Multicenter CT Image-Based Anatomic Assessment of Patients with Aortoiliac Aneurysm Undergoing Endovascular Repair with Iliac Branch Devices

BACKGROUND

The Global Iliac Branch Study (NCT05607277) is an international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study of anatomic predictors of adverse iliac events (AIEs) in aortoiliac aneurysms treated with iliac branch devices (IBDs).

METHODS

Patients with pre-IBD and post-IBD computed tomography imaging were included. We measured arterial diameters, stenosis, calcification, bifurcation angles, and tortuosity indices using a standardized, validated protocol. A composite of ipsilateral AIE was defined, a priori, as occlusion, type I or III endoleak, device constriction, or clinical event requiring reintervention. Paired t-test compared tortuosity indices and splay angles pretreatment and post-treatment for all IBDs and by device material (stainless steel and nitinol). Two-sample t-test compared anatomical changes from pretreatment to post-treatment by device material. Logistic regression assessed associations between AIE and anatomic measurements. Analysis was performed by IBD.

RESULTS

We analyzed 297 patients (286 males, 11 females) with 331 IBDs (227 stainless steel, 104 nitinol). Median clinical follow-up was 3.8 years. Iliac anatomy was significantly straightened with all IBD treatment, though stainless steel IBDs had a greater reduction in total iliac artery tortuosity index and aortic splay angle compared to nitinol IBDs (absolute reduction -0.20 [-0.22 to -0.18] vs. -0.09 [-0.12 to -0.06], P < 0.0001 and -19.6° [-22.4° to -16.9°] vs. -11.2° [-15.3° to -7.0°], P = 0.001, respectively). There were 54 AIEs in 44 IBDs in 42 patients (AIE in 13.3% of IBD systems), requiring 35 reinterventions (median time to event 41 days; median time to reintervention 153 days). There were 18 endoleaks, 29 occlusions, and 5 device constrictions. There were no strong associations between anatomic measurements and AIE overall, though internal iliac diameter was inversely associated with AIE in nitinol devices (nAIE, nitinol = 8).

CONCLUSIONS

Purpose-built IBDs effectively treat aortoiliac disease, including that with tortuous anatomy, with a high patency rate (91.5%) and low reintervention rate (9.1%) at 4 years. Anatomic predictors of AIE are limited.

Dilated Internal Iliac Artery Confers a Higher Risk of Endoleak in Iliac Branch Devices in a Single Centre Retrospective Experience

OBJECTIVE

Iliac branch devices (IBDs) have shown good results but there is little evidence for the risk of internal iliac artery (IIA) endoleak, so there are no clear recommendations on the maximum diameter it should be. Based on limited evidence, it was hypothesised that an IIA of ≥ 11 mm in diameter presents an increased risk of type Ic endoleak.

METHODS

This was a single centre, retrospective case control study. Patients undergoing an IBD with the main trunk of the IIA as the target vessel, between 2015 and 2021, were identified. Two groups were created: those with a main trunk diameter of < 11 mm; and those with a diameter of ≥ 11 mm. Technical success, freedom from type Ic endoleak, and re-intervention rates were compared. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed to show a cutoff IIA diameter value for risk of type Ic endoleak. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess the risk of type Ic endoleak and the presence of calcification, stenosis, and landing zone length in the IIA.

RESULTS

There were 182 IBDs identified. The dilated IIA group (54 IBDs) had significantly lower technical success (91% vs. 98.4%; p = .002), lower freedom from type Ic endoleak (77% vs. 97.1% at 24 months; p = .001), and lower freedom from re-interventions (70% vs. 92.4% at 24 months; p = .002). The ROC curve showed that 10.5 mm was the cutoff diameter for type Ic endoleak. Moderate or severe calcification as well as landing zone length < 5 mm also correlated with type Ic endoleak.

CONCLUSION

IBDs have a statistically significantly higher rate of technical failure, lower freedom from type Ic endoleak, and lower freedom from re-intervention when the IIA is ≥ 11 mm in diameter.

Pararenal Aortic Thrombus in Patients Undergoing Aortic Aneurysm Repair With Chimney Technique

INTRODUCTION

Chimney technique (chimney graft in abdominal aortic aneurysm repair [ChEVAR]) can be used to treat patients with pararenal aortic aneurysm unfit for open surgery and not suitable for custom-made fenestrated endograft. Since almost 1 in 5 patients undergo a reintervention within 3 years, features associated with higher risk of complications need to be investigated to tailor the follow-up schedule to each patient. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of mural thrombus in the pararenal aorta on perioperative and follow-up complications after ChEVAR.

METHODS

All consecutive patients undergoing ChEVAR at our center from 2015 to 2022 were included in this retrospective study. Collected variables included number of target vessels, stent graft size, presence, and severity of mural thrombus in pararenal aorta, which was reported with a scoring system from 0 to 10 based on thrombus type, thickness area, and circumferenceAnalyzed outcomes included perioperative and follow-up complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients underwent ChEVAR during the study period. In 4 patients the indication for ChEVAR was type 1A endoleak after a previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The number of target vessels was 1 in 17 patients (55%), 2 in 12 (39%), 3 in 1 (3%), and 4 in 1 (%). The mean mural thrombus score was 5.9. Complications were the following: type 1A endoleak in 4 cases (13%), chimney stent complications in 7 cases (23%) (including partial or total thrombosis, intrastent stenosis, displacement), renal function worsening during follow-up in 8 cases (26%). Overall survival was 90% at 2 years. Patients with severe mural thrombus showed lower freedom from ChEVAR-related complications (28% vs 59% at 2 years, p=0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of severe pararenal aortic mural thrombus was associated with lower freedom from ChEVAR-related complications in patients undergoing ChEVAR for pararenal aortic aneurysm repair. Further research with a larger number of patients is required to confirm these results.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The analysis of severity of mural thrombus in pararenal aorta, which was reported with a scoring system from 0 to 10 based on thrombus type, thickness area and circumference, can be useful and can be represent an important predictor element for complications in patient submitted to Chimney tecnique; in fact the presence of severe pararenal aortic mural thrombus was associated with lower freedom from ChEVAR-related complications in patients undergoing ChEVAR for pararenal aortic aneurysm repair. Then, in patient with pararenal aortic aneurysm, a preoperative evaluation could be focused on severity of mural thrombus to minimize the complications in ChEVAR tecnique or to change the surgical strategy.

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.

Transfemoral Access to Implant Iliac Branch Devices After Previous Aortic Grafts

OBJECTIVE

To report on the outcomes of patients undergoing an iliac branch device implantation after previous open or endovascular aorto-biliac repair, using exclusively femoral access for catheterization and delivery of the covering stent to the hypogastric artery.

METHODS

Single-center retrospective study in which all patients in whom an iliac branch device was implanted after previous open or endovascular aorto-biliac repair were identified. Patients in whom the hypogastric artery catheterization and delivery of the bridging cover stent were achieved via exclusive femoral access were included. Different techniques were used based on surgeon preference. Technical success and access-related complications, as well as iliac branch device endoleak or occlusions during follow-up, were evaluated.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2021, 28 patients with a prior open or endovascular aorto-biliac repair underwent 34 iliac branch device implantations. Most (71%) had juxtarenal or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms, 82% had common iliac artery aneurysms, and 25% had hypogastric artery aneurysms. Bilateral iliac branch device implantations were performed in 21% of the patients, and in 26% of cases, landing in the superior gluteal artery was obtained. An "up-and-over" technique from the contralateral groin was used in 65% of the cases, and a steerable sheath in 35%. Technical success was 94%, with no complications related to access or technique to catheterize and deliver the stents in the hypogastric artery. The cohort had 20% of major complications, with 3 perioperative deaths. Kaplan-Meier estimated an iliac branch device freedom from occlusion and endoleak was 92% and 83% at 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The implantation of an iliac branch device over previous aortic or open endografts involving the aortic bifurcation is feasible and safe. We suggest using a femoral approach as the primary access of choice.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In this study we present 28 patients with previous aortoiliac grafts in which iliac branch devices were performed as a subsequent step.We demonstrated the feasibility of the technique despite the difficulty of crossing a neobifurcation, with a steep angle, without complications associated with the technique. Based on our experience, we recommend transfemoral access as the first option for bypassing the hypogastric artery stent, preserving upper extremity access and its possible complications.

Results of iliac branch devices for hypogastric salvage after previous aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this multicentric study was to assess the "REsults of iliac branch deviceS for hypogastriC salvage after previoUs aortic rEpair (RESCUE)."

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs) after previous open aortic repair (OAR) or endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) at seven centers were captured. The study cohort was divided into two groups according to the type of repair originally performed. Early outcomes included immediate technical success and perioperative adverse events. Late outcomes included survival, side branch (SB) primary patency, SB instability, and new onset buttock claudication.

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients (82 male) were included in the study, 10 of them received bilateral implantation of IBDs. This resulted in a total of 104 devices included in the final analysis. Indication for treatment were endoleak 1b or progressive iliac aneurysmal degeneration or distal para-anastomotic aortic aneurysms; 73 were implanted after previous EVAR and 31 after previous OAR. Technical success was 100% in both groups. The 3-year rate of freedom from SB instability was 90.1% after previous EVAR and 85.4% after previous OAR, respectively (P = .05). The 3-year estimates of SB primary patency were significantly lower in patients who had received OAR as compared with those that had received EVAR (89.8% vs 94.9%; P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular treatment with IBDs following previous OAR or EVAR is safe and effective up to 3 years. Freedom from SB instability during follow-up was lower in patients who had previously undergone OAR than EVAR.

Outcome of different endovascular modalities to treat common iliac artery aneurysms, single center study

INTRODUCTION

Iliac aneurysms occur in 10% of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). There are three different endovascular approaches to their treatment in the context of infrarenal Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair (EVAR): occlusion by coiling the internal iliac, incorporation using an iliac branch device, and delaying repair using a bell bottom limb. We sought to determine outcomes associated with these three strategies in our practice.

METHODOLOGY

The study was a combined prospective cohort study with a retrospective arm: prospective patient recruitment was done for 1 year from September 2019 and ended by September 2020, and retrospective data was collected from 2017 to 2019. Demographic, procedural, and imaging data was collected. SPSS was used to analyze data as patients were classified by limbs in four groups: iliac branched, bell bottom, coil and cover technique, and standard treated limbs.

RESULTS

There were 65 male and 4 female patients included in this study incorporating 137 limbs with a mean age of 78 years (SD ± 8 years). Two patients died after discharge (at 3 and 21 months postoperatively, without hospital admission) and five patients were lost to long-term follow-up. Three patients had operations that deviated from the plan: one was an IBD converted to bell bottom, one was an IBD that was converted to coil and cover, and one was a bell bottom that did not seal. Follow-up revealed late type IB endoleak in three bell bottom limbs and one limb treated with coil and cover. Common iliac occlusion occurred in one IBD, three bell bottom limbs, and two limbs treated with coil/cover technique. There were four additional ischemic events (buttock claudication in three and intestinal ischemia in one): all ischemic events occurred in the coil and cover group (p = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the small population size examined in this study, there is no statistical difference between treatment groups; however, there was a trend toward bell bottom technique being associated with higher incidence of type IB endoleak. Coil and cover technique was associated with decreased IB endoleak; however, Buttock claudication and intestinal ischemia occurred more significantly in this group. Using IBD may be the best strategy to improve short- and long-term outcomes in patients with iliac aneurysms.

Use of Secondary Iliac Branch Devices after Previous Endovascular Abdominal and Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and effectiveness of iliac branch devices (IBDs), as secondary procedure, for the treatment of type Ib endoleak or evolution of iliac artery disease after prior endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for thoraco-abdominal (TAAAs) or abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

METHODS

A multicentre observational study of three European centres. The study included 75 patients (age 71 ± 9 years, 96% men) with previous EVAR (n = 64, 85%) or fenestrated or branched (FB) EVAR (n = 11, 15%). Overall, 88 IBDs were implanted to treat aneurysmal iliac artery evolution in 40 (53%) and type Ib endoleak in 35 (47%) cases, respectively. Thirteen (17%) patients received bilateral IBDs. Internal iliac artery (IIA) catheterisation was done through a transaxillary access (n = 82, 93%) or up and over (n = 6, 7%) technique. The primary endpoint was technical success. Secondary endpoints were 30 day major adverse event, early and long term freedom from re-intervention and target vessel instability.

RESULTS

All procedures were technically successful (100%). During hospitalisation, there were four (5%) major adverse events and three (4%) early re-interventions, but no death, stroke, or damage to previous endografts. The median follow up was 47 (interquartile range 42) months, and the five year survival rate was 78 ± 6% with no aortic related death. Cox's regression analysis showed pre-operative renal function impairment (hazard ratio [HR] 3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 10.1; p = .033), and primary TAAA repair (HR 6.1; 95% CI 1.6-22.3; p = .006) as independent factors for long term mortality. Freedom from re-interventions was 85 ± 4% at five years with 11 (12%) cases (five endoleaks, four IBD thromboses, two stenoses). IIA instability was reported in three (3%) limbs and freedom from IIA instability was 95 ± 3% after 60 months.

CONCLUSION

Secondary IBD after EVAR is a safe and effective procedure with high technical success and low complication rates. The technique of choice to revascularise the IIA seems not to affect early and follow up results. Long term durability of IBD repair is acceptable with low rates of IIA re-intervention.

Outcomes of the Gore® Excluder® Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis Using Self Expanding or Balloon-Expandable Stent Grafts for the Internal Iliac Artery Component

OBJECTIVE

The GORE^® EXCLUDER^® Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE; W.L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Arizona) was developed to be used in combination with a self-expanding stent graft (SESG) for the internal iliac artery (IIA) bridging stent. Balloon-expandable stent grafts (BESGs) are an alternative for the IIA, offering advantages in sizing, device tracking, precision, and lower profile delivery. We compared the performance of SESG and BESG when used as the IIA bridging stent in patients undergoing EVAR with IBE.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent EVAR with IBE implantation at a single center from October 2016 to May 2021. Anatomic and procedural characteristics were recorded via chart review and computed tomography (CT) postprocessing software (Vitrea^® v7.14). Devices were assigned to SESG vs. BESG groups based on the type of device landing into the most distal IIA segment. Analysis was performed per device to account for patients undergoing bilateral IBE. The primary endpoint was IIA patency, and secondary endpoint was IBE-related endoleak.

RESULTS

During the study period, 48 IBE devices were implanted in 41 patients (mean age 71.1 years). All IBE devices were implanted in conjunction with an infrarenal endograft. There were 24 devices in each of the self-expanding internal iliac component (SE-IIC) and balloon-expandable internal iliac component (BE-IIC) groups. The BE-IIC group had smaller diameter IIA target vessels (11.6±2.0 mm vs. 8.4±1.7 mm, p<0.001). Mean follow-up was 525 days. Loss of IIA patency occurred in 2 SESG devices (8.33%) at 73 and 180 days postprocedure, and in zero BESG devices, however, this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.16). There was 1 IBE-related endoleak requiring reintervention during the study period. A BESG device required reintervention due to Type 3 endoleak at 284 days.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in outcomes between SESG and BESG when used for the IIA bridging stent in EVAR with IBE. The BESGs were associated with using 2 IIA bridging stents and were more often deployed in smaller IIA target arteries. Retrospective study design and small sample size may limit the generalizability of our findings.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This series compares postoperative and midterm outcomes of self expanding stent grafts and balloon expandable stent grafts (BESG) when used as the internal iliac stent graft as part of a Gore® Excluder® Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE). With similar outcomes between the two stent-grafts, our series suggests that some of the advantages of BESG, device sizing, tracking, deployment, and profile, may be able to be leveraged without impacting the mid-term performance of the IBE.

Type Ic Endoleak after LifeStream Balloon-Expandable Stent Graft and Zenith Iliac Branch Device Placement

Considering the recent advancements in endovascular management of aortoiliac aneurysms, the use of an iliac branch device (IBD) to preserve pelvic blood flow and reduce complications caused by embolization of the internal iliac artery (IIA) is recommended by various guidelines. Although the outcomes reported following IBD placement are mainly positive and durable, IBD-specific complications such as a type Ic endoleak and associated reintervention may occur. Moreover, only one IBD device and one type of balloon-expandable bridging stent graft for IIA are currently available on the domestic market. Here we present two cases of type Ic endoleak following IBD placement. In both cases, IIA diameter was slightly larger than the basic instructions for use. Notably, the initial procedures were considered successful; however, type Ic endoleaks were detected on 1-month follow-up imaging. This finding emphasizes the need for a precise preoperative evaluation, intraoperative manipulation, and postoperative follow-up.

Effect of iliac tortuosity on outcomes after iliac branch procedures

OBJECTIVE

To report a two-centers evaluation of the effects of iliac axis tortuosity on iliac branch device (IBD) results.

METHODS

From 2015 to 2021, all IBD procedures performed at two European centers were analyzed retrospectively. The preoperative pelvic tortuosity index (PTI), external tortuosity index (ETI), and double iliac sign (DIS) were assessed for each iliac axis submitted to IBD. The primary endpoints were technical success, early and mid-term IBD complications (occlusion, stenosis, endoleaks [ELs]) and reinterventions, and the association with the PTI, ETI, and DIS. The 30-day mortality, survival, freedom from complications and freedom from reinterventions (FFR) were the secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

During the study period, 224 patients had undergone 256 IBD procedures for 165 (64.5%) aortoiliac aneurysms, 44 (17.2%) isolated iliac aneurysms, 11 (4.3%) abdominal aortic aneurysms with a short iliac landing zone, and 36 (14.1%) type Ib ELs. IBD was planned with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for 158 (61.7%), fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for 45 (7.6%), and isolated for 53 (20.7%) cases. Technical success and 30-day mortality were 99.2% (254 of 256) and 0.9% (2 of 224), respectively. A PTI >1.4, an ETI >1.7, and the DIS were tested to identify the risk factors for the endpoints. No ELs and 9 (3.5%) IBD occlusions, requiring five reinterventions (2%), had occurred within 30 days. No association with the PTI, ETI, or DIS was identified; IBD oversizing of ≥25% on the external iliac artery was independently related to occlusion (odds ratio, 4.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-18.1; P = .045). The mean follow-up was 31 ± 27 months, with 11 IBD occlusions, 14 ELs, and 21 reinterventions. At 1, 3, and 5 years of follow-up survival, IBD patency, and FFR were 95%, 89%, and 80%; 93%, 91%, and 90%; and 93%, 89%, and 83%, respectively. The risk factors for overall complications (n = 34; 13.3%) and reinterventions (n = 26; 10.2%) were an ETI >1.7 (P = .037 and P = .019), a PTI >1.4 (P = .016 and P = .012), and a type Ib EL as the indication (P = .025 and P = .001), respectively. Cox regression confirmed PTI >1.4 as an independent predictor of overall complications and reinterventions (hazard ratio [HR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-4.4; P = .018; and HR, 3 95% CI, 1.3-6.8; P = .018, respectively) and ETI >1.7 as an independent risk factor for ELs (HR 6; 95% CI, 2.1-17.5; P = .001). The freedom from complications and FFR were significantly lower with a PTI >1.4 at 3 years (73% vs 92% [log-rank P = .01] and 77% vs 93% [log-rank P = .001], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We found IBDs to be safe and effective in the treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms. Early complications are uncommon and related to endograft oversizing rather than anatomic characteristics in the present study. Iliac tortuosity is a risk factor for overall complications and reinterventions, in particular for IBD-related ELs.

Long-term outcomes of endovascular aortic repair with flared iliac limb endografts in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm and aneurysmal common iliac arteries

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair with flared iliac limb grafts in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and aneurysmal common iliac arteries (CIAs).

METHODS

This is a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study that involves four tertiary referral hospitals between May 1, 2005, and April 30, 2019. Primary outcomes were freedom from aneurysm-related mortality (ARM), and freedom from iliac-related reintervention.

RESULTS

We studied 995 aneurysmal iliac limbs in 795 (85.2%) patients who met the inclusion criteria. Median AAA diameter was 55mm (IQR: 51-60). Early mortality occurred in 3 (0.4%) patients. The median of follow-up time was 52 months (IQR: 26-88). Estimated freedom from ARM was 99±0.002% (95% CI: 99-99.9) at 1 year, and 99±0.004% (95% CI: 97.9-99.6) at 5-years. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR=6.4, 95% CI: 1.7-24.0, P=0.006), chronic kidney disease (HR=5.5, 95% CI: 1.4-21.9, P=0.016), and the presence of an aneurysmal left CIA (HR=5.3, 95% CI: 1.0.5-27.4, P=0.044) was associated with ARM. There were 42 (7.3%) late iliac-related events (limb occlusion, N.=5; iliac-related endoleaks, N.=37). Estimated freedom from iliac-related reintervention was 98±0.003% (95% CI: 97-99) at 1 year, and 95±0.01% (95% CI: 92.7-96.7) at 5-years, which was associated with an aneurysmal right CIA (HR=2.2, 95% CI: 1.3-3.9; P=0.005), and age ≥78 years (HR=1.9, 95% CI: 1.01-1.3; P=0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR flared iliac limb grafts showed a high rate of freedom from ARM and a low reintervention rate. Owing to these results, it can be a durable and stable alternative for patients aged >78 years.

The Impact of Iliac Artery Anatomy on Distal Landing Zone After EVAR During the 12-Month Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Proximal sealing zone has been the main interest in endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), although the distal landing zone remodeling may also affect EVAR durability. The aim of this study was to assess iliac anatomy and its potential impact on distal landing zone adverse events after EVAR during the 12-month follow-up.

METHODS

A prospective data collection of patients treated with standard bifurcated EVAR devices for abdominal aortic aneurysm was undertaken between 2017 and 2019. Patients that received extension to the external iliac artery were excluded. Follow-up included computed tomography angiography (CTA) at the 1st and 12th month postoperatively. The common iliac artery (CIA) diameter was assessed in three levels: origin (just below the aortic bifurcation), distally (just above the iliac bifurcation) and the middle of the distance between these two landmarks. Iliac angle, tortuosity indexes, relining and oversizing were also analyzed. Distal landing zone-related adverse events were any limb related re-intervention, endoleak type Ib, graft migration, limb stenosis, or occlusion.

RESULTS

In total, 268 iliac limbs (134 patients) were included. In all three levels, the mean iliac artery diameters increased at 12-month follow-up. At the origin of the CIA, the diameter increased from 18.7 ± 10.5 mm to 19.9 ± 9.4 mm (P = 0.04), at the middle portion of the CIA, the diameter changed significantly from 15.5 ± 5.1 mm to 17.4 ± 5.4 mm (P < 0.001) and at the distal CIA, from 14.6 ± 3.3 mm to 15.1 ± 3.9 mm (P = 0.03). The iliac angle remained stable (P = 0.14) while the CIA index decreased significantly from 1.17 ± 0.13 to 1.11 ± 0.09 (P < 0.001). The mean value of oversizing was 21.5 ± 14.5% and affected distal iliac diameter increase (P < 0.001). The composite outcome of distal landing zone adverse events was not associated to diameter changes at any level. In 57 cases, a distal iliac diameter ≥18 mm was recorded. The estimated oversizing was lower (16.3 ± 11.8%) compared to <18 mm arteries (22.5 ± 14.9%, P = 0.01). At 12-month follow-up, iliac diameters remained stable in the ≥18 mm group. Endoleak type Ib was more common in iliac arteries ≥18 mm [3 (5.3%) vs. 1 (0.5%) (P = 0.04)] at 12-months.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-EVAR iliac artery dilation does not seem to have an impact on distal landing zone adverse events during the 12-month follow-up. Aggressive oversizing may be related to iliac dilation. EVAR patients with iliac arteries ≥18 mm are at higher risk for ET Ib.

One-Year Results of ZBIS Iliac Branch Device With an Off-Label Connection Limb

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to study 1-year results of Zenith branch iliac endovascular graft (ZBIS) with the off-label use of a 13 mm spiral Z limb to connect to the aortic main body.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review from 2015 to 2019 of all iliac branch devices (IBDs) was performed at 1 institution that were connected to an aortic main body with a 13 mm spiral Z limb and had at least 1-year follow-up with computed tomography (CT). Primary endpoints are freedom from ZBIS separation from the connection limb, endoleak (EL), or reintervention at 1 year. Secondary endpoints are primary and secondary ZBIS patency, presence of any EL, and aortic reinterventions.

RESULTS

Of 149 IBDs implanted in this period, 45 ZBIS in 35 patients were connected with a 13 mm limb and had a 1-year CT; 97% of patients had common iliac artery (CIA) aneurysms, 7% of patients had hypogastric artery (HA) aneurysms, and 30% of patients had bilateral ZBIS implantation. Technical success was 98%. In 84% of cases, the Advanta V12 was used as the HA mating stent; 56% of patients had an EL, mostly type II, which resolved spontaneously in 70% at 1 year, and 9% of ZBIS required reinterventions at 1 year (2 for thrombosis, 2 for type Ic EL from HA mating stent). One-year ZBIS primary patency and secondary patency were 96% and 100%, respectively. No EL was noted to be related to the 13 mm connection limb. No migration or separation of the devices occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of 13 mm spiral Z limb to connect a ZBIS with the main body in our series yields a high technical success rate and good 12-month outcomes without device separation or migration.

Outcomes of balloon-expandable versus self-expandable stent graft for endovascular repair of iliac aneurysms using iliac branch endoprosthesis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of internal iliac artery (IIA) stenting using balloon-expandable (BESG) or self-expandable stent grafts (SESG) during endovascular repair of aortoiliac aneurysms with iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE; W. L. Gore, Flagstaff, Ariz).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive patients treated for aortoiliac aneurysms using IBE between 2014 and 2020. IIA stenting was performed using either the IIA side branch SESG or a Gore VBX BESG (W. L. Gore). Indications for use of BESGs were "up-and-over" IBE technique for type IB endoleak after prior endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), short IIA length, and need for IIA extension into divisional branches (outside instructions for use). End points included technical success, freedom from buttock claudication, primary IIA patency, and freedom from IIA branch instability (eg, branch-related death or rupture, occlusion, disconnection, or reintervention for stenosis, kink, or endoleak), freedom from type IC/IIIC endoleak, and freedom from secondary interventions.

RESULTS

There were 90 patients (86 males and 4 females) with a mean age of 74 ± 7 years treated by EVAR with 108 IBEs. Choice of stent was BESG in 43 and SESG in 65 targeted IIAs. BESGs were used more frequently in patients with prior EVAR (22% vs 2%; P = .003,), isolated IBEs (31% vs 2%; P < .001), and in patients with IIA aneurysms requiring stenting into divisional branches (36% vs 5%; P < .001). Technical success was similar for BESGs and SESGs (97% vs 100%; P = .40), respectively. The mean follow-up was 25 ± 16 months (range, 11-34 months). At 2 years, freedom from buttock claudication was 100% for BESG and 95 ± 3% for SESG (Log-rank 0.26), with no difference in primary patency (BESG, 100% vs SESG, 94 ± 4%; Log-rank 0.94). There were four (9%) IIA-related endoleaks in the BESG group and one (2%) in the SESG group (P = .08). Freedom from IIA branch instability was 87 ± 6% for BESG and 96 ± 3% for SESG at 2 years (Log-rank 0.043). Freedom from type IC/IIIC endoleak was 87 ± 7% for BESG and 98 ± 2% for SESG at the same interval (Log-rank 0.06). There was no difference in freedom from reinterventions for BESG and SESG (92 ± 6% vs 98 ± 2%; Log-rank 0.34), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

BESGs were used more frequently during IBE procedures indicated for failed EVAR, isolated common iliac aneurysms, and IIA aneurysms requiring extension into divisional branches. Despite these differences and BESG being used outside instructions for use, both stent types had similar primary patency, freedom from buttock claudication, and freedom from reinterventions. However, BESGs were associated with higher rates of IIA-related branch instability.

Modalities of endovascular management for internal iliac artery aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Internal iliac artery aneurysms (IIAA) are uncommon. Open repair is technically challenging and has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared with repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. The aim of this study is to assess the outcomes of endovascular treatment of IIAA and incidence of postoperative pelvic ischaemia.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective analysis was performed for IIAAs treated with endovascular repair between January 2005 and December 2017. Aneurysm morphology, mode of presentation and operative technique were evaluated. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and incidence of pelvic ischaemia. Secondary outcomes were technical success, major complications and reintervention.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine IIAAs were treated in 23 patients with a mean age of 74 */- 9 years. Six patients had isolated IIAAs (26%); the remaining 17 patients had aortoiliac aneurysms. Five patients (22%) required emergent repair for ruptured IIAAs. Mean IIAA size was 4.1 cm */- 1.8 and ruptures occurred at mean 6.1 cm */- 2.6. Endovascular techniques used: stent graft occlusion of the internal iliac artery (IIA) ostium (n = 16), deployment of iliac branch device (n = 9), and other endovascular techniques (n = 4). The 30-day mortality was zero. Three patients (13%) experienced post-operative pelvic ischemia which were all minor chronic gluteal claudication after IIA occlusion. Primary technical success was achieved in 27 repairs (93%). There was one late reintervention (3%).

CONCLUSION

IIAAs are often asymptomatic and diagnosed incidentally, however, a significant proportion present emergently. Endovascular treatment is feasible for both ruptured and non-ruptured aneurysms with low perioperative morbidity, mortality and reintervention rates.

Bilateral Use of Iliac Branch Devices for Aortoiliac Aneurysms Is Safe and Feasible, and Procedural Volume Does Not Seem to Affect Technical or Clinical Effectiveness: Early and Midterm Results From the pELVIS International Multicentric Registry

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate early and follow-up outcomes following bilateral use of iliac branch devices (IBD) for aortoiliac endografting and assess the impact of center volume. We used data from the pELVIS international multicentric registry.

METHODS

For the purpose of this study, only those patients receiving concomitant bilateral IBD implantation were analyzed. To assess the impact that procedural volume of bilateral IBD implantation could have on early and follow-up outcomes, participating institutions were classified as Site(s) A if they had performed >10 and/or >20% concomitant bilateral IBD procedure, otherwise they were classified as Site(s) B. Endpoints of the analysis included early (ie, 30-day) mortality and morbidity, as well as all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality during follow-up. Additional endpoints that were evaluated included IBD-related reinterventions, IBD occlusion or stenosis requiring reintervention (ie, loss of primary patency), and IBD-related type I endoleak.

RESULTS

Overall, 96 patients received bilateral IBD implantation (out of 910 procedures collected in the whole pELVIS cohort), of whom 65 were treated at Site A (ie, Group A) and 31 were treated at Site(s) B (ie, Group B). In total, only 1 death occurred within 30 days from bilateral IBD implantation, and 9 patients experienced at least 1 major complication without any significant difference between subjects in Group A versus those in Group B (10.8% vs 6.5%, p=0.714). In the overall cohort, the 2-year freedom from IBD-related type I endoleaks and IBD primary patency were 96% and 92%, respectively; no significant differences were seen in those rates between Group A or Group B (95% vs 100%, p=0.335; 93% vs 88%, p=0.470). Freedom from any IBD-related reinterventions was 83% at 2 years, with similar rates between study groups (85% vs 83%, p=0.904).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the pELVIS registry, concomitant bilateral IBD implantation is a safe and feasible technique for management of aortoiliac aneurysms in patients with suitable anatomy. Despite increased technical complexity, effectiveness of the repair is satisfactory with low rates of IBD-related adverse events at mid-term follow-up. Procedural volume does not seem to affect technical or clinical outcomes after bilateral use of IBD, which remains a favorable treatment option in selected patients.

One Year Outcomes of an International Multicentre Prospective Cohort Study on the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis for Aorto-Iliac Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE) was developed to preserve perfusion in the hypogastric artery after endovascular repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms. This study reports the 12 month technical and clinical outcomes of treatment with this device.

METHODS

This study was a physician initiated international multicentre, prospective cohort study. The primary endpoint was primary patency of the hypogastric branch at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included technical and clinical outcomes. Patients with an indication for elective treatment with the Gore Excluder IBE were enrolled between March 2015 and August 2018. Baseline and procedural characteristics, imaging data, physical examinations and questionnaire data (Walking Impairment Questionnaire [WIQ], EuroQol-5-Dimensions [EQ5D], International Index of Erectile Function 5 [IIEF-5]) were collected through 12 month follow up.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were enrolled of which 97% were male, with a median age of 70.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 64.5 - 75.5 years). An abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) above threshold for treatment was found in 42.7% and in the remaining patients the iliac artery diameter was the indication for treatment. The maximum common iliac artery (CIA) diameter on the Gore Excluder IBE treated side was 35.5 mm (IQR 30.8 - 42.0) mm. Twenty-two patients received a bilateral and seven patients had an isolated IBE. Median procedural time was 151 minutes (IQR 117 - 193 minutes) with a median hospital stay of four days (IQR 3 - 5 days). Primary patency of the IBE at 12 month follow up was 91.3%. Primary patency for patients treated inside and outside the instructions for use were 91.8% and 85.7%, respectively (p = .059). Freedom from secondary interventions was 98% and 97% at 30 days and 12 months, respectively. CIA and AAA diameters decreased significantly through 12 months. IIEF-5 and EQ5D scores remained stable through follow up. Patency of the contralateral internal iliac artery led to better IIEF-5 outcomes. WIQ scores decreased at 30 days and returned to baseline values through 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Use of the Gore Excluder IBE for the treatment of aorto-iliac aneurysms shows a satisfactory primary patency through 12 months, with significant decrease of diameters, a low re-intervention rate, and favourable clinical outcomes.

Results of the Galician registry in the treatment of complex aortoiliac aneurysms with GORE® EXCLUDER® Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (GALIBER)

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to report the medium-term results of GORE^® EXCLUDER^® Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE, W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) for the treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms by using the GALIBER registry.

METHODS

Patients with aortoiliac or isolated common iliac/hypogastric aneurysms treated with Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis device between January 2014 and May 2019 were prospectively collected from 5 centers. Demographic, clinical, and radiologic data were extracted from electronic databases. Technical success was defined as successful implantation of the Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis device with exclusion of aortoiliac aneurysm, as well as patency of Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis in the follow-up. Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis patency was evaluated by Doppler ultrasound and/or computed tomography based on the protocol of each participant center. Follow-up was 731 days +/- 499.

RESULTS

Between January 2014 and May 2019, 105 iliac arteries were treated with GORE^® IBE device, in 81 patients (79 men, two women; mean age 71, range 52-91). Only seven patients (8.6%) were symptomatic. 60 patients (74%) had aortic and iliac enlargement. Thirty-three patients presented bilateral iliac aneurysms (40.7%): In twenty-four (29.6%) patients, an Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis device was implanted in both sides, and in nine patients (11.1%), one Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis was used with the embolization of the contralateral hypogastric artery. Technical success was achieved in the 99% (104/105 iliac branch device implanted). There were no procedural deaths or type I or III intraoperative endoleaks observed. During the follow-up (range 55-1789 days), 28 (34.5%) type II endoleaks were observed and one (1.2%) type Ia was observed. The patency of the hypogastric arteries treated with the iliac branch device was 98.1% during the follow-up (range 55-1789 days). In 30% of the patients with contralateral hypogastric embolization, some kind of complications was observed in the embolizated side: one developed ischemic colitis and two buttock claudication.

CONCLUSIONS

Preservation of internal iliac artery with the Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis device can be performed safely with excellent technical success and good medium-term patency rates. These results support hypogastric preservation whenever possible to prevent ischemic complications.

Conformability of the GORE EXCLUDER iliac branch endoprosthesis is associated with freedom from adverse iliac events

OBJECTIVE

The GORE EXCLUDER iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE; W.L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) is designed to preserve internal iliac artery (IIA) patency during endovascular treatment of aneurysms involving the common iliac artery. The device is intended to conform to iliac tortuosity, which may decrease adverse iliac events (AIE). The objective of this study was to evaluate risk factors for AIE after IBE implantation.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of the prospective, multicenter GORE 12-04 IBE pivotal trial. Patients with preoperative and postoperative axial imaging were included, with analysis based on each treated iliac system. An independent core laboratory performed all scan measurements, including iliac diameters, lengths, and tortuosity. Conformability was analyzed by the changes in tortuosity after IBE deployment, with less change indicating greater conformation. The end point was AIE, defined as ipsilateral radiographic or clinical complications. Critical nonconformation was defined as a threshold change in tortuosity associated with a significant increase in AIE.

RESULTS

We included 98 patients with 101 treated iliac systems. There were eight AIE (8%; six IIA component occlusions, one iliac branch component occlusion, and one EIA dissection requiring reintervention). Patients with AIE had smaller IIA diameters and less IBE conformability. After multivariable logistic regression analysis, an IIA diameter of less than 10 mm and a change in total iliac tortuosity beyond -15% were independently associated with AIE (odds ratio, 12 [interquartile range, 1.4-110] and odds ratio, 8.2 [interquartile range, 1.5-46], respectively), and the latter was used to define critical nonconformation. Critical nonconformation occurred in 11% of treated systems, and was associated with a high rate of AIE (36% vs 4%; P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Endograft conformation is a novel device property and technical outcome that, along with a larger IIA diameter, is associated with freedom from AIE after IBE deployment. An evaluation of these risk factors may better inform the management of patients with iliac aneurysmal disease. Further research on endograft conformation and patient outcomes is warranted, particularly for those with challenging anatomy undergoing complex procedures.

Bell-bottom technique in iliac branch era: mid-term single stent graft performance

BACKGROUND

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is considered the primary option for abdominal aortic aneurysm but the management of concomitant wide or aneurysmal iliac arteries (CIAs) is still controversial.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated mid-term results of patients receiving standard EVAR combined with bell-bottom technique (BBT) using Medtronic Endurant endograft between January 2009 and December 2018. Patients were followed up by CT scan performed 1 month after the procedure and by duplex ultrasound annually (with or without contrast medium) followed by CT scan in case of evolution.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients (67 males; mean age of 77,1 years) with abdominal aortic aneurysm and wide or aneurysmal common iliac artery (distal landing zone diameter up to 25 mm and length more than 20 mm) were treated with standard EVAR and BBT (107 limbs) using Endurant stent graft. The median aortic diameter was 56,1 mm (31.0-85.0). Technical success was obtained in 100%. Mean procedural time was of 100.1 min. No 30 days' mortality, renal failure or limb ischaemia occurred. The median follow-up was of 36.56 months (1-136). 5-year aneurysm related mortality was not found. At 5 years, the number of all-cause deaths was seven. The freedom from secondary intervention was 91.6% at 5 years. Three patients (4.4%) were treated for iliac related complications at 5 years: internal iliac artery aneurysm, iliac obstruction, type 1b endoleak, all successfully treated by endovascular technique.

CONCLUSIONS

According with this study BBT using Endurant stent graft is effective and safe with good mid-term results, with low rate of iliac related complications and no aneurysm related mortality.

The Effect of Manufacturer's Instructions for Use Compliance on Cook ZBIS Iliac-Branched Endograft Long-Term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines indicate iliac-branched endografts (IBDs) as the ideal means to preserve pelvic perfusion during endovascular aortic repair. Because patient vascular anatomy represents the main limitation to extensive use of these devices, off-label application may be considered to expand the number of patients being treated. The aim of this study is to evaluate long-term outcomes obtained using the Cook ZBIS endograft in the treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms as per or outside manufacturer's instruction for use (IFU).

METHODS

Data from all patients who underwent IBD implant in a single center were reviewed. Study population was divided into two subgroups: Group I treated as per manufacturer's IFU and group II treated outside IFU.

RESULTS

During the study period (2008-2018), 119 patients were treated with 130 IBDs. Eighty-six patients were treated as per IFU (group I) and 44 outside IFU (group II). Overall technical success was 99.2%. Mean follow-up was of 63.5 ± 38.3 months for group I and 58.3 ± 35.9 months for group II (P = 0.45). Freedom from reintervention at ten years was 79.8% in group I and 69.6% in group II (P = 0.29). Freedom from IBD-related reintervention rate was 98.7% and 95.3% in groups I and II, respectively (P = 0.240). Iliac-branched module thrombosis occurred significantly more in patients treated outside IFU with 4 cases in group I (4.7%) and 10 cases in group II (22.7%), (P = 0.005). Cox regression analysis identified hypogastric artery aneurysm as the only independent predictor for both IBD thrombosis and hypogastric artery occlusion during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

When used by an experienced team, Cook IBDs are safe and effective in the treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms both inside and outside IFU. Anyway a lower target hypogastric patency rate should be expected when treating patients with hypogastric aneurysms.

Iliac Branch Devices With Standard vs Fenestrated/Branched Stent-Grafts: Does Aneurysm Complexity Produce Worse Outcomes? Insights From the pELVIS Registry

Purpose: To compare the outcomes of iliac branch devices (IBD) used in combination with standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) vs with fenestrated/branched EVAR (f/bEVAR) to treat complex aortoiliac aneurysms. Materials and Methods: The pELVIS Registry database containing the outcomes of IBD use at 8 European centers was interrogated to identify all IBD procedures that were combined with either standard EVAR or f/bEVAR. Among 669 patients extracted from the database, 629 (mean age 72.1±8.8 years; 597 men) had received an IBD combined with standard EVAR vs 40 (mean age 71.1±8.0 years; 40 men) who underwent f/bEVAR with an IBD. The mean aortic aneurysm diameters were 46.4±13.3 mm in the f/bEVAR patients vs 45.0±15.5 mm in the standard EVAR cases. The groups were similar in terms of baseline clinical characteristics and aneurysm morphology. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare patient survival, IBD occlusion, type III endoleak, and aneurysm-related reinterventions in follow-up. The estimates are presented with the 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Technical success was 100% in the f/bEVAR+IBD group and 99% in the EVAR+IBD group (p=0.85). The 30-day mortality was 0% vs 0.5%, respectively (p=0.66), while the 30-day reintervention rates were 7.5% vs 4.1% (p=0.31). The mean follow-up was 32.1±21.3 months for f/bEVAR+IBD patients (n=30) and 35.5±26.8 months for EVAR+IBD patients (n=571; p=0.41). The 12-month survival estimates were 93.4% (95% CI 93.2% to 93.6%) in the EVAR+IBD group vs 93.6% (95% CI 93.3% to 93.9%) for the f/bEVAR+IBD group (p=0.93). There were no occlusions or type III endoleaks in the f/bEVAR+IBD group at 12 months, while the estimates for freedom from occlusion and from type III endoleak in the EVAR+IBD group were 97% (95% CI 96.8% to 97.2%) and 98.5% (95% CI 98.4% to 98.6%), respectively. The 12-month estimates for freedom for aneurysm-related reintervention were 93% (95% CI 92.7% to 93.3%) in the EVAR+IBD group vs 86.4% (95% CI 85.9% to 86.9%) in the f/bEVAR+IBD patients (p=0.046). Conclusion: Treatment of complex aortoiliac disease with f/bEVAR+IBD can achieve equally good early and 1-year outcomes compared to treatment with IBDs and standard bifurcated stent-grafts, except for a somewhat higher reintervention rate in f/bEVAR patients.

Results of Iliac Branch Devices in Octogenarians Within the pELVIS Registry

Purpose: To evaluate if the elderly could benefit from the implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs) to preserve the patency of the internal iliac artery (IIA) in aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation. Materials and Methods: From January 2005 to April 2017, 804 patients enrolled in the pELVIS registry underwent endovascular aneurysm repair with 910 IBDs due to aneurysmal involvement of the iliac bifurcation. Among the 804 patients, 157 (19.5%) were octogenarians (mean age 82.9±2.5 years; 157 men) with 171 target IIAs for preservation. Outcomes at 30 days included technical success, death, conversion to open surgery, and major complications. Outcomes evaluated in follow-up were patency of the IBD and target vessels, type I and type III endoleaks, aneurysm-related reinterventions, aneurysm-related death, and overall patient survival. Kaplan-Meier analyses were employed to evaluate the late outcome measures; the estimates are presented with the 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Technical success was 99.4% with no intraoperative conversions or deaths (1 bridging stent could not be implanted, and the IIA was sacrificed). Perioperative mortality was 1.9%. The overall perioperative aneurysm-related complication rate was 8.9% (14/157), with an early reintervention rate of 5.1% (8/157). Median postoperative radiological and clinical follow-up were 21.8 months (range 1-127) and 29.3 months (range 1-127), respectively. Estimated rates of freedom from occlusion of the IBD, the IIA, and the external iliac artery at 60 months were 97.7% (95% CI 96.1% to 99.3%), 97.3% (95% CI 95.7% to 98.9%), and 98.6% (95% CI 97% to 99.9%), respectively. Estimated rates of freedom from type I and type III endoleaks and device migration at 60 months were 90.9% (95% CI 87% to 94.3%), 98.7% (95% CI 97.5% to 99.8%), and 98% (95% CI 96.4% to 99.6%), respectively. Freedom from all cause reintervention at 60 months was 87.4% (95% CI 82.6% to 92.2%). The estimated overall survival rate at 60 months was 59% (95% CI 52.4% to 65.6%). Conclusion: IBD implantation in octogenarians provided acceptable perioperative mortality and morbidity rates, with satisfying long-term freedom from IBD-related complications and should be considered a feasible repair option for selected elderly patients affected by aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation.

Internal iliac artery revascularisation versus internal iliac artery occlusion for endovascular treatment of aorto-iliac aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is used to treat aorto-iliac and isolated iliac aneurysms in selected patients, and prospective studies have shown advantages compared with open surgical repair, mainly in the first years of follow-up. Although this technique produces good results, anatomic issues (such as common iliac artery ectasia or an aneurysm that involves the iliac bifurcation) can make EVAR more complex and challenging and can lead to an inadequate distal seal zone for the stent-graft. Inadequate distal fixation in the common iliac arteries can lead to a type Ib endoleak. To avoid this complication, one of the most commonly used techniques is unilateral or bilateral internal iliac artery occlusion and extension of the iliac limb stent-graft to the external iliac arteries with or without embolisation of the internal iliac artery. However, this occlusion is not without harm and is associated with ischaemic complications in the pelvic territory such as buttock claudication, sexual dysfunction, ischaemic colitis, gluteal necrosis, and spinal cord injury. New endovascular devices and alternative techniques such as iliac branch devices and the sandwich technique have been described to maintain pelvic perfusion and decrease complications, achieving revascularisation of the internal iliac arteries in patients not suitable for an adequate seal zone in the common iliac arteries. These approaches may also preserve the quality of life of treated individuals and may decrease other serious complications including spinal cord ischaemia, ischaemic colitis, and gluteal necrosis, thereby decreasing the morbidity and mortality of EVAR.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of internal iliac artery revascularisation versus internal iliac artery occlusion during endovascular repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms and isolated iliac aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialists searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 28 August 2019. The review authors searched Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and the Indice Bibliográfico Español de Ciencias de la Salud (IBECS) on 28 August 2019 and contacted specialists in the field and manufacturers to identify relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared internal iliac artery revascularisation with internal iliac artery occlusion for patients undergoing endovascular treatment of aorto-iliac aneurysms and isolated iliac aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed identified studies for potential inclusion in the review. We used standard methodological procedures in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no RCTs that met the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no RCTs that compared internal iliac artery revascularisation versus internal iliac artery occlusion for endovascular treatment of aorto-iliac aneurysms and isolated iliac aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation. High-quality studies that evaluate the best strategy for managing endovascular repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms with inadequate distal seal zones in the common iliac artery are needed.

Comparison of Two Iliac Branch Devices and Their Midterm Performance in Maintaining Blood Flow to the Internal Iliac Artery

Purpose: To compare and contrast the midterm outcomes of the E-liac and Zenith (ZBIS) iliac branch devices (IBDs) for the preservation of the internal iliac artery (IIA) in aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation. Materials and Methods: Between January 2014 and December 2018, 84 consecutive patients (median age 74 years; 76 men) were electively treated with the E-liac (n=44) or ZBIS (n=40) IBDs and were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the technical success, patency, need for reintervention, and mortality associated with these devices. Results: Technical success was achieved in 95 of 99 implantations (95.9%) without any statistically significant difference between the groups (93.7% vs 98.0%, p=0.114). During the first 30 days, 3 occlusions in the ZBIS group and 1 in the E-liac group were identified. There was 1 perioperative death in the ZBIS group. The median follow-up was 37 months for the ZBIS group and 28 months for the E-liac group (p=0.657). Six patients from the ZBIS group and 7 from the E-liac group were lost to follow-up. Among the remaining, there were 2 further deaths recorded, 1 in each group. Four further reinterventions in the E-liac group and 2 in the ZBIS group were performed during follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from reintervention were 87.2% (95% CI 82.6% to 90.2%) for the ZBIS group and at 86.0% (95% CI 83.7% to 89.1%) for the E-liac group (p=0.563); the freedom from occlusion estimates were 89.7% (95% CI 85.8% to 94.5%) and 95.3% (95% CI 92% to 98.7%; p=0.317), respectively. Conclusion: The E-liac and the ZBIS IBDs showed equally high technical success, midterm patency, and low reintervention rates.

Risk Factors for Early and Late Iliac Limb Occlusions of Stent Grafts Extending to the External Iliac Artery after Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Iliac limb stent grafting to the external iliac artery (EIA) is a commonly performed procedure in various situation during endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR). However, this procedure is associated with a risk of graft occlusion. We evaluated risk factors affecting occlusion among patients who underwent iliac limb stent-graft extension to the EIA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We compared occluded limbs with patent limbs during the follow-up period using variables, including anatomical values, demographics, and other factors. Thereafter, we divided the occluded limbs into early and late occlusion subgroups. The main and subgroup analyses used the same variables. Survival analysis was performed to evaluate time-dependent risk factors for late limb occlusion.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2016, 766 iliac limbs from 383 patients who underwent EVAR were initially included in our analysis. Among them, 134 iliac limbs underwent limb extension to the EIA. The limb extension was a significant risk factor for occlusion (hazard ratio = 6.34, P < 0.001). Occlusion occurred in 10 patients who underwent iliac limb extension. The size of common iliac artery (CIA) was associated with occlusion. The most significant factor was iliac bifurcation diameter (patent vs. occluded limbs, 21.6 ± 7.6 vs. 27.5 ± 9.5 mm, P = 0.005). Subgroup analysis revealed that the CIAs of the early occlusion subgroup were generally more tortuous (1.16 ± 0.33 vs. 1.47 ± 0.25, P = 0.091) and longer (53 ± 24 vs. 74 ± 9, P = 0.01) than those of the patent limb group. In addition, the EIA diameters of the late occlusion subgroup were narrower than those of the patent limb group (10.9 ± 1.6 mm vs. 9.1 ± 0.8 mm, P = 0.011). Using the log-rank test, those patients with an EIA diameter narrower than 10.1 mm had a higher risk for late limb occlusion (log-rank χ² = 5.73, P = 0.017) and the patients who did not take at least a single antiplatelet agent had a significantly higher chance of limb occlusion (log-rank χ² = 11.029, P = 0.001). In addition, the patients who did not take a statin had a higher risk for late limb occlusion (log-rank χ² = 7.41, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients who underwent EVAR with iliac limb extension, the CIA length affected early limb occlusion and predisposed patients to vessel injury or stent-graft kinking, and there was the possibility that CIA tortuosity was associated with a higher risk. The late occlusion subgroup had narrower EIAs than the patent limb group. Appropriate antiplatelet and statin therapy is expected to play a key role in the prevention of late limb occlusion after EVAR.

Outcomes after Standalone Use of Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis for Endovascular Repair of Isolated Iliac Artery Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study was to describe outcomes of stand-alone use (i.e., without concomitant implantation of an aortic stent graft) of the Gore Excluder iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE) for elective endovascular repair of isolated iliac artery aneurysms.

METHODS

We evaluated all consecutive patients electively treated for isolated iliac artery aneurysms using standalone Gore Excluder IBE (January 2014-December 2018). Early (i.e., 30-day) endpoints were technical success, mortality, major adverse events (MAEs), and major access-site complications. Late endpoints were survival, freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), internal iliac artery (IIA) primary patency, IIA branch instability, graft-related adverse events (GRAEs), secondary interventions, endoleaks (ELs), aneurysm sac behavior, and new-onset buttock claudication (BC).

RESULTS

A total of 11 consecutive patients (10 men; median age 75 years) were included. The technical success rate was 100%. At 30 days, mortality, MAEs, and major access-site complications were all 0%. Survival and freedom from ARM were 91% and 100%, respectively; only one nonaortic related death was recorded during follow-up. At a median follow-up of 14 months, IIA primary patency, IIA branch instability, and GRAEs were 100%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. No instances of graft migration ≥10 mm were detected. No graft-related secondary interventions were recorded, and 2 patients required a procedure-related secondary intervention 3 months after the index procedure (1 common femoral artery endarterectomy and 1 external iliac artery stenting). Although new-onset type 1 or type 3 ELs were never noted, one patient developed a new-onset type 2 EL. Aneurysm sac regression ≥5 mm was noted in 6 patients (55%), whereas in the remaining ones, the sac size was stable. No instances of new-onset BC were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of standalone Gore Excluder IBE for elective endovascular repair of isolated iliac artery aneurysms is a safe, feasible, and effective treatment option. These results may support use of the technique as an effective means of endovascular reconstruction in patients with suitable anatomy.

Incidence and management of iliac artery aneurysms associated with endovascular treatment of juxtarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

This study reports the clinical impact of iliac artery aneurysms (IAAs) in a population of patients with juxtarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms being treated with fenestrated or branched aortic endografts.

METHODS

Data from 364 patients with IAA (33%) were extracted from the 1118 patients treated for juxtarenal or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms with a fenestrated or branched aortic endograft in a physician-sponsored investigational device exemption trial (2001-2016). IAAs were defined as ≥21 mm in diameter, as measured by an imaging core laboratory. Outcomes were assessed by univariate and multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

IAAs were unilateral in 219 (60%) and bilateral in 145 (40%) of the 364 patients. Treatment was iliac leg endoprosthesis without coverage of the hypogastric artery (seal distal to the IAA in the common iliac artery), placement of a hypogastric branched endograft in 105 (21%), and hypogastric artery coverage with extension into the external iliac artery in 103 (20%); 67 (13%) were untreated. Procedure duration was longer for those with IAA (5.3 ± 1.79 hours vs 4.6 ± 1.74 hours; P < .001), although hospital stay was not. There was no difference in aneurysm-related mortality and all-cause mortality for patients with unilateral and bilateral IAAs compared with those without an IAA. Treatment of patients with a hypogastric branched endograft had similar all-cause mortality compared with treatment of patients without a hypogastric branched endograft but also with an IAA. Reintervention rates were significantly higher in those with bilateral IAAs compared with no IAA (hazard ratio, 1.886; P < .001). Spinal cord ischemia trended higher in patients with bilateral IAA.

CONCLUSIONS

IAA management at the time of fenestrated or branched endovascular aneurysm repair increases procedure time without increasing hospitalization. The reintervention rate and spinal cord ischemia rate are higher in patients with bilateral IAA compared with those with no IAA.

Outcomes of the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis Using Division Branches of the Internal Iliac Artery as Distal Landing Zones

Purpose: To evaluate the outcomes of the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE) using division branches of the internal iliac artery (IIA) as distal landing zones. Materials and Methods: Between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018, 74 patients (mean age 74±7 years; 72 men) treated for aortoiliac or common iliac artery aneurysms had an IBE deployed with distal landing of the side branch within the main trunk (n=60) of the internal iliac artery (IIA) vs within a division branch (n=25). Thirteen (17%) patients received bilateral IBE implantations for a total of 85 vessels evaluated. Early endpoints were technical success, 30-day mortality, 30-day major adverse events (MAEs), and 30-day major access complications. Late endpoints were survival, primary and secondary IIA patency, freedom from IIA branch instability, freedom from new-onset buttock claudication, and aneurysm sac diameter changes. Time-dependent outcomes were reported as Kaplan-Meier curves with differences assessed using the log-rank test. Estimates are presented with the 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The overall technical success rate was 97%, with 1 technical failure per group (p=0.43). Two patients, one from each group, died within 30 days (p=0.43). No significant differences were seen in the rates of 30-day MAEs (7% vs 17%, p=0.35) or major access complications (9% vs 11%, p>0.99) for patients receiving distal landing in the main trunk vs a division branch, respectively. The mean follow-up for the entire cohort was 19±12 months. The overall 1-year survival rate was 94% (95% CI 74% to 99%). The primary and secondary patency rates at 1 year were 98% (95% CI 88% to 99%) vs 95% (95% CI 72% to 99%, p=0.72) and 98% (95% CI 88% to 99%) vs 100% (p=0.41) for the main trunk vs division branch groups, respectively. Freedom from IIA branch instability estimates were also similar at 1-year follow-up [93% (95% CI 82% to 97%) vs 90% (95% CI 66% to 97%), p=0.29], as were the freedom from new-onset buttock claudication estimates [98% (95% CI 86% to 99%) and 94% (95% CI 67% to 99%), respectively; p=0.62]. Mean sac diameter change was 5.4±5.3 mm, not significantly different between the groups (p=0.85). Conclusion: Use of the posterior or anterior division of the IIA as a distal landing zone for the Gore Excluder IBE was safe and efficacious in the midterm. This technique may permit extending indications for endovascular repair of aortoiliac aneurysms to cases with unsuitable anatomy within the IIA main trunk. Long-term assessment is needed to affirm the efficacy of this technique.

Insights and Clinical Implications from the pELVIS Registry for the Treatment of Aneurysms Involving the Iliac Bifurcation

The pErformance of iLiac branch deVIces for aneurysmS (pELVIS) Registry is the largest retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on the use of iliac branch devices (IBD) for the treatment of iliac and aortoiliac aneurysms. It shows the feasibility of the technique with good short- and mid-term results. The most common anatomical challenge for IBD use is the presence of aneurysmal deterioration of the internal iliac arteries (IIA). Experience acquired in the registry treating concomitant aneurysmal lesions of the IIA provides significant information on the performance of IBDs for this specific clinical presentation. Treatment of isolated aneurysms in the common iliac artery without extension to the infrarenal aorta showed favourable results with lower costs, and lower use of irradiation and contrast media. Overall, the relatively low procedure-related complications and repeat interventions show broad applicability of the technique. Further analysis is required to evaluate the longstanding performance of IBD.

Endovascular Treatment of Aorta-Iliac Aneurysms with a Flared Iliac Limb

Endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR) relies on the quality of the proximal and distal landing zone. Reinterventions are higher in patients with suboptimal landing zone. The study aimed to evaluate reintervention rate after endovascular treatment of an aorta-iliac aneurysm using the flared iliac limbs. The retrospective study included 179 patients treated with EVAR at a single university hospital institution from January 2011 to January 2014 of which 75 patients (42%) were treated with flared iliac limb stent graft and 104 patients (58%) were treated with a nonflared iliac limb stent graft. There were 165 male patients (92%), mean age was 75.8 ± 6.6 years. Thirty-six patients underwent secondary treatment accounting for overall reintervention rate of 20%. Endoleak type 1b occurred in 13 patients (7%), followed by endoleak type 1a in six patients (3%). Endoleak type 2 occurred in seven patients (4%) requiring the treatment due to abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) enlargement, endoleak type 3 in three patients (2%), and leg stent graft thrombosis in seven patients (4%). In 143 patients (80%), there were no secondary interventions during the follow-up period. Reintervention due to endoleak type 1b was statistically significantly higher in a flared iliac limb group ( p  < 0.02) with the rate of 7.2% compared with 1.9% rate in nonflared iliac limb group. The mean follow-up was 44.3 ± 20.4. Overall mortality was 33%. Flared iliac limb with a distal diameter of ≥ 20 mm, show a higher rate of iliac limb reintervention in a follow-up period due to endoleak type 1b.

Customized endovascular repair of common iliac artery aneurysms

Open technique for elective repair of iliac artery aneurysms can be safely performed with good outcomes but not inconsequential morbidity. An endovascular approach has been shown to have both periprocedural and postoperative advantages with equivalent outcomes. Endovascular repair of common iliac arteries (CIAs) without sacrificing the hypogastric artery using an iliac branch device is a complex endovascular technique requiring a proximal seal zone that may be absent in larger CIA aneurysms. We present two cases in which CIA aneurysms were repaired with a customized endovascular technique using the benefit of the aortic bifurcation for stability in addition to providing a long proximal seal zone with the AFX device (Endologix, Irvine, Calif) paired with the iliac branch device (W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) for internal iliac artery preservation.

Open Versus Endovascular Repair of Isolated Iliac Artery Aneurysms

PURPOSE:

Outcomes of open iliac artery repair (OIR) and endovascular iliac artery repair (EVIR) were compared at a tertiary referral vascular center.

METHODS:

From 2004 to 2015, all patients treated for isolated iliac artery aneurysms (IAAs) were retrospectively identified, and patient records and computed tomography (CT) scans were analyzed. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points were 30-day mortality and morbidity and freedom from reintervention. For follow-up, data from outpatient visits and CT scans following a standard surveillance protocol were used.

RESULTS:

A total of 106 IAAs in 94 patients were treated (mean follow-up: 35.7 months; 66 OIR; 40 EVIR). Six (15%) aneurysms from the EVIR group and 4 (6.1%) from open-operated IAA presented in the state of rupture. There was no difference in overall survival between EVIR and OIR ( P = .14). In multivariable analysis, higher risk of death was associated with ruptured IAA (rIAA; hazard ratio [HR]: 40.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.05-796.18; P = .02) and coronary heart disease (HR: 11.07, 95% CI: 1.94-63.36; P < .01). The 30-day mortality was 1.9% overall (0% OIR, 5.0% EVIR, P = .27), but there were no differences between OIR and EVIR in 30-day morbidity ( P = .11). Freedom from reintervention was higher for OIR than for EVIR ( P < .01). In multivariable analysis, a higher reintervention rate was seen in EVIR (HR: 10.80, 95% CI: 2.20-53.01; P < .01) and in rIAA (HR: 12.02, 95% CI: 1.31-111.11; P = .03).

CONCLUSION:

Iliac artery aneurysmss can be safely and effectively treated by EVIR or OIR regarding 30-day morbidity, mortality, and long-term survival, although freedom from reintervention is significantly lower after EVIR.