Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Diameter versus Volume: A Systematic Review

Implantable Pressure-Sensing Devices for Monitoring Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in Post-Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Over the past two decades, there has been extensive research into surveillance methods for the post-endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms, highlighting the importance of these technologies in supplementing or even replacing conventional image-screening modalities. This review aims to provide an overview of the current status of alternative surveillance solutions for endovascular aneurysm repair, while also identifying potential aneurysm features that could be used to develop novel monitoring technologies. It offers a comprehensive review of these recent clinical advances, comparing new and standard clinical practices. After introducing the clinical understanding of abdominal aortic aneurysms and exploring current treatment procedures, the paper discusses the current surveillance methods for endovascular repair, contrasting them with recent pressure-sensing technologies. The literature on three commercial pressure-sensing devices for post-endovascular repair surveillance is analyzed. Various pre-clinical and clinical studies assessing the safety and efficacy of these devices are reviewed, providing a comparative summary of their outcomes. The review of the results from pre-clinical and clinical studies suggests a consistent trend of decreased blood pressure in the excluded aneurysm sac post-repair. However, despite successful pressure readings from the aneurysm sac, no strong link has been established to translate these measurements into the presence or absence of endoleaks. Furthermore, the results do not allow for a conclusive determination of ongoing aneurysm sac growth. Consequently, a strong clinical need persists for monitoring endoleaks and aneurysm growth following endovascular repair.

Importance of sac regression after EVAR and the role of EndoAnchors

The initial success and widespread adoption of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms have been tempered by numerous reports of secondary interventions and increased long-term mortality compared with open repair. Over the past decade, several studies on postoperative sac dynamics after EVAR have suggested that the presence of sac regression is a benign feature with a favorable prognosis. Conversely, increasing sacs and even stable sacs can be indicators of more unstable sac behavior with worse outcomes in the long-term. Endoleaks were initially perceived as the main drivers of sac behavior. However, the observation that sac regression can occur in the presence of endoleaks, and vice versa - increasing sacs without evidence of endoleak - on imaging studies, suggests the involvement of other contributing factors. These factors can be divided into anatomical factors, patient characteristics, sac thrombus composition, and device-related factors. The shift of interest away from especially type 2 endoleaks is further supported by promising results with the use of EndoAnchors regarding postoperative sac behavior. This review provides an overview of the existing literature on the implications and known risk factors of post-EVAR sac behavior, describes the accurate measurement of sac behavior, and discusses the use of EndoAnchors to promote sac regression.

Aortic Size Index Versus Aortic Diameter in the Prediction of Rupture in Women With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) pose significant challenges in clinical management, particularly in female patients, whose unique anatomical and physiological characteristics influence rupture risk. While aortic diameter (AD) has traditionally been the primary metric for predicting rupture, its limitations, especially in women, have spurred exploration into alternative measures such as the aortic size index (ASI). This review examines the anatomy and physiology of AAAs in women, gender-specific challenges in diagnosis and management, and the comparative effectiveness of ASI versus AD in predicting rupture risk. ASI, calculated as AD divided by body surface area (BSA), offers a more nuanced assessment by adjusting for individual body size differences, potentially mitigating gender disparities in rupture rates. Comparative analyses indicate ASI's superiority in predicting adverse aortic events, particularly in women, thereby advocating for its integration into clinical practice to improve patient outcomes. Additionally, emerging techniques such as 3D volumetric measurements and biomechanical assessments show promise in enhancing rupture risk prediction, heralding a shift toward more personalized and effective management strategies for AAA patients.

The Role of Aortic Volume in the Natural History of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms and Post-Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Surveillance

There has been a debate about whether maximum diameter can be solely used to assess the natural history of abdominal aortic aneurysm. The aim of the present review is to collect all the available evidence on the role of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) volume in the natural history of AAAs, including small untreated AAAs and AAAs treated by EVAR. The current literature appears to reinforce the role of volume as a supplementary measure for evaluating the natural history of AAA, in both intact AAAs and after EVAR. The clinical impact of AAA volume measurements remains unclear. Several studies show that volumetric analysis can assess changes in AAAs and predict successful endoluminal exclusion after EVAR more accurately than diameter. However, most studies lack strict standardized measurement criteria and well-defined outcome definitions. It remains unclear whether volumetry could replace diameter assessment in defining the risk of rupture of AAAs and identifying clinically relevant sac growth.

Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Sac Diameter Assessment for Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair

PURPOSE

Artificial intelligence (AI) using an automated, deep learning-based method, Augmented Radiology for Vascular Aneurysm (ARVA), has been verified as a viable aide in aneurysm morphology assessment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of ARVA when analyzing preoperative and postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) in patients managed with fenestrated endovascular repair (FEVAR) for complex aortic aneurysms (cAAs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Preoperative and postoperative CTAs from 50 patients (n=100 CTAs) who underwent FEVAR for cAAs were extracted from the picture archiving and communication system (PACS) of a single aortic center equipped with ARVA. All studies underwent automated AI aneurysm morphology assessment by ARVA. Appropriate identification of the outer wall of the aorta was verified by manual review of the AI-generated overlays for each patient. Maximum outer-wall aortic diameters were measured by 2 clinicians using multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) and curved planar reformatting (CPR), and among studies where the aortic wall was appropriately identified by ARVA, they were compared with ARVA automated measurements.

RESULTS

Identification of the outer wall of the aorta was accurate in 89% of CTA studies. Among these, diameter measurements by ARVA were comparable to clinician measurements by MPR or CPR, with a median absolute difference of 2.4 mm on the preoperative CTAs and 1.6 mm on the postoperative CTAs. Of note, no significant difference was detected between clinician measurements using MPR or CPR on preoperative and postoperative scans (range 0.5-0.9 mm).

CONCLUSION

For patients with cAAs managed with FEVAR, ARVA provides accurate preoperative and postoperative assessment of aortic diameter in 89% of studies. This technology may provide an opportunity to automate cAA morphology assessment in most cases where time-intensive, manual clinician measurements are currently required.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In this retrospective analysis of preoperative and postoperative imaging from 50 patients managed with FEVAR, AI provided accurate aortic diameter measurements in 89% of the CTAs reviewed, despite the complexity of the aortic anatomies, and in post-operative CTAs despite metal artifact from stent grafts, markers and embolization materials. Outliers with imprecise automated aortic overlays were easily identified by scrolling through the axial AI-generated segmentation MPR cuts of the entire aorta.This study supports the notion that such emerging AI technologies can improve efficiency of routine clinician workflows while maintaining excellent measurement accuracy when analyzing complex aortic anatomies by CTA.

Beyond Diameter: Enhancing Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Surveillance with Volumetric Assessments after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR)

This study aimed to investigate the relationship between maximum transverse diameter (MTD) and volume measurements in patients who underwent reoperations after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), and their association with the occurrence of endoleaks. The study included 51 patients who underwent EVAR and subsequent re-operations caused by endoleaks type I-III. In some number of events, multiple re-operations were needed. MTD was measured using the Horos software, and segmentations of the AAA were performed using 3D Slicer. This study first evaluated post-operative computed tomography angiography (CTA) to measure MTD and volume. Then, similar measurements were made in the control scan for re-operation qualification. Negative remodeling (increase in MTD and/or volume) was observed in 40 cases using MTD, and 48 cases using volume measurements. The volume measurement showed lower missed negatives than MTD, indicating its effectiveness in screening for negative remodeling (p < 0.001). Combining both methods identified 51 negative remodeling cases and 8 positive changes, with a higher sensitivity compared to MTD alone. The volume of the sac did not predict specific endoleak types. Decreases in MTD were observed in smaller sacs, with smaller volume changes. Volume measurement is a valuable screening tool, and combining MTD and volume enhances sensitivity. However, sac volume does not predict endoleak type.