Fascial Closure Following Percutaneous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

• Published in: European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery Vol. 41; no. 3; pp. 346 - 349
• Main Authors: Harrison, G.J, Thavarajan, D, Brennan, J.A, Vallabhaneni, S.R, McWilliams, R.G, Fisher, R.K
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01.03.2011
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aneurysm, False - etiology; Aortic Aneurysm - surgery; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects; Endovascular aneurysm repair; Endovascular Procedures - adverse effects; England; Fascial closure; Fasciotomy; Female; Femoral Artery - diagnostic imaging; Femoral Artery - surgery; Hemorrhage - etiology; Hemorrhage - prevention & control; Hemostatic Techniques - adverse effects; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Percutaneous; Punctures; Surgery; Thrombosis - etiology; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex; Wound Closure Techniques - adverse effects; Endovascular aneurysm repair; Percutaneous; Fascial closure
• ISSN: 1078-5884; 1532-2165
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2010.11.020

Abstract Introduction There are potential benefits of percutaneous over open femoral access for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Subsequent arterial closure using percutaneous devices is costly, whilst open repair risks potential wound complications and delayed discharge. The technique of fascial closure has perceived advantages but its efficacy is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and durability of fascial closure after EVAR. Methods Patients undergoing EVAR using devices up to 24 French were considered. Exclusion criteria included morbid obesity, high bifurcation, previous surgery, inadvertent high puncture, arteries <5 mm and surgeon preference. The primary outcome measure was immediate technical success. All patients were followed-up clinically and with duplex at one and twelve months to determine secondary complications. Results Over a one-year period fascial closure of 69 common femoral arteries was attempted in 38 patients undergoing EVAR. Nine primary failures were due to haemorrhage in eight arteries and thrombosis in one artery; all had immediate, uncomplicated open revision. Of the 60 (87%) successful procedures, all had duplex surveillance at one month. Four pseudoaneurysms were identified, all treated conservatively. At one year, 61 fascial closures (88%) were imaged, four patients had died and two were lost to follow-up. Three of the pseudoaneurysms had resolved, the fourth patient had died (unrelated). No other complication attributable to fascial closure was found at either one or twelve months. Conclusion Fascial closure is a safe, durable and cost-effective method of arterial closure following EVAR. Success and complication rates are comparable to other techniques.