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

Outcomes of "Anterior Versus Posterior Divisional Branches of the Hypogastric Artery as Distal Landing Zone for Iliac Branch Devices": The International Multicentric R3OYAL Registry

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this multicentric registry was to assess the outcomes of "anteRior versus posteRior divisional bRanches Of the hYpogastric artery as distAl landing zone for iLiac branch devices (R3OYAL)."

METHODS

The main exposure of interest for the purpose of this study was the internal iliac artery (IIA) divisional branch (anterior vs posterior) that was used as distal landing zone. Early endpoints included technical success and adverse events. Late endpoints included survival, primary/secondary IIA patency, and IIA branch instability.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients were included in the study, of which 50 received bilateral implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs). This resulted in a total of 221 incorporated IIAs included in the final analysis, of which 40 were anterior divisional branches and 181 were posterior divisional branches. Technical success was high in both groups (anterior division: 98% vs posterior division: 100%, P = .18). Occurrence of any adverse event was noted in 14% of patients in both groups (P = 1.0). The overall rate of freedom from the composite IBD branch instability did not show significant differences between patients receiving distal landing in the anterior or posterior division of the IIA at 3 years (79% vs 87%, log-rank test = .215). The 3-year estimates of IBD patency were significantly lower in patients who received distal landing in the anterior divisional branch than those who received distal landing in the posterior divisional branch (primary patency: 81% vs 96%, log-rank test = .009; secondary patency: 81% vs 97%, log-rank test < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the IIA as distal landing zone for IBD implantation shows comparable profiles in terms of immediate technical success, perioperative safety, and side-branch instability up to 3 years. However, IBD patency at 3 years was higher when the distal landing zone was achieved within the posterior divisional branch of the IIA.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The results from this large multicentric registry confirm that use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the internal iliac artery (IIA) as distal landing zone for implantation of iliac branch devices (IBD) shows comparable profiles of safety and feasibility, thereby allowing to extend the indications for endovascular repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms to cases with unsuitable anatomy within the IIA main trunk. Although mid-term rates of device durability and branch instability seem to be similar, the rates of primary and secondary IBD patency at three years was favored when the distal landing zone was achieved in the posterior divisional branch of the IIA.

Outcomes of the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis for Japanese Patients With Aortoiliac Aneurysms: A Study Based on J-Preserve Registry

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical utility of the Gore Excluder iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE) for Japanese patients with aortoiliac aneurysms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study (J-Preserve Registry). Patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair using the Gore Excluder IBE for aortoiliac aneurysms between August 2017 and June 2020 were enrolled. Data pertaining to the baseline and anatomical characteristics, technical details, and clinical outcomes were collected from each institution. The primary endpoints were technical success, IBE-related complications, and reinterventions. Secondary endpoints were mortality, aneurysm size change, and reintervention during follow-up. Technical success was defined as accurate deployment of the IBE without type Ib, Ic, or III endoleaks on the IBE sides on completion angiography. A change in aneurysm size of 5 mm or more was taken to be a significant change.

RESULTS

We included 141 patients with 151 IBE implantations. Sixty-five IBE implantations (43.0%) had at least one instruction for use violation. Twenty-two patients (15.6%) required internal iliac artery (IIA) embolization for external iliac artery extension on the contralateral side. Of 151 IBE implantations, 19 exhibited IIA branch landing zones due to IIA aneurysms. Mean maximum and proximal common iliac artery (CIA) diameters were 32.9±9.9 mm and 20.5±6.9 mm, respectively. The mean CIA length was 59.1±17.1 mm. The IIA landing diameter and length were 9.0±2.3 mm and 33.8±14.6 mm. The overall technical success rate was 96.7%. There were no significant differences in IBE-related complications (2.3% vs 5.3%, p=0.86) or IBE-related reinterventions (1.5% vs 5.3%, p=0.33) between the IIA trunk and IIA branch landing groups. The mean follow-up period was 635±341 days. The all-cause mortality rate was 5.0%. There were no aneurysm-related deaths or ruptures during the follow-up. Most patients (95.7%) had sac stability or shrinkage.

CONCLUSION

The Gore Excluder IBE was safe and effective for Japanese patients in the midterm. Extending the IIA device into the distal branches of the IIA was acceptable, which may permit extending indications for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair of aortoiliac aneurysms to more complex lesions.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study suggests clinical benefits of the Gore Excluder IBE for Japanese patients, despite 43% of the IBE implantations having at least one IFU violation.

A multicenter experience of three different "iliac branched" stent grafts for the treatment of aorto-iliac and/or iliac aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of 3 different commercial iliac branch devices (IBDs): the Zenith Branch Iliac Endovascular Graft; the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch System and the E-liac Stent Graft System for the treatment of aorto-iliac or iliac aneurysms.

METHODS

From January 2017 to February 2020, a retrospective reviewed was conducted on a total of 96 patients. Primary endpoint was IBD instability rate at 24-months. Secondary endpoints included onset of any endoleaks, buttock claudication, IBD-related reintervention and all-death rates, post-operative acute kidney and changes in maximum diameter from baseline of the aortic aneurysmal sac.

RESULTS

At 24 months, the branch instability rate was similar amongst the three IBDs employed [Jotec 1/24 (4.1%), Gore 1/12 (8.3%), Cook 6/47 (12.7%), p-value = 0.502]. As well, no statistical difference in terms of branch-occlusion and branch-related endoleaks was observed. The Jotec group showed a significant decrease in maximum diameter from the baseline of the aortic aneurysmal sac when compared to the Gore group alone. No other differences were found relevant to the onset of any endoleaks, reinterventions and all-death rates. At 24-months, the Kaplan-Meier estimate of survival freedom from any branch instability was 95.8%, 91.6% and 86.8% for Jotec, Gore and Cook groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of IBDs represents a safe method for preserving patency of the IIA during treatment of aorto-iliac or iliac aneurysms providing a low rate of IBD instability.

Midterm Results of Iliac Branch Devices in a Newly Established Aortic Center

The first-line treatment of common iliac artery aneurysms is endovascular repair. International guidelines recommend the preservation of the internal iliac artery, which is best achieved by the implantation of an iliac bifurcation device (IBD). Our aim was to evaluate the initial midterm results of IBDs in the leading vascular center of Hungary. In this single-center retrospective study, relevant clinical data and the results of the imaging examinations were collected and analyzed in all patients who underwent IBD implantation between December 2010 and July 2021. Thirty-five patients (31 males, mean age: 67.9 ± 8.5 years) underwent endovascular treatment with 37 IBD implantations. Technical success was achieved in 88.2% of the patients, with no perioperative mortality or open surgical conversion. One patient was lost during follow-up. Internal iliac artery occlusion was detected in three (8.8%) patients, and reintervention was performed in five (14.7%) patients. Primary patency of the internal iliac branch was 97.1% at 1 month, 93% at 2 months, and 89.0% at 5 years. The average follow-up time was 20.1 ± 26.2 months, during which two (5.9%) deaths occurred. Our initial experience with iliac branch devices was associated with a low complication rate and a favorable outcome, which confirms the midterm success of this intervention.

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

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

Bilateral Implantation of Double-Branched Iliac Branch Devices for Endovascular Repair of Aorto-Bi-Iliac Aneurysm With Concomitant Hypogastric Aneurysms: The Quadruple Branch

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to describe the use of a double-branched custom-made iliac branch device (IBD) for the endovascular repair of an aorto-bi-iliac aneurysm with concomitant bilateral hypogastric aneurysms.

TECHNIQUE

A 61-year-old man on peritoneal dialysis underwent a computed tomography (CT) of the infrarenal aorta before planned kidney transplantation. The CT showed an asymptomatic aorto-bi-iliac aneurysm of 54 mm involving the hypogastric artery (HA) bilaterally (right HA 31 mm; left HA 40 mm). The treatment consisted of an endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and the bilateral implantation of custom-manufactured IBDs with double inner branches to preserve both superior and inferior gluteal arteries. At 1 year follow-up, the patient remains free of symptoms and the postoperative CT showed a successfully excluded aneurysm with patent bridging stent grafts to all HA branches.

CONCLUSION

The bilateral implantation of double-branched IBDs is a feasible technique. Preservation of both hypogastric arteries and its branches can be achieved with this technique and therefore decrease the risk of buttock claudication and other ischemic complications.