Spontaneous Delayed Sealing in Selected Patients with a Primary Type-Ia Endoleak After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Endosutured Aneurysm Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Short Necks Achieves Acceptable Midterm Outcomes-Results from the Peru Registry

BACKGROUND

The study aims to describe midterm outcomes following treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with short necks by endosutured aneurysm repair using the Heli-FX EndoAnchor system.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of prospectively collected data from 9 vascular surgery departments between June 2010 and December 2019, including treated AAAs with neck lengths ≤10 mm. The decision for the use of EndoAnchors was made by the treating surgeon or multidisciplinary aortic committee according to each center's practice. There were 2 Groups further assessed according to neck length, A (≥4 and <7 mm) and B (≥7 and ≤10 mm). The main outcomes analyzed were technical success, freedom from type Ia endoleaks (TIaELs), sac size increase, all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients were included in the study, 17 fell into Group A and 59 into Group B. Median follow-up for the cohort was 40.5 (interquartile range 12-61) months. A median of 6 (interquartile range 3) EndoAnchors were deployed in each subject. Technical success was 86.8% for the total group, 82.4% and 88.1% (P = 0.534) for Groups A and B respectively. Six out of 10 (60%) of TIaELs at the completion angiographies showed spontaneous resolution. Cumulative freedom from TIaEL at 3 and 5 years for the total group was 89% and 84% respectively; this was 93% and 74% for Group A and 88% at both intervals in Group B (P = 0.545). In total, there were 7 (9.2%) patients presenting with TIaELs over the entire study period. Two (11.8%) in Group A and 5 (8.5%) in Group B (P = 0.679). There were more patients with sac regression in Group B (Group A = 6-35.3% vs. Group B = 34-57.6%, P = 0.230) with no statistical significance. All-cause mortality was 19 (25%) patients, with no difference (4-23.5% vs. 15-25.4%, P = 0.874) between groups; whereas aneurysm-related mortality occurred in 1 patient from Group A and 3 from Group B.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates reasonable outcomes for patients with short-necked AAAs treated by endosutured aneurysm repair in terms of TIaELs up to 5-year follow-up. EndoAnchor use should be judiciously evaluated in short necks and may be a reasonable option when anatomical constraints are encountered, mainly for those with 7-10 mm neck lengths. Shorter neck length aspects, as indicated by the results from Group A, may be an alternative when no other options are available or feasible.

Risk factors of type 1A endoleak following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms are the treatment of first choice. However, the proximal sealing of endovascular aneurysm repair is the Achilles' heel of the procedure. Insufficient proximal sealing can lead to endoleak type 1A and therefore expansion of the aneurysm sack and subsequent rupture.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients with an infrarenal abdominal aneurysm treated with endovascular aneurysm repair. We studied whether demographic and anatomical features were risk factors for endoleak type 1A. Also, the results of different treatment strategies were described.

RESULTS

257 Patients were included in the study, most patients were male. In the multivariate analysis, female gender and infrarenal angulation were the most important risk factors for endoleak type 1A. Endoleak type 1A diagnosed at completion angiography disappeared in 77.8%. The occurrence of endoleak type 1A was associated with a higher risk of aneurysm-related mortality (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Conclusions should be drawn with care, since the number of patients included in this study was small and there was a high incidence of patients lost to follow-up. This study suggests that endovascular aneurysm repair in female patients and patients with severe infrarenal angulation is associated with a higher risk of endoleak type 1A.

Selective aneurysmal sac neck-targeted embolization during endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm with hostile neck anatomy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of selective aneurysmal sac neck-targeted embolization in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with a hostile neck anatomy (HNA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between October 2020 and June 2022, patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and HNA who underwent EVAR with a low-profile stent graft and a selective aneurysmal sac neck-targeted embolization technique were analysed. An HNA was defined by the presence of any of the following parameters: infrarenal neck angulation > 60°; neck length < 15 mm; conical neck; circumferential calcification ≥ 50%; or thrombus ≥ 50%. Before occluding the entire aneurysm during the procedure, a buddy wire was loaded prophylactically into the sac through the contralateral limb side. If a type Ia endoleak (ELIa) occurred and persisted despite adjunctive treatment such as balloon moulding or cuff extension, this preloaded wire could be utilized to enable a catheter to reach the space between the stent graft and sac neck to perform coil embolization. In the absence of ELIa, the wire was simply retracted. The primary outcome of this study was freedom from sac expansion and endoleak-related reintervention during the follow-up period; secondary outcomes included technical success and intraoperative and in-hospital postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Among the 28 patients with a hostile neck morphology, 11 (39.5%) who presented with ELIa underwent intraprocedural treatment involving sac neck-targeted detachable coil embolization. Seventeen individuals (60.7%) of the total patient population did not undergo coiling. All patients in the coiling group underwent balloon moulding, and 2 patients additionally underwent cuff extension. In the noncoiling group, 14 individuals underwent balloon moulding as a treatment for ELIa, while 3 patients did not exhibit ELIa during the procedure. The coiling group showed longer operating durations (81.27 ± 11.61 vs. 70.71 ± 7.17 min, P < 0.01) and greater contrast utilization than the noncoiling group (177.45 ± 52.41 vs. 108.24 ± 17.49 ml, P < 0.01). In the entire cohort, the technical success rate was 100%, and there were no procedure-related complications. At a mean follow-up of 18.6 ± 5.2 months (range 12-31), there were no cases of sac expansion (19 cases of sac regression, 67.86%; 9 cases of stability, 32.14%) or endoleak-related reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective aneurysmal sac neck-targeted embolization for the treatment of ELIa in AAA patients with an HNA undergoing EVAR is safe and may prevent type Ia endoleak and related sac expansion after EVAR.

The Correlation of Aortic Neck Angle and Length in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm with Severe Neck Angulation for Prediction of Intraoperative Neck Complications and Postoperative Outcomes after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in a hostile neck has been associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to determine the association of infrarenal aortic neck angle and length and establish an optimal cutoff value to predict intraoperative neck complications and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of patients with an intact infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with severe neck angulation (>60 degrees) who underwent EVAR from October 2010 to October 2018. Demographic data, aneurysm morphology, and operative details were collected. The ratio of neck angle and length was calculated as the optimal cutoff value of the aortic neck angle-length index. The patients were categorized into two distinct groups using latent profile analysis, a statistical technique employed to identify concealed subgroups within a larger population by examining a predetermined set of variables. Intraoperative neck complications, adjunct neck procedures, and early and late outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

115 patients were included. Group 1 (G1) had 95 patients with an aortic neck angle-length index ≤ 4.8, and Group 2 (G2) had 20 patients with an aortic neck angle-length index > 4.8. Demographic data and aneurysm morphology were not significantly different between groups except for neck length (p < 0.001). G2 had more intraoperative neck complications than G1 (21.1% vs. 55%, p = 0.005). Adjunctive neck procedures were more common in G2 (18.9% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). The thirty-day mortality rate was not statistically different. G1 patients had a 5-year proximal neck re-intervention-free rate comparable to G2 patients (93.7% G1 vs. 87.5% G2, p = 0.785). The 5-year overall survival rate was not statistically different (59.9% G1 vs. 69.2% G2, p = 0.891).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with an aortic neck angle-length index > 4.8 are at greater risk of intraoperative neck complications and adjunctive neck procedures than patients with an aortic neck angle-length index ≤ 4.8. The 5-year proximal neck re-intervention-free rate and the 5-year survival rate were not statistically different. Based on our findings, this study suggests that the aortic neck angle-length index is a reliable predictor of intraoperative neck complications during EVAR in AAA with severe neck angulation.

European Expert Opinion on Infrarenal Sealing Zone Definition and Management in Endovascular Aortic Repair Patients: A Delphi Consensus

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to provide a consensus definition of the infrarenal sealing zone and develop an algorithm to determine when and if adjunctive procedure(s) or reintervention should be considered in managing patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

METHODS

A European Advisory Board (AB), made up of 11 vascular surgeons with expertise in EVAR for AAA, was assembled to share their opinion regarding the definition of preoperative and postoperative infrarenal sealing zone. Information on their current clinical practice and level of agreement on proposed reintervention paths was used to develop an algorithm. The process included 2 virtual meetings and 2 rounds of online surveys completed by the AB (Delphi method). Consensus was defined as reached when ≥ 8 of 11 (73%) respondents agreed or were neutral.

RESULTS

The AB reached complete consensus on definitions and measurement of the pre-EVAR target anticipated sealing zone (TASZ) and the post-EVAR real achieved sealing zone (RASZ), namely, the shortest length between the proximal and distal reference points as defined by the AB, in case of patients with challenging anatomies. Also, agreement was achieved on a list of 4 anatomic parameters and 3 prosthesis-/procedure-related parameters, considered to have the most significant impact on preoperative and postoperative sealing zones. Furthermore, the agreement was reached that in the presence of visible neck-related complications, both adjunctive procedure(s) and reintervention should be contemplated (100% consensus). In addition, adjunctive procedure(s) or reintervention can be considered in the following cases (% consensus): insufficient sealing zone on completion imaging (91%) or on the first postoperative computed tomography (CT) scan (91%), suboptimal sealing zone on completion imaging (73%) or postoperative CT scan (82%), and negative evolution of the actual sealing zone over time (91%), even in the absence of visible complications.

CONCLUSIONS

AB members agreed on definitions of the pre- and post-EVAR infrarenal sealing zone, as well as factors of influence. Furthermore, a clinical decision algorithm was proposed to determine the timing and necessity of adjunctive procedure(s) and reinterventions.

Editor's Choice - Endurant Stent Graft in Patients with Challenging Neck Anatomy "One Step Outside Instructions for Use": Early and Midterm Results from the EAGLE Registry

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the Endurant for Challenging Anatomy: Global Experience (EAGLE) registry is to evaluate prospectively the technical and clinical success rate of a stentgraft used in patients with challenging neck anatomy outside the instructions for use (IFU) but within objective anatomical limits.

METHODS

This was a prospective, international, multicentre, observational study. From 1 February 2012 to 1 September 2017, patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm with a challenging infrarenal neck that were deemed suitable for endovascular aneurysm repair were included prospectively at 23 European centres. Patients were distributed by anatomy into three groups: short neck (SN; infrarenal neck 5 - 10 mm in combination with suprarenal angulation [α] ≤ 45° and infrarenal angulation [β] ≤ 60°); medium neck (MN; infrarenal neck 10 - 15 mm with α ≤ 60° and β 60° - 75° or α 45°- 60° and β ≤ 75°; and long angulated neck (LN; infrarenal neck ≥ 15 mm with α ≤ 75° and β 75°- 90° or α 60°- 75° and β ≤ 90°. All computed tomography scans were reviewed by an independent core laboratory. Primary outcomes were technical and clinical success. Secondary endpoints were peri-operative major adverse events, all cause mortality, aneurysm related mortality, endoleaks, migration, and secondary intervention.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty patients (81.3% male) were included (SN = 55, MN = 16, LN = 79). The median follow up was 36 ± 12.6 months. In the overall cohort, the technical success rate was 93.3%. Estimated freedom from aneurysm related death was 97.3% at three years. Freedom from secondary interventions was 84.7% at three years. Estimated clinical success was 96.0%, 90.8%, and 83.2% at 30 days, one year, and three years, respectively. Estimated freedom from all cause mortality, late type IA endoleak, and migration at three years was 75.1%, 93.7%, and 99.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The early and midterm results of the EAGLE registry show that endovascular repair with the Endurant stentgraft in selected patients with challenging infrarenal neck anatomy yields results in line with large "real world" registries. Long term results are awaited for more definitive conclusions.

The Association between Device Instructions for Use Adherence and Outcomes after Elective Endovascular Aortic Abdominal Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

Aortic neck anatomy has a significant impact on the complexity of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), with concern that neck characteristics outside of instructions for use (IFU) may result in worse outcomes. Therefore, this study determined the impact of neck characteristics outside of IFU on perioperative and one-year outcomes and mid-term survival after EVAR.

METHODS

We identified all patients undergoing elective infrarenal EVAR from December 2014 to May 2020 in the Vascular Quality Initiative database. Neck characteristics outside of IFU were determined based the specific device IFU neck characteristics (Neck diameter, length, and angulation). Patients without one-year follow-up were excluded for the 1-year outcomes analyses (n=6,138 (40%)). We used multivariable adjusted logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models to identify the independent associations between neck characteristics outside of IFU and our outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 15,448 patients identified, 22.1% had neck characteristics outside of IFU, including 6.6% with a infrarenal angle, 6.8% with a neck length, 10.4% with a neck diameter, and 1.1% with a suprarenal angulation outside of IFU. Of these, 2.4% had more than one neck characteristic outside of IFU. Patients with neck characteristics outside of IFU were more often female (27.9% vs. 15.0%, P<.001) and were older (median age 75 vs. 73, P<.001). EVAR patients with neck characteristics outside of IFU had higher rates of type Ia endoleaks at completion (4.8% vs. 2.5%, P<.001), perioperative mortality (1.2% vs. 0.6%, P<.001), one-year sac expansion (7.1% vs. 5.3%, P=.017), and one-year reinterventions (4.4% vs. 3.2%, P=.03). In multivariable adjusted analyses, neck characteristics outside of IFU were independently associated with type Ia completion endoleaks (OR 1.6, [1.3-2.0], P<.001), perioperative mortality (OR 1.8; [1.2-2.7]; P=.005), one-year sac expansion (OR 1.4; [1.0-1.8]; P=.025) and one-year reinterventions (OR 1.4; [1.0-1.9]; P=.039). Unadjusted mid-term survival was lower for patients with neck characteristics outside of IFU than for patients without (5-year survival 84.0% vs. 86.7%, log-rank<.001). However, after adjustment, survival was similar for patients with neck characteristics outside of IFU to those within (HR: 1.1; [1.0-1.3]; P=.22).

CONCLUSION

Neck characteristics outside of IFU are independently associated with completion type Ia endoleaks, perioperative mortality, one-year sac expansion and one-year reinterventions among patients undergoing elective EVAR. These results indicate that continued effort is needed to improve the proximal seal in patients with neck characteristics outside of IFU undergoing EVAR. Also, in patients with severe hostile neck characteristics, alternative approaches such as open repair, use of a fenestrated or branched device, or endoanchors should be considered.

Use of Chimney Technique Does Not Improve the Outcome of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Patients With a Hyperangulated and Short Proximal Aortic Neck

PURPOSE

We hypothesized that extending the proximal landing zone with the chimney technique could be beneficial in patients with a hyperangulated proximal aortic neck, defined as more > 60 degrees.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the outcome of prospectively collected data of patients treated by endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal aortic aneurysm with a hyperangulated proximal aortic neck. In all, 104 out of 130 patients were treated without (Group A) and 24 with the chimney endovascular aortic repair (ChEVAR, Group B). Primary outcome was technical and clinical success according to the reporting standards of the Society of Vascular Surgery.

RESULTS

The use of the chimney technique was associated with a significantly longer operation duration (167 vs. 93 min, p < .001), longer fluoroscopy time (44 vs.30 min, p = < .001), and larger amount of contrast medium used (149 vs. 127 ml, p = .03) but did not significantly improve technical (79.2% vs. 87.7%) and clinical success (54.2% vs. 68.9%). Aneurysm-related mortality was higher in group B (8.3% vs. = 0%, p < .001). Type IA endoleak was high in both groups at completion angiography (11.3% in Group A vs. 12.5% in Group B) and at follow-up (10.4% in Group A vs. 4.5% in Group B) without significant difference between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data did not show a benefit of the primary use of the chimney technique in patients with a hyperangulated and short neck, although more studies are required to support this conclusion. Other strategies or new technologies are required for improving EVAR results in aneurysm patients with severe angulated proximal and short neck.

The impact of type 1a endoleak on the long-term outcome after EVAR

OBJECTIVE

Endoleaks remains a major determinant of outcome after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. The objective of this study is to evaluate the long-term impact of proximal type 1 endoleak encountered at the case end of the EVAR procedure or during follow-up.

METHODS

All patients treated with EVAR between February 2001 and August 2017 in our institution were included. Data were collected retrospectively. A descriptive analysis of subgroups with type 1a endoleak at case end or with type 1a endoleak first encountered during follow-up was performed.

RESULTS

In total, 468 patients were included for analysis. At the case end of the EVAR procedure, in 5.3% (25/468) of patients, a type 1a endoleak was seen. In 72% of cases (18/25) the type 1a endoleak spontaneously disappeared on the first follow-up computed tomography angiography and never recurred. At the end of the follow-up period, no patient in this subgroup died with a type 1a endoleak on follow-up. In 3.4% (16/468) of all cases, a type 1a endoleak was encountered for the first time during follow-up. In 87.5% (14/16) of these cases, reintervention was performed. Two patients died with a persisting type 1a endoleak during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should differentiate between the type 1a endoleak at the case end and the type 1a endoleak first occurring during follow-up. For type 1a endoleak at the case end, expectant management can be adopted. Delayed type 1a endoleak seen during follow-up rarely seals spontaneously and needs reintervention in the majority of cases.

Long-term outcomes and interventions of postoperative type 1a endoleak following elective endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the incidence and long-term outcomes of postoperative type 1a endoleak (PT1a) following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive aorto-iliac EVARs performed at a single institution from June 2006 to June 2012 was conducted. Patients with PT1a were identified by postoperative imaging and compared with those who did not develop a PT1a. Late outcomes were also studied of a subset of patients with PT1a who had persistent intraoperative type 1a endoleak (iT1a) on completion angiogram during EVAR that had resolved on initial follow-up imaging.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty-nine patients underwent EVAR with median follow-up of 87 months (interquartile range, 64-111 months). The incidence of PT1a was 8.2% (n = 32) with a median follow-up of 74 months (interquartile range, 52-138 months). Compared with the total cohort, those who developed PT1a were statistically more likely to be female (32% vs 17%; P = .03) and have a higher all-cause mortality (71% vs 40%; P < .01) and aneurysm-related mortality (15.6% vs 1.7%; P < .01). Median time to presentation was 52 months. Of the 32 patients with PT1a, five (15.6%) presented with aortic rupture, of which three underwent extension cuff placement, one had open graft explant, and one declined intervention. Six patients in total (18.7%) declined intervention; five of these died of nonaneurysmal causes and one remains alive. Of the 26 patients with PT1a who had intervention, 21 (80.7%) showed resolution of PT1a, and five (19.2%) had recurrence. For patients with recurrent PT1a, two had resulting aneurysm-related mortality, two endoleaks resolved after relining with an endograft, and one patient declined intervention but remains alive. Patients with PT1a who had intervention with resolution showed no significant difference in median survival estimates (140.0 months) compared with the remaining EVAR cohort (120.0 months; P = .80). Within the PT1a cohort, 6 (18.7%) had also experienced iT1a with a mean time to presentation of the late PT1a of 45 months. iT1a was associated with a significantly increased likelihood of developing a PT1a (P < .01) and decreased median survival (P < .01), but there was no known aneurysm-related mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Development of PT1a following elective EVAR is associated with increased all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality and presents an average of 52 months postoperatively. This underscores the importance of long-term surveillance. Patients with PT1a who had a successful intervention showed no significant difference in median survival. Those with iT1a had a higher risk for PT1a compared with the EVAR cohort overall and had decreased median survival, without increased aneurysm-related mortality.

Outcomes of chimney/snorkel endovascular repair for symptomatic and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Symptomatic and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are increasingly being managed with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). We aimed to identify the outcomes of symptomatic and ruptured AAAs that had undergone EVAR with a chimney or snorkel technique (ChEVAR).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed using the Vascular Quality Initiative registry from March 2013 to July 2019. All patients with symptomatic and ruptured AAAs with a proximal aortic zone of disease from 6 to 9 who had undergone ChEVAR were included. The outcomes were analyzed in accordance with the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards for EVAR.

RESULTS

ChEVAR was performed in 77 patients (ruptured, 35 [45.5%]; symptomatic, 42 [54.5%]). The median age was 73.0 years (interquartile range [IQR], 67.0-81.0 years), and 54 patients (70.1%) were men. The median maximum aneurysm diameter was 67.5 mm (IQR, 54.5-83.3 mm). All patients had American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥III. For the patients with ruptured AAAs, the mean lowest preoperative systolic blood pressure was 95.3 ± 29.3 mm Hg. The fluoroscopy time was 57.4 minutes (IQR, 41.2-79.0 minutes). The proximal aortic zone of disease was zone 6 in 9 (11.7%), zone 7 in 21 (27.3%), zone 8 in 36 (46.8%), and zone 9 in 11 (14.3%) patients. ChEVAR involved more than one vessel in 55 patients (71.4%). No significant difference was found in 30-day mortality between the patients with ruptured vs symptomatic AAAs (11.4% vs 7.1%; P = .695). Reintervention was required for 10 patients (13.0%) at a median of 9 postoperative days, 2 (20.0%) of whom died. Postoperatively, 31 patients (40.3%) had experienced a major complication. A type I endoleak had occurred in nine patients (11.7%), two (22.2%) of whom died. Long-term follow-up data were available for 38 patients (49.4%) at a median of 406.5 days (IQR, 326.8-602.0 days) postoperatively. Of the 18 patients with long-term radiographic data, sac growth was detected in 4 (22.2%). A total of 14 patients had died at a median of 26.5 days (IQR, 3.0-468.5 days).

CONCLUSIONS

ChEVAR for symptomatic and ruptured AAAs can be performed with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality. Long-term data are needed to determine the durability.

Multiple Chimney Endografts (ChEVAR) for Ruptured Pararenal Aortic Aneurysm

We present a ruptured pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repaired with a complex three-vessel chimney EVAR . This technique allows for rapid sealing of the aneurysm with branch preservation and avoids complex open aortic surgery. This case report highlights techniques and pitfalls from complex three-vessel chimney EVAR repair in the emergency setting.

Outcomes of type Ia endoleaks after endovascular repair of the proximal aorta

OBJECTIVE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can be complicated by a type Ia endoleak. However, its natural history remains unclear. This report describes the natural history and midterm outcome of conservatively treated type Ia endoleaks in the proximal aorta.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2015, 395 patients underwent TEVAR at our institution. Only TEVARs landing proximally at landing zones 0, 1, and 2 were included (221/395). Type Ia endoleak's flow was classified as "fast" or "slow" based on the time needed to visualize the aneurysmal sac during arteriogram.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 4.1 years. Aortic dissection, thoracic aortic aneurysm, and traumatic aortic injury were the most common indications for TEVAR; the incidence of type Ia endoleak was not statistically different. Forty-seven patients (21.3%) had a type Ia endoleak. TEVAR landing proximally at zone 1 increased the odds of developing a type Ia endoleak (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-5.9; P = .0072). The 30-day mortality and the overall survival was not influenced by the development of immediate-type Ia endoleak. In 34 (72.3%) patients, the endoleak resolved spontaneously. Ninety-four percent of these patients had a SlowE (n = 32/34). All of spontaneous resolutions occurred before the end of the first postoperative year.

CONCLUSIONS

SlowE tends to resolve within 1 year after TEVAR. Initial conservative treatment seems to be a reasonable approach in patients with SlowE.

Type IA endoleak caused by interlocked suprarenal bare-metal stents after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with successful endovascular rescue

A physically active 90-year-old man underwent endovascular repair of an asymptomatic but enlarging abdominal aortic aneurysm. Postoperative computed tomography demonstrated entanglement of nonadjacent proximal bare-metal stents. This was associated with graft infolding and a type IA endoleak. The patient underwent percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and placement of a Palmaz stent. Subsequent surveillance imaging showed resolution of the type I endoleak >1 year later. This report demonstrates an uncommon cause of stent graft infolding, an already rare complication of endovascular aneurysm repair, and highlights the need to carefully assess the morphologic appearance of the proximal fixation stents after graft deployment.

Adjunctive Procedures for Challenging Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Repair: When Needed and How Effective?

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is now considered the first choice treatment modality for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) treatment. Advocates for endovascular strategies will try to treat all AAA by EVAR, regardless if the anatomy is conducive for treatment or not. However, the long-term outcomes of EVAR outside the instructions for use (IFU) due to a hostile aneurysmal neck or iliac artery anatomy are known to be poor. The EVAR procedures can be classified according to the technical difficulty, IFU, and need for visceral revascularization: standard, adjunctive, and complex EVAR. The situation required for adjunctive procedures can be classified as the following four steps: a hostile neck (i.e., short or severely angled); large inferior mesenteric or lumbar artery; tough iliac artery anatomy, such as a short common iliac artery and stenotic external iliac artery; and limitations in vascular access. This article will discuss the adjunctive procedures to overcome hostile aneurysm neck and unsuitable iliac artery anatomy.

Multicenter Registry about the Use of EndoAnchors in the Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Hostile Neck Showed Successful but Delayed Endograft Sealing within Intraoperative Type Ia Endoleak Cases

BACKGROUND

The durability of endovascular aortic aneurysms repair (EVAR) is highly related to several anatomical constraints. The term "hostile neck" describes several anatomical features that usually make EVAR treatment technically demanding despite having higher risk of failure. The aim of the study was to describe a multicenter experience with EVAR and an adjunctive use of EndoAnchors in hostile neck anatomies.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected from 4 academic vascular centers including 46 patients with a hostile neck treated by standard EVAR with the adjunctive use of EndoAnchors. Twenty-two of them (47.8%, group A) had an intraoperative type Ia endoleak, and 24 (52.2%) patients were treated in a preventive manner (group B). Primary endpoints were technical and procedural success. Secondary endpoints were regression of the aneurysm sac, freedom from type Ia endoleak, and reinterventions.

RESULTS

Neck length and diameter showed no statistical difference in preoperative measures, 9.1 ± 6.9 mm and 8.6 ± 2.8 mm and 25.4 ± 4.7 mm and 27.3 ± 4.7 mm, in group A and B, respectively. Aneurysm sac diameter decreased from 58.2 ± 8 mm and 57.9 ± 9.8 mm to 55.7 ± 8.5 mm and 53.8 ± 10.4 mm in group A and B; respectively, at the last computed tomography scan. Technical and procedural success was 97.8% and 100%, respectively, for group B. Group A showed persistence of type Ia endoleak at completion angiogram in 9 (40.9%) patients. Five of them showed early spontaneous sealing at the first (30 days) computed tomography angiography (CTA), and in the remaining 4, a delayed spontaneous sealing was diagnosed at 12-month CTA. No neck-related secondary procedures were performed. Overall survival was 91%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that additional use of EndoAnchors can successfully improve the sealing of abdominal endografts in case of intraoperative type Ia endoleaks in hostile neck anatomies, representing a safe and effective endovascular alternative in our armamentarium. However, meticulous radiological follow-up is necessary because complete resolution of all observed intraoperative type Ia endoleaks was not observed until the 12-month CTA follow-up.

Effectiveness of Intra-Arterial Aneurysm Sac Embolization for Type Ia Endoleak after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and durability of intra-arterial aneurysm sac embolization for the treatment of type Ia endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From February 2011 to December 2016, 22 patients underwent embolization of a type Ia endoleak after EVAR. Four patients (18%) were treated during the index EVAR and 18 (82%) in follow-up. Five patients (23%) were treated urgently and 17 (77%) electively. The embolization was performed with the use of liquid embolic agent, coils, and/or plugs. Adjunctive neck procedures were performed in 55% (n = 12) of the patients. The primary endpoint of this study was freedom from sac enlargement. Key secondary endpoints were technical success and freedom from endoleak-related reinterventions.

RESULTS

Technical success was 100%. The 30-day mortality was 5% (n = 1; acute coronary syndrome). At a mean follow-up of 15.4 months (range 0.1-65.4) the freedom from sac enlargement rate was 76% (16 out of 21). Reintervention-free survival rates at 6, 12, and 24 months were 80%, 68% and 68%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with persistent type Ia endoleak the embolization of the aneurysm sac with or without adjunctive neck procedures can be safely performed, leading to acceptable clinical and radiologic outcomes.

Outcomes of endovascular treatment of endoleak type Ia after EVAR: a systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular repair of infra-renal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) has become treatment of choice. However, individuals undergoing EVAR have a high re-intervention rate. The aim of this study is to evaluate the current endovascular treatment modalities of endoleak type Ia (ET Ia) treatment after EVAR and their outcome.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched with PRISMA methodology for studies reporting on endovascular treatment of ET Ia after EVAR. Studies presenting treatment of intra-operative ET Ia were excluded.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Two international registries, fourteen non-randomized retrospective and twelve case-report studies were included reporting on 356 patients. Reported endovascular techniques included fenestrated-, branched-, chimney EVAR, endovascular sealing (EVAS), endoanchors, embolization techniques, cuff and/or "giant" Palmaz stents. Technical success rate ranged from 90% to 100%, with intra-operative mortality rate of 0%. During early period, persistence of ET Ia was 3.4% (9/262) and the re-intervention rate was 3.5% (8/227). The 30-day mortality rate was 2% (7/356). Mean follow-up was 22.4 months±18. Presence of ET Ia was 5.9% (21/356), and the reintervention rate was 5.1% (18/349). The mortality rate was 13% (26/203), while the primary patency rate of TVs ranged from 94.3% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

A multitude of techniques for endovascular repair for ET Ia exists. No strong evidence supports one specific technique. The early and mid-term outcomes are encouraging in terms of ET Ia resolution, mortality and morbidity rates.

Select type I and type III endoleaks at the completion of fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair resolve spontaneously

OBJECTIVE

The Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) consider the presence of a type I or type III endoleak a technical failure. However, the nature and implications of these endoleaks in fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) are not well understood.

METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective review of 53 patients who underwent FEVAR with the Zenith Fenestrated AAA Endovascular Graft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) from 2013 to 2018. We excluded one patient without contrast-enhanced postoperative imaging who was lost to follow-up after discharge. Small, slow, type I and type III endoleaks on completion angiography were routinely observed. We identified patients with completion type I or type III endoleaks by angiography review and characterized endoleak type, location, and rate of resolution on initial postoperative imaging.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were included; mean age was 75 ± 8 years, 75% were male, and 91% were white. Of 146 visceral vessels (100 renal arteries and 46 superior mesenteric arteries), 145 (99%) were preserved with 103 fenestrations and 43 scallops; 102 (70%) target vessels were stented. After implantation of all device components, 31 patients (60%) had evidence of type I or type III endoleak. Twelve patients (39%) underwent further intervention at the index procedure, and three endoleaks resolved completely. Twenty-eight patients (54%) had a type I or type III endoleak on completion angiography. There were no differences between patients with and without completion endoleaks in baseline demographics, graft design, neck anatomy, or proportion of cases performed within the instructions for use of the device. Perioperative mortality was 1.9%. On initial postoperative imaging, 27 of 28 (96%) endoleaks resolved spontaneously. One small, persistent type IA or type III endoleak was identified on postoperative day 27 and was observed. This endoleak had resolved completely on computed tomography angiography 6 months postoperatively. In patients without a completion endoleak, one type IA endoleak secondary to graft infolding was discovered on postoperative imaging and was successfully treated with placement of endoanchors and Palmaz stent. Median follow-up was 269 days. No additional type I or type III endoleaks were identified in any patient for the duration of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas completion type I and type III endoleaks are common after FEVAR with the ZFEN device, nearly all of these endoleaks resolve spontaneously by the initial postoperative imaging. These results suggest that select completion endoleaks after FEVAR with the ZFEN device do not require intervention at the index procedure.

Midterm Single-Center Results of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair With Additional EndoAnchors

PURPOSE

To review midterm clinical outcomes of EndoAnchor placement during or after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or chimney EVAR (ch-EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted of 51 consecutive patients [median age 75 years; 38 men] who underwent EVAR/ch-EVAR with EndoAnchor placement between June 2010 and December 2016 to prevent seal failures (31, 61%) or to treat type Ia endoleak and/or migration (20, 39%). Median aortic neck diameter was 27.7 mm and median neck length was 9.0 mm. Thirty-three (65%) had a conical neck; 48 (94%) had at least 1 hostile neck characteristic. Thirty-two (63%) patients had severe comorbidities (ASA score ⩾III). Eight patients had a single ch-EVAR procedure. Baseline patient characteristics, anatomic variables, procedure details, early and late complications, reinterventions, and aneurysm-related and all-cause mortality rates were recorded. Follow-up imaging was performed with computed tomography angiography (CTA) or duplex ultrasonography.

RESULTS

Median procedure time was 100 minutes; a median of 6 EndoAnchors were implanted. There were 10 (10%) residual type Ia endoleaks at the end of the procedure; 9 had resolved by the first postoperative CTA. One residual and 2 new type Ia endoleaks were identified at the first postoperative imaging. Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 24.0 months, during which 3 new type Ia endoleaks were identified. Five of the 6 type Ia endoleaks were treated, 1 resolved spontaneously. There was 1 endograft limb occlusion without clinical consequences, 1 chimney graft occlusion without possibilities for a reintervention, 1 rupture after type IV endoleak (a Nellix device was successfully deployed within the main device), and 1 complete graft explantation for infection. There was no new-onset hemodialysis. Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from type Ia endoleak, proximal neck-related reinterventions, and aneurysm-related mortality at 2 years were 87.3%, 92.2%, and 94.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

EndoAnchors are helpful in the endovascular treatment of unfavorable proximal aortic necks, with fair midterm results.

Conservative management of type 1A endoleaks at completion angiogram in endovascular repair of infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysms with current generation stent grafts

Purpose

Proximal type 1A endoleaks on completion intra-operative angiography are not infrequently seen following endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR). The natural course of these leaks is not well established. We sought to determine the rate of spontaneous resolution and a conservative treatment approach to these endoleaks.

Methods

All cases involving endovascular repairs of infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysms resulting in proximal type 1A endoleak on final intra-operative completion angiography were retrospectively reviewed from 1 April 2010 and 30 March 2015. Demographic, pre and post-procedural imaging, and clinical outcomes were reviewed. Summarizing descriptive statistics are reported.

Results

Of the 337 patients who underwent an EVAR, 24 patients (7.1%) had a proximal type 1A endoleak on final intra-operative angiography. Twenty-two of 24 patients (92%) with proximal type 1A endoleaks had spontaneous resolution on follow-up imaging without any intervention, while two (8%) patients had a persistent endoleak. One of these patients required intervention. The median follow-up for patients with resolved endoleaks was 2.5 years vs. 4 and 6 years, respectively, for patients that did not resolve spontaneously.

Conclusion

A conservative approach may be used in the management of patients with proximal type 1A endoleaks on completion angiography once maximum proximal seal was achieved intra-operatively as the vast majority of these leaks spontaneously seal.

Collected Transatlantic Experience From the PERICLES Registry: Use of Chimney Grafts to Treat Post-EVAR Type Ia Endoleaks Shows Good Midterm Results

Purpose: The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the performance of the chimney (ch) technique in the treatment of type Ia endoleaks after standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: Between January 2008 and December 2014, 517 chEVAR procedures were performed in 13 US and European vascular centers (PERICLES registry). Thirty-nine patients (mean age 76.9±7.1 years; 33 men) were treated for persistent type Ia endoleak and had computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography follow-up at >1 month. Endurant abdominal stent-grafts were used in the 20 cases. Single chimney graft placement was performed in 18 (46%) patients and multiple in 21 (54%). Overall, 70 visceral vessels were targeted for revascularization. Results: Technical success was achieved in 35 (89.7%) cases; 3 persistent type Ia endoleaks and 1 chimney graft occlusion were detected within the first 30 days. Thirty-day mortality was 2.6%. Two other deaths (not aneurysm related) occurred during a mean follow-up of 21.9 months (0.23–71.3). Primary patency of the chimney grafts was 94.3% at 36 months. In a subgroup analysis comparing Endurant to other stent-grafts, no significant differences were observed regarding persistent endoleak [1/20 (5%) vs 2/19 (11%), p=0.6] or reintervention [1/20 (5%) vs 0/19 (0%)]. Conclusion: The present series demonstrates that chEVAR in the treatment of post-EVAR type Ia endoleaks has satisfactory results independent of the abdominal and chimney graft combinations. Midterm results show that chEVAR is an effective method for treating type Ia endoleaks.

In Vitro Quantification of Gutter Formation and Chimney Graft Compression in Chimney EVAR Stent-Graft Configurations Using Electrocardiography-Gated Computed Tomography

Purpose: To assess the dynamic behavior of chimney grafts during the cardiac cycle. Methods: Three chimney endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) stent-graft configurations (Endurant and Advanta V12, Endurant and Viabahn, and Endurant and BeGraft) were placed in silicone aneurysm models and subjected to physiologic flow. Electrocardiography (ECG)-gated contrast-enhanced computed tomography was used to visualize geometric changes during the cardiac cycle. Endograft and chimney graft surface, gutter volume, chimney graft angulation over the center lumen line, and the D-ratio (the ratio between the lengths of the major and minor axes) were independently assessed by 2 observers at 10 time points in the cardiac cycle. Results: Both gutter volumes and chimney graft geometry changed significantly during the cardiac cycle in all 3 configurations (p<0.001). Gutters and endoleaks were observed in all configurations. The largest gutter volume (232.8 mm3) and change in volume (20.7 mm3) between systole and diastole were observed in the Endurant-Advanta configuration. These values were 2.7- and 3.0-fold higher, respectively, compared to the Endurant-Viabahn configuration and 1.7- and 1.6-fold higher as observed in the Endurant-BeGraft configuration. The Endurant-Viabahn configuration had the highest D-ratio (right, 1.26–1.35; left, 1.33–1.48), while the Endurant-BeGraft configuration had the lowest (right, 1.11–1.17; left, 1.08–1.15). Assessment of the interobserver variability showed a high correlation (intraclass correlation >0.935) between measurements. Conclusion: Gutter volumes and stent compression are dynamic phenomena that reshape during the cardiac cycle. Compelling differences were observed during the cardiac cycle in all configurations, with the self-expanding (Endurant–Viabahn) chimney EVAR configurations having smaller gutters and less variation in gutter volume during the cardiac cycle yet more stent compression without affecting the chimney graft surface.

Late open conversion after endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysm failure: Better and easier option than complex endovascular treatment

AIM

Conversion to open repair becomes the last option in case of endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysm failure, when radiological interventional procedures are unfeasible. While early conversion to open repair generally derives from technical errors, aetiopathogenesis and results of late conversion to open repair often remain unclear.

METHODS

We report data from our Institute's experience on late conversion to open repair. Twenty-two late conversion to open repairs out of 435 consecutive patients treated during a 18 years period, plus two endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysms performed in other centres, are analysed. The indication for conversion to open repair was aneurysm enlargement because of type I, type III, type II endoleak and endotension. Even if seven cases (23%) had shown an initial aneurysmal shrinkage, in a later phase, the sac began to enlarge again. In 12 patients, conversion to open repair was the last chance after unsuccessful secondary endovascular procedures.

RESULTS

Three cases (12.5%) were treated in emergency. Aortic cross-clamping was only infrarenal in 10 cases, only or temporarily suprarenal in 14 and temporarily supraceliac in 9 cases, for 19 total and 5 partial endograft excisions. Two patients died for Multiple Organ Failure (MOF), on 42nd (endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysm infection) and 66th postoperative day. No other conversion to open repair-related deaths or major complications were revealed by follow-up post-conversion to open repair (mean: 68 months ranging from 24 to 180 months).

CONCLUSION

Late conversion to open repair is often an unpredictable event. It represents a technical challenge: specifically, the most critical point is the proximal aortic clamping that often temporarily excludes the renal circulation. In our series, conversion to open repair can be performed with a low rate of complications. In response to an endovascular repair of abdominal aneurysm failure, before applying complex procedures of endovascular treatment, conversion to open repair should be taken into account.

Management of Immediate Post-Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Type Ia Endoleaks and Late Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Post-endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) endoleaks and the need for reintervention are challenging. Additional endovascular treatment is advised for type Ia endoleaks detected on post-EVAR completion angiogram. This study analyzed management and late outcomes of these endoleaks.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from EVAR patients during a 10-year period. All post-EVAR type Ia endoleaks on completion angiogram were identified (group A) and their early (30-day) and late outcomes were compared with outcomes of patients without endoleaks (group B). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for survival analysis, sac expansion, late type Ia endoleak, and reintervention.

RESULTS

Seventy-one of 565 (12.6%) patients had immediate post-EVAR type Ia endoleak. Early intervention (proximal aortic cuffs and/or stenting) was used in 56 of 71 (79%) in group A vs 31 of 494 (6%) in group B (p < 0.0001). Late type Ia endoleak was noted in 9 patients (13%) in group A at a mean follow-up of 28 months vs 10 patients (2%) in group B at a mean follow-up of 32 months (p < 0.0001). Late sac expansion and reintervention rates were 9% and 10% for group A vs 5% and 3% for group B (p = 0.2698 and p = 0.0198), respectively. Freedom rates from late type Ia endoleaks at 1, 3, and 5 years for group A were 88%, 85%, and 80% vs 98%, 98%, and 96% for group B (p < 0.001); and for late intervention, were 94%, 92%, and 77% for group A, and 99%, 97%, and 95% for group B (p = 0.007), respectively. Survival rates were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate post-EVAR type Ia endoleaks are associated with higher rates of early interventions, late endoleaks and reintervention, which will necessitate strict post-EVAR surveillance.

Classification of gutter type in parallel stenting during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Gutters can be described as the loss of continuous apposition between the main body of the endograft, the chimney stent graft, and the aortic wall. Gutters have been associated with increased risk of type IA endoleaks and are considered to be the Achilles' heel of chimney endovascular aneurysm repair (ch-EVAR). However, there is no classification yet to classify and quantify gutter types after ch-EVAR.

METHODS

Different gutter types can be distinguished by their morphologic appearance in two- and three-dimensional views and reconstructed slices perpendicular to the center lumen line.

RESULTS

Three main categories are defined by (1) the most proximal beginning of the gutter, (2) the length of gutter alongside the endograft, and (3) its distal end. Type A gutters originate at the proximal fabric of an endograft, type B gutters originate as loss of apposition of the chimney stent graft in the branch vessel, and type C gutters start below the fabric of the endograft. To determine eventual changes of gutter size during follow-up computed tomography angiograms (CTAs), measurements may be performed with dedicated software on the follow-up CTA scan to assess the extent of gutters over the aortic circumference, ranging from 0° to 360° of freedom, together with the maximum gap between the endograft material and the aortic wall as it appears on reconstructed axial CTA scan slices.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed gutter classification enables a uniform nomenclature in the current ch-EVAR literature and a more accurate risk assessment of gutter-associated endoleaks. Moreover, it allows monitoring of eventual progression of gutter size during follow-up.

A 15-Year Single-Center Experience of Endovascular Repair for Elective and Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Purpose: To evaluate the differences in technical outcomes and secondary interventions between elective endovascular aneurysm repair (el-EVAR) procedures and those for ruptured aneurysms (r-EVAR). Methods: Of the 906 patients treated with primary EVAR from September 1998 until July 2012, 43 cases were excluded owing to the use of first-generation stent-grafts. Among the remaining 863 patients, 773 (89.6%) patients (mean age 72 years; 697 men) with asymptomatic or symptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) were assigned to the el-EVAR group; 90 (10.4%) patients (mean age 73 years; 73 men) were assigned to the r-EVAR group based on blood outside the aortic wall on preoperative imaging. The primary study outcome was technical success; secondary endpoints, including freedom from secondary interventions and late survival, were examined with Kaplan-Meier analyses. Results: At baseline, r-EVAR patients had larger aneurysms on average (p<0.001) compared to el-EVAR patients. Technical success was comparable (p=0.052), but there were more type Ia endoleaks at completion angiography in the r-EVAR group (p=0.038). As anticipated, more patients died in the first month in the r-EVAR group (18.9% vs 2.2% el-EVAR, p<0.001). At 5 years, there was an overall survival of 65.1% for the el-EVAR patients vs 48.1% in the r-EVAR group (p<0.001). The freedom from AAA-related mortality was 95.7% for el-EVAR and 71.0% for r-EVAR (p<0.001). Five-year freedom from type I/III endoleaks was significantly lower in the r-EVAR group (78.7% vs 90.0%, p=0.003). Five-year freedom from secondary intervention estimates were not significantly different (el-EVAR 84.2% vs r-EVAR 78.2%, p=0.064). Conclusion: Within our cohort of primary EVAR patients, r-EVAR cases showed comparable stent-graft–related technical outcome. Although there was a higher incidence of type Ia endoleaks on completion angiography in the r-EVAR group, the overall secondary intervention rate was comparable to el-EVAR.

Spontaneous Sealing of a Type Ia Endoleak after Ovation Stent Graft Implantation in a Patient with On-Label Aortic Neck Anatomy

We report a case of an early type Ia endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of an abdominal aortic aneurysm by Ovation Stent Graft implantation and spontaneously resolved without further reintervention. The patient presents a conical aortic neck, but EVAR was performed within the instruction for use proposed by manufactory. At completion angiography, a low-flow type Ia endoleak was present and left untreated. Computed tomographic angiography performed on the third postoperative day showed infolding of the 2 sealing rings. The patient was dismissed without further treatment. At 3-month follow-up, the leak appeared spontaneously sealed with partial expansion of the 2 rings.

Noninvasive Estimation of Aneurysm Sac Pressurization Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using M-Mode Ultrasonography to Evaluate Significance of Endoleaks: A Feasibility Study

PURPOSE

To establish the feasibility of indirectly estimating aneurysm sac pressurization from recordings of aortic pulsatile wall motion (PWM) using M-mode ultrasonography before and after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

Twenty consecutive patients (mean age 72 years; 19 men) scheduled for EVAR in a single institution underwent M-mode ultrasonography 1 day before EVAR to record PWM of the abdominal aortic aneurysm wall during the cardiac cycle, along with simultaneous blood pressure measurements. The recording was repeated the first postoperative day. Pressure-strain elastic modulus (Ep) was calculated from the preoperative displacement and pressure data. This value and the postoperative PWM were used to inverse estimate pulse pressure in the abdominal aortic aneurysm sac post EVAR. Immediate pressure reduction post EVAR was compared between groups of endoleak vs no endoleak and expansion vs no expansion during 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Intraobserver variability of the method presented a mean value of 0.04 mm with a 1.2-mm coefficient of variation (95% limits of agreement -1.16 to 1.24 mm). PWM was significantly reduced postoperatively (1.2 vs 0.3 mm, p<0.001) as was pulse pressure exerted on the aneurysm sac (67 vs 16 mm Hg, p<0.001). The pressure reduction was similar between the endoleak vs no endoleak groups (79% vs 75%, p=0.65), but it was significantly greater in the no expansion group (79.5%) vs the group with aneurysm expansion (50%, p=0.008).

CONCLUSION

M-mode ultrasonography may provide a useful adjunct during EVAR surveillance to noninvasively estimate sac pressurization and identify aneurysms at risk of enlargement.

Nellix EndoVascular Aneurysm Sealing System: Device description, technique of implantation, and literature review

Clinical outcome reports document that from 30% to 60% of endovascular aneurysm repair procedures are performed outside of US Food and Drug Administration-approved Instruction for Use, or "off label." Endovascular aneurysm repair performed outside of Instruction for Use has a significantly higher rate of device failure, potentially requiring device reintervention and even planned or emergent explant. The Nellix device has the potential to reduce the rate of aneurysm device failure through its novel design. The objective of this article was to introduce the Nellix EndoVascular Aneurysm Sealing System and indications for use and describe the technique of implantation. We describe various modes of endovascular aneurysm repair failure and how the Nellix system can reduce these unplanned adverse outcomes. Additional clinical applications and theoretical shortcomings of endovascular aneurysm sealing devices are detailed.

Late single-center outcome of the Talent Abdominal Stent Graft after a decade of follow-up

OBJECTIVE

Lifelong yearly surveillance is advised after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms. This follow-up requires a substantial amount of health care resources. The aim of this paper was to assess the occurrence of stent graft-related complications and secondary interventions during a minimum 10-year follow-up after elective EVAR.

METHODS

Patients who were treated in a high-volume endovascular center in The Netherlands with the Talent infrarenal stent graft (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, Calif) between June 1999 and February 2005 were included. Patients with previous aortic surgery or emergency interventions were excluded. Our primary outcome was clinical success up to 10 years. Secondary end points were technical success and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 149 patients were included; 91.9% were male. The mean age was 70.2 ± 7.8 years. A stent graft was implanted in 98% of patients; technical success was achieved in 89.9%. Clinical success after 30 days, 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years was 81.1%, 74.3%, 70.3%, and 65.5%, respectively. In 30 patients (20.7%), a secondary intervention was required; 80.0% of first secondary interventions occurred within the first 5 years. Six late conversions were necessary because of stent graft infection (2), migration (2), or persisting endoleak (2). The 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were 55.2% and 38.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of EVAR-related complication is highest in the first 5 years. Consequently, the main focus should be on that period; further follow-up must not be neglected, as complications occur up to 10 years after treatment.

Performance of the Endurant stent graft in challenging anatomy

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare perioperative and postoperative outcomes after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in patients with various neck morphologic features.

METHODS

Data from the Endurant Stent Graft Natural Selection Global Postmarket Registry (ENGAGE) were used for the analyses. Patients were categorized into three different groups according to proximal aortic neck anatomy: regular (REG), intermediate (INT), and challenging (CHA). REG was defined as AAAs with a proximal neck ≥15 mm combined with a suprarenal angulation (α) ≤45 degrees and an infrarenal neck angulation (ß) ≤60 degrees. INT was defined as AAAs with a proximal neck of 10 to 15 mm combined with α ≤45 degrees and ß ≤60 degrees or with a proximal neck of >15 mm combined with α ≤60 degrees and ß = 60 to 75 degrees or α = 45 to 60 degrees and ß ≤75 degrees. CHA was defined as infrarenal necks that exceed at least one of the three defining factors.

RESULTS

Overall, 925 patients (75.9%) had REG anatomy, 189 patients (15.5%) had INT anatomy, and 104 patients (8.5%) had CHA anatomy. Patient demographics and risk factors were similar. There was a significant difference in AAA diameter between the REG and CHA groups (59.4 mm vs 65.2 mm; P < .001). Technical success was similar among groups (REG 99.1% vs INT 99.5% vs CHA 97.1%). There were no differences in mortality or the need for secondary procedures within 30 days or at 1 year. A significantly higher rate of type I endoleaks within 30 days was seen in CHA compared with REG (adjusted odds ratio, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.46) and INT (adjusted odds ratio, 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.70), but there was no difference at 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world, global experience shows promising results and indicates that endovascular AAA repair with the Endurant stent graft (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, Calif) is safe and effective in patients with challenging aortic neck anatomy. However, long-term follow-up of patients is required to confirm results.