Institutional experience with the Zenith Fenestrated aortic stent graft

Midterm Outcomes of Antegrade In Situ Laser Fenestration of Polyester Endografts for Urgent Treatment of Aortic Pathologies Involving the Visceral and Renal Arteries

OBJECTIVE

Aortic endografting and antegrade in situ laser fenestration of visceral arteries (LFEVAR) may be considered as an alternative to open surgery for the emergency repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) in fragile patients. The aim of this article was to evaluate the midterm results of LFEVAR performed with polyester endografts.

METHODS

From August 2015 to December 2020, all consecutive LFEVAR performed for non-deferrable treatment of complex AAA were analysed. Polyester endografts were deployed and subsequently fenestrated using an atherectomy laser probe; the fenestrations were enlarged using cutting and semicompliant balloons before implantation of balloon expandable bridging stents into the target vessels. Prospectively collected midterm survival, patency, and re-intervention rates were analysed.

RESULTS

Forty four procedures were performed for 11 type 1a endoleaks, five thoraco-abdominal aneurysms, 20 pararenal aneurysms, four segmental renal artery (RA) preservations, three anastomotic aneurysms, and one aortic dissection. One hundred and eight laser fenestrations were performed (26 for the superior mesenteric artery [SMA], 13 for the coeliac trunk, 33 and 31 for the right and left RA, respectively). The median ischaemia duration was 7, 48, 48, and 45 minutes, respectively. The technical success rate was 97%, with no open surgical conversions. The 30 day mortality was 4.5% (n = 2). No spinal cord ischaemia events were observed nor early stent related complications. Kaplan-Meier overall survival at two years was 73%, the aortic related re-intervention free survival was 70%, and the stent related re-intervention free survival was 90.6%. Four target vessel thromboses were detected, of which three were rescued. Three type IIIc endoleaks, one RA false aneurysm, and one SMA stenosis, required re-intervention during a median follow up of 24.7 months.

CONCLUSION

Antegrade LFEVAR is feasible, safe, and provides satisfactory early and midterm outcomes for non-deferrable treatment of aortic pathologies involving the visceral segment. Long term data are mandatory to confirm the usefulness of this promising off label technique.

Fenestrierte und verzweigte endovaskuläre Aortenprothesen

Hintergrund

Komplexe abdominelle aortale Pathologien, welche die Abgänge der Viszeralarterien miterfassen und bei denen kein adäquater proximaler Hals gegeben ist, können heute mittels fortgeschrittener FEVAR/BEVAR-Technik („fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair“) mit ähnlicher Sicherheit und vergleichbaren Erfolgsraten behandelt werden wie infrarenale Pathologien mit konventionellem EVAR.

Methodische Innovationen und Probleme

Zur Versorgung der Viszeralarterien können Fenestrierungen (bei Abgang der Viszeralarterie aus der nichtdilatierten Aorta) oder Verzweigungen (bei Abgang aus der dilatierten Aorta) verwendet werden. Beide Arten von Öffnungen werden mit Verbindungsstentgrafts (VSG) zu den Viszeralarterien abgedichtet. Mehrere Hersteller bieten fenestrierte oder verzweigte Endoprothesen an, wobei diese nur in Einzelfällen CE-zertifiziert und überwiegend in Europa als individuelle Sonderanfertigungen patientenbezogen erhältlich sind. Dies setzt eine entsprechende Lieferzeit voraus, was die Behandlung akuter Patienten mit solchen Prothesen unmöglich macht. Es liegen allerdings zwei Produkte von vierfach verzweigten Endoprothesen vor, die einen größeren Bereich der anatomischen Gegebenheiten bei thorakoabdominellen Aneurysmen auch im Akutfall abdecken und behandelbar machen. Sämtliche FEVAR- und BEVAR-Hauptkörper benötigen VSG, die durchgehend von Fremdherstellern stammen und von denen gegenwärtig noch kein einziges Produkt für diese Anwendung zertifiziert ist.

Empfehlungen

Da Probleme an Verbindungsstentgrafts eine wesentliche Ursache für Reinterventionen sind, sollte in der Nachsorge Knickbildungen und Brüchen an diesen Verbindungsstents besonderes Augenmerk geschenkt und von der Verwendung einschichtiger Designs beim BEVAR abgesehen werden.

Temporary Reperfusion of the Aneurysm Sac as a Prevention of Spinal Cord Ischemia After Endovascular Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is still a feared complication for patients suffering from thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) who undergo endovascular treatment. The aims of this work are to review the available literature on different reperfusion methods of the aneurysm sac, and to analyze whether the different reperfusion methods, also in combination with other factors, are effective in reducing SCI risk and if the impact varies with the patient's age.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE library was searched for studies published until November 2020 concerning TAAA, endovascular repair, and SCI preventive measures. Systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. Primary outcome consisted of correlation between endovascular repair techniques (type A: single step; type B: staged approach with reperfusion branches; type C: staged sequential approach with positioning of the thoracic component). A logistic-weighted regression for each event (SCI, transient, and permanent) was then performed with type of treatment, age, and interaction between them as input factors. Finally, another logistic-weighted regression was performed to analyze the other relevant factors for which observations are available together with the endovascular technique.

RESULTS

Data from 53 studies with a total of 3095 patients were analyzed. Type A, type B, and type C endovascular strategies were adopted in 75%, 13%, and 12% of studied patients, respectively. Data showed that both type B and type C treatments are associated with lower risk of SCI, with a higher reduction of type C with respect to type B, although this positive trend is limited for elder patients. Moreover, a greater aortic diameter, a reduced aneurysm extent, and the absence of cerebrospinal fluid drainage positioning contribute to lower the risk of SCI. Concerning permanent SCI, both type B and type C are effective in reducing percentages for all ages, with type C treatment more beneficial for younger patients and type B for elder ones.

CONCLUSION

According to the anatomy and the endovascular repair feasibility criteria, staged endovascular treatment appears to offer relevant advantages over single-step treatment in reducing the risk of SCI, regardless of the reperfusion method adopted.

Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair With Chimney Graft for Thoracoabdominal Aneurysm

Thoracoabdominal aneurysms pose technical challenges for endovascular repair due to involvement of visceral and renal vessels. We report a case series of four patients diagnosed with thoracoabdominal aneurysm who underwent complex endovascular repair with Fenestrated Device and chimney grafts (FEVARCh). FEVARCh is a technically feasible approach for repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms that involve renal, superior mesenteric, and celiac arteries for patients not appropriate for open surgical repair. Further studies are needed to understand the implications of resultant Type 1a endoleaks and strategies to minimize the displacement of the main body graft with adjunct chimneys.

Multicenter Mid-Term Outcomes of the Chimney Technique in the Elective Treatment of Degenerative Pararenal Aortic Aneurysms

PURPOSE

Chimney endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (CHEVAR) has predominantly been described as an alternative technique for the management of urgent presentations of degenerative pararenal aortic aneurysms (dPAAs). However, the role of CHEVAR in the treatment of asymptomatic patients remains unknown. The aim of current multinational study was to evaluate the outcomes of elective CHEVAR of dPAAs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 267 consecutive dPAA patients treated with elective CHEVAR at 13 European and US centers from 2008 to 2014. Primary endpoints were 30 days and out of hospital CHEVAR-related mortality. Secondary endpoints included persistent type Ia endoleak or endotension, angiographically confirmed occlusion and/or high-grade chimney graft (CG) or involved splanchnic vessel stenosis identified at index procedure and/or during follow-up, as well as CHEVAR-related re-intervention.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time was 25.5±13.3 months. The 442 visceral vessels were involved and mean number of CGs per patient was 1.63±0.7. 436 targeted vessels were successfully cannulated. The aortic graft intentionally covered 6 renal arteries and immediate technical success was 98.6%. The 30 days mortality was 1.9% (n=5), while the in-hospital complication rate was 10.1% (n=27) including 3 strokes, 1 permanent dialysis, and 1 intestinal ischemia. No 30 day type Ia endoleaks were detected and 3.2% of CGs (n=14, including the intentionally covered) had evidence of occlusion and/or stenosis. The overall CHEVAR-related mortality was 2.2% (n=6). Freedom from primary and secondary type Ia endoleak/endotension rates at 3 years was 93.0% and 98.0%, respectively. Primary and secondary CG patency was 87.0% and 89.0%. Primary and secondary endovascular freedom from any endpoint at 3 years was 81.0% and 94.0% respectively.

CONCLUSION

Elective use of CHEVAR in the management of dPAAs seems to be durable. These results are comparable to published outcomes with other total endovascular strategies, which justifies an expanded role for CHEVAR in the treatment of asymptomatic patients presenting with dPAAs.

Effect of obesity on radiation exposure, quality of life scores, and outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of obesity on procedural metrics, radiation exposure, quality of life (QOL), and clinical outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data from 334 patients (236 men; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) enrolled in a prospective nonrandomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR from 2013 to 2019. The patients were classified using the body mass index (BMI) as obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m²) or nonobese (BMI <30 kg/m²). QOL questionnaires (short-form 36-item questionnaire) and imaging studies were obtained preoperatively and at 2 months and 6 months postoperatively, and annually thereafter. The procedures were performed using two different fixed imaging systems. The end points included procedural metrics (ie, total operative time, fluoroscopic time, contrast volume), radiation exposure, technical success, 30-day mortality, and major adverse events, QOL changes, freedom from target vessel instability, freedom from reintervention, and patient survival.

RESULTS

The aneurysm extent was a pararenal aortic aneurysm in 117 patients (35%) and a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm in 217 patients (65%). Both groups had similar demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, and aneurysm extent, except for a greater incidence of hyperlipidemia and diabetes among the obese patients (P < .05). No significant differences were found in the procedural metrics or intraprocedural complications between the groups, except that the obese patients had greater radiation exposure than the nonobese patients (mean, 2.5 vs 1.6 Gy; P < .001), with the highest radiation exposure in those obese patients who had undergone the procedure using system 1 (fusion alone) instead of system 2 (fusion and digital zoom; mean, 4.1 vs 1.5 Gy; P < .001). Three patients had died within 30 days (0.8%), with no difference in mortality or major adverse events between the groups. The mental QOL scores had improved in the obese group at 2 and 12 months compared with the nonobese patients, with persistently higher scores up to 3 years. At 3 years, the obese and nonobese patients had a similar incidence of freedom from target vessel instability (74% ± 6% vs 80% ± 3%; P = .99, log-rank test), freedom from reintervention (66% ± 6% vs 73% ± 4%; P = .77, log-rank test), and patient survival (83% ± 5% vs 75% ± 4%; P = .16, log-rank test).

CONCLUSIONS

FB-EVAR was performed with high technical success and low mortality and morbidity, with no significant differences between the obese and nonobese patients. The procedural metrics and outcomes were similar, with the exception of greater radiation exposure among obese patients, especially for the procedures performed using system 1 with fusion alone compared with system 2 (fusion and digital zoom). Obese patients had higher QOL mental scores at 2 and 12 months, with a similar reintervention rate, target vessel outcomes, and survival compared with nonobese patients.

Perioperative and Long-term Results of Zenith Fenestrated Aortic Repair in Women

BACKGROUND

Inferior perioperative outcomes for women receiving major vascular surgery are well established in the literature in multiple arterial distributions. Therefore, this study was completed to determine the perioperative and durability results associated with women undergoing complex aortic reconstruction using the Zenith Fenestrated platform (ZFEN; Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN).

METHODS

A retrospective review of a fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) database capturing all ZFENs performed at our institution between October 2012 and March 2019 was completed. Preoperative, intraoperative, perioperative, and follow-up outcomes were tabulated for females and compared with their male counterparts.

RESULTS

Within our study period, 136 total ZFEN procedures were performed; of which, 20 devices (14.7%) were implanted in women. Intraoperatively, we observed a higher rate of estimated blood loss (660.0 mL vs. 311.6 mL, P < 0.01) and resultant need for transfusion (1.4 vs. 0.3 units, P < 0.01) in women despite a similar frequency of brachial (5.0% vs. 7.8%, P > 0.99) and femoral artery cutdowns (55.0% vs. 49.1%, P = 0.81). Operative (295.7 min vs. 215.7 mins, P < 0.01) and fluoroscopy (84.3 vs. 58.7 min, P < 0.01) times were also significantly higher in females than those in their male counterparts. In the perioperative (30-day) period, we observed significantly longer length of stay (5.6 days vs. 3.3 days, P = 0.03) and continued need for transfusion (50% vs. 9.5%, P < 0.01) in women. Statistical trends favoring men were also noted with respect to all-cause mortality, reintervention, visceral stent thrombosis, renal failure, acute kidney injury, and respiratory failure. After a mean follow-up of nearly 2 years, we found no differences in late all-cause or aneurysm-related mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, or need for reinterventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The implantation of ZFEN in females is significantly more difficult than that in their male counterparts and may result in increased perioperative, but not necessarily long-term, complications.

Outcomes of elective use of the chimney endovascular technique in pararenal aortic pathologic processes

OBJECTIVE

In the treatment of pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms and aortic pathologic processes, chimney endovascular aneurysm repair (CHEVAR) represents an alternative technique for urgent cases. The aim of the study was to evaluate the outcomes of CHEVAR in the elective setting.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected records of 165 consecutive asymptomatic CHEVAR patients who were treated between March 2009 and January 2018 with the Endurant stent graft (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, Calif). A total of 244 chimney grafts (CGs) were implanted. The primary end point was clinical success, defined as freedom from procedure-related mortality, persistent type IA endoleak, occlusion or high-grade stenosis (>70%) of CGs, and any chimney technique-related secondary procedure for the entire follow-up period. Secondary clinical success included patients with successful treatment of a primary end point with a secondary endovascular procedure.

RESULTS

All 244 targeted chimney vessels were successfully cannulated. Total perioperative morbidity was 7.8% (n = 13), including 3 (1.8%) cases of bowel ischemia, 1 (0.6%) patient with renal ischemia, and 1 patient (0.6%) with stroke. Median follow-up was 25.5 ± 2.2 months. Both 30-day and follow-up procedure-related mortality rates were 1.8% (n = 3). Primary and secondary freedom from persistent type IA endoleak rates were 96.4% (n = 159) and 99.4% (n = 164), respectively. Primary and secondary CG patency rates were 92.2% (n = 225) and 95.9% (n = 234), respectively. The rate of reinterventions related to the chimney technique was 10.9% (n = 18), and 83.3% of them were performed by endovascular means. The estimated cumulative primary patency and freedom from persistent type IA endoleak were 87.5% and 95.3%, respectively, and the primary and secondary clinical successes rates at midterm were 80.3% and 87.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The elective use of CHEVAR with the Endurant stent graft in our series showed favorable midterm clinical results, which are similar to the published results of other total endovascular modalities. A prospective randomized trial of elective treatment of pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms and aortic pathologic processes with current endovascular options is needed to assess the value of CHEVAR in the elective setting.

Safety and Feasibility of Performing Fenestrated Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair Using a Portable C-arm Without Fusion Technology: A Single-Center Experience

Objective Most centers performing fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (F-EVAR) use hybrid rooms with fusion technology for mapping. We present our experience of successfully performing F-EVAR using C-arm without fusion technology. Methods During the period of January 2016 to October 2018, data were collected from a prospectively maintained F-EVAR database at our tertiary care institute. The primary endpoint was technical success, and the secondary outcomes measured were short- and midterm clinical success (both defined by the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards), blood loss, radiation dose, operative time, postoperative endoleaks, aneurysm rupture, endograft patency, and complications. Results We performed 11 F-EVARs during the study period in five (45.5%) males and six (54.5%) females, with a mean age of 75+8 years. All procedures were performed under general anesthesia using OEC 9900 Elite Mobile C-arm (GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL, USA) without the use of fusion technology. Three patients had planned preoperative open procedures for access due to prior cutdown or bypass. Technical success was achieved in all 11 (100%) cases. The mean length of stay was 5+2 days, and the mean follow-up was 7.5+6.5 months. The mean procedure time was 301+167 minutes, and the mean blood loss was 361+233 mL. Mean fluoroscopy time was 72+31 minutes, and the mean radiation exposure time was 2,160+930 mGy. No patients required intraoperative transfusion. Thirty-day (short term) clinical success was achieved in 10 (90.0%), cases whereas six-month (midterm) clinical success was achieved in 7 (77.7%) patients. Branch vessel patency was 11 (100%) at 30 days and 9 (81.8%) at six months, and primary endograft patency was 100% (11) at six months. We had no perioperative mortality or major adverse cardiac event at 30 days. Thirty-day postoperative morbidity included readmission for pulmonary edema from cardiac failure in one patient. Two patients had clinically insignificant silent cardiac enzyme elevation. Three patients had re-interventions performed during the mean follow-up period. Two patients developed renal stent thrombosis resulting in renal insufficiency, which is defined as an increase in creatinine concentration ≥0.5 mg/dL, without the need for dialysis. One type II endoleak was identified postoperatively that required trans-lumbar embolization. No type I or III endoleaks were identified during the study period. Asymptomatic common femoral artery thrombosis was seen on follow-up imaging in one patient. Conclusions We conclude that F-EVAR can be safely performed using C-arm without the use of fusion technology. Its utility can be expanded to centers with appropriate skill set but no hybrid technology.

Outcomes after treatment of complex aortic abdominal aneurysms with the fenestrated Anaconda endograft

OBJECTIVE

To date, information on the fenestrated Anaconda endograft is limited to case series with a small sample size. This study was performed to assess the technical and clinical outcome of this device in a large international case series.

METHODS

All worldwide centers having treated more than 15 complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) or type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm patients with the fenestrated Anaconda endograft were approached. Main outcome parameters were procedural technical success, postoperative and follow-up clinical outcome for endoleaks, target vessel patency, reintervention rate, and patient survival.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-five consecutive cases treated between June 2010 and May 2018 in 11 sites were included. Patients were treated for a short neck infrarenal (n = 98), juxtarenal (n = 191), suprarenal AAA (n = 27), or type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 19). Mean age was 73.6 ± 4.6 years (292 male). Endografts contained a total of 920 fenestrations, with a mean of 2.7 ± 0.8 fenestrations per case. Technical success was 88.4% (primary, 82.7%; assisted primary 5.7%). In 6.9% of cases, a procedural type IA endoleak was observed, spontaneously disappearing in 82.6% during early follow-up. The development of a type IA endoleak was associated with greater neck angulation (odds ratio [OR], 0.94; P = .01), three fenestrations (OR, 42.7; P = .01) and the presence of augmented proximal rings (OR, 0.17; P = .03). Median follow-up was 1.2 years (interquartile range, 0.4-2.6). The mean estimated glomerular filtration rate deteriorated from 67.6 ± 19.3 mL/min/1.73 m² preoperatively to 59.3 ± 22.7 mL/min/1.73 m² at latest follow-up (P = .00). The freedom from AAA growth were 97.9 ± 0.9% (n = 190) and 86.4 ± 3.0% (n = 68), with a freedom from AAA rupture of 99.7 ± 0.3% (n = 191) and 99.1 ± 0.7% (n = 68), at 1 and 3 years, respectively. The endoleak-free survival, excluding spontaneously resolved procedural endoleaks, at 1 and 3 years was 73.4 ± 2.6 (n = 143) and 65.6 ± 3.4% (n = 45), respectively. The target vessel patency at one and three years were 96.4 ± 0.7% (n = 493) and 92.7 ± 1.4% (n = 156), respectively. A total of 75 reinterventions were done in 64 cases (19.1%), of which 25 cases for an endoleak. The reintervention-free survival at 1 and 3 years were 83.6 ± 2.2% (n = 190) and 71.0 ± 3.7% (n = 68), respectively. No deaths during procedure, extending within 24 hours postoperatively, were observed. Within 30 days 14 patients (4.2%) died and during follow-up another 39 patients (11.6%) died. Three deaths were considered AAA related (one rupture, one endograft infection, and one bilateral renal artery occlusion). The estimated cumulative survival at 1 and 3 years were 89.8 ± 1.8% (n = 191) and 79.2 ± 3.0% (n = 68), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The custom-made fenestrated Anaconda endograft is a valuable option for the treatment of a complex AAA. A procedural type IA endoleak is seen relatively frequently, but spontaneously resolves in most cases.

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair is financially viable at a high-volume medical center with positive hospital contribution margins and physician payment

OBJECTIVE

To examine hospital finances and physician payment associated with fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) for complex aortic disease at a high-volume center and to compare the costs and reimbursements for FEVAR with open repair, and their trends over time.

METHODS

Clinical and financial data were collected retrospectively from electronic medical and administrative records. Data for each patient included inpatient and outpatient encounters 3 months before and 12 months after the primary aneurysm operation.

RESULTS

Between 2007 and 2017, 157 and 71 patients were treated with physician-modified endograft (PMEG) and Cook Zenith Fenestrated (ZFEN) repair, respectively. Twenty-one patients who were evaluated for FEVAR underwent open repair instead. The 228 FEVAR patients provided a total positive contribution margin (reimbursements minus direct costs) of $2.65 million. The index encounter (the primary aneurysm operation and hospitalization) accounted for the majority (90.6%) of the total contribution margin. The largest component (50.3%) of direct cost for FEVAR from the index encounter was implant/graft expenses. The average direct costs for FEVAR and for open repair from the index encounter were $34,688 and $35,020, respectively. The average contribution margins for FEVAR and for open repair were approximately $10,548 and $21,349, respectively, attributable to differences in reimbursement. The average direct cost for FEVAR trended down over time as cumulative experience increased. Average reimbursement for FEVAR increased after Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services approved payments with the Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) trial for PMEG in 2011, and a new technology add-on payment for ZFEN in 2012. These factors transitioned the average contribution margin from negative to positive in 2012. The average physician payments for PMEG increased from $128 to $5848 after the start of the IDE trial. The average physician payments for ZFEN and for open repair between 2011 and 2017 were $7597 and $7781, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

FEVAR can be performed at a high-volume medical center with positive contribution margins and with comparable physician payments to open repair. At this institution, hospital reimbursement and physician payments improved for PMEG with participation in an IDE trial, while hospital direct costs decreased for both PMEG and ZFEN with accumulated experience.

Aggressive Surveillance Is Needed to Detect Endoleaks and Junctional Separation between Device Components after Zenith Fenestrated Aortic Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Junctional separation and resulting type IIIa endoleak is a well-known problem after EVAR (endovascular aneurysm repair). This complication results in sac pressurization, enlargement, and eventual rupture. In this manuscript, we review the incidence of this late finding in our experience with the Cook Zenith fenestrated endoprosthesis (ZFEN, Bloomington, IN).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of a prospectively maintained institutional ZFEN fenestrated EVAR database capturing all ZFENs implanted at a large-volume, academic hospital system. Patients who experienced junctional separation between the fenestrated main body and distal bifurcated graft (with or without type IIIa endoleak) at any time after initial endoprosthesis implantation were subject to further evaluation of imaging and medical records to abstract clinical courses.

RESULTS

In 110 ZFENs implanted from October 2012 to December 2017 followed for a mean of 1.5 years, we observed a 4.5% and 2.7% incidence of clinically significant junctional separation and type IIIa endoleak, respectively. Junctional separation was directly related to concurrent type Ib endoleak in all 5 patients. Three patients presented with sac enlargement. One patient did not demonstrate any evidence of clinically significant endoleak and had a decreasing sac size during follow-up imaging. The mean time to diagnosis of modular separation in these patients was 40 months. Junctional separation was captured in surveillance in 2 patients and reintervened upon before manifestation of endoleak. However, the remaining 3 patients completed modular separation resulting in rupture and emergent intervention in 2 and an aortic-related mortality in the other.

CONCLUSIONS

Junctional separation between the fenestrated main and distal bifurcated body with the potential for type IIIa endoleak is an established complication associated with the ZFEN platform. Therefore, we advocate for maximizing aortic overlap during the index procedure followed by aggressive surveillance and treatment of stent overlap loss captured on imaging.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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