Preoperative predictive factors for type II endoleak: Trying to define high-risk patients

Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm-related type II endoleak: a multicenter study on the possibility of further intervention

Background

We aimed to analyze the risk factors associated with Type II endoleak (T2EL) requiring reintervention after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for multicenter abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 614 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms who underwent elective EVAR at three centers (Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University, Shanxi Provincial People's Hospital) from January 2017 to December 2021. After applying exclusion criteria, 375 patients were included in the study, with 50 patients in the T2EL-related reintervention group and 325 patients in the non-T2EL group. Single-factor and multiple-factor logistic analyses were used to identify high-risk factors, and ROC curve analysis was performed to determine the risk thresholds for mesenteric artery diameter, number of lumbar arteries, maximum aneurysm diameter, and proportion of intraluminal thrombus volume.

Results

The rate of T2EL-related reintervention among the 375 patients was 13.33% (50/375). Single-factor analysis indicated that age, hypertension, maximum aneurysm diameter, proportion of intraluminal thrombus, diameter of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA), and number of patent lumbar arteries (LA) were risk factors for T2EL-related reintervention. Multiple-factor logistic analysis identified maximum aneurysm diameter, proportion of thrombus, IMA diameter, and number of patent LA as the main influencing factors for T2EL-related reintervention after EVAR. Significant risk factors for reintervention were maximum aneurysm diameter (OR = 1.043, 95% CI 1.015-1.072, P = 0.002), IMA diameter (OR = 3.901, 95% CI 1.116-13.632, P = 0.033), and number of LA (OR = 2.584, 95% CI 1.722-3.769, P < 0.001). A significant protective factor for reintervention was thrombus proportion (OR = 0.895, 95% CI 0.864-0.927, P < 0.001). ROC curve analysis showed that the risk thresholds for reintervention were an IMA diameter of 2.95 mm, intraluminal thrombus volume proportion <42.5%, number of LA ≤5.5, and aneurysm diameter of 53.55 mm.

Conclusion

Cases with identified risk factors are considered to have a higher risk of T2EL-related reintervention after EVAR. Exceeding the new risk thresholds may indicate a higher likelihood of T2EL-related reintervention after EVAR.

Ten years of physician-modified endografts

OBJECTIVES

Physician-modified endografts (PMEGs) have expanded the scope of endovascular abdominal aortic repair beyond the infrarenal aorta. Patients with prohibitively high surgical risk and visceral segment disease are often candidates for this intervention, which mitigates much of the morbidity and mortality associated with conventional open repair. Here we present the institutional PMEG experience of a high-volume aortic center.

METHODS

We studied all PMEGs performed at our institution from 2012 to 2023. We included cases that were submitted to the US Food sand Drug Administration in support of an investigational device exemption (IDE) trial, as well as those in the subsequently approved IDE trial. Over this 11-year period, we assessed the changes in operative characteristics and perioperative outcomes over time. Additionally, we compared the outcomes from PMEG cases to those of Zenith fenestrated (ZFEN) grafts (done by the surgeon with the PMEG IDE), an alternative device used for aneurysms involving the lower visceral segment. Here we assessed operative characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and 5-year survival and reintervention rates.

RESULTS

When assessing the change over time for PMEG operative characteristics, we found a trend toward decreased fluoroscopy time and decreased proportions of completion type I and type III endoleaks (all P < .05). Perioperative outcomes have remained stable over this period, with an overall perioperative mortality rate of 4.9% (noting that this registry also includes cases that were urgent and emergent). Despite the increased complexity of PMEGs relative to ZFENs, we found comparable perioperative outcomes with regard to mortality (4.9% vs 4.3%; P = .86), permanent spinal cord ischemia (1.1% vs 0%; P = .38), postoperative myocardial infarction (4.3% vs 2.9%; P = .60), postoperative respiratory failure (7.1% vs 4.3%; P = .43), and new dialysis use (2.2% vs 4.3%; P = .35). Additionally, 5-year survival (PMEG 54% vs ZFEN 65%; P = .15) and freedom from reintervention (63% vs 74%; P = .07) were similar between these cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Throughout our >10-year experience with PMEGs, we have noted improvements in operative outcomes, which can likely be attributed to technological advances and increased physician experience. Additionally, we have found that PMEGs perform well when compared with ZFENs, despite being a more complicated repair that is able to treat a larger segment of the aorta. PMEGs are crucial for the comprehensive care of vascular patients with complex aortic disease. As further operative advancements are made, we only expect the use of this intervention to increase.

Safety of preoperative branch embolization in patients undergoing evar

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the safety of pre-endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) embolization of aortic side branches - the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed. A search of MEDLINE and DIMENSION databases identified 9 studies published from 2011 to 2021 that satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These studies were analyzed to detect the incidence of embolization-related complications. A total of 482 patients underwent preoperative aortic side branch embolization, 30 (6.2%) of whom suffered some kind of minor complication. The only major complication observed was ischemic colitis in 4 (0.82%) patients, two (0.41%) of whom died after bowel resection surgery. Regarding these findings, aortic side branch embolization seems to be a safe procedure, with very low percentages of both minor and major complications.

A nomogram risk assessment model to predict the possibility of type II endoleak-related re-intervention after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR)

This study aimed to develop and validate a novel nomogram risk assessment model to predict the possibility of type II endoleak (T2EL)-related re-intervention. The data of 455 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms who underwent elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) procedures between January 2018 and December 2021 at our single center were retrospectively reviewed. Following the implementation of exclusion criteria, 283 patients were finally included and divided into T2EL-related re-intervention (n = 42) and non-T2EL (n = 241) groups. The overall T2EL-related re-intervention rate for 283 patients was 14.8% (42/283). Using multivariate analysis, significant risk factors for re-intervention included age (OR, 1.172; 95% CI, 1.051-1.307; P = 0.004), smoking (OR, 13.418; 95% CI, 2.362-76.215; P = 0.003), diameter of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) (OR, 21.380; 95% CI, 3.060-149.390; P = 0.002), and number of patent lumbar arteries (OR, 9.736; 95% CI, 3.175-29.857; P < 0.001). The discrimination ability of this risk-predictive model was reasonable (concordance index [C-index] = 0.921; 95% CI, 0.878-0.964). The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test was performed on the model, and the chi-square value was 3.210 (P = 0.920), presenting an excellent agreement between the model-predicted and observed values. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve identified that the risk thresholds of re-intervention were a diameter of > 2.77 mm for the diameter of the inferior mesenteric artery and a proportion of < 45.5% for thrombus volume in the aneurysm sac. This novel nomogram risk assessment model for predicting the possibility of patients' T2EL-related re-interventions after EVAR should be helpful in discriminating high-risk patients. Two novel risk thresholds may imply a higher possibility of T2EL-related re-intervention after EVAR.