Preliminary experience with the Endurant II short form stent-graft system

Endografts for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms with a hostile neck anatomy: A systematic review

Background

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has emerged as a better alternative to conventional open surgery for AAAs. The purpose of the review is to define the improvement in the clinical management of the patient with hostile neck AAAs due to the introduction of new endografts while giving a thorough description of their instructions for use (IFUs), main characteristics and part sizing, reporting their outcomes from clinical studies and categorizing their usability.

Methods

A MEDLINE search was conducted using keyword-specific combinations. Clinical studies were searched via the clinicaltrials.gov website. Relevant articles' references were also hand-searched.

Results

We retrieved 640 records describing Alto, Ovation iX, Treovance, Aorfix, Anaconda, Conformable, and Endurant II/IIs endografts. Aortic necks >60° can be managed with Anaconda, Aorfix, and Conformable, which can treat up to 90° necks requiring ≥15 mm (Anaconda ≥20 mm), and Treovance, which is eligible for necks ≤75° with ≥15 mm length. Ovation's innovation of combining polymer-filled O-rings with integral anchors can treat conical necked AAAs giving Ovation iX and Alto an advantage. Short-necked AAAs can be treated with Alto, eligible for necks as short as 7 mm, and Endurant II, which can treat ≥10 mm necks or 4 mm if used in conjunction with the EndoAnchors system, respectively. Alto and Conformable report a 100% technical success rate, absence of AAA-related death, migration, ruptures, and limb occlusion during follow-up. Endurant II and Ovation iX report >99% technical success rate and are almost free from the AAA mortality rate, ruptures, migration, and limb occlusion, while Ovation iX has a high rate of sac dilation (15.5%) in a 5-year follow-up. Anaconda is slightly better than Aorfix and Treovance, which are related to the lowest technical success rates, 98.3%, 96.3%, and 96%, respectively. Aorfix has the highest AAA mortality rate, 4% in a 60 month follow-up.

Conclusion

Most new generation endografts described have comparable results. They broaden the eligibility of patients for EVAR due to their unique technical characteristics described. There is a lack of comparative studies for newer endografts and postmarket clinical studies with long-term results concerning the most recently approved devices described, Alto and Conformable.

Five-year outcomes of the Bi- versus Trimodular EndurantTM stent-graft in 100 patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Recent studies on the Endurant™ endografts mainly compared outcomes of the bimodular stent-graft to other manufacturer's endografts or reported results for cases outside manufacturer's instructions for use (IFU), while data on the experience of standard endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) inside manufacturer's IFU comparing the bi- with the trimodular device is limited.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria were: 1) infrarenal aneurysms (>50 mm diameter) treated by Endurant^TM II (END II) or Endurant^TM IIs (END IIs) stent-graft inside manufacturer's IFU; 2) available CTA with 1 mm reconstruction of the entire aorta prior to intervention. Endpoints comparing the devices included technical success, 30-day mortality, rate of complications (bleeding with conversion to open repair, stent-graft stenosis/occlusion, acute distal embolism, infection or postprocedural necessity of dialysis), endoleaks and reinterventions (5-year follow-up). Aneurysm sac diameters were compared between baseline preinterventional CTA and last post-interventional CTA.

RESULTS

One hundred patients (90% male, mean age 74 years) treated with END II (N.=66) or END IIs (N.=34) were included. Technical success was 99%. One procedure-related active bleeding occurred ending up in surgical conversion (END II N.=1). 30d mortality was 0%. No initial type I/III endoleaks were present. Re-interventions were required in 19/100 (19%) of patients (END II N.=10; END IIs N.=9, P=0.17). The outcome of EVAR including technical success, 30d mortality, rate of complications, endoleaks and re-interventions showed no significant differences comparing END II/IIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Five-year outcomes of EVAR show consistently safe and effective results for either END II or IIs device.

2D perfusion angiography as quantitative method to evaluate iloprost effect on foot circulation

Background: Two-dimensional (2D) perfusion angiography is useful for the evaluation of foot perfusion in patients with critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Iloprost is a synthetic prostacyclin analogue presenting vasodilating properties. Aim of this study was to demonstrate the utility of 2D perfusion angiography as quantitative method to evaluate iloprost effect on foot circulation. Patients and methods: Between January 2020 and June 2020 25 patients with CLTI underwent below-the-knee (BTK) endovascular revascularization, intra-arterial administration of iloprost, and assessment of foot perfusion by 2D perfusion angiography. Iloprost was administered as an intra-arterial bolus of 3 μg over 1-3 minutes immediately after BTK revascularization. The 2D perfusion angiography was performed in a standardized manner with a 5-F catheter placed into the popliteal artery. A wide region of interest (ROI) was identified to assess the foot perfusion. Time-density curves were calculated by the perfusion software. Changes of the overall time-density curves before and after the administration of iloprost were evaluated. Results: Endovascular revascularization was successful in all cases. The mean reduction of systolic pressure value after iloprost administration was 23.1 mmHg. Eight patients (32%) experienced a minor complication (6 cutaneous rush, 2 symptomatic hypotension >40 mmHg). In 20 patients the time-density curves under ROI increased after the intra-arterial administration of iloprost (+31.6%, range from +4.9% to +78.7%). Five patients had no modification or a slight decrease of foot perfusion after iloprost administration (non-responders patients). Conclusions: Patients undergoing intra-arterial administration of iloprost accounted for a not negligible rate of minor complications. 2D perfusion angiography was valuable as quantitative method to evaluate the iloprost effect on foot circulation. This technique could be useful to classify the patients in responders or non-responders to iloprost therapy.