Multicenter experience of upper extremity access in complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Purpose: Upper extremity access (UEA) for antegrade cannulation of aortic side branches is a relevant part of endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysms and can be achieved using several techniques, sites, and sides. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different UEA strategies in a multicenter registry of complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: In six aortic centers in the Netherlands, all endovascular aortic procedures from 2006 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who received UEA during complex EVAR were included. The primary outcome was a composite end point of any access complication, excluding minor hematomas. Secondary outcomes were access characteristics, access complications considered individually, access reinterventions, and incidence of ischemic cerebrovascular events. Results: A total of 417 patients underwent 437 UEA for 303 fenestrated/branched EVARs and 114 chimney EVARs. Twenty patients had bilateral, 295 left-sided, and 102 right-sided UEA. A total of 413 approaches were performed surgically and 24 percutaneously. Distal brachial access (DBA) was used in 89 cases, medial brachial access (MBA) in 149, proximal brachial access (PBA) in 140, and axillary access (AA) in 59 cases. No significant differences regarding the composite end point of access complications were seen (DBA: 11.3% vs MBA: 6.7% vs PBA: 13.6% vs AA: 10.2%; P =.29). Postoperative neuropathy occurred most after PBA (DBA: 1.1% vs MBA: 1.3% vs PBA: 9.3% vs AA: 5.1%; P =.003). There were no differences in cerebrovascular complications between access sides (right: 5.9% vs left: 4.1% vs bilateral: 5%; P =.75). Significantly more overall access complications were seen after a percutaneous approach (29.2% vs 6.8%; P =.002). In multivariate analysis, the risk for access complications after an open approach was decreased by male sex (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10-0.72; P =.009), whereas an increase in age per year (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.004-1.179; P =.039) and diabetes mellitus type 2 (OR: 3.70; 95% CI: 1.20-11.41; P =.023) increased the risk. Conclusions: Between the four access localizations, there were no differences in overall access complications. Female sex, diabetes mellitus type 2, and aging increased the risk for access complications after a surgical approach. Furthermore, a percutaneous UEA resulted in higher complication rates than a surgical approach

Meta-analysis of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in combination with intra-aortic balloon pump vs. extracorporeal membrane oxygenation only in patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction

BackgroundIncidence and mortality of cardiogenic shock (CS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain high despite substantial therapy improvements in acute percutaneous coronary intervention over the last decades. Unloading the left ventricle in patients with Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) can be performed by using an intra-aortic balloon pumps’ (IABP) afterload reduction, which might be especially beneficial in AMI patients with CS.ObjectiveThe objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO treatment on the mortality of patients with CS due to AMI.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed using EMBASE, COCHRANE, and MEDLINE databases. Studies comparing the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO on mortality of patients with AMI were included. Meta-analyses were performed to analyze the effect of the chosen treatment on 30-day/in-hospital mortality.ResultsTwelve studies were identified by the literature search, including a total of 5,063 patients, 81.5% were male and the mean age was 65.9 years. One thousand one hundred and thirty-six patients received treatment with VA-ECMO in combination with IABP and 2,964 patients received VA-ECMO treatment only. The performed meta-analysis showed decreased mortality at 30-days/in-hospital after VA-ECMO + IABP compared to VA-ECMO only for patients with cardiogenic shock after AMI (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.30–0.44, P≤0.001). Combination of VA-ECMO + IABP was associated with higher rates of weaning success (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16–0.53, P < 0.001) without an increase of vascular access complications (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.35–2.08, P = 0.72).ConclusionIn this meta-analysis, combination therapy of VA-ECMO + IABP was superior to VA-ECMO only therapy in patients with CS due to AMI. In the absence of randomized data, these results are hypothesis generating only

Multicenter experience of upper extremity access in complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Purpose: Upper extremity access (UEA) for antegrade cannulation of aortic side branches is a relevant part of endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysms and can be achieved using several techniques, sites, and sides. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different UEA strategies in a multicenter registry of complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: In six aortic centers in the Netherlands, all endovascular aortic procedures from 2006 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who received UEA during complex EVAR were included. The primary outcome was a composite end point of any access complication, excluding minor hematomas. Secondary outcomes were access characteristics, access complications considered individually, access reinterventions, and incidence of ischemic cerebrovascular events. Results: A total of 417 patients underwent 437 UEA for 303 fenestrated/branched EVARs and 114 chimney EVARs. Twenty patients had bilateral, 295 left-sided, and 102 right-sided UEA. A total of 413 approaches were performed surgically and 24 percutaneously. Distal brachial access (DBA) was used in 89 cases, medial brachial access (MBA) in 149, proximal brachial access (PBA) in 140, and axillary access (AA) in 59 cases. No significant differences regarding the composite end point of access complications were seen (DBA: 11.3% vs MBA: 6.7% vs PBA: 13.6% vs AA: 10.2%; P =.29). Postoperative neuropathy occurred most after PBA (DBA: 1.1% vs MBA: 1.3% vs PBA: 9.3% vs AA: 5.1%; P =.003). There were no differences in cerebrovascular complications between access sides (right: 5.9% vs left: 4.1% vs bilateral: 5%; P =.75). Significantly more overall access complications were seen after a percutaneous approach (29.2% vs 6.8%; P =.002). In multivariate analysis, the risk for access complications after an open approach was decreased by male sex (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10-0.72; P =.009), whereas an increase in age per year (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.004-1.179; P =.039) and diabetes mellitus type 2 (OR: 3.70; 95% CI: 1.20-11.41; P =.023) increased the risk. Conclusions: Between the four access localizations, there were no differences in overall access complications. Female sex, diabetes mellitus type 2, and aging increased the risk for access complications after a surgical approach. Furthermore, a percutaneous UEA resulted in higher complication rates than a surgical approach

FEI Helios NanoLab 400S FIB-SEM

The FEI Helios NanoLab400S FIB-SEM is one of the world's most advanced DualBeamTM focused ion beam (FIB) platforms for transmission electron microscopy (TEM) sample preparation, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) imaging and analysis in semiconductor failure analysis, process development and process control. The FEI Helios NanoLab400S FIB-SEM combines an ElstarTM electron column for high-resolution and high-contrast imaging with a high-performance SidewinderM ion column for fast and precise cross sectioning. The FEI Helios NanoLab M 400S is optimised for high throughput high-resolution S/TEM sample preparation, SEM imaging and energy dispersive X-ray analysis. Its exclusive FlipStageTM and in situ STEM detector can flip from sample preparation to STEM imaging in seconds without breaking vacuum or exposing the sample to the environment. Platinum gas chemistry is the preferred metal deposition when a high deposition rate and precision of the deposition are required. Carbon deposition can be chosen as well. The system additionally allows for spatially resolved compositional analysis using the attached EDAX Genesis XM 4i X-ray microanalysis system