Nationwide Analysis of Persistent Type II Endoleak and Late Outcomes of Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Japan: a Propensity-matched Analysis

Fibrin Glue Sac Filling for Preventing Type II Endoleak, Short-Term Outcomes of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Type II endoleak (T2EL) worsens the long-term results of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). How to prevent T2ELs remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fibrin glue sac filling (FGSF) to prevent T2ELs after EVAR.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. Patients were randomly divided into group A (standard EVAR + FGSF) and group B (standard EVAR). The follow-up plans included outpatient or telephone consultation at 1 and 3 months and computed tomography (CT) angiography at 6 months, 1 year, and once a year after EVAR.

RESULTS

A total of 64 abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients were randomized to the 2 groups. All patients were followed up for more than 6 months. The 2 groups showed similar baseline characteristics. The rate of T2ELs on immediate angiography in group A (9.6%) was significantly lower than that in group B (33.3%, p=0.033). Moreover, the sac area change was significantly reduced in group A at 6 months after EVAR (p=0.021). However, T2EL incidence was similar at the 6-month (p=0.055) and 1-year (p=0.057) follow-ups, and AAA diameter change was also similar at 1 year. There were similar operation times, radiation doses, severe adverse events (SAEs), and reinterventions between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Fibrin glue sac filling could prevent short-term type II endoleaks and promote AAA shrinkage after 6 months. The FGSF procedure is swift and straightforward; however, patients are at risk of bowel ischemia, especially after previous bowel resections or concomitant superior mesenteric artery (SMA) disease.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) couldn't prevent type II endoleak (T2EL). In this study, we found fibrin glue sac filling (FGSF) could prevent T2EL and promote AAA shrinkage in a short term. And the FGSF procedure is easy, it will be a useful supplement to standard EVAR for clinicians. And FGSF might have potential usefulness on ruptured aneurysms, although without direct evidence.Fibrin glue is often used to hemostasis and tissue adhesion in surgical patients and burn patients, we firstly carry out a randomized controlled study and prove that fibrin glue sac filling could prevent T2EL and promote sac remodeling.

Side branch embolization before endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair to prevent type II endoleak: A prospective multicenter study

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pre-emptive transcatheter arterial embolization (P-TAE) of aortic side branches to prevent type II endoleak in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, single-arm trial enrolled 100 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm from nine hospitals between 2018 and 2021. There were 85 men and 15 women, with a mean age of 79.6 ± 6.0 (standard deviation) years (range: 65-97 years). P-TAE was attempted for patent aortic side branches, including the inferior mesenteric artery, lumbar arteries, and other branches. The primary endpoint was late type II endoleak incidence at 6 months post-repair. Secondary endpoints included changes in aneurysmal sac diameter at 6- and 12 months, complications, re-intervention, and aneurysm-related mortality. Aneurysm sac changes at 6- and 12 months was compared between the late and no-late type II endoleak groups.

RESULTS

Coil embolization was successful in 80.9% (321/397) of patent aortic side branches, including 86.3% of the inferior mesenteric arteries, 80.3% of lumbar arteries, and 55.6% of other branches without severe adverse events. Late type II endoleak incidence at 6 months was 8.9% (8/90; 95% confidence interval: 3.9-16.8%). Aneurysm sac shrinkage > 5 mm was observed in 41.1% (37/90) and 55.3% (47/85) of the patients at 6- and 12-months post-EVAR, respectively. Patients with late type II endoleak had less aneurysm sac shrinkage than those without type II endoleak at 12 months (-0.2 mm vs. -6.0 mm; P = 0.040). No patients required re-intervention for type II endoleak, and no aneurysm-related mortalities occurred.

CONCLUSION

P-TAE is safe and effective in preventing type II endoleak, leading to early sac shrinkage at 12 months following EVAR.

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.

In situ fenestration (ISF) versus single-branched stent graft (SBSG) implantation in the management of acute Stanford type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery

Background

With the advances in medical technology and materials, thoracic endovascular aortic repair has become the mainstay of treatment for aortic dissection. In situ fenestration (ISF) and single-branch stent graft (SBSG) implantation are commonly used methods, with each having its own advantages and disadvantages. The study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes and one-year follow-up results of patients who underwent ISF or SBSG in the treatment of acute Stanford type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery (LSA).

Methods

From January 2018 to December 2022, consecutive patients with Stanford type B aortic dissection were retrospectively recruited and divided into ISF group and SBSG group according to the type of surgery. The patient's aortic physiology was evaluated by computed tomography angiography at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after discharge.

Results

This study included 67 patients in the SBSG group and 21 patients in the ISF group. The baseline and preoperative indices were similar between the groups. The success rate of perioperative treatment was 100%, and no adverse consequences occurred in either group. No spinal cord ischemia, stroke, or paraplegia occurred in either group during the one-year follow-up. The rate of endoleak in the SBSG group was significantly lower (3%, all type I endoleaks) than that in the ISF group (9.5% type I and 14.3% type II endoleaks) (P=0.005). Type II endoleak mainly occurred in the LSA. In addition, complete thrombosis of the false lumen was achieved in 95.5% of the SBSG group versus 81.0% of the ISF group, but this was not a significant difference (P=0.091). The maximum diameter of the true lumen increased significantly in the ISF (P<0.001) and SBSG (P<0.001) groups. Meanwhile, the maximum diameter of the false lumen was significantly reduced in the ISF (P<0.001) and SBSG (P<0.001) groups, but the difference in the maximum diameter change of the true or false lumen between the two groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05).

Conclusions

SBSG was associated with a significantly lower incidence of endoleak than was ISF. However, there were no differences observed in complete thrombosis of the false lumen. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to definitively establish which treatment is superior in terms of complete thrombosis of the false lumen.

Implications and late outcomes of type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Type II endoleaks (T2ELs) are the most common cause of reintervention after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Although most resolve spontaneously, the long-term implications of T2ELs remain elusive. We aim to evaluate the impact of persistent and late T2ELs on clinical outcomes after EVAR.

METHODS

This was a single-institution retrospective review of patients who underwent EVAR for degenerative infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm between January 2010 and June 2022 with no type I (T1EL) or III (T3EL) endoleak seen at EVAR completion. Patients were categorized based on T2EL status. Group 1 included patients with never detected or transient T2ELs (detected at EVAR completion but not after). Group 2 encompassed persistent T2ELs (seen at EVAR completion and again during follow-up) and late T2ELs (detected for the first time at any point during follow-up). Time-to-event analysis was conducted using a time-dependent approach to T2EL status. Primary outcomes included freedom from sac enlargement (SE), aneurysm-related reinterventions, and overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 803 patients met inclusion criteria. Group 1 included 418 patients (52%), of which 85% had no T2ELs and 15% had transient T2ELs. Group 2 had 385 patients; 23% had persistent T2ELs, and 77% developed a new T2EL. Patients in group 1 had a higher prevalence of smoking (88% vs 83%; P < .001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (33% vs 25%; P = .008), chronic kidney disease (13% vs 8%; P = .021), and a higher mean Society for Vascular Surgery score (7 vs 6 points; P = .049). No differences were found in aneurysm diameter or morphology. Mean follow-up was 5 years for the entire cohort. In Group 2, 58 patients (15%) underwent T2EL treatment, most commonly transarterial embolization. At 10 years after EVAR, Group 2 was associated with lower freedom from SE (P < .001) and abdominal aortic aneurysm-related reinterventions (P < .001) and comparable overall survival (P = .42). More T1ELs were detected during follow-up in Group 2 (6 [1%] vs 20 [5%]; P = .004), with 15 (75%) of these detected at a median of 3 years after the T2EL. No difference between groups was observed in explant (0.7% vs 2.1%; P = .130) or aneurysm rupture (0.5% vs 1.3%; P = .269) rates.

CONCLUSIONS

One-half of patients treated with infrarenal EVAR developed persistent/late T2ELs, which are associated with a higher risk of SE and reinterventions. No difference in overall survival or aneurysm rupture risk was seen at 10 years, based on T2EL status or T2EL intervention. A conservative approach to T2ELs may be appropriate for most patients with absent T1ELs or T3ELs.

Preemptive treatment of type II endoleak for abdominal aortic aneurysm with renal fusion (horseshoe kidney)

OBJECTIVE

To assess viability and safety of preemptive treatment of type II endoleak for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repairs.

METHODS

A 69-year-old man with renal fusion (horseshoe kidney) was referred for treatment of a 5.5 cm AAA. His anatomy was suitable for endovascular repair. The risk for type II endoleak was increased because of multiple infrarenal arterial orifices originating within the aneurysm sac. These included an accessory renal artery that supplied the renal isthmus, a patent inferior mesenteric artery, and a pair of large lumbar arteries originating from a single orifice (8 mm) at L3 spinal level. The lumbar orifice was selectively cannulated and occluded with thrombogenic coils 1 week prior to his endovascular aneurysm repair.

RESULTS

Aneurysm repair was uneventful with no signs of early or delayed endoleak and long-term follow-up of 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive coil embolization of perianeurysmal arteries may be considered as a safe and effective strategy for management of potential type II endoleak.

Midterm outcomes of endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm using the cuff-first technique to prevent type II endoleaks

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the initial and midterm outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using the cuff-first technique (CFT) to prevent type II endoleak (T2EL).

METHODS

CFT involves deploying an aortic cuff inside the AAA to cover the ostium of the aortic side branch vessels before deploying the main body. We performed a retrospective review of all patients undergoing EVAR with CFT or side branch embolization (SBE) for AAAs at The Jikei University Hospital between 2016 and 2022. Primary endpoint was the rate of aneurysm sac shrinkage. Secondary endpoints were procedure time, radiation exposure, technical and clinical success rates, occurrence of T2EL, and freedom from reintervention or aneurysm-related death.

RESULTS

Of 406 patients who underwent EVAR for AAAs, CFT was utilized in 56 (CFT group) and SBE in 35 (SBE group); all 91 patients were included in this study. There were no differences in patient demographics between groups, but there were differences in patency rate of the inferior mesenteric artery and absent intraluminal thrombus. The technical success rate per target vessel in the CFT and SBE group was 97.8% and 91.8%, and the clinical success rate was 91.0% and 100%, respectively. The median procedure time was shorter for CFT than for SBE: CFT, 10 (interquartile range [IQR], 6-14) minutes vs SBE, 25 (IQR, 18.5-45) minutes; P < .05), and median radiation exposure was lower for CFT than for SBE (CFT, 1455 (IQR, 840-2634) mGy vs SBE, 2353 (IQR, 1552-3586) mGy; P < .05). During the median follow-up of 25 months (IQR, 12.5-47 months), sac shrinkage occurred at similar rates in both groups (CFT, 37.5% vs SBE, 40.0%; P = .812), and there were no differences in freedom from reintervention (CFT, 96.2% and 91.4% at 12 and 36 months vs SBE, 100% and 89.5% at 12 and 36 months; log-rank P = .761) and freedom from aneurysm-related death (100% at 36 months in both groups; log-rank P = .440). The odds ratio of CFT vs SBE for sac regression was calculated by adjusting for inferior mesenteric artery patency and absent intraluminal thrombus, resulting in no statistical significance (odds ratio, 1.231; 95% confidence interval, 0.486-3.122).

CONCLUSIONS

CFT is feasible with a shorter procedure time and lower radiation exposure than SBE and comparable mid-term outcomes, including sac shrinkage rate, compared with SBE. We believe that CFT, if anatomically suitable, is an alternative to SBE for the prevention of T2EL during EVAR.

Ten-year single-center outcomes following endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm using the INCRAFT device

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to report the long-term outcomes beyond 10 years of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms using the low-profile INCRAFT device.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing EVAR using the INCRAFT device as part of the regulatory trial between 2012 and 2013. Primary endpoint was aneurysm-related death. Secondary endpoints were all-cause death, reintervention, late open conversion, and aneurysm status (shrinkage, stable, and growth).

RESULTS

Thirty patients with a mean age of 71.8 ± 7.7 years were included in this study. The median aneurysm diameter at EVAR was 54.5 mm (interquartile range, 53-56.8 mm). All abdominal aortic aneurysms in this study were treated following the device's instructions for use. At index EVAR, the INCRAFT device was successfully implanted in all patients using a percutaneous approach under local anesthesia. No patients experienced major adverse events or procedure-related complications 30 days after EVAR. During the median follow-up of 125 months (interquartile range, 98-131 months) with follow-up rates of 100% at 5 years and 96.7% at 10 years, aneurysm-related mortality was 0%, and freedom from all-cause mortality was 82.9% at 5 years and 75.3% at 10 years. Reintervention was required in 10 patients with 15 procedures. Sac growth was observed in 11 patients (36.7%), six of whom eventually required late open conversion; five of these patients underwent open aneurysmorrhaphy with stent graft preservation, and one underwent open surgical repair with endograft explantation. Late rupture was identified in one case, where type Ia endoleak led to rupture at 69 months, and open repair was successfully performed. Freedom from reintervention was 89.0% at 5 years but declined to 60.9% at 10 years; freedom from late open conversion was 100% at 5 years but declined to 70.8% at 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term outcomes of the INCRAFT stent graft showed no aneurysm-related deaths. However, sac growth occurred persistently throughout the follow-up period, resulting in a relatively high rate of reinterventions in the later periods, which highlights the importance of lifelong postoperative surveillance and appropriate reinterventions when indicated.

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.

Understanding Type II Endoleak: A Harmless Imaging Finding or a Silent Threat?

Type II endoleak (T2EL) represents a challenging clinical entity following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Although several studies have suggested that T2ELs are related to an increased risk of aneurysm sac growth and subsequent rupture, the exact role that T2ELs play in long-term outcomes remains debatable. Understanding the pathophysiology, diagnostic modalities, and management options of T2ELs is important for patients' safety and proper resource utilization. While conservative management may be suitable for asymptomatic patients with a stable aneurysm size, interventional approaches, including transarterial embolization, direct sac puncture embolization and open conversion have been described for patients with persistent T2EL associated with sac expansion. However, more research is needed to better determine the clinical benefit of such interventions. A thorough evaluation of all endoleak types before T2EL treatment would be reasonable for patients with T2ELs associated with sac expansion. Further studies are needed to refine treatment strategies aimed at minimizing T2EL-related complications. Collaborative efforts among vascular specialists, radiologists, and researchers are of paramount importance to address this ongoing clinical challenge.

Remodeling of the Proximal Sealing Zone and Sac Shrinkage after Endovascular Aortic Repair or Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

Variations in sac shrinkage (SS) are noted between endovascular aneurysm repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair for short neck AAA. These variations may originate from difference in the geometry and length of proximal sealing, which influences the quality and durability of the seal. This study aimed to explore the disparities in aneurysm exclusion and sac remodeling across these 2 scenarios.

METHODS

This study involved a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 2014 to 2021. Of 486 endovascular abdominal aortic repair cases, 33 that exclusively used a low permeability expanded polytetrafluoroethylene infrarenal device, strictly adhering to the instructions for use (IFUs), were selected. Concurrently, 30 cases of fenestrated repair that utilized modified polyester woven fabric devices proximally with consistent use of the aforementioned low-permeability devices infrarenally were examined. The quality of both proximal and distal sealing zones in fenestrated repairs was maintained within the range specified in the expanded polytetrafluoroethylene infrarenal device's IFUs, ensuring consistent sealing integrity for reliable group comparisons. Key metrics used for analysis were the detection of endoleaks and measurements of sac dimensions. Additional analyses included comparisons of demographic data and postoperative diameter changes in the proximal sealing zone (PZ) (encompassing 0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 mm below the most proximal sealing stent).

RESULTS

The demographic data and preoperative maximum-minimum diameter of the aneurysms did not differ between the groups. Proximal neck dilatation was similarly observed after both procedures. Immediately after the procedure, the incidence of lumbar arterial type II endoleaks was significantly lower after fenestrated repair than that after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR, 10% vs. 39.4%, P = 0.0094). At the final observation, EVAR substantially reduced the PZ length (-4.73 ± 15.30%), while fenestrated repair maintained the length (21.98 ± 24.34%; P < 0.0001). The preservation of the sealing length in fenestrated repairs was attributable to dilation occurring within the sealing range of the proximal device, oversized to accommodate the larger diameters in the more proximal sections of the aorta. The cumulative occurrence of SS (>5 mm) following fenestrated repair increased faster than that after endovascular repair (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Although aortic neck dilatation progressed similarly in both groups, fenestrated repair maintained the sealing length and demonstrated a greater extent of SS, even under the challenging circumstances in PZ. The superior postoperative results were linked to both the durability of proximal sealing and a lower occurrence of lumbar arterial type II endoleaks, stemming from the effective shuttering of the collateral sources in the proximal lumbar or intercostal arteries.

Preemptive Embolization of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Sac Side Branch Arteries Promotes Early Sac Shrinkage after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair 1

BACKGROUND

The association between the occlusion rate of the side branch arteries branching from the abdominal aortic aneurysm sac and aneurysm sac shrinkage is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of preemptive embolization of multiple side branch arteries branching from the abdominal aortic aneurysm sac in early aneurysm sac shrinkage after endovascular aneurysm repair.

METHODS

Patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms, with or without preemptive embolization of multiple side branch arteries, including the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries, between January 2016 and August 2021, were retrospectively evaluated. Preemptive embolization was introduced at our institution in January 2018 and has been performed in all patients who undergo endovascular aneurysm repair since then. We compared occlusion rates of the side branch arteries, frequency of type 2 endoleaks, changes in aneurysm sac size, percentage of aneurysm sac size decrease, and frequency of reduction in the aneurysm sac diameter by > 5 mm.

RESULTS

The study included 43 patients in the embolization group and 20 in the nonembolization group. Preemptive embolization was successfully performed without any ischemic complications. The total occlusion rate of side branch arteries was significantly higher in the embolization group than in the nonembolization group (70.2% vs. 29.3%, P < 0.05). At 24 months of follow-up, the type 2 endoleak frequency was significantly lower in the embolization group than in the nonembolization group (6.9% vs. 31.6%, P < 0.05). The frequency of reduction in the aneurysm sac diameter by > 5 mm was significantly higher in the embolization group than in the nonembolization group at 24 months (62.1% vs. 31.6% P < 0.05). The optimal cutoff value for the total occlusion rate of the side branch arteries to achieve reduction in the aneurysm sac diameter by > 5 mm at 24 months, after endovascular aneurysm repair, was 66.7% in all patients (area under the curve = 0.634; sensitivity = 62.5%; specificity = 70.8%). These findings suggest that occluding 66.7% or more of the side branch arteries may result in early aneurysmal shrinkage.

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive embolization of multiple side branch arteries, branching from the abdominal aortic aneurysm sac, may contribute to early aneurysm sac shrinkage; this may serve as a marker for fewer late complications after endovascular aneurysm repair.

Aortic aneurysm sac filling with AneuFix injectable polymer during endovascular aneurysm repair: feasibility and safety trial study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Type II endoleaks (T2ELs) following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) can lead to aneurysm growth, compromising the stent graft seal and risking rupture. Preventing these endoleaks during EVAR involves filling the AAA sac around the stent graft to exclude the aneurysm and block any arteries causing the endoleak. This study investigates the feasibility and safety of using AneuFix, a biocompatible injectable polymer developed by TripleMed (Geleen, the Netherlands), for aneurysmal sac filling during EVAR in high-risk T2EL patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A feasibility, single-arm, single-centre clinical trial will initially include five patients with infrarenal AAA, eligible for EVAR, and at high risk for T2EL based on the number of patent lumbar arteries and the cross-sectional area of the aortic lumen at the level of the inferior mesenteric artery. Postevaluation by the Data Safety and Monitoring Board, the study cohort will extend to 25 patients. During EVAR and after stent graft deployment, the aneurysm sac is filled with AneuFix polymer using a filling sheath positioned parallel to the contralateral limb with the tip inside the aneurysm sac. Primary outcome is technical success (successful AAA sac filling). The secondary outcomes include clinical success at 6 and 12 months (occurrence of T2ELs and AAA growth assessed with CT angiography), intraoperative and perioperative complications, all endoleaks, adverse events, re-interventions, aneurysm rupture and patient survival.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial was approved by the Dutch Authorities (Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects, IGJ), Amsterdam University Medical Centre Ethical Commission, and adheres to the Declaration of Helsinki and European Medical Device Regulation. Results will be shared at (inter)national conferences and in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04307992.

Reintervention Rate after Treatment with the INCRAFT AAA Ultra-Low-Profile Stent Graft System

BACKGROUND

The INCRAFT stent graft system is an ultra-low-profile endograft for the exclusion of infrarenal aortic aneurysms. In the market approval studies, an increased rate of device-related complications was observed and the endograft was approved with mandated postmarketing investigations. Our aim was to analyze mid-term outcomes of a real-world patient cohort treated with the INCRAFT endograft.

METHODS

Consecutive patients treated with the INCRAFT endograft between February 2015 and December 2022 at a single institution were included. In accordance with the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards, safety endpoints were reported and outcome endpoints included reinterventions, technical success, aortic-related and overall-mortality, endoleak, stent fracture, and endograft migration >5 mm.

RESULTS

Eighty patients (85% male) with a mean age of 76 ± 7 years were included. Fifty-two patients (65%) were treated within the endograft's instruction for use. Mean aortic diameter was 59 ± 10 mm and 91% of the procedures were performed percutaneously. Mean follow-up (FU) was 37 ± 25 months and there was no aortic- or procedure-related mortality. Reinterventions occurred in 25 patients (31%) with a freedom from reintervention at 1, 3, and 5 years of 84%, 66%, and 55%. The most frequent reinterventions were limb graft stenting (23%) and type II endoleak embolization (14%). Limb occlusion rate was 9% and in 3 patients (4%) distal endograft migrations >5 mm occurred. Persisting type II endoleaks were observed in 29% and aneurysm diameter was stable in 41% and had shrunk in 38%. Three type III endoleaks (4%) developed during FU and 4 open conversions (5%) were necessary. No known risk factors, including treatment outside instruction for use, were predictive for reinterventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms with the INCRAFT stent graft system was safe and successful. Nevertheless, a substantial rate of reinterventions was necessary during FU to maintain endograft patency and prevent aneurysm growth.

Successful open surgical treatment for persistent type II endoleak following thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a case report

BACKGROUND

The occurrence of type II endoleaks after endovascular repair of aortic aneurysm has gradually gained increasing attention. We present a case of a patient with an expanding aneurysm after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for a type II endoleak, in which successful direct ligations of the intercostal artery were performed using a sac incision without cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or graft replacement.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 62-year-old male patient, previously treated with TEVAR for a descending thoracic aortic aneurysm, presented with ongoing chest discomfort. Based on the diagnosis of a growing aneurysm and type II endoleak, the patient was prepared for CPB and aortic cross-clamping, as a precautions against the possibility of a type I endoleak. A longitudinal opening of the thoracic aortic aneurysm sac was performed following left thoracotomy. Visual confirmation identified the T5 level intercostal artery as the source of the endoleak, and after confirming the absence of a type I endoleak, multiple ligations were applied to the intercostal artery. Follow-up computed tomography confirmed the absence of endoleaks or sac growth.

CONCLUSION

In a case involving TEVAR for a thoracic aortic aneurysm, open suture ligations were used to treat type II endoleaks without having to resort to CPB, resulting in successful outcomes.

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.

Type II endoleaks after fenestrated/branched endografting for juxtarenal and pararenal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Persistent type II endoleaks (pEL2s) are not uncommon after endovascular aneurysm repair and their impact on long-term outcomes is well-documented. However, their occurrence and natural history after fenestrated/branched endografting (F/B-EVAR) for juxtarenal and pararenal aneurysms (J/P-AAAs) have been scarcely investigated. Aim of this study was to report incidence, risk factors, and natural history of pEL2 after F/B-EVAR in J/P-AAAs.

METHODS

Between 2016 and 2022, all J/P-AAAs undergoing F/B-EVAR were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. EL2 were assessed at the completion angiography, at 30 days and after 6 months as primary outcomes. Preoperative risk factors for pEL2, follow-up survival, freedom from reinterventions (FFR) and aneurysm shrinkage (≥5 mm) were considered as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 132 patients, there were 88 (67%) JAAAs and 44 (33%) PAAAs. Seventeen EL2 (13%) were detected at the completion angiography and 36 (27%) at 30-day computed tomography angiography. The mean follow-up was 28 ± 23 months. Eleven (31%) EL2 sealed spontaneously within 6 months and three new cases were detected, for an overall of 28 pEL2/107 patients (26%) with available radiological follow-up of ≥6 months. Preoperative antiplatelet therapy (odds ratio, 4.7; 95% confidence interval [CI[, 1-22.1; P = .05), aneurysm thrombus volume of ≤40% and six or more patent aneurysm afferent vessels (odds ratio, 7.2; 95% CI, 1.8-29.1; P = .005) were independent risk factors for pEL2. The estimated 3-year survival was 80%, with no difference between cases with and without pEL2 (78% vs 85%; P = .08). The estimated 3-year FFR was 86%, with no difference between cases with and without pEL2 (81% vs 87%; P = .41). Four cases (3%) of EL2-related reinterventions were performed. In 65 cases (49%), aneurysm shrinkage was detected. pEL2 was an independent risk factor for absence of aneurysm shrinkage during follow-up (hazard ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.2-8.3; P = .014). Patients without shrinkage had lower follow-up survival (64% vs 86% at 3-year; P = .009) and FFR (74% vs 90% at 3 years; P = .014) than patients with shrinkage.

CONCLUSIONS

PEL2 is not infrequent (26%) after F/B-EVAR for J/P-AAAs and is correlated with preoperative antiplatelet therapy, aneurysm thrombus volume of ≤40%, and six or more patent sac afferent vessels. Patients with pEL2 have a diminished aneurysm shrinkage, which is correlated with lower follow-up survival and FFR compared with patients with aneurysm shrinkage.

Efficacy of Sac Coil Embolization in Endovascular Aortic Repair for Sac Shrinkage in Patients at a High Risk of Type II Endoleak from Lumbar Arteries

BACKGROUND

In endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), preemptive embolization of sac branch vessels is effective in preventing postoperative type II endoleak (T2EL). However, this technique has not been widely adopted especially for lumbar arteries (LAs) because of technical difficulties and time constraints. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of nonselective sac coil embolization, which is a simpler surgical method, in postoperative sac shrinkage for patients at a high risk of T2EL from LAs.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed 76 patients who underwent elective EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm with 4 or more patent LAs or at least 1 patent LA of ≥2 mm at our hospital between January 2014 and December 2022. The patients who underwent sac coil embolization were included in Group Ⅰ (n = 20), and the others were divided into 2 groups: those with an inferior mesenteric artery that was originally occluded or embolized by coils or stent graft bodies (Group Ⅱ, n = 21), and those without that (Group Ⅲ, n = 35). In Group Ⅰ, 0.035-inch coils were inserted into the sac after complete stent graft deployment. The cumulative incidence of sac shrinkage (≥5 mm) was compared between the groups. Further, univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to determine the predictors of sac shrinkage.

RESULTS

Sac shrinkage (≥5 mm) was observed more frequently in Group Ⅰ (50%) than in Group Ⅱ (19%) and Group Ⅲ (17%) (P = 0.052 and 0.043, respectively). The cumulative incidence of sac shrinkage was significantly higher in Group Ⅰ than in Group Ⅱ (log-rank P = 0.039) and Group Ⅲ (log-rank P = 0.024). Multivariable Cox regression analyses revealed that sac embolization was a significant predictor of sac shrinkage (hazard ratio, 4.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-10.8; P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Nonselective sac coil embolization in EVAR is potentially effective for sac shrinkage in the early postoperative phase in patients at high risk of T2EL from LAs. This simple procedure may improve prognosis after EVAR.

Pre-emptive Aortic Side Branch Embolization during Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using the Excluder Stent-Graft System: A Prospective Multicenter study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of pre-emptive transcatheter arterial embolization (P-TAE) for aortic side branches (ASBs) to prevent Type 2 endoleaks (EL2) before endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using the Excluder stent-graft system (Excluder).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective, multicenter study, 80 patients (mean age, 79.1 years [SD ± 6.7]; 85.0% were men; mean aneurysmal sac diameter, 48.4 mm [SD ± 7.4]) meeting the eligibility criteria were prospectively enrolled from 9 hospitals. Before EVAR, P-TAE was performed to embolize the patent ASBs originating from the abdominal aortic aneurysm. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) was performed at 1 month and 6 months after EVAR. The primary endpoint was EL2 incidence at 6 months, and the secondary endpoints were aneurysmal sac diameter changes at 6 and 12 months, P-TAE outcomes, adverse events related to P-TAE, reintervention, and aneurysm-related mortality.

RESULTS

All patients successfully underwent P-TAE without serious. Coil embolization was successful in 81.6% of ASBs. EL2 incidence at 6 months was identified in 18 of 70 (25.7%) patients. Aneurysmal sac diameter shrinkage (≥5 mm) was observed in 30.0% of patients at 6 months and in 40.9% at 12 months. Only 1 patient required reintervention for EL2 within 1 year of EVAR; aneurysm-related deaths were not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

P-TAE for ASBs before EVAR using Excluder is a safe and effective strategy. It aids in achieving early aneurysmal sac shrinkage and reduces EL2 reintervention at 1 year after EVAR.

Dynamic Radial MR Imaging for Endoleak Surveillance after Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Inconclusive CT Angiography: A Prospective Study

Background/Objectives: To assess free-breathing, dynamic radial magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for detecting endoleaks post-endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in cases with inconclusive computed tomography angiography (CTA). Methods: This prospective single-center study included 17 participants (mean age, 70 ± 9 years; 13 males) who underwent dynamic radial MRI (Golden-angle RAdial Sparse Parallel-Volumetric Interpolated BrEath-hold, GRASP-VIBE) after inconclusive multiphasic CT for the presence of endoleaks during the follow-up of EVAR-treated abdominal aortic aneurysms. CT and MRI datasets were independently assessed by two radiologists for image quality, diagnostic confidence, and the presence/type of endoleak. Statistical analyses included interrater and intermethod agreement, and diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC)). Results: Subjective image analysis demonstrated good image quality and interrater agreement (k ≥ 0.6) for both modalities, while diagnostic confidence was significantly higher in MRA (p = 0.03). There was significantly improved accuracy for detecting type II endoleaks on MRA (AUC 0.97 [95% CI: 0.87, 1.0]) compared to CTA (AUC 0.66 [95% CI: 0.41, 0.91]; p = 0.03). Although MRA demonstrated higher values for sensitivity, specificity, AUC, and interrater agreement, none of the other types nor the overall detection rate for endoleaks showed differences in the diagnostic performance over CT (p ≥ 0.12). CTA and MRA revealed slight to moderate intermethod concordance in endoleak detection (k = 0.3-0.64). Conclusions: The GRASP-VIBE MRA characterized by high spatial and temporal resolution demonstrates clinical feasibility with good image quality and superior diagnostic confidence. It notably enhances diagnostic performance in detecting and classifying endoleaks, particularly type II, compared to traditional multiphase CTA with inconclusive findings.

ELECT: prospective, randomized trial comparing microvascular plug versus platinum-fibered microcoils for embolization of aneurysm sac side branches before endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Preemptive selective embolization of aneurysm sac side branches (ASSBs) has been proposed to prevent type II endoleak after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aimed to explore if an embolization strategy using microvascular plugs (MVP) reduces intervention time and radiation dose compared to platinum-fibered microcoils. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the devices in occluding the treated artery was assessed.

METHODS

Sixty patients scheduled for EVAR underwent percutaneous preemptive embolization of ASSBs using MVPs or coils after a 1:1 randomization. Follow-up imaging was performed during aortic stentgraft implantation.

RESULTS

Overall, 170 ASSBs were successfully occluded (83 arteries by MVPs and 87 by coils) and no acute treatment failure occurred. The mean procedure time was significantly lower in the group treated with MVPs (55 ± 4 min) compared to coil occlusion (67 ± 3 min; p = 0.018), which was paralleled by a numerically lower radiation dose (119 Gy/cm2 vs. 140 Gy/cm2; p = 0.45). No difference was found for contrast agent use (34 ml MVP group vs 35 ml coil group; p = 0.87). At follow-up, reopening of lumbar arteries was seen in nine cases (four after coil embolization; five after MVPs).

CONCLUSION

Both microvascular plugs and coils can be effectively used for preemptive embolization of aneurysm sac side branches before EVAR. Use of plugs offers a benefit in terms of intervention time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03842930 Registered 15 February 2019.

A Greek Multicentre Study Assessing the Outcome of Late Rupture After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

Late rupture after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) for an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is an increasing complication associated with a high mortality rate. This study aimed to analyse the causes and outcomes in patients with AAA rupture after EVAR.

METHODS

A multi-institutional Greek study of late ruptures after EVAR between 2008 - 2022 was performed. Primary outcomes were intra-operative and in hospital death.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients presented with late rupture after EVAR (proportion of ruptured EVARs among all EVARs, 0.6%; 69 males; mean age 77.2 ± 6.7 years). The mean time interval between EVAR and late rupture was 72.3 months (range 6 - 180 months). In all cases the cause of rupture was the presence of an endoleak (type I, 73%) with sac enlargement. Moreover, 34% of subjects with rupture after EVAR had been lost to follow up and 32% underwent a secondary intervention. Additionally, 57 patients (81%) were treated by conversion to open surgical repair (COSR) and the remainder by endovascular correction of endoleak (ECE). Eleven intra-operative deaths (16%) were recorded. The overall in hospital mortality rate was 41% (23% ECE vs. 46% COSR; p = .21). Of the patients who presented as initially haemodynamically stable, 23% died during hospitalisation, while the respective mortality rate for patients who presented as unstable was 78% (odds ratio [OR] 11.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6 - 39.1; p < .001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that severity of haemodynamic shock was the most significant risk factor for intra-operative (OR 7.15, 95% CI 1.58 - 32.40; p = .010) and in hospital death (OR 9.53, 95% CI 2.79 - 32.58; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

These data underline the devastating prognosis of late rupture after EVAR. Haemodynamic status at presentation was an important predictive factor for death both in the ECE and COSR groups. Rigorous follow up and prompt evaluation of an unstable patient in case of rupture after EVAR is recommended.

Two-Stage Endovascular Aneurysm Repair with Preemptive Embolization: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Type II endoleak is the most common complication of endovascular aneurysm repair. Retrograde perfusion from the aneurysmal sac side branch to the aneurysmal sac, including the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries, is associated with adverse events after endovascular aneurysm repair, such as aneurysm sac enlargement, reintervention, rupture, and abdominal aortic aneurysm-related death. Preemptive embolization of the aneurysmal sac side branch before endovascular aneurysm repair is an effective and safe procedure for preventing type II endoleak and reducing the size of the aneurysmal sac. Since 2019, we have been conducting preemptive embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries. Thus, we intended to work on a two-stage endovascular aneurysm repair in which embolization and endovascular aneurysm repair are performed on separate days, owing to concerns about prolonged operative time and increased contrast media use and radiation exposure from performing endovascular aneurysm repair simultaneously. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a two-stage endovascular aneurysm repair.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 114 cases of endovascular aneurysm repair (95 men and 19 women) for AAA performed at our hospital between January 2019 and December 2022. Inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar artery embolization were performed simultaneously with endovascular aneurysm repair (simultaneous group) in 49 cases, and two-stage embolization was performed (two-stage group) in 30 cases. The primary endpoints included the occurrence of T2EL during follow-up and the embolization rate of the IMA or LAs.

RESULTS

Type II endoleak did not occur in the two-stage group (follow-up period: 35 ± 6.2 months), whereas it was observed in 8.2% of patients more than 6 months after EVAR in the simultaneous group (follow-up period: 28 ± 5.5 months). While the total operative time was 340 ± 111.2 min in the simultaneous group, the durations for embolization and endovascular aneurysm repair in the two-stage group were 169 ± 35.5 min and 135.0 ± 26.4 min (total time 304 ± 31.2 min, P = 0.21), respectively, indicating a reduction in the total time required for the 2 techniques. The total amounts of contrast media used in the simultaneous and two-stage groups were 200.0 ± 179.2 mL and 182.0 ± 51.2 mL (P = 0.42), respectively, and the corresponding total radiation doses were 2502.4 ± 690.5 mGy and 2114.6 ± 351.2 mGy (P = 0.28), respectively, showing a decrease in both in the two-stage group. The lumbar artery embolization rates were 74.3% and 87.9% (P < 0.01) in the simultaneous and two-stage groups, respectively, indicating a significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-stage endovascular aneurysm repair with preemptive embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries may be an effective strategy for reducing type II endoleak occurrence, overall operative time, contrast use, and overall radiation exposure.

Injection of n-Butyl-2-Cyanoacrylate into the Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Sac during Endovascular Aortic Repair to Prevent Type II Endoleaks Caused by Lumbar Arteries

PURPOSE

To evaluate midterm results of whether the strategy to occlude target lumbar arteries using n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (nBCA) injection during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) reduced the incidence of Type II endoleak (T2EL) after EVAR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2013 and 2020, 187 patients underwent EVAR; 106 in the treatment group received nBCA injection during EVAR, whereas 81 in the historical control group did not. The incidence of T2EL at 7 days, need for reintervention, and post-EVAR aneurysmal shrinkage were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Between the treatment group and the control group, significant differences were achieved in the incidence of T2EL (2.8% vs 28.4%; P < .0001) and decreased aneurysmal diameter was observed at 1 year after EVAR (-5.2 vs -3.8 mm; P = .034). In multivariate analysis, nBCA injection (odds ratio [OR], 0.04; P = .001) and younger age (OR, 0.92; P = .036) were significantly associated with a reduced incidence of T2EL. As a possible adverse event associated with nBCA injection, 2 cases of transient lower-limb motor dysfunction (1.9%) were observed. Propensity score analysis revealed that the treatment group had a significantly lower incidence of T2EL than that in the control group (P = .0002) even though there was no difference in the incidence of inferior mesenteric artery coil embolization between the groups. The survival rate without aneurysm sac enlargement (100.0% vs 69.8%; P = .014) and the reintervention-free rate (100.0% vs 63.1%; P = .034) in the treatment group were significantly higher than those in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant nBCA injection can provide durable EVAR without T2EL, as supported by the avoidance of reintervention associated with aneurysm sac enlargement.

Early Clinical Results From the Japanese Prospective Multicenter Study to Evaluate Zenith Alpha Abdominal Stent Graft for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (JUSTICE) Registry Demonstrate Acceptable Limb Patency at 12 Months

PURPOSE

Recent reports of the Zenith Alpha abdominal endovascular graft (Zenith Alpha AAA, Cook, Inc., Bloomington, Indiana) have demonstrated an unexpectedly high incidence of limb graft occlusion (LGO). The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the performance of the Zenith AAA in Japan, with a specific focus on LGO.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All endovascular aneurysm repairs (EVARs) for abdominal aortic aneurysms performed using the Zenith Alpha AAA from July 2020 to October 2021 in 23 Japanese hospitals were prospectively evaluated. All computed tomographic images were analyzed in the core laboratory. Late complications were defined as any aneurysm-related events occurring >30 days after EVAR, including aneurysm sac enlargement of >5 mm and any reinterventions performed. Endoleaks without sac enlargement or reintervention were excluded as late complications.

RESULTS

During the study period, 147 EVARs were performed using the Zenith Alpha AAA. The mean patient age was 76.5±7.7 years, 84.4% of patients were male, and the mean aneurysm diameter was 52.4±9.2 mm. Instruction-for-use violations were observed in 76 patients (51.7%), primarily associated with a severely angulated proximal neck (>60°). There were six intraoperative complications and 62 additional intraoperative treatments reported, most of which involved preemptive coil embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery (37 cases). Technical success, defined as the absence of type 1 or 3 endoleaks on final angiography, was achieved in 99.3% of patients. At 12 months, there was only one case of type 1/3 endoleak (0.8%) and one aneurysm sac enlargement exceeding 5 mm (0.8%); however, a high incidence of type 2 endoleaks was observed in 35.2% of patients, and aneurysm sac regression exceeding 5 mm was achieved in 30.1% of patients. Nine late complications were observed, and the rate of freedom from late complications at 12 months was 93.5%, encompassing four LGOs and one limb graft stenosis (3.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to recent reports, our Japanese multicenter prospective study demonstrated satisfactory early clinical results, including an acceptable LGO rate, for the low-profile Zenith Alpha AAA. Long-term follow-ups will be performed to confirm the persistence of these outcomes.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study prospectively evaluated the performance of 147 Zenith Alpha AAAs used for endovascular aneurysm repair with core-lab adjudication focusing especially on limb graft occlusion (LGO). At 12 months, aneurysm sac regression exceeding 5 mm was achieved in 30.1% of patients, and there was only one type 1/3 endoleak, one aneurysm sac enlargement (>5 mm), and nine late complications including five LGOs (3.4%), resulting in rate of freedom from late complications at 93.5%. Satisfactory early clinical results, including an acceptable rate of LGO can be achieved, particularly with cautious usage of the Zenith Alpha Spiral-Z Endovascular Leg." 5mm), and nine late complications including five LGOs (3.4%), resulting in rate of freedom from late complications at 93.5%. Satisfactory early clinical results, including an acceptable rate of LGO can be achieved, particularly with cautious usage of the Zenith Alpha Spiral-Z Endovascular Leg.

Plug-Based Embolization Techniques of Aortic Side Branches during Standard and Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair

Vascular plugs are an evolving family of vessel occluders providing a single-device embolization system for large, high-flow arteries. Nitinol mesh plugs and polytetrafluoroethylene membrane plugs are available in different configurations and sizes to occlude arteries from 3 to 20 mm in diameter. Possible applications during complex endovascular aortic procedures are aortic branch embolization to prevent endoleak or to gain an adequate landing zone, directional branch occlusion, and false lumen embolization in aortic dissection. Plugs are delivered through catheters or introducers, and their technical and clinical results are comparable to those of coil embolization. Plugs are more accurate than coils as repositionable devices, less prone to migration, and have fewer blooming artifacts on postoperative computed tomography imaging. Their main drawback is the need for larger delivery systems. This narrative review describes up-to-date techniques and technology for plug embolization in complex 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.

Image Guidance Techniques and Treatment Approach Optimization in the Management of Type-II Endoleak After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Over the past 3 decades endovascular aortic aneurysm repair emerged as the primary approach for abdominal aortic aneurysm management, however the occurrence of endoleak following endograft implantation imposes a high toll on patients and hospitals alike. The early diagnosis and appropriate treatment of endoleaks is associated with better outcomes, which calls for more advanced imaging and a standardized approach for endoleak diagnosis and management following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Although conventional strategy with non-targeted deployment of coils and embolic material in the aneurysm sac is considered to be the standard approach in many hospitals, it may not prove to be a viable option, given that it affects any further follow-up imaging in the event of sub-optimal therapy and consequent recurrence.

METHODS

Based on our tertiary aortic referral center experience we summarize and describe strategies for optimal selection of various treatment approaches for Type-II Endoleak management including endovascular, percutaneous and laparoscopic approaches with particular focus on intraoperative image guidance techniques.

RESULTS

After failed conventional endovascular embolization attempt we recommend specific complex type II endoleak management approaches based on the location of the endoleak within the aneurysm sac along the x, y and z axis. A transabdominal or laparoscopic approach enable treatment in endoleaks located in the anterior portion of the sac. Endoleaks in the posterior portion of the sac could be treated using the transcaval or the translumbar approach, depending on whether the endoleak is situated on the left or the right side. Alternative strategies should be considered if patient anatomy does not allow for either transcaval or translumbar approach. The transgraft technique is reserved for endoleaks located in the cranial portion of the sac, while the perigraft approach could present a means of treatment for endoleaks situated in the caudal portion of the aneurysm sac.

CONCLUSION

We encourage establishing a patient specific treatment plan in accordance with individual anatomy based on cross sectional imaging modality (time resolved dynamic imaging in selected cases) and intraoperative image guidance to provide a safe and accurate endoleak localization and embolization for patients undergoing type II endoleak treatment.

Intra-Sac Injection of Thrombin During Endovascular Aneurysm Repair to Remedy Type II Endoleak and Promote Sac Shrinkage

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of intra-sac thrombin injection to remedy type II endoleaks (T2ELs) during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

224 cases abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were treated with EVAR. For the 52 cases of intra-operative type II endoleaks and 8 cases of ruptured AAAs, after the grafts were deployed, thrombin was injected into the aneurysm sac through a preset catheter. The occurrence of endoleaks post-EVAR were followed up with by Computed Tomography (CT) angiogram. The diameter and the volume of the aneurysm sac were also measured. Endpoints included incidence of T2ELs, AAA sac shrinkage and re-intervention rate and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The overall technical success rate was 100%. Fifty-two patients were followed up with for 9-56 (median 24) months. No serious complications were observed during follow-up. The incidence of endoleak was 5.8% (3/52) during follow-up. The maximum diameter of the aneurysm decreased from 61.1 ± 14.2 mm to 53.7 ± 10.6 mm, 47.9 ± 8.3 mm and 43.7 ± 7.2 mm (87.9%, 78.4% and 71.5% of pre-EVAR) at the 6-month, 1-year and 2-year follow-up, respectively (P < .05). The volume of the aneurysm sac shrank from 236.2 ± 136.2 cm3 to 202.6 ± 114.1 cm3, 155.6 ± 68.4 cm3 and 129.7 ± 52.4 cm3 (85.8%, 65.9%, and 54.9% of pre-EVAR) at the 6-month, 1-year and 2-year follow-up, respectively (P < .05). The rate of various endoleaks was 5.8% (3/52) and the re-intervention rate was 1.9% (1/52) in this research.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical outcomes show that intra-sac injection of thrombin during EVAR is safe and may be effective in remedying small amount and low-velocity endoleaks and promoting shrinkage of the aneurysm sac.

Initial two-day blood pressure management after endovascular aneurysm repair improves midterm outcomes by reducing the incidence of early type II endoleak

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate midterm outcomes of our novel strategy of postoperative initial 2-day blood pressure management (BPM) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for the prevention of subsequent type II endoleak (T2EL) in a single-center series.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2014, 137 patients who underwent EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were reviewed. Starting from 2013, the mean blood pressure was maintained between 75 and 90 mmHg for the initial 24 hours after EVAR followed by systolic pressure controlled below 120 mmHg during the next 24 hours in the treatment group (n = 76). The incidence of T2EL detected at 7 days, reintervention, and AAA sac diameter up to 5 years after EVAR were compared with those of the control group comprising of 60 consecutive patients who underwent standard EVAR without BPM prior to 2013.

RESULTS

Between the treatment group and the control group, significant differences were achieved in the incidence of T2EL at 7 days (19.7% vs 40.0%; P = .009), a mean decrease of AAA sac diameter at 1-year (-5.1 ± 4.9 vs -2.2 ± 6.7 mm; P = .013) and 2-year (-5.4 ± 7.7 vs -1.7 ± 10.8 mm; P = .045). In addition, there was a significant decrease in the incidence of T2EL detected at 7 days with the use of the Gore Excluder with 22.7% in the treatment group vs 80.0% in the control group (P < .001), which resulted in a significant decrease in the aneurysm sac diameter up to 4 years after EVAR. Survival rate without AAA sac enlargement at 5 years after EVAR (83.0% vs 70.0%; P = .021) in the treatment group was significantly higher than that of the control group, whereas no significant differences were observed in the freedom rates of reintervention, T2EL-related reintervention, and all-cause mortality between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative initial 2-day BPM had a preventive effect on AAA sac enlargement until midterm periods, by reducing the incidence of T2EL at 7 days after EVAR. The usage of Gore Excluder under BPM was especially associated with sustained positive effects until the midterm follow-up.

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.

Long-Term Outcomes of Simple Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Based on the Initial Aortic Diameter

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the effects of initial abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) diameter on aneurysmal sac expansion/shrinkage, endoleaks, and reintervention postelective simple endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

Overall, 228 patients monitored for >1 year after EVAR were analyzed. Male and female participants with initial AAA diameters <55 mm and <50 mm, respectively, composed the small group (group S), while those with initial AAA diameters ≥55 mm (men) and ≥50 mm (women) composed the large group (group L). Aneurysmal sac expansion of 10 mm and/or reintervention during follow-up (composite event) and its related factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

The 5-year freedom from composite event rate was significantly higher in group S (92.4 ± 2.8%) than that in group L (79.1 ± 4.9%; P <0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed AAA diameters before EVAR in group S (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.81; P = 0.01) and type II endoleak (T2EL) at discharge (hazard ratio, 2.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-6.20; P <0.01) as factors associated with the composite event. The freedom from composite event rate decreased to 51 ± 13% at 5 years in group L with T2EL.

CONCLUSIONS

Group S had high freedom from composite event rate; in group L, the rate decreased to 51% at 5 years with T2EL at discharge.

Preemptive Embolization of the Lumbar Arteries and Inferior Mesenteric Artery to Prevent Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Enlargement Associated with Type 2 Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Purpose

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of preemptive embolization (PE) of the lumbar arteries (LAs) and inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) (PELI) for preventing abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) enlargement associated with type 2 endoleak (T2EL).

Material and Methods

Patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) between January 2015 and December 2020 were classified into the control (without PE), IMA (PE of a patent IMA with a diameter ≥2.5 mm), and PELI (PE of patent LAs with a diameter ≥2 mm and IMA) groups. The rate of freedom from AAA enlargement following EVAR (enlargement ≥5 mm from pre-EVAR) was compared using the log-rank test. The prevalence of T2EL at 6 months and 1 year after EVAR was compared using Fisher's exact test.

Results

The cumulative rates of freedom from AAA enlargement at 54 months after EVAR (maximum observational period in the PELI group) were as follows: control group, 77.5%; IMA group, 62.5%; and PELI group, 100%. The mean CT follow-up periods of the control, IMA, and PELI groups were 46.4 ± 22.3, 31.1 ± 20.6, and 22.9 ± 15.5 months, respectively. None of the 31 patients in the PELI group experienced AAA enlargement after EVAR, whereas 2 out of the 16 patients in the IMA group and 20 out of the 98 patients in the control group had AAA enlargement. No significant differences were observed in the rate of freedom from AAA enlargement (PELI group vs. IMA group, P = 0.11; PELI group vs. control group, P = 0.11). The prevalence of T2EL was significantly lower in the PELI group than in the control group at 6 months (13.6% in PELI group vs. 42.1% in control group, P = 0.02) and 1 year (14.3% in PELI group vs. 40.0% in control group, P = 0.04).

Conclusions

PELI was significantly associated with a low prevalence of T2EL and may prevent T2EL-associated AAA enlargement.

Possible implications of device-specific variability in post-endovascular aneurysm repair sac regression and endoleaks for surveillance categorization

OBJECTIVE

Significant sac regression during early surveillance has been shown to best predict reintervention-free long-term surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Furthermore, a persistent endoleak has been related to a worse outcome. Individualized surveillance algorithms based on these findings have been suggested. There are no studies comparing the performance of different stent grafts regarding sac regression, the presence of type II endoleaks, and their possible implications for individualized surveillance. The objective of this study was to evaluate device-specific differences and how these may affect patient categorization for surveillance.

METHODS

Patients were treated electively with standard EVAR between 2005 and 2015 using three different devices (Zenith by Cook, Excluder by Gore, and Endurant by Medtronic). The data were reviewed retrospectively until 2020. Patients' computed tomography angiographies (CTAs) at 30 days and at 2 years were analyzed for freedom from endoleaks and for sac regression of ≥5 mm. Reinterventions during long-term surveillance were counted. Patients were categorized according to the presence of any endoleak and sac regression at 30 days and 2 years, and the probability of reintervention-free long-term surveillance was evaluated based on these findings.

RESULTS

A total of 435 patients were treated for an abdominal aortic aneurysm with EVAR during the study period. At 30 days, 80.0% (n = 339) of the patients were free from endoleaks, and at 2 years, 78.9% (n = 273) were free from endoleaks. There was a significant difference in endoleak rate at 30 days and 2 years between the devices (P < .001 and P = .001). There was no significant difference in sac regression between the devices at 2 years (P = .096). The categorization at 30 days based on endoleak status had a sensitivity of 44.9%, specificity of 87.4%, and negative predictive value of 84.1% for finding a reintervention-requiring complication during long-term follow-up. The corresponding figures at 2 years were 63.3%, 91.4%, and 89.4%, respectively. The combination of freedom from endoleaks and sac regression of ≥5 mm in the 2-year CTA best predicted an uneventful long-term surveillance. Patients who met this criterion had a 95.6% probability (negative predictive value) of having a reintervention-free long-term surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant differences in the prevalence of endoleaks between devices at 30 days and 2 years, but there is no difference in sac regression. Patients with sac regression of ≥5 mm and no endoleaks in the 2-year CTA can be safely categorized for infrequent surveillance regardless of the stent graft model that has initially been used.

Editor's Choice - The VASCUNExplanT Project: An International Study Assessing Open Surgical Conversion of Failed Non-Infected Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

The need for open surgical conversion (OSC) after failed endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) persists, despite expanding endovascular options for secondary intervention. The VASCUNExplanT project collected international data to identify risk factors for failed EVAR, as well as OSC outcomes. This retrospective cross sectional study analysed data after OSC for failed EVAR from the VASCUNET international collaboration.

METHODS

VASCUNET queried registries from its 28 member countries, and 17 collaborated with data from patients who underwent OSC (2005 - 2020). Any OSC for infection was excluded. Data included demographics, EVAR, and OSC procedural details, as well as post-operative mortality and complication rates.

RESULTS

There were 348 OSC patients from 17 centres, of whom 33 (9.4%) were women. There were 130 (37.4%) devices originally deployed outside of instructions for use. The most common indication for OSC was endoleak (n = 143, 41.1%); ruptures accounted for 17.2% of cases. The median time from EVAR to OSC was 48.6 months [IQR 29.7, 71.6]; median abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter at OSC was 70.5 mm [IQR 61, 82]. A total of 160 (45.6%) patients underwent one or more re-interventions prior to OSC, while 63 patients (18.1%) underwent more than one re-intervention (range 1 - 5). Overall, the 30 day mortality rate post-OSC was 11.8% (n = 41), 11.1% for men and 18.2% for women (p = .23). The 30 day mortality rate was 6.1% for elective cases, and 28.3% for ruptures (p < .0001). The predicted 90 day survival for the entire cohort was 88.3% (95% CI 84.3 - 91.3). Multivariable analysis revealed rupture (OR 4.23; 95% CI 2.05 - 8.75; p < .0001) and total graft explantation (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.02 - 4.34; p = .04) as the only statistically significant predictive factors for 30 day death.

CONCLUSION

This multicentre analysis of patients who underwent OSC shows that, despite varying case mix and operative techniques, OSC is feasible but associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates, particularly when performed for rupture.

Impact of Patent Lumbar Arteries on Aneurysm Sac Enlargement with Type II Endoleak after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the impact of the number of patent lumbar arteries (LAs) on sac enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort single centre registry study. Between January 2006 and December 2019, 336 EVARs were reviewed using a commercially available device excluding type I or type III endoleaks during a follow up of ≥ 12 months. Patients were divided into four groups based on the pre-operative patency of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and high (≥ 4) or low (≤ 3) number of patent LAs: Group 1, patent IMA and high number of patent LAs; Group 2, patent IMA and low number of patent LAs; Group 3, occluded IMA and a high number of patent LAs; Group 4, occluded IMA and low number of patent LAs.

RESULTS

Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 included 124, 104, 45, and 63 patients, respectively. The median follow up duration was 65.1 months. Significant differences in the incidence of overall type II endoleak (T2EL) at discharge between Group 1 and Group 2 (59.7% vs. 36.5%, p < .001) and between Group 3 and Group 4 (33.3% vs. 4.8%, p < .001) were observed. In patients with a pre-operatively patent IMA, the rate of freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement was significantly lower in Group 1 than in Group 2 (69.0% vs. 81.7% five years after EVAR, p < .001). In patients with a pre-operatively occluded IMA, the freedom rate from aneurysm sac enlargement was not significantly different between Groups 3 and Group 4 (95.0% vs. 100% five years after EVAR, p = .075).

CONCLUSION

A high number of patent LAs seemed to have a significant role in sac enlargement with T2EL when the IMA was patent pre-operatively, whereas a high number of patent LAs seemed to have limited influence on sac enlargement when the IMA was occluded pre-operatively.

Incidence, reintervention, and survival associated with type II endoleak at hospital discharge after elective endovascular aneurysm repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative

BACKGROUND

The longitudinal clinical significance of type II endoleaks (T2ELs) remains controversial. Specifically, the real-world incidence, need for reintervention, and associated mortality referable to T2ELs remain unknown. Moreover, current professional society clinical practice guidelines recommend differing aneurysm sac growth thresholds to prompt intervention. Therefore, the purpose of this analysis was to better quantify the prevalence of early T2ELs after infrarenal endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and determine its association with reintervention and survival.

METHODS

All elective EVARs from the Vascular Quality Initiative (2010-2020) were examined to identify patients with isolated T2ELs vs no endoleak (NONE) at discharge. Procedures with a type I or III endoleak were excluded. A subgroup analysis was performed on patients surviving beyond the first postoperative year with follow-up data available on endoleaks. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included perioperative mortality and reinterventions. Outcomes were assessed by multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for covariates.

RESULTS

We identified 53,697 patients who underwent EVAR. The overall incidence of isolated T2ELs at discharge was 16%. In-hospital mortality was lower for those with isolated T2ELs vs NONE (0.8% vs 1.9%, odds ratio: 0.6, 95% confidence interval: 0.5-0.8, P < .0001). Unadjusted overall survival was marginally higher at 5 years for patients with T2ELs vs NONE (84% vs 82%); however, after risk adjustment, survival was similar (hazard ratio: 0.95, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-1.0). Among 44,345 patients with 1-year follow-up, 66% had data on endoleak status for assessment. Survival was similar regardless of endoleak status (NONE, at discharge only, at follow-up only, or at both time points). Among patients with documented T2ELs during follow-up, 6.1% and 2.5% had abdominal aortic aneurysm sac diameter growth ≥5 mm and ≥10 mm, respectively. Reinterventions occurred in 12%. Rupture (1%) and any open reintervention (4%) were rare among patients with 1-year follow-up. For patients with T2ELs, 5-year survival was similar between those with and without reintervention by 1 year (89% vs 91%, log-rank P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

T2ELs remain common after EVAR within the Vascular Quality Initiative and are not associated with long-term mortality. Reinterventions for T2ELs were not associated with improved overall survival among patients with T2ELs. Although additional data surrounding the appropriate role of reintervention for T2ELs remain necessary, it appears that the natural history of T2ELs is benign.

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.

High incidence of type 2 endoleak and low associated adverse events in the Vascular Quality Initiative linked to Medicare claims

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 endoleak (T2EL) is the most common adverse finding on postoperative surveillance after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). A low rate of aneurysm-related mortality with T2EL has been established. However, the optimal management strategy and the efficacy of reintervention remain controversial. This study used data from the Vascular Quality Initiative linked to Medicare claims (VQI-Medicare) to evaluate T2LE in a real-world cohort.

METHODS

This retrospective review of EVAR procedures in VQI-Medicare included patients undergoing their first EVAR procedure between 2015 and 2017. Patients with an endoleak other than T2EL on completion angiogram and those without VQI imaging follow-up were excluded. Patients without Medicare part A or part B enrollment at the time of the procedure or without 1-year complete Medicare follow-up data were also excluded. The exposure variable was T2EL, defined as any branch vessel flow detected within the first postoperative year. Outcomes of interest were mortality, reintervention, T2EL-related reintervention, post-EVAR imaging, and T2EL behavior including spontaneous resolution, aneurysm sac regression, and resolution after reintervention. The association of prophylactic branch vessel embolization (PBE) with T2EL resolution and aneurysm sac regression was also evaluated.

RESULTS

In a final cohort of 5534 patients, 1372 (24.7%) had an identified T2EL and 4162 (75.2%) did not. The median age of patients with and without T2EL was 77 and 75 years, respectively. There were no differences in mortality, imaging, reintervention, or T2EL-related reintervention at 3 years after the procedure for patients with T2EL. The aneurysm sac diameter decreased by 4 mm (range: 9-0 mm decrease) in the total cohort. Patients with inferior mesenteric artery-based T2EL had the smallest decrease in aneurysm diameter (median 1 mm decrease compared with 1.5 mm for accessory renal artery-based T2EL, 2 mm for multiple feeding vessel-based T2EL, and 4 mm for lumbar artery-based T2EL; P < .001). Spontaneous resolution occurred in 73.7% of patients (n = 809). T2ELs with evidence of multiple feeding vessels were associated with the lowest rate of spontaneous resolution (n = 51, 54.9%), compared with those with a single identified feeding vessel of inferior mesenteric artery (n = 99, 60.0%), lumbar artery (n = 655, 77.7%), or accessory renal artery (n = 31, 79.5%) (P < .001). PBE was performed in 84 patients. Patients who underwent PBE and were without detectable T2EL after EVAR had the greatest rate of sac regression at follow-up (7 mm decrease) compared with baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

T2EL after EVAR is associated with high rates of spontaneous resolution, low rates of aneurysm sac growth, and no evidence of increased early mortality or reintervention. PBE in conjunction with EVAR may be indicated in some circumstances.

Role of Aggressive Aneurysm Sac Embolization Before Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair in Preventing Type II Endoleak and Sac Expansion

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of aggressive embolization of side branches arising from the aneurysmal sac before endovascular aneurysm repair.

Methods

This retrospective study included 95 patients who underwent endovascular infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair at Tottori University Hospital between October 2016 and January 2021. Of these, 54 underwent standard endovascular aneurysm repair (conventional group), and 41 underwent coiling of the inferior mesenteric and lumbar arteries before undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (embolization group). The occurrence of type II endoleak, change in aneurysmal sac diameter, and reintervention rate due to type II endoleak during follow-up were evaluated.

Results

Compared to the conventional group, the embolization group had a significantly lower incidence of type II endoleak, more frequent aneurysmal sac shrinkage, and lower aneurysmal sac growth related to type II endoleak.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrated the effectiveness of aggressive aneurysmal sac embolization before endovascular aneurysm repair to prevent type II endoleak and the consequent long-term aneurysmal sac enlargement.

The Association Between the D-dimer Level at 1 Year After EVAR and Sac Diameter Change in Patients With Persistent Type 2 Endoleak

PURPOSE

Recent studies suggested that continuous clotting renewal in thrombi plays a central role in sac enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). We reviewed patients with persistent type 2 endoleak (T2EL) to estimate the impact of D-dimer level on sac enlargement.

METHODS

A retrospective review of elective EVAR for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm performed between June 2007 and February 2020. Persistent T2EL was defined as T2EL confirmed at both the 6 and 12 month contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) follow-ups. "Isolated" T2EL was defined as T2EL without other types of endoleak within 12 months. Patients with >2 year follow-up, persistent isolated T2ELs, and D-dimer level data at 1 year (DD1Y) were included. Patients with any reintervention within 12 months were excluded. The association between DD1Y and aneurysm enlargement (AnE), defined as a ≥5 mm diameter increase, within 5 years was analyzed. Among 761 conventional EVAR, 515 patients had >2 years of follow-up. Thirty-three patients with any reintervention within 12 months and 127 patients without CECT at either 6 or 12 months were excluded. Among 131 patients with persistent isolated T2ELs, 74 patients with DD1Y data were enrolled. During a 37 month median follow-up [25-60, IQR], 24 AnEs were observed. In the AnE patients, the median DD1Y was significantly higher than that in the other patients (12.30 [6.88-21.90] vs 7.62 [4.41-13.00], P=0.024). ROC curve analysis indicated that the optimal cutoff point of DD1Y for AnE was 5.5 µg/mL (AUC=0.681). In univariate analysis, angulated neck, occlusion of the inferior mesenteric artery, and DD1Y≥5.5 µg/mL were significantly associated with AnE (P= 0.037, 0.038, and 0.010). Cox regression analysis revealed that DD1Y≥5.5 µg/mL was correlated with AnE (P=0.042, HR [95% CI] 4.520 [1.056-19.349]).

CONCLUSION

A 1 year higher D-dimer level can potentially predict AnE within 5 years in persistent T2EL patients. AnE was considered improbable when the D-dimer level was low enough.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The present study suggests that a 1-year higher D-dimer level could potentially predict aneurysm expansion within 5 years in patients with persistent type 2 endoleak (T2EL). On the other hand, aneurysm expansion was considered unlikely if the D-dimer level was low enough.As there are many patients with T2EL who require regular follow-up, any predictor of future aneurysm expansion could be of great help in conserving medical resources. In patients with a low likelihood of future expansion, we might consider delaying follow-up, similar to patients with sac shrinkage.

Identifying Patients at High Risk for Post-EVAR Aneurysm Sac Growth

PURPOSE

Post-EVAR (endovascular aneurysm repair) aneurysm sac growth can be seen as therapy failure as it is a risk factor for post-EVAR aneurysm rupture. This study sought to identify preoperative patient predictors for developing post-EVAR aneurysm sac growth.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to select potential predictive preoperative factors for post-EVAR sac growth (including a total of 34.886 patients), which were evaluated by a retrospective single-center analysis of patients undergoing EVAR between 2009 and 2019 (N=247) with pre-EVAR computed tomography scans and at least 1 year follow-up. The primary study outcome was post-EVAR abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) sac enlargement (≥5 mm diameter increase). Multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed.

RESULTS

Potential correlative factors for post-EVAR sac growth included in the cohort analysis were age, sex, anticoagulants, antiplatelets, renal insufficiency, anemia, low thrombocyte count, pulmonary comorbidities, aneurysm diameter, neck diameter, neck angle, neck length, configuration of intraluminal thrombus, common iliac artery diameter, the number of patent lumbar arteries, and a patent inferior mesenteric artery. Multivariate analysis showed that infrarenal neck angulation (hazard ratio, 1.014; confidence interval (CI), 1.001-1.026; p=0.034) and the number of patent lumbar arteries (hazard ratio, 1.340; CI, 1.131-1.588; p<0.001) were associated with post-EVAR growth. Difference in estimated freedom from post-EVAR sac growth for patients with ≥4 patent lumbar arteries versus <4 patent lumbar arteries became clear after 2 years: 88.5% versus 100%, respectively (p<0.001). Of note, 31% of the patients (n=51) with ≥4 patent lumbar arteries (n=167) developed post-EVAR sac growth. In our cohort, the median maximum AAA diameter was 57 mm (interquartile range [IQR] = 54-62) and the median postoperative follow-up time was 54 months (IQR = 34-79). In all, 23% (n=57) of the patients suffered from post-EVAR growth. The median time for post-EVAR growth was 37 months (IQR = 24-63). In 46 of the 57 post-EVAR growth cases (81%), an endoleak was observed; 2.4% (n=6) of the patients suffered from post-EVAR rupture. The total mortality in the cohort was 24% (n=60); 4% (n=10) was AAA related.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that having 4 or more patent lumbar arteries is an important predictive factor for postoperative sac growth in patients undergoing EVAR.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study strongly suggests that having 4 or more patent lumbar arteries should be included in preoperative counseling for EVAR, in conjunction to the instructions for use (IFU).

Systematic Review on Abdominal Penetrating Atherosclerotic Aortic Ulcers: Outcomes of Endovascular Repair

PURPOSE

To systematically review existing evidence on outcomes of endovascular repair of abdominal atherosclerotic penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cochrane Central Registry of Registered Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. The systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol (PRISMA-P 2020). The protocol was registered in the international registry of systematic reviews (PROSPERO CRD42022313404). Studies reporting on technical and clinical outcomes of endovascular PAU repair in 3 or more patients were included. Random effects modeling was used to estimate pooled technical success, survival, reinterventions, and type 1 and type 3 endoleaks. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Pooled results are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study quality was assessed using an adapted version of the Modified Coleman Methodology Score.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies including 165 patients with a mean/median age ranging from 64 to 78 years receiving endovascular therapy for PAU between 1997 and 2020 were identified. Pooled technical success was 99.0% (CI: 96.0%-100%). In all, 30-day mortality was 1.0% (CI: 0%-6.0%) with an in-hospital mortality of 1.0% (CI: 0.0%-13.0%). There were no reinterventions, type 1, or type 3 endoleaks at 30 days. Median/mean follow-up ranged from 1 to 33 months. Overall, there were 16 deaths (9.7%), 5 reinterventions (3.3%), 3 type 1 (1.8%), and 1 type 3 endoleak (0.6%) during follow-up. The quality of studies was rated low according to the Modified Coleman score at 43.4 (+/- 8.5) of 85 points.

CONCLUSION

There is low-level evidence on outcomes of endovascular PAU repair. While in the short-term endovascular repair of abdominal PAU seems safe and effective, mid-term and long-term data are lacking. Recommendations with regard to treatment indications and techniques in asymptomatic PAU should be made cautiously.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This systematic review demonstrated that evidence on outcomes of endovascular abdominal PAU repair is limited. While in the short-term endovascular repair of abdominal PAU seems safe and effective, mid-term and long-term data are lacking. In the context of a benign prognosis of asymptomatic PAU and lacking standardization in current reporting, recommendations with regard to treatment indications and techniques in asymptomatic PAUs should be made cautiously.

Successful treatment of a patient with a 'flow-through' type II endoleak associated with an aberrant renal artery after endovascular aneurysm repair

Identification and control of responsible feeding arteries are crucial in treating type II endoleaks after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). A 78-year-old female patient required management of a type II endoleak 8 years after EVAR. A persistent endoleak from the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) enlarged the size of an aneurysm sac. Sac angiography from the IMA revealed a flow-through endoleak from the IMA to an aberrant renal artery (ARA). After coil embolization of the ARA through the sac together with the IMA, the sac shrank. Control of flow-through vessels may be essential for managing post-EVAR enlargement due to type II endoleaks.

Efficacy and safety of prophylactic intraoperative sac embolization in EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm: A meta-analysis

Objective

We aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic sac embolization during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients suffering from abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wanfang and China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) to identify studies evaluating the outcomes of sac embolization vs. no embolization among patients who had received EVAR. The time limit of the search was from the establishing database to July 22, 2022. Outcome measures involved the type II endoleak rate, the other endoleak rate, the reintervention rate, mortality, and operation time. Fixed (no heterogeneity) or random effects models were constructed for each outcome. The outcomes are represented as the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Among the 2,622 studies screened, 13 studies involving 747 participants were included in the review. The incidence of early-term type II endoleak (OR = 0.2, 95% CI (0.13,0.31), P < 0.00001), mid-term type II endoleak (OR = 0.23, 95% CI (0.15,0.37), P < 0.00001), late-term type II endoleak (OR = 0.27, 95% CI (0.16,0.46), P < 0.00001) and reintervention (OR = 0.50, 95% CI (0.37,0.78), P = 0.002) within the sac embolization group were significantly lower than those in the non-embolization group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups were found for the other endoleak rates (OR = 0.67, 95% CI (0.34,1.32), P = 0.25), mortality (OR = 0.64, 95% CI (0.25,1.66), P = 0.36) and operation time operation (MD = 5.76, 95% CI (-8.30,19.83), P = 0.42).

Conclusions

EVAR combined with sac embolization effectively reduces the incidence of type II endoleak and the reintervention rate without enhancing the operation time. Therefore, more high-quality studies are still needed for validation due to the limited amount and quality of included literature.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022365648.

A nomogram risk assessment model to predict the possibility of type II endoleak-related re-intervention after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR)

This study aimed to develop and validate a novel nomogram risk assessment model to predict the possibility of type II endoleak (T2EL)-related re-intervention. The data of 455 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms who underwent elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) procedures between January 2018 and December 2021 at our single center were retrospectively reviewed. Following the implementation of exclusion criteria, 283 patients were finally included and divided into T2EL-related re-intervention (n = 42) and non-T2EL (n = 241) groups. The overall T2EL-related re-intervention rate for 283 patients was 14.8% (42/283). Using multivariate analysis, significant risk factors for re-intervention included age (OR, 1.172; 95% CI, 1.051-1.307; P = 0.004), smoking (OR, 13.418; 95% CI, 2.362-76.215; P = 0.003), diameter of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) (OR, 21.380; 95% CI, 3.060-149.390; P = 0.002), and number of patent lumbar arteries (OR, 9.736; 95% CI, 3.175-29.857; P < 0.001). The discrimination ability of this risk-predictive model was reasonable (concordance index [C-index] = 0.921; 95% CI, 0.878-0.964). The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test was performed on the model, and the chi-square value was 3.210 (P = 0.920), presenting an excellent agreement between the model-predicted and observed values. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve identified that the risk thresholds of re-intervention were a diameter of > 2.77 mm for the diameter of the inferior mesenteric artery and a proportion of < 45.5% for thrombus volume in the aneurysm sac. This novel nomogram risk assessment model for predicting the possibility of patients' T2EL-related re-interventions after EVAR should be helpful in discriminating high-risk patients. Two novel risk thresholds may imply a higher possibility of T2EL-related re-intervention 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.