Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of percutaneous femoral access with large-bore sheaths (>21F outer diameter) mainly employed for thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic endovascular treatment and to stratify the outcomes on the basis of the introducer size. Methods: Between December 2015 and December 2018, all consecutive patients who received endovascular repair through a percutaneous approach with a suture-mediated vascular closure device (VCD) and the preclose technique were included in a retrospective single-center study called Totally Percutaneous Approach to Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Aneurysms (PEVAR-PRO). The morphologic characteristics of the access vessels and patients' demographics were recorded, and 30-day closure success was defined as the primary end point. Analysis of the closure success comparing large-bore sheaths vs small-bore sheaths (≤21F outer diameter) was performed after 1:1 propensity score matching of preoperative confounding variables. Results: The closure success rate of the entire study cohort was 94% (622 femoral accesses in 360 patients; median age, 74 years; 84% male). Univariate analysis identified eight different factors associated with failure, but only two remained significant on multivariate analysis: diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-6.2; P =.011) and common femoral artery stenosis >50% (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.3-13.7; P =.019). After propensity score matching (1:1, 172 femoral accesses per group), closure success rate was not significantly different between large-bore and small-bore sheaths (90.7% vs 93.0%; P =.43). Multivariate analysis of the large-sheath group identified two factors associated with failure: small (<9 mm) femoral arteries (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.5-31.6; P =.13) and access vessel calcifications involving more than one-third of the circumference (OR, 7.9; 95% CI, 2.1-29.4; P =.002). Neither previous femoral cutdown (44 accesses [23%]) nor percutaneous closure with VCDs (38 accesses [20%]) affected the closure success rate in the large-sheath group. Closure failure did not significantly increase the need for postoperative blood transfusions or hospital length of stay. Conclusions: Off-label use of VCDs and the preclose technique for percutaneous approach with large-bore sheaths needed for complex aortic endovascular procedures is safe and feasible. Closure success rate is not significantly different from that obtained with on-label application of VCDs with smaller sheaths.

Outcomes of routine use of percutaneous access with large-bore introducer sheaths (>21F outer diameter) during endovascular aneurysm repair

Melloni A.;Salvati S.;Melissano G.;Chiesa R.;Bertoglio L.
2020-01-01

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of percutaneous femoral access with large-bore sheaths (>21F outer diameter) mainly employed for thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic endovascular treatment and to stratify the outcomes on the basis of the introducer size. Methods: Between December 2015 and December 2018, all consecutive patients who received endovascular repair through a percutaneous approach with a suture-mediated vascular closure device (VCD) and the preclose technique were included in a retrospective single-center study called Totally Percutaneous Approach to Endovascular Treatment of Aortic Aneurysms (PEVAR-PRO). The morphologic characteristics of the access vessels and patients' demographics were recorded, and 30-day closure success was defined as the primary end point. Analysis of the closure success comparing large-bore sheaths vs small-bore sheaths (≤21F outer diameter) was performed after 1:1 propensity score matching of preoperative confounding variables. Results: The closure success rate of the entire study cohort was 94% (622 femoral accesses in 360 patients; median age, 74 years; 84% male). Univariate analysis identified eight different factors associated with failure, but only two remained significant on multivariate analysis: diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-6.2; P =.011) and common femoral artery stenosis >50% (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.3-13.7; P =.019). After propensity score matching (1:1, 172 femoral accesses per group), closure success rate was not significantly different between large-bore and small-bore sheaths (90.7% vs 93.0%; P =.43). Multivariate analysis of the large-sheath group identified two factors associated with failure: small (<9 mm) femoral arteries (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.5-31.6; P =.13) and access vessel calcifications involving more than one-third of the circumference (OR, 7.9; 95% CI, 2.1-29.4; P =.002). Neither previous femoral cutdown (44 accesses [23%]) nor percutaneous closure with VCDs (38 accesses [20%]) affected the closure success rate in the large-sheath group. Closure failure did not significantly increase the need for postoperative blood transfusions or hospital length of stay. Conclusions: Off-label use of VCDs and the preclose technique for percutaneous approach with large-bore sheaths needed for complex aortic endovascular procedures is safe and feasible. Closure success rate is not significantly different from that obtained with on-label application of VCDs with smaller sheaths.
2020
Endovascular
Percutaneous
Preclose
ProGlide
Stent graft
Thoracic
Thoracoabdominal
Vessel closure device
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11768/108008
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 14
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact