OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the approaches to reno-visceral target vessels (TVs) cannulation during branched-fenestrated endovascular aortic repair, determine the evidence base that links these approaches to clinical outcomes and identify literature gaps. METHODS: A scoping review following the PRISMA Protocols Extension for Scoping Reviews was performed. Available full-text studies published in English (PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases; last queried, 31 June 2022) were systematically reviewed and analysed. Data were reported as descriptive narrative or tables, without any statistical analysis nor quality assessment. RESULTS: Fourteen retrospective articles were included. Seven articles studied the use of upper extremity access (UEA) during branched-fenestrated endovascular aortic repair, 3 studied the use of steerable sheaths and 4 included both approaches. A left UEA was used in 757 patients (technical success: 99%, stroke rate: 1-3%) and a right UEA in 215 patients (technical success: 92-98%, stroke rate: 0-13%). Seven studies (1066 patients) described a surgical access only (technical success: 80-99%, stroke rate: 0-13%), while 3 studies (146 patients) described a percutaneous access only (technical success: 83-90%, stroke rate: 3%) and lastly 4 studies compared UEA versus use of steerable sheaths from the transfemoral approach (TFA) (UEA: 563 patients, technical success: 95-98%, stroke rate: 1-8%; TFA: 209 patients, technical success: 98-100%, stroke rate: 0-1%). CONCLUSIONS: Both UEA and TFA as cannulation approaches were associated with high technical success and low perioperative complications. Currently, there is a paucity of high-quality data to provide definitive indication. Optimal UEA in terms of side (left versus right) and approach (surgical versus percutaneous) needs further study.
A scoping review on the approaches for cannulation of reno-visceral target vessels during complex endovascular aortic repair
Melloni A.;Bertoglio L.Conceptualization
2022-01-01
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the approaches to reno-visceral target vessels (TVs) cannulation during branched-fenestrated endovascular aortic repair, determine the evidence base that links these approaches to clinical outcomes and identify literature gaps. METHODS: A scoping review following the PRISMA Protocols Extension for Scoping Reviews was performed. Available full-text studies published in English (PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases; last queried, 31 June 2022) were systematically reviewed and analysed. Data were reported as descriptive narrative or tables, without any statistical analysis nor quality assessment. RESULTS: Fourteen retrospective articles were included. Seven articles studied the use of upper extremity access (UEA) during branched-fenestrated endovascular aortic repair, 3 studied the use of steerable sheaths and 4 included both approaches. A left UEA was used in 757 patients (technical success: 99%, stroke rate: 1-3%) and a right UEA in 215 patients (technical success: 92-98%, stroke rate: 0-13%). Seven studies (1066 patients) described a surgical access only (technical success: 80-99%, stroke rate: 0-13%), while 3 studies (146 patients) described a percutaneous access only (technical success: 83-90%, stroke rate: 3%) and lastly 4 studies compared UEA versus use of steerable sheaths from the transfemoral approach (TFA) (UEA: 563 patients, technical success: 95-98%, stroke rate: 1-8%; TFA: 209 patients, technical success: 98-100%, stroke rate: 0-1%). CONCLUSIONS: Both UEA and TFA as cannulation approaches were associated with high technical success and low perioperative complications. Currently, there is a paucity of high-quality data to provide definitive indication. Optimal UEA in terms of side (left versus right) and approach (surgical versus percutaneous) needs further study.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
ezac478.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Documento in Post-print
Licenza:
NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione
519.58 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
519.58 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.