Clinical Significance of Type II Endoleak after Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Clinical Study of the Results of Sac Prefilling Performed to Prevent Type II Endoleaks After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of sac prefilling (SP) with fibrin glue and/or a coil to prevent type II endoleaks (T2ELs) after endovascular aneurysm repair. The main outcome measure was prevalence of incidence of T2ELs.

METHODS

First, this is a retrospective observational study on patients treated in our institution. Patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair between January 2017 and July 2022 were included and divided into the endovascular aneurysm repair and endovascular aneurysm repair with SP groups. Additionally, all patients were divided into high-risk (HR) and low-risk (LR) groups based on their risk for T2ELs. The prevalence of incidence of T2ELs at 1 year postoperatively was the main effectiveness index, and the colorectal ischemia complication rate was the main safety index.

RESULTS

A total of 431 patients were included in this clinical study. The endovascular aneurysm repair group and SP group comprised 383 patients and 48 patients, respectively. No statistically significant differences between these groups were observed. The HR group included 282 patients; 246 of these patients were in the HR endovascular aneurysm repair group, and 36 were in the HR SP group. The prevalence of incidence of T2ELs in the endovascular aneurysm repair group was higher than that of the SP group at 6 and 12 months postoperatively (15.4% vs 2.8% and 13.2% vs 0%); statistically significant differences between these groups were observed (p = 0.039 and p = 0.032). The postoperative follow-up period was 60 months. A Kaplan-Meier curve analysis indicated that the cumulative T2EL incidence rate of the endovascular aneurysm repair group was significantly higher than that of the SP group (p = 0.011). The LR group included a total of 149 patients; 137 of these patients were in the endovascular aneurysm repair group, and 12 were in the SP group. No statistically significant differences between these groups were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm who are at HR for T2ELs, SP could effectively, and safely prevent postoperative T2ELs.Clinical ImpactThis study points out that in patients with AAA, the sac prefilling technique is more suitable for patients with high-risk factors, so the operator should evaluate the patient's anatomical condition more thoroughly before EVAR.

Endovascular Aneurysmal Repair With the INCRAFT Stent Graft System for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Combined Korean Multi-Center and Single-Center Registry Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The INCRAFT™ Stent Graft System is a trimodular, bifurcated, ultra-low-profile endovascular device designed for endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study population comprised a prospective multi-center cohort (n = 85) and a single-center retrospective cohort (n = 61) of Korean AAA patients treated with INCRAFT. Postprocedural follow-up involved computed tomography (CT) imaging at 1 and 12 months post-procedure to monitor aneurysm dimensions and detect any endoleak.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 72.0 ± 7.1 years, with the majority being male (91.8%). The average maximal aortic sac diameter was 54.7 ± 8.6 mm. Technical success was achieved in 82.9%, primarily due to the relatively high incidence of type I endoleak (17.1%) observed on immediate angiographical assessment. The rate of 30-day major vascular complication was 0.7%. For the hemostasis of bilateral femoral access arteries, 57.5% required only 2 ProGlides. At the 30-day follow-up CT, the prevalence of endoleaks was 30.4% including type I (1.4%), type II (26.1%), and undermined type (2.8%). At the 12-month follow-up, the major adverse event rate was 6.2% attributed to noncardiovascular mortality. Aneurysm-related events included 3 cases (2.1%) of re-interventions due to graft occlusion (n = 2) and type II endoleak with sac expansion (n = 1). Aneurysm shrinkage and enlargement occurred in 37.8% and 3.4% of patients, respectively. At the 12-month follow-up, type II endoleak was the most frequent type, with a prevalence of 22.7%. Type I endoleak and undetermined type were found in 0.8% and 17.8% of cases, respectively, with no instances of type III endoleak.

CONCLUSION

INCRAFT demonstrated favorable early and 12-month clinical efficacy and safety profiles for treating Korean patients with AAA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

K-INCRAFT; www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier: NCT03952780Clinical ImpactEndovascular aneurysmal repair (EVAR) is effective treatment option for unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in patients with high perioperative risk and suitable anatomy. The INCRAFT stent graft system is an ultra-low-profile endovascular graft designed for EVAR, and its efficacy and safety have been demonstrated in multi-center European and U.S.

TRIALS

Our study found that the INCRAFT stent graft system has favorable early and 12-month clinical efficacy and safety profiles in treating AAAs within Korean population, with a 30-day major vascular complications rate of 0.7% and no cases of aneurysmal-related mortality or rupture.

Real world experience with the TREO device in standard EVAR: Mid-term results of 150 cases from a German Multicenter study

Background: The objective of the study was to analyze mid-term results of unselected patients treated with the TREO (Terumo Aortic, Florida, USA) device at six German hospital sites. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective analysis of patients treated within and outside instructions for use (IFU) from January 2017 to November 2020 was performed. Primary outcomes were technical success, mortality and endograft related complications according to IFU status. Secondary outcomes were aneurysm/procedure related re-interventions. Results: 150 patients (92% male, mean age 73 ±8 years) were treated (within IFU 84% vs. outside IFU 16%) with the TREO device for abdominal aortic aneurysms (n=127 intact, n=17 symptomatic and n=6 ruptured; p=0.30). Technical success was achieved in 147/150 (within IFU 99% vs. outside IFU 92%, p=0.08). 30-day mortality was 2%, one year and overall mortality was 3% and 5%. During a mean follow-up of 28.4 months (range: 1-67.4 months), 35 (25%; within IFU 23% vs. outside IFU 35%, p=0.23) patients suffered from endoleaks. The majority were endoleaks type II (n=33), the remaining type Ia (n=5) and type Ib (n=3). No endoleaks type III-V, migrations or aneurysm ruptures occurred. Overall, 19 patients (13%; within IFU 13% vs. 15% outside IFU, p=0.70) received a secondary intervention: nine endoleak related endovascular procedures, three open conversions, two endograft limb related interventions, four surgical revisions of the femoral access sites and two bowl ischemia related procedures, respectively. Conclusions: This non industry-sponsored, multicenter trial indicates that using the TREO device in a real-world setting (both within and outside IFU) seems feasible in the treatment of patients suffering from AAA. While the rate of complications and secondary interventions is in line with previously published data, the findings highlight the fact that standard EVAR is associated with serious adverse events.

Surgical Treatment for Sac Expansion Caused by Type II Endoleaks after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms/Iliac Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to examine the outcomes of open surgery techniques involving sacotomy and suturing of the feeding vessels in patients with aneurysm sac expansion after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

Fourteen consecutive patients treated with sacotomy and suturing of feeding vessels for expanding aneurysm sacs with type II endoleaks following EVAR, between January 2018 and December 2022, were retrospectively included. All patients underwent preoperative digital subtraction angiography, and attempts were made to embolize the thick feeding vessels to reduce intraoperative bleeding. Age, sex, comorbidities, clinical presentation, aneurysm sac increase, morbidity, mortality, and follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 72.89 ± 5.13 years old, and 13 (92.9%) patients were male. The sac size at the time of the open procedure was 107.89 ± 22.58 mm, and the extent of sac growth at the time of the open procedure was 37.50 ± 18.29 mm. The initial technical success rate of laparotomy and open ligation of the culprit arteries causing type II endoleaks was 92.9% (13/14). Among the patients, 5 (35.7%) had been treated with interventional embolization before the open procedure. One endograft was removed and replaced by a bifurcated Dacron graft because of distal dislocation in one patient. All patients recovered, and no deaths were recorded postoperatively. No patients had an eventful postoperative course or any subsequent graft-related complications during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Open surgical repair involving sacotomy and suturing of the feeding vessels appeared to have good outcomes in the treatment of patients with aneurysm sac expansion caused by type II endoleaks after EVAR. Preoperative embolization of feeding vessels can thus effectively reduce intraoperative bleeding.

An Expert-Based Review on the Relevance and Management of Type 2 Endoleaks Following Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) are life-threatening and require emergent surgical therapy. Endovascular aortic repair for rupture (rEVAR) has become the leading strategy due to its minimal invasive approach with expected lower morbidity and mortality, especially in patients presenting with hemodynamic instability and relevant comorbidities. Following rEVAR, intraoperative angiography or early postinterventional computed tomography angiography have to exclude early type 1 or 3 endoleaks requiring immediate reintervention. Persistent type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) after rEVAR, in contrast to elective cases, can cause possibly lethal situations due to continuing extravascular blood loss through the remaining aortic aneurysm rupture site. Therefore, early identification of relevant persistent T2ELs associated with continuous bleeding and hemodynamic instability and immediate management is mandatory in the acute postoperative setting following rEVAR. Different techniques and concepts for the occlusion of T2ELs after rEVAR are available, and most of them are also used for relevant T2ELs after elective EVAR. In addition to various interventional embolization procedures for persistent T2ELs, some patients require open surgical occlusion of T2EL-feeding arteries, abdominal compartment decompression or direct surgical patch occlusion of the aneurysm rupture site after rEVAR. So far, in the acute situation of rAAAs, indications for preemptive or intraoperative T2EL embolization during rEVAR have not been established. In the long term, persistent T2ELs after rEVAR can lead to continuous aneurysm expansion with the possible development of secondary proximal type I endoleaks and an increased risk of re-rupture requiring regular follow-up and early consideration for reintervention. To date, only very few studies have investigated T2ELs after rEVAR or compared outcomes with those from elective EVAR regarding the special aspects of persisting T2ELs. This narrative review is intended to present the current knowledge on the incidence, natural history, relevance and strategies for T2EL management after rEVAR.

Jejunal ischaemia following inferior mesenteric artery angioembolisation for type 2 endoleak

We present a rare case of short-segment jejunal infarction following inferior mesenteric artery embolisation for type 2 endoleak in a patient who previously underwent endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Potential causes for the event might include thromboembolism or traumatic thrombosis of a jejunal branch of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) caused by a buddy guide wire used to maintain the position of the long vascular sheath in the SMA hiatus. The condition was recognised on CT and treated with resection of the infarcted segment of the small bowel followed by primary anastomosis.

Feeding Flow Velocity on Doppler Ultrasound Predicting the Outcome of Type II Endoleak following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Background

The objective is to study the relation between the velocity of the arterial feeder and the progression of the postendovascular aneurysm repair aneurysm to find out the cut point velocity, which causes a significant increase in size of the aneurysm sac.

Methods

Retrospective study of patients with Type II endoleak followed up with the duplex ultrasound between January 2010 and June 2022. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the velocity, number of feeding artery, and flow pattern were studied. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to evaluate a test performance and the most appropriate cutoff velocity of the arterial feeder.

Results

The peak systolic velocity (PSV) of >75 cm/s, multiple feeding arteries, and the to-and-fro pattern show a significant distinguish the stable size from the significant increase in the size of the aneurysm with a sensitivity of 100.0%, a specificity of 100.0%, and an accuracy of 100.0% (P = 0.002).

Conclusion

The patient with a PSV >75 cm/s, multiple feeding arteries, and the to-and-fro pattern are correlated with significant aneurysm expansion and need closer follow-up than the patient with low PSV, single feeding artery, and monophasic pattern.

Direct sac puncture versus transarterial embolization of type II endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: Comparison of outcomes

PURPOSE

Type 2 endoleak (T2EL) is the most common type of endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), and increases the risk of aneurysm sac rupture if it persists beyond 6 months. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of direct sac puncture versus transarterial embolization of T2ELs.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 42 consecutive T2EL embolization procedures, 19 by DSP and 23 by transarterial technique, between January 2015 and December 2020. Primary outcome was aneurysm sac stability and resolution of endoleak at follow-up imaging. Adverse events (AE) were classified based on the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) practice guidelines.

RESULTS

Technical success was 94.7% (18/19) in the DSP group and 86.9% (20/23) in the transarterial group (p = 0.32 (-0.77-0.25)). Treatment efficacy was evaluated in 16 patients in the DSP group and 18 patients in the transarterial group who had follow-up imaging ≥6 months after embolization. Mean imaging follow-up was 17.1 ± 11.2 (range, 6-41) months in the DSP group and 26.5 ± 15.4 (range, 6-48) months in the transarterial group (p = 0.06, -19.24-0.37). Treatment efficacy was 75% (12/16) in the DSP group and 33.3% (6/18) in the transarterial group (p = 0.02, 95% CI, 0.09-0.97). There was no procedure-related mortality. Moderate-severe AE occurred in 15.7% (3/19) in the DSP group and 8.7% (2/23) in the transarterial group (p = 0.44, -0.12-0.26).

CONCLUSION

In this study, DSP embolization of T2EL was equally safe and more effective than transarterial embolization in achieving aneurysm sac stability and resolution of endoleak.

ELECT: prospective, randomized trial comparing microvascular plug versus platinum-fibered microcoils for embolization of aneurysm sac side branches before endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Preemptive selective embolization of aneurysm sac side branches (ASSBs) has been proposed to prevent type II endoleak after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aimed to explore if an embolization strategy using microvascular plugs (MVP) reduces intervention time and radiation dose compared to platinum-fibered microcoils. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the devices in occluding the treated artery was assessed.

METHODS

Sixty patients scheduled for EVAR underwent percutaneous preemptive embolization of ASSBs using MVPs or coils after a 1:1 randomization. Follow-up imaging was performed during aortic stentgraft implantation.

RESULTS

Overall, 170 ASSBs were successfully occluded (83 arteries by MVPs and 87 by coils) and no acute treatment failure occurred. The mean procedure time was significantly lower in the group treated with MVPs (55 ± 4 min) compared to coil occlusion (67 ± 3 min; p = 0.018), which was paralleled by a numerically lower radiation dose (119 Gy/cm2 vs. 140 Gy/cm2; p = 0.45). No difference was found for contrast agent use (34 ml MVP group vs 35 ml coil group; p = 0.87). At follow-up, reopening of lumbar arteries was seen in nine cases (four after coil embolization; five after MVPs).

CONCLUSION

Both microvascular plugs and coils can be effectively used for preemptive embolization of aneurysm sac side branches before EVAR. Use of plugs offers a benefit in terms of intervention time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03842930 Registered 15 February 2019.

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound after Endovascular Aortic Repair: Supplement and Potential Substitute for CT in Early- and Long-Term Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Endoleaks are the most common complication after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Computed tomography angiography (CTA) is presently the golden standard for lifelong surveillance after EVAR. Several studies and meta-analyses have shown contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to be a good alternative. The main goal of our study was to further validate the inclusion of CEUS in follow-up examination protocols for the systematic surveillance after EVAR.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who had received CEUS as part of their routine surveillance after EVAR at our center was conducted. Detection rate and classification of endoleak types were compared between available postinterventional CTA/magnetic resonance angiography and follow-up CEUS examinations. Last preinterventional CTAs before EVAR served as baselines with focus on potential cofactors such as age, body mass index, maximum aortic aneurysm diameters, endoleak orientation, and distance-to-surface influencing detection rates and classification.

RESULTS

In total, 101 patients were included in the analysis. Forty-four endoleaks (43.5% of cases) were detected by either initial CEUS or CTA, mostly type II (37.6% of the included patients). Initial CEUS showed an endoleak sensitivity of 91.2%, a specificity of 100%, a positive predictive value of 100%, and a negative predictive value of 84.6%. No covariate with an influence on the correct classification could be identified either for CEUS or CT.

CONCLUSIONS

CEUS should be considered a valid complementary method to CTA in the lifelong surveillance after EVAR. As type II endoleaks seem to be a common early-term, sometimes spontaneously resolving complication that can potentially be missed by CTA, we suggest combined follow-up protocols including CEUS in the early on postinterventional assessment.

Late Open Abdominal Aneurysm Reconstruction and Graft Salvage in a Patient With Persistent Endoleak Type II Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

This study highlights a case of late open conversion repair (OCR) for persistent Type II endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), presenting a 78-year-old male with a history of EVAR for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. Despite conservative management of the initial endoleak, the aneurysm sac's progressive growth necessitated open reconstruction to salvage the graft. Successful postoperative outcomes emphasize the critical need for meticulous intervention strategies and surveillance in managing persistent Type II endoleaks. This case underlines the importance of a tailored approach, leveraging both endovascular and open surgical techniques, to optimize long-term outcomes and prevent aneurysm rupture in complex cases.

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Management of Endoleaks Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Endoleaks represent the most common complication after EVAR. Some types are associated with ongoing risk of aneurysm rupture and necessitate long-term surveillance and secondary interventions.

PURPOSE

This document, as with all CIRSE Standards of Practice documents, will recommend a reasonable approach to best practices of managing endoleaks. This will include imaging diagnosis, surveillance, indications for intervention, endovascular treatments and their outcomes. Our purpose is to provide recommendations based on up-to-date evidence, updating the guidelines previously published on this topic in 2013.

METHODS

The writing group was established by the CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee and consisted of clinicians with internationally recognised expertise in endoleak management. The writing group reviewed the existing literature performing a pragmatic evidence search using PubMed to select publications in English and relating to human subjects up to 2023. The final recommendations were formulated through consensus.

RESULTS

Endoleaks may compromise durability of the aortic repair, and long-term imaging surveillance is necessary for early detection and correct classification to guide potential re-intervention. The majority of endoleaks that require treatment can be managed using endovascular techniques. This Standards of Practice document provides up-to-date recommendations for the safe management of endoleaks.

Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Abdominal aortic aneurysms are found in up to 6% of men and 1.7% of women over the age of 65 years and are usually asymptomatic. The natural history of aortic aneurysms is continued dilation leading to rupture, which is associated with an overall 80% mortality. Of the patients with ruptured aneurysms that undergo intervention, half will not survive their hospitalization. Reduction in aneurysm mortality is therefore achieved by prophylactic repair during the asymptomatic period. On a population-based level, this is supported by abdominal aortic aneurysm screening programs. Approximately 60% of abdominal aortic aneurysms are confined to the infrarenal portion of the aorta and are amenable to repair with off-the-shelf endovascular devices. Endovascular techniques have now replaced open surgery as the primary modality for aneurysm repair.

Role of Aggressive Aneurysm Sac Embolization Before Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair in Preventing Type II Endoleak and Sac Expansion

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of aggressive embolization of side branches arising from the aneurysmal sac before endovascular aneurysm repair.

Methods

This retrospective study included 95 patients who underwent endovascular infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair at Tottori University Hospital between October 2016 and January 2021. Of these, 54 underwent standard endovascular aneurysm repair (conventional group), and 41 underwent coiling of the inferior mesenteric and lumbar arteries before undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (embolization group). The occurrence of type II endoleak, change in aneurysmal sac diameter, and reintervention rate due to type II endoleak during follow-up were evaluated.

Results

Compared to the conventional group, the embolization group had a significantly lower incidence of type II endoleak, more frequent aneurysmal sac shrinkage, and lower aneurysmal sac growth related to type II endoleak.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrated the effectiveness of aggressive aneurysmal sac embolization before endovascular aneurysm repair to prevent type II endoleak and the consequent long-term aneurysmal sac enlargement.

Volumetric analysis of effectiveness of embolization for preventing type II endoleaks following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

The presence of endoleak was associated with the failure of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) treatment. The key to eliminating type II endoleak has shifted from reintervention to prevention. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of applying fibrin sealant to prevent type II endoleak in conjunction with EVAR.

METHODS

All patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm who underwent EVAR from June 2019 to July 2021 were reviewed. Patients were grouped as Group A: standard EVAR with preemptive embolization and Group B: standard EVAR alone. The primary endpoint was the incidence of type II endoleak. The secondary endpoints were aneurysm sac regression, the inferior mesenteric artery patency, the numbers of patent lumbar arteries, and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 104 patients were included in Group A, and 116 were included in Group B. Technical success rate was 100%. The overall incidence of type II endoleak in Group A was significantly lower than that in Group B (4.8% vs 19.0%). The mean time of freedom from type II endoleak was 22.71 months for Group A (95% confidence interval, 21.59-23.83 months) and 19.89 months for Group B (95% confidence interval, 18.08-21.70 months). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from type II endoleak showed a significantly longer duration of freedom from type II endoleak in Group A (81.0% vs 95.2%). Group A showed a continuous sac regression tendency. In Group B, the sac volume decreased within 12 months but increased by 3.07 cm³ at 24 months. No complications were noted in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonselective preemptive embolization with porcine fibrin sealant during EVAR was safe and effective in preventing type II endoleak in the short and mid-term. Preemptive embolization can lead to a significantly higher sac regression rate. Larger patient populations and longer follow-ups with randomized control designed trials are expected to verify the long-term effectiveness and safety of preemptive embolization in preventing type II endoleak.

Endovascular aortic arch repair with chimney technique for pseudoaneurysm

BACKGROUND

Aortic pseudoaneurysm is a life-threatening clinical condition, and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been reported to have a relatively satisfactory effect in aortic pathologies. We summarized our single-centre experience using chimney TEVAR for aortic arch pseudoaneurysms with inadequate landing zones.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted from October 2015 to August 2020, 32 patients with aortic arch pseudoaneurysms underwent chimney TEVAR to exclude an aortic lesion and reconstruct the supra-aortic branches, including 3 innominate artery, 12 left common carotid arteries and 29 left subclavian arteries. Follow-up computed tomography was suggested before discharge; at 3, 6, 12 months and yearly thereafter.

RESULTS

The median age of 32 patients was 68.0 years (range, 28-81) with the mean max diameter of aneurysm of 47.9 ± 12.0 mm. Forty-four related supra-aortic branches were well preserved, and the technical success rate was 100%. The Type Ia endoleaks occurred in 3 (9%) patients. Two patients were lost to follow-up and 4 patients died during the follow-up period. The mean follow-up times was 46.5 ± 14.3 months. One patient died due to acute myocardial infarction just 10 days after chimney TEVAR and the other 3 patients passed away at 1.5 months, 20 months, and 31 months with non-aortic reasons. The 4.5-year survival estimate was 84.4%. The primary patency rate of the target supra-arch branch vessels was 97.7% (43/44), and no other aorta-related reinterventions and severe complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

For aortic arch pseudoaneurysms with inadequate landing zones for TEVAR, the chimney technique seems to be feasible, with acceptable mid-term outcomes, and it could serve as an alternative minimally invasive approach to extend the landing zone. Slow flow type Ia endoleak could be treated conservatively after chimney TEVAR. Additional experience is needed, and the long-term durability of chimney TEVAR requires further follow-up.

Relevance of Type II Endoleak After Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is widely used as an alternative to open repair in elective and even in emergent cases of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA). One of the most frequent complications after EVAR is type II endoleak (T2EL). In elective therapy, evidence-based therapeutic recommendations for T2EL are limited. Completely unclear is the role of T2EL after EVAR for rAAA (rEVAR). This study aims to investigate the significance of T2ELs after rEVAR.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective single-center data analysis of all patients who underwent rEVAR between January 2010 and December 2020 with primary T2EL. The outcome criteria were overall and T2EL-related mortality and reintervention rate as well as development of aneurysm diameter over follow-up (FU).

RESULTS

During the study period between January 2010 and December 2020, 35 (25%) out of 138 patients with rEVAR presented a primary postoperative T2EL (age 74±11 years, 34 males). At rupture, mean aneurysm diameter was 73±12 mm. Follow-up was 26 (0-172) months. The reintervention-free survival was 69% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 55%-86%) at 30 days, 58% (95% CI: 43%-78%) at 1 year, and 52% (95% CI: 36%-75%) at 3 years. In 40% (n=14), T2ELs resolved spontaneously within a median time of 3.4 (0.03-85.6) months. The overall and T2EL reintervention rates were 43% (n=15) and 9% (n=3), respectively. Within 30 days, 11 patients (31%) required reintervention, of which 2 were T2EL related. Aneurysm sac growth by ≥5 mm was seen in 3 patients (9%), and aneurysm shrinkage rate was significantly higher in sealed T2EL group (86% vs 5%, p<0.0001). The overall survival was 85% (95% CI: 74%-98%) at 30 days, 75% (95% CI: 61%-92%) at 1 year, and 67% (95% CI: 51%-87%) at 3 years. Six deaths were aneurysm related, while 1 was T2EL related within the first 30 days due to persistent hemorrhage. During FU, one more patient died due to a T2EL-related secondary rupture (T2EL-related mortality, 5.7%, n=2). Multivariable analysis revealed that arterial hypertension was associated with an increased risk for reintervention (hazard ratio [HR]: 27.8, 95% CI: 1.48-521, p=0.026) and age was associated with an increased risk for mortality (HR 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.26, p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

T2ELs after rEVAR showed a benign course in most cases. In the short term, the possibility of persistent bleeding should be considered. In the mid term, a consequent FU protocol is required to detect known late complications after EVAR at an early stage and to prevent secondary rupture and death.

A systematic review of the current status of interventions for type II endoleak after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

To study the mid- and long-term outcomes of type II endoleak treatment after EVAR and the technical aspects of different techniques to exclude endoleaks which different embolic agents.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the approach recommended by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for meta-analyses of interventional studies. The comprehensive search was conducted using the following database: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Patient characteristic, intervention approaches, embolic agents, and results at mid and long term follow up were studied.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies corresponding to a total of 141 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria with a mean age of 73-78.6 years and a mean duration of follow up varying from 25 to 42 months. There were different techniques for embolization used (translumbar, transarterial, and transcaval approach) with various types of embolic agents. In all studies, the indication for embolization of the type II endoleaks was sac enlargement of more than 5 mm. A wide range of technical success rate was reported regardless of the intervention strategy being used (17,6%-100%). The overall technical success rate of all studies was 62%.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows that there is a wide variety of techniques to exclude a persistent type II endoleak. Different kinds of embolic agents have be used. Due to a lack of peer reviewed data on longterm follow-up, it was not possible to come to recommendations what treatment would be the best for a durable exclusion of a persistent type II endoleak after an initially successful EVAR. There remains an urgent need for proper executed studies, either randomized or with close observation in relation to longer follow-up.

Use of the AFX Stent Graft in Patients with Extremely Narrow Aortic Bifurcation: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Introduction

This study analyzed the patient outcomes following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal aortic pathologies with very narrow aortic bifurcations using the AFX stent graft.

Methods

The data was retrieved from the archived medical records of 35 patients treated for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) (48.6%) or penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) (51.4%) with very narrow aortic bifurcation between January 2013 and May 2020. Patient survival, freedom from endoleak (EL), and limb occlusion were estimated applying the Kaplan–Meier method.

Results

The mean follow-up time was 20.4 ± 22.8 months. The mean aortic bifurcation diameter was 15.8 ± 2.2 mm. Technical success was 100%, and no procedure-related deaths occurred. Two type II ELs occurred within 30-day follow-up. We observed one common iliac artery stenosis at four months and one type III EL at 54 months in the same patient, both of which required re-intervention. Overall patient survival was 95 ± 5% (AAA: 100%; PAU: 89 ± 10%), freedom from limb occlusion was 94 ± 5% (AAA: 91 ± 9%; PAU: 100%), freedom from type II EL was 94 ± 4% (AAA: 88 ± 8%; PAU: 100%), and freedom from EL type III was 83 ± 15% (AAA: 80 ± 18%; PAU: 100%) at the end of the follow-up period.

Conclusions

Very narrow aortic bifurcations may predispose patients to procedure-related complications following EVAR. Our results suggest a safe use of the AFX stent graft in such scenarios. The overall short- and long-term procedure-related patient outcomes are satisfying albeit they may seem superior for PAU when compared to AAA.

Late Open Repair of a Massive Common Iliac Artery Aneurysm after Endovascular Failure

Giant Common Iliac Artery Aneurysms (CIAA) are an uncommon pathology that may present as a late complication after endovascular aortic repair secondary to aneurysmal degeneration with endoleak. We present an unusual case of a patient presenting 9 years after index endovascular CIAA exclusion with a painless abdominal mass found to be a 20+ cm CIAA secondary to type II endoleak from a recanalized coil embolized hypogastric artery. The patient underwent open aneurysmorrhaphy with ligation of the hypogastric artery.

Risk Analysis of Aneurysm Sac Enlargement Caused by Type II Endoleak after Endovascular Aortic Repair

BACKGROUND

Although the preoperative risk factors associated with the occurrence of type II endoleak (ETII) after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) have gradually become more evident, the preoperative risk factors associated with aneurysm sac enlargement caused by ETII remain unclear. This study aimed to determine the preoperative risk factors associated with aneurysm sac enlargement caused by ETII after EVAR.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study reviewed 519 EVARs performed for true abdominal aortic aneurysm between January 2006 and December 2018 at our institution. EVARs using commercially available bifurcated devices with no type I or III endoleaks during follow-up and with ≥12 months follow-up were included. A total of 320 patients were enrolled in the study. To identify the preoperative risk factors of sac enlargement after EVAR, Cox regression analysis was used to assess preoperative data.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 60.8 months. Overall, 135 of 320 patients (42%) had ETII during follow-up, and 47 of 135 patients (35%) developed aneurysm sac enlargement. Multivariate analysis revealed that chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage ≥4 (hazard ratio [HR], 4.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13-10.15; P = 0.001), patent inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) (HR, 17.85; 95% CI, 2.46-129.73; P< 0.001), and number of patent lumbar arteries (LAs) (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.13-1.68; P= 0.002) were risk factors of aneurysm sac enlargement caused by ETII.

CONCLUSIONS

CKD stage ≥4, patent IMA, and number of patent LAs were independent risk factors for aneurysm sac enlargement after EVAR. In particular, patent IMA had the highest HR and seemed to have the greatest impact on long-term aneurysm sac enlargement. Hence, taking preoperative measures to address a patent IMA appears to be important in reducing the incidence of sac enlargement.

Predictive Value of Preprocedural Computed Tomography Angiography for the Technical Success of Transarterial Embolization of Type II Endoleaks Arising from the Lumbar Arteries

PURPOSE

To evaluate the ability of preprocedural computed tomography angiography (CTA) to predict the technical success of embolization of type II endoleak arising from a lumbar artery after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients at a single academic institution who underwent angiography with possible embolization for a post-EVAR lumbar-supplied type II endoleak from 2009 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who did not undergo CTA before the procedure were excluded. CTAs were reviewed for the ability to trace the entire course of a feeding vessel from the internal iliac artery (IIA) to the lumbar artery at the site of the endoleak. Procedural imaging was reviewed for technical success, defined as the catheterization and embolization of the aneurysm sac through a lumbar artery.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven angiograms with a type II endoleak and suspected feeding lumbar artery were identified. On CTA acquired before the procedure, the arterial path supplying this lumbar artery could be traced from the IIA to the aneurysm sac in 18 (32%) patients. Embolization was technically successful in 16 of these 18 (89%) procedures compared with 10 of 39 (26%) procedures in which the supplying artery could not be traced using CTA (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A potential catheter path from the IIA through the iliolumbar and lumbar arteries to the aneurysm sac can be traced on preprocedural CTA in the minority of lumbar-supplied type II endoleaks. The ability to trace these inflow vessels may predict technical success during embolization. The low rate of technical success when the feeding vessel could not be traced using CTA suggests that these patients should be considered for percutaneous or transcaval sac puncture.

Computed Tomography Angiography Prediction of Successful Trasnscatheter Embolization for Type II Endoleak of Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the utility of computed tomography (CT) angiography before transarterial embolization (TAE) in predicting TAE's technical success for type II endoleaks (T2ELs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-eight patients (mean age, 74.4 years; range, 46-89 years) who underwent attempted TAE for T2EL from July 2014 to August 2019 and underwent CT angiography before the procedure were included. Each CT angiography result was assessed for a feeding artery that was traceable over its entire course from either the superior mesenteric artery or the internal iliac artery to the endoleak cavity. TAE was performed using coils and was considered technically successful if embolization of the endoleak cavity and feeding artery was performed. The technical success rates were compared between patients with and without traceable feeding arteries.

RESULTS

A fully traceable feeding artery supplying 75% (44/59) of endoleaks in the cohort was identified. TAE was technically successful in 95% (42/44) of these cases but only in 13% (2/15) of the cases without a fully traceable feeding artery (P < .001). When the inferior mesenteric artery was the feeding artery, it was always fully traceable, and TAE was technically successful in 100% (33/33) of the cases. When a lumbar artery was the feeding artery, it was fully traceable in only 42% (11/26) of the cases. When the lumbar artery was not fully traceable, TAE was technically successful in only 13% (2/15) of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The traceability of a feeding artery over its entire course to an endoleak cavity using CT angiography was associated with TAE's technical success. Lumbar feeding arteries were less likely to be fully traceable. TAE's high failure rate when the feeding artery was not fully traceable suggests that translumbar embolization can be considered as an initial approach for theses patients.

Transcaval embolization for type II endoleak after endovascular aortic repair of infrarenal, juxtarenal, and type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine the outcomes of transcaval embolization (TCE) for type II endoleak after infrarenal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and fenestrated/branched EVAR (F/BEVAR).

METHODS

A retrospective single-center cohort study of all consecutive TCE procedures between August 2015 and August 2019 was performed to investigate technical success, in-hospital morbidity, and 30-day mortality as well as clinical success during follow-up. The indication for TCE was an aneurysm sac growth of 5 mm or more owing to a type II endoleak after EVAR for infrarenal or F/BEVAR for juxtarenal and type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm.

RESULTS

A total 25 TCE procedures in 24 patients (95.8% male) were included. Technical success was 96.0% (24/25); selective and nonselective TCE were performed in 48% of patients. The in-hospital morbidity and 30-day mortality were 0%. The median follow-up was 23.1 months (interquartile range, 10.9-40.1 months). Freedom from type II endoleak-related reintervention was 84.6% at 12 months. Comparing clinical success after TCE, reintervention was necessary in 16.7% of patients after nonselective and 20% of patients after selective TCE. Regarding TCE after EVAR vs F/BEVAR, reintervention was performed in 12.5% of EVAR and 33.3% of F/BEVAR patients during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

TCE is an acceptable treatment alternative for type II endoleak with aneurysm sac enlargement and can be used after EVAR for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms and F/BEVAR for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms and type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

Prophylactic Aneurysm Embolization during EVAR Is Safe, Improves Sac Regression and Decreases the Incidence of Type II Endoleak

BACKGROUND

Clinically significant endoleaks remain costly, time-consuming, morbid and even mortal following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Perigraft arterial sac embolization (PASE) has been utilized to treat type II endoleaks (T2EL) diagnosed at the time of EVAR or after repair. Our objective was to analyze the safety and efficacy of prophylactic PASE on the incidence of T2EL and aneurysm sac regression in patients undergoing EVAR.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of prospectively maintained databases from the University of California San Diego and the San Diego Veterans Affairs hospitals between 2015 and 2019. Prophylactic PASE (pPASE) was performed at the time of EVAR with thrombin, contrast and gelfoam liquid embolic aneurysm treatment as previously described. We evaluated technical success, freedom from T2EL, freedom from reintervention, from sac expansion, from type I/III EL, from all-cause mortality (ACM), from aneurysm-related mortality and from non-target embolization (NTE).

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients were included in the study. Technical success was 100% and no NTE was observed. The average duration of follow-up was 14 ± 11months. In those treated and followed by CT scan, 100% of patients' aneurysms halted their growth following PASE, while 65.9% demonstrated sac regression. Mean aneurysm sac diameter decreased by 9 mm (95% CI 7-12). At 3 years, freedom from T2EL was 87.1%. Presence of T2EL did not result in aneurysm expansion during the follow-up period and thus did not require reintervention in any of these patients. Freedom from re-intervention was 83.2% for Type Ib EL and limb occlusion and all procedures were determined to be successful at the time of completion. No aneurysm-related deaths occurred during the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

PASE proves to be an effective tool in sac management for prophylaxis of endoleak and maximizing sac regression in EVAR. It is safe, effective and durable when employed in this manner in the short and medium-term and was associated with low rates of T2ELs and reinterventions and a 100% freedom from sac expansion. Further analysis is required to evaluate the long-term outcomes of this adjunctive procedure in EVAR.

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.

Post-EVAR Thrombus Density on Late Non-Contrast CT Scans Predicts Successful Aneurysm Exclusion

PURPOSE

The incidence of type II endoleaks (ELII) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) ranges from 10-44%. Aneurysm thrombus density after EVAR could predict successful aneurysm exclusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-seven patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) who had a CT scan within the first 45 days (early group) post-surgery or after 7 months (late group) were included. Thrombus density was analyzed on non-contrast enhanced CT scans.

RESULTS

A total of 5/13 (38%) patients in the early group had an ELII and 9/14 (64.3%) in the late group had a persistent ELII since surgery. In the early group, thrombus density was similar in patients with or without an ELII (mean: 39.9 ± 4.8 vs. 41.9 ± 3.4, p = 0.7; median: 38.7 ± 4.8 vs. 39.7 ± 3.1, p = 0.8). In patients with an ELII, there was no difference in thrombus density at 45 days and after 7 months (mean: 39.9 ± 4.8 vs. 40.2 ± 2.1, p = 0.9; median: 38.7 ± 4.8 vs. 38 ± 2.6, p = 0.9). In patients without an ELII, thrombus density was significantly higher at 45 days than after 7 months (mean: 41.9 ± 3.44 vs. 25.7 ± 2.0, p = 0.005; median: 39.7 ± 3.11 vs. 24.4 ± 1.5, p = 0.004). In patients with an ELII, thrombus density was significantly higher after 7 months than in patients without an ELII (mean: 40.2 ± 2.1 vs. 25.7 ± 2.0. p = 0.001; median: 38 ± 2.6 vs. 24.4 ± 1.5, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Low thrombus density after EVAR on late unenhanced CT scans predicts aneurysm exclusion.

Postimplantation syndrome in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair - a systematic review

Postimplantation syndrome (PIS) following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a poorly understood phenomenon occurring in the early post-operative course. The underlying aetiology, risk factors, clinical sequalae, and treatment options, are largely unknown. The lack of any standardised diagnostic criteria limits current research in this field. The MEDLINE database was interrogated using a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) search strategy. Five search terms were used; "postimplantation syndrome" AND "aneurysm", AND "infection", AND "complications", AND "biomarkers", AND "outcomes". 19 studies were included in the review process, reporting a 17.4%-39.0% incidence of PIS. IL-6 was the most commonly elevated biomarker in PIS vs. non-PIS patients. There was a higher incidence of PIS in patients who received polyester rather than expanded-polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) grafts. There was a lower rate of type 2 endoleaks observed in patients who developed PIS. Early major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were higher in PIS patients, however there were no studies reporting long-term MACE. Length of stay was higher in PIS patients. Current data support the role of IL-6 as being key to the development of PIS following EVAR. Further work describing the effect that PIS has on long-term clinical outcomes is needed. Lack of standardised diagnostic criteria limit the reporting of PIS between centres, the criteria proposed by this review may resolve this.

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.

Type II Endoleaks After EVAR: A Literature Review of Current Concepts

Endoleak is the most frequent complication following endovascular aneurysm repair, which is not present in the surgical counterpart. The most frequent type of endoleak corresponds to type II, and its natural history remains poorly understood. Therefore, their treatment continues to be a topic of debate. The vast majority of the studies found in the literature are of a retrospective nature, and there are no prospective studies comparing intervention versus a conservative approach. Future studies should aim to compare not only different approaches to resolve type II endoleak but also when should be the right time to treat them, with the primary purpose of avoiding sac rupture. The objective of this review is to provide the reader with a literature overview about type II endoleaks to help in the decision-making process on this topic.

The association between perioperative embolization of hypogastric arteries and type II endoleaks after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Type II endoleaks (T2ELs) are the most common type of endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The iliolumbar artery arising from the hypogastric artery is often a major source of T2ELs, and transarterial embolization of the iliolumbar artery through the hypogastric artery is sometimes performed to interrupt sac expansion during follow-up. Considering the equivocal results of an association between hypogastric embolization and T2ELs in previous studies, this topic has re-emerged after the advent of iliac branch devices. This study reviewed our series to clarify whether hypogastric embolization is associated with T2ELs at 12 months after EVAR.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective EVAR between June 2007 and May 2017 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) at 12 months were included. Patients in whom CTA revealed type I or type III endoleaks during follow-up, who required reinterventions before 12 months, and who had solitary iliac aneurysms were excluded. The primary outcome was the incidence of T2ELs at 12 months after EVAR. The associations of patients' characteristics, anatomic factors, hypogastric embolization, and type of endograft with the primary outcome were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 375 patients were enrolled. During the median follow-up of 59.5 months (interquartile range, 19-126 months), 40 patients died, and 50 reinterventions were performed. In 108 patients (28.8%), either hypogastric artery was embolized to extend distal landings to the external iliac artery. Bilateral and unilateral embolization was performed in nine and 99 patients, respectively. In total, 153 patients (40.8%) had T2ELs found by CTA at 12 months. In the univariate analysis, the status of hypogastric artery occlusion or embolization was not significantly different between patients with and without T2ELs. However, there were not enough patients to detect a 10% difference in T2ELs with >80% statistical power. In the multivariate analysis, significant associations with T2EL were observed for female sex (P = .049), patent inferior mesenteric artery (P = .006), and presence of five or more patent lumbar arteries (P < .001) but not for hypogastric embolization. In addition, compared with the Zenith (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) endograft, the Excluder (W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) endograft was significantly related to T2EL (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

No significant association between hypogastric embolization and T2EL was demonstrated in this retrospective study, which lacked adequate statistical power.

Type 2 Endoleaks: Common and Hard to Eradicate yet Benign?

PURPOSE

The exact significance of type 2 endoleaks (T2ELs) and the indication and efficacy of treatment are widely debated. We report our experience with managing T2ELs in a tertiary Asian centre.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) between February 2006 and December 2016. Patients with T2ELs were identified, and their data were analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients underwent EVAR, of which 67 (42.9%) developed T2ELs. Seven were lost to follow-up. The remaining 60 patients had a mean follow-up period of 50.3 ± 33.9 months-34 (56.7%) experienced T2ELs early and the rest (43.3%) had late T2ELs. Forty-one patients had isolated T2EL, whilst 19 had concomitant T1EL and/or T3EL. Spontaneous resolution occurred in 25 patients (41.7%). All T2ELs with stable sac size were on continued surveillance. Amongst those with persistent T2ELs associated with sac growth (n = 17), 14 underwent intervention, of which 7 (50%) received > 1 embolisation procedure. A total of 16 transarterial embolisation and 8 translumbar embolisation procedures were performed. Technical success rate was 75%. In the intervention group, 5 (35.7%) had complete and sustained resolution, 7 had persistent/recurrent T2ELs but stable sac size, and 2 had progressive sac expansion. Overall mortality due to sac rupture occurred in 2 patients with concomitant T2EL and T1EL/T3EL.

CONCLUSION

T2ELs are common, albeit mostly benign if occurring in isolation and not in association with sac growth. Achieving complete T2EL resolution with embolisation is difficult even with reinterventions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2B, retrospective study.

Mid-term Outcomes and Predictors of Transarterial Embolization for Type II Endoleak After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the mid-term outcomes of transarterial embolization (TAE) for type II endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and investigate the predictors of sac enlargement after embolization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 55 patients [48 men and 7 women, median age 79.0 (interquartile ranges 74-82) years] who underwent TAE for type II endoleak from 2010 to 2018. The aneurysmal sac enlargement, endoleaks, aneurysm-related adverse event rate, and reintervention rate were evaluated. Patients' characteristics and clinical factors were evaluated for their association with sac enlargement.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients underwent TAE with technical success and were subsequently followed for a median of 636 (interquartile ranges 446-1292) days. The freedom from sac enlargement rates at 1, 3, and 5 years was 73.2%, 32.0%, and 26.7%, respectively. After initial TAE, the recurrent type II, delayed type I, and occult type III endoleak were identified in 39 (71%), 5 (9%), and 3 (5%) patients, respectively. Although a patient had aorto-duodenal fistula, there was no aneurysm-related death. The freedom from reintervention rates was 84.6%, 35.7%, and 17.0%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, sac diameter > 55 mm at initial TAE (hazard ratios, 3.23; 95% confidence intervals, 1.22-8.58; P < 0.05) was a significant predictor of sac enlargement.

CONCLUSION

TAE for type II endoleak was not effective in preventing sac enlargement, and reinterventions were required among the mid-term follow-up. The sac diameter > 55 mm at initial TAE was a significant predictor of sac enlargement.

A meta-analysis of translumbar embolization versus transarterial embolization for type II endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between transarterial and translumbar (direct aneurysm sac puncture) approaches for persistent type II endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

METHODS

We searched multiple electronic databases (up to October 31, 2018) for eligible trials in patients with type II endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs that evaluated the outcomes of translumbar embolization vs transarterial embolization. The primary outcome was clinical success (absence of the endoleak on the last examination); the secondary outcomes were technical success and complication rate. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated.

RESULTS

Among the 904 studies screened, 9 studies with 354 participants were included in this review. None of the studies reported rupture or mortality. The translumbar group had a relatively higher clinical success rate than the transarterial group, but this difference was not statistically significant (OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.00-5.25; P = .05; I2 = 52%). The technical success rate was significantly higher in the translumbar group than in the transarterial group (OR, 13.32; 95% CI, 3.41-52.07; P = .0002; I2 = 0%). No significant difference was found in the complication rate of the two groups (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.26-4.96; P = .85; I2 = 0%). We also included five studies that reported the clinical outcomes of open repair. All patients were technically treated by open repair, and 58 of 60 patients owned clinical success during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The translumbar route was more successful in obliterating the endoleak on follow-up imaging. When repeated endovascular embolizations fail, a laparotomy should follow.

Atypical Type 2 Endoleak from an Artery Supplying the Psoas Major Muscle Following Endovascular Repair in a Case of Isolated Common Iliac Artery Aneurysm

In this report, we present a rare case of type 2 endoleak (T2EL) from an artery supplying the psoas major muscle, following an endovascular repair of a common iliac artery aneurysm (CIAA). A 79-year-old male underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for the right isolated CIAA using stent graft, with embolization of the ipsilateral internal iliac artery. The aneurysm was stable for 2 years, after which a follow-up CT revealed a 5 mm increase in the CIAA diameter and an endoleak of unknown origin. Conventional and CT angiographies revealed the source to be a branch from the ipsilateral deep circumflex iliac artery supplying the psoas major muscle that had developed an anastomosis at its terminal end with the vasa vasorum at the CIAA. Transarterial embolization of T2EL using glue was performed successfully, following which the T2EL disappeared.

Fate of Pure Type II Endoleaks Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Purpose

Type II endoleaks (T2ELs) are the most common type of endoleaks observed after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). However, whether T2ELs should be treated remains debatable. In the present study, we aimed to describe the natural course of T2ELs and suggest the direction of their management.

Materials and Methods

We reviewed the data of 383 patients who underwent EVAR between 2007 and 2016. Data, including demographic and anatomical details, were collected, and patients with T2ELs were compared to those without them. Patients with T2ELs were categorized into subgroups according to changes in sac size and treatment requirement.

Results

We found patent lumbar artery count and lesser thickness of mural thrombi to be significant risk factors for T2ELs. Among the 383 patients, 85 (22.2%) patients were diagnosed with pure T2ELs. Among these 85 patients, the sac size increased in 29 (34.1%) patients, showed no significant change in 39 (45.9%) patients, and decreased in 17 (20.0%) patients. Fifteen (17.6%) patients, among 85 with initial pure T2ELs, showed spontaneous resolution. Five (5.9%) patients among 29, in whom the sac size increased, developed combined-type endoleaks. No sac ruptures were noted among the patients with T2ELs.

Conclusion

T2ELs with sac expansion potentially contribute to other types of endoleaks. Therefore, periodic screening is important for these patients, particularly for those showing an increasing sac size. In addition, intervention should be considered when other types of endoleaks occur.

Results of Transarterial Embolization for Treating Type 2 Endoleaks: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Type 2 endoleaks (T2Es) are the main cause of reintervention after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR). The objective of this study is to quantify success rates of T2E treatment.

METHODS

This study involves a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database containing data on all consecutive patients treated for a T2E between 2003 and 2017 in a single center. Technical success was defined as absence of endoleak in the final angiographic control after treatment. Clinical success was defined as absence of sac growth over 5 mm in the contrast-enhanced computed tomography performed a year thereafter. Statistics included Kaplan-Meier survival estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 528 elective EVARs were performed in the period. Thirty-six of these (6.8%) developed a T2E requiring reintervention, a median of 37.9 months after EVAR. Twenty-five percent of the treatments were performed more than 5 years after intervention. Twenty-eight of the 36 treatments were performed via transarterial embolization. For this technique, technical success was 71.4% and clinical success was 62.5%. A subsequent reintervention was required in 35.7% of patients. In this cohort, the rate of aneurysm rupture was 10.7% (n = 3/28), open surgical conversion was needed in 2 of 28 cases (7.1%), and rate of aneurysm-related death was 14.3% (n = 4/28) over follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

A high percentage of patients are at risk of adverse outcomes after T2E treatment. Strict imaging follow-up is still needed in this population.

Tight systolic blood pressure control with combination therapy decreases type 2 endoleaks in patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has revolutionized the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) disease. However, the survival advantage is lost in the long term due the occurrence of endoleaks affecting the late rupture of aneurism sac. Few data are available on the role of blood pressure control in affecting the incidence of type 2 endoleaks in patients undergoing EVAR.

OBJECTIVE

Aim of this study was to evaluated whether systolic blood pressure (SBP) control to target 130 mmHg reached after preoperative cardiology consultant might decrease the incidence of type II endoleak(T2E), sac expansion and related aortic reintervention after elective endovascular aneurysm repair(EVAR).

METHODS

We analyzed 386 patients undergoing EVAR between 2008 and 2016. The primary endpoints were T2E, sac expansion and related aortic re-intervention or sac shrinkage during a median follow-up of 24 months [12-48]. The secondary endpoint was every cause of vascular or cardiac morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

The SBP value of 130 mmHg at the time of EVAR resulted, at ROC curve analysis, the most sensitive and specific for all the analyzed endpoints (T2E, n = 74; sac expansion n = 19; re-intervention, n = 10, sac shrinkage, n = 72). The combination antihypertensive therapy showed a significant inverse relationship with T2E occurrence. The incidence of primary endpoints was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in patients with SBP ≥ 130 mmHg. Cardiovascular death was significantly more prevalent (p < 0,001) in patients with SBP ≥130 mmHg. These findings were confirmed at the multivariable Cox regression analysis [primary endpoint HR = 0.09(0.06-0.15), p < 0.001; cardiovascular death HR = 0.33(0.12-0.85), p = 0.023].

CONCLUSIONS

Tight SBP control at the target of 130 mmHg at the time of elective EVAR significantly decreases TE2 occurrence, need of re-intervention and cardiovascular death in a prolonged follow-up of a large sample of patients.

Pre-operative Aneurysm Thrombus Volume, But Not Density, Predicts Type 2 Endoleak Rate Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

The impact of aneurysm thrombus characteristics on type 2 endoleak rate following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is unclear. The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of pre-operative aneurysm thrombus volume and density on the incidence of type 2 endoleak following EVAR for infrarenal AAA.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was completed on all patients who underwent standard EVAR at an academic medical institution between May 1, 2010 and June 1, 2016 with a minimum follow-up period of 12 months. The final analysis included 170 patients. Thrombus volume and density were determined by analyzing pre-operative computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans using the TeraRecon plaque analysis module. The number and diameter of patent infrarenal aortic branch vessels were also identified. Type 2 endoleak was diagnosed by post-operative CTA, duplex ultrasound, or angiography.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up period of 29 months, 88 (51.8%) of 170 patients had a type 2 endoleak. The thrombus volume as a proportion of the infrarenal aorta volume was significantly lower in patients with type 2 endoleak (odds ratio [OR] 0.034, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.005-0.291, P = 0.002). The number of patent lumbar arteries was significantly greater in patients with type 2 endoleak (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.16-1.56, P < 0.0005). Both variables independently predicted the incidence of type 2 endoleak in a multivariate analysis. Thrombus density was not related to the incidence of type 2 endoleak.

CONCLUSIONS

A lower ratio of thrombus volume/infrarenal aorta volume and a higher number of patent lumbar arteries were associated with an increased incidence of type 2 endoleak. A multivariate logistic regression model was generated to pre-operatively predict the risk of type 2 endoleak. This model can guide the stratification of patients for intensity of endoleak surveillance following EVAR and consideration of pre-operative treatment.

Trans-luminal repair of a ruptured AAA with Type Ia and Type II endoleaks

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) with an associated Type II endoleak is rare. Emergent surgical repair is often necessary and may be associated with high morbidity and mortality. We report an alternative unique trans-luminal repair strategy in an 84-year-old male who presented with a rAAA with prior EVAR, and Type Ia and Type II endoleaks. The operative strategy consisted of proximal endograft extension into the para-renal aorta, followed by staged sac embolization using glue. Postoperatively, the patient recovered well from the repair, and follow-up imaging demonstrated a stable repair.

Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Treatment for Type II Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy and need for secondary interventions for type II endoleaks following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) remain controversial. This systematic review aimed at investigating the clinical outcomes of different type II endoleak treatments in patients with a persistent type II endoleak after EVAR.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, Medline via Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar.

REVIEW METHODS

This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA Statement. Outcomes of interest were technical and clinical success, change in sac diameter, complications, need for additional interventions, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture, and (AAA related) mortality. Meta-analyses were performed with random effects models.

RESULTS

A total of 59 studies were included, with a cumulative cohort of 1073 patients with persistent type II endoleak. Peri-operative complications following treatment of type II endoleaks occurred in 3.8% of patients (95% CI 2.7-5.2%), and AAA related mortality was 1.8% (95% CI 1.1-2.7%). Overall technical success was 87.9% (95% CI 83.1-92.1%), while clinical success was 68.4% (95% CI 61.2-75.1%). Among studies detailing sac dynamics, decrease or stable sac, with or without resolution, was achieved in 78.4% (95% CI 70.2-85.6%). Changes in sac diameter following type II endoleak treatment were documented in 157 patients to at least 24 months. Within this group an actual decrease in sac diameter was reported in only 27 of 40 patients.

CONCLUSION

There is little evidence supporting the efficacy of secondary intervention for type II endoleaks after EVAR. Although generally safe, the lack of evidence supporting the efficacy of type II endoleak treatment leads to difficulty in assessing its merits.