Aneurysm Sac Dynamics and its Prognostic Significance Following Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Postdissection aortic aneurysm sac enlargement after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

Aneurysm sac changes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FBEVAR) for postdissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (PD-TAAs) are poorly understood. Partial thrombosis of the false lumen and endoleaks may impair sac regression. To characterize sac changes after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs, this study examined midterm results and predictors for sac enlargement.

METHODS

FBEVARs performed for PD-TAAs in 10 physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2008 to 2023 were analyzed. The maximum aortic aneurysm diameter was compared between the 30-day computed tomography angiogram and follow-up imaging studies. Aneurysm sac enlargement was defined as an increase in diameter of ≥5 mm. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were used to evaluate sac enlargement and midterm FBEVAR outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 3296 FBEVARs, 290 patients (72.4% male; median age, 68.4 years) were treated for PD-TAAs. Most aneurysms treated were extent II (72%) and III (12%). Mean aneurysm diameter was 66.5 ± 11.2 mm. Mortality at 30 days was 1.4%. At a mean follow-up of 2.9 ± 1.9 years, at least one follow-up imaging study revealed sac enlargement in 43 patients (15%), sac regression in 115 patients (40%), and neither enlargement nor regression in 137 (47%); 5 (2%) demonstrated both expansion and regression during follow-up. Freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement was 93%, 82%, and 80% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Overall, endoleaks were detected in 27 patients (63%) with sac enlargement and 143 patients (58%) without enlargement (P = .54). Sac enlargement was significantly more frequent among older patients (mean age at the index procedure, 70.2 ± 8.9 years vs 66.5 ± 11 years; P = .04) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year (74% vs 52%; P = .031). Cox regression revealed age >70 years at baseline (hazard ratio [HR], 2.146; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.167-3.944; P = .010) and presence of type II endoleak at 1 year (HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.07-4.79; P = .032) were independent predictors of sac enlargement. Patient survival was 92%, 81%, and 68% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Cumulative target vessel instability was 7%, and aneurysm-related mortality was 2% at 5 years. At least 42% of patients required secondary interventions. Sac enlargement did not affect patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Aneurysm sac enlargement occurs in 15% of patients after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs. Elderly patients (>70 years at baseline) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year may need closer monitoring and secondary interventions to prevent sac enlargement. Despite sac enlargement in some patients, aneurysm-related mortality at 5 years remains low and overall survival was not associated with sac enlargement.

Midterm Outcomes and Aneurysm Sac Dynamics Following Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair after Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) is a feasible option for aortic repair after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), due to improved peri-operative outcomes compared with open conversion. However, little is known regarding the durability of FEVAR as a treatment for failed EVAR. Since aneurysm sac evolution is an important marker for success after aneurysm repair, the aim of the study was to examine midterm outcomes and aneurysm sac dynamics of FEVAR after prior EVAR.

METHODS

Patients undergoing FEVAR for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms from 2008 to 2021 at two hospitals in The Netherlands were included. Patients were categorised into primary FEVAR and FEVAR after EVAR. Outcomes included five year mortality rate, one year aneurysm sac dynamics (regression, stable, expansion), sac dynamics over time, and five year aortic related procedures. Analyses were done using Kaplan-Meier methods, multivariable Cox regression analysis, chi square tests, and linear mixed effect models.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety-six patients with FEVAR were identified, of whom 27% (n = 53) had had a prior EVAR. Patients with prior EVAR were significantly older (78 ± 6.7 years vs. 73 ± 5.9 years, p < .001). There were no significant differences in mortality rate. FEVAR after EVAR was associated with a higher risk of aortic related procedures within five years (hazard ratio [HR] 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 6.5, p = .037). Sac dynamics were assessed in 154 patients with available imaging. Patients with a prior EVAR showed lower rates of sac regression and higher rates of sac expansion at one year compared with primary FEVAR (sac expansion 48%, n = 21/44, vs. 8%, n = 9/110, p < .001). Sac dynamics over time showed similar results, sac growth for FEVAR after EVAR, and sac shrinkage for primary FEVAR (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

There were high rates of sac expansion and a need for more secondary procedures in FEVAR after EVAR than primary FEVAR patients, although this did not affect midterm survival. Future studies will have to assess whether FEVAR after EVAR is a valid intervention, and the underlying process that drives aneurysm sac growth following successful FEVAR after EVAR.

Endovascular Repair of Juxtarenal and Pararenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Using a Novel Low-Profile Fenestrated Custom-Made Endograft: Technical Details and Short-Term Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to share preliminary experiences and outcomes with a novel custom-made fenestrated TREO® Abdominal Stent-Graft System to treat juxtarenal and pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

METHODS

Juxtarenal and pararenal AAA patients treated with the custom-made fenestrated TREO® Abdominal Stent-Graft System were included from 4 high-volume European academic medical centers from June 2021 to September 2023. Technical success and 30-day/in-hospital mortality and complications were analyzed. Technical success was defined as successful endovascular implantation of the stent graft with preservation of antegrade flow to the target vessels, and absence of type 1 or 2 endoleak (EL) at the first postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA).

RESULTS

Forty-two consecutive patients were included. The majority of the devices were constructed with 2 (N=4; 9.5%), 3 (N=9; 21.4%), or 4 (N=27; 64%) fenestrations. In 1 case, the device was constructed with a single fenestration (2.4%) and 1 device contained 5 fenestrations (2.4%); 17% had previous AAA repair. Target vessel cannulation with placement of a bridging stent was successful in all but 1 vessel (99, 3%). One aneurysm-related death occurred in the direct postoperative period and 2 limb occlusions necessitated reintervention during admission. In the median follow-up period of 101 (2-620) days, 3 more patients died due to non-aneurysm-related causes. Technical success was achieved in 90% of the cases. Nineteen ELs were seen on the first postoperative CT scan: 1 type 1b EL (N=1; 2%), 15 type 2 ELs (N=15; 36%), and 3 type 3 ELs (N=3%). Eleven patients received more than 1 CT scan during a median follow-up of 361 days (82-620): 3 type 2 ELs resolved and 1 type 3 EL was treated in this period. In the follow-up, 1 patient had a coagulation disorder that caused occlusions of the branches.

CONCLUSION

The results of the first experiences using the custom-made fenestrated TREO® Abdominal Stent-Graft System in Europe are promising. There was a low short-term mortality and morbidity rate in these patients of which 17% had previous AAA repair. Mid-term and long-term follow-up data are needed to evaluate endograft durability and performance.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study shows the first experiences and short-term results of a novel low-profile custom-made device: the custom-made fenestrated TREO® Abdominal Stent-Graft System. Showing these results and experiences can help the physicians in clinical decision-making for their patients.