Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging after endovascular treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms

Endovascular Repair of Thoracic and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Pre- and Postprocedural Imaging

Endovascular repair of thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms is a safe alternative to conventional open surgical repair. Clinical success, however, is highly dependent on patient selection. Diagnostic vascular imaging has an essential role for this selection process. Following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), patients require long-term surveillance and again vascular imaging serves an integral function. This article reviews EVAR selection criteria and post-EVAR assessment and then discusses the imaging modalities used to evaluate these patients, namely multi-detector-row computed tomographic angiography, magnetic resonance imaging/angiography, duplex ultrasonography, and catheter angiography.

Aortic aneurysm volume calculation: effect of operator experience

BACKGROUND

We have successfully applied sequential volumetric analysis of abdominal aortic aneurysms to exclude endoleak in patients who have an aortic endostent. This study compared the effect of variable operator experience on volumetric calculation accuracy.

METHODS

Four operators with different experience levels calculated abdominal aneurysm volumes in 10 patients at two different times (>/= 1 week apart). The four reviewers were ranked as having a high level of experience (one full-time laboratory worker specializing in three dimensions with 3 years of experience), a moderate level of experience (one part-time laboratory worker specializing in three dimensions/computed tomographic technician with 1 year of part-time experience), and a low level of experience (two individuals taught volumetric measurements for the purposes of this study: a fellow in abdominal imaging and a computed tomographic technician). All volumes were calculated with a GE Advantage 4.0 workstation (General Electric, Waukesha, WI, USA).

RESULTS

Mean aneurysm volume and volume difference between two measurements were calculated for four operators. The average (standard deviation) percent volume differences were 1.2% (0.2%) for the experienced reader, 3.2% (0.3%) for the moderately experienced reader, and 6.0% (1.0%) and 5.8% (1.1%) for the two readers with light experience. Differences between averages were statistically significant (p < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

We have defined a percent margin of error for aortic aneurysm volume measurement and have shown a direct correlate to level of experience. Diagnosis of endoleak based on aneurysm volume enlargement on serial scans needs to account for the level of operator experience.

MRA is useful as a follow-up technique after endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms with nitinol endoprostheses

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether MR angiography (MRA) is a useful tool for the follow-up of aortic aneurysms treated with nitinol endoluminal grafts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We examined 28 patients treated with nitinol endovascular stents to repair an aortic aneurysm with CT angiography (CTA) and MRA. Eleven patients (group 1) underwent an MRA after a positive CTA for endoleak was observed. Afterwards, 17 patients (group 2) were scheduled for both follow-up examinations. The kind of endoleak that occurred and the maximum aortic diameter were compared. The sensitivity of CTA relative to MRA for detecting endoleaks in group 2 was calculated. Signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) were measured in the aortoiliac lumen at the arterial phase in, above, and below the endoprostheses. Student's t-test was used to compare aneurysm dimensions and SNR measurements.

RESULTS

Three type III leaks were correctly assessed at both examinations; however, CTA was less sensitive (50%) than MRA in depicting type II or unclassified leaks. No differences in aneurismal size were observed between the two examinations or between arterial SNRs observed in or out of the devices.

CONCLUSION

MRA can provide all relevant information necessary for the follow-up of patients treated with nitinol endoprostheses, and performs better than CTA in detecting endoleaks.

What is the significance of endoleaks and endotension

Endovascular repair has been used over a decade as a treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm, and has become a widely accepted treatment method with a low rate of perioperative complications. Endoleak, perigraft blood flow outside endograft but within aneurysmsac, has been intensively studied during the last 10 years of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVR). The natural history of aneurysms with endoleak and the true clinical significance of various types of endoleaks remains unclear. Type I/III endoleak has been found to be associated with aneurysm rupture, while the risk of rupture of aneurysms with type II endoleak and endotension appears very small. In endotension, the aneurysm sac remains pressurized, even if there is no evidence of an endoleak. Currently,it is accepted that type I/III endoleaks should be corrected, preferably by endovascular means, due to the risk of rupture. If endovascular repair is not possible, then open conversion should be considered. The risk of conversion should be weighed against the risk of aneurysm rupture. Treatment of type II endoleaks and endotension is more controversial. In those with aneurysm enlargement,secondary interventions are often performed.

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Contrast-enhanced US for Missed Endoleaks after Endoluminal Repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate contrast material-enhanced ultrasonography (US) for depiction of endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (or endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR]) in patients with aneurysm enlargement and no evidence of endoleak.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From November 1998 to February 2003, 112 patients underwent EVAR. At follow-up, duplex US and biphasic multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography were performed. In 10 patients (group A), evident aneurysm enlargement was observed, with no evidence of complications, at both CT angiography and duplex US. Group A patients, 10 men (mean age, 69.6 years +/- 10 [standard deviation]), underwent US after intravenous bolus injection of a second-generation contrast agent, with continuous low-mechanical index (0.01-0.04) real-time tissue harmonic imaging. Group B patients, 10 men (mean age, 71.3 years +/- 8.2) with aneurysm shrinkage and no evidence of complications, and group C patients, 10 men (mean age, 73.2 years +/- 6) with CT angiographic evidence of endoleak, underwent contrast-enhanced US. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) was performed in groups A and C. Endoleak detection and characterization were assessed with imaging modalities used in groups A-C; at contrast-enhanced US, time of detection of endoleak, persistence of sac enhancement, and morphology of enhancement were evaluated.

RESULTS

In group A, contrast-enhanced US depicted one type I, six type II, one type III, and two undefined endoleaks that were not detected at CT angiography. All leakages were characterized by slow and delayed echo enhancement detected at longer than 150 seconds after contrast agent administration. DSA results confirmed findings in all patients; percutaneous treatment was performed. In group B, contrast-enhanced US did not show echo enhancement; in group C, results with this modality confirmed findings at CT angiography and DSA.

CONCLUSION

Contrast-enhanced US depicts endoleaks after EVAR, particularly when depiction fails with other imaging modalities.

Durability and Validity of a Remote, Miniaturized Pressure Sensor in an Animal Model of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

PURPOSE

To investigate whether a remote, miniaturized pressure sensor could maintain calibration and function through organized thrombus over an extended period in a porcine model of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

METHODS

Six adult pigs had an AAA surgically created and excluded. A sensor zeroed to atmospheric pressure was placed within the aneurysm sac and another within the suprarenal aorta of each animal. Pressure measurements were taken at the initial operation and then on a weekly basis over 2 months. The aortic sensors were correlated to an intra-arterial pressure catheter at the initial operation and at the time of sacrifice. Back-table sensor correlation with atmospheric pressure was done at the time of explantation.

RESULTS

Three animals died during the follow-up period. Five animals were available for 6-week follow-up, of which 3 survived for the complete 8-week protocol. Two of the surviving animals had an intra-aortic sensor. All 5 aneurysm sac sensors functioned throughout the experimental period. At the time of sacrifice, the sacs contained a large amount of organized thrombus in which the sac sensors were deeply embedded. The 3 aortic sensors also functioned throughout the course of the experiments. The pressures correlated within 5 mmHg to the catheter-based measurements taken at the initial operation and at the time of sacrifice. Comparison to atmospheric pressure revealed no calibration offset in any sensor.

CONCLUSIONS

This chronic implantation study demonstrates the durability of a remote, miniaturized pressure sensor within a surgically created aneurysm sac as well as the suprarenal aorta of a porcine AAA model. There was no calibration offset in any of the sensors, and they remained valid at explantation. We believe that this is further evidence of the potential applicability of this sensor for clinical use.

Suitability of 7 Aortic Stent-Graft Models for MRI-Based Surveillance

PURPOSE

To evaluate the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics of commercially available stent-grafts used for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

METHODS

Seven endovascular grafts (AneuRx, Lifepath, Talent, Excluder, Zenith, Quantum LP, and Ancure) were suspended in a water bath containing gadolinium and scanned using a 1.5-T clinical MRI scanner. Two different scan techniques (T(1)-weighted spoiled gradient echo and spin echo) based upon a clinical MRI endograft surveillance protocol were used for each stent-graft. The scans were evaluated for susceptibility artifacts and radiofrequency (RF) shielding and caging artifacts.

RESULTS

For most endografts, the lumen and structures surrounding the endograft were well visualized. However, the ferromagnetic properties of the Zenith and Lifepath devices resulted in large susceptibly artifacts that obliterated the endograft lumen as well as adjacent structures. All fully supported grafts showed some amount of signal loss from the graft lumen caused by RF caging. For the Ancure graft, evaluation around the attachment sites might be problematic.

CONCLUSIONS

An MRI-based surveillance protocol appears to be a viable option for the AneuRx, Talent, Excluder, and Quantum LP stent-grafts.

Magnetic resonance-guided placement of aortic stents grafts: feasibility with real-time magnetic resonance fluoroscopy

PURPOSE

The artifact behavior of different aortic stent-grafts was evaluated with real-time magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and the feasibility of real-time MR-guided stent-graft placement in the abdominal aorta was tested.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seven different stent-grafts and their deployment systems were analyzed in an in vitro setting regarding their artifacts on different real-time MR images with cartesian, spiral, and radial k-space filling. The device and the real-time sequence with the fewest artifacts were used for an in vivo study in a swine model. In four animals, a straight aortic stent-graft was placed in the infrarenal abdominal aorta under real-time MR guidance. Results were controlled with MR angiography, multislice spiral computed tomography, and digital subtraction angiography.

RESULTS

The in vitro study proved only one of the seven stent grafts (including deployment systems) to be suitable for real-time MR-guided intervention. MR-guided placement of the stent-grafts was possible in all animals. In one animal, the stent-graft dislocated during withdrawal of the deployment system as a result of a mismatch between stent-graft diameter and size of the infrarenal aorta.

CONCLUSION

Real-time MR-guided placement of stent-grafts in the abdominal aorta with use of commercially available standard instruments is feasible. However, for clinical use, dedicated devices and deployment systems producing less artifacts are required.

Type II endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: a conservative approach with selective intervention is safe and cost-effective

OBJECTIVES

The conservative versus therapeutic approach to type II endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) has been controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and cost-effectiveness of the conservative approach of embolizing type II endoleak only when persistent for more than 6 months and associated with aneurysm sac growth of 5 mm or more.

METHODS

Data for 486 consecutive patients who underwent EVAR were analyzed for incidence and outcome of type II endoleaks. Spiral computed tomography (CT) scans were reviewed, and patient outcome was evaluated at either office visit or telephone contact. Patients with new or late-appearing type II endoleak were evaluated with spiral CT at 6-month intervals to evaluate both persistence of the endoleak and size of the aneurysm sac. Persistent (>or=6 months) type II endoleak and aneurysm sac growth of 5 mm or greater were treated with either translumbar glue or coil embolization of the lumbar source, or transarterial coil embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery.

RESULTS

Type II endoleaks were detected in 90 (18.5%) patients. With a mean follow-up of 21.7 +/- 16 months, only 35 (7.2%) patients had type II endoleak that persisted for 6 months or longer. Aneurysm sac enlargement was noted in 5 patients, representing 1% of the total series. All 5 patients underwent successful translumbar sac embolization (n = 4) or transarterial inferior mesenteric artery embolization (n = 4) at a mean follow-up of 18.2 +/- 8.0 months, with no recurrence or aneurysm sac growth. No patient with treated or untreated type II endoleak has had rupture of the aneurysm. The mean global cost for treatment of persistent type II endoleak associated with aneurysm sac growth was US dollars 6695.50 (hospital cost plus physician reimbursement). Treatment in the 30 patients with persistent type II endoleak but no aneurysm sac growth would have represented an additional cost of US dollars 200000 or more. The presence or absence of a type II endoleak did not affect survival (78% vs 73%) at 48 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective intervention to treat type II endoleak that persists for 6 months and is associated with aneurysm enlargement seems to be both safe and cost-effective. Longer follow-up will determine whether this conservative approach to management of type II endoleak is the standard of care.

Time-resolved magnetic resonance angiography as a noninvasive method to characterize endoleaks: initial results compared with conventional angiography

PURPOSE

Several types of endoleaks have been described, each with different methods of treatment. Conventional arteriography is widely regarded as the gold standard for the classification of endoleaks. Recently, faster magnetic resonance gradients have allowed for rapid data acquisition and review of vascular studies as a real-time continuous angiogram (time resolved magnetic resonance angiography [TR-MRA]). This study was performed to compare the findings of TR-MRA with conventional angiography for the characterization of endoleaks.

METHODS

Between June 2002 and June 2003, 12 patients with documented endoleaks following endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms (10 abdominal and two thoracic) underwent TR-MRA to identify and characterize the endoleak. All patients had nitinol-based aortic stent grafts. MRA was performed on a 1.5-Tesla magnet (Sonata class; Siemens Medical Systems, Iselin, NJ). The TR-MRA studies were reviewed under continuous observation as a "cine MR angiogram." These MRA data sets were used to classify the endoleaks into types 1 through 3. The patients underwent conventional angiography following the MRA to confirm the findings and to plan treatment. The MRA findings were compared with the findings made at conventional arteriography.

RESULTS

TR-MRA identified seven patients with type 1 leaks, including four proximal and three distal. Four patients had type 2 leaks, including two arising from the inferior mesenteric artery and two from an iliolumbar artery. One patient had a type 3 leak. Conventional angiography confirmed the type of endoleak in all 12 patients.

CONCLUSION

These initial results demonstrate TR-MRA to be an effective noninvasive method for classifying endoleaks. This technique may allow for screening of patients with endoleaks to identify those requiring urgent repair.

MR imaging for the detection of endoleaks in recipients of abdominal aortic stent-grafts with low magnetic susceptibility

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

This study was performed to assess the efficacy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the detection of endoleaks in recipients of abdominal aortic stent-grafts with low magnetic susceptibility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective search was conducted in radiology department records for cases of patients with low-susceptibility stent-grafts who had been evaluated with MR imaging and either computed tomography (CT) or conventional angiography within a 1-month time frame. Any endoleaks previously confirmed and classified with the use of CT and/or conventional angiography were compared with findings from MR imaging.

RESULTS

Nine patients fit the selection criteria. Images of five of those patients depicted six different endoleaks. Two endoleaks had been confirmed with CT, another two had been confirmed with CT and angiography, and two had been confirmed with angiography alone. All endoleaks visualized at CT and/or angiography were accurately detected and classified also with MR imaging. In some cases, the endoleak was more clearly visualized with MR imaging than with CT. In four patients in whom no endoleaks were found at CT, MR imaging also indicated no endoleaks.

CONCLUSION

MR imaging is a suitable modality for identifying endoleaks in patients with low-susceptibility stent-grafts. Moreover, MR imaging may be more sensitive than CT for the detection of small endoleaks.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging for aortic stent-graft surveillance

PURPOSE

To compare unenhanced and enhanced ultrasound imaging to computed tomographic angiography (CTA) or magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for surveillance of aortic endografts.

METHODS

Thirty consecutive patients (29 men; mean age 69 years, range 50-82) who underwent endovascular aortic aneurysm repair agreed to participate in a follow-up program. Patients underwent CTA (26/30) or MRA (4/30), plain abdominal radiography, and unenhanced and enhanced ultrasound examinations at 3, 12, and 24 months to evaluate aneurysm diameter, endoleaks, and graft patency. The accuracy of ultrasound was compared with CTA or MRA as the reference standards.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients reached the 24-month assessment (mean follow-up 30 months, range 6-60). All endoleaks detected by CTA or MRA were confirmed by enhanced ultrasound; the aneurysm diameter in these patients remained unchanged or increased. In patients without endoleaks on any imaging method, the sac diameter remained unchanged or decreased. Endoleaks disclosed by enhanced ultrasound alone, all type II, numbered 16 at 3 months, 6 at 12 months, and 3 at 24 months. In this group, the aneurysm diameter remained unchanged or increased. Enhanced ultrasound yielded 100% sensitivity in detecting endoleaks, but compared with CTA and MRA, all endoleaks detected by enhanced ultrasound alone were false positives (mean specificity 65%). Nevertheless, because changes in the postoperative aneurysm diameter were similar in patients with endoleaks detectable on CTA/MRA and on enhanced ultrasound ("true positives") and in those with endoleaks detectable only on enhanced ultrasound ("false positives"), some endoleaks were possibly "true positive" results.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced ultrasound is a useful method in the long-term surveillance of endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs, possibly in association with CTA or MRA. Enhanced ultrasound also seems able to identify endoleaks missed by other imaging techniques, but this conclusion awaits further investigation.

Risk factors of early and late complications in patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

to identify pre-operative factors that could predict complications following from transluminal repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA).

METHODS

during a 5-year period, 96 consecutive patients underwent elective endovascular treatment of a AAA. In all patients, helical CT and/or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and plain abdominal roentgenogram were performed at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months and yearly thereafter. Angiography was performed systematically 1 year after the stent-graft implantation, or earlier if helical CT or MRI diagnosed an increase in the maximal transverse diameter or a high flow endoleak.

RESULTS

early (<30 days) morbidity (12%) was significantly increased by pre-operative renal insufficiency (p < 0.01). Early mortality (2%) correlated with ASA score (p = 0.01). Median follow-up was 27 months (range 3-66). Mortality (12%) during follow-up was correlated to the pre-operative coronary status (p = 0.01). A type I endoleak was diagnosed in 18 patients (19%). Common iliac artery diameter was correlated with the presence of type I endoleak (p < 0.001). A type II endoleak was diagnosed in 47 (49%) patients. The diagnostic of type II endoleak was significantly increased (p = 0.001) in patients with pre-operative patent IMA associated with more than four patent lumbar arteries. The anatomic characteristics of the aneurysm were correlated to the additional endovascular procedures during stentgraft implantation (p = 0.01), and to the implantation of a complementary iliac limb extension during follow-up (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

the risk factors determined by this statistical analysis could help surgeons to select more accurately patients suitable for endovascular treatment.

Controversies in the management of type II "branch" endoleaks following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Successful endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is often defined as complete exclusion of blood flow within the aneurysm sac. Perigraft flow, also known as endoleak, is the most common complication following EVAR. Attachment site related endoleaks (type I) are generally considered to warrant some form of intervention due to the belief that they represent a risk for future rupture. Management of type II endoleaks, also known as branch or collateral endoleaks, is more controversial. Some advocate a policy of watchful-waiting whereas others treat all type II endoleaks as soon as they are discovered. The following review explores the controversies pertaining to the management, diagnosis and surveillance imaging, and treatment of type II endoleaks.

Imaging of aortic stent-grafts and endoleaks

Although the technical success of stent-graft implantation is established and relatively safe, data on the long-term safety and efficacy of endovascular repair are just emerging. Because several late complications of aortic stent-graft placement have been observed, life-long follow-up remains essential. Imaging methods form an integral part of every stage of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. The current imaging strategy should include initial plain films, CT angiography, and color-coded Duplex sonography. Plain films are an excellent means to detect migration, angulation, kinking, and structural changes of the stent mesh, including material fatigue, at follow-up. Helical CT angiography is considered a potentially revolutionary method for the noninvasive complete postprocedural assessment of aortic sten-grafting. Current data justify the use of biphasic C angiography as the postprocedural imaging technique of choice in most patients [118]. Ultrasound offers the advantages of low cost and lack of radiation exposure. High-quality ultrasound reliably excludes endoleaks in patients after stent-grafting of AAAs. There is a substantial variability, however, in measuring the diameter of aneurysm sacs; thus, confirmation using an alternative study is prudent in cases that demonstrate a significant change in size during follow-up. MR angiography serves as an attractive alternative to CT angiography in patients with impaired renal function or known allergic reaction to iodinated contrast media. With current techniques, the visualization of aortic stent-grafts (with the exception of stainless-steel-based devices) is sufficient with MR angiography. There is evidence that MR imaging is superior to CT angiography in detecting small type 2 endoleaks or for excluding retrograde perfusion in patients with suspected endotension. The role of diagnostic catheter angiography is limited to assessment of vascular pathways in equivocal cases or for suspected endotension. Currently, a consensus view about postprocedural management after aortic stent-graft implantation is lacking. The authors propose performing a baseline CT angiography at discharge and a biphasic CT angiography and Duplex ultrasound scan at three months. In patients with no evidence of an endoleak, CT angiography, plain film and Duplex sonography (abdomen) should be repeated every year after endovascular repair. If an endoleak is present at follow-up, immediate appropriate treatment should be initiated.