow for easier endovascular reintervention.

Endovascular intervention with a low-profile visualized intraluminal support stent for ruptured, very small, wide-necked, intracranial aneurysms

Published in August 2021

Long-term outcomes of endovascular treatment for aortic pseudoaneurysm in patients with Behçet’s disease

Objectives Behçet’s disease (BD) is a multisystem inflammatory disorder with unknown etiology, and its aneurysmal lesions are associated with high mortality due to the high risk of rupture. This study intended to further explore the long-term safety and efficacy of endovascular therapy for BD-related aortic pseudoaneurysm (BAP). Methods From January 2009 to May 2021, 17 BAP patients who underwent endovascular repair were retrospectively identified and enrolled. Adequate immunosuppressive treatment was instituted before and after endovascular treatment unless emergency surgery was required. The patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months and yearly after the primary endovascular intervention by computed tomography angiography (CTA) examination. Results Nineteen BAPs were identified among 17 patients. BAPs located at the aortic arch were found in three patients (17.6%), descending thoracic aorta in 5 (29.4%), and abdominal aorta in 10 (58.8%; suprarenal abdominal aorta in 2 [11.8%], and infrarenal abdominal aorta in 8 [47.1%]). The mean ESR during admission was 56.5 ± 24.9 mm/h (range = 30.0–120.0 mm/h), which fell to 22.7 ± 18.4 mm/h (range = 2.0–74.0 mm/h) before the endovascular intervention ( p < 0.001). The rate of favorable immunosuppressive control before intervention is 76.5% (13/17). Technical success was achieved in all patients. Median follow-up time was 57.0 months (interquartile range [IQR] = 21.3–67.3 months). Pseudoaneurysm recurrence was observed in four patients, type I endoleak in one, pseudoaneurysms sac dilation in one, and external iliac artery occlusion in 1. Two patients died of pseudoaneurysm rupture. Five-year accumulated overall rate, recurrence-free rate, and reintervention-free survival rate of BAP patients were 92.8%, 75.4%, and 71.8%, respectively. Conclusion Endovascular treatment in BAP patients seemed to be associated with long-term safety and efficacy with a 5-year overall survival rate of 92.8%. Adequate immunosuppressive treatment was essential for BAP patients to prevent aortic pseudoaneurysm recurrence and improve the prognosis.