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

Initial Outcomes of Embolization for Type II Endoleak: Comparison of n-Butyl Cyanoacrylate-Ethiodized Oil Mixture with n-Butyl Cyanoacrylate-Ethiodized Oil-Ethanol Mixture

PURPOSE

To compare the safety and effectiveness of n-butyl cyanoacrylate (nBCA)-ethiodized oil (NE) mixture and nBCA-ethiodized oil-ethanol (NEE) mixture embolization for Type II endoleak (T2EL) after endovascular aortic repair.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 32 patients with 49 procedures who underwent T2EL embolization between January 2008 and June 2022. Cases with no follow-up after embolization, technical failure, treatment with coil only, Type I endoleak at the embolization, and re-embolization were excluded. The resultant final cohort included 24 patients (14 men and 10 women; mean age, 83.3 years [interquartile range, 77-89 years]) who underwent initial T2EL embolization, with 15 patients in the NE group and 9 patients in the NEE group. The 2 groups were compared in terms of adverse events (AEs), freedom from sac enlargement, and freedom from reintervention.

RESULTS

The follow-up period after embolization for T2EL was 960 days (SD ± 1,007) in the NE group and 484 days (SD ± 192) in the NEE group, without significant differences. No AEs above moderate were observed in either group. The rate of freedom from sac enlargement at 1 year was 65.0% in the NE group and 87.5% in the NEE group (P = .03). The rate of freedom from reintervention at 1 year was 69.2% in the NE group and 100.0% in the NEE group (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The NEE group had significantly higher rates of freedom from sac enlargement and reintervention at 1 year compared with the NE group. These results suggest that T2EL embolization with NEE may be more effective than that with NE.

Technical and clinical success analysis of transarterial embolization therapy in type II endoleaks following endovascular aortic repair

This single-center study investigated the safety and efficacy of transarterial embolization of type II endoleaks for expanding aneurysm sacs following endovascular aortic repair (EVAR).36 patients (33 men, 75.9±6.6 years) underwent a total of 50 endovascular procedures for type II endoleak embolization between 2008 and 2023. Analyses included the assessment of patient risk profiles, aneurysm morphology, and endoleak characteristics. Outcome parameters comprised the technical success (i.e., complete lack of blood flow in the previously perfused aneurysm sac) and complication rates, while clinical success was defined as the absence of endoleak persistence or recurrence and freedom from aneurysm enlargement > 0.5 cm over the follow-up period.Transarterial embolization was technically successful in 84% of procedures with a complication rate of 2%. Most interventions were coil-based (72%), while a small number relied solely on liquid embolic agents (14%). Absence of a persisting endoleak in the earliest follow-up could be demonstrated in 75.6% of cases, whereas the absence rate for endoleak recurrence was substantially lower (46.3%). No aneurysm enlargement > 0.5 cm during follow-up was ascertained after 73.2% of interventions.Transarterial embolization represents a safe treatment for type II endoleaks after EVAR. While embolization was moderately effective in preventing further expansion of aneurysms due to endoleak recurrence, most procedures were successful in permanently eliminating the targeted feeder vessels. · Transarterial embolization of type II endoleaks has a high technical success rate.. · The emergence of new feeder vessels may necessitate multiple procedures over time.. · Patient risk profiles did not factor into the clinical outcome.. · Krompaß K, Grunz JP, Augustin AM et al. Technical and clinical success analysis of transarterial embolization therapy in type II endoleaks following endovascular aortic repair. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; DOI 10.1055/a-2384-4601.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Intraoperative evaluation for endoleaks using the SCORPION procedure during endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVES

Endoleaks are important complications of endovascular aortic repair. Usually, endoleaks are judged indirectly by aortography or postoperative computed tomography. However, findings from these modalities are difficult to distinguish because of the divergency of endoleaks. Few studies have reported direct visualization of endoleaks. Herein, we introduce a direct procedure for intraoperatively evaluating endoleaks using angioscopy.

METHODS

From April 2023, consecutive patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm, except emergency cases and those of narrow access, seen at Sunagawa City Medical Center were enrolled in our study. Endoleaks were detected by intraoperative angioscopy using a novel endovascular procedure.

RESULTS

Seven patients underwent endovascular aortic repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm with intraoperative angioscopy. None of the enrolled patients experienced complications. The procedure revealed types 2, 3a, and 4 endoleaks.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to demonstrate intraoperative visualization of endoleaks using angioscopy. Direct findings observed by this novel procedure might provide information on the velocity and volume of the endoleak, providing comprehensive insights into the intra-sac hemodynamics after the endovascular aortic repair.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Reducing aneurysm sac growth and secondary interventions following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair by preemptive coil embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries

OBJECTIVE

Type II endoleak (EL-2) is the most common complication following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), leading to continued sac growth and potential rupture. In this study, we examined the association between patency of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and lumbar arteries (LAs) with respect to sac growth. The effect of preemptive embolization of the IMA and/or LAs on the need for secondary interventions for sac growth post-EVAR was also evaluated.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed on consecutive patients who underwent EVAR for non-ruptured, infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) from January 2012 to December 2020. A select group of patients underwent preemptive embolization of the IMA and/or LA. Patients with any types I, III, or IV endoleaks were excluded. Patency of the IMA and LA on preoperative computed tomography angiogram (CTA) was evaluated on TeraRecon workstation. All secondary interventions to treat EL-2 were recorded. Sac growth was defined as centerline axial diameter increase of ≥5 mm on follow-up CTA.

RESULTS

A total of 300 patients (mean age, 74 ± 8.5 years; 83.7% male) underwent EVAR. Ninety-nine patients had preemptive embolization of the IMA and/or LA. Mean follow-up of the cohort was 59.3 ± 30.5 months. Thirty-six patients (12%) demonstrated sac growth on follow-up; 12 of these (33.3%) had preemptive embolization. The median time until detection of sac growth was 28.8 months (interquartile range, 15.2-46.5 months), with a mean growth of 10.1 ± 6.4 mm. Sac growth was significantly associated with presence of EL-2: 27 of 36 (75%) with EL-2 vs 9 of 36 (25%) without EL-2 (P < .001). Patients with sac growth had a higher mean total number (2.6 ± 1.5) of patent lower LAs (L3, L4) compared with those without (2.0 ± 1.4; P = .03). Patency of L1, L2, and L3 LAs were not associated with sac growth. However, patency of at least one L4 LA was significantly associated with sac growth (14.8% vs 7.7%; P = .04). The highest incidence of sac growth (17.6%) was seen when both IMA and L4 LA were patent; significantly different from the lowest incidence (5.3%) when both were occluded preoperatively (P = .018). Preemptive coiling of the IMA and/or LA significantly reduced the need for post-EVAR secondary intervention for sac growth. Freedom from post-EVAR secondary intervention was achieved in 92 of 99 (92.9%) pre-EVAR coiled patients vs 163 of 201 (81.5%) patients who did not undergo pre-EVAR coiling (P = .009).

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive coil embolization of the IMA and LAs, especially L4 LA, reduces the need for secondary interventions for sac growth, potentially improving the long-term durability of EVAR.

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

Objective

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

Materials and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Surgical Treatment of Sac Enlargement Due to Type II Endoleaks Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

An aneurysm sac enlargement caused by type II endoleak (T2EL) following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms may cause serious complications such as rupture. Consequently, methods that preoperatively prevent or postoperatively treat T2EL have been employed. When significant aneurysm enlargement occurs due to persistent T2EL, embolization is first performed through several access points. However, although these endovascular reinterventions have a high technical success rate and are safe, their effectiveness remains questionable. When such endovascular procedures fail to stabilize sac enlargement, open surgical conversion (OSC) becomes the last-resort treatment option. We review several strategies of OSC for the repair of T2EL following EVAR. Among the three main OSC procedures, namely, complete endograft removal, partial endograft removal, and complete endograft preservation, partial endograft removal under infrarenal clamping was considered the most appropriate owing to its less invasiveness and durability.