Conversion to Open Repair after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Causes and Results. A French Multicentric Study

Acute Intraoperative Conversion from Endovascular to Open vs Planned Open Operation for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Propensity-Score Matched Study from the American College of Surgeons NSQIP-Targeted Database

BACKGROUND

Evaluating outcomes for acute intraoperative conversion to open surgery during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) was difficult due to low incidence. This study aimed to compare 30-day outcomes between patients with acute intraoperative conversion during EVAR and planned open surgery, and to identify risk factors associated with acute conversion.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients who underwent EVAR or planned open AAA repair were identified in American College of Surgeons NSQIP-targeted databases from 2012 to 2021. Patients with acute intraoperative conversion during EVAR were selected. A 1:3 propensity-score matching was used to match demographics, baseline characteristics, surgical indications, aneurysm size and extent, and emergency cases between the conversion open and planned open groups. Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 20,566 EVAR cases, 177 (0.86%) had acute intraoperative conversion to open surgery. The conversion open group was matched to 504 of 5,249 planned open patients. Conversion open and planned open groups had comparable 30-day mortality (23.43% vs 17.46%, p = 0.09) and organ system complications, including major adverse cardiovascular event (14.86% vs 10.71%, p = 0.17), pulmonary complications (17.71% vs 24.01%, p = 0.09), and renal complications (8.57% vs 11.11%, p = 0.39). The conversion open group had lower bleeding requiring transfusion (48.57% vs 75.60%, p < 0.01), shorter operation time (p < 0.01), and shorter length of stay (p < 0.01). Other postoperative outcomes did not differ. Risk factors associated with acute intraoperative conversion included ruptured aneurysm with or without hypotension. Protective factors included hypertension and aortic distal aneurysm extent.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this study does not endorse a universal "EVAR first" strategy for all patients with AAA, EVAR can be attempted first in eligible patients with AAA. Even when EVAR is unsuccessful, intraoperative conversion to open surgery still appears to be safe compared with planned open repair.

Late post-EVAR abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture: a meta-analysis study

This study presents updated information on post-endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) late aortic rupture (LAR) as the data in the literature are limited. It comprises a meta-analysis based on the recent evidence regarding the incidence, causes, treatment outcomes, and prognosis of post-EVAR. A meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies were identified by searching electronic databases and scanning bibliographic references from 1991 to April 1, 2023. Our analysis provided evidence that the most common causes of rupture after EVAR were type Ia and Ib Endoleaks (Els). Post-rupture mortality after EVAR was high (35.6%) and comparable to the morbidity of de novo ruptures. Endovascular repair appears to have better results compared to conversion to open repair. A significant number of patients had prior endovascular reoperations and inadequate follow-up. Patient compliance with the surveillance protocol is mandatory.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of incidence, indications, and outcomes of early open conversions after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to report incidence, indications, and outcomes of early open conversions (EOC) after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), defined as surgical conversion performed within 30 days from the initial EVAR.

EVIDENCE AQUISITION

A systematic review of the literature was performed (database searched: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library; last search April 2023). Articles reporting EOC after EVAR comprising at least five patients were included. Meta-analyses of proportions were performed using a random-effects model.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Seventeen non-randomized studies, published between 1999 and 2022, were included. A total of 35,970 patients had previously undergone EVAR, of these 438 patients underwent EOC. Estimated incidence of EOC was 1.4% (95% CI 1.1-1.4; I2=81.66%). Specifically, in the works published before 2010 the incidence was 1.8% (95% CI 1.3-2.4; I2=74.25) while for subsequent ones it was 0.9% (95% CI 0.6-1.1; I2=69.82). Weighted mean age was 74.91 years (95% CI 72.42-77.39; I2=83.11%). Estimated rate of cause determining EOC were: access issue in 27.7% of patients (95% CI 13.8-41.6; I2=88.14%), incorrect placement of the endograft in 20.1% (95% CI 10.2-30.0; I2=76,9%), problems with "delivery system" in 9.0% (95% CI 4.9-13.1; I2=0%), aorto-iliac rupture in 8.6% (95% CI 4.5-12.6; I2=0%), endoprosthesis migration in 7.9% of cases (95% CI 3.3-12.4; I2=22.96%), failure in engaging the contralateral gate in 4.8% (95% CI 1.6-8; I2=0%), "kinking" or "twisting" of endoprosthesis in 3.3% (95% CI 0.6-5.9; I2=0%), graft thrombosis in 3.2% (95% CI 0.6-5.7; I2=0%), type Ia endoleak in 2.9% (95% CI 0.4-5.4; I2=0%), type III endoleak in 2.8% (95% CI 0.3-5.3; I2=0%) and endograft infection in 2.7% (95% CI 0.3-5.2; I2=0%). Intraoperative conversion rate was 91.1% (95% CI 85.8-96.4; I2=66.01%). Early mortality rate after EOC was 14.5% (95% CI 9.1-19.9; I2=48.31%). Mean length of stay (LOS) was 11.94 days (95% CI 6.718-17.172; I2=92.34%).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of EOC seems to decrease over time. Causes of EOC were mainly related to access problems and incorrect positioning of the endograft. Most of the EOC were performed intraoperatively carrying a high mortality rate.

Open Surgical Conversion After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a preferred treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms, though it comes with complications such as endoleaks and graft infections that may necessitate late open conversion (LOC). This systematic review and meta-analysis, drawing on studies from PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, aimed to evaluate the incidence, outcomes, and factors leading to LOC after EVAR. The analysis of 11 selected studies revealed a 5.3% incidence of LOC, with a patient cohort predominantly male (79%) and an average age of 73.5 years. The interval between initial EVAR and LOC was 35.1 months on average, with the Excluder device most frequently necessitating LOC. A notable 68% of endovascular salvage attempts before LOC failed. The study highlighted rupture and type I endoleak as the primary reasons for urgent LOC, which exhibited a 10-fold higher mortality rate compared to elective LOC. Elective LOC procedures had a 30-day mortality rate similar to primary elective open aneurysm repairs. These findings underscore the importance of vigilant post-EVAR patient monitoring and suggest that the methodological quality of underlying research should be considered in interpreting these results.

Endovascular maneuvers for contralateral stent graft limb misplacement in endovascular aortic repair

Cannulation and placement of the contralateral stent graft limb during endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) procedure are crucial steps as mispositioning may lead to conversion to open aortic repair. Endovascular bail-out strategies for stent graft relocation in EVAR are underreported though detailed knowledge may facilitate application and prevent conversion. We present three endovascular bail-out strategies for repositioning of a mispositioned contralateral stent graft limb. (1) Retraction of the mispositioned component with an inflated reliant balloon and placement of an interposition stent graft after successful cannulation; (2) Push-maneuver of the mispositioned stent graft into the infrarenal aortic aneurysm with an inflated reliant balloon supported by a large lumen introducer sheath and (3) Parallel placement of a second contralateral stent graft limb displacing the mispositioned one against the atrial wall in cases with adequate vessel diameter. Prevention of stent graft mispositioning by applying recognized tests to ensure correct placement are essential, following the slogan: check twice, deploy once.

Clinical presentation, operative management, and long-term outcomes of rupture after previous abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the presentation trends, intervention, and survival of patients who had been treated for late abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture (LAR) after open repair (OR) or endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data from a single-center, retrospective database for patients treated for LAR from 2000 to 2020. The end points were the 30-day mortality, major postoperative complication, and survival. The outcomes between LAR managed with EVAR (group I) vs OR were compared (group II).

RESULTS

Of 390 patients with infrarenal aortic rupture, 40 (10%) had experienced aortic rupture after prior aortic repair and comprised the LAR cohort (34 men; age 78 ± 8 years). LAR had occurred before EVAR in 30 and before OR in 10 patients. LAR was more common in the second half of the study with 32 patients after 2010. LAR after prior OR was secondary to ruptured para-anastomotic pseudoaneurysms. After initial EVAR, LAR had occurred despite reintervention in 17 patients (42%). The time to LAR was shorter after prior EVAR than after OR (6 ± 4 vs 12 ± 4 years, respectively; P = .003). Treatment for LAR was EVAR for 25 patients (63%; group I) and OR for 15 (37%, group II). LAR after initial OR was managed with endovascular salvage for 8 of 10 patients. Endovascular management was more frequent in the latter half of the study period. In group I, fenestrated repair had been used for seven patients (28%). Salvage for the remaining cases was feasible with EVAR, aortic cuffs, or limb extensions. The incidence of free rupture, time to treatment, 30-day mortality (8% vs 13%; P = .3), complications (32% vs 60%; P = .1), and disposition were similar between the two groups. Those in group I had had less blood loss (660 vs 3000 mL; P < .001) and less need for dialysis (0% vs 33%; P < .001) than those in group II. The median follow-up was 21 months (interquartile range, 6-45 months). The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival was 76%, 52%, and 41%, respectively, and was similar between groups (28 vs 22 months; P = .48). Late mortality was not related to the aorta.

CONCLUSIONS

LAR after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair has been encountered more frequently in clinical practice, likely driven by the frequency of EVAR. However, most LARs, including those after previous OR, can now be salvaged with endovascular techniques with lower morbidity and mortality.

Perioperative and long-term outcomes after open conversion of endovascular aneurysm repair versus primary open aortic repair

BACKGROUND

The use of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has superseded that of open aneurysm repair (OAR) as the procedure of choice for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. However, significant rates of late reintervention and aneurysm rupture have been reported after EVAR, resulting in the need for conversion to OAR (C-OAR). To assess the relative effects of C-OAR on patients, we compared the outcomes of these patients to those of patients who had undergone P-OAR.

METHODS

The data from all patients who had undergone C-OAR and P-OAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database from 2003 to 2018 were queried. Multivariable logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were used to assess the perioperative long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 4763 patients were included (91.4%, P-OAR; 8.6%, C-OAR). C-OAR was associated with a significant increase in the odds of perioperative mortality (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.7; P = .027) and renal complications (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2; P = .004) vs P-OAR. At 5 years, conversion was associated with a higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.9; P < .001), aneurysmal rupture (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.1; P = .007), and reintervention (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.05-1.97; P = .022) compared with P-OAR. These results also persisted at 10 years, with conversion associated with a higher risk of mortality (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8; P < .001), rupture (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.8; P = .018), and reintervention (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1; P = .010).

CONCLUSIONS

The results from the present study have demonstrated that C-OAR is associated with a significantly higher risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with P-OAR. We found a significant increase in mortality, aneurysm rupture, and reintervention at 5 and 10 years of follow-up.

Contemporary incidence, outcomes, and survival associated with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair conversion to open repair among Medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVE

The widespread application of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has ushered in an era of requisite postoperative surveillance and the potential need for reintervention. The national prevalence and results of EVAR conversion to open repair, however, remain poorly defined. The purpose of this analysis was to define the incidence of open conversion and its associated outcomes.

METHODS

The SVS Vascular Quality Initiative EVAR registry linked to Medicare claims via Vascular Implants Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network was queried for open conversions after initial EVAR procedures from 2003 to 2016. Cumulative conversion incidence within up to 5 years after EVAR and outcomes after open intervention were determined. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify independent predictors of conversion and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 15,937 EVAR patients, 309 (1.9%) underwent an open conversion: 43% (n = 132) early (<30 days) and 57% (n = 177) late (>30 days). The longitudinally observed rate of conversion was constant over time, as well as by geographic region. Independent predictors of conversion included female sex (hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; P < .001), aneurysm diameter or more than 6.0 cm at the time of index EVAR (HR, 1.74; P < .001), nonelective repair (compared with elective presentation: HR, 1.72; P < .001), and aortouni-iliac repairs (HR, 2.19; P < .001). In contrast, adjunctive operative procedures such as endo-anchors or cuff extensions (HR, 0.62; P = .06) were protective against long-term conversion. Both early (HR, 1.6; P < .001) and late (HR, 1.26; P = .07) open conversions were associated with significant 30-day (total cohort, 15%) and 1-year mortality (total cohort, 25%). Patients undergoing open conversion experienced high rates of 30-day readmission (42%) and cardiac (45%), renal (32%), and pulmonary (30%) complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This large, registry-based analysis is among the first to document the incidence and outcomes for open conversion after EVAR in a national cohort with long-term follow-up. Importantly, women, patients with large aneurysms, and complex anatomy, as well as urgent or emergent EVARs are at an increased risk for open conversion. It seems that more conversions are performed in the early postoperative period, despite perceptions that conversion is a delayed phenomenon. In all instances, conversion is associated with significant morbidity and mortality and highlights the importance of appropriate patient selection at the time of index EVAR.

The failing endograft-A systematic review of aortic graft explants and associated outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The prominent use of endovascular stent grafts in the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms is associated with increased descriptions of late complications such as graft infection and endoleaks, which can confer significant morbidity and mortality. Failed endovascular management of late complications often requires open conversion and graft explantation. This systematic review sought to highlight the peri- and post-operative course of patients undergoing aortic graft explants to inform readers of the associated morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing this procedure.

METHODS

The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A search of the PubMed, Google Scholar and Ovid MEDLINE databases from January 1995 to April 2021 was performed with a combination of MeSH terms pertaining to endovascular aneurysm repair and open conversion. Articles were screened and included based on pre-determined selection criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 818 studies were identified, with 41 meeting inclusion criteria. These studies examined a total of 1324 patients, 84.3% of whom were male with a mean age of 74 years at explantation. Mean time to graft explantation was 36 months, with a mean aneurysm size of 66 mm. The majority of aortic explants were performed for persistent endoleaks (68%), and 10% for infection. There was high morbidity with the procedure, with high rates of post-operative complications (mean, 37%) and 30-day mortality (11%). The most common complications included renal (15%), respiratory (12%) and cardiac (9%). Most explanted grafts were first-generation endografts. Morbidity and mortality rates were reduced in patients undergoing elective explants compared to emergent procedures (3.3% compared to 43.4%).

CONCLUSION

Aortic graft explant remains a highly co-morbid procedure, with high rates of peri- and post-operative complications and mortality. The number of explant procedures reported over the past 25 years has increased, reflecting the prominent use of EVAR in the management of AAAs. Whilst remaining a highly co-morbid procedure, patients undergoing elective explants had markedly reduced rates of mortality and morbidity compared to emergent explants. Thus, clinical focus should be on identifying patients who require graft explantation early to perform these procedures in an elective setting.

Early and late results of open surgical and endovascular treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms, selected according to surgical risk

Background

Open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) surgery are alternative treatments for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (IRAAA).

Objectives

To compare OSR and EVAR for the treatment of IRAAA.

Methods

119 patients with IRAAA were electively operated by the same surgeon between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2015, following selection for OSR or EVAR according to surgical risk. Complications, reinterventions, failures, and early and late mortality were analyzed.

Results

63 OSR and 56 EVAR patients were analyzed. They were similar in terms of age (70 years), gender (92% men), and average diameter of IRAAA (6.5 cm), but with different comorbidities, surgical risk, and anatomy. EVAR was better than OSR regarding time in the operating theatre (177.5 vs. 233.3 minutes), need for transfusion (25 vs. 73%), and length of stay in ICU (1.3 vs. 3.3 days) and hospital (8.1 vs. 11.1 days). OSR allowed more associated procedures to be conducted simultaneously (19.0 vs. 1.8%). There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to complications (25.4 vs. 25.1%), reinterventions (3.2 vs. 5.2%), or early mortality (1.6 vs. 0%). During follow-up, OSR was associated with fewer revisions (3.13 vs. 4.21), angio-CTs (0.22 vs. 3.23), complications (6.4 vs. 37.5%), reinterventions (3.2 vs. 23.2%), and failures (1.6 vs. 10.7%), and had better survival (78.2 vs. 63.2%).

Conclusions

Correct selection of patients achieves excellent results because it avoids OSR in patients at high risk and avoids EVAR in patients with high anatomical complexity, achieving similar results in the perioperative period, but better results for OSR over the course of follow-up.

Comparison of the bifurcated graft reconstruction and aortic stump closure in open surgical conversion after endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

The optimal management of the aortic stump in open surgical conversion (OSC) after AAA endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is debated. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacies and safety between the bifurcated prosthetic vascular graft in situ stump reconstruction (p-graft ISSR) and aortic stump closure (ASC) in OSC.

METHODS

We analyzed 973 elective AAA patients admitted from 1/1/2001 to 12/31/2020, at the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University. We conducted a statistical analysis of the clinical characteristics, procedural data, as well as outcomes and technique considerations of aortic stump management in OSC patients.

RESULTS

A total of 24 male patients had OSC after EVAR. The rate of stent graft infection was 54.17% before OSC. Eleven patients underwent ASC, and 13 patients were treated with p-graft ISSR. The major complication after OSC was aortic stump bleeding (total incidence was 37.50%) (1 patient with a periaortic hematoma and 8 patients with a stump blowout). The total incidences of stump blowout between the patients with ASC and those with p-graft ISSR were significantly different (45.45% vs. 23.08%, p<0.05). The total perioperative mortality was 25.00% (6 patients with stump blowouts). The perioperative survival rates between these two aortic stump management approaches were 72.72% and 76.92% (ASC vs. p-graft ISSR, p<0.05). In total, 18 patients were followed up (3-180 months). There were 3 aorta-related deaths during the late follow-up period (including both of the 2 stump-blowout-related deaths just treated with ASC).

CONCLUSIONS

If the condition of the aorta and peri-aortic tissue are suitable for a prosthetic graft bypass, the p-graft ISSR is highly recommended for OSC patients after EVAR.

Preliminary Clinical and Radiologic Outcome of Matched Patients with Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms Treated by Low-Profile vs Standard Profile Branched Aortic Endografts

BACKGROUND

Durability of low-profile branched aortic stent-grafts (LPSG) in the treatment of patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) remains unclear. Objective of this study is to compare the outcomes of LPSG with standard profile branched aortic stent-grafts (SPSG).

METHODS

Between January 2016 and January 2020, 225 consecutive patients with TAAA were treated by branched endovascular aortic repair (BEVAR). Twenty-four patients who were treated with a LPSG were compared to 24 patients who received SPSG as a control group. Control patients were selected according to aneurysm size (maximum aneurysm diameter) and extension (Crawford classification) as well as availability of adequate preoperative and postoperative CT-angiograms at 24 months. The primary endpoint was ongoing clinical success defined as successful implantation and freedom from aneurysm- or procedure-related death, secondary intervention, type I or III endoleak, infection, thrombosis, aneurysm expansion or rupture and conversion. Secondary endpoints were radiological changes of the branched endograft (migration, shortening, scoliosis, lordosis, and fracture).

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 22.6 (LPSG) and 26.2 months (SPSG), no significant difference was found in terms of technical success (100% in both groups), late mortality (4.2% vs 0%), aneurysm diameter increase (4.2% in both groups) and reinterventions (25% vs 37.5%). Infection, thrombosis, aneurysm expansion or rupture and conversion were not observed. Radiological analysis of aortic graft remodeling showed no fracture and no significant migration, shortening, scoliosis and lordosis of the LPSG (6.1 mm, 7.5 mm, 12.8° and 6.1°) compared to SPSG (3.9 mm, 5.1 mm, 7.9° and 5.6°) after 2 years.

CONCLUSION

The clinical and radiological findings of the present study showed no increased mortality and complications for the matched patients who underwent treatment with low-profile vs standard-profile BEVAR. This study provides preliminary evidence of safety and efficacy of low-profile branched endografts in patients with demanding iliac access vessels.

Progressive Device Failure at Long Term Follow Up of the Nellix EndoVascular Aneurysm Sealing (EVAS) System

OBJECTIVE

High rates of midterm failure of the Nellix EndoVascular Aneurysm Sealing (EVAS) System resulted in device withdrawal from the UK market. The study aim was to report long term Nellix EVAS outcomes and management of a failing device.

METHODS

A retrospective review of EVAS procedures at a tertiary unit was performed. Device failure was defined as a triad of stent migration, stent separation, and secondary sac expansion, or any intervention for type 1 endoleak, device rupture, or explant.

RESULTS

161 (male n = 140, female n = 21) patients with a median follow up of 6.0 (IQR 5.0-6.6) years were included. Freedom from all cause mortality estimate at six years was 41.5%. There were 70 (43.5%) device failures with a freedom from device failure estimate at six years of 32.3%. Failure was the result of sac expansion (n = 41), caudal stent migration (n = 36), stent separation (n = 26), and secondary AAA rupture (n = 15). A substantial number of type 1 endoleaks was present (1a n = 33, 1b n = 11), but the type 2 endoleak rate was low at 3.7%. Some 36 (22.4%) patients required re-intervention. Twenty-one patients underwent explant with no 30 day deaths. Six patients underwent Nellix-in-Nellix application (NINA) with one early death from bowel ischaemia and one patient who died later from non-aneurysm related cause. Two NINA patients have ongoing sac expansion and two have had thrombosis of a Nellix limb or visceral stent. Proximal embolisation was only successful in one of six cases.

CONCLUSION

The long term failure rate of Nellix EVAS is high. All patients with a device must be informed and be enrolled in enhanced surveillance. EVAS explant is an acceptable technique with favourable outcomes. Management by open explant, if the patient is fit, should be considered early and offered to those with device failure.

Strategy to avoid open surgical conversion after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm

Purpose

Open surgical conversion (OSC) is the last treatment option for patients with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR)failure. We investigated the underlying causes of EVAR failure requiring OSC and attempted to determine strategies to avoid OSC after EVAR.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the database of patients who underwent OSC after EVAR from 2005 to 2018 in a single institution. Twenty-six OSCs were performed in 24 patients (median age, 74.5 years; 79.2% of males) who had undergone standard EVAR. We investigated pre-, intra-, and postoperative computed tomography or angiographic images and outcomes of the OSCs.

Results

Two main indications for OSC were persistent endoleak (50.0%) and endograft infection (EI) (38.5%). All 13 patients who underwent OSC due to endoleaks received EVAR outside of indications for use. Among 10 patients who underwent OSC due to EI, we found overlooked infection sources in 7 (70.0%) at the time of EVAR or during the surveillance period. OSC was performed at a median of 31.8 months (interquartile range, 9.4-69.8) after EVAR as an emergency (15.4%) or elective (84.6%) surgery. Aortic endograft was removed in 84.6% of cases (totally, 57.7%; partially, 26.9%), whereas it was preserved in 4 cases (15.4%). After 26 OSCs, 2 early deaths (7.7%) and 2 aortoenteric fistulae (7.7%) developed as major complications.

Conclusion

OSC after EVAR was associated with relatively higher perioperative morbidity and mortality. To avoid OSC after EVAR, we recommend careful assessment of coexisting infection sources and avoidance of EVAR for patients with especially unfavorable anatomy for EVAR, particularly the in proximal neck.

Lessons Learned from Open Surgical Conversion after Failed Previous EVAR

BACKGROUND

Delayed open conversion (OpC) after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is becoming increasingly common worldwide. We reviewed our experience to characterize the perioperative spectrum of OpC repairs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained institutional database to identify patients who underwent late OpC after failed EVAR was performed. Patient and aneurysm baseline characteristics, mechanism of failure, perioperative details, including type of repair/complications/survival, and late outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

From January 2003 to January 2020, 38 male patients (mean age, 75 ± 7 years; range, 60-90) required late OpC. Interval time from initial EVAR to OpC was 63.6 ± 33.8 months (range, 17-120). Mean diameter of the aneurysms was 82.2 ± 22.1 mm before OpC compared with 62.9 ± 13 mm before endograft implantation. Mechanisms of failure were type Ia, Ib, II, and III endoleaks in 14 (36.8%), 9 (23.7%), 4 (10.5%), and 1 (2.6%) patient(s), respectively; infection in 3 (7.9%), leg ischemia in 2 (5.3%), and multiple causes in 5 (13.2%) patients. We observed 4 (10.5%) asymptomatic, 16 (42.1%) symptomatic, and 18 (47.3%) ruptured aneurysms. Four patients (10.5%) had stable contained ruptures, whereas the remaining 13 (34.2%) and 1 additional patient (2.6%) with aortoenteric fistula presented with hemorrhagic shock (class ≥II). Total endograft explantation, endograft preservation, or proximal/distal partial graft removal was performed in 16 (42.1%), 10 (26.3%), and 2 (5.2%)/9 (23.7%) of patients, respectively. Technical success was 100%, excluding an early postaortic clamping death. Overall, 30-day mortality was 21.1% (8 of 38) and significantly higher in patients with hemorrhagic shock or hemodynamic instability at presentation (P = 0.04 and P = 0.009, respectively) and in patients who had endografts with hooks/barbs or experiencing higher postoperative complication rate (P = 0.02 and P = 0.006, respectively). By definition, procedure success was 81.1%. Mean follow-up was 37.6 ± 39.8 months. By the end of the study, we recorded 11 deaths (2 were aneurysm related).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high technical success, OpC has a significant mortality in patients presenting with hemorrhagic shock and had active fixation endografts or experiencing high complication rate. Many other confounding factors may play a role.

Elective late open conversion after endovascular aneurysm repair is associated with comparable outcomes to primary open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Three of four patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm are now treated with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The incidence of secondary procedures and surgical conversions is increasing for a population theoretically unfit for open surgery. The indications and outcomes of late open surgical conversions after EVAR in a high-volume tertiary vascular unit are reported.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study includes all patients who underwent a late open conversion between January 1996 and July 2018. Data were collected from records on patient demographics, operative indications, surgical strategy, perioperative outcomes, and medium-term survival.

RESULTS

Sixty-two consecutive patients (88.7% male) with a mean age of 77.5 years are included. The median duration since index EVAR was 38.5 months; 65% of stent grafts requiring late open conversion had suprarenal fixation. Indications included 22.6% type IA, 16.1% type IB, and 45.2% type II endoleaks; 12.9% graft thrombosis; and 14.5% endoprosthesis infection. Complete endograft explantation was performed in 37.1% of patients and a partial explantation in 54.8%, whereas 8.1% of stent grafts were wholly preserved in situ. Overall 30-day mortality was 12.9% (n = 8) in the cohort and 2.7% for elective patients. The all-cause morbidity rate was 40.1%, and the median length of hospital stay was 9 days. After follow-up of 28.4 months (range, 1.8-187.3 months), all-cause survival was 58.8%. Avoidance of aortic clamping (P = .006) and elective procedures (P = .019) were associated with a significant reduction in the length of hospital stay. Moreover, the 30-day mortality (P = .002), occurrence of postoperative renal dysfunction (P = .004), and intestinal ischemia (P = .017) were increased in the emergency setting. Excluding cases with rupture or infection, survival estimates were 97%, 97%, and 71% at 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Technically more complex than primary open surgery, late open conversion is a procedure that generates an acceptable perioperative risk when it is performed in a high-volume aortic surgical center. Elective open conversion is associated with excellent early and late outcomes. Endograft preservation strategies decrease perioperative morbidity.

Minimally Invasive Open Conversion for Late EVAR Failure

OBJECTIVE

With the increasing use of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), open repair after aortic stent grafting is of growing interest. The surgical conversion treatment may be a very challenging process with high mortality and in-hospital complication rates. The aim of this article is to present our experience in patients with EVAR failure treated by minimally invasive open conversion (MOC) and its technical aspects.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on a prospectively compiled computerized database of consecutive patients treated by MOC at our institution between May 2014 and June 2018. Indications for treatment were endoleaks with sac growth at least >5 mm in the last 6 months and failure of previous endovascular tentative for aneurysm sealing. Demographics of the patients, reason for conversion, previous endovascular procedures, surgical outcomes, and survival were reviewed. MOC was performed by a small abdominal incision, infrarenal clamping, and partial explantation of the endograft in all patients.

RESULTS

A total of 10 patients were treated during the study period. The mean interval to MOC after EVAR was 45.1 months (range, 14-128). Indications for MOC included type Ia endoleak in three patients (30%), persistent type II EL in four (40%), and type III EL in one patient (10%), indeterminate or type V EL in two (20%). At 30 days, no deaths or reinterventions were reported, and major complication rate was 10% (one postoperative pneumonia). At mean follow-up of 22.9 ± 15.9 months, no reinterventions were described. Death rate was (20%) with one aneurysm-related death (10%) for graft infection 32 months after MOC and one (10%) cardiac event at 18 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the potential high risk of open conversion, MOC appears to be a safe surgical solution for EVAR failure. This potentially challenging operation may be improved with minimally invasive techniques that are presented.

State of the art and meta-analysis of secondary open aortic procedure after abdominal endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Secondary open aortic procedures (SOAP) treat complications of endovascular aneurysm repair, when further endovascular options are exhausted. We aimed at depicting the state of the art of SOAP with high-level evidence.

METHODS

A systematic review of the SOAP literature, with a meta-analysis of its outcomes (primary outcome operative mortality; secondary outcome major morbidity) and metaregression of risk factors for mortality (PROSPERO 42017075631).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies (1093 patients) were elected for analysis. SOAP was performed within the same hospitalization of or 30 days from domestic endovascular aneurysm repair (early SOAP) in 0.2% of the patients (85/40,256), and in a nonelective setting in 24.3% (95% confidence interval, 21.8-26.9). Most frequent indications were endoleak (44.4%; 95% confidence interval, 41.4-47.3) and rupture (12.7%; 95% confidence interval, 10.4-15.1). The most common procedures were infrarenal aortic replacement (85.2%; 95% confidence interval, 82.6-87.7) with high use of supravisceral clamping (suprarenal, 25% [95% confidence interval, 21.9-28.1] and supraceliac, 20.7% [95% confidence interval, 17.8-23.6]), and axillobifemoral bypass with stent explant (6.9%; 95% confidence interval, 5.1-8.7). Operative mortality (in-hospital or 30-day) was 10.9% (95% confidence interval, 8.7-13.5). The most frequent morbidities were respiratory (11.4%; 95% confidence interval, 8.1-15.9) and renal (9.5%; 95% confidence interval, 8.1-15.9). Risk factors for mortality were supravisceral clamping (Z = 3.007; Q = 9.044; P = .003) and nonelective status (Z = 3.382; Q = 11.440; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoleak is the main indication for SOAP, which mostly consists of infrarenal aortic replacement. Risk factors for operative mortality are nonelective status and supravisceral clamping.

Laparoscopic ligation of Type II endoleaks following endovascular aneurysm repair: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The clinical significance of Type II endoleak remains contentious; the strategies used for its management have continued to expand. We systematically review the literature and comprehensively appraise the effectiveness of laparoscopic intervention in the management of this common complication.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines on MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for relevant articles reporting laparoscopic surgery of Type II endoleak post-endovascular aortic repair.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies representing 40 patients were investigated. Mean age was 72.7 years, and proportion of males was 90.0%. All patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists grade II and above and underwent standard infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair. The mean duration of operation was 130.2 min, with a mean blood loss across of 173.8 mL. The overall technical success rate was 90% (27/30). Two patients required reoperation within 24 h, with further lumbar ligations that were successful. One other patient required conversion to open surgery due to significant bleeding at the dorsal aorta. The perioperative and 30-day mortality rate was 2.5% (1/40). The mean length of hospital stay was 3.7 days (range 1 to 10 days). The mean length of follow-up was 36.7 months (range 3 to 103.2 months), where the rate of recurrence was 22.5% (9/40).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic ligation of feeding vessels causing Type II endoleak is potentially an alternative treatment after failed standard endovascular embolization, particularly in select centres with necessary resources and capabilities.

Late open conversions after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair in an urgent setting

OBJECTIVES

We report a multicenter experience of urgent late open conversion (LOC), with the goal of identifying the mode of presentation, technical aspects, and outcomes of this cohort of patients.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) requiring LOC (>30 days after implantation) from 1996 to 2016 in six vascular centers was performed. Patients with aneurysm rupture or other conditions requiring urgent surgery (<24 hours) were included. Patient demographics, time interval between EVAR and LOC, endograft characteristics, previous attempts at endovascular correction, indications, operative technique, 30-day mortality and morbidity, and long-term survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 42 patients (88.1% men; mean age, 75.8 ± 9.0 years) included. Among the 42 explanted grafts, 33 were bifurcated, 1 tube, 6 aortouni-iliac, and 2 side-branch devices. Suprarenal fixation was present in 78.6%. Twelve patients (28.6%) underwent endovascular reintervention before LOC. Indications for urgent LOC were aneurysm rupture in 24 of the 42 cases (57.1%), endograft infection in 11 (26.2%), endoleak associated with aneurysm growth and pain in 6 (14.3%), and recurrent endograft thrombosis in 2 (4.8%). The proximal aortic cross-clamping site was infrarenal in 38.1% of cases, suprarenal in 19.1%, and supraceliac in 42.9%. Complete removal of the endograft was performed in 32 patients (76.2%) and partial removal in 10 (proximal preservation in 7 of 10). Reconstructions were performed with Dacron grafts in 33 of the 42 cases, cryopreserved arterial allografts in 5, and endograft removal associated with prosthetic axillobifemoral bypass in 4. The 30-day mortality was 23.8%; hemorrhagic shock was an independent risk factor of early mortality (odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-73.7; P = .018). During a mean follow-up of 23.9 ± 36.0 months, two late aneurysm-related deaths occurred. The estimated 1- and 5-year survival rates were 62.1% and 46.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent LOC after EVAR are associated with high postoperative mortality rates and poor long-term survival. Further studies are necessary to define the timing and the best treatment option for failing EVAR.

Early outcomes with a single-sided access endovascular stent

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to report the 1-year follow-up study results of the new Horizon stent graft (Endospan, Herzliya, Israel) from two different prospective consecutive trials. The Horizon abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft system is a 14F profile system requiring only a single access site. It consists of three modules, introduced separately: base limb (iliac to iliac limb); distal aortic limb; and proximal aortic limb with a bare suprarenal crown and active fixation.

METHODS

Data from the first in man (FIM) clinical study with 10 patients enrolled and the pivotal study with 30 patients were analyzed. Outcomes measured were freedom from major adverse events (MAEs) including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, renal failure, respiratory failure, paraplegia, stroke, bowel ischemia, and procedural blood loss ≥1000 mL. Performance end points included successful delivery and deployment of the device, freedom from aneurysm growth ≥5 mm, type I or type III endoleak, stent graft occlusion, conversion to open surgery, rupture, and stent graft migration.

RESULTS

In the FIM study, one conversion to open surgery with >1000 mL of blood loss was registered perioperatively. In the pivotal study, no perioperative MAE was registered. Overall, at 1-year follow-up, two deaths and one aneurysm growth unrelated to endoleak were registered.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of both the FIM and pivotal studies demonstrated that 39 of 40 procedures were successful for delivery and deployment of the Horizon stent graft. No MAE was registered during the follow-up. The primary safety and performance end points were met in both studies.

An Institution-Wide Algorithm for Treatment of Type II Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR)

Objectives:

Multiple endovascular techniques have been described for the treatment of persistent type II endoleaks (pT2ELs) causing aneurysm sac growth following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). In the event of a failed endovascular procedure and a pT2EL, a consensus regarding further treatment is lacking, and the literature suggests repeated endovascular attempts are rarely successful. Herein, we propose an algorithm for definitive management of pT2ELs with persistent sac growth following EVAR.

Methods:

A retrospective review of 29 patients who underwent treatment of persistent sac growth in the setting of pT2ELs was performed. Intervention methods were determined at the discretion of the operating surgeon. Aneurysmal sac enlargement was defined as a diameter increase > 5 mm, and persistent endoleak was defined as lasting greater than 6 months.

Results:

From 2000 to 2015, 917 EVAR procedures were performed at our institution. Isolated pT2ELs with sac enlargement were identified in 29 patients. Twenty-five patients underwent direct translumbar sac puncture and coiling and/or Onyx (Onyx, Plymouth, Minnesota) embolization of the culprit vessels. Thirteen (52%) of 25 patients had pT2EL after first endovascular intervention, and 10 (40%) of 25 patients failed 2 endovascular treatments. Of those 10, 7 displayed persistent aneurysmal sac growth and underwent a third embolization procedure. Type II endoleaks persisted in 6 patients; 3 patients were subsequently treated with laparotomy, ligation of lumbar vessels, sac exploration, and sac plication around the endograft. Technical success for this technique was 100%. During a mean follow-up of 38.4 months, no recurrent T2ELs, stent graft migration, and/or disjunction were observed.

Conclusions:

We propose a new algorithm for the management of pT2ELs. If 2 endovascular procedures fail to control of the endoleak, repeat endovascular attempts are not recommended. Endovascular failure should be followed by laparotomy with surgical ligation of culprit feeding vessels followed by sac exploration and plication of the sac, and endoaneurysmorrhaphy.

Late Type 3b Endoleak Mimicking Type 2 Endoleak after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair has been widely used for the treatment of AAA as a safe and efficient method, but endoleaks causing persistent expansion of aneurysm sac may cause aneurysmal rupture and death. Type 3 endoleak is rare but a predominant cause of late rupture. Type 3b endoleak can be misdiagnosed as type 2 endoleak, which is more frequent. Here we report two cases of type 3b endoleak mimicking type 2 endoleak, which were successfully treated by open surgery of partial explantation of the stent-graft and endoaneurysmal interposition graft replacement.

Conversion from endovascular to open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have found conflicting results regarding the operative risks associated with conversion to open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair after failed endovascular treatment (endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR]). The purpose of this study was to assess the outcome of patients undergoing a conversion, and compare outcomes with standard open AAA repair and EVAR. In addition, we sought out to identify factors associated with conversion.

METHODS

All patients undergoing a conversion to open repair, and those undergoing standard EVAR and open repair between 2005 and 2013 were included from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with conversion, and to assess independent perioperative risks associated with conversion compared with standard AAA repair. Subanalysis for factors associated with conversion was performed among patients additionally included in the more detailed targeted vascular module of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

RESULTS

A total of 32,164 patients were included, with 300 conversions, 7188 standard open repairs, and 24,676 EVARs. Conversion to open repair was associated with a significantly higher 30-day mortality than standard open repair (10.0% vs 4.2%; odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-3.6; P < .001), and EVAR (10.0% vs 1.7%; OR, 7.2; 95% CI, 4.8-10.9; P < .001). Conversion surgery was additionally followed by an increased occurrence of any complication (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9 [open]; OR, 7.8; 95% CI, 6.1-9.9 [EVAR]). Factors associated with conversion were young age (OR, 1.2 per 10 years decrease; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4), female gender (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0), and nonwhite race (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.6). Conversely, body mass index >30 was negatively associated with (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9). Among anatomic characteristics captured in the targeted vascular data set (n = 4555), large aneurysm diameter demonstrated to be strongly associated with conversion (OR, 1.1 per 1 cm increase; 95% CI, 1.03-1.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion to open repair after failed EVAR is associated with substantially increased perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with standard AAA repair. Factors associated with conversion are large diameter of the aneurysm, young age, female gender, and nonwhite race, whereas obesity is inversely related to conversion surgery.

Late open conversion after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

This study determined the incidence, the surgical details, and the outcome of late open conversion after failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm.

METHODS

A review of English-language medical literature from 1991 to 2014 was conducted using the PubMed and EMBASE databases to find all studies involving late conversion after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm. The search identified 26 articles encompassing 641 patients (84% men; median age, 73.5 years).

RESULTS

Mean interval from the initial implantation was 38.5 ± 10.7 months. The cumulative single-center open conversion rate was 3.7%. The indications for late open conversion included endoleak in 62.4%, infection in 9.5%, migration in 5.5%, and thrombosis in 6.7%. Operations were urgent in 22.5% of the patients. The 30-day mortality was 9.1%. Mortality rates were different between elective (3.2%) and nonelective patients (29.2%). Five aneurysm-related deaths (1.5%) and two graft infections (0.6%) occurred during a median follow-up of 26.4 months (range, 5-50.2 months).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of patients with failed EVAR and without further options for endovascular salvage is growing. Endoleak remains the most important weakness of EVAR as the leading cause of late open conversion. Such procedures, although technically demanding, are associated with relatively low mortality rates when performed electively. Open repair still represents a valuable solution for many patients with failed EVAR.

Catheter-based bailout techniques for an interrupted deployment of the excluder endograft due to broken deployment string

In this report we describe catheter-based bailout techniques for when the distal end of the ipsilateral leg of an Excluder endograft has remained undeployed due to a broken deployment string. We attempted to advance a percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) balloon into an undeployed leg via the brachial artery, but were unable to do so. The delivery catheter was then pulled out through the undeployed leg while the main body was supported by a dilated touch-up balloon to prevent stent graft migration, which subsequently enabled insertion of the balloon via the ipsilateral femoral artery. Complete deployment was accomplished by balloon dilation. Although this is situation is extremely rare, it should be recognized and catheter-based strategies should be known for dealing with this complication.

Tortuous iliac systems--a significant burden to conventional cannulation in the visceral segment: is there a role for robotic catheter technology?

PURPOSE

To attempt to quantify the effect of varying degrees of iliac tortuosity on maneuverability and "torquability" of endovascular catheters in the visceral segment, comparing conventional and robotic cannulation techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a fenestrated endograft within a pulsatile phantom, 10 experienced operators cannulated the renal arteries via three different access vessels of varying iliac tortuosity with the use of conventional and robotic techniques. All procedures were performed in the angiography suite and recorded for blinded video assessment for quantitative (time, catheter-tip movements) and qualitative metrics (operator performance scores).

RESULTS

In total, 120 cannulations were observed. With increasing iliac tortuosity, median time and number of catheter movements required for renal cannulation with conventional techniques increased in stepwise fashion for mild, moderate, and severe iliac tortuosity (times, 7.6 min [interquartile range (IQR), 4.6-9.3 min] vs 6.9 min [4.2-11.4 min] vs 17.7 min [13.3-22.6 min], respectively; movements, 184 [IQR, 110-351] vs 251 [207-395] vs 569 [409-616], respectively). Median renal cannulation times were significantly reduced with the use of the robotic system irrespective of mild, moderate, or severe tortuosity (times, 1.4 min [IQR, 1.1-1.9 min] vs 3 min [2.3-3.3 min] vs 2.8 min [1.5-3.9 min], respectively; movements, 19 [IQR, 14-27] vs 46 [43-58] vs 45 [40-66], respectively; P < .005). Overall operator performance scores improved significantly with the use of the robotic system irrespective of iliac tortuosity severity.

CONCLUSIONS

In cases of moderate to severe iliac tortuosity, conventional catheter manipulation and control becomes an issue. The improvement in positional control and predictability seen with advanced catheter designs may be amplified in cases of severe iliac tortuosity.

Thoracic or thoracoabdominal approaches to endovascular device removal and open aortic repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aortic repair is becoming increasingly common and diverse in its application despite ongoing uncertainty about long-term durability. Recent reports detail late conversion to open surgical repair to treat disease progression and repair failure. We describe our experience with using thoracic or thoracoabdominal approaches to endovascular device removal and open aortic repair after previous endovascular procedures.

METHODS

Thirty-five patients underwent open aortic repair through thoracotomy (n=7) or thoracoabdominal incision (n=28) 0.5 to 48 months after undergoing endovascular thoracic (n=27) or abdominal (n=8) aortic procedures. Indications for open repair included expanding aneurysm (n=23), device infection (n=8), fistula (n=5), pseudoaneurysm (n=2), aneurysm rupture (n=2), and restenosis (n=1). Endovascular devices were completely removed in 26 patients and partially removed in 9. Descending thoracic aortic repair was performed in 10 patients, thoracoabdominal aortic repair in 24, and juxtarenal abdominal aortic repair in 1.

RESULTS

There were 2 in-hospital deaths (6%), both in patients who presented with endovascular device infection. There were 8 late deaths. Overall 1-year survival was 83%±7%. Among the patients who presented with infected devices, 3 experienced major late complications, including persistent infection, pseudoaneurysm, and recurrent fistula; 2 of these patients succumbed to late deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Open surgical repair after previous endovascular aortic procedures is successful in the majority of patients, particularly in those without device infections. Achieving definitive aortic repair in patients with infected endovascular devices is particularly challenging.

Conversion to open repair after endografting for abdominal aortic aneurysm: a review of causes, incidence, results, and surgical techniques of reconstruction

PURPOSE

To review the incidence, causes, and mortality rates of early and late conversion to open surgery after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

METHODS

A systematic search of the English-language literature from 2002 to 2009 was performed by interrogation of the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases. Studies were included if they: (1) had >100 patients treated with EVAR and (2) provided adequate data to calculate incidence and associated mortality rates. The search yielded 13 articles with sufficient data to analyze early conversion (12,236 patients, 178 conversions) and 15 articles with available data for late conversion (14,298 patients, 279 conversions).

RESULTS

The rate of early conversion among the 13 articles reviewed ranged from 0.8% to 5.9%; more recent studies carried lower rates of early conversion. Mortality rates of early conversion varied between 0% and 28.5%. Overall, there were 178 (1.5%) early conversions among the 12,236 AAAs treated with EVAR, with an average mortality of 12.4%. The rates of late conversion ranged from 0.4% to 22%. Of the 14,289 AAA patients undergoing endovascular repair, 279 (1.9%) required late conversion; the mortality rate was 10%.

CONCLUSION

Though the incidence is gradually declining, secondary interventions persist as the Achilles' heel of EVAR. A lifelong follow-up strategy for AAA patients treated with EVAR is essential for early detection and treatment of complications of the procedure. Vascular surgeons should be familiar with the complex open conversion procedures.