The role of fEVAR, chEVAR and open repair in treatment of juxtarenal aneurysms: a systematic review

Ultrasound Coded-Excitation Imaging for Endoleak Detection After Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVES

Several imaging modalities have been suggested for surveillance after fenestrated endovascular aortic repair in general and endoleak detection in specific. In the present project a coded excitation-based ultrasound (B-Flow) was investigated for endoleak detection after complex endovascular aortic repair.

METHODS

Patients post complex endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR or T/FEVAR) undergoing follow-up appointments including ultrasonography of the aorta at a vascular and endovascular surgery outpatient center were included in the study. B-Flow was compared with computed tomography angiography (CTA), Duplex ultrasound (DUS), and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) regarding agreement and reliability for endoleak detection and characterization.

RESULTS

In total, 47 follow-ups were included. They accumulated in a total of 149 imaging investigations. Endoleaks were discovered in 44.7% of B-Flow studies and a majority of these endoleaks were classified as type II. Agreement between B-Flow and other imaging modalities was good (>80.0%) in general. However, with B-Flow 6 and 2 endoleaks would have been missed compared with CEUS and CTA, respectively. Regarding endoleak classification, B-Flow had a strong agreement (94.5%) with CEUS in detected cases. Furthermore, in a limited subset analysis, imaging findings were externally validated using findings from angiography.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasonography allows for endoleak detection and characterization without an invasive procedure or the use of potentially nephrotoxic contrast medium and can reduce radiation exposure. While CEUS mitigates issues of radiation and nephrotoxicity it still requires the intravenous application of contrast enhancers. Ultrasound coded-excitation imaging such as B-Flow could therefore further simplify endoleak surveillance after fenestrated endovascular aortic repair.

Comparison of Fenestrated Stentgrafts and Open Repair for Juxtarenal Aortic Aneurysms Using a Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative morbi-mortality and medium-term follow-up of fenestrated stent grafting and open repair (OR) for patients with juxtarenal aortic aneurysms (JRAAs).

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent custom-made fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) or OR for complex abdominal aortic aneurysm between 2005 and 2017 in 2 tertiary centers were scrutinized. Patients with JRAA constituted the study group. Suprarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms were excluded. The groups were made comparable through the use of a propensity score matching.

RESULTS

277 patients with JRAAs were included, 102 (36.8%) in the FEVAR group and 175 (63.2%) in the OR group, respectively. After propensity score matching, 54 FEVAR patients (52.9%) and 103 OR patients (58.9%) were included for analysis. In-hospital mortality rates were 1.9% (n = 1) in the FEVAR group versus 6.9% (n = 7) in the OR group (P = 0.483). Postoperative complications were less common in the FEVAR group (14.8% vs. 30.7%; P = 0.033). Mean follow-up was 42.1 months in the FEVAR group and 40 months in the OR group. Overall mortality rates at 12 and 36 months were 11.5% and 24.5% in the FEVAR group versus 9.1 % (P = 0.691) and 11.6% (P = 0.067) in the OR group. Late reinterventions were more frequent in the FEVAR group (11.3% vs. 2.9%; P = 0.047). However, freedom from reintervention rates were not significantly different at 12 months (FEVAR: 86% vs. OR: 90%; P = 0.560) and 36 months (FEVAR: 86% vs. OR: 88.4%, P = 0.690). In the FEVAR group, persistent endoleak during follow-up was identified in 11.3% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, there was no statistical difference in terms of mortality in-hospital at 12 or 36 months between FEVAR and OR groups for JRAA. FEVAR for JRAA was associated with a significant reduction of overall postoperative major complications compared with OR. There were significantly more late reinterventions in the FEVAR group.

Long-Term Survival and Quality of Life After Fenestrated Endovascular Repair for Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

OBJECTIVES

Fenestrated endovascular repair (FEVAR) has become a widely used treatment option for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) but long-term survival and quality of life (QoL) outcomes are scarce. This single center cohort study aims to evaluate both long-term survival and QoL after FEVAR.

METHODS

All juxtarenal and suprarenal AAA patients treated with FEVAR in a single-center between 2002 and 2016 were included. QoL scores, measured by the RAND 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), were compared with baseline data of the SF-36 provided by RAND.

RESULTS

A total of 172 patients were included at a median follow-up of 5.9 years (IQR 3.0-8.8). Follow-up at 5 and 10 years post-FEVAR yielded survival rates of 59.9% and 18%, respectively. Younger patient age at surgery had a positive influence on 10-year survival and most patients died due to cardiovascular pathology. Emotional well-being was better in the research group as compared to baseline RAND SF-36 1.0 data (79.2 ± 12.4 vs 70.4 ± 22.0; P < 0.001). Physical functioning (50 (IQR 30-85) vs 70.6 ± 27.4; P = 0.007) and health change (51.6 ± 17.0 vs 59.1 ± 23.1; P = 0.020) were worse in the research group as compared to reference values.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival was 60% at 5-years follow-up, which is lower than reported in recent literature. An adjusted positive influence of younger age at surgery was found on long-term survival. This could have consequences for future treatment indication in complex AAA surgery but further large-scale validation is necessary.

Chimney vs. Fenestrated Endovascular vs. Open Repair for Juxta/Pararenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of the Medium-Term Results

Introduction: This systematic review with network meta-analysis aimed at comparing the medium-term results of open surgery (OS), fenestrated endovascular repair (FEVAR), and chimney endovascular repair (ChEVAR) in patients with juxta/pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (JAAAs/PAAAs). Materials and methods: MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science were searched from inception date to 1st July 2022. Any studies comparing the results of two or three treatment strategies (ChEVAR, FEVAR, or OS) on medium-term outcomes in patients with JAAAs/PAAAs were included. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, aortic-related reintervention, and aortic-related mortality, while secondary outcomes were visceral stent/bypass occlusion/occlusion, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), new onset renal replacement therapy (RRT), total endoleaks, and type I/III endoleak. Results: FEVAR (OR = 1.53, 95%CrI 1.03-2.11) was associated with higher medium-term all-cause mortality than OS. Sensitivity analysis including only studies that analysed JAAA showed that FEVAR (OR = 1.65, 95%CrI 1.08-2.33) persisted to be associated with higher medium-term mortality than OS. Both FEVAR (OR = 8.32, 95%CrI 3.80-27.16) and ChEVAR (OR = 5.95, 95%CrI 2.23-20.18) were associated with a higher aortic-related reintervention rate than OS. No difference between different treatment options was found in terms of aortic-related mortality. FEVAR (OR = 13.13, 95%CrI 2.70-105.2) and ChEVAR (OR = 16.82, 95%CrI 2.79-176.7) were associated with a higher rate of medium-term visceral branch occlusion/stenosis compared to OS; however, there was no difference found between FEVAR and ChEVAR. Conclusions: An advantage of OS compared to FEVAR and ChEVAR after mid-term follow-up aortic-related intervention and vessel branch/bypass stenosis/occlusion was found. This suggests that younger, low-surgical-risk patients might benefit from open surgery of JAAA/PAAA as a first approach.