Zenith Bifurcated Iliac Side Branch Device: Mid-term Results and Assessment of Risk Factors for Intraoperative Thrombosis

Outcomes of the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis for Japanese Patients With Aortoiliac Aneurysms: A Study Based on J-Preserve Registry

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical utility of the Gore Excluder iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE) for Japanese patients with aortoiliac aneurysms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study (J-Preserve Registry). Patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair using the Gore Excluder IBE for aortoiliac aneurysms between August 2017 and June 2020 were enrolled. Data pertaining to the baseline and anatomical characteristics, technical details, and clinical outcomes were collected from each institution. The primary endpoints were technical success, IBE-related complications, and reinterventions. Secondary endpoints were mortality, aneurysm size change, and reintervention during follow-up. Technical success was defined as accurate deployment of the IBE without type Ib, Ic, or III endoleaks on the IBE sides on completion angiography. A change in aneurysm size of 5 mm or more was taken to be a significant change.

RESULTS

We included 141 patients with 151 IBE implantations. Sixty-five IBE implantations (43.0%) had at least one instruction for use violation. Twenty-two patients (15.6%) required internal iliac artery (IIA) embolization for external iliac artery extension on the contralateral side. Of 151 IBE implantations, 19 exhibited IIA branch landing zones due to IIA aneurysms. Mean maximum and proximal common iliac artery (CIA) diameters were 32.9±9.9 mm and 20.5±6.9 mm, respectively. The mean CIA length was 59.1±17.1 mm. The IIA landing diameter and length were 9.0±2.3 mm and 33.8±14.6 mm. The overall technical success rate was 96.7%. There were no significant differences in IBE-related complications (2.3% vs 5.3%, p=0.86) or IBE-related reinterventions (1.5% vs 5.3%, p=0.33) between the IIA trunk and IIA branch landing groups. The mean follow-up period was 635±341 days. The all-cause mortality rate was 5.0%. There were no aneurysm-related deaths or ruptures during the follow-up. Most patients (95.7%) had sac stability or shrinkage.

CONCLUSION

The Gore Excluder IBE was safe and effective for Japanese patients in the midterm. Extending the IIA device into the distal branches of the IIA was acceptable, which may permit extending indications for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair of aortoiliac aneurysms to more complex lesions.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study suggests clinical benefits of the Gore Excluder IBE for Japanese patients, despite 43% of the IBE implantations having at least one IFU violation.

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using Physician-Modified Fenestrated Endurant Contralateral Limb for Internal Iliac Artery Preservation

CLINICAL IMPACT

We developed a novel Endovascular aortic repair technique for internal iliac artery preservation using a physician modified Endurant contralateral limb. This procedure was safe and reliable for preserving internal iliac artery flow in 24 patients with common and internal iliac artery aneurysms. We believe that our technique has the potential to expand the anatomic indications for internal iliac artery preserving procedures.

The sandwich technique to preserve the internal iliac artery during EVAR for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm with congenital anomalies

Congenital abnormalities of the iliac artery are uncommon and often discovered incidentally during the diagnosis or treatment of peripheral vascular diseases such as abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and peripheral arterial diseases. The endovascular treatment of infrarenal AAA can be complicated by anatomic abnormalities in the iliac arteries, such as the absence of the common iliac artery (CIA) or overly short bilateral common iliac arteries. We present a case of a patient with a ruptured AAA and bilateral absence of the CIA, successfully treated by endovascular intervention combined with preservation of the internal iliac artery using the sandwich technique.

Preliminary outcomes of the LifeStream balloon-expandable stentgraft in Zenith Iliac branch device to preserve pelvic circulation: A Korean multicenter study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate early outcomes of aortoiliac or isolated iliac artery aneurysm repair using the Zenith® Bifurcated Iliac Side (ZBIS) stent graft combined with the LifeStream™ Balloon Expandable Vascular Covered Stent as a bridging stentgraft.

METHODS

Between August 2018 and February 2020, 38 patients (37 male, mean age 72.7 years) received 46 LifeStream stents in conjunction with 38 ZBIS stent grafts to bridge hypogastric arteries for aneurysm repair in six university hospitals in Korea. The primary outcomes were technical success rate and procedure-related complications. Secondary outcomes were bridging stent graft patency and re-intervention.

RESULTS

All procedures were performed as elective standard endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and unilateral iliac branch device (IBD). Mean follow-up was 13.1 months, and patient overall survival rate was 96.7%. Technical success rate was 76.3% (n = 29). Causes of failure included seven total endoleaks; six type Ic and one type IIIc from the IBD junction, one unintentional IIA coverage, and one failure to deploy the IIA stent graft. Procedure-related complications occurred in two patients: one LifeStream migration and one ZBIS stent graft migration. Overall patency rates for the LifeStream and ZBIS stents were 97.4% and 97.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This multicenter preliminary experience with the LifeStream™ Balloon Expandable Vascular Covered Stent in IBD demonstrated good patency; however, an unexpectedly high rate of type Ic endoleaks was observed. Combined use of the LifeStream stent with the ZBIS stent graft is safe and feasible to preserve pelvic circulation with good patency and a low rate of device-related reintervention.

Effect of iliac tortuosity on outcomes after iliac branch procedures

OBJECTIVE

To report a two-centers evaluation of the effects of iliac axis tortuosity on iliac branch device (IBD) results.

METHODS

From 2015 to 2021, all IBD procedures performed at two European centers were analyzed retrospectively. The preoperative pelvic tortuosity index (PTI), external tortuosity index (ETI), and double iliac sign (DIS) were assessed for each iliac axis submitted to IBD. The primary endpoints were technical success, early and mid-term IBD complications (occlusion, stenosis, endoleaks [ELs]) and reinterventions, and the association with the PTI, ETI, and DIS. The 30-day mortality, survival, freedom from complications and freedom from reinterventions (FFR) were the secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

During the study period, 224 patients had undergone 256 IBD procedures for 165 (64.5%) aortoiliac aneurysms, 44 (17.2%) isolated iliac aneurysms, 11 (4.3%) abdominal aortic aneurysms with a short iliac landing zone, and 36 (14.1%) type Ib ELs. IBD was planned with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for 158 (61.7%), fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for 45 (7.6%), and isolated for 53 (20.7%) cases. Technical success and 30-day mortality were 99.2% (254 of 256) and 0.9% (2 of 224), respectively. A PTI >1.4, an ETI >1.7, and the DIS were tested to identify the risk factors for the endpoints. No ELs and 9 (3.5%) IBD occlusions, requiring five reinterventions (2%), had occurred within 30 days. No association with the PTI, ETI, or DIS was identified; IBD oversizing of ≥25% on the external iliac artery was independently related to occlusion (odds ratio, 4.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-18.1; P = .045). The mean follow-up was 31 ± 27 months, with 11 IBD occlusions, 14 ELs, and 21 reinterventions. At 1, 3, and 5 years of follow-up survival, IBD patency, and FFR were 95%, 89%, and 80%; 93%, 91%, and 90%; and 93%, 89%, and 83%, respectively. The risk factors for overall complications (n = 34; 13.3%) and reinterventions (n = 26; 10.2%) were an ETI >1.7 (P = .037 and P = .019), a PTI >1.4 (P = .016 and P = .012), and a type Ib EL as the indication (P = .025 and P = .001), respectively. Cox regression confirmed PTI >1.4 as an independent predictor of overall complications and reinterventions (hazard ratio [HR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-4.4; P = .018; and HR, 3 95% CI, 1.3-6.8; P = .018, respectively) and ETI >1.7 as an independent risk factor for ELs (HR 6; 95% CI, 2.1-17.5; P = .001). The freedom from complications and FFR were significantly lower with a PTI >1.4 at 3 years (73% vs 92% [log-rank P = .01] and 77% vs 93% [log-rank P = .001], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We found IBDs to be safe and effective in the treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms. Early complications are uncommon and related to endograft oversizing rather than anatomic characteristics in the present study. Iliac tortuosity is a risk factor for overall complications and reinterventions, in particular for IBD-related ELs.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness and safety of unilateral versus bilateral iliac branch devices for aortoiliac and iliac artery aneurysms

OBJECTIVES

Iliac branch devices (IBDs) have been utilized in the treatment of aortoiliac and isolated iliac artery aneurysms. The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of IBDs.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted by identifying studies in the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases regarding the outcomes of IBDs in aortoiliac or isolated iliac artery aneurysms between May 2006 and December 2020. Individual studies were evaluated for the following major outcomes: technical success, 30-day mortality, primary patency, endoleak, reintervention, and rates of pelvic ischemia. Furthermore, sub-group meta-analyses were performed to compare the pelvic ischemic events in patients with bilateral IBDs, unilateral IBDs and bilateral internal iliac artery (IIA) embolization/coverage.

RESULTS

45 studies with a total of 2736 patients undergoing unilateral or bilateral IBDs met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The pooled technical success rate of IBD was 98.0% (CI: 97.3-98.7%). Following IBD treatment, the 30-day mortality rate was 0.4% (CI: 0.07-0.70%); 30-day patency was 98.4% (CI: 97.7-99.0%); buttock claudication developed in 1.84% (CI: 1.26-2.41%); endoleak occurred in 11.9% (CI: 9.2-14.7%) and re-intervention in 7.6% (CI: 5.65-9.58%). Furthermore, in the patients with bilateral iliac artery involvement the pooled estimate rates of buttock claudication were 0.7% in bilateral IBD group, 7.9% in unilateral IBD with contralateral IIA embolization patients and 33.8% in bilateral IIA embolization/coverage patients, which were statistically significant among the three groups. Sexual dysfunction was 5.0% in bilateral IIA occlusion group, which was significantly higher than that in IBD groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The utilization of IBDs in treatment of aortoiliac or isolated iliac artery aneurysms is associated with high technical success rates as well as low incidences of pelvic ischemia. The risk of postoperative buttock claudication can be further decreased with both IIA preservation if patients are anatomically suitable for bilateral IBDs.

One-Year Results of ZBIS Iliac Branch Device With an Off-Label Connection Limb

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to study 1-year results of Zenith branch iliac endovascular graft (ZBIS) with the off-label use of a 13 mm spiral Z limb to connect to the aortic main body.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review from 2015 to 2019 of all iliac branch devices (IBDs) was performed at 1 institution that were connected to an aortic main body with a 13 mm spiral Z limb and had at least 1-year follow-up with computed tomography (CT). Primary endpoints are freedom from ZBIS separation from the connection limb, endoleak (EL), or reintervention at 1 year. Secondary endpoints are primary and secondary ZBIS patency, presence of any EL, and aortic reinterventions.

RESULTS

Of 149 IBDs implanted in this period, 45 ZBIS in 35 patients were connected with a 13 mm limb and had a 1-year CT; 97% of patients had common iliac artery (CIA) aneurysms, 7% of patients had hypogastric artery (HA) aneurysms, and 30% of patients had bilateral ZBIS implantation. Technical success was 98%. In 84% of cases, the Advanta V12 was used as the HA mating stent; 56% of patients had an EL, mostly type II, which resolved spontaneously in 70% at 1 year, and 9% of ZBIS required reinterventions at 1 year (2 for thrombosis, 2 for type Ic EL from HA mating stent). One-year ZBIS primary patency and secondary patency were 96% and 100%, respectively. No EL was noted to be related to the 13 mm connection limb. No migration or separation of the devices occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of 13 mm spiral Z limb to connect a ZBIS with the main body in our series yields a high technical success rate and good 12-month outcomes without device separation or migration.

Solitary Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis placement for iliac aneurysms

INTRODUCTION

Isolated iliac artery aneurysms (IAA), accounting for 2-7 percent of all abdominal aneurysms, are nowadays often treated with the use of iliac branched endografts. Although outside of the manufacturer's instructions for use, iliac branched devices can be used solely, without the adjunctive placement of an EVAR device, for the treatment of isolated IAA. In this study we aim to describe the outcomes of the use of the Gore IBE device, without support of an infrarenal EVAR device, for the exclusion of isolated IAA.

DESIGN

This study is an international multicenter retrospective cohort analysis.

METHOD

All patients that were treated with a solitary IBE for IAA exclusion from 11-01-2013 up to 31-12-2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome was technical success. Secondary outcomes included mortality, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and re-interventions.

RESULTS

In total 18 European and American centers participated, including 51 patients in which 54 IAAs were excluded. The technical success rate was 94.1%, with an assisted technical success rate of 96.1%. There was no 30-day mortality and a 98.1% patency of both the internal and external iliac artery was found at 24-months follow-up. At 24-months follow-up, 81.5% of patients were free of complications and 90% were free of a secondary intervention.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with a solitary IBE is a safe and, at midterm, effective treatment strategy in selected patients with a solitary IAA.

Conformability of the GORE EXCLUDER iliac branch endoprosthesis is associated with freedom from adverse iliac events

OBJECTIVE

The GORE EXCLUDER iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE; W.L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) is designed to preserve internal iliac artery (IIA) patency during endovascular treatment of aneurysms involving the common iliac artery. The device is intended to conform to iliac tortuosity, which may decrease adverse iliac events (AIE). The objective of this study was to evaluate risk factors for AIE after IBE implantation.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of the prospective, multicenter GORE 12-04 IBE pivotal trial. Patients with preoperative and postoperative axial imaging were included, with analysis based on each treated iliac system. An independent core laboratory performed all scan measurements, including iliac diameters, lengths, and tortuosity. Conformability was analyzed by the changes in tortuosity after IBE deployment, with less change indicating greater conformation. The end point was AIE, defined as ipsilateral radiographic or clinical complications. Critical nonconformation was defined as a threshold change in tortuosity associated with a significant increase in AIE.

RESULTS

We included 98 patients with 101 treated iliac systems. There were eight AIE (8%; six IIA component occlusions, one iliac branch component occlusion, and one EIA dissection requiring reintervention). Patients with AIE had smaller IIA diameters and less IBE conformability. After multivariable logistic regression analysis, an IIA diameter of less than 10 mm and a change in total iliac tortuosity beyond -15% were independently associated with AIE (odds ratio, 12 [interquartile range, 1.4-110] and odds ratio, 8.2 [interquartile range, 1.5-46], respectively), and the latter was used to define critical nonconformation. Critical nonconformation occurred in 11% of treated systems, and was associated with a high rate of AIE (36% vs 4%; P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Endograft conformation is a novel device property and technical outcome that, along with a larger IIA diameter, is associated with freedom from AIE after IBE deployment. An evaluation of these risk factors may better inform the management of patients with iliac aneurysmal disease. Further research on endograft conformation and patient outcomes is warranted, particularly for those with challenging anatomy undergoing complex procedures.

Preservation of internal iliac artery flow during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in a patient with bilateral absence of common iliac artery

Bilateral absence of the common iliac artery is an extremely rare congenital vascular malformation in which the distal aorta divides directly into two external iliac arteries and two internal iliac arteries. In the case of the presence of this vascular malformation in association with an aortic aneurysm, preservation of the internal iliac artery flow during endovascular aortic repair represents a technical challenge. We have reported a case in which the bilateral absence of the common iliac artery associated with an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm was successfully treated by endovascular aortic repair using commercially available iliac branched devices to maintain pelvic perfusion.

The outcomes of internal iliac artery preservation during endovascular or open surgery treatment for aortoiliac aneurysms

Background

Internal iliac artery (IIA) preservation continues to be a challenge during open surgery or endovascular repair of abdominal aortoiliac aneurysm (AAIA).

Objectives

To determine the results in terms of survival and clinical outcomes in patients with aortoiliac aneurysms (AAIA) treated with endovascular (EV) or open surgical (OS) repair.

Methods

This was a retrospective consecutive cohort study of patients with AAIA who underwent EV or OS repair.

Results

Post-procedure hospitalization time and intensive care unit stay were both longer in the OS group than in the EV group (7.08 ± 3.5 days vs. 3.32 ± 2.3 days; p = 0.03; 3.35 ± 2.2 days vs. 1.2 ± 0.8 days; p = 0.02, respectively). There were two cases of bowel ischemia (4.7%; OS 8.3% and EV 3.2%; p = 0.48), two cases of buttock claudication (4.7%; OS 8.3% and EV 3.2%; p = 0.48), and one case of sexual dysfunction (2.3% OS), all of them in patients with bilateral occlusion of the internal iliac artery (five patients, 11.6%; p = 0.035). Overall survival at 720 days was 80.6% in the EV group and 66.7% in the OS group (p = 0.58).

Conclusions

In the present study, OS and EV repair of aortoiliac aneurysms had similar overall survival and outcomes. Preservation of at least one internal iliac artery is associated with good results and no further complications.

Iliac Branch Devices With Standard vs Fenestrated/Branched Stent-Grafts: Does Aneurysm Complexity Produce Worse Outcomes? Insights From the pELVIS Registry

Purpose: To compare the outcomes of iliac branch devices (IBD) used in combination with standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) vs with fenestrated/branched EVAR (f/bEVAR) to treat complex aortoiliac aneurysms. Materials and Methods: The pELVIS Registry database containing the outcomes of IBD use at 8 European centers was interrogated to identify all IBD procedures that were combined with either standard EVAR or f/bEVAR. Among 669 patients extracted from the database, 629 (mean age 72.1±8.8 years; 597 men) had received an IBD combined with standard EVAR vs 40 (mean age 71.1±8.0 years; 40 men) who underwent f/bEVAR with an IBD. The mean aortic aneurysm diameters were 46.4±13.3 mm in the f/bEVAR patients vs 45.0±15.5 mm in the standard EVAR cases. The groups were similar in terms of baseline clinical characteristics and aneurysm morphology. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare patient survival, IBD occlusion, type III endoleak, and aneurysm-related reinterventions in follow-up. The estimates are presented with the 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Technical success was 100% in the f/bEVAR+IBD group and 99% in the EVAR+IBD group (p=0.85). The 30-day mortality was 0% vs 0.5%, respectively (p=0.66), while the 30-day reintervention rates were 7.5% vs 4.1% (p=0.31). The mean follow-up was 32.1±21.3 months for f/bEVAR+IBD patients (n=30) and 35.5±26.8 months for EVAR+IBD patients (n=571; p=0.41). The 12-month survival estimates were 93.4% (95% CI 93.2% to 93.6%) in the EVAR+IBD group vs 93.6% (95% CI 93.3% to 93.9%) for the f/bEVAR+IBD group (p=0.93). There were no occlusions or type III endoleaks in the f/bEVAR+IBD group at 12 months, while the estimates for freedom from occlusion and from type III endoleak in the EVAR+IBD group were 97% (95% CI 96.8% to 97.2%) and 98.5% (95% CI 98.4% to 98.6%), respectively. The 12-month estimates for freedom for aneurysm-related reintervention were 93% (95% CI 92.7% to 93.3%) in the EVAR+IBD group vs 86.4% (95% CI 85.9% to 86.9%) in the f/bEVAR+IBD patients (p=0.046). Conclusion: Treatment of complex aortoiliac disease with f/bEVAR+IBD can achieve equally good early and 1-year outcomes compared to treatment with IBDs and standard bifurcated stent-grafts, except for a somewhat higher reintervention rate in f/bEVAR patients.

Outcomes after Standalone Use of Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis for Endovascular Repair of Isolated Iliac Artery Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study was to describe outcomes of stand-alone use (i.e., without concomitant implantation of an aortic stent graft) of the Gore Excluder iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE) for elective endovascular repair of isolated iliac artery aneurysms.

METHODS

We evaluated all consecutive patients electively treated for isolated iliac artery aneurysms using standalone Gore Excluder IBE (January 2014-December 2018). Early (i.e., 30-day) endpoints were technical success, mortality, major adverse events (MAEs), and major access-site complications. Late endpoints were survival, freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), internal iliac artery (IIA) primary patency, IIA branch instability, graft-related adverse events (GRAEs), secondary interventions, endoleaks (ELs), aneurysm sac behavior, and new-onset buttock claudication (BC).

RESULTS

A total of 11 consecutive patients (10 men; median age 75 years) were included. The technical success rate was 100%. At 30 days, mortality, MAEs, and major access-site complications were all 0%. Survival and freedom from ARM were 91% and 100%, respectively; only one nonaortic related death was recorded during follow-up. At a median follow-up of 14 months, IIA primary patency, IIA branch instability, and GRAEs were 100%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. No instances of graft migration ≥10 mm were detected. No graft-related secondary interventions were recorded, and 2 patients required a procedure-related secondary intervention 3 months after the index procedure (1 common femoral artery endarterectomy and 1 external iliac artery stenting). Although new-onset type 1 or type 3 ELs were never noted, one patient developed a new-onset type 2 EL. Aneurysm sac regression ≥5 mm was noted in 6 patients (55%), whereas in the remaining ones, the sac size was stable. No instances of new-onset BC were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of standalone Gore Excluder IBE for elective endovascular repair of isolated iliac artery aneurysms is a safe, feasible, and effective treatment option. These results may support use of the technique as an effective means of endovascular reconstruction in patients with suitable anatomy.

Outcomes of the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis Using Division Branches of the Internal Iliac Artery as Distal Landing Zones

Purpose: To evaluate the outcomes of the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE) using division branches of the internal iliac artery (IIA) as distal landing zones. Materials and Methods: Between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018, 74 patients (mean age 74±7 years; 72 men) treated for aortoiliac or common iliac artery aneurysms had an IBE deployed with distal landing of the side branch within the main trunk (n=60) of the internal iliac artery (IIA) vs within a division branch (n=25). Thirteen (17%) patients received bilateral IBE implantations for a total of 85 vessels evaluated. Early endpoints were technical success, 30-day mortality, 30-day major adverse events (MAEs), and 30-day major access complications. Late endpoints were survival, primary and secondary IIA patency, freedom from IIA branch instability, freedom from new-onset buttock claudication, and aneurysm sac diameter changes. Time-dependent outcomes were reported as Kaplan-Meier curves with differences assessed using the log-rank test. Estimates are presented with the 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The overall technical success rate was 97%, with 1 technical failure per group (p=0.43). Two patients, one from each group, died within 30 days (p=0.43). No significant differences were seen in the rates of 30-day MAEs (7% vs 17%, p=0.35) or major access complications (9% vs 11%, p>0.99) for patients receiving distal landing in the main trunk vs a division branch, respectively. The mean follow-up for the entire cohort was 19±12 months. The overall 1-year survival rate was 94% (95% CI 74% to 99%). The primary and secondary patency rates at 1 year were 98% (95% CI 88% to 99%) vs 95% (95% CI 72% to 99%, p=0.72) and 98% (95% CI 88% to 99%) vs 100% (p=0.41) for the main trunk vs division branch groups, respectively. Freedom from IIA branch instability estimates were also similar at 1-year follow-up [93% (95% CI 82% to 97%) vs 90% (95% CI 66% to 97%), p=0.29], as were the freedom from new-onset buttock claudication estimates [98% (95% CI 86% to 99%) and 94% (95% CI 67% to 99%), respectively; p=0.62]. Mean sac diameter change was 5.4±5.3 mm, not significantly different between the groups (p=0.85). Conclusion: Use of the posterior or anterior division of the IIA as a distal landing zone for the Gore Excluder IBE was safe and efficacious in the midterm. This technique may permit extending indications for endovascular repair of aortoiliac aneurysms to cases with unsuitable anatomy within the IIA main trunk. Long-term assessment is needed to affirm the efficacy of this technique.

Endovascular treatment of iliac aneurysmal disease with internal iliac artery preservation: a review of two different approaches

INTRODUCTION

The feasibility of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is often challenged by the concurrent presence of common iliac artery aneurysms, which prevent the attainment of a successful distal sealing. The present review aims to portray the safety and efficacy of two internal iliac artery (IIA) preservation strategies in the endovascular treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms: the iliac branch extension device (IBED) and the parallel graft - "sandwich" technique (PG-ST).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify publications on endovascular treatment of iliac aneurysmal disease using IBED or PG-ST. Primary endpoints were freedom from endoleak, IIA branch occlusion and secondary interventions.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Twenty-eight studies were selected for analysis describing a total of 1316 patients, 1169 in the IBED group and 147 in the PG-ST group. The technical success rates were akin for IBED and PG-ST (83.9-100% versus 81.3-100%). The defined primary endpoints were reported by fourteen articles. Freedom from endoleak, IIA branch occlusion and reintervention, at 6 months, were as follows: 82-100% versus 86%, 90-94% versus 88%, and 90-98% versus 87%, respectively for IBED and PG-ST. Later outcomes were only recorded in the IBED group, and freedom from endoleak, IIA branch occlusion and reintervention, at 9 years, were 83%, 81-90%, and 64-75%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Both IBED and PG-ST have proven to be safe and valid approaches. However, while IBED has established as a durable procedure, mid-term data lacks on PGs performance and further studies are required to attest durability of the latter procedure.

Isolated Common Iliac Artery Aneurysms Treated Solely With Iliac Branch Stent-Grafts: Midterm Results of a Multicenter Registry

PURPOSE

To assess early and midterm outcomes of iliac branch device (IBD) implantation without an aortic stent-graft for the treatment of isolated common iliac artery aneurysm (CIAA).

METHODS

From December 2006 to June 2016, 49 isolated CIAAs in 46 patients were treated solely with an IBD at 7 vascular centers. Five patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 41 male patients (mean age 72.5±7.8 years) for analysis. Mean CIAA diameter was 39.1±10.5 mm (range 25-65). Thirty-two patients (2 with bilateral CIAAs) were treated with a Cook Zenith iliac branch device; 9 patients (1 bilateral) received a Gore Excluder iliac branch endoprosthesis. Primary endpoints were technical success, survival, aneurysm exclusion, device patency, and freedom from reintervention at 1 and 5 years. Freedom from major adverse events and aneurysm shrinkage at 1 year were also assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-day mortality and the IBD occlusion rate were 2.4% and 2.3%, respectively. At a mean follow-up of 40.2±33.9 months, no patient presented buttock claudication, erectile dysfunction, or bowel or spinal cord ischemia. Three patients died within 6 months after the procedure. Estimates of cumulative survival, device patency, and freedom from reintervention were 90.2%, 95.2%, and 95.7%, respectively, at 1 and 5 years. At 1 year, CIAA shrinkage ≥5 mm was recorded in 21 of 38 survivors. No evidence of endoleak, device migration, or disconnection was found on imaging follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The use of IBDs without an aortic stent-graft for isolated CIAAs resulted in excellent patency, with low morbidity and mortality. This, in conjunction with no endoleak or migration and a low reintervention rate, supports the use of isolated IBDs as a stable and durable means of endovascular reconstruction in cases with suitable anatomy. Longer follow-up and a larger cohort are needed to validate these results.