Type II Endoleak Nidus Volume on Arterial and Delayed Phases of Initial CT Angiography after Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Predicts Persistent Endoleak and Aneurysm Sac Enlargement

Purpose

To evaluate type II endoleak nidus volume (ENV) in the arterial phase (ENV_AP) and delayed phase (ENV_DP) of the first postoperative CT angiography (CTA) as a predictor of persistent endoleak and aneurysm sac enlargement at follow-up CTA in patients with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Materials and Methods

Ninety-three patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 72 years ± 8; range, 56-88 years) with EVAR and type II endoleak were included in a single-institution retrospective study conducted between March 1, 2005, and December 31, 2018. ENV_AP, ENV_DP, change of volume (ENV_DP-AP), and percentage of ENV_AP and ENV_DP in aneurysm sac volume (ASV) (ENV_AP/ASV%, ENV_DP/ASV%, respectively) were measured on first postoperative CTA images. The mean follow-up was 31.6 months ± 26.6 (range, 6-163.8 months). Patients were divided into two groups (group A, spontaneous resolution of endoleak without intervention [n = 29] and group B, persistent endoleak at follow-up CTA [n = 64]) and compared by using the Mann-Whitney U, Wilcoxon signed rank, and Pearson χ² tests. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to compare accuracies of parameters at first postoperative CTA.

Results

The accuracy of ENV_DP (area under the ROC curve [AUC], 0.78) was superior to the accuracy of ENV_DP/ASV% (AUC, 0.76), ENV_DP-AP (AUC, 0.74), ENV_AP (AUC, 0.71), and ENV_AP/ASV% (AUC, 0.69) in indicating persistent endoleak. In group B, 46 patients (72%) showed ASV enlargement and 44 patients (69%) underwent endoleak embolization. ENV_AP (1.7 cm³ ± 2.9 vs 3.4 cm³ ± 4.2; P = .001), ENV_DP (2.9 cm³ ± 3.8 vs 8.0 cm³ ± 9.6; P < .001), ENV_DP-AP (1.1 cm³ ± 1.8 vs 4.5 cm³ ± 7.8; P < .001), ENV_AP/ASV% (0.9% ± 1.5 vs 1.7% ± 2.2; P = .003), and ENV_DP/ASV% (1.6% ± 2.2 vs 3.7% ± 3.6; P < .001) were smaller in group A than in group B.

Conclusion

ENV_DP of the first postoperative CTA is an accurate predictor of persistent endoleak compared with ENV_AP, and persistent endoleak is associated with aneurysm sac enlargement, in which earlier intervention is recommended.© RSNA, 2021.

Type 2 Endoleak Management

Type 2 endoleaks are the most common endoleak type following endovascular aneurysm repair. The natural history of these endoleaks can vary, with some demonstrating a self-limited or indolent course, while others can contribute to aneurysm sac enlargement and rupture. A variety of embolization techniques, including transarterial catheterization and direct sac puncture techniques, have been developed for the treatment of type 2 endoleaks. In this article, the authors review the indications, techniques, and outcomes of current treatment strategies for type 2 endoleaks.

Higher preprocedural fibrinogen levels are associated with aneurysm sac regression after EVAR

Summary. Background: The aim of our study was to determine the diameter of the aneurysm sac 24 months after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR); to identify factors associated with sac regression, and to determine the impact of sac regression on all-cause mortality during long-term follow-up. Patients and methods: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from patients treated with EVAR between January, 2010 and July, 2016. Sac regression was defined as at least 5 mm decrease in aneurysm diameter in relation to the preprocedural diameter seen on computed tomography angiography. Sociodemographic information, comorbidities, treatment, laboratory parameters, selected anatomical and genetic factors were all analysed to determine their impact on sac regression. Results: During the study period, 124 patients with mean age of 71.2 ± 7.2 years met the inclusion criteria. Sac regression was found in 45.2% of patients. Higher preprocedural fibrinogen was found in patients with sac regression in comparison with patients with stable sac or sac expansion (3.84 g/l vs 3.47 g/l; p = 0.028). In multivariate analysis after adjustment for age, hypertension, sex, smoking, dyslipidaemia, volume and percentage of intraluminal thrombus higher fibrinogen was associated with an increased probability of sac regression (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.29–4.72; p = 0.006). Persistent type II endoleak was associated with significantly lower probability of sac regression in univariate and multivariate analysis after adjustment for age, hypertension, sex, smoking and dyslipidaemia (OR 0.26; 95% CI 0.10–0.66; p = 0.004). Higher age was a significant predictor of sac regression in multivariate analysis after adjustment for hypertension, sex, smoking and dyslipidaemia (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02–1.14; p = 0.012). No difference was found between patient subgroups with and without sac regression in all-cause mortality during follow-up. Conclusions: Higher preprocedural fibrinogen, absence of persistent type II endoleak and higher age were predictive factors of aneurysm sac regression post-EVAR.

[Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) : Complication management]

A variety of complications may be experienced during or after endovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Acute procedure-related complications include injury to the access vessels, improper endograft placement, ischaemic and systemic complications as well as the postimplantation syndrome. Femoral pseudoaneurysms, endograft migration, kinking or occlusion, endoleaks and endograft infection are complications that have been observed at follow-up. Meticulous patient selection and preprocedural work-up can reduce the incidence of these complications. The majority of the complications, acute as well those at follow-up, can be dealt with endoluminally. It is of essence, however, that a wide variety of catheters, guidewires, stents, stent-grafts and embolics are readily available in the repertoire of the interventionalist. In a small number of patients with endograft occlusion or infection or with bleeding complications/pseudoaneurysms of the access vessels, open surgical intervention may become necessary. To obtain optimal results, close interdisciplinary co-operation, especially between the interventionist, the vascular surgeon and the anaesthetist is mandatory.

The UK EndoVascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) randomised controlled trials: long-term follow-up and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Short-term survival benefits of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair (OR) of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms have been shown in randomised trials, but this early survival benefit is soon lost. Survival benefit of EVAR was unclear at follow-up to 10 years.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term efficacy of EVAR against OR in patients deemed fit and suitable for both procedures (EVAR trial 1; EVAR-1); and against no intervention in patients unfit for OR (EVAR trial 2; EVAR-2). To appraise the long-term significance of type II endoleak and define criteria for intervention.

DESIGN

Two national, multicentre randomised controlled trials: EVAR-1 and EVAR-2.

SETTING

Patients were recruited from 37 hospitals in the UK between 1 September 1999 and 31 August 2004.

PARTICIPANTS

Men and women aged ≥ 60 years with an aneurysm of ≥ 5.5 cm (as identified by computed tomography scanning), anatomically suitable and fit for OR were randomly assigned 1 : 1 to either EVAR (n = 626) or OR (n = 626) in EVAR-1 using computer-generated sequences at the trial hub. Patients considered unfit were randomly assigned to EVAR (n = 197) or no intervention (n = 207) in EVAR-2. There was no blinding.

INTERVENTIONS

EVAR, OR or no intervention.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end points were total and aneurysm-related mortality until mid-2015 for both trials. Secondary outcomes for EVAR-1 were reinterventions, costs and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

In EVAR-1, over a mean of 12.7 years (standard deviation 1.5 years; maximum 15.8 years), we recorded 9.3 deaths per 100 person-years in the EVAR group and 8.9 deaths per 100 person-years in the OR group [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.27; p = 0.14]. At 0-6 months after randomisation, patients in the EVAR group had a lower mortality (adjusted HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.02 for total mortality; HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.93 for aneurysm-related mortality; p = 0.031), but beyond 8 years of follow-up patients in the OR group had a significantly lower mortality (adjusted HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.56, p = 0.048 for total mortality; HR 5.82, 95% CI 1.64 to 20.65, p = 0.0064 for aneurysm-related mortality). The increased aneurysm-related mortality in the EVAR group after 8 years was mainly attributable to secondary aneurysm sac rupture, with increased cancer mortality also observed in the EVAR group. Overall, aneurysm reintervention rates were higher in the EVAR group than in the OR group, 4.1 and 1.7 per 100 person-years, respectively (p < 0.001), with reinterventions occurring throughout follow-up. The mean difference in costs over 14 years was £3798 (95% CI £2338 to £5258). Economic modelling based on the outcomes of the EVAR-1 trial showed that the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the patient's lifetime exceeds conventional thresholds used in the UK. In EVAR-2, patients died at the same rate in both groups, but there was suggestion of lower aneurysm mortality in those who actually underwent EVAR. Type II endoleak itself is not associated with a higher rate of mortality.

LIMITATIONS

Devices used were implanted between 1999 and 2004. Newer devices might have better results. Later follow-up imaging declined, particularly for OR patients. Methodology to capture reinterventions changed mainly to record linkage through the Hospital Episode Statistics administrative data set from 2009.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR has an early survival benefit but an inferior late survival benefit compared with OR, which needs to be addressed by lifelong surveillance of EVAR and reintervention if necessary. EVAR does not prolong life in patients unfit for OR. Type II endoleak alone is relatively benign.

FUTURE WORK

To find easier ways to monitor sac expansion to trigger timely reintervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN55703451.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and the results will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Type II endoleaks: challenges and solutions

Type II endoleaks are the most common endovascular complications of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR); however, there has been a divided opinion regarding their significance in EVAR. Some advocate a conservative approach unless there is clear evidence of sac expansion, while others maintain early intervention is best to prevent adverse late outcomes such as rupture. There is a lack of level-one evidence in this challenging group of patients, and due to a low event rate of complications, large numbers of patients would be required in well-designed trials to fully understand the natural history of type II endoleak. This review will discuss the imaging, management, and outcome of patients with isolated type II endoleaks following infra-renal EVAR.

Management of Endoleaks

The management of endoleaks remains an inherent challenge to endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), particularly as evolving techniques and devices have allowed treatment of increasingly complex aneurysm anatomy. Endovascular techniques are the favored modality for endoleak repair and include techniques to bridge the endoleak defector and embolize the endoleak nidus and inflow/outflow vessels. Conversion to surgical repair remains the definitive option in cases where less invasive methods have failed or are precluded. In this article, the authors review evidence on the indications, approach, and outcomes of current techniques for endoleak management.

Ultra-low profile polymer-filled stent graft for abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment: a two-year follow-up

PURPOSE

This study evaluated 2 years of follow-up of the Ovation Abdominal Stent Graft System (TriVascular Inc., Santa Rosa, CA, USA) for endovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective multicentre study included 36 patients (median age, 73.6 year) with AAAs (mean diameter, 5.65 cm) treated with the Ovation stent graft and followed up for at least 2 years. Safety and effectiveness of the Ovation stent graft were evaluated. Indications for EVAR were the following: AAA ≥5 cm, neck length ≥7 mm, angulation ≤60° and diameter <30 mm; the presence of neck calcification and thrombosis was not considered a contraindication; distal iliac landing zone length of 10 mm, and diameter between 5 and 20 mm. Patients were treated under a common protocol, including clinical and imaging follow-up at discharge, 30 days, 6 months, and annually for 5 years. Adverse events, clinical and imaging data and possible re-intervention were recorded.

RESULTS

The Ovation stent graft was implanted successfully in 36 patients (100 %). None of the patients required conversion to open surgery, and none presented with an aneurysm rupture. Endograft stent fracture or migration was not observed in any case. No type I, III or IV endoleaks were observed; in 12 patients (33.3 %), a type II endoleak was noted, in one case with sac enlargement but not treated due to concomitant comorbidities and the patient's decision.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2-year results of the Ovation Abdominal Stent Graft System demonstrate excellent safety and effectiveness in the treatment of patients with AAAs, particularly in those with challenging anatomical characteristics.

CT features of early type II endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms help predict aneurysm sac enlargement

PURPOSE

To determine computed tomographic (CT) features of early type II endoleaks associated with aneurysm sac enlargement after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Institutional review board approval was not required for this retrospective study. The authors reviewed imaging and clinical data from 56 patients (seven women, 49 men; mean age ± standard deviation, 71 years ± 7.9; age range, 52-85 years) with early type II endoleak who had undergone EVAR between December 2002 and December 2011 and who had been followed up with imaging and clinical evaluation for at least 6 months. The number and diameter of all feeding and/or draining arteries were measured, and endoleaks were classified according to their sources into simple inferior mesenteric artery (IMA), simple lumbar artery (LA), complex LA, and complex IMA-LA type II endoleaks. Volume and attenuation of the nidus were measured. Aneurysm enlargement was defined as an increase in the aneurysm volume of more than 5% during follow-up. Simple and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent clinical and imaging variables associated with aneurysm enlargement.

RESULTS

Twenty-three of the 56 patients (41%) showed aneurysm sac enlargement during follow-up (mean follow-up, 3.0 years ± 2.0). With the multivariate model, the variables that showed the strongest indicators for aneurysm sac enlargement were complex IMA-LA type II endoleak (odds ratio [OR] = 10.29, P = .004) and the diameter of the largest feeding and/or draining artery (OR = 4.55, P = .013). Patients without complex IMA-LA type II endoleak in whom the largest feeding and/or draining artery was larger than 3.8 mm and patients with a complex IMA-LA type II endoleak in whom the largest feeding and/or draining artery was larger than 2.2 mm were at high risk for aneurysm sac enlargement.

CONCLUSION

The strongest indicators for aneurysm sac enlargement are complex IMA-LA type II endoleak and the diameter of the largest feeding and/or draining artery.

Can early computed tomography angiography after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair predict the need for reintervention in patients with type II endoleak?

PURPOSE

This study was designed to identify parameters on CT angiography (CTA) of type II endoleaks following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), which can be used to predict the subsequent need for reinterventions.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 62 patients with type II endoleak who underwent early CTA in mean 3.7 ± 1.9 days after EVAR. On the basis of follow-up examinations (mean follow-up period 911 days; range, 373-1,987 days), patients were stratified into two groups: those who did (n = 18) and those who did not (n = 44) require reintervention. CTA characteristics, such as AAA, endoleak, as well as nidus dimensions, patency of the inferior mesenteric artery, number of aortic branch vessels, and the pattern of endoleak appearance, were recorded and correlated with the clinical outcome.

RESULTS

Univariate and receiver operating characteristic curve regression analyses revealed significant differences between the two groups for the endoleak volume (surveillance group: 1391.6 ± 1427.9 mm(3); reintervention group: 3227.7 ± 2693.8 mm(3); cutoff value of 2,386 mm(3); p = 0.002), the endoleak diameter (13.6 ± 4.3 mm compared with 25.9 ± 9.6 mm; cutoff value of 19 mm; p < 0.0001), the number of aortic branch vessels (2.9 ± 1.2 compared with 4.2 ± 1.4 vessels; p = 0.001), as well as a "complex type" endoleak pattern (13.6 %, n = 6 compared with 44.4 %, n = 8; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Early CTA can predict the future need for reintervention in patients with type II endoleak. Therefore, treatment decision should be based not only on aneurysm enlargement alone but also on other imaging characteristics.

Volumetric quantification of type II endoleaks: an indicator for aneurysm sac growth following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

PURPOSE

To test the hypothesis that type II endoleak cavity volume (ECV) and endoleak cavity diameter (ECD) measurements are accurate indicators of aneurysm sac volume (ASV) enlargement in patients who undergo endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in the abdominal aorta.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The institutional review board approved and waived the need to obtain patient consent for this HIPAA-compliant retrospective study. In 72 patients who underwent EVAR, 160 computed tomographic (CT) angiography studies revealed type II endoleaks. Corresponding to these 160 CT angiography studies, 113 CT follow-up studies (in 52 patients) were available and were included in the analysis. ECV measurements were obtained by two observers in consensus by using arterial enhanced phase (ECVAEP) and 70-second delayed enhanced phase (ECVDEP) CT images. The ECVDEP was also normalized as the ECV/ASV ratio. Maximum (ECDM) and transverse (ECDT) ECDs were determined from delayed enhanced phase images. The outcome was determined as interval increase (>2%) in ASV versus stable or decreasing (≤2%) ASV. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to compare the accuracy of type II ECV and ECD measurements in indicating interval increase in ASV.

RESULTS

In 56 (49.5%) of 113 CT studies in type II endoleaks, there was an interval increase in ASV. The accuracies of ECVDEP (area under the ROC curve [AUC], 0.85) and normalized ECVDEP (AUC, 0.86) were superior to the accuracies of ECDM (AUC, 0.73), ECDT (AUC, 0.73), and ECVAEP (AUC, 0.66). At ROC curve analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for type II endoleak cavities with an ECVDEP of less than 0.5 mL for showing no future sac volume enlargement were 33% (19 of 57), 100% (56 of 56), 100% (19 of 19), and 60% (56 of 94), respectively.

CONCLUSION

With use of the delayed enhanced phase of CT angiography, ECV measurement is an accurate indicator of aneurysm sac enlargement.

Type II endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: fate of the aneurysm sac and neck changes during long-term follow-up

PURPOSE

To evaluate the frequency of type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and to compare sac diameter and neck changes in patients with type II endoleak to endoleak-free patients with at least 3-year imaging follow-up.

METHODS

Among 407 consecutive EVAR patients, 109 patients (101 men; mean age 72.1 years, range 55-86) had at least 3-year computed tomography (CT) data and no type I or III endoleak. In this cohort, 49 patients presented with a type II endoleak at some time and 60 patients had no endoleak. Patients with type II endoleaks were further divided into subgroups based on the vessel origin and the perfusion status (persistent or transient). The course of the perfusion status of type II endoleaks and changes in the aneurysm sac diameters, neck diameters, and renal to stent-graft distances (RSD) were evaluated in the defined groups. Reintervention and death rates were also reported.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 68.1 ± 23.8 months. Compared to the no endoleak group, overall sac diameter increased significantly in the type II endoleak group (p = 0.007), but vessel origin did not have any influence. With regard to the perfusion status of type II endoleaks, aneurysm sac changes were significantly higher (p = 0.002) in the persistent endoleak group. During the study period, the increase in the proximal neck diameter was significantly higher in the no endoleak group compared to the type II endoleak group (p = 0.025). No significant difference was found in RSD changes between the defined groups. Reinterventions were performed in 20 (18.3%) patients (13 for type II endoleak); 2 (1.8%) patients without type II endoleak died of ruptured aneurysm.

CONCLUSION

Persistent type II endoleaks led to significant aneurysm sac enlargement, but without increased mortality or rupture rates.

Current Endovascular Management of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Fatal rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) remains a feared complication. Development of vascular surgery techniques over 50 years ago has fulfilled the promise of preventing rupture, but the significant morbidity associated with open repair causes physicians and their older patients pause. With the advent of less invasive endovascular techniques and devices, patients now have another viable treatment option. We review some of the important trials as well as discuss developments in the continually evolving field of endovascular repair of AAAs.