Mid- and long-term device migration after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: A comparison of AneuRx and Zenith endografts

A Single-Institution Case Series of Total Endovascular Relining for Type 3 Endoleaks in Traditional Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) Grafts with Raised Bifurcations

BACKGROUND

The endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms can be performed with a wide variety of devices. Many of these grafts elevate the aortic bifurcation which can limit future repairs if the graft material fails thereby creating a type III endoleak to aorto-uniliac grafts. Many manufacturers have grafts susceptible to this, but we have seen this in the Medtronic AneuRx graft. Our goal is to provide technical details and outcomes regarding a novel technique to reline these grafts while maintaining inline flow to the iliac arteries.

METHODS

This was a single-institution review of patients who had endoleaks requiring intervention after a previously placed graft with an elevated aortic bifurcation. Primary outcomes included technical success defined as placement of all planned devices, resolution of type III endoleak, aneurysm size at follow-up, and requirement of reintervention. Secondary outcomes included 30-day complications, aneurysm-related mortality, and all-cause mortality. Technical details of the operation include back-table deployment of an Ovation device, modification of the deployment system tether and pre-emptive placement of an up and over 0.014″ wire. The wire is placed up and over and hung outside the contralateral gate. Once the main body is introduced above the old graft, the 0.014" is snared from the contralateral side and externalized. The main body is then able to be seated at the bifurcation as the limb is not fully deployed and then device deployment is completed per instructions for use.

RESULTS

Our study consists of 4 individuals, 3 of which had an abdominal aortic aneurysm initially managed with an AneuRx endovascular aneurysm repair and 1 with a combination of Gore and Cook grafts. All 4 patients were male with an average age of 84.5 years at time of reline. All patients had at least 10 years between initial surgery and reline at our institution. Primary outcomes revealed no type 1 or 3 endoleaks at follow-up, technical success was 100% and 1 patient required reintervention for aneurysm growth and type 2 endoleak. In terms of our secondary outcomes, there was 1 postoperative complication which was cardiac dysfunction secondary to demand ischemia, aneurysm-related mortality was 0% and all-cause mortality was 25% at average follow-up of 2.44 years.

CONCLUSIONS

As individuals continue to age, there are more patients who would benefit from less invasive reinterventions following endovascular aneurysm repair. Whether this is due to aortic degeneration, stent migration, or stent material damage is not always known. In this study, we present an endovascular approach to treating type III endoleak patients with a previous graft and elevated aortic bifurcation using Ovation stent grafts and found no evidence of type 1 or 3 endoleaks on follow-up imaging. This approach may allow patients with type III endoleak the option of a minimally invasive, percutaneous approach where they previously would not have had one.

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.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Status of diagnosis and therapy of abdominal aortic aneurysms

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are characterized by localized dilation of the abdominal aorta. They are associated with several serious consequences, including compression of adjacent abdominal organs, pain, treatment-related financial expenditure. The main complication of AAA is aortic rupture, which is responsible for about 200,000 deaths per year worldwide. An increasing number of researchers are dedicating their efforts to study AAA, resulting in significant progress in this field. Despite the commendable progress made thus far, there remains a lack of established methods to effectively decelerate the dilation of aneurysms. Therefore, further studies are imperative to expand our understanding and enhance our knowledge concerning AAAs. Although numerous factors are known to be associated with the occurrence and progression of AAA, the exact pathway of development remains unclear. While asymptomatic at most times, AAA features a highly unpredictable disease course, which could culminate in the highly deadly rupture of the aneurysmal aorta. Current guidelines recommend watchful waiting and lifestyle adjustment for smaller, slow-growing aneurysms, while elective/prophylactic surgical repairs including open repair and endovascular aneurysm repair are recommended for larger aneurysms that have grown beyond certain thresholds (55 mm for males and 50 mm for females). The latter is a minimally invasive procedure and is widely believed to be suited for patients with a poor general condition. However, several concerns have recently been raised regarding the postoperative complications and possible loss of associated survival benefits on it. In this review, we aimed to highlight the current status of diagnosis and treatment of AAA by an in-depth analysis of the findings from literatures.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Effect of stent graft fixation types on pararenal aortic diameter and renal function after endovascular aortic repair

Background: This study aims to identify pararenal aortic diameter changes following endovascular aortic repair and to investigate the effects of suprarenal fixation on renal function.

Methods: Between May 2006 and January 2019, a total of 168 patients (135 males, 33 females; mean age: 75.2±8.4 years; range, 48 to 93 years) who underwent endovascular aortic repair were retrospectively analyzed. To compare the effects of graft types, we measured the change in pararenal aortic diameter at four levels: below the celiac artery, below the superior mesenteric artery, at the lowest renal artery, and 1 cm below the lowest renal artery. To evaluate the effect of suprarenal fixation on renal function, serial measurements of serum creatinine, glomerular filtration rate, creatinine clearance rate, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were made. We examined the factors related to post-procedural aortic diameter.

Results: The mean change in the aortic diameter was statistically significant, being 12.9±10% in the suprarenal fixation group and 6.19±6.9% in the infrarenal fixation group only at the lowest renal artery level (p=0.001). There was no significant difference in the rate of type I endoleak (p=0.330) or renal function and adverse events (p>0.107) between the groups. The formula for calculating post-procedural aortic diameter was as follows: post-procedural aortic diameter (renal artery level, mm) =1.845 (in case of suprarenal fixation) + 1.012 × pre-procedural aortic diameter (renal artery level, mm) + 0.029 × follow-up time (months) + 0.039 × oversizing (%) (R2=0.773, p<0.001).

Conclusion: Suprarenal fixation affects the infrarenal aortic diameter at the lowest renal artery level without significant type I endoleak. However, it does not result in significant renal dysfunction. Pre-procedural aortic diameter, computed tomography follow-up time, suprarenal fixation type, and stent oversizing are the only definite independent correlation factors for postprocedural aortic diameter. This formula can predict the change of aortic diameter after endovascular aortic repair.

Endograft platform does not influence aortic neck dilatation after infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair with primary endostapling

OBJECTIVES

Aortic endografts used for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are based on varying skeletal platforms such as stainless steel or nitinol stents, using radial force applied to seal at the aneurysm neck, and varying proximal fixation methods, applying either suprarenal or infrarenal fixation. This study assesses whether varying skeleton/fixation platforms affect neck-related outcomes after primary endostapling with Heli-FX EndoAnchors at EVAR.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a prospective database of infrarenal EVAR undertaken at a single centre. Chimney-EVAR, secondary cases were excluded. Primary outcomes analysed included neck diameter evolution from pre-EVAR to latest imaging follow-up, including a comparison of stent platforms to see if there was any outcome difference between those using stainless steel or nitinol, as also freedom from type I endoleakage and migration. Secondary outcomes assessed included average number of EndoAnchors, and sac size patterns before and after EVAR.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients underwent endostapled infrarenal EVAR between September 2013 and March 2020. After exclusion of ineligible patients, 84 patients (76 male, 8 female, age 73.7 ± 7.8 years) were available for analysis. 57/27 endografts used suprarenal/infrarenal fixation, whilst 16/68 devices were based on stainless steel/nitinol platforms, respectively. Mean oversizing was higher for stainless steel/suprarenal fixation endografts (p = 0.02). A total of 582 EndoAnchors were deployed, averaging 7 ± 2 per patient. Median neck diameter was 25 mm (IQR 22-31) with 22 necks having non-parallel morphology (conical, tapered or bubble). Median follow-up period was 28.5 (IQR 12-43) months. Neck evolution studies suggested aortic neck dilatation of 5 ± 4 mm (p <0.001, paired T-test), independent of platforms employed (p = NS, ANOVA). There was no endograft migration; one immediate post-EVAR endoleak settled by eight weeks. There was a mean 5.7 ± 8.2 mm sac size reduction (p < 0.001, paired T-test).

CONCLUSION

Aortic neck dilatation occurs after EVAR with primary endostapling, but the process may be independent of stainless steel/nitinol platforms, possibly due to the attenuating effect of EndoAnchors. Adjunct aneurysm neck fixation by primary endostapling prevents migration regardless of whether suprarenal/infrarenal fixation is the primary fixative method. Device platform choice therefore may be left to the operator discretion if primary endostapling is applied at EVAR. Freedom from complications such as migration and endoleakage in the intermediate term suggests a higher level of 'tolerance' to aortic neck dilatation with primary endostapling. We would therefore suggest routine usage of EndoAnchors at EVAR when not otherwise contraindicated.

Quantification of suprarenal aortic neck dilation after fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Suprarenal aortic neck dilation (AND) after fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) with commercially available devices has not yet been well characterized. The aim of this study was to measure diameter changes in the supravisceral aorta after FEVAR.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective review involving patients with juxtarenal aneurysms treated with Cook ZFEN devices (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). Patients with at least 1 year of cross-sectional radiologic follow-up were included. AND was defined as ≥3 mm at any measured location. Aortic diameter, defined as the average outer to outer diameter on three-dimensional centerline imaging, was measured at seven locations along the length of the ZFEN device from the proximal fixation struts to the bottom of the second seal stent. The first postoperative CT scan (≤1 month) served as a baseline from which subsequent measurements at annual intervals were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients who underwent FEVAR from 2012 to 2018 met inclusion criteria, with a total of 119 target vessels (83 renal stents, 41 superior mesenteric artery scallops or large fenestrations). Mean follow-up time was 30.3 months. Any AND was found to occur in 32 (74.4%) patients. Aortic diameter dilation at latest follow-up was found to occur at all measured locations from the top of the fixation struts (1.9 ± 2.4 mm; P < .0001) to the middle of the second seal stent (1.3 ± 3.8 mm; P < .01). Diameter growth was most pronounced in the middle of the first seal stent, with mean AND of 3.6 ± 3.2 mm. At this location, the aorta experienced nearly linear annual growth of 0.99 mm (95% confidence interval, 0.7-1.28 mm) per year. Increasing device oversizing relative to the native visceral aorta was the strongest predictor of postoperative neck diameter growth (1.34 mm per 10% increase in oversizing; P = .02), whereas increasing proximal seal length was protective of growth (-1.82 mm per 10-mm increase in seal length; P = .016). Proximal seal lengths ≥3 cm were associated with less neck dilation compared with <3 cm (2.6 mm vs 4.9 mm; P = .022). Type IA endoleak in this cohort was rare (n = 1) and not associated with AND (P = .256).

CONCLUSIONS

Dilation of the suprarenal aorta is a common finding in midterm follow-up after FEVAR and not associated with proximal endoleak. Aggressive device oversizing is predictive of dilation, whereas longer seal lengths are associated with less dilation along the suprarenal seal zone. These results support the continued use of FEVAR for juxtarenal aneurysms, particularly in patients in whom ≥3 cm of healthy seal length can be obtained.

Best Practice Guidelines: Imaging Surveillance After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE. Abdominal aortic aneurysm is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the preferred treatment modality. Surveillance imaging after EVAR detects potential complications. The most common complication is endoleak, which can predispose the aorta to rupture. This article provides a comprehensive and evidence-based review regarding surveillance imaging after EVAR to help readers understand current societal guidelines, guide institutional protocols, and provide a framework to facilitate safe, cost-effective, and clinically relevant imaging of patients after EVAR. CONCLUSION. Lifelong surveillance is necessary for patients who have undergone EVAR. Triple-phase CT angiography (CTA) within 30 days after EVAR is necessary to triage patients appropriately and guide future imaging. Patients without endoleak on initial CTA can be monitored with annual duplex ultrasound. Patients with type I or type III endoleaks should be referred for intervention. Patients with type II and type V endoleaks should be referred for intervention only if the sac diameter grows by more than 1 cm. MR angiography should be used primarily as a problem-solving modality or in patients with contraindications to contrast media or radiation. Strong consideration should be given to more frequent surveillance in patients who have undergone EVAR who have aneurysms with a hostile neck anatomy compared with those patients with favorable neck anatomy.

Comparison of Outcomes in Elective Endovascular Aortic Repair vs Open Surgical Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

IMPORTANCE

Knowledge regarding the long-term outcomes of elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is increasing. However, data with greater than 10 years' follow-up remain sparse and are lacking from population-based studies.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the long-term outcomes of EVAR compared with open surgical repair (OSR) for elective treatment of AAA.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked administrative health data from Ontario, Canada, to identify all patients 40 years and older who underwent elective EVAR or OSR for AAA repair from April 1, 2003, to March 31, 2016, with follow-up terminating on March 31, 2017. A total of 17 683 patients were identified using validated procedure and billing codes and were propensity score matched. Analysis was conducted from June 26, 2018, to January 16, 2019.

EXPOSURES

Elective EVAR or OSR for AAA.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival, defined as being free of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; reintervention; and secondary rupture.

RESULTS

Among 17 683 patients who received elective AAA repairs (mean [SD] age, 72.6 [7.8] years; 14 286 [80.8%] men), 6100 (34.5%) underwent EVAR and 11 583 (65.5%) underwent OSR. From these patients, 4010 well-balanced propensity score-matched pairs of patients were defined, with a mean (SD) age of 73.0 (7.6) years and 6583 (82.1%) men. In the matched cohort, the mean (SD) follow-up was 4.4 (2.7) years, and maximum follow-up was 13.8 years. The overall median survival was 8.9 years. Compared with OSR, EVAR was associated with a higher survival rate up to 1 year after repair (91.0% [95% CI, 90.1%-91.9%] vs 94.0% [95% CI, 93.3%-94.7%]) and a higher major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival rate up to 4 years after repair (69.9% [95% CI, 68.3%-71.3%] vs 72.9% [95% CI, 71.4%-74.4%]). Cumulative incidence of reintervention was higher among patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR at the 7-year follow-up (45.9% [95% CI, 44.1%-47.8%] vs 42.2% [95% CI, 40.4%-44.0%]). Survival analyses demonstrated no statistically significant differences in long-term survival, reintervention, and secondary rupture for patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR. Kaplan-Meier analysis suggested superior long-term major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival among patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR (32.6% [95% CI, 26.9%-38.4%] vs 14.1% [95% CI, 4.0%-30.4%]; stratified log-rank P < .001) during a maximum follow-up of 13.8 years.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Endovascular aortic repair was not associated with a difference in long-term survival during more than 13 years' maximum follow-up. The reasons for these findings will require studies to consider specific graft makes and models, adherence to instructions for use, and types and reasons for reintervention.

The impact of randomized trial results on abdominal aortic aneurysm repair rates from 2003 to 2016: A population-based time-series analysis

Objectives

The uptake of endovascular aortic repair for elective and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is not well studied. We aimed to examine the trends in open surgical repair and endovascular aortic repair of eAAA and rAAA and to examine the effects of randomized trial publications on elective open surgical repair and endovascular aortic repair rates.

Methods

We conducted a population-based time-series analysis of eAAA and rAAA repairs in Ontario, Canada from 2003 to 2016. We examined changes in overall and approach-specific rates of eAAA and rAAA repair using exponential smoothing models. Interventional autoregressive integrated moving average models were fit to the eAAA rates to examine the impact of randomized trial results on these rates.

Results

We identified 19,489 eAAA (12,232 open (63%) and 7257 endovascular (37%)) and 2732 rAAA (2466 open (90%) and 266 endovascular (10%)) repairs from 2003 to 2016. The rate of eAAA repair declined from 6.39/100,000 in 2003 to 5.59/100,000 in 2016 (13% decrease, p = 0.17). The rate of elective open surgical repair decreased nearly three-fold from 6.07/100,000 to 2.12/100,000 ( p < 0.0001), while elective endovascular aortic repair increased approximately 10-fold (0.32/100,000 to 3.47/100,000, p < 0.0001). The rate of ruptured open surgical repair decreased from 1.62/100,000 to 0.37/100,000 ( p < 0.44), while ruptured endovascular aortic repair uptake increased (0.00/100,000 to 0.12/100,000, p < 0.25). The mid-term results of the DREAM and EVAR-1 trials were associated with a decrease in the rate of elective open surgical repair decline after 2010 ( p = 0.01).

Conclusions

While elective open surgical repair use has significantly decreased from 2003 to 2016, elective endovascular aortic repair use has significantly increased. The DREAM and EVAR-1 results significantly impacted the observed rates of elective open surgical repair only. The reasons for these trends require further characterization.

Patient-specific in silico endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: application and validation

Non-negligible postinterventional complication rates after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) leave room for further improvements. Since the potential success of EVAR depends on various patient-specific factors, such as the complexity of the vessel geometry and the physiological state of the vessel, in silico models can be a valuable tool in the preinterventional planning phase. A suitable in silico EVAR methodology applied to patient-specific cases can be used to predict stent-graft (SG)-related complications, such as SG migration, endoleaks or tissue remodeling-induced aortic neck dilatation and to improve the selection and sizing process of SGs. In this contribution, we apply an in silico EVAR methodology that predicts the final state of the deployed SG after intervention to three clinical cases. A novel qualitative and quantitative validation methodology, that is based on a comparison between in silico results and postinterventional CT data, is presented. The validation methodology compares average stent diameters pseudo-continuously along the total length of the deployed SG. The validation of the in silico results shows very good agreement proving the potential of using in silico approaches in the preinterventional planning of EVAR. We consider models of bifurcated, marketed SGs as well as sophisticated models of patient-specific vessels that include intraluminal thrombus, calcifications and an anisotropic model for the vessel wall. We exemplarily show the additional benefit and applicability of in silico EVAR approaches to clinical cases by evaluating mechanical quantities with the potential to assess the quality of SG fixation and sealing such as contact tractions between SG and vessel as well as SG-induced tissue overstresses.

Current evidence on aortic remodeling after endovascular repair

Anatomical changes after endovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are thoroughly studied as they could affect the long-term postoperative outcome. The aim of the present study was to review the literature and summarize the recent data regarding the aortic remodeling and its clinical significance. A continuous aortic neck expansion is observed after EVAR and is more rapid at the first month and during the third postoperative year. This aortic neck dilation is not influenced by the type of proximal stent-graft fixation, is comparable to open surgical aneurysm repair and is most probably related with the natural progression of aneurismal disease. Aortic neck angulation reduces significantly immediately after EVAR and then continues to reduce slowly and gradually. Neck angulations ≥60° have a greater reduction compared to neck angulations <60°. An expansion of the common iliac arteries at the distal landing zone is also observed after EVAR and is more prominent in the first six postoperative months. A postoperative increase of the distance between superior mesenteric artery and iliac bifurcations (aortoiliac elongation) is described and is associated with increased type I endoleaks and reinterventions. The aneurysm sac diameter most frequently reduces after EVAR in absence of an endoleak and this aneurysm sac regression has been associated with the stent-graft type.

Complications of endovascular aneurysm repair of the thoracic and abdominal aorta: evaluation and management

In recent decades, endovascular aneurysm repair or endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has become an acceptable alternative to open surgery for the treatment of thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms and other aortic pathologies such as the acute aortic syndromes (e.g., penetrating aortic ulcer, intramural hematoma, dissection). Available data suggest that endovascular repair is associated with lower perioperative 30-day all-cause mortality as well as a significant reduction in perioperative morbidity when compared to open surgery. Additionally, EVAR leads to decreased blood loss, eliminates the need for cross-clamping the aorta and has shorter recovery periods than traditional surgery. It is currently the preferred mode of treatment of thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms in a subset of patients who meet certain anatomic criteria conducive to endovascular repair. The main disadvantage of EVAR procedures is the high rate of post-procedural complications that often require secondary re-intervention. As a result, most authorities recommend lifelong imaging surveillance following repair. Available surveillance modalities include conventional radiography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance angiography, ultrasonography, nuclear imaging and conventional angiography, with computed tomography currently considered to be the gold standard for surveillance by most experts. Following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, the rate of complications is estimated to range between 16% and 30%. The complication rate is higher following thoracic EVAR (TEVAR) and is estimated to be as high as 38%. Common complications include both those related to the endograft device and systemic complications. Device-related complications include endoleaks, endograft migration or collapse, kinking and/or stenosis of an endograft limb and graft infection. Post-procedural systemic complications include end-organ ischemia, cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events and post-implantation syndrome. Secondary re-interventions are required in approximately 19% to 24% of cases following endovascular abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysm repair respectively. Typically, most secondary reinterventions involve the use of percutaneous techniques such as placement of cuff extension devices, additional endograft components or stents, enhancement of endograft fixation, treatment of certain endoleaks using various embolization techniques and embolic agents and thrombolysis of occluded endograft components. Less commonly, surgical conversion and/or open surgical modification are required. In this article, we provide an overview of the most common complications that may occur following endovascular repair of thoracic and AAAs. We also summarize the current surveillance recommendations for detecting and evaluating these complications and discuss various current secondary re-intervention approaches that may typically be employed for treatment.

The UK EndoVascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) randomised controlled trials: long-term follow-up and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Short-term survival benefits of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair (OR) of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms have been shown in randomised trials, but this early survival benefit is soon lost. Survival benefit of EVAR was unclear at follow-up to 10 years.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term efficacy of EVAR against OR in patients deemed fit and suitable for both procedures (EVAR trial 1; EVAR-1); and against no intervention in patients unfit for OR (EVAR trial 2; EVAR-2). To appraise the long-term significance of type II endoleak and define criteria for intervention.

DESIGN

Two national, multicentre randomised controlled trials: EVAR-1 and EVAR-2.

SETTING

Patients were recruited from 37 hospitals in the UK between 1 September 1999 and 31 August 2004.

PARTICIPANTS

Men and women aged ≥ 60 years with an aneurysm of ≥ 5.5 cm (as identified by computed tomography scanning), anatomically suitable and fit for OR were randomly assigned 1 : 1 to either EVAR (n = 626) or OR (n = 626) in EVAR-1 using computer-generated sequences at the trial hub. Patients considered unfit were randomly assigned to EVAR (n = 197) or no intervention (n = 207) in EVAR-2. There was no blinding.

INTERVENTIONS

EVAR, OR or no intervention.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end points were total and aneurysm-related mortality until mid-2015 for both trials. Secondary outcomes for EVAR-1 were reinterventions, costs and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

In EVAR-1, over a mean of 12.7 years (standard deviation 1.5 years; maximum 15.8 years), we recorded 9.3 deaths per 100 person-years in the EVAR group and 8.9 deaths per 100 person-years in the OR group [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.27; p = 0.14]. At 0-6 months after randomisation, patients in the EVAR group had a lower mortality (adjusted HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.02 for total mortality; HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.93 for aneurysm-related mortality; p = 0.031), but beyond 8 years of follow-up patients in the OR group had a significantly lower mortality (adjusted HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.56, p = 0.048 for total mortality; HR 5.82, 95% CI 1.64 to 20.65, p = 0.0064 for aneurysm-related mortality). The increased aneurysm-related mortality in the EVAR group after 8 years was mainly attributable to secondary aneurysm sac rupture, with increased cancer mortality also observed in the EVAR group. Overall, aneurysm reintervention rates were higher in the EVAR group than in the OR group, 4.1 and 1.7 per 100 person-years, respectively (p < 0.001), with reinterventions occurring throughout follow-up. The mean difference in costs over 14 years was £3798 (95% CI £2338 to £5258). Economic modelling based on the outcomes of the EVAR-1 trial showed that the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the patient's lifetime exceeds conventional thresholds used in the UK. In EVAR-2, patients died at the same rate in both groups, but there was suggestion of lower aneurysm mortality in those who actually underwent EVAR. Type II endoleak itself is not associated with a higher rate of mortality.

LIMITATIONS

Devices used were implanted between 1999 and 2004. Newer devices might have better results. Later follow-up imaging declined, particularly for OR patients. Methodology to capture reinterventions changed mainly to record linkage through the Hospital Episode Statistics administrative data set from 2009.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR has an early survival benefit but an inferior late survival benefit compared with OR, which needs to be addressed by lifelong surveillance of EVAR and reintervention if necessary. EVAR does not prolong life in patients unfit for OR. Type II endoleak alone is relatively benign.

FUTURE WORK

To find easier ways to monitor sac expansion to trigger timely reintervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN55703451.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and the results will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Comparison of Endovascular Stent Grafts for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Medicare Beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

Increased renal complications have been suggested with suprarenal stent grafts, but long-term analyses have been limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of endograft choice on perioperative and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

We compared Medicare beneficiaries undergoing endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysms repair from 2005 to 2008 with endografts with infrarenal fixation and a single docking limb (AneuRx, Excluder) to those with suprarenal fixation and 2 docking limbs (Zenith), or a unibody configuration (Powerlink). Propensity score weighting accounted for differences in patient characteristics among the different graft formations, and perioperative mortality, complications, and length of stay and 4-year rates of survival, rupture, and reintervention were compared.

RESULTS

Forty-six thousand one hundred seventy-one Medicare beneficiaries were identified including 11,002 (24%) with suprarenal fixation, 32,909 (71%) with infrarenal fixation, and 2,260 (5%) with a unibody graft. After propensity score weighting, there were no significant differences in patients' baseline clinical and demographic characteristics. The suprarenal fixation patients had higher rates of perioperative mortality (1.7% vs. 1.3%, P < 0.01), renal failure (6.0% vs. 4.7%, P < 0.001), and mesenteric ischemia (0.7% vs. 0.4%, P < 0.01) and longer length of stay (3.4 days vs. 3.0 days, P < 0.001) compared with patients with infrarenal fixation. Unibody grafts had higher rates of renal failure (5.9% vs. 4.7%, P < 0.001), mesenteric ischemia (1.0% vs. 0.4%, P < 0.001), and conversion to open repair (0.7% vs. 0.1%, P < 0.001) compared to those with infrarenal fixation and single docking limbs. At 4 years, mortality remained slightly higher with suprarenal compared to infrarenal fixation (30% vs. 29%, P = 0.047), although these patients had fewer conversions to open repair (0.6% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.03) and aneurysm-related reinterventions (10% vs. 12%, P < 0.01). At 4 years, unibody grafts had more aneurysm-related interventions compared to infrarenal fixation grafts (15% vs. 12%, P < 0.01) but fewer conversions to open repair (0.4% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.02). Late rupture did not differ among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to infrarenal fixation devices, patients who underwent EVAR with suprarenal fixation had higher perioperative mortality and renal complications but fewer reinterventions including conversion, while the unibody graft had more perioperative complications and aneurysm-related reinterventions, but fewer conversions to open repair. Although these differences could be explained by selection bias, these data suggest that further comparative effectiveness analyses should be performed to understand the outcomes following EVAR with suprarenal fixation and unibody grafts.

Complementary roles of open and hybrid approaches to thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair remains a significant challenge with considerable perioperative morbidity and mortality. A hybrid approach utilizing visceral debranching with endovascular aneurysm exclusion has been used to treat high-risk patients and therefore allow repair in more patients. Limited data exist regarding long-term outcomes with this procedure as well as comparison to conventional open repair. This study describes our institutional algorithmic approach to TAAA repair using both open and hybrid techniques.

METHODS

Hybrid and open TAAA repairs performed between July 2005 and August 2015 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional aortic surgery database. Perioperative morbidity and mortality, freedom from reintervention, and long-term and aorta-specific survival were calculated and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

During the study period, 165 consecutive TAAA repairs were performed, including 84 open repairs and 81 hybrid repairs. Patients in the hybrid repair group were significantly older, were more frequently female, and had a generally greater comorbid disease burden, including significantly more chronic kidney disease. Despite the older and sicker cohort, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality between the two groups (9.9% hybrid vs 7.1% open; P = .59). Major morbidity rates differed by procedure, with patients undergoing open repair having a significantly higher rate of postoperative stroke (9.5% open vs 0% hybrid; P = .017), whereas patients undergoing hybrid repair had a higher rate of new permanent dialysis (14.8% hybrid vs 3.6% open; P = .043). There was no difference between groups in the rate of postoperative permanent paraplegia/paresis (8.3% open vs 7.4% hybrid; P = .294). There was a significantly increased rate of reintervention in the hybrid repair group (12.3% hybrid vs 1.2% open, P = .004), with all hybrid reinterventions performed because of endoleak. One-year survival was similar between groups at 69% in hybrid repairs vs 77% in open repairs. Long-term survival was worse in the hybrid group (5-year survival, 32% hybrid vs 56% open), although late survival appeared to be influenced mainly by comorbid disease burden, given the similar long-term aorta-specific survival between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of an algorithmic approach whereby higher risk patients with TAAA are treated by a hybrid approach and lower risk patients with conventional open repair yields satisfactory short- and long-term outcomes. The availability of multiple options for TAAA repair within a single center likely allows repair in more patients with consequent decrease in the risk of aorta-related death, at the expense of increased reinterventions for endoleak.

Device-Specific Resistance to in Vivo Displacement of Stent-Grafts Implanted with Maximum Iliac Fixation

Purpose:

To compare the in vivo device-specific downward displacement force of various externally supported endografts implanted with maximum iliac fixation.

Methods:

Twenty female sheep had aneurysms created with a graft patch in the infrarenal aorta. In 12 animals, a fully supported modular bifurcated stent-graft [AneuRx (n=4), Talent (n=4), or Zenith (n=4)] was deployed; in the other 8, a bifurcated aortic graft was surgically anastomosed to the infrarenal aorta. All grafts were displaced in vivo by applying downward traction to a guidewire brought out both femoral arteries. The peak force to cause initial stent-graft migration or disruption of the sutured anastomosis was recorded and compared.

Results:

There was no difference in animal size, aortic neck diameter or length, aneurysm size, or iliac artery diameter for animals receiving the AneuRx, Talent, or Zenith stent-grafts and those undergoing surgical repair. The mean length of iliac fixation was 31.0±0.3 mm, 30.8±0.5 mm, and 31.3±0.6 mm for the AneuRx, Talent, and Zenith devices, respectively (p=NS). Peak force to initiate migration was 30.2=5.5 N (range 25–38) for the AneuRx, 44.8±5.5 N (range 40–53) for the Talent, 46.7±5.4 N (range 38–55) for the Zenith, and 40.6±7.5 N (range 31–50) for the surgical anastomosis (p=0.01). There was no difference detected in the peak force to initiate migration between the suprarenally affixed Talent and Zenith stent-grafts and the surgical anastomosis (p=0.55).

Conclusion:

Devices with a suprarenal component require significantly greater force to cause downward displacement compared to infrarenal devices. The force required to displace a suprarenal device with maximal iliac fixation was equivalent to the force required to disrupt a surgical anastomosis.

Advanced Endovascular Approaches in the Management of Challenging Proximal Aortic Neck Anatomy: Traditional Endografts and the Snorkel Technique

Advances in endovascular technology, and access to this technology, have significantly changed the field of vascular surgery. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), in which endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has replaced the traditional open surgical approach in patients with suitable anatomy. However, approximately one-third of patients presenting with AAAs are deemed ineligible for standard EVAR because of anatomic constraints, the majority of which involve the proximal aneurysmal neck. To overcome these challenges, a bevy of endovascular approaches have been developed to either enhance stent graft fixation at the proximal neck or extend the proximal landing zone to allow adequate apposition to the aortic wall and thus aneurysm exclusion. This article is composed of two sections that together address new endovascular approaches for treating aortic aneurysms with difficult proximal neck anatomy. The first section will explore advancements in the traditional EVAR approach for hostile neck anatomy that maximize the use of the native proximal landing zone; the second section will discuss a technique that was developed to extend the native proximal landing zone and maintain perfusion to vital aortic branches using common, off-the-shelf components: the snorkel technique. While the techniques presented differ in terms of approach, the available clinical data, albeit limited, support the notion that they may both have roles in the treatment algorithm for patients with challenging proximal neck anatomy.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of migration after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Aim

To identify patients who are under higher threat for migration because of an old generation stent graft application.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was undertaken to identify all studies which included older generation endografts and data reporting on graft migration after EVAR. Outcome data were pooled and combined, and were calculated using fixed or random effects models.

Results

From 2000 to 2014, 22 retrospective studies were identified reporting on stent- graft migration after EVAR (8.6%). From those patients, 39% received re-intervention with the mean time of identification ranging from 12 to 36 months. Six of these retrospective nonrandomized studies were eligible for meta-analysis. AAA diameter (AAA diameter: 0.719 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.00065–1.4384 mm; p = 0.00497) and neck length (neck length: 4.36 mm; 95% CI: 1.3277–7.394; p = 0.0048) were the only significant factors associated with stent- graft migration. Neck diameter and neck angulation did not have any important influence on stent-graft migration.

Conclusions

Patients with large AAA and short necks who were treated with older generation stent grafts such as AneurX and Talent are in higher risk for endograft migration than others. Stent- graft migration consists of an insidious and underestimated threat.

Standard endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms in patients with very short proximal necks using the Endurant stent graft

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated and compared the midterm results of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair with the Endurant (Medtronic Inc, Santa Rosa, Calif) stent graft system in off-label use in patients with short (<10 mm) proximal aortic necks and in patients treated according to device-specific instructions for use.

METHODS

This was a case-control (2:1) single-center retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data performed between September 2008 and December 2012. Analysis identified 19 elective patients with short (<10 mm) proximal necks and mild angulations (≤45°) treated with the Endurant stent graft and 38 patients matched for age, sex, and aneurysm diameter with proximal aortic necks ≥10 mm in length who met the instructions for use. End points included technical and clinical success and freedom from any secondary intervention, any type of endoleak, and aneurysm-related death.

RESULTS

The short-neck group was a mean ± standard deviation age of 71.7 ± 8.9 years, 84% were men, and their mean infrarenal aortic neck length was 6.1 ± 1.2 mm. Mean suprarenal and infrarenal angles were 110° ± 10.4° and 170° ± 15.4°, respectively. Aortic neck diameters were similar between the groups (26.6 ± 3.8 vs 25.7 ± 3.7 mm; P = .36). Primary technical success was achieved in all cases. Off-label patients were more likely to require additional proximal cuff deployment to successfully obtain a seal (21% vs 3%; P = .04). The two patient groups were similar in rates of perioperative mortality, morbidity, and complications. Mean follow-up of 24 ± 12 months revealed no differences in clinical success, freedom from reintervention, and aneurysm-related death. No type I endoleaks were observed in either group during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The Endurant stent graft system applied off-label in patients with very short aneurysm necks (<10 mm) with mild angulation showed acceptable treatment results. These midterm results might suggest its use in carefully selected patients with very short neck anatomy. Long-term data are needed to verify the observed durability of the Endurant stent graft.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm-repair devices

Traditional open aneurysm repair is associated with significant perioperative morbidity. The development of abdominal aneurysm-repair devices has provided a minimally invasive alternative to open repairs. The field of aneurysm-repair devices is burgeoning since the approval of the first device in 1999. A clear perioperative survival advantage and lower perioperative morbidity has been reported by multiple studies. In addition to benefiting the normal risk aortic aneurysm patient, this new technology is making the repair of aneurysms in older patients with high operative risk factors possible. Modifications to devices are introduced rapidly to overcome anatomical limitations and to improve on device-related complications such as endoleaks and migration. Limited long-term outcomes are available for newer devices, and life-long surveillance is still recommended for all patients. Patient selection and preoperative planning are the cornerstones to successful endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Current status of medical treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm

Although cardiovascular disease is widely recognized as the leading cause of death, a lesser known fact is that aortic aneurysm is the 15th leading cause of death over the age of 65 years in the USA. The golden standard of the treatments are invasive interventions either with open surgical repair (OS) or endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The concept of medical treatment is to prevent abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) from rupture and avoid surgical treatment by preventing aneurysm enlargement or even reducing aneurysm size. Matrix metalloproteinases (MMP) are structurally related metalloendopeptidases that can degrade the extracellular matrix and is thought to play important roles in AAA. There are many proposed pharmacological treatments including: β-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE inhibitors), angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB), statins, macrolides and, doxycycline, an inhibitor of the MMP. The latter is a potential promising drug as medical treatment for AAA and the Non-invasive Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Clinical Trial (N-TA(3)CT) is currently ongoing in the USA. Here, the pathophysiology and potential medical therapy for AAA will be reviewed.

Endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: what one needs to know

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current state of diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of the different types of endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (endovascular aneurysm repair, EVAR).

RECENT FINDINGS

Endoleaks are the most frequent complication after EVAR, the most common indication for secondary interventions, and the most common cause of rupture after EVAR. Imaging is critical for detecting endoleaks. Type I and III endoleaks require urgent intervention to prevent aneurysm rupture. Intervention for other endoleaks or endotension is indicated if the aneurysm sac continues to grow during follow-up. The majority of endoleaks can be treated with endovascular techniques. Open surgical conversion may be considered if the risk of aneurysm rupture is high and if no endovascular options are available or if they have failed.

SUMMARY

Endoleaks continue to be a challenge and this article discusses the different treatment options for endoleaks after EVAR. Long-term follow-up after EVAR is required to diagnose and treat endoleaks before they result in aneurysm rupture. The majority of endoleaks can be treated with endovascular techniques, although open surgical interventions may be required in selected patients.

Pulsatility in the iliac artery is significant at several levels: implications for EVAR

PURPOSE

To evaluate the pulsatility of the iliac arteries and compare their distension at several levels that might influence preoperative stent-graft sizing and the long-term durability of stent-graft sealing and fixation.

METHODS

Preoperative dynamic computed tomographic angiography (CTA) scans of 30 patients (24 men; median age 75 years, range 60-85) with an abdominal aortic aneurysm and patent iliac arteries were included. The CTAs consisted of 8 images per heartbeat. Bilateral diameter and area changes per heartbeat were measured semi-automatically in the common iliac artery (CIA) at 3 levels: (A) 0.5 cm after the aortic bifurcation, (B) in the middle of the CIA, and (C) 0.5 cm proximal to the iliac bifurcation. Pulsatility was defined as the largest difference in area and average diameter change over 180 axes per heartbeat. Pulsatility at the 3 levels was compared, and the intraobserver variability of the method was calculated according to Bland and Altman.

RESULTS

The mean area increases in the CIAs at levels A, B, and C were 12.5% (16.3 mm²), 11.2% (13.6 mm²), and 9.6% (12.6 mm²), respectively, and the mean iliac diameter increases were 9.2% (1.1 mm), 8.5% (1.0 mm), and 8.1% (1.0 mm). The iliac distension was statistically significant at all levels. The iliac distension at level A was statistically significantly larger than the distension at level C. The intraobserver variability was 13.3 mm² for area and 0.6 mm for diameter measurements.

CONCLUSION

The pulsatility in the iliac arteries is statistically significant at several levels relevant to endovascular aneurysm repair. The distension of the iliac artery possibly decreases more distally, which might encourage the extension of stent-grafts to the internal iliac artery.

Biomechanical and histologic analysis in aortic endoprosthesis using fibrin glue

BACKGROUND

The absence of incorporation between endoprosthesis (EP) and the arterial wall may lead to device migration and endoleaks around the stent graft. Alternatives have been tested aiming to improve this incorporation. Fibrin glue is used in many operating procedures promoting adhesion and tissue regeneration; however, its use to improve EP incorporation by arteries is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to analyze dislodgement forces needed to extract the EPs implanted in pig aorta, compare different oversizing and fibrin glue injections, and to analyze histologic changes among groups.

METHODS

Straight EPs were implanted in the thoracic aorta of pigs using 10% oversizing plus fibrin glue in the interface between the EP and the artery (group 1), using 20% oversizing (group 2), and 10% oversizing (group 3). Fourteen days after the implant, the animals were killed to enable biomechanical analysis of the EP and to verify histologic changes of the aortic wall and its interface with the EP.

RESULTS

Group 1 showed a dislodgement force of 21.9 ± 5.3 Newton (N) being higher than the other groups and statistically significant when compared to group 3 (15.6 ± 3.6N), P = .003%. Group 2 had a higher dislodgement force and statistically more significant than group 3 (19.5 ± 7.8N). Histologic analysis showed tissue reaction with inflammatory cells and fibroblasts higher in group 1 and group 2 compared to group 3.

CONCLUSION

This study reports a large animal survival model of thoracic aortic stent graft placement by testing the impact of fibrin glue on EP incorporation. Compared to oversizing alone, fibrin glue placed between the stent graft and the arterial wall increases EP incorporation. Additional studies are needed to determine the potential utility of fibrin glue in the setting of human arterial endografts.

Midterm results of the Anson Refix endostapling fixation system for aortic stent-grafts

PURPOSE

To report the midterm results of a new vascular endostapling system in the endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR).

METHODS

A prospective single-center study was performed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of the Anson Refix Endostapler, which implants a nitinol clip to provide transmural stent-graft fixation to the adventitia. Eight patients (6 men; mean age 71 years, range 59-82) underwent EVAR with endostaple fixation between November 2007 and March 2008. Follow-up evaluation consisted of plain radiography, duplex sonography at 6 months, and computed tomography after the procedure, at 12 months, and then annually. In addition to evaluating safety and feasibility, the study assessed device integrity and freedom from endoleaks, rupture, and migration in follow-up.

RESULTS

Attempts to implant 29 endostaples (range 3-7, median 3) were successful in 20 (70%) instances; 9 clips did not fully penetrate the graft and tissue due to severe calcification of the wall. They were successfully retracted; no endostaple migrated or was lost. The delivery time from insertion of the Refix delivery catheter to its withdrawal was a mean 57 minutes (range 20-120) over and above the regular stent-graft procedure. The delivery time improved as the learning curve was passed (mean 27.5 minutes in the last 4 cases). During the mean 18.2+/-2.2 months of follow-up, there were no device failures, migrations, endoleaks, conversions, or secondary procedures.

CONCLUSION

The midterm results of this prospective study document the safety and feasibility of the Anson Refix endostapling system. However, further evaluation is mandatory to draw robust conclusions about the utility of this new aortic stent-graft fixation modality.