Technical considerations and performance of bridging stent-grafts for iliac side branched devices based on a pooled analysis of single-center experiences

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.

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.

Midterm Results of a Surgeon-Modified Device to Preserve the Flow of the Internal Iliac Artery During Endovascular Repair of Aneurysm: Single-Center Experiences

BACKGROUND

During endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), commercial iliac branch devices (IBDs) have become an inescapable alternative for preserving antegrade internal iliac artery (IIA) blood flow. Due to the different morphological features of aneurysms, commercial IBDs may not be suitable for all patients. Reported experience with the implantation of the new surgeon-modified IBD (sm IBD) is limited. This investigation describes the indications, efficacy, and safety of the sm IBD.

METHODS

Data from consecutive elective implantations of IBDs in patients between March 2011 and May 2021 in a single center were incorporated. The sm IBDs were indicated in patients with common iliac artery aneurysms (CIAAs) and with a challenging anatomy and in those patients with or without abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (15 male, mean age 67.6 ± 7.9 years) were included. Fifteen sm IBDs were implanted in 1 procedure (100%). Fourteen (93.3%) patients had simultaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and 1 (6.7%) patient previously had a bilateral CIAAs repair by EVAR. The mean common iliac artery (CIA) diameter was 36.6 ± 12.5 mm. Technical success was obtained in all patients (100%). The median operation time was 189.7 ± 78.6 min, with a median fluoroscopy time of 45.3 ± 15.9 min. Axillary artery access was used in 11 (73.3%) procedures. The mean total hospital stay was 5.6 ± 2.8 days, and the postoperative follow-up was 35.4 months (range 2-120). The estimated IIA bridge stent patency at 1 year after operation was 100% and 85.7% ± 13.2% 5 years postoperatively. One (6.7%) IIA branch was occluded, and this patient remained asymptomatic. One patient (6.7%) needed reintervention, and another (6.7%) patient had type II leakage, which is currently under close surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

Using an IBD to maintain the pelvic blood flow is an effective and feasible intravascular technique, especially for patients with an abnormal iliac artery anatomy. This novel technique has similar midterm procedural success rate compared to the use of commercial IBDs. Therefore, these devices are more suitable for patients with certain anatomic challenges and can be used as an alternative treatment.

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.

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.

Endovascular treatment of hypogastric artery aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Internal iliac artery aneurysm (IIAA) is a rare entity. Its treatment can be technically challenging. The aim of this study was to evaluate the treatment possibilities in an era of advanced endovascular techniques and their potential to preserve iliac blood flow while reliably excluding the aneurysm.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 46 consecutive patients with endovascularly treated IIAA was performed. Data were collected from a single-institution aortoiliac database. The following end points were recorded: technique of aneurysm exclusion, technical success rates, perioperative morbidity and mortality, primary patency, and midterm follow-up.

RESULTS

Between September 2009 and May 2016, a total of 46 patients with 55 IIAAs were identified. The majority of patients (n = 39 [84.8%]) had aortoiliac aneurysms and seven had isolated IIAAs (15.2%). The following surgical techniques were used: implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs; n = 29), occlusion of the internal iliac artery (IIA) by ostium coverage with or without prior coil embolization (n = 23), and other endovascular techniques (n = 3). Primary assisted technical success was achieved in 93.1% of IBD implantations and in 100% of occlusions by ostium coverage and other techniques. Overall 30-day mortality was 4.3% (n = 2) and 0% in electively treated patients. Assisted midterm patency after IBD implantation was 93.1%. Gluteal claudication occurred in seven patients (15.2%) who had undergone intentional or accidental occlusion of the IIA or the superior gluteal artery. Reintervention rates within the midterm follow-up were 13.8% (n = 4) after IBD implantation and 4.3% (n = 1) after coverage of the IIA ostium. No ruptures were observed during follow-up, and no complications occurred during reinterventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of IBD devices for the treatment of hypogastric artery aneurysms shows good technical results with a high primary patency and a low rate of perioperative complications. Although successful aneurysm exclusion while preserving pelvic blood flow is associated with a higher rate of reinterventions during midterm follow-up, it should be taken into consideration, especially in complex endovascular aortoiliac aneurysm repair.

Sealing Devices in Chimney Aortic Repair (CH EVAS) Versus Chimney Aortic Repair with Conventional Devices (CH EVAR): A Systematic Review

AIM

The aim of this study was to review the literature about the occurrence of postoperative type I endoleak (EL) and chimney graft thrombosis (CGT) after the use of sealing devices in chimney endovascular aortic repair (Ch EVAS), compared to chimney EVAR using conventional devices (Ch EVAR).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature on PubMed and MEDLINE with the terms "Chimney" and "Parallel grafts" was performed. The review was set up following the PRISMA guidelines. Case series about the use of the chimney/snorkel technique during endovascular repair of juxtarenal/pararenal aneurysms (AAA) were considered. Only papers with full text available in English and reporting complete data with at least 1 month of follow-up about at least 5 cases were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 90 papers were assessed for eligibility. According to the inclusion criteria, only 25 papers could be analyzed (20 in the Ch EVAR group and 5 in the Ch EVAS group). A type I EL occurred in 9.3% after Ch EVAR (95% CI 7.1-12.2%) and in 8.3% after Ch EVAS (95% CI 3.5-18.5%), being not significantly different. CGT occurred in 10.7% of cases after Ch EVAR (95% CI 8.8-13%) and in 8.8% of cases after Ch EVAS (95% CI 3.3-21.3%), being also not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

The reported rate of type I EL and CGT occurring after Ch EVAR tended to be slightly higher than those reported after Ch EVAS, even if the difference was not statistically significant.

Successful Off-Label Use of an Iliac Branch Device to Rescue an Occluded Aortofemoral Bypass Graft

Purpose: To report an alternative approach for rescue of an occluded aortofemoral bypass using the Gore Excluder Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE). Case Report: A 52-year-old man presented with acute right limb ischemia because of displaced and occluded iliac stents and was treated with aortofemoral bypass. On the third postoperative day, there was early bypass failure due to distal embolization from aortic thrombus. After fluoroscopy-guided balloon thrombectomy of the bypass, an endovascular bailout strategy was used. The Gore Excluder IBE was deployed below the renal arteries (with the external iliac limb opening in the surgical prosthesis and the gate opening within the aortic lumen). After antegrade catheterization of the gate, a Gore Viabahn endoprosthesis was inserted as the bridging endograft and deployed so that it landed just above the preimplanted aortoiliac kissing stents without overlapping them. Completion angiography showed technical success without complications; results were sustained at 1-year follow-up. Conclusion: The Gore Excluder IBE may represent a versatile solution for the rescue of complex cases when open surgery would be associated with a considerable risk. This off-label application of a well-recognized endovascular device is safe and feasible and may prove useful as a valuable alternative in properly selected patients.

Longer bridging stent-grafts in iliac branch endografting does not worsen outcome and expands its applicability, even in concomitant diseased hypogastric arteries

BACKGROUND

The iliac side branch device (IBD) is a valid method for the treatment of abdominal aorto-iliac aneurysms. However there is still a lack of evidence regarding the optimal length of the bridging stent graft (BSG) since aneurysmal degeneration of the hypogastric artery (HA) is an exclusion criterion. The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of longer BSG compared to the widely used 38mm stent-grafts in terms of reintervention rate and primary patency.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed our prospectively collected database of all patients who underwent an endovascular aneurysm repair using an IBD in our center between April 2005 and May 2015. The used BSGs were divided into 2 groups. In group A, the BSG was ≤38 mm, and group B>38 mm. The primary endpoint was BSG-related events, including stenosis, occlusion or endoleak. Secondary endpoints were technical success, primary patency and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty IBDs were implanted in 215 consecutive patients. Ninetyseven (37%) in group A and 163 (63%) in group B. The technical success rate was 100%. The 30-day mortality was 1% (N.=1) and 1.2% (N.=2) respectively for group A and B (P=0.8). The freedom from BSG-related events amounted to 84% at 60 months for the total cohort. The comparison between the two groups shows no significant difference, while a slight favorable trend for group B (75% vs. 91% at 60 months, P=0.081) was observed. No differences were found as to primary patency (96% and 99% at 60 months respectively for group A and B, P=0.237).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of longer stent-grafts (>38 mm) seems not to affect the performance of BSG even in the long run, expanding the indication for IBD also for aneurysms of the hypogastric artery.

Secondary Procedures Following Iliac Branch Device Treatment of Aneurysms Involving the Iliac Bifurcation: The pELVIS Registry

Purpose: To evaluate the incidence and reasons for secondary procedures in patients treated with iliac branch devices (IBDs) for isolated iliac aneurysm or aortoiliac aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation. Methods: Between January 2005 and December 2015, 575 surgical-high-risk patients (mean age 72.0±8.4 years; 558 men) with isolated iliac aneurysms (n=79) or aortoiliac aneurysms involving the iliac bifurcation (n=496) were treated with placement of 650 ZBIS or Gore IBDs (75 bilateral) in 6 European centers. The primary outcome was procedure-related reinterventions for occlusion or high-grade (>70%) stenosis of the bridging device, occlusion of the ipsilateral common or external iliac artery (EIA), type I/III endoleak, rupture, or infection following IBD implantation. Clinical and radiological data were analyzed based on preset definitions of comorbidities, aneurysm morphology, intraoperative variables, and follow-up strategies. Results: Nine (1.6%) reinterventions were performed within 30 days for occlusion or endoleak. Among 10 (1.5%) occluded EIAs ipsilateral to a deployed IBD, 6 underwent a reintervention with additional stent placement after thrombolysis (n=4) or a femorofemoral or iliofemoral crossover bypass (n=2). Three of 14 patients with early type I endoleak had a reintervention for an insufficient proximal sealing zone (stent-grafts in 2 common iliac arteries and 1 bifurcated endograft). Mean clinical and radiological follow-up were 32.6±9.9 and 29.8±21.1 months, respectively. Forty-two (7.3%) patients underwent reinterventions in the follow-up period. The overall postoperative reintervention rate was 8.9%. Both external and common iliac segments occluded in 30 (4.6%) IBDs; 2 patients had a crossover bypass and 14 were treated with endovascular techniques. In the other 14 patients, no specific treatment was performed. Seven (1.2%) patients with isolated EIA occlusion were treated during follow-up. Nineteen of the overall 28 patients with type I endoleak underwent endovascular repair. The other 9 were under radiological surveillance due to less significant (<5 mm) sac increase. No reintervention was performed to recanalize 11 (1.6%) occluded internal iliac arteries. Conclusion: Midterm experience with placement of IBDs is associated with a low incidence of secondary procedures due to type I endoleaks and occlusions. The main reasons for reinterventions seem to be short proximal sealing zone and poor conformability of the ZBIS device in elongated EIAs.

Endovascular therapeutic options for the treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms

About 20% of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms have associated iliac aneurysms. Distal sealing during the endovascular treatment of aortic-iliac aneurysms is a challenge that has led to the emergence of several technical options to achieve this goal over the years. Internal iliac artery embolization is associated with the risk of ischemic complications, such as gluteal necrosis, lower limb neurological deficit, colonic ischemia, impotence and gluteal claudication. This article summarizes the technical options for endovascular treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms with different approaches to preserving the patency of internal iliac arteries.

Critical analysis of results after chimney endovascular aortic aneurysm repair raises cause for concern

OBJECTIVE

"Chimney" techniques used to extend landing zones for endovascular aortic repair (chEVAR) have been increasingly reported; however, concerns about durability and patency remain. The purpose of this analysis was to examine midterm outcomes of chEVAR.

METHODS

All patients at the University of Florida treated with chEVAR were reviewed. Major adverse events (MAEs) were recorded and defined as any chimney stent thrombosis, type Ia endoleak in follow-up, reintervention, 30-day/in-hospital death, or ≥25% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate after discharge. Primary end points included chimney stent patency and freedom from MAE. Secondary end points included complications and long-term survival.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2012, 41 patients (age ± standard deviation, 73 ± 8 years; male, 66% [n = 27]) were treated with a total of 76 chimney stents (renal, n = 51; superior mesenteric artery, n = 16; celiac artery, n = 9) for a variety of indications: juxtarenal, 42% (n = 17, one rupture), suprarenal, 17% (n = 7), and thoracoabdominal aneurysm, 17% (n = 7); aortic anastomotic pseudoaneurysm, 15% (n = 6; three ruptures); type Ia endoleak after EVAR, 7% (n = 3); and atheromatous disease, 2% (n = 1). Two patients had a single target vessel abandoned because of cannulation failure, and one had a type Ia endoleak at case completion (technical success, 93%). Intraoperative complications occurred in seven patients (17%), including graft maldeployment with unplanned mesenteric chimney (n = 2) and access vessel injury requiring repair (n = 5). Major postoperative complications developed in 20% (n = 8). The 30-day mortality and in-hospital mortality were 5% (n = 2) and 7% (n = 3), respectively. At median follow-up of 18.2 months (range, 1.4-41.5 months), 28 of 33 patients (85%) with available postoperative imaging experienced stabilization or reduction of abdominal aortic aneurysm sac diameters. Nine patients (32%) developed endoleak at some point during follow-up (type Ia, 7% [n = 3]; type II, 10% [n = 4]; indeterminate, 7% [n = 3]), and one patient underwent open, surgical conversion. The estimated probability of freedom from reintervention (±standard error mean) was 96% ± 4% at both 1 year and 3 years. Primary patency of all chimney stents was 88% ± 5% and 85% ± 5% at 1 year and 3 years, respectively. Corresponding freedom from MAEs was 83% ± 7% and 57% ± 10% at 1 year and 3 years. The actuarial estimated survival for all patients at 1 year and 5 years was 85% ± 6% and 65% ± 8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate that chEVAR can be completed with a high degree of success; however, perioperative complications and MAEs during follow-up, including loss of chimney patency and endoleak, may occur at a higher rate than previously reported. Elective use of chEVAR should be performed with caution, and comparison to open and fenestrated EVAR is needed to determine long-term efficacy of this technique.