Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) is an arterial emergency with an overall mortality of 80%-90% secondary to massive hemorrhage. If a patient with RAAA presents in a primary hospital without resolution capacity, survival will depend on early transfer to a center with adequately trained specialists. This article reviews the evidence supporting the centralization of AAAR treatment in qualified centers, specifying the criteria used for the selection of referral centers and the role of a coordinating unit. Our current referral system, which is based primarily on costs, is also described. Patients with AAAR who consult in non-resolving centers should be rapidly transferred to a qualified referral center, following a transfer protocol, and guided by a coordinating unit acting according to technical and established criteria based on results, quality, and costs. Qualified referral centers should have an accredited vascular surgeon and a high institutional aortic surgery volume, adequate infrastructure, endovascular resolution capacity, support services (intensive care, hemodialysis, etc.) and specialized personnel permanently available.

Background: Chronic limb ischemia can lead to high rates of limb loss and mortality. Open surgery is the gold standard for treatment of distal disease. Endovascular surgery should have less complications with similar outcomes. Aim: To report a cohort of patients with distal arterial disease treated with endovascular surgery at our institution. Material and Methods: Review of angioplasty records of patients undergoing distal lower extremity endovascular procedures between 2016 and 2019. Demographics, comorbidities, form of presentation, type of intervention, perioperative complications, and length of stay were analyzed. The primary outcomes were wound healing, reinterventions and freedom from major amputation. Secondary outcomes were overall survival and amputation-free survival. Results: Forty-eight limbs of 41 patients with a mean age 75 years (78% males) were treated. Ninety-three percent had hypertension, 88% diabetes, 30% chronic kidney disease. 73% presented with major wounds. Plain balloon and drug coated balloon angioplasties were carried out in 65 and 31% of procedures respectively, with no difference in results. In 46% of the cases, only chronic total occlusions were treated. Wound healing was achieved in 85% of procedures and 90% of patients were free from amputation at one year of follow up. Complications were observed in 18% of procedures, perioperative mortality was 2% and one-year survival was 76%. Conclusions: Endovascular therapy achieves high rates of wound healing and freedom from amputation with low perioperative mortality and moderate complication rates.

Background: The therapeutic range (TR) of activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) for unfractionated heparin (UFH) dosing was established in the 1970 decade. Since then aPTT determination has changed. Current TR may be sub or supra-therapeutic depending on the reagents of the test, and therefore, responsible for complications of therapy. Aim: To establish the TR for UFH dosing in our institution using antifactor Xa analysis as reference standard. Material and Methods: After obtaining an informed consent, 43 blood samples were obtained for aPTT determination and antifactor Xa assay in 23 patients treated with intravenous UFH. Samples were processed at Emergency and Hemostasis Labs. We excluded patients receiving other anticoagulants, with thrombophilia, pregnancy or liver disease. Results: Mean aPTT values in the Hemostasis and Emergency labs were 57.1 ± 18.9 and 56.6 ± 18.3 seconds, respectively (p = 0.77). The squared correlation coefficients between aPTT and antifactor Xa at hemostasis and emergency labs were R2 0.5 and 0.45 respectively, p < 0.001. Using a linear regression analysis, therapeutic aPTT range values in our laboratory were established between 50 and 80 seconds, corresponding to antifactor Xa values of 0.3 to 0.7 IU/mL. Conclusions: According to current recommendations, validation of aPTT determination with reference techniques should be done in every institution.

Background: symptoms predominate. Diagnosis is based on clinical findings and appropriate imaging. We report two females, aged 35 and 51 years. One of them presented with a pelvic mass and dyspnea, the other patient had severe cardiac failure on admission. Computed axial tomography scan allowed an accurate preoperative diagnosis on both patients. Successful one stage resection of the tumor was performed under cardiopulmonary bypass. Both patients are asymptomatic on follow up at 6 months and 25 years.

Background. Current endografts used in treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), use large (18-25F) delivery systems. Graft fixation and aneurysm sealing is obtained by a proximal stent, requiring an aortic neck >15 mm. Objective. To compare the efficacy and safety of Ovation™ endograft (TriVascular, USA) with standard endografts. Methods. Between November 2009 and August 2010 we treated 47 AAA. In 10 patients we used Ovation™ (Group 1). Ten patients treated during the same period with commercially available endografts were used as controls (Group (2). The Ovation™ endo-prosthesis is tri-modular, made of PTFE andnitinol with low profile (13-15F) and has a barbed suprarenal stent for fixation. Sealing is obtained independently through 2 inflatable rings filled with a biocompatible polymer during the procedure. Implantation followed the standard procedure through femoral exposure, using the Philips Allura imaging equipment (Best, Netherlands). Procedure duration, length of stay (LOS) and complications were compared between groups. Fisher exact test and unpaired Student’s t test were used for comparisons. Results. Results. Technical success was 100%. We observed no difference between groups (age, sex, AAA size, ASA risk, preoperative lab work). Procedure time (hrs) was 2,12 ± 0,7 vs. 2,0 ± 0,6 (NS), LOS (hrs) was 44,5 ± 10,7 vs. 49,5 ± 32,0 (NS) in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. Aneurysm neck length and ICU stay were shorter in Group 1 (p= 0,035 and 0,0451 respectively). During a 12 month follow up no adverse events, type I or III endoleak, or secondary interventions have occurred. Conclusion. Results with Ovation™ are comparable to other endografts currently available, achieving the same standards of efficacy and safety. Its highly flexible delivery system allows navigation through small vessels, easy deployment and effective sealing of AAA with necks > 7 mm, broadening the span of patients suitable for endovascular treatment.

Introducción: Las endoprótesis actuales para tratar aneurismas aórticos (AAA) requieren introductores de alto diámetro (18-25F) y se sustentan excluyendo el aneurisma, mediante la fuerza radial de stents metálicos. Objetivo: prótesis Ovation™ (TriVascular, EEUU) con aquellas disponibles en el mercado. Material y Método: Entre Noviembre 2009 y Agosto 2010 tratamos 47 AAA. En 10 pacientes usamos Ovation™ (Grupo 1). Grupo Control (2): diez pacientes tratados contemporáneamente con endoprótesis comerciales. Ovation™ es tri-modular, de PTFE y nitinol con un stent barbado para fijación supra-renal. Sella bajo las arterias renales mediante 2 anillos llenados con un polímero durante el implante. Usa introductor 13-15F. Usa-Philips-Allura (Best, Holanda). Comparamos: duración del procedimiento, hospitalización y complicaciones. Utilizamos test de Fisher exacto y t de student no pareado. Resultados: Éxito técnico 100%. Sin diferencia entre grupos (edad, sexo, tamaño AAA, riesgo ASA, laboratorio preoperatorio). Tiempo operatorio (hrs): 2,12 ± 0,7 vs. 2,0 ± 0,6 (NS). Estadía postoperatoria (hrs): 44,5 ± 10,7 vs 49,5 ± 32,0 (NS). El cuello del AAA y la permanencia en UTI fueron más cortos en grupo 1 (p= 0,035 y 0,0451). Seguimiento (4,5-12 meses) sin eventos adversos, endofugas tipo I ni III, ni re-intervenciones. Conclusiones: Los resultados con Ovation™ a corto plazo son comparables con los de otras endoprótesis, cumpliendo con estándares de eficacia y seguridad. Ovation ™ navega por vasos pequeños, permite un despliegue preciso y sellado efectivo en cuellos > 7 mm, ampliando el tratamiento endovascular del AAA.

OBJETIVO: A cirurgia endovascular se estabeleceu como opção eficaz no tratamento da doença oclusiva aterosclerótica das artérias ilíacas. Entretanto, o uso desses procedimentos para tratar outros tipos de lesão ainda não foi bem estudado. Nosso objetivo é analisar indicações e resultados do uso de endoprótese em lesões ilíacas não-oclusivas. MATERIAL E MÉTODOS: Revisamos retrospectivamente os registros de 14 pacientes consecutivos, todos homens, com idade média de 61,6 anos (faixa: 25-80 anos), tratados por via endovascular entre 2001 e 2006 por lesões ilíacas não-oclusivas. O estudo pré e pós-operatório incluiu tomografia computadorizada. O procedimento foi realizado em bloco cirúrgico, utilizando um angiógrafo digital. Foi utilizado acesso femoral, com a inserção de endopróteses tubulares. RESULTADOS: Em 11 pacientes, houve embolização de artéria hipogástrica ipsilateral associada. As patologias tratadas foram: oito aneurismas ateroscleróticos, 3 dissecções, 2 lesões traumáticas e um pseudo-aneurisma anastomótico. A comorbidade mais freqüente foi hipertensão, em 43% dos casos. Não houve mortalidade operatória. Um paciente apresentou um pseudo-aneurisma femoral tratado com compressão. Um paciente tratado por fístula arteriovenosa traumática em nível ilíaco teve sua insuficiência cardíaca resolvida, com persistência assintomática de mínimo fluxo. A estada pós-operatória foi de 3 dias (média). Não se apresentaram outras endofugas inciais ou tardias. Durante um acompanhamento médio de 20,5 meses (faixa de 1 a 49 meses), um paciente morreu de câncer e nenhum requereu procedimentos complementares. CONCLUSÃO: O tratamento endovascular de lesões ilíacas através de endoprótese é seguro e permite um resultado durável no manejo de um amplo espectro de patologias.

OBJETIVO: La cirugía endovascular se ha establecido como una opción eficaz en el tratamiento de la enfermedad oclusiva ateroesclerótica de las arterias iliacas. Sin embargo, el uso de estos procedimientos para tratar otro tipo de lesiones aún no ha sido bien estudiado. Nuestro objetivo es analizar indicaciones y resultados del uso de endoprótesis en lesiones iliacas no oclusivas. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Revisamos retrospectivamente los registros de 14 pacientes consecutivos, todos hombres, 61,6 años de edad en promedio (rango: 25-80) tratados por vía endovascular entre 2001 y 2006 por lesiones iliacas no oclusivas. El estudio pre y postoperatorio incluyó tomografía computada. El procedimiento se efectuó en quirófano, utilizando un angiógrafo digital. Se usó acceso femoral insertando endoprótesis tubulares. RESULTADOS: En 11 pacientes se asoció embolización de arteria hipogástrica ipsilateral. Las patologías tratadas fueron: ocho aneurismas ateroescleróticos, 3 disecciones, 2 lesiones traumáticas y un pseudoaneurisma anastomótico. La co-morbilidad más frecuente fue la hipertensión en 43% de los casos. No hubo mortalidad operatoria. Un paciente presentó un pseudoaneurisma femoral tratado con compresión. Un paciente tratado por fístula arteriovenosa traumática a nivel iliaco resuelve su insuficiencia cardiaca, con persistencia asintomática de mínimo flujo. La estadía postoperatoria fue de 3 días (mediana). No se presentaron otras endofugas iniciales o tardías. Durante un seguimiento promedio de 20,5 meses (rango 1 a 49), un paciente fallece por cáncer y ninguno ha requerido procedimientos complementarios. CONCLUSIÓN: El tratamiento endovascular de lesiones iliacas mediante endoprótesis es seguro y permite un resultado durable en el manejo de un amplio espectro de patologías.