Endosuture aneurysm repair in patients treated with Endurant II/IIs in conjunction with Heli-FX EndoAnchor implants for short-neck abdominal aortic aneurysm

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Five-year outcomes of endosuture aneurysm repair in patients with short neck abdominal aortic aneurysm from the ANCHOR registry

OBJECTIVE

Hostile aortic neck anatomies such as proximal short necks are known to put patients at an increased risk for type IA endoleaks, migration, and need for reinterventions. The Heli-FX EndoAnchor System was designed to improve seal of aortic stent grafts. Endosuture aneurysm repair (ESAR) using EndoAnchors with the Endurant stent graft has been shown to be safe and effective for the treatment of patients with short necks through one year. This study reports the 5-year patient outcomes of the Aneurysm Treatment using the Heli-FX EndoAnchor System Global Registry (ANCHOR) short neck regulatory cohort.

METHODS

The 70 patients from the ANCHOR Registry were cohort submitted to regulators for approval of the Endurant short neck indication. Patients had an infrarenal neck length of ≥ 4 mm and <10 mm. At 5 years, this short neck cohort had clinical and imaging follow-up compliance rates of 85% (28/33) and 70% (23/33), respectively.

RESULTS

The short neck cohort had a mean age of 71.3±8.1 years and was 27.1% (19/70) female. Kaplan Meier freedom from all-cause mortality was 68.5 ± 6.2%, freedom from aneurysm-related mortality was 90.1 ± 4.5%, freedom from any endovascular or surgical secondary procedure was 76.9 ± 7.2%, and freedom from rupture was 95.6 ± 3.2%. Eight patients had a total of nine type IA endoleaks detected through 5 years, of which three resolved spontaneously by the next follow-up visit. There were two patients with renal complications who did not undergo reintervention and there were no device migrations reported through 5 years. After 5 years, 68.2% of patients (15/22) had sac regression, 13.6% (3/22) had stable sacs, and 18.2% (4/22) had increased sac diameter as compared with their 1-month measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

After ESAR treatment using Heli-FX EndoAnchors with Endurant, the 5-year outcomes of the short neck cohort from the ANCHOR registry had encouraging results with regards to proximal neck-related complications, secondary procedures, and sac regression. This review of ESAR in patients with short proximal necks showed positive outcomes through 5 years although follow-up of a larger cohort is necessary.

Physician-Modified Single-Fenestrated EndoSuture Aneurysm Repair (FESAR) for Urgent Juxtarenal AAA Repair

PURPOSE

To describe the endovascular treatment of a symptomatic juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (JAAA) using a combination of endoanchors (Heli-FX EndoAnchor, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) and a physician-modified single-fenestrated endograft.

TECHNIQUE

An 85 year-old patient unfit for open aortic repair presented for a symptomatic JAAA, characterized by an infrarenal neck with 0.6 cm in length and 23 mm in diameter. A 28 mm-diameter Endurant aortic cuff (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) was modified with a single fenestration for the left renal artery (LRA) and diameter-reducing tie, then re-sheathed and deployed. The LRA was cannulated with a 7F sheath and the constraining wire was withdrawn. Being the shortest neck length on the right side of the cuff, the endograft was anchored to the aortic wall on this side with 2 endoanchors. The LRA was stented and flared, then a distal physician-modified (without free-flow) bifurcated Endurant graft (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) was overlapped with the proximal cuff and stabilized with 6 endoanchors. Correct positioning with complete aneurysm exclusion was confirmed with a 30 day and 9 month computed tomography angiograms.

CONCLUSIONS

In extremely selected cases, association of endoanchors and single-fenestrated physician-modified graft may be useful to treat complex urgent aortic aneurysm using readily available devices.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This technical note demonstrates the feasibility of a single-fenestrated physician-modified Endurant endograft deployed in combination with endosuture fixation (FESAR), to urgently treat a juxtarenal aortic aneurysm unfit for open repair and not suitable for standard endovascular repair nor off-the-shelf endografts.

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

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

Anatomical feasibility of the current endovascular solutions for Juxtarenal aortic abdominal aneurysm repair

PURPOSE

Endovascular repair of juxta-renal aneurysms (JAAAs) can be achieved by fenestrated endografts (FEVAR), parallel-grafts (CHEVAR) and standard abdominal endografts + endoanchors (ESAR). Aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of their anatomical feasibility in JAAAs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients submitted to JAAAs treatment from 2006 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed, irrelevant of the procedure performed. Juxta-renal aneurysm was defined according with the current ESVS clinical practice guidelines. Preoperative computed tomography angiographies were analyzed to evaluate the anatomical feasibility of: FEVAR (Cook Zenith-platform; CE-marked or custom-made device), CHEVAR (Medtronic Endurant + Atrium Advanta - CE marked combination) and ESAR (Medtronic Endurant + Helifix - CE marked combination) according with the manufactures' instruction for use. The anatomical feasibility of these three endovascular solutions was assessed according with the proximal neck, target visceral vessels (TVVS) and iliac access characteristics.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine cases were considered. There were no cases of frank aortic rupture and in all patients at least one arterial access from above was available. Fenestrated endograft, CHEVAR, and ESAR were anatomically feasible in 93 (94%), 37 (37%), and 27 (27%) cases, respectively (p <. 001). Fenestrated endograft requires design with <3, three and >3 fenestrations in 29 (31%), 33 (36%), and 31 (33%) cases, respectively. Parallel graft technique have required 1 or 2 parallel graft configurations in 12 (12%) and 25 (25%) cases, respectively. Among the 14 cases with aneurysm diameter >70 mm, the anatomical feasibility of FEVAR, CHEVAR, and ESAR was 13(93%), 4(29%), and 4 (29%) cases, respectively (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Fenestrated endograft is more frequently applicable than CHEVAR and ESAR as endovascular treatment of JAAAs. Since this difference is valid also in aneurysms with diameter >70 mm, the issue of a rapid availability is of paramount importance. The 6% of cases have not any endovascular solution and requires open surgery.

EndoSuture aneurysm repair versus fenestrated aneurysm repair in patients with short neck abdominal aortic aneurysm

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare midterm results of EndoAnchors in EndoSuture aneurysm repair (ESAR) versus fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) in short neck abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

METHODS

All patients who underwent an ESAR procedure for a short neck AAA at our center between September 2017 and May 2020 were considered for analysis. To form the control group, preoperative computed tomography angiography of patients who underwent FEVAR for juxtarenal AAA between April 2012 and May 2020 were reviewed and patients who met short neck criteria selected. A propensity-matched score on neck length and neck diameter was calculated, resulting in 18 matched pairs. AAA shrinkage, type Ia endoleaks (EL), AAA-related reinterventions, and AAA-related deaths were compared.

RESULTS

The median AAA diameter was 54 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 52-61 mm) versus 58 mm (IQR, 53-63 mm) with a median neck length of 8 mm (IQR, 6-12 mm) vs 10 mm (IQR, 6-13 mm) in ESAR and FEVAR patients, respectively. Technical success was 100% in both groups. Procedural success was 94% in the ESAR group versus 100% in the FEVAR group. The median procedure duration was 138 mm (IQR, 113-182 mm) vs 240 mm (IQR, 199-293 mm) ( P < .001) and the median length of stay was 2 days (IQR, 2-3 days) vs 7 days (IQR, 6-7 days) (P < .001) in ESAR and FEVAR patients, respectively. No major hospital complications were observed in ESAR patients compared with two in FEVAR patients (11%) with one transient acute kidney injury and one transient paraplegia. The median follow-up was 23 months (IQR, 19-33 months) vs 36 months (IQR, 22-57 months) with 67% versus 61% AAA shrinkage in the ESAR and FEVAR groups, respectively (P = .73). No type Ia EL, proximal neck-related reinterventions, or AAA-related deaths were observed in either group. No AAA-related reintervention was observed in the ESAR group versus three reinterventions in the FEVAR group (P = .23).

CONCLUSIONS

ESAR seems to be a safe technique with no major postoperative complications or reinterventions observed during follow-up. It seems to offer similar midterm results as FEVAR in terms of type Ia EL, aneurysm shrinkage, and aneurysm-related mortality. ESAR seems to be a good off-the-shelf alternative to FEVAR in case of technical constraints.

Use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers increases the risk of postoperative acute kidney injury after elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the major treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA); however, EVAR still carries a considerable risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). The present study aimed to investigate the risk factors for AKI after elective EVAR procedures.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study. Eligible patients who underwent EVAR from September 2011 to March 2019 in West China Hospital were included. The primary outcome was the occurrence of AKI within two days after EVAR, which was defined by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes Clinical Practice Guideline. Demographics, comorbidities, medications, laboratory tests, anatomical parameters of AAA, and relative operative details were collected as variables. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were applied to identify the risk factors among variables, and covariate interactions were further assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 679 eligible patients were included. The incidence of postoperative AKI was 8.2% (56/679) in the whole cohort, and it was associated with a lower 5-year survival rate (63.5% vs . 80.9%; χ 2  = 4.10; P  = 0.043). The multivariable logistic regression showed that chronic kidney disease (OR, 5.06; 95% CI: 1.43-17.95; P  = 0.012), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR, 2.60; 95% CI: 1.17-5.76; P  = 0.019), and short neck (OR, 2.85; 95% CI: 1.08-7.52; P  = 0.035) were independent risk factors for postoperative AKI. In the covariate interaction analysis, the effect of ACEIs/ARBs use on postoperative AKI was similar across all subgroups ( P  > 0.05), thereby suggesting a robust effect of ACEIs/ARBs use in all patients undergoing elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative AKI was associated with lower survival rate, and the use of ACEIs/ARBs was the only adjustable independent risk factor. Clinicians should consider withdrawing ACEIs/ARBs in high-risk patients undergoing elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair to prevent postoperative AKI.

Ruptured juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm managed with endosuture aneurysm repair

The use of Heli-FX EndoAnchors (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, CA) with the Endurant II stent graft (Medtronic CardioVascular) has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms with neck lengths ≤4 mm. The use of this technique of endosuture aneurysm repair has not been previously described in the setting of rupture. We have presented two cases of successful endosuture aneurysm repair of ruptured juxtarenal AAAs.

Endografts for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms with a hostile neck anatomy: A systematic review

Background

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has emerged as a better alternative to conventional open surgery for AAAs. The purpose of the review is to define the improvement in the clinical management of the patient with hostile neck AAAs due to the introduction of new endografts while giving a thorough description of their instructions for use (IFUs), main characteristics and part sizing, reporting their outcomes from clinical studies and categorizing their usability.

Methods

A MEDLINE search was conducted using keyword-specific combinations. Clinical studies were searched via the clinicaltrials.gov website. Relevant articles' references were also hand-searched.

Results

We retrieved 640 records describing Alto, Ovation iX, Treovance, Aorfix, Anaconda, Conformable, and Endurant II/IIs endografts. Aortic necks >60° can be managed with Anaconda, Aorfix, and Conformable, which can treat up to 90° necks requiring ≥15 mm (Anaconda ≥20 mm), and Treovance, which is eligible for necks ≤75° with ≥15 mm length. Ovation's innovation of combining polymer-filled O-rings with integral anchors can treat conical necked AAAs giving Ovation iX and Alto an advantage. Short-necked AAAs can be treated with Alto, eligible for necks as short as 7 mm, and Endurant II, which can treat ≥10 mm necks or 4 mm if used in conjunction with the EndoAnchors system, respectively. Alto and Conformable report a 100% technical success rate, absence of AAA-related death, migration, ruptures, and limb occlusion during follow-up. Endurant II and Ovation iX report >99% technical success rate and are almost free from the AAA mortality rate, ruptures, migration, and limb occlusion, while Ovation iX has a high rate of sac dilation (15.5%) in a 5-year follow-up. Anaconda is slightly better than Aorfix and Treovance, which are related to the lowest technical success rates, 98.3%, 96.3%, and 96%, respectively. Aorfix has the highest AAA mortality rate, 4% in a 60 month follow-up.

Conclusion

Most new generation endografts described have comparable results. They broaden the eligibility of patients for EVAR due to their unique technical characteristics described. There is a lack of comparative studies for newer endografts and postmarket clinical studies with long-term results concerning the most recently approved devices described, Alto and Conformable.

Endovascular interventions in main renal artery pathologies: an overview and update

Renal arteries are involved in a wide spectrum of pathologies including atherosclerosis, fibromuscular dysplasia, Takayasu arteritis, aneurysms, and aortic type B dissections extending into main renal arteries. They manifest as renovascular hypertension, renal ischemia, and cardiovascular dysfunction. The location of the renal arteries in relation to the abdominal aortic aneurysm is a critical determinant of interventional options and long-term prognosis. This article provides a comprehensive review of the role of interventional radiologists in transcatheter interventions in various pathologies involving the main renal arteries with analysis of epidemiology, pathophysiology, newer interventional techniques, and management options.

[Endovascular aortic repair: the hostile aneurysm neck : Morphologic definition, impact on long-term outcome, and treatment options]

DEFINITION

A hostile neck is defined by various anatomical conditions that describe a morphology of the proximal aneurysmal neck of infrarenal aortic aneurysms that is unfavorable for endovascular treatment (endovascular aortic repair, EVAR): proximal landing zone length ≤ 15 mm, angulation of the aortic neck > 60°, conical aortic neck, diameter of the aortic neck > 32 mm, and circumferential calcification/thrombus.

EFFECTS ON OUTCOME

These morphological parameters are not only associated with a higher perioperative technical failure rate (primary type 1 endoleak) but also with poorer long-term results (secondary type 1 endoleak) and thus a higher reintervention rate in standard EVAR, so that standard EVAR should be reserved for a few exceptions in these cases.

TREATMENT OPTIONS

Due to the rapid development of endovascular techniques in the last decade, we now have a variety of endovascular options for aneurysms with hostile necks, for both elective treatment and emergency care, in addition to conventional open surgery, which is still the standard method in many cases and is currently undergoing a renaissance: fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) as the method of first choice in the elective setting, EVAR with chimneys (ChEVAR), endosuture aneurysm repair (ESAR). An important option is the conservative approach, which can be a reasonable choice if the patient's preference is taken into account and a careful risk-benefit assessment is performed.

Peri-Operative Management of Patients Undergoing Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Repair for Juxtarenal, Pararenal and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Preventing, Recognizing and Treating Complications to Improve Clinical Outcomes

The advent and refinement of complex endovascular techniques in the last two decades has revolutionized the field of vascular surgery. This has allowed an effective minimally invasive treatment of extensive disease involving the pararenal and the thoracoabdominal aorta. Fenestrated-branched EVAR (F/BEVAR) now represents a feasible technical solution to address these complex diseases, moving the proximal sealing zone above the renal-visceral vessels take-off and preserving their patency. The aim of this paper was to provide a narrative review on the peri-operative management of patients undergoing F/BEVAR procedures for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (JAAA), pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (PRAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurism (TAAA). It will focus on how to prevent, diagnose, and manage the complications ensuing from these complex interventions, in order to improve clinical outcomes. Indeed, F/BEVAR remains a technically, physiologically, and mentally demanding procedure. Intraoperative adverse events often require prolonged or additional procedures and complications may significantly impact a patient's quality of life, health status, and overall cost of care. The presence of standardized preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative pathways of care, together with surgeons and teams with significant experience in aortic surgery, should be considered as crucial points to improve clinical outcomes. Aggressive prevention, prompt diagnosis and timely rescue of any major adverse events following the procedure remain paramount clinical needs.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Morphological applicability of currently available stent grafts in the endovascular repair of asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm in East-Central European patients

Introduction

Currently, there is a wide range of commercially available devices for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) that differ in terms of both anatomical requirements and the technology and technique of deployment.

Aim

To assess the applicability of currently commercially available devices for EVAR in the treatment of an asymptomatic abdominal aneurysm (AAA).

Material and methods

The study group included 100 patients with infrarenal AAA with a maximum diameter ≥ 50 mm, qualified for invasive treatment at the University Hospital in 2013–2014. The aortoiliac morphological characteristics of the AAA were evaluated on preoperative computed tomography angiograms using the OsiriX DICOM viewer in the 3D-MPR mode. The morphological applicability of 14 types of CE-marked and FDA-approved stent grafts was determined based on their instructions for use (IFU).

Results

EVAR was feasible with at least one of the analysed devices in 68% of patients. The morphological applicability was as follows: Excluder Conformable (65%), Ovation iX (51%), Endurant II (47%), Treo (45%), Excluder C3 (45%), AFX 2 (45%), Incraft (44%), E-tegra (44%), Zenith Alfa (41%), Zenith Flex (40%), Anaconda (39%) Aorfix (37%), Altura (34%), and E-vita (20%). The differences in the stent graft applicability were statistically significant (p < 0.001). A wide diameter of the common iliac artery, angulated proximal neck, and diameter of proximal neck out of range constituted the most frequent causes of EVAR inapplicability.

Conclusions

The IFU-based applicability of currently available AAA stent graft systems differs significantly. Despite the constant evolution of EVAR technology, at least 32% of AAA will require a different therapeutic approach.

Clinical trial outcomes and thoracic aortic morphometry after one year with the Valiant Navion stent graft system

AUTHORS' NOTE

On February 17, 2021, Medtronic Incorporated issued a global voluntary recall of the Valiant Navion Thoracic Stent Graft System (the device under study in the Valiant Evo Global Clinical Program that is the subject of this publication), and instructed physicians to immediately cease use of the Valiant Navion system and return any unused product. Medtronic initiated the recall in response to three clinical trial subjects recently observed with stent fractures, two of whom have confirmed type IIIb endoleaks. The data collection, analysis, and manuscript submission occurred before the notice of this recall, and, specifically, the 100 procedures reviewed for this series were free of events at 1 year related to the reason for this device recall. The authors of this article and the manufacturer were unaware of the recently detected adverse events at the time of the preparation of the manuscript, and the 1-year trial results, and imaging-based analyses described are unchanged. Management of thoracic aortic aneurysms continues to be a challenging problem and outcomes are dependent on patient anatomy. The present publication focuses on the importance of achieving proximal and distal seals and the consideration of the temporal changes of the aortic morphology as a part of the TEVAR planning process. The authors believe there is still scientific merit in disclosing this information, despite the current nonavailability of the Valiant Navion system.

OBJECTIVE

The Valiant Navion stent graft system (Medtronic Inc, Santa Rosa, Calif) is a third-generation device with improved conformability. We have reported the 1-year clinical trial outcomes, with a focus on an imaging-based analysis of the aortic morphology. We assessed the effects of graft implantation on the native anatomy and the effects of the 1-year changes in thoracic aorta morphology on the original seal zones of the stent graft.

METHODS

A total of 100 subjects were enrolled in a prospective single-arm clinical trial investigating the Valiant Navion stent graft system. An independent core laboratory (Syntactx, New York, NY) assessed the anatomic characteristics and performance outcomes.

RESULTS

Through 1 year of follow-up, the freedom from all-cause mortality, aneurysm-related mortality, and secondary procedures was 89.8%, 97.0%, and 94.8% respectively. Of the 100 patients, 5 had undergone a total of six secondary procedures, and 9 patients had developed an endoleak (type Ia and Ib in 1, type Ia in 1, type Ib in 3, and type II in 4 patients) within the first year. After 1 year, 2 of 76 patients (2.6%) had had an increase in their maximum aneurysm diameter of ≥5 mm, 62 (81.6%) had had stable sacs, and 12 (15.8%) had experienced sac shrinkage. Although no deployment failures had occurred, 36 of the 100 proximal (36%) and 31 of the 100 distal (31%) attachment zones were considered short according to our definitions. The stent graft had conformed to the native anatomy at implantation, because the preprocedural thoracic aorta tortuosity (1.45 ± 0.02) had not significantly changed at 1 month after implantation (1.46 ± 0.02). Despite a natural increase in thoracic tortuosity after 1 year (1.49 ± 0.02), wall apposition had been maintained over time, as evidenced by the low endoleak rates. Aortic elongation and dilation had occurred at the proximal end of the graft by an average of 1.2 mm and 1.6 mm, respectively. Aortic remodeling was more pronounced at the distal end, with an average increase of 4.2 mm in length and 2.8 mm in diameter.

CONCLUSIONS

The included patients had had positive 1-year outcomes with high freedom from mortality, endoleak development, and secondary procedures. Aortic elongation and dilation were more prevalent at the distal end, emphasizing the importance of distal attachment zone consideration as part of preoperative planning. Because aortic remodeling can be expected to continue over time, additional follow-up and imaging analysis in the trial will be necessary to assess the aortic morphology and its effects on stent graft performance.

Endovascular aortic repair with EndoAnchors demonstrate good mid-term outcomes in physician-initiated multicenter analysis-The PERU registry

OBJECTIVES

We aim to describe real-world outcomes from multicenter data about the efficacy of adjunct Heli-FX EndoAnchor usage in preventing or repairing failures during infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), so-called EndoSutured-aneurysm-repair (ESAR).

METHODS

The current study has been assigned an identifier (NCT04100499) at the US National Library of Medicine (https://ClinicalTrials.gov). It is an observational retrospective study of prospectively collected data from seven vascular surgery departments between June 2010 and December 2019. Patients included in the ANCHOR registry were excluded from this analysis. The decision for the use of EndoAnchors was made by the treating surgeon or multidisciplinary aortic committee according to each center's practice. Follow-up imaging was scheduled according to each center's protocol, which necessarily included either abdominal ultrasound or radiography or computed tomographic scan imaging. The main outcomes analyzed were technical success, freedom from type Ia endoleaks (IaEL), all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality, and sac variation and trends evaluated for those with at least six months imaging follow-up.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-five patients underwent ESAR in participating centers during the study period. After exclusions, 221 patients (184 males, 37 females, mean age 75 ± 8.3 years) were finally included for analysis. Median follow-up for the cohort was 27 (interquartile range 12-48) months. A median 6 (interquartile range 3) EndoAnchors were deployed at ESAR, 175 (79%) procedures were primary and 46 (21%) revision cases, 40 associated with type IaEL. Technical success at operation (initial), 30-day, and overall success were 89, 95.5, and 96.8%, respectively; the 30-day success was higher due to those with subsequent spontaneous proximal endoleak seal. At two years, freedom from type IaEL was 94% for the whole series; 96% and 86% for the primary and revision groups, respectively; whereas freedom from all-cause mortality, aneurysm-related mortality, and reintervention was 89%, 98%, and 87%, respectively. Sac evolution pre-ESAR was 66 ± 15.1 vs. post ESAR 61 ± 17.5 (p < 0.001) and for 180 patients with at least six-month follow-up, 92.2% of them being in a stable (51%) or regression (41%) situation.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world registry demonstrates that adjunct EndoAnchor usage at EVAR achieves high rates of freedom from type IaEL at mid-term including in a high number of patients with hostile neck anatomy, with positive trends in sac-size evolution. Further data with longer follow-up may help to establish EndoAnchor usage as a routine adjunct to EVAR, especially in hostile necks.

An update on the improvement of patient eligibility with the use of new generation endografts for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms

PURPOSE

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), performed within device instructions for use (IFU), offers improved outcomes. New endograft designs attempt to increase eligibility rates of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients treated within device IFU. We aim to examine the anatomic suitability of the Ovation endograft in our AAA patients and compare it with the other contemporary devices.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Three-hundred and seven consecutive elective AAA patients treated during a 5-year period were included. Patient-specific anatomic characteristics were based on endograft IFUs to determine eligibility rates of each system.

RESULTS

Two-hundred-twenty-five patients underwent EVAR and 82 open surgery. Ineligibility for device implantation was significantly lower for the Ovation iX system (32%) compared to other devices (AFX-2:49%, Altura:49%, Anaconda:54%, Endurant II:46%, Excluder:52%, Excluder Conformable:39%, Incraft:43%, E-Tegra:52%, Zenith-Alpha:52%; P-Value<0.001). The Alto system (next-generation Ovation) achieved an even lower ineligibility rate of 30% (P = 0.008). Short proximal aortic neck length followed by access vessel inadequacy were the primary reasons for ineligibility.

CONCLUSION

The Ovation-iX included more patients with anatomic characteristics within device IFUs resulting in improved eligibility rates compared with the rest of contemporary devices. Its evolution, the Alto system, further improves patient eligibility due to the inclusion of shorter aortic necks.

EXPERT OPINION

The Ovation iX system presented a significantly better performance and was eligible for use in a greater number of patients in our series of elective AAA repairs, accommodating patient-specific aortic anatomies. Of course, performing EVAR within the endograft's IFU is important to achieve optimal and durable outcomes. The proximal neck length followed by the size of the access vessels are the two more common factors resulting in loss of eligibility. Except for overall eligibility rates, a case by case decision must be made on which is the most suitable device for each patient, based on the specific characteristics of its unique anatomy.

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.

Predictors of inadequate EndoAnchors aortic wall penetration for the Endosutured therapy in hostile neck patients

BACKGROUND

The use of EndoAnchors is increasing; however, not much about appropriate use in terms of aortic wall penetration (AWP) is described. We aim to evaluate the procedural and anatomical conditions related with borderline (b) or absence (ab) of AWP when checked on first CT-scan after the Endosutured aortic repair (ESAR) for hostile neck anatomies (HNA).

METHODS

This study with NCT04100499 is a single center prospective evaluation of patients receiving EndoAnchors for prevention or treatment of a proximal EVAR failure. AWP was evaluated on first CT-scan and findings correlated with neck anatomical features and procedural data. The sum of borderline and absence of AWP was considered as Inadequate - In-AWP (failure). Adjunctive procedures, reinterventions, all-cause mortality, absence of type Ia EL and aneurysm related mortality are also described.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients were treated during the study period and 43 high-surgical risk patients were finally included in the study for analysis with at least one HNA criteria (58%) and associating two in 21% or even three in 21%. A total of 250 EndoAnchors were deployed at a median 6 (range, 4-10) per case. From those, 31 (12.5%) achieved b-AWP and 11 (4.4%) ab-AWP, meaning 42 (16.8%) EndoAnchors with In-AWP. Univariate-analysis showed being an occasional user and a therapeutic case as predictor for at least one and more failures. The only predictor on multivariate analysis for two or more EndoAnchors with In-AWP was being an occasional user. Cumulative-survival and freedom from type-Ia EL at 2-years was 84% and 95%; respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes of the ESAR therapy should be validated according to their aortic wall penetration checked on first CT-scan. EndoAnchors use in HNA should not be considered an easy approach for the endovascular technique, especially for therapeutic cases. An individual and specific case analysis counterbalancing inadequate use of the device in unexperienced users should be evaluated against the increased risk of proximal failure as in standard EVAR alone during HNA treatment.

Endurant stent graft demonstrates promising outcomes in challenging abdominal aortic aneurysm anatomy

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the 5-year safety and effectiveness outcomes of patients enrolled in the Endurant Stent Graft Natural Selection Global Post Market Registry (ENGAGE) who were treated outside the approved indications for use (IFU) of the Endurant stent graft.

METHODS

Our primary outcome measure was 12-month treatment success, defined as successful endograft delivery and deployment and the absence of type I or III endoleak, stent migration or limb occlusion, late conversion, and abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter increase or rupture. Secondary outcome measures included 30-day all-cause mortality, major adverse events, secondary procedures, technical observations, aneurysm-related mortality, and all-cause mortality within 12 months.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics of ENGAGE patients treated outside (225 [17.8%]) and within (1038 [82.2%]) the IFUs were similar, except that female patients comprised a much higher percentage of the outside IFU group (19.1% vs 8.7%; P < .001). The outside IFU group presented with lower rates of coronary artery disease and cardiac revascularization and a greater number of symptomatic patients compared with the within IFU group (21.3% vs 15.0%; P = .020). Technical success was achieved in more than 99% of all patients. The outside and within IFU groups showed a comparable and low occurrence of uncorrected type I (0.9% vs 1.2%; P = 1.00) and type III endoleak (0.4% vs 0.3%; P = .54) immediately after device implantation. The 5-year freedom from type IA endoleaks was 89.4% vs 96.7% (P < .0001) for those patients outside and within the IFUs, respectively, although both groups had similar type III endoleaks through 5 years (P = .61). Stent graft limb occlusion estimated overall survival, and freedom from aneurysm-related mortality and endovascular interventions were comparable in both patient groups through the 5-year follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier estimates at 5 years showed a trend for low but increased need for type I or III endoleak correction procedures in the outside IFU group compared with the within IFU group (7.2% vs 5.2%; P = .099).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences were not observed in all-cause mortality, aneurysm-related mortality, and secondary procedures between within and outside IFU patients through a 5-year follow-up in the ENGAGE registry. Proximal necks with angulation or diameters outside the IFUs were the most common reasons for patients identified as being outside IFU, and the cohort had increased incidence of type IA endoleaks. Despite the challenges presented from the broad range of aortic and abdominal aortic aneurysm morphologies, the Endurant stent graft showed promising 5-year outcomes.

Outcomes of endosutured aneurysm repair with the Heli-FX EndoAnchor implants

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular aneurysm repair has gained field over open surgery for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm. However, type Ia endoleak represents a common complication especially in hostile neck anatomy that is recently faced using endoanchors. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to collect and analyse all the available comparative evidence on the outcomes of the endosuture aneurysm repair in patients with or without hostile neck in standard endovascular aneurysm repair.

METHODS

The current meta-analysis was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All the prospective and retrospective studies reporting primary use of the Heli-FX EndoAnchor implants were considered eligible for inclusion in this study. The main study outcomes (technical success of endoanchor implantation, incidence of type Ia endoleak, aortic stent graft migration and the percentage of patients who presented regression or expansion of aneurysm sac throughout the follow-up) were subsequently expressed as proportions and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Eight studies with a total of 968 patients were included in a pooled analysis. The technical success of the primary endoanchor fixation was 97.12% (95%CI: 92.98-99.67). During a mean six months follow-up period, a pooled rate of 6.23% (95%CI: 0.83-15.25) of the patients developed a persistent type Ia endoleak despite the primary implantation. Migration of the main graft was reported in five studies, in which a 0.26% (95%CI = 0.00-1.54) of the patients required an additional proximal aortic cuff. Regression of the aneurysm sac was observed at 68.82% (95%CI: 51.02-84.21). An expansion of the aneurysm sac was found in 1.93% (95%CI: 0.91-3.24) of the participants. The overall survival rate was 93.43% (95%CI: 89.97-96.29) at a mean six months follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Endosuture aneurysm repair with the Heli-FX EndoAnchor implants seems to be technically feasible and safe either for prevention or for repair of intraoperative type Ia endoleak. Despite the primary implants of endoanchors, few cases of persistent type Ia endoleak and migration are still conspicuous. Long-term follow up is needed to determinate the role of this therapeutic option in the treatment of aortic aneurysms.

[Proximal fixation devices in endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneyrysm with unfavourable proximal neck anatomy]

Abdominal aortic aneurysm is a common vascular disease requiring surgical treatment. Currently, endovascular aortic repair is a good alternative to open surgery. However, high incidence of unfavorable anatomical variants of the proximal landing zone limit the use of endovascular aortic repair in these patients. Additional techniques can increase applicability of endovascular procedure with optimal results. Two patients with unfavorable proximal neck anatomy undergoing endovascular aortic repair with anchor type of proximal fixation devices are reported in the article.