Safety of Percutaneous Femoral Access for Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Through Previously Surgically Exposed or Repaired Femoral Arteries
- PMID: 35514295
- PMCID: PMC10503241
- DOI: 10.1177/15266028221092980
Safety of Percutaneous Femoral Access for Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Through Previously Surgically Exposed or Repaired Femoral Arteries
Abstract
Objective: Percutaneous femoral artery access is being increasingly used in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). The technique can be challenging in patients with previously surgically exposed or repaired femoral arteries because of excessive scar tissue. However, a successful percutaneous approach may cause less morbidity than a "re-do" open femoral approach. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of prior open surgical femoral exposure on technical success and clinical outcomes of percutaneous approach.
Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who underwent percutaneous EVAR between 2010 and 2020 at 2 major aortic centers. Patients were divided into 2 groups (with or without prior open surgical femoral access) for analysis of clinical outcomes. Only punctures with sheaths ≥12Fr were included for analysis. The access and (pre)closure techniques were similar in both institutions. Primary end points were intraoperative technical success, access-related revision, and access complications. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify determinants of conversion to open approach and femoral access complications in intact and re-do groins.
Results: A total of 632 patients underwent percutaneous (complex) EVAR: 98 had prior open surgical femoral access and 534 patients underwent de novo femoral percutaneous access. A total of 1099 femoral artery punctures were performed: 149 in re-do and 950 in intact groins. The extent of endovascular repair included 159 infrarenal, 82 thoracic, 368 fenestrated/branched, and 23 iliac branch devices. No significant differences were seen in technical success (re-do 93.3% vs intact 95.3%, p=0.311), access-related surgical revision (0.7% vs 0.6%, p=0.950), and access complications (2.7% vs 4.0%, p=0.443). For the whole group, significant predictors for access complications in multivariate analyses were main access site (odds ratio [OR] 2.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07%-5.35%; p=0.033) and increase of the procedure time per hour (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.34%-2.04%; p<0.001), while increase in sheath-vessel ratio had a protective effect (OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.127%-0.85%; p=0.021). Surgical conversion was predicted by main access site (OR 2.32; 95% CI 1.28%-4.19%; p=0.007) and calcification of 50% to 75% of the circumference of the access vessel (OR 3.29; 95% CI 1.38%-7.86%; p=0.005).
Conclusion: Within our population prior open surgical femoral artery exposure or repair had no negative impact on the technical success and clinical outcomes of percutaneous (complex) endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.
Keywords: access complications; endovascular aortic repair; percutaneous access; technical success; transfemoral access.
Conflict of interest statement
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Similar articles
-
A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of totally percutaneous access versus open femoral exposure for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (the PEVAR trial).J Vasc Surg. 2014 May;59(5):1181-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.10.101. Epub 2014 Jan 17. J Vasc Surg. 2014. PMID: 24440678 Clinical Trial.
-
Femoral artery calcification as a determinant of success for percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.J Vasc Surg. 2013 Nov;58(5):1208-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.05.028. Epub 2013 Jul 2. J Vasc Surg. 2013. PMID: 23830310
-
Impact of iliac artery anatomy on the outcome of fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair.J Vasc Surg. 2017 Dec;66(6):1659-1667. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.04.063. Epub 2017 Sep 6. J Vasc Surg. 2017. PMID: 28888759
-
Experience With Unfavorable Iliac Access When Performing Fenestrated/Branched Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.J Endovasc Ther. 2021 Apr;28(2):315-322. doi: 10.1177/1526602821991125. Epub 2021 Feb 8. J Endovasc Ther. 2021. PMID: 33554706 Review.
-
Comparison between the outcomes of transfemoral access and transfemoral access with adjunct upper extremity access in patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair: A pilot systematic review and meta-analysis.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 May;103(6):982-994. doi: 10.1002/ccd.31048. Epub 2024 Apr 8. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2024. PMID: 38584518
Cited by
-
Analysis of Determinants for Suture-mediated Closure Device Failure During EVAR Procedures.Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2024 Feb;58(2):129-135. doi: 10.1177/15385744231189356. Epub 2023 Jul 14. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2024. PMID: 37450890 Free PMC article.
-
Large-Bore Transfemoral Arterial Access: Techniques and Troubleshooting.Semin Intervent Radiol. 2024 Dec 18;41(6):560-565. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1800957. eCollection 2024 Dec. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2024. PMID: 40190770 Review.
References
-
- Arnaoutakis DJ, Scali ST, Beck AW, et al.. Comparative outcomes of open, hybrid, and fenestrated branched endovascular repair of extent II and III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2020;71(5):1503–1514. - PubMed
-
- Vierhout BP, Pol RA, El Moumni M, et al.. Editor’s choice—arteriotomy closure devices in EVAR, TEVAR, and TAVR: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials and cohort studies. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017;54(1):104–115. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
