Purpose: To report the initial outcomes of physician-modified inner branched endovascular repair (PMiBEVAR) for pararenal aneurysms (PRAs), thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs), and aortic arch aneurysms in high-surgical-risk patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 10 patients (6 men; median age, 83.0 years) treated using PMiBEVAR were enrolled in this retrospective, single-center study. All patients were at high surgical risk because of severe comorbidities (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score≥3 or emergency repair). End points were defined as technical success per patient and per vessel (successful deployment), clinical success (no endoleaks postoperatively), in-hospital death, and major adverse events. Results: There were 3 PRAs, 4 TAAAs, and 3 aortic arch aneurysms with 12 renal-mesenteric arteries and 3 left subclavian arteries incorporated by inner branches. The technical success rate was 90.0% (9/10) per patient and 93.3% (14/15) per vessel. The clinical success rate was 90% (9/10). There were 2 in-hospital deaths, unrelated to aneurysms. Paraplegia and shower emboli occurred separately in 2 patients. Three patients experienced prolonged ventilation for 3 days after surgery. Aneurysm sac shrinkage occurred in 4 patients, and aneurysm size stabilized in 1 patient during follow-up, more than 6 months later. None of the patients required intervention. Conclusion: PMiBEVAR is a feasible approach for treating complex aneurysms in high-surgical-risk patients. This technology may complement the existing technology in terms of improved anatomical adaptability, no time delay and practicability in many countries. However, long-term durability remains undetermined. Further large-scale and long-term studies are needed. Clinical impact This is the first clinical study to investigate outcomes of physician-modified inner branched endovascular repair (PMiBEVAR). PMiBEVAR for treating pararenal aneurysm, thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, or aortic arch aneurysm is a feasible procedure. This technology is likely to complement existing technology in terms of improved anatomical adaptability (compared to off-the-shelf devices), no time delay (compared to custom-made devices), and the potential to be performed in many countries. On the other hand, surgery time varied greatly depending on the case, suggesting a learning curve and the need for technological innovation to perform more consistent surgeries.
