Role of historical and procedural staging during elective fenestrated and branched endovascular treatment of extensive thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

Objective: Procedural staging is often performed to reduce the incidence of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) during endo-vascular treatment of extensive thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). However, its role in the case of previous thoracic or infrarenal aortic repair (historical staging) has been controversial. In the present study, we evaluated the SCI rates when procedural staging was routinely used and studied its potential benefits when previous aortic repairs had already been performed. Methods: The data from patients treated electively with fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair for extent I, II, III, and V TAAAs were retrieved from amulticenter registry (four high-volume national teaching hospitals) and analyzed. The primary endpoint was the rate of SCI and its association with preoperative and postoperative variables, including historical staging, procedural staging, and an impaired collateral network (subclavian or hypogastric stenosis >75% per occlusion). Variables were defined in accordance with the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. A logistic regression model with stepwise selection was used to identify the predictors of SCI. Results: A total of 240 patients (76% male; median age, 73 years) were analyzed. Of the 240 patients, 43 (18%) had presented with an impaired collateral network, 136 (57%) had had historical staging, and 157 (65%) had received procedural staging. Preoperative spinal fluid cerebrospinal drainage was performed in 130 patients (54%). Permanent grade 3 SCI was observed in 13 patients (5%) and was negatively affected by both an impaired collateral network (odds ratio [OR], 17.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-176; P = .016) and the presence of bilateral iliac occlusive disease (OR, 10.1; 95% CI, 1.198.3; P = .046). Both historical (OR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.001-0.46; P = .014) and procedural (OR, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.02-0.7; P = .019) staging mitigated the permanent SCI rates. The need for postoperative transfusions (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8; P = .014) and the occurrence of postoperative renal complications (OR, 6.5; 95% CI, 1.2-35.0; P < .001) were associated with the development of SCI. Among the patients with historical staging, no further benefit from procedural staging was observed (SCI with procedural staging, 1%; vs no staging, 2%; P = NS). Conclusions: For patients with extensive TAAAs treated with fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair, both historical and planned procedural staging were associated with reduced permanent SCI rates. However, no additional benefit was observed when procedural staging was performed in patients with historical staging and an intact collateral network. The protective role of preoperative cerebrospinal fluid drainage placement requires further investigation.

Automated summary

For patients with extensive TAAAs treated with fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair, both historical and planned procedural staging were associated with reduced permanent SCI rates. However, no additional benefit was observed when procedural staging was performed in patients with historical staging and an intact collateral network. Further investigation is needed to explore the protective role of preoperative cerebrospinal fluid drainage placement.