We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Outcomes of Open Mesenteric Bypass after a Failed Endovascular or Open Mesenteric Revascularization for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia.
Journal of Vascular Surgery 2024 March 28
INTRODUCTION: Clinical practice guidelines have recommended an endovascular-first approach(ENDO) for management of patients with chronic mesenteric ischemia(CMI) while open mesenteric bypass(OMB) is proposed for subjects deemed to be poor ENDO candidates. However, the impact of a previous failed endovascular or open mesenteric reconstruction on subsequent OMB is unknown. Accordingly, this study was designed to examine the results of a remedial OMB(R-OMB) after a failed ENDO or primary OMB(P-OMB) for patients with recurrent CMI.
METHODS: All patients undergoing OMB from 2002-2022 at the University of Florida were reviewed. Outcomes after R-OMB(i.e., history of failed ENDO or P-OMB) and P-OMB were compared. The primary end-point was 30-day mortality while secondary outcomes included complications, re-intervention, and survival. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate freedom from re-intervention and all-cause mortality while multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling identified predictors of death.
RESULTS: A total of 145 OMB procedures(R-OMB, n=48[33%]; P-OMB, n=97[67%]) were analyzed. A majority of R-OMB operations were performed for a failed stent(prior ENDO, n=39[81%]; prior OMB, n=9[19%]). R-OMB patients were generally younger(66±9 vs. P-OMB, 69±11-years;p=.09) and had lower incidence of smoking exposure(29% vs. P-OMB, 48%;p=.07); however, there were no other differences in demographics or comorbidities. R-OMB was associated with less intraoperative transfusion(0.6 vs. P-OMB, 1.4 units;p=.01) but there were no differences in conduit choice or bypass configuration. The overall 30-day mortality and complication rates were 7%(n=10/145) and 53%(n=77/145), respectively, with no difference between groups. Notably, R-OMB had decreased cardiac(6% vs. P-OMB, 21%;p<.01) and bleeding complication rates(2% vs. P-OMB, 15%;p=.01). The freedom from re-intervention(1- and 5-year:R-OMB-95±4%, 83±9% vs. P-OMB-97±2%, 93±5%, respectively; log-rank p=.21) and survival(1- and 5-year:R-OMB-82±6%, 68±9% vs. P-OMB-84±4%, 66±7%;p=.91) were similar. Independent predictors of all-cause mortality included new postoperative hemodialysis requirement(HR 7.4, 95%CI 3.1-17.3;p<.001), pulmonary(HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4-5.3;p=.004) and cardiac(HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1-5.1;p=.04) complications, as well as female sex(HR 2.1, 95%CI 1.03-4.8;p=.04). Notably, R-OMB was not a predictor of death.
CONCLUSIONS: The perioperative and longer-term outcomes for a remedial OMB after a failed intraluminal stent or previous open bypass appear to be comparable to a P-OMB. These findings support the recently updated clinical practice guideline recommendations for an endovascular-first approach to treating recurrent CMI due to the significant perioperative complication risk of OMB. However, among the subset of patients deemed ineligible for endoluminal reconstruction after failed mesenteric revascularization, R-OMB results appear to be acceptable and highlights the utility of this strategy in selected patients.
METHODS: All patients undergoing OMB from 2002-2022 at the University of Florida were reviewed. Outcomes after R-OMB(i.e., history of failed ENDO or P-OMB) and P-OMB were compared. The primary end-point was 30-day mortality while secondary outcomes included complications, re-intervention, and survival. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate freedom from re-intervention and all-cause mortality while multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling identified predictors of death.
RESULTS: A total of 145 OMB procedures(R-OMB, n=48[33%]; P-OMB, n=97[67%]) were analyzed. A majority of R-OMB operations were performed for a failed stent(prior ENDO, n=39[81%]; prior OMB, n=9[19%]). R-OMB patients were generally younger(66±9 vs. P-OMB, 69±11-years;p=.09) and had lower incidence of smoking exposure(29% vs. P-OMB, 48%;p=.07); however, there were no other differences in demographics or comorbidities. R-OMB was associated with less intraoperative transfusion(0.6 vs. P-OMB, 1.4 units;p=.01) but there were no differences in conduit choice or bypass configuration. The overall 30-day mortality and complication rates were 7%(n=10/145) and 53%(n=77/145), respectively, with no difference between groups. Notably, R-OMB had decreased cardiac(6% vs. P-OMB, 21%;p<.01) and bleeding complication rates(2% vs. P-OMB, 15%;p=.01). The freedom from re-intervention(1- and 5-year:R-OMB-95±4%, 83±9% vs. P-OMB-97±2%, 93±5%, respectively; log-rank p=.21) and survival(1- and 5-year:R-OMB-82±6%, 68±9% vs. P-OMB-84±4%, 66±7%;p=.91) were similar. Independent predictors of all-cause mortality included new postoperative hemodialysis requirement(HR 7.4, 95%CI 3.1-17.3;p<.001), pulmonary(HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4-5.3;p=.004) and cardiac(HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1-5.1;p=.04) complications, as well as female sex(HR 2.1, 95%CI 1.03-4.8;p=.04). Notably, R-OMB was not a predictor of death.
CONCLUSIONS: The perioperative and longer-term outcomes for a remedial OMB after a failed intraluminal stent or previous open bypass appear to be comparable to a P-OMB. These findings support the recently updated clinical practice guideline recommendations for an endovascular-first approach to treating recurrent CMI due to the significant perioperative complication risk of OMB. However, among the subset of patients deemed ineligible for endoluminal reconstruction after failed mesenteric revascularization, R-OMB results appear to be acceptable and highlights the utility of this strategy in selected patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
Management of Diverticulitis: A Review.JAMA Surgery 2024 April 18
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app