Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Treatment for Type II Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Early and severe aortic endograft infection after percutaneous coil embolization of type 2 endoleak: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular aneurysm repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm is superior to open surgery regarding perioperative morbidity and mortality. Complications such as endoleaks represent a significant source of secondary intervention. Vascular graft infection is another serious complication found in 0.2 to 1 % of series. We hereby describe a case of a rapidly progressive aortic infection by Cutibacterium acnes following a percutaneous embolization procedure for a type II endoleak.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 75-year-old man presented with a fever along with lower back and buttock pain five days after embolization via direct percutaneous puncture for a type II endoleak. White blood cell scintigraphy and blood culture suggested the presence of aortitis, but the patient experienced notable spontaneous improvement in both clinical symptoms and biological markers. The patient underwent CT-angiography which revealed aneurysm rupture requiring urgent open surgery and initiation of antimicrobial therapy. Similarly to blood cultures, per-operative aortic wall tissue samples also revealed presence of Cutibacterium acnes.

DISCUSSION

Aortic endograft infection after embolization is an uncommon complication. The diagnosis is based on a combination of imaging, blood, and nuclear tests. Repeated CT-angiography may be helpful when infection occurs quickly after embolization. Staphylococcus and Streptococci are common pathogens implicated in these infections.

CONCLUSIONS

This is a case of an early and severe aortic endograft infection after percutaneous coil embolization of type 2 endoleak. Rupture occurred in less two weeks despite a slow-growing organism infection. The treatment includes endograft removal and antibacterial therapy. Caution is warranted when suspecting aortic endoprosthesis infection, necessitating close follow-up.

Surgical Treatment for Sac Expansion Caused by Type II Endoleaks after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms/Iliac Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to examine the outcomes of open surgery techniques involving sacotomy and suturing of the feeding vessels in patients with aneurysm sac expansion after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

Fourteen consecutive patients treated with sacotomy and suturing of feeding vessels for expanding aneurysm sacs with type II endoleaks following EVAR, between January 2018 and December 2022, were retrospectively included. All patients underwent preoperative digital subtraction angiography, and attempts were made to embolize the thick feeding vessels to reduce intraoperative bleeding. Age, sex, comorbidities, clinical presentation, aneurysm sac increase, morbidity, mortality, and follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 72.89 ± 5.13 years old, and 13 (92.9%) patients were male. The sac size at the time of the open procedure was 107.89 ± 22.58 mm, and the extent of sac growth at the time of the open procedure was 37.50 ± 18.29 mm. The initial technical success rate of laparotomy and open ligation of the culprit arteries causing type II endoleaks was 92.9% (13/14). Among the patients, 5 (35.7%) had been treated with interventional embolization before the open procedure. One endograft was removed and replaced by a bifurcated Dacron graft because of distal dislocation in one patient. All patients recovered, and no deaths were recorded postoperatively. No patients had an eventful postoperative course or any subsequent graft-related complications during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Open surgical repair involving sacotomy and suturing of the feeding vessels appeared to have good outcomes in the treatment of patients with aneurysm sac expansion caused by type II endoleaks after EVAR. Preoperative embolization of feeding vessels can thus effectively reduce intraoperative bleeding.

Five-year follow-up of randomized clinical trial for pre-emptive inferior mesenteric artery embolization during endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Type II endoleak (T2EL) is the most common type of endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and a common indication for reintervention due to late sac enlargement. Although pre-emptive embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) has been proposed to prevent this, no studies have prospectively demonstrated its efficacy. This study aimed to prove the validity of IMA embolization during EVAR in selective cases by analyzing the mid-term outcomes of a randomized clinical trial (RCT).

METHODS

This single-center, parallel-group, non-blinded RCT included participants at high risk of T2EL, characterized by a patent IMA in conjunction with one or more following risk factors: a patent IMA ≥3 mm in diameter, lumbar arteries ≥2 mm in diameter, or an aortoiliac-type aneurysm. The participants were randomly assigned to two groups in a 1:1 ratio: one undergoing EVAR with IMA embolization and the other without. The primary endpoint was T2EL occurrence. The secondary endpoints included aneurysm sac changes and reintervention. In addition to RCT participants, outcomes of patients with low risk of T2EL were also analyzed.

RESULTS

The embolization and non-embolization groups each contained 53 patients. Five-year follow-up after the last patient enrollment revealed that T2ELs occurred in 28.3% and 54.7% of patients in the IMA embolization and non-embolization groups, respectively (P = .006). Both freedom from T2EL-related sac enlargement ≥5 mm and cumulative incidence of sac shrinkage ≥5 mm were significantly higher in the IMA embolization group than in the non-embolization group (95.5% vs 73.6% at 5 years; P = .021; 54.2% vs 33.6% at 5 years; P = .039, respectively). The freedom from T2EL-related sac enlargement ≥10 mm, an alternative indicator for T2EL-related reintervention, showed similar results (100% vs 90.4% at 5 years; P = .019). Outcomes in the low-risk group were preferable than those in the non-embolization group and comparable to those in the IMA embolization group.

CONCLUSIONS

A lower threshold for pre-emptive IMA embolization when implementing EVAR would be more appropriate if limited to patients at high risk of T2ELs.

A computational study of artery curvature and endograft oversize influence on seal zone behavior in endovascular aortic repair

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a minimally invasive procedure involving the placement of an endograft inside the dissection or an aneurysm to direct blood flow and prevent rupture. A significant challenge in endovascular surgery is the geometrical mismatch between the endograft and the artery, which can lead to endoleak formation, a condition where blood leaks between the endograft and the vessel wall. This study uses computational modeling to investigate the effects of artery curvature and endograft oversizing, the selection of an endograft with a larger diameter than the artery, on endoleak creation. Finite element analysis is employed to simulate the deployment of endografts in arteries with varying curvature and diameter. Numerical simulations are conducted to assess the seal zone and to quantify the potential endoleak volume as a function of curvature and oversizing. A theoretical framework is developed to explain the mechanisms of endoleak formation along with proof-of-concept experiments. Two main mechanisms of endoleak creation are identified: local buckling due to diameter mismatch and global buckling due to centerline curvature mismatch. Local buckling, characterized by excess graft material buckling and wrinkle formation, increases with higher levels of oversizing, leading to a larger potential endoleak volume. Global buckling, where the endograft bends or deforms to conform to the centerline curvature of the artery, is observed to require a certain degree of oversizing to bridge the curvature mismatch. This study highlights the importance of considering both curvature and diameter mismatch in the design and clinical use of endografts. Understanding the mechanisms of endoleak formation can provide valuable insights for optimizing endograft design and surgical planning, leading to improved clinical outcomes in endovascular aortic procedures.

An Expert-Based Review on the Relevance and Management of Type 2 Endoleaks Following Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) are life-threatening and require emergent surgical therapy. Endovascular aortic repair for rupture (rEVAR) has become the leading strategy due to its minimal invasive approach with expected lower morbidity and mortality, especially in patients presenting with hemodynamic instability and relevant comorbidities. Following rEVAR, intraoperative angiography or early postinterventional computed tomography angiography have to exclude early type 1 or 3 endoleaks requiring immediate reintervention. Persistent type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) after rEVAR, in contrast to elective cases, can cause possibly lethal situations due to continuing extravascular blood loss through the remaining aortic aneurysm rupture site. Therefore, early identification of relevant persistent T2ELs associated with continuous bleeding and hemodynamic instability and immediate management is mandatory in the acute postoperative setting following rEVAR. Different techniques and concepts for the occlusion of T2ELs after rEVAR are available, and most of them are also used for relevant T2ELs after elective EVAR. In addition to various interventional embolization procedures for persistent T2ELs, some patients require open surgical occlusion of T2EL-feeding arteries, abdominal compartment decompression or direct surgical patch occlusion of the aneurysm rupture site after rEVAR. So far, in the acute situation of rAAAs, indications for preemptive or intraoperative T2EL embolization during rEVAR have not been established. In the long term, persistent T2ELs after rEVAR can lead to continuous aneurysm expansion with the possible development of secondary proximal type I endoleaks and an increased risk of re-rupture requiring regular follow-up and early consideration for reintervention. To date, only very few studies have investigated T2ELs after rEVAR or compared outcomes with those from elective EVAR regarding the special aspects of persisting T2ELs. This narrative review is intended to present the current knowledge on the incidence, natural history, relevance and strategies for T2EL management after rEVAR.

Understanding Type II Endoleak: A Harmless Imaging Finding or a Silent Threat?

Type II endoleak (T2EL) represents a challenging clinical entity following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Although several studies have suggested that T2ELs are related to an increased risk of aneurysm sac growth and subsequent rupture, the exact role that T2ELs play in long-term outcomes remains debatable. Understanding the pathophysiology, diagnostic modalities, and management options of T2ELs is important for patients' safety and proper resource utilization. While conservative management may be suitable for asymptomatic patients with a stable aneurysm size, interventional approaches, including transarterial embolization, direct sac puncture embolization and open conversion have been described for patients with persistent T2EL associated with sac expansion. However, more research is needed to better determine the clinical benefit of such interventions. A thorough evaluation of all endoleak types before T2EL treatment would be reasonable for patients with T2ELs associated with sac expansion. Further studies are needed to refine treatment strategies aimed at minimizing T2EL-related complications. Collaborative efforts among vascular specialists, radiologists, and researchers are of paramount importance to address this ongoing clinical challenge.

Open Conversion with Explantation of Stent Grafts After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

BACKGROUND

Although endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is widely used worldwide, the fact that it is associated with increased rates of reintervention has been considered a problem. This study aimed to analyze the outcomes of primary open AAA repair and open conversion with explantation of stent grafts after EVAR.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we enrolled 1,120 patients (open repair, n = 664; EVAR, n = 456) who underwent AAA repair at Kobe University from 1999 to 2019. Of the 664 patients who underwent open repair, 121 (patients who underwent primary open repair (POR) as a concomitant procedure and patients with ruptured AAA) were excluded from the study. The outcomes of POR were compared with those of open conversion with explantation of stent grafts.

RESULTS

Of the 543 patients who underwent open repair, 513 underwent POR and 30 underwent open conversion with explantation of stent grafts. The operation time for POR was significantly less than that for open conversion with explantation. During surgery, patients who underwent open conversion with explantation required significantly more transfusions of red cell concentrate, fresh frozen plasma, and platelet concentrate than those who underwent POR. Overall, 30 patients who underwent open conversion with explantation required a total of 48 reinterventions before surgery. Hospital mortality rates were 0.7% and 0% in the POR and open conversion with explantation groups, respectively (P = 0.62). Although overall survival at 5 years in the POR group was significantly better than that in the open conversion with explantation group (89.3 ± 1.7% vs. 79.5 ± 9.6%; P = 0.01), there were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding the freedom from aortic event (hospital death, reintervention, and aortic death). According to the multivariate analysis, open conversion with explantation was not an independent risk factor for late death. There were 20 patients who were hesitant to undergo OCE, although we recommended OCE. In a subgroup analysis, the overall mean cost borne by patients who underwent EVAR was approximately 2.3 times higher compared with that borne by patients who underwent POR.

CONCLUSIONS

Although demanding, both early and long-term outcomes of OCE have been favorable in our present study. OCE is highly recommended in patients with persistent sac enlargement after EVAR.

Impact of the Patency of Inferior Mesenteric Artery on 7-Year Outcomes After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

The impact of preoperative patent inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) on late outcomes following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the specific influence of IMA patency on 7-year outcomes after EVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, 556 EVARs performed for true abdominal aortic aneurysm cases between January 2006 and December 2019 at our institution were reviewed. Endovascular aneurysm repairs performed using a commercially available device with no type I or type III endoleak (EL) during follow-up and with follow-up ≥12 months were included. A total of 336 patients were enrolled in this study. The cohort was divided into the patent IMA group and the occluded IMA group according to preoperative IMA status. The late outcomes, including aneurysm sac enlargement, reintervention, and mortality rates, were compared between both groups using propensity-score-matched data.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 86 patients were included in each group. The median follow-up period was 56 months (interquartile range: 32-94 months). The incidence of type II EL at discharge was 50% in the patent IMA group and 19% in the occluded IMA group (p<0.001). The type II EL from IMA and lumbar arteries was significantly higher in the patent IMA group than in the occluded IMA group (p<0.001 and p=0.002). The rate of freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement with type II EL was significantly higher in the occluded IMA group than in the patent IMA group (94% vs 69% at 7 years; p<0.001). The rate of freedom from reintervention was significantly higher in the occluded IMA group than in the patent IMA group (90% vs 74% at 7 years; p=0.007). Abdominal aortic aneurysm-related death and all-cause mortality did not significantly differ between groups (p=0.32 and p=0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Inferior mesenteric artery patency could affect late reintervention and aneurysm sac enlargement but did not have a significant impact on mortality. Preoperative assessment and embolization of IMA might be an important factor for improvement in late EVAR outcomes.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The preoperative patency of the inferior mesenteric artery was significantly associated with a higher incidence of sac enlargement and reintervention with type II endoleak following endovascular aneurysm repair, even after adjustment for patient background. Preoperative assessment and embolization of inferior mesenteric artery might be an important factor for improvement in late EVAR outcomes.

Laser assisted trans-endograft coil embolization of a type II endoleak

A type II endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair can be challenging to stop. Numerous methods have been described, including trans-arterial, trans-lumbar, trans-caval, trans-endograft, peri-endograft, and open and laparoscopic surgical techniques. We present our experience with a laser-assisted trans-endograft approach, including technical variations of previous descriptions that might improve efficacy. In select cases, the laser-assisted trans-endograft approach might provide the most direct method of accessing and occluding the vessels feeding type II endoleaks.

Transarterial Embolisation of Abdominal Aortic Type II Endoleaks Accessed via the Deep Circumflex Iliac Artery: A Case Series and Literature Review

We report our technique and experience treating 3 patients with native abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) sac expansion following EVAR, who were managed with transarterial embolisation via the deep circumflex iliac artery (DCIA). In this case series, we demonstrate that transarterial embolisation via the DCIA is a feasible and safe treatment option. The DCIA should be routinely interrogated with angiography as not only a cause of possible Type II endoleak, but also to identify a potential access route to the abdominal aortic sac for interventional treatment.

Injection of n-Butyl-2-Cyanoacrylate into the Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Sac during Endovascular Aortic Repair to Prevent Type II Endoleaks Caused by Lumbar Arteries

PURPOSE

To evaluate midterm results of whether the strategy to occlude target lumbar arteries using n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (nBCA) injection during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) reduced the incidence of Type II endoleak (T2EL) after EVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2013 and 2020, 187 patients underwent EVAR; 106 in the treatment group received nBCA injection during EVAR, whereas 81 in the historical control group did not. The incidence of T2EL at 7 days, need for reintervention, and post-EVAR aneurysmal shrinkage were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Between the treatment group and the control group, significant differences were achieved in the incidence of T2EL (2.8% vs 28.4%; P < .0001) and decreased aneurysmal diameter was observed at 1 year after EVAR (-5.2 vs -3.8 mm; P = .034). In multivariate analysis, nBCA injection (odds ratio [OR], 0.04; P = .001) and younger age (OR, 0.92; P = .036) were significantly associated with a reduced incidence of T2EL. As a possible adverse event associated with nBCA injection, 2 cases of transient lower-limb motor dysfunction (1.9%) were observed. Propensity score analysis revealed that the treatment group had a significantly lower incidence of T2EL than that in the control group (P = .0002) even though there was no difference in the incidence of inferior mesenteric artery coil embolization between the groups. The survival rate without aneurysm sac enlargement (100.0% vs 69.8%; P = .014) and the reintervention-free rate (100.0% vs 63.1%; P = .034) in the treatment group were significantly higher than those in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant nBCA injection can provide durable EVAR without T2EL, as supported by the avoidance of reintervention associated with aneurysm sac enlargement.

Importance of sac regression after EVAR and the role of EndoAnchors

The initial success and widespread adoption of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms have been tempered by numerous reports of secondary interventions and increased long-term mortality compared with open repair. Over the past decade, several studies on postoperative sac dynamics after EVAR have suggested that the presence of sac regression is a benign feature with a favorable prognosis. Conversely, increasing sacs and even stable sacs can be indicators of more unstable sac behavior with worse outcomes in the long-term. Endoleaks were initially perceived as the main drivers of sac behavior. However, the observation that sac regression can occur in the presence of endoleaks, and vice versa - increasing sacs without evidence of endoleak - on imaging studies, suggests the involvement of other contributing factors. These factors can be divided into anatomical factors, patient characteristics, sac thrombus composition, and device-related factors. The shift of interest away from especially type 2 endoleaks is further supported by promising results with the use of EndoAnchors regarding postoperative sac behavior. This review provides an overview of the existing literature on the implications and known risk factors of post-EVAR sac behavior, describes the accurate measurement of sac behavior, and discusses the use of EndoAnchors to promote sac regression.

Midterm outcomes of side branch embolization and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effects of total side branch embolization at endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms on the incidences of persistent type 2 endoleak (pT2EL), changes in sac diameter, and reintervention.

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2021, all patients who underwent primary EVAR with a few exceptions were included. Side branch embolization was considered during EVAR for inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) or IMA plus lumbar artery (LA) when feasible for contrast agent use. Outcomes measured were pT2EL, sac diameters, reintervention, ruptures, and aneurysm-related mortality. Radiation exposure and safety outcomes were also reported.

RESULTS

Among 732 patients who underwent EVAR, 616 (84.2%) were included. Of the 616 patients, 223 (36.2%) did not undergo side branch embolization (NO-E), whereas 228 (37.0%) underwent IMA only (IMA-E) and 165 (26.8%) underwent IMA+LA including median sacral artery (IMA+LA-E). The technical success rate of IMA and LA embolization was 97.0% and 74.7%, respectively. Crude incidences of pT2EL were significantly different from 6 months through 3 years (NO-E, 27.8%; IMA-E, 31.7%; IMA+LA-E, 9.4% at 3 years; P = .007). In the multivariate analysis adjusted for background differences, the incidences of pT2EL were significantly higher in the NO-E (odds ratio [OR], 3.21; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 1.08-9.57; P = .004) and IMA-E (OR, 4.86; 95% CIs, 1.68-14.11; P = .004) compared with the IMA+LA-E group. Similarly, any reintervention until 3 years was significantly frequent in the NO-E (OR, 5.26; 95% CIs, 1.76-15.70; P = .003) and IMA-E group (OR, 4.19; 95% CIs, 1.38-12.67; P = .01). Surgical conversion and secondary rupture were seen only in 1 patient without any aneurysm-related mortality. Percent sac shrinkage from the baseline was significantly promoted in the IMA+LA group (NO-E, 12.1% ± 16.6%; IMA-E, 11.4% ± 16.7%; IMA+LA-E, 18.0% ± 18.8%; P = .047). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in the IMA+LA-E group (NO-E, 60.2 ± 47.4 minutes; IMA-E, 59.3 ± 39.5 minutes; IMA+LA-E, 75.5 ± 42.8 minutes; P < .0001), and so do the dose-area product (NO-E, 424.6 ± 333.4 Gy cm2; IMA-E, 477.7 ± 342.4 Gy cm2; IMA+LA-E, 631.8 ± 449.1 Gy cm2; P < .0001). No embolization-related complications or radiation-related adverse events were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-emptive embolization of IMA, LAs, and median sacral artery at the time of EVAR reduced the incidences of pT2EL and any reintervention and promoted sac shrinkage during the follow-up period of 3 years.

Outcomes of Late Partial Conversion With Graft Replacement for Sac Enlargement After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

Outcomes of late open conversion with graft replacement for enlargement after endovascular aortic repair remain unclear. Here, we report the outcomes of graft replacement after endovascular aortic repair.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fourteen patients who underwent graft replacement after endovascular aneurysm repair between November 2016 and October 2022 were included. Graft replacement was indicated in cases of rupture and enlargement of the aneurysm sac and when reintervention with endovascular therapy could not be performed.

RESULTS

The mean age at graft replacement was 80 ± 7 years. The follow-up period from endovascular aortic repair to graft replacement was 73 ± 41 months. The endoleaks that caused enlargement of the aneurysm sac were type I in 8 patients and type II in 6 patients. Ruptures were observed in 5 patients. One patient had paraplegia as a postoperative complication, and 2 patients died within 30 days. Morbidity and mortality were observed in cases of rupture, and no morbidity or mortality was observed in any elective surgery cases.

CONCLUSION

Late open conversion with graft replacement after endovascular aortic repair is a feasible elective surgery. However, morbidity and mortality have been observed in cases of rupture.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In elective surgery, postoperative outcomes are good for late open conversion with graft replacement after endovascular aortic repair. On the other hand, morbidity and mortality were observed in case of rupture. Therefore, it is important to perform elective surgical reintervention at the appropriate time.

Effectiveness of Intra-operative Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Assessment to Optimize Type II Endoleak Embolization

PURPOSE

To analyze the effectiveness of type II endoleaks (T2E) embolization using intra-operative contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS).

METHODS

Consecutive patients treated for T2E underwent a standardized protocol with trans-arterial or trans-lumbar access, large volume embolization, onlay fusion, and intra-operative CEUS. Technical success was defined by exclusion of endoleak by CEUS.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients (mean age 81 ± 11 years old; 89% male) were treated. The mean aneurysm sac enlargement was 11 ± 8 mm from T2E diagnosis. Embolization was performed using Onyx® 18 in all patients with adjunctive coils in 13 patients (50%). After the first embolization, CEUS documented residual T2E in 13 patients (50%). Ten patients (38%) had additional embolization, which successfully eradicated the T2E in seven of them. Technical success was 50% after the first embolization attempt and 77% after additional attempts guided by CEUS (P = 0.080). There was no mortality. Median imaging follow-up was 22 months. Among the 20 patients with no residual T2E on completion CEUS, 16 (80%) had sac stabilization and none required additional interventions for T2E. Of the six patients with residual T2Es on CEUS, three had sac stabilization (50%) and one required additional reintervention for T2E. There was one late aortic rupture at 56 months.

CONCLUSION

One in two patients treated by T2E embolization had residual endoleak on intra-operative CEUS after a first embolization attempt, decreasing to one in four patients after multiple attempts. A negative completion CEUS following embolization was associated with higher rates of sac stabilization and no need for additional T2E embolization.

Safety of preoperative branch embolization in patients undergoing evar

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the safety of pre-endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) embolization of aortic side branches - the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed. A search of MEDLINE and DIMENSION databases identified 9 studies published from 2011 to 2021 that satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These studies were analyzed to detect the incidence of embolization-related complications. A total of 482 patients underwent preoperative aortic side branch embolization, 30 (6.2%) of whom suffered some kind of minor complication. The only major complication observed was ischemic colitis in 4 (0.82%) patients, two (0.41%) of whom died after bowel resection surgery. Regarding these findings, aortic side branch embolization seems to be a safe procedure, with very low percentages of both minor and major complications.

Image Guidance Techniques and Treatment Approach Optimization in the Management of Type-II Endoleak After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Over the past 3 decades endovascular aortic aneurysm repair emerged as the primary approach for abdominal aortic aneurysm management, however the occurrence of endoleak following endograft implantation imposes a high toll on patients and hospitals alike. The early diagnosis and appropriate treatment of endoleaks is associated with better outcomes, which calls for more advanced imaging and a standardized approach for endoleak diagnosis and management following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Although conventional strategy with non-targeted deployment of coils and embolic material in the aneurysm sac is considered to be the standard approach in many hospitals, it may not prove to be a viable option, given that it affects any further follow-up imaging in the event of sub-optimal therapy and consequent recurrence.

METHODS

Based on our tertiary aortic referral center experience we summarize and describe strategies for optimal selection of various treatment approaches for Type-II Endoleak management including endovascular, percutaneous and laparoscopic approaches with particular focus on intraoperative image guidance techniques.

RESULTS

After failed conventional endovascular embolization attempt we recommend specific complex type II endoleak management approaches based on the location of the endoleak within the aneurysm sac along the x, y and z axis. A transabdominal or laparoscopic approach enable treatment in endoleaks located in the anterior portion of the sac. Endoleaks in the posterior portion of the sac could be treated using the transcaval or the translumbar approach, depending on whether the endoleak is situated on the left or the right side. Alternative strategies should be considered if patient anatomy does not allow for either transcaval or translumbar approach. The transgraft technique is reserved for endoleaks located in the cranial portion of the sac, while the perigraft approach could present a means of treatment for endoleaks situated in the caudal portion of the aneurysm sac.

CONCLUSION

We encourage establishing a patient specific treatment plan in accordance with individual anatomy based on cross sectional imaging modality (time resolved dynamic imaging in selected cases) and intraoperative image guidance to provide a safe and accurate endoleak localization and embolization for patients undergoing type II endoleak treatment.

Initial two-day blood pressure management after endovascular aneurysm repair improves midterm outcomes by reducing the incidence of early type II endoleak

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate midterm outcomes of our novel strategy of postoperative initial 2-day blood pressure management (BPM) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for the prevention of subsequent type II endoleak (T2EL) in a single-center series.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2014, 137 patients who underwent EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were reviewed. Starting from 2013, the mean blood pressure was maintained between 75 and 90 mmHg for the initial 24 hours after EVAR followed by systolic pressure controlled below 120 mmHg during the next 24 hours in the treatment group (n = 76). The incidence of T2EL detected at 7 days, reintervention, and AAA sac diameter up to 5 years after EVAR were compared with those of the control group comprising of 60 consecutive patients who underwent standard EVAR without BPM prior to 2013.

RESULTS

Between the treatment group and the control group, significant differences were achieved in the incidence of T2EL at 7 days (19.7% vs 40.0%; P = .009), a mean decrease of AAA sac diameter at 1-year (-5.1 ± 4.9 vs -2.2 ± 6.7 mm; P = .013) and 2-year (-5.4 ± 7.7 vs -1.7 ± 10.8 mm; P = .045). In addition, there was a significant decrease in the incidence of T2EL detected at 7 days with the use of the Gore Excluder with 22.7% in the treatment group vs 80.0% in the control group (P < .001), which resulted in a significant decrease in the aneurysm sac diameter up to 4 years after EVAR. Survival rate without AAA sac enlargement at 5 years after EVAR (83.0% vs 70.0%; P = .021) in the treatment group was significantly higher than that of the control group, whereas no significant differences were observed in the freedom rates of reintervention, T2EL-related reintervention, and all-cause mortality between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative initial 2-day BPM had a preventive effect on AAA sac enlargement until midterm periods, by reducing the incidence of T2EL at 7 days after EVAR. The usage of Gore Excluder under BPM was especially associated with sustained positive effects until the midterm follow-up.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Endovascular aortic repair with sac embolization for the prevention of type II endoleaks (the EVAR-SE study): study protocol for a randomized controlled multicentre study in Germany

BACKGROUND

Beyond a certain threshold diameter, abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are to be treated by open surgical or endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). In a quarter of patients who undergo EVAR, inversion of blood flow in the inferior mesenteric artery or lumbar arteries may lead to type II endoleak (T2EL), which is associated with complications (e.g. AAA growth, secondary type I endoleak, rupture). As secondary interventions to treat T2EL often fail and may be highly invasive, prevention of T2EL is desirable. The present study aims to assess the efficacy of sac embolization (SE) with metal coils during EVAR to prevent T2EL in patients at high risk.

METHODS

Over a 24-month recruitment period, a total of 100 patients undergoing EVAR in four vascular centres (i.e. Klinikum rechts der Isar of the Technical University of Munich, University Hospital Augsburg, University Hospital Dresden, St. Joseph's Hospital Wiesbaden) are to be included in the present study. Patients at high risk for T2EL (i.e. ≥ 5 efferent vessels covered by endograft or aneurysmal thrombus volume <40%) are randomized to one group receiving standard EVAR and another group receiving EVAR with SE. Follow-up assessments postoperatively, after 30 days, and 6 months involve contrast-enhanced ultrasound scans (CEUS) and after 12 months an additional computed tomography angiography (CTA) scan. The presence of T2EL detected by CEUS or CTA after 12 months is the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints comprise quality of life (quantified by the SF-36 questionnaire), reintervention rate, occurrence of type I/III endoleak, aortic rupture, death, alteration of aneurysm volume, or diameter. Standardized evaluation of CTA scans happens through a core lab. The study will be terminated after the final follow-up visit of the ultimate patient.

DISCUSSION

Although preexisting studies repeatedly indicated a beneficial effect of SE on T2EL rates after EVAR, patient relevant outcomes have not been assessed until now. The present study is the first randomized controlled multicentre study to assess the impact of SE on quality of life. Further unique features include employment of easily assessable high-risk criteria, a contemporary follow-up protocol, and approval to use any commercially available coil material. Overcoming limitations of previous studies might help SE to be implemented in daily practice and to enhance patient safety.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05665101. Registered on 23 December 2022.

Multicenter Comparative Analysis of Late Open Conversion in Patients With Adherence and Nonadherence to Instructions for Use Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

The widespread adoption of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) as preferred treatment modality for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has enlarged the number of patients needing open surgical conversion (OSC). The relationship between adherence to Instructions For Use (IFU) and EVAR long-term outcomes remains controversial. The aim of this study is to compare preoperative differences and postoperative outcomes between EVAR patients not adjusted to IFU and adjusted to IFU who underwent OSC.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study reviewed 33 explanted EVARs between January 2003 and December 2019 at 14 Vascular Units. Patients were included if OSC occurred >30 days after implantation and excluded if explantation was performed to treat an endograft infection, aortic dissection, or traumatic transections. Variables analyzed included baseline characteristics, adherence to IFU, implant and explant procedural details, secondary reinterventions, and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifteen explanted patients (15/33, 45.5%) were identified not accomplished to IFU (out-IFU) at initial EVAR vs 18 explanted patients adjusted (in-IFU). During follow-up, a mean of 1.73±1.2 secondary reinterventions were performed, with more type I endoleaks treated in the subgroup out-IFU: 16.7% vs 6.3% in-IFU patients and more type III endoleaks (8.3% vs 0%). Patients out-IFU had shorter mean interval from implant to explant: 47.60±28.8 months vs 71.17±48. Type II endoleak was the most frequent indication for explantation. Low-flow endoleaks (types II, IV, V) account for 44% of indications for OSC in subgroup of patients in-IFU, compared with 13.3% in patients out-IFU and high-flow endoleaks (types I and III) were the main indication for patients out-IFU (33.3% vs 16.7% in-IFU). Total endograft explantation was performed in 57.5% of cases (19/33) and more suprarenal clamping was required in the subgroup out-IFU. Overall, 30-day mortality rate was 12.1% (4/33): 20% for patients out-IFU and 5.6% in-IFU.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, type II endoleak is the most common indication for conversion and differences have been found between patients treated outside IFU with explantation taking place earlier during follow-up, mainly due to high-flow endoleaks and with higher mortality in comparison with patients adjusted to IFU. Ongoing research is required to delve into these differences.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Anticoagulation on Outcomes After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

Our objective was to investigate whether patients who receive anticoagulation therapy have different outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) from those who do not.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies that compared outcomes of EVAR in patients who were on therapeutic anticoagulation vs those who were not. We developed and reported the review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines with a registered protocol (CRD42022375894). The Ovid interface was used to search Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to November 2022. The quality of studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) (maximum score=9), and the evidence was appraised with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was the effect estimate in time-to-event meta-analyses, calculated using the inverse-variance statistical method and random-effects models.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies qualified for inclusion reporting a total of 35 739 individuals. Anticoagulated patients had a statistically significantly higher hazard of death (HR=1.93, 95% CI=1.03-3.63), endoleak (HR=2.13, 95% CI=1.55-2.93), reintervention (HR=1.79, 95% CI=1.27-2.52), and aneurysm sac expansion (HR=2.72, 95% CI=1.57-4.72) than patients not receiving anticoagulation therapy. The median score on the NOS was 7 (range=4-9). The certainty of evidence was very low for mortality and reintervention and low for endoleak and sac expansion.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulation is a poor prognostic factor after standard EVAR and should be considered in decision-making, consent processes, and surveillance strategies.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The number of individuals who take anticoagulation treatment has been rapidly increasing over the recent years. We aimed to investigate the effect of such treatment on outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Anticoagulated patients were found to have increased mortality, endoleak, and reintervention rates after EVAR compared to their non-anticoagulated counterparts. Anticoagulation therapy has a prognostic role in EVAR and should be considered in decision making and EVAR surveillance. Anticoagulated patients need to be informed of the higher failure rates of EVAR, and intensified surveillance strategies may need to be implemented in this patient cohort.

Preemptive Embolization of the Lumbar Arteries and Inferior Mesenteric Artery to Prevent Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Enlargement Associated with Type 2 Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Purpose

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of preemptive embolization (PE) of the lumbar arteries (LAs) and inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) (PELI) for preventing abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) enlargement associated with type 2 endoleak (T2EL).

Material and Methods

Patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) between January 2015 and December 2020 were classified into the control (without PE), IMA (PE of a patent IMA with a diameter ≥2.5 mm), and PELI (PE of patent LAs with a diameter ≥2 mm and IMA) groups. The rate of freedom from AAA enlargement following EVAR (enlargement ≥5 mm from pre-EVAR) was compared using the log-rank test. The prevalence of T2EL at 6 months and 1 year after EVAR was compared using Fisher's exact test.

Results

The cumulative rates of freedom from AAA enlargement at 54 months after EVAR (maximum observational period in the PELI group) were as follows: control group, 77.5%; IMA group, 62.5%; and PELI group, 100%. The mean CT follow-up periods of the control, IMA, and PELI groups were 46.4 ± 22.3, 31.1 ± 20.6, and 22.9 ± 15.5 months, respectively. None of the 31 patients in the PELI group experienced AAA enlargement after EVAR, whereas 2 out of the 16 patients in the IMA group and 20 out of the 98 patients in the control group had AAA enlargement. No significant differences were observed in the rate of freedom from AAA enlargement (PELI group vs. IMA group, P = 0.11; PELI group vs. control group, P = 0.11). The prevalence of T2EL was significantly lower in the PELI group than in the control group at 6 months (13.6% in PELI group vs. 42.1% in control group, P = 0.02) and 1 year (14.3% in PELI group vs. 40.0% in control group, P = 0.04).

Conclusions

PELI was significantly associated with a low prevalence of T2EL and may prevent T2EL-associated AAA enlargement.

Brazilian Society for Angiology and Vascular Surgery guidelines on abdominal aortic aneurysm

The Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, through the Guidelines Project, presents new Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Guidelines, on the subject of care for abdominal aortic aneurysm patients. Its development prioritized descriptive guidelines, using the EMBASE, LILACS, and PubMed databases. References include randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and cohort studies. Quality of evidence was evaluated by a pair of coordinators, aided by the RoB 2 Cochrane tool and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale forms. The subjects include juxtarenal aneurysms, infected aneurysms, and new therapeutic techniques, especially endovascular procedures. The current version of the guidelines include important recommendations for the primary topics involving diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up for abdominal aortic aneurysm patients, providing an objective guide for medical practice, based on scientific evidence and widely available throughout Brazil.

Impact of Patent Lumbar Arteries on Aneurysm Sac Enlargement with Type II Endoleak after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the impact of the number of patent lumbar arteries (LAs) on sac enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort single centre registry study. Between January 2006 and December 2019, 336 EVARs were reviewed using a commercially available device excluding type I or type III endoleaks during a follow up of ≥ 12 months. Patients were divided into four groups based on the pre-operative patency of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and high (≥ 4) or low (≤ 3) number of patent LAs: Group 1, patent IMA and high number of patent LAs; Group 2, patent IMA and low number of patent LAs; Group 3, occluded IMA and a high number of patent LAs; Group 4, occluded IMA and low number of patent LAs.

RESULTS

Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 included 124, 104, 45, and 63 patients, respectively. The median follow up duration was 65.1 months. Significant differences in the incidence of overall type II endoleak (T2EL) at discharge between Group 1 and Group 2 (59.7% vs. 36.5%, p < .001) and between Group 3 and Group 4 (33.3% vs. 4.8%, p < .001) were observed. In patients with a pre-operatively patent IMA, the rate of freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement was significantly lower in Group 1 than in Group 2 (69.0% vs. 81.7% five years after EVAR, p < .001). In patients with a pre-operatively occluded IMA, the freedom rate from aneurysm sac enlargement was not significantly different between Groups 3 and Group 4 (95.0% vs. 100% five years after EVAR, p = .075).

CONCLUSION

A high number of patent LAs seemed to have a significant role in sac enlargement with T2EL when the IMA was patent pre-operatively, whereas a high number of patent LAs seemed to have limited influence on sac enlargement when the IMA was occluded pre-operatively.

Patent iliolumbar artery increase no risk of type II endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm: a case-control study

Objective

The aims of the present study were to explore the risk factors for type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and the association between T2ELs and the iliolumbar artery.

Materials and methods

A single-center, retrospective case-control study in West China Hospital was conducted among patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) who underwent EVAR between June 2010 and June 2019. The associations of patient characteristics, anatomical factors, internal iliac artery embolization, and ILA with the primary outcome were analyzed. The secondary objective was to analyze survival and reintervention between the T2EL group and the non-T2EL group. Kaplan-Meier survival, propensity matching analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used.

Results

A total of 603 patients were included. The median follow-up was 51 months (range 5.0-106.0). There was a significant difference in the diameter of the lumbar artery (LA), middle sacral artery (MSA) and inferior mesentery artery (IMA), proportion of thrombus and LA numbers. The univariate analysis showed that T2ELs were more likely to develop more thrombus in aneurysm cavity (OR = 0.294, p = 0.012), larger MSA (OR = 1.284, p = 0.04), LA (OR = 1.520, p = 0.015), IMA (OR = 1.056, p < 0.001) and more LAs (OR = 1.390, p = 0.019). The multivariate analysis showed that the number of LAs (HR: 1.349, 95% CI: 1.140-1.595, p < .001) and the diameter of the IMA (HR: 1.328, 95% CI: 1.078-1.636, p = 0.008) were significantly associated with T2ELs. There were no new findings from the propensity score matching. The reintervention-free survival rates were significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.048). Overall survival and AAA-related death rates were not different between the two group. This was consistent with the PSM analysis.

Conclusion

The iliolumbar artery and the different internal iliac artery interventions may not increase the incidence of T2ELs. But the numbers of LAs and IMA diameter were independent risk factors for T2Els. T2ELs was associated with the reintervention but did not affect long-term survival or increase aneurysm-related mortality after EVAR.

Pre-Operative Four Dimensional Flow Sensitive Magnetic Resonance Imaging Assessment of Aortic Side Branches as a Method to Predict Risk of Type II Endoleak Resulting in Sac Enlargement After EVAR

OBJECTIVE

To predict sac enlargement with type II endoleak (ELII) before endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using four dimensional flow sensitive magnetic resonance imaging (4D flow MRI).

METHODS

A single centre retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was conducted. Patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) who underwent EVAR between 2013 and 2019 were included. Aortic branches occluded pre-EVAR, and patients with endoleaks other than ELII were excluded. The aortic branch diameter, peak flow velocity (PFVe), and amplitude of the dynamics of flow volume (AFV) were measured in each aortic branch pre-EVAR. Total flow volume per minute (TFV/min), defined as the sum of AFV/min, was calculated in each case. According to computed tomography findings one year post-EVAR, the aortic branches and patients were divided into patent vessel and occluded vessel groups and sac expanding and non-expanding groups. PFVe, AFV/min, and TFV/min were analysed via receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

The patent aortic branches pre-EVAR (69 inferior mesenteric arteries [IMAs]; 249 lumbar arteries [LAs]) of 100 patients were included. Patent IMAs (n = 14) and occluded IMAs (n = 55), patent LAs (n = 23) and occluded LAs (n = 226), and expanding (n = 9) and non-expanding (n = 91) groups were compared, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed in branch diameters (IMA; patent, 2.5 ± 0.8 mm, occluded, 2.5 ± 0.8 mm, p < .78 and LA; patent, 1.5 ± 0.3 mm, occluded, 1.5 ± 0.4 mm, p < .35). PFVe (IMA; patent, 262.6 mm2/sec, occluded, 183.4 mm2/sec and LA; patent, 142.6 mm2/sec, occluded, 47.7 mm2/sec) and AFV/min (IMA; patent, 8.4 mL, occluded, 5.2 mL and LA; patent, 4.2 mL, occluded, 1.4 mL) were higher in the patent vessel group (p < .050). TFV/min was statistically significantly higher in the expanding group (24.1 mL/min) than in the non-expanding group (7.0 mL/min) (p < .010).

CONCLUSION

Pre-EVAR haemodynamic analyses using 4D flow MRI were useful to detect aortic branches responsible for ELII and to predict AAA cases with sac enlargement. This analysis suggests a new strategy for pre-EVAR aortic branch embolisation.

The Association Between the D-dimer Level at 1 Year After EVAR and Sac Diameter Change in Patients With Persistent Type 2 Endoleak

PURPOSE

Recent studies suggested that continuous clotting renewal in thrombi plays a central role in sac enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). We reviewed patients with persistent type 2 endoleak (T2EL) to estimate the impact of D-dimer level on sac enlargement.

METHODS

A retrospective review of elective EVAR for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm performed between June 2007 and February 2020. Persistent T2EL was defined as T2EL confirmed at both the 6 and 12 month contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) follow-ups. "Isolated" T2EL was defined as T2EL without other types of endoleak within 12 months. Patients with >2 year follow-up, persistent isolated T2ELs, and D-dimer level data at 1 year (DD1Y) were included. Patients with any reintervention within 12 months were excluded. The association between DD1Y and aneurysm enlargement (AnE), defined as a ≥5 mm diameter increase, within 5 years was analyzed. Among 761 conventional EVAR, 515 patients had >2 years of follow-up. Thirty-three patients with any reintervention within 12 months and 127 patients without CECT at either 6 or 12 months were excluded. Among 131 patients with persistent isolated T2ELs, 74 patients with DD1Y data were enrolled. During a 37 month median follow-up [25-60, IQR], 24 AnEs were observed. In the AnE patients, the median DD1Y was significantly higher than that in the other patients (12.30 [6.88-21.90] vs 7.62 [4.41-13.00], P=0.024). ROC curve analysis indicated that the optimal cutoff point of DD1Y for AnE was 5.5 µg/mL (AUC=0.681). In univariate analysis, angulated neck, occlusion of the inferior mesenteric artery, and DD1Y≥5.5 µg/mL were significantly associated with AnE (P= 0.037, 0.038, and 0.010). Cox regression analysis revealed that DD1Y≥5.5 µg/mL was correlated with AnE (P=0.042, HR [95% CI] 4.520 [1.056-19.349]).

CONCLUSION

A 1 year higher D-dimer level can potentially predict AnE within 5 years in persistent T2EL patients. AnE was considered improbable when the D-dimer level was low enough.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The present study suggests that a 1-year higher D-dimer level could potentially predict aneurysm expansion within 5 years in patients with persistent type 2 endoleak (T2EL). On the other hand, aneurysm expansion was considered unlikely if the D-dimer level was low enough.As there are many patients with T2EL who require regular follow-up, any predictor of future aneurysm expansion could be of great help in conserving medical resources. In patients with a low likelihood of future expansion, we might consider delaying follow-up, similar to patients with sac shrinkage.

Pre-Emptive Embolization of the Aneurysm Sac or Aortic Side Branches in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

To investigate outcomes of pre-emptive embolization of the aneurysm sac or aortic side branches in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

The review was reported as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 with a preregistered protocol. Bibliographic sources (MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL) were searched using subject headings and free text terms. Randomized controlled trials comparing EVAR with versus without embolization were included. Pooled estimates of dichotomous outcomes were calculated using odds ratio (OR) or risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) applying the Mantel-Haenszel method. Continuous outcomes were summarized using mean difference (MD) and 95% CI applying the inverse variance method. The certainty of evidence was appraised with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. Version 2 of the Cochrane tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Trial sequential analysis assumed alpha = 5% and power = 80%.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials were included. No significant difference was found in aneurysm-related mortality (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), overall mortality (OR 1.85, 95% CI 0.42-8.13), aneurysm rupture (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), type II endoleak-related reintervention (RD -0.07, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.06), procedure time (MD 20.12, 95% CI -11.54 to 51.77), or fluoroscopy time (MD 11.17, 95% CI -11.22 to 33.56). Patients with pre-emptive embolization had significantly lower odds of type II endoleak (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26-0.78) and sac expansion (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07-0.52). The risk of bias was high for all outcomes. The certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes, except for type II endoleak, for which it was low. Trial sequential analysis showed an inconclusive result for overall mortality and type II endoleak-related reintervention but confirmed the advantage of embolization in reducing type II endoleak and sac expansion.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited, low certainty data suggest pre-emptive embolization confers no clinical benefits in EVAR.

Fibrin Glue Sac Filling for Preventing Type II Endoleak, Short-Term Outcomes of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Type II endoleak (T2EL) worsens the long-term results of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). How to prevent T2ELs remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fibrin glue sac filling (FGSF) to prevent T2ELs after EVAR.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. Patients were randomly divided into group A (standard EVAR + FGSF) and group B (standard EVAR). The follow-up plans included outpatient or telephone consultation at 1 and 3 months and computed tomography (CT) angiography at 6 months, 1 year, and once a year after EVAR.

RESULTS

A total of 64 abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients were randomized to the 2 groups. All patients were followed up for more than 6 months. The 2 groups showed similar baseline characteristics. The rate of T2ELs on immediate angiography in group A (9.6%) was significantly lower than that in group B (33.3%, p=0.033). Moreover, the sac area change was significantly reduced in group A at 6 months after EVAR (p=0.021). However, T2EL incidence was similar at the 6-month (p=0.055) and 1-year (p=0.057) follow-ups, and AAA diameter change was also similar at 1 year. There were similar operation times, radiation doses, severe adverse events (SAEs), and reinterventions between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Fibrin glue sac filling could prevent short-term type II endoleaks and promote AAA shrinkage after 6 months. The FGSF procedure is swift and straightforward; however, patients are at risk of bowel ischemia, especially after previous bowel resections or concomitant superior mesenteric artery (SMA) disease.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) couldn't prevent type II endoleak (T2EL). In this study, we found fibrin glue sac filling (FGSF) could prevent T2EL and promote AAA shrinkage in a short term. And the FGSF procedure is easy, it will be a useful supplement to standard EVAR for clinicians. And FGSF might have potential usefulness on ruptured aneurysms, although without direct evidence.Fibrin glue is often used to hemostasis and tissue adhesion in surgical patients and burn patients, we firstly carry out a randomized controlled study and prove that fibrin glue sac filling could prevent T2EL and promote sac remodeling.

Prophylactic Perigraft Arterial Sac Embolization During EVAR: Minimizing Type II Endoleaks and Improving Sac Regression

BACKGROUND

Type II endoleaks (ELII) are the most common complication following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Persistent type II endoleaks require continual surveillance and have been shown to increase the risk of Type I and III endoleaks, sac growth, need for intervention, conversion to open or even rupture directly or indirectly. These are often difficult to treat following EVAR and there are limited data regarding the effectiveness of prophylactic treatment of ELII. The aim of this study is to report midterm outcomes of prophylactic perigraft arterial sac embolization (pPASE) performed in patients undergoing EVAR.

METHODS

This is a comparison of two elective cohorts of those undergoing EVAR using the Ovation stent graft with and without prophylactic branch vessel and sac embolization. Patients who underwent pPASE at our institution had data collected in a prospective, IRB approved database. These were compared against the core lab adjudicated data from the Ovation IDE trial. Prophylactic PASE was performed at the time of EVAR with thrombin, contrast and gelfoam if lumbar or mesenteric arteries were patent. Endpoints included freedom from ELII, reintervention, sac growth, all-cause mortality (ACM) and aneurysm-related mortality (ARM).

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients (13.1%) underwent pPASE, while 238 patients (86.9%) had standard EVAR. Median follow-up was 56 months (IQR 33-60). The 4-year freedom from ELII estimates were 84% for the pPASE vs 50.7% for the standard EVAR group (P=0.0002). All aneurysms in the pPASE group remained stable in size or demonstrated regression, whereas aneurysm sac expansion was seen in 10.9% of the standard EVAR group, P=0.03. At 4 years, mean AAA diameter decreased by 11mm (95% CI 8-15) in the pPASE group vs 5mm (95%CI 4-6) for the standard EVAR group, P=0.0005. There were no differences in the 4-year freedom from ACM and ARM. However, the difference in reintervention for ELII trended toward significance (0.0% vs 10.7%, P=0.1). On multivariable analysis, pPASE was associated with a 76% reduction in ELII [aHR(95%CI): 0.24 (0.08-0.65), P=0.005].

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that pPASE in those undergoing EVAR is safe and effective in the prevention of EII and significantly improves sac regression over standard EVAR while minimizing the need for reintervention.

Evolution of open aneurysmorrhaphy for management of sac expansion after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the perioperative and mid-term clinical outcomes of open aneurysmorrhaphy (OA) for the treatment of sac expansion after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

OA involves sac exposure without dissection of the proximal or distal neck, sacotomy and ligation of back-bleeding vessels, preservation of the prior stent graft, and tight closure of the sac around the stent graft. We performed a retrospective review of all patients who had undergone OA for nonruptured sac expansion after standard EVAR at our institution between January 2015 and June 2021. The primary end points were 30-day mortality and aneurysm-related death. The secondary end points were postoperative complications, overall survival, freedom from reintervention, and sac regrowth rate.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients had undergone OA. Their mean age was 76.9 ± 6.7 years. The median sac diameter at OA was 79 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 76-92 mm). The median duration from the index EVAR to OA was 82 months (IQR, 72-104 months). Preoperative computed tomography angiography confirmed a type II endoleak (EL) in 20 patients, 1 of whom had had a coexisting type Ia EL; a type IIIb EL was identified in 1 patient. Concomitant endovascular procedures had been performed in six patients to treat a type I or III EL or reinforce the proximal and distal seals. The OA technique has been modified since 2017, with the addition of more aggressive dissection of the sac and complete removal of the mural thrombus to further decrease the sac diameter. Postoperative complications occurred in two patients and included abdominal lymphorrhea and failed hemostasis of the common femoral artery requiring surgical repair in one patient each. The 30-day mortality was 0%. During the median follow-up of 36 months (IQR, 14-51 months), the overall survival was 92.7% and 86.9% at 12 and 36 months, respectively, without any aneurysm-related death. In the late (2017-2021) treatment group, the median sac diameter immediately after OA was smaller than that in the early (2015-2016) treatment group (early group: median, 50 mm; IQR, 39-57 mm; vs later group: median, 41 mm; IQR, 32-47 mm; P = .083). Furthermore, in the late group, the sac regrowth rate was lower (early group: median, 0.36 mm/mo; IQR, 0.23-0.83 mm/mo; vs late group: median, 0 mm/mo; IQR, 0-0.11 mm/mo; P = .0075) and the freedom from reintervention rate was higher (late group: 94.7% at both 12 and 36 months, respectively; early group: 71.4% and 53.6% at 12 and 36 months, respectively; log-rank P = .070).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results have shown that OA for the management of post-EVAR sac expansion is feasible with acceptable mid-term outcomes. Aggressive dissection and tight plication of the sac might be imperative for better mid-term outcomes after OA.

Midterm Outcomes of Endoleak Type 2 Embolization after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Using a Neurointerventional Approach

BACKGROUND

Type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) have been considered a benign condition and intervention is recommended when they are associated to sac expansion. The aim of this study was to report on T2EL embolization midterm outcomes, using neurointerventional material.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis of consecutive patients treated with transarterial embolization, using neurointerventional material, for T2EL after standard endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) between January 01, 2017 and July 30, 2022, was undertaken. Primary outcome was technical success and secondary outcome was T2EL recurrence during follow-up.

RESULTS

Twenty six patients [92.3% males, mean age 73.9 ± 7.7 years] were included. The median time between EVAR and T2EL diagnosis was 12 months (range: 1-84 months). In 38.5% of patients, T2EL was detected at first month after EVAR. The time to embolization was 18 months (range: 1-96 months). In 42.3% of cases, a patent inferior mesenteric artery was suspected to relate to T2EL formation while in 42.3% of cases, a lumbar artery. Twelve procedures (38.4%) were performed using coils and Onyx and 13 (50%), using only Onyx. Technical success was 84.6%. The mean follow-up was 24 months (range: 1-60 months), including 20 patients. In 30% of cases, an T2EL recurrence was detected. Three patients (11.5%) underwent secondary embolization.

CONCLUSIONS

Transarterial embolization for T2EL, using neurointerventional material, provided acceptable technical success and T2EL recurrence rates at 2 years of follow-up. Longer follow-up data would further estimate the durability of the technique.

Preoperative predictive factors for type II endoleak: Trying to define high-risk patients

OBJECTIVE

Type 2 endoleaks (T2E) continue to be the "Achilles Heel" of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The aim of this study is to analyze preoperative factors of patients who underwent EVAR to define risk factors for T2E.

METHODS

From January 2015 to June 2020, 140 of 191 patients who underwent EVAR in our institution meet inclusion criteria for this study. Postoperative image control were performed using duplex ultrasound or CT scan. All T2E detected during follow-up were confirmed by angio CT. Preoperative anatomic and clinical variables were analyzed for T2E using t-test, Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher exact test. ROC curves and the corresponding area under the curve (AUC) were used to describe the predictive accuracy for endoleak.

RESULTS

T2E was detected in 16 patients (11.43%)0.12 of them (75%) were persistent and 10 (62.5%) provoked sac enlargement. Predictive factors for T2E were a greater IMA diameter (2.5 ± 0.5 vs. 3.3 ± 0.5, p < 0.001) and an increasing number of LA (4.8 ± 1.6 vs. 6.7 ± 1.4, p < 0.001). ROC curve analysis stablished thresholds of 3.5 mm for IMA diameter (sensitivity 77%, specificity 86%) and 5.5 for patent LA (sensitivity 88%, specificity 59%) as risk factor to develop T2E.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative aortic side branches embolization to avoid T2E is not still standarised. We tried to define a group of high-risk patients for T2E. According to our findings, patients with a preoperative IMA> 3 mm and more than 5 patent LA should be considered for pre-EVAR embolization.

Outcomes of embolization procedures for type II endoleaks following endovascular abdominal aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the mid-term outcomes of embolization procedures for type II endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic repair, and clarify the risk factors for aneurysm enlargement after embolization procedures.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicenter registry study enrolling patients who underwent embolization procedures for type II endoleaks after EVAR from January 2012 to December 2018 at 19 Japanese centers. The primary end point was the rate of freedom from aneurysm enlargement, more than 5 mm in the aortic maximum diameter, after an embolization procedure. Demographic, procedural, follow-up, and laboratory data were collected. Continuous variables were summarized descriptively, and Kaplan-Meier analyses and a Cox regression model were used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 315 patients (248 men and 67 women) were enrolled. The average duration from the initial embolization procedure to the last follow-up was 31.6 ± 24.6 months. The rates of freedom from aneurysm enlargement at 3 and 5 years were 55.4 ± 3.8% and 37.0 ± 5.2%, respectively. A multivariate analysis revealed that a larger aortic diameter at the initial embolization procedure and the presence of a Moyamoya endoleak, defined as heterogeneous contrast opacity with an indistinct faint border, were associated with aneurysm enlargement after embolization management.

CONCLUSIONS

The embolization procedures were generally ineffective in preventing further expansion of abdominal aortic aneurysms in patients with type II endoleaks after EVAR, especially in patients with a large abdominal aortic aneurysm and/or a presence of a Moyamoya endoleak.

Occult endoleaks revealed during open conversions after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in a multicenter experience

BACKGROUND

An occult endoleak (OE) may be the underlying cause of aneurysm sac expansion after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The aim of this study is to describe intraoperative findings of OE during surgical endograft explantations.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, multicenter analysis of all open conversions (OC) after EVAR from 1997 to 2020 in 12 vascular centers. We excluded patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endograft infection, endograft thrombosis, and thoracic-EVAR. An OE was defined as an endoleak revealed during OC not shown on preoperative imaging, which was likely the real cause for sac enlargement. We reported the number of OE, and we described the type of OE in relation to the initial alleged or associated endoleak. A separate analysis of patients with an initial diagnosis of endotension was also performed.

RESULTS

An OE was found in 32/255 patients (12.5%). In the 78.1% of the cases (25/32) a type II endoleak hid a type I or III endoleak. Endotension was the initial diagnosis of 26/255 patients (10.2%). In 4/26 cases (15.4%), a type I or II OE was revealed. In 5/26 cases (19.2%) an endograft infection was found intraoperatively. In 2/26 cases we found an angiosarcoma. Fifteen cases of endotension (57.7%) remained unexplained.

CONCLUSIONS

OE represent a not negligible cause of EVAR failure. A type II endoleak associated with sac enlargement may actually conceal a higher-flow endoleak. In most of the cases, the initial diagnosis of endotension remains unexplained. However, endotension sometimes conceals severe underlying pathologies such as infections.

Evaluation Of The Effectiveness Of Endovascular Treatment Of Type 2 Endoleaks

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a safe and minimally invasive alternative to open surgical repair for infra renal aortic aneuvrysm. EVAR requires lifelong post-procedural surveillance. Endoleaks represent the main complication. Type II endoleaks (EL2) are the most frequent and tend to be indolent. Most practitioners do not treat in EL2 as long as they are associated with stable aneurysm diameter. European guidelines recommend treatment in case of aneurysm growth. Several techniques can be offered, such as transarterial embolization and translumbar embolization. This study reports the experience and results of a single center for EL2 endovascular treatment. The aim of this study was to determine more precisely the efficacity of embolization for type 2 endoleaks treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A single center cohort of patients treated for EL2 with endovascular technique between 1998 and 2018 was formed to perform a descriptive analysis. Preoperative sizing, risk factors of endoleaks and intraoperative data were collected. CT scans were regularly performed after EVAR to detect endoleak recurrence. Clinical recurrence was defined as the persistence of aneurysm sac growth and radiological recurrence was defined as the occurrence of EL2 on a post-embolization CT scan. Data related to reintervention, overall mortality and aneurysm related mortality were also collected. Kaplan Meier survival analyses were used to determine the rates of reoperation-free survival and recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

Six hundred seven patients underwent an endovascular treatment for abdominal aorta aneurysm between 1998 and 2018. One hundred forty-five type 2 endoleaks occurred during this period. Nineteen patients (median age 76 years), underwent endovascular treatment for EL2, with immediate success on 15 patients (8 transarterial embolization, 8 direct sac puncture and 3 combined procedures). During follow-up, 5 patients required a new translumbar embolization and 6 required an open surgery for recurrence of the EL2. Six patients died, 2 of them of causes related to the aneurysm. At 59,6 months median follow-up, 53% of the patients presented a radiologic recurrence, with a sac growth of more than 5 mm since last procedure in 4 patients (24%).

CONCLUSION

Long term clinical recurrence of type 2 endoleaks treated by endovascular procedures appear to be frequent in our experience, leading to several deaths and requiring open surgical treatment.

Dynamic CT angiography is more accurate in diagnosing endoleaks than standard triphasic CT angiography and enables targeted embolization

PURPOSE

The primary objective was to compare the accuracy of dynamic CT angiography (d-CTA) with standardized triphasic contrast enhanced CT angiography (t-CTA) in diagnosing endoleak type after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) using digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as reference standard. The secondary objective was to study the impact of d-CTA on image-fusion guided endoleak embolization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of patients who underwent d-CTA imaging after EVAR between March 2019 and July 2021 was performed. De-identified images were independently reviewed by two-two blinded readers to document endoleak type and target vessels. Impact of d-CTA-guided embolization was evaluated by number of planning angiograms, radiation exposure and accuracy of target vessel overlay.

RESULTS

During the study period, 52 patients underwent d-CTA, 19 had all three modalities available for analysis. DSA imaging confirmed 4(21.0%) type-I, 14(73.7%) type-II and 1(5.3%) type-III endoleak. Findings from d-CTA matched with DSA in 19/19 cases (100%), whereas t-CTA matched in 14/19 cases (73.7%). In type-II endoleaks, number of target vessels identified by d-CTA, t-CTA and DSA were 23, 17 and 16 respectively. Mean dose-length product from d-CTA and t-CTA was 1445±551 and 1612±530 mGy*cm (p=0.26). Nine patients underwent d-CTA-guided type-II endoleak embolization, using a median of 1(range:1-4) planning angiogram before embolization utilizing 21.6(±8.7)% of total procedural radiation dose. Target vessel overlay was accurate in 9/9(100%) cases.

CONCLUSION

Dynamic, time-resolved CTA is more accurate compared to standardized triphasic contrast enhanced CTA in diagnosing endoleak type after EVAR. In type-II endoleak, d-CTA better identified target vessels and enabled safe, targeted embolization.

Decreasing Trends in Reintervention and Readmission After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in a Multiregional Implant Registry

OBJECTIVES

As endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) matures into its third decade, measures such as long-term reintervention and readmission have become a focus of quality improvement efforts. Within a large United States integrated healthcare system, we describe time trends in the rates of long-term reinterventions utilization measures.

METHODS

Data from a US multiregional EVAR registry was used to perform a descriptive study of 3,891 adults who underwent conventional infrarenal EVAR for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm between 2010 to 2019. Three-year follow-up was 96.7%. Outcomes included 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft revision (defined as a procedure involving placement of a new endograft component), secondary interventions (defined as a procedure necessary for maintenance of EVAR integrity, e.g., coil embolization and balloon angioplasty/stenting), conversion to open, interventions for type II endoleaks alone, and 90-day readmission. Crude cause-specific reintervention probabilities were calculated by operative year using the Aalen-Johansen estimator, with death as a competing risk and December 31, 2020 as the study end date.

RESULTS

Excluding interventions for type II endoleak alone, 1-year secondary intervention incidence decreased from 5.9% for EVARs in 2010 to 2.0% in 2019 (p<0.001) and 3-year incidence decreased from 7.2% to 3.6% from 2010 to 2017 (p=0.03). The 3-year incidences of graft revision (mean incidence 3.4%) and conversion to open remained fairly stable (mean incidence 0.6%) over time. The 3-year incidence of interventions for type II endoleak alone also decreased from 3.4% in 2010 to 0.7% in 2017 (p=0.01). 90-day readmission rates decreased from 19.3% for index EVAR in 2010 to 9.2% in 2019 (p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive data from a multiregional healthcare system demonstrates decreasing long-term secondary intervention and readmission rates over time in patients undergoing EVAR. These trends are not explained by evolving management of type II endoleaks and suggest improving graft durability, patient selection or surgical technique. Further study is needed to define implant and anatomic predictors of different types of long-term reintervention.

Relevance of Type II Endoleak After Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is widely used as an alternative to open repair in elective and even in emergent cases of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA). One of the most frequent complications after EVAR is type II endoleak (T2EL). In elective therapy, evidence-based therapeutic recommendations for T2EL are limited. Completely unclear is the role of T2EL after EVAR for rAAA (rEVAR). This study aims to investigate the significance of T2ELs after rEVAR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective single-center data analysis of all patients who underwent rEVAR between January 2010 and December 2020 with primary T2EL. The outcome criteria were overall and T2EL-related mortality and reintervention rate as well as development of aneurysm diameter over follow-up (FU).

RESULTS

During the study period between January 2010 and December 2020, 35 (25%) out of 138 patients with rEVAR presented a primary postoperative T2EL (age 74±11 years, 34 males). At rupture, mean aneurysm diameter was 73±12 mm. Follow-up was 26 (0-172) months. The reintervention-free survival was 69% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 55%-86%) at 30 days, 58% (95% CI: 43%-78%) at 1 year, and 52% (95% CI: 36%-75%) at 3 years. In 40% (n=14), T2ELs resolved spontaneously within a median time of 3.4 (0.03-85.6) months. The overall and T2EL reintervention rates were 43% (n=15) and 9% (n=3), respectively. Within 30 days, 11 patients (31%) required reintervention, of which 2 were T2EL related. Aneurysm sac growth by ≥5 mm was seen in 3 patients (9%), and aneurysm shrinkage rate was significantly higher in sealed T2EL group (86% vs 5%, p<0.0001). The overall survival was 85% (95% CI: 74%-98%) at 30 days, 75% (95% CI: 61%-92%) at 1 year, and 67% (95% CI: 51%-87%) at 3 years. Six deaths were aneurysm related, while 1 was T2EL related within the first 30 days due to persistent hemorrhage. During FU, one more patient died due to a T2EL-related secondary rupture (T2EL-related mortality, 5.7%, n=2). Multivariable analysis revealed that arterial hypertension was associated with an increased risk for reintervention (hazard ratio [HR]: 27.8, 95% CI: 1.48-521, p=0.026) and age was associated with an increased risk for mortality (HR 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.26, p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

T2ELs after rEVAR showed a benign course in most cases. In the short term, the possibility of persistent bleeding should be considered. In the mid term, a consequent FU protocol is required to detect known late complications after EVAR at an early stage and to prevent secondary rupture and death.

Factors Associated With Spontaneous Sac Shrinkage in Patients With Persistent Type 2 Endoleaks After EVAR

PURPOSE

Despite controversy surrounding the management of type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), the current European guidelines recommend reintervention for T2ELs when the aneurysm expands by ≥10 mm. Meanwhile, sac shrinkage ≥10 mm can be considered low risk for failure even with T2ELs, and the guidelines suggest less frequent follow-up delayed until 5 years after EVAR. This study reviewed patients with persistent T2ELs to identify predictors of spontaneous sac shrinkage (SpS) within 5 years.

METHODS

A retrospective review of elective EVAR for infrarenal aortic aneurysms between June 2007 and December 2017. Patients with >1 year follow-up and persistent T2ELs, defined as T2ELs confirmed at both the 6 and 12 month follow-up with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), were included. Any reintervention or type 1 or 3 endoleaks within 12 months were excluded. SpS was defined as a ≥10 mm reduction in diameter without any reintervention. Aneurysm enlargement (AnE) was defined as a ≥5 mm increase in diameter. Factors associated with SpS within 5 years were analyzed. The clinical outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

Among 726 patients, 162 patients had persistent isolated T2ELs. After excluding 21 patients, 141 patients were enrolled. During a median follow-up of 43 months (interquartile range [IQR], 26-60), 28 SpS and 39 AnE were observed, and 31 reinterventions were performed. The cumulative rates of SpS were 14.2%±2.9% and 25.6%±5.1% at 1 and 5 years. Cox regression analysis revealed that the presence of ≥6 patent lumbar arteries had a significant negative correlation with SpS (p=0.036). During further follow-up after SpS, 2 reinterventions for type 1a and 3b endoleaks were required at 49 and 45 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with fewer patent lumbar arteries were likely to experience SpS within 5 years, even in the presence of persistent T2ELs. Follow-up imaging studies were advisable earlier than 5 years, even after SpS.

Persisting Type 2 Endoleaks Following EVAR for AAA Are Associated With AAA Expansion

PURPOSE

To determine the evolution of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) diameter in the presence of persisting type 2 endoleaks (pEL2) following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective, single-center, case-control study. All patients with pEL2 (pEL2 group, persisting for > 12 months) between 2004 and 2018 were identified and compared with a 1:1 age- and gender-matched control with no endoleak (control group). Primary outcome measures were freedom from AAA expansion and freedom from AAA shrinkage over time. AAA diameter measurements were performed on computed tomography angiography (CTA). Secondary outcome measures were survival, AAA-related mortality, reinterventions for pEL2, incidence of secondary type 1 endoleaks (EL1), and infrarenal aortic branch vessel anatomy.

RESULTS

A total of 773 patients were treated with EVAR for AAA between 2004 and 2018. Of them, 286 patients demonstrated type 2 endoleaks (EL2) in postoperative CTA or intraoperative angiography (37%). Forty-five of 286 EL2 (15.7%) were pEL2 (pEL2 group). Freedom from AAA expansion in the pEL2 group was 100%, 96.7%, 85.2%, and 54.3% after 1, 2, 3, and 4 years, respectively, compared with 100% after 1, 2, 3, and 4 years in the control group (p<0.01). Freedom from AAA shrinkage in the pEL2 group after 1, 2, 3, and 4 years was 95.5%, 90.4%, 90.4%, and 79.1%, respectively, compared with 86.7%, 34.8%, 19.3%, and 19.3% in the control group (p<0.01). Overall survival at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years was 100%, 97.6%, 95.0% and 95.0% in the pEL2 group and 100% at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years in the control group (p=0.17). There were no AAA-related deaths in either group. Patients with pEL2 had a significantly increased number of infrarenal aortic branches (p<0.05, respectively). Eighteen patients (40.0%) in the pEL2 group underwent 34 reinterventions for pEL2, with a median follow-up (FU) of 925 days (0-4173). Clinical success was achieved in 9 patients (50.0%). Four patients (8.9%) with pEL2 developed secondary EL1 after a median FU of 1278 days (662-2121).

CONCLUSION

pEL2 are associated with AAA expansion during midterm FU. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the association of AAA expansion due to pEL2 with clinical outcomes to allow recommendations with regard to treatment indications.

Multicentre Comparison between Open Conversions and Semi-Conversions for Late Endoleaks after EVAR

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to compare early and follow-up outcomes of late open conversions (LOC, with complete or partial endograft explantation) and semi-conversions (SC, with endograft preservation) after EVAR in a multicentre experience.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All-LOC and SC performed from 1997 to 2020 in 11 vascular centres were compared. Endograft infections or thrombosis were excluded. Primary endpoints were early mortality, and long-term survival estimates. Secondary endpoints were differences in: postoperative complication rates, conversion-related complications during follow-up.

RESULTS

In the considered period, 347 patients underwent surgery for EVAR complications. Among these, 270 were operated on for endoleaks (222 LOC, 48 SC). The 2 groups were homogeneous in terms of ASA score (3.2±0.7 LOC, 3±0.5 SC; P=.128) and main endograft characteristics (suprarenal fixation, bifurcated/aorto-uni-iliac configuration). Mean age was 75±8 at LOC and 79±7 at SC (P=.009). Reasons for LOC were: 62.2% (138/222) type I endoleak, 21.6% (48/222) type II, 7.7% (17/222) type III, 8.5% (19/222) endotension. Indications for SC were: 64.6% (31/48) type II endoleak, 33.3% (16/48) type I, 2.1% (1/48) type III. Thirty-day mortality was 12.2% (27/222) in the LOC group, and 10.4% (5/48) in the SC group (P=.73). Postoperative complication rate was higher in the LOC group (45.5% vs. 29.2%, P=.04). The estimated survival rate after LOC was 80% at 1 year and 64% at 5 years; after SC 72% at 1 year and 37% at 5 years (log-rank P=.01). During the median follow-up of 21.5 months (inter-quartile range 2.4-61), an endoleak after SC was found in the 38.3% of the cases; sac growth was recorded in the 27.7% of SC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SC have an early benefit over LOC in terms of reduced postoperative complications, but a significantly inferior mid-term survival. The high rates of persistent and/or recurrent endoleaks reduce SC durability.

Significance of preoperative thrombus burden in the prediction of persistent Type II endoleak and re-intervention following infra-renal EVAR

BACKGROUND

Persistent Type II endoleak has necessitated prolonged surveillance and is a reason for re-intervention following infra-renal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The aim of this study was to assess the association of thrombus burden (TB) within the aneurysmal sac in the prediction of persistent Type II endoleaks.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing infra-renal EVAR from October 2009 to October 2017 in a single vascular network were included. TB was assessed on preoperative CT-angiogram and was defined as a percentage of thrombus across the maximal sac diameter in comparison to the luminal diameter measured orthogonally at the same level. Patients were categorised into 3 groups; Low TB (<25%), Medium TB (25%-50%) and High TB (>50%). All patients underwent postoperative EVAR surveillance comprising of computed tomographic angiography or duplex ultrasound. Type II endoleak observed for more than one year was defined as persistent Type II endoleak. Odds ratio and Student's T-test were used to determine significance.

RESULTS

Some 275 EVARs were performed in the study period. 45 procedures were excluded due to either iliac-only intervention (n=9), no pre-operative information (n=7), abandoned (n=1) or less than 1 year's follow-up data (n=28). For the 230 procedures included, the median follow-up was 43 (12-102) months. There were no significant differences between the groups for age, gender, co-morbidities nor preoperative sac diameter. There was high inter-observer reliability with a kappa value of 0.89 (0.84-0.94) with a total discordance of 7% across the cohorts. Persistent Type II endoleak occurred significantly more frequently with reduced TB: 41% of the low TB cohort compared with 4% of the high TB cohort [OR 15.36 (3.5-67.3) p=0.0003]. Re-intervention was also significantly more likely to occur in the presence of a persistent Type II endoleak compared to its absence; n=12/13 (92%) patients who underwent re-intervention had a persistent Type II endoleak [OR 43.4 (5.5-242) p=0.0003]. Sac size reduction was significantly greater in medium TB and high TB cohorts when compared to low TB; -25% and -27% vs. -15% (p=0.0046 and p<0.0001). Decreased TB was associated with a significant increase in Inferior Mesenteric Artery (IMA) patency; the mean TB, where the IMA was patent, being 29% compared to 40% where the IMA was occluded p<0.0001. When considered together, patients with a low TB and a patent IMA were even more likely to have a persistent Type II endoleak when compared to those with a high TB and an occluded IMA; [OR 34.1 (1.99-583) p=0.015].

CONCLUSION

Low thrombus burden is associated with increased rates of persistent Type II endoleak, especially in the presence of a patent IMA. High thrombus burden is associated with increased sac regression and low re-intervention rates. Thrombus burden can be assessed reliably and could be used for risk stratification in the planning of infra-renal EVAR. Pre-emptive embolization of IMA or lumbar vessels in those with low thrombus burden may be beneficial. Thrombus burden could be a useful tool for designing post-EVAR surveillance regimen.

Prophylactic Sac Outflow Vessel Embolization is Associated with Improved Sac Regression in Patients Undergoing Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

Type II endoleaks (T2E), commonly identified after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), have been associated with late endograft failure and secondary rupture. Number and size of patent aortic aneurysm sac outflow vessels, namely the inferior mesenteric, lumbar, and accessory renal arteries, have been implicated as known risk factors for persistent T2E. Given technical challenges associated with post-EVAR embolization, prophylactic embolization of aortic aneurysm sac outflow vessels has been advocated to prevent T2E; however, current evidence is limited. We sought to examine the effect of concomitant prophylactic aortic aneurysm sac outflow vessels embolization in patients undergoing EVAR.

METHODS

Patients 18 and older in the SVS Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent elective EVAR for intact aneurysms between January 2009 and November 2020 were included. Patients with history of prior aortic repair and those without available follow-up data were excluded. Patient demographics, operative characteristics, and outcomes were analyzed by group: EVAR with or without prophylactic sac outflow vessel embolization (emboEVAR). Outcomes of interest were rates of in-hospital postoperative complications, incidence of aneurysmal sac regression (≥5mm) and T2E, and rates of re-intervention in follow-up.

RESULTS

15060 patients were included: 272 had emboEVAR and 14788 had EVAR alone. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of age, comorbidities, or anatomic characteristics including mean maximum preoperative aortic diameter (5.5 vs. 5.6 cm, p=0.48). emboEVAR was associated with significantly longer procedural times (148 vs. 124 minutes, p<0.0001), prolonged fluoroscopy (32 vs. 23 minutes, p<0.0001), increased contrast use (105 vs. 91 mL, p<0.0001), without significant reduction in T2E at case completion (17.7% vs. 16.3%, p=0.54). Incidence of postoperative complications (3.7% vs. 4.6%, p=0.56), index hospitalization reintervention rates (0.7% vs. 1.3%, p=0.59), length of stay (1.8 vs. 2 days, p=0.75), and thirty-day mortality (0% vs. 0%, p=1) were similar between groups. In mid-term follow-up (14.6±6.2 months), the emboEVAR group had a significantly greater mean reduction in maximum aortic diameter (0.69 vs. 0.54 cm, p=0.006) with a higher proportion experiencing sac regression ≥5 mm (53.5% vs. 48.7%). Re-intervention rates were similar between groups. On multivariable analysis, prophylactic aortic aneurysm sac outflow vessel embolization (OR 1.34, CI 1.04-1.74, p=0.024) was a significant independent predictor of sac regression.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic sac outflow vessel embolization can be performed safely for patients with intact aortic aneurysms undergoing elective EVAR without significant associated perioperative morbidity or mortality. emboEVAR is associated with significant sac regression compared to EVAR alone in mid-term follow-up. Although there was not a decrease in the incidence of T2E, this technique shows promise and future efforts should focus on identifying a subset of aneurysm and outflow branch characteristics that will benefit from concomitant selective versus complete prophylactic sac outflow vessel embolization.

Safety and Validity of the Proposed European Society for Vascular Surgery Infrarenal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance Protocol: A Single Centre Evaluation

OBJECTIVE

Long term surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is essential to detect late complications, but there is variation in practice. The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) made a recommendation for a new surveillance protocol; one element involves risk stratifying patients depending on sac size reduction and presence of endoleak at their 30 day computed tomography angiogram into low risk groups (delayed imaging to five years) or higher risk groups (continue with the current protocol). The aim was to test this suggested protocol retrospectively within an EVAR patient cohort.

METHODS

Data on EVARs performed from October 2009 to October 2019 were collected. Information gathered from an existing surveillance programme was used to assess the proposed ESVS protocol. All patients who underwent re-intervention were reviewed to see whether adopting the proposed ESVS protocol would have detected these events.

RESULTS

In total, 309 procedures were included. Altogether, 219 of these patients had no endoleak (70.9%) and 86 had a type II (27.8%) endoleak. Only four developed a type I or III endoleak. No patient in the low risk cohort (no initial endoleak or sac shrinkage > 1 cm) required secondary intervention. Five year follow up data were available for 103 patients. In the type II endoleak group, there were 28 secondary interventions in 22 patients. No patient experienced a ruptured aneurysm within five years post-operatively. Had the proposed ESVS protocol been followed, all patients requiring a secondary intervention or with increasing sac size would have been detected/captured. Further, adherence to the ESVS guidelines would have resulted in 103 patients with a five year follow up history qualifying for reduced surveillance. A further 120 patients who had reached the three and four year follow up timepoints could have qualified for a reduced surveillance, reducing imaging cost further.

CONCLUSION

Adopting the proposed ESVS EVAR surveillance protocol safely identified "low risk" patients who did not go on to require a secondary intervention. These patients could benefit from reduced surveillance scanning.