Objectives: Carbon dioxide (CO) angiography for endovascular aortic repair (CO-EVAR) is used to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), especially in patients with chronic kidney disease or allergy to iodinated contrast medium (ICM). However, some technical issues regarding the visualization of the lowest renal artery (LoRA) and the best quality image through angiographies performed from pigtail or introducer sheath are still unsolved. The aim of this study was to analyze different steps of CO-EVAR to create an operative standardized protocol.

Methods: Patients undergoing CO-EVAR were prospectively enrolled in five European centers from 2019 to 2021. CO-EVAR was performed using an automated injector (pressure, 600 mmHg; volume, 100 cc); a small amount of ICM was injected in case of difficulty in LoRA visualization. LoRA visualization and image quality (1 = low, 2 = sufficient, 3 = good, 4 = excellent) were analyzed at different procedure steps: preoperative CO angiography from pigtail and femoral introducer sheath (first step), angiographies from pigtail at 0%, 50%, and 100% of proximal main body deployment (second step), contralateral hypogastric artery (CHA) visualization with CO injection from femoral introducer sheath (third step), and completion angiogram from pigtail and femoral introducer sheath (fourth step). Intraoperative and postoperative CO-related adverse events were also evaluated. χ and Wilcoxon tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results: In the considered period, 65 patients undergoing CO-EVAR were enrolled (55/65 [84.5%] male; median age, 75 years [interquartile range (IQR), 11.5 years]). The median ICM injected was 17 cc (IQR, 51 cc); 19 (29.2%) of 65 procedures were performed with 0 cc ICM. Fifty-five (84.2%) of 65 patients underwent general anesthesia. In the first step, median image quality was significantly higher with CO injected from femoral introducer (pigtail, 2 [IQR, 3] vs introducer, 3 [IQR, 3]; P = .008). In the second step, LoRA was more frequently detected at 50% (93% vs 73.2%; P = .002) and 100% (94.1% vs 78.4%; P = .01) of proximal main body deployment compared with first angiography from pigtail; similarly, image quality was significantly higher at 50% (3 [IQR, 3] vs 2 [IQR, 3]; P ≤ .001) and 100% (4 [IQR, 3] vs 2 [IQR, 3]; P = .001) of proximal main body deployment. CHA was detected in 93% cases (third step). The mean image quality was significantly higher when final angiogram (fourth step) was performed from introducer (pigtail, 2.6 ± 1.1 vs introducer, 3.1 ± 0.9; P ≤ .001). The intraoperative (7.7%) and postoperative (12.5%) adverse events (pain, vomiting, diarrhea) were all transient and clinically mild.

Conclusions: Preimplant CO angiography should be performed from femoral introducer sheath. Gas flow impediment created by proximal main body deployment can improve image quality and LoRA visualization with CO. CHA can be satisfactorily visualized with CO alone. Completion CO angiogram should be performed from femoral introducer sheath. This operative protocol allows performance of CO-EVAR with 0 cc or minimal ICM, with a low rate of mild temporary complications.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2023.01.013DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

introducer sheath
24
femoral introducer
24
image quality
20
proximal main
16
lora visualization
12
quality higher
12
main body
12
body deployment
12
introducer
10
operative protocol
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!