Editor's Choice - Comparison of Outcomes for Major Contemporary Endograft Devices Used for Endovascular Repair of Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Do Not Mix It up! Long-Term Outcomes of Different Proximal Aortic Cuffs with the AFX Endograft

BACKGROUND

The AFX unibody endograft offers advantages in treating abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with narrow aortic bifurcations due to its unique design, where the flow divider sits at the native aortic bifurcation. However, its limited length options may limit complete proximal neck utilization. As per device instruction for use, the implant should be completed with an aortic cuff. This study aims to evaluate the long-term outcomes of patients treated with an all-Endologix implant versus a combination of Endologix and Medtronic devices.

METHODS

This retrospective, single-center study included 134 consecutive AAA patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using the AFX unibody endograft paired with suprarenal aortic cuffs from Endologix (n = 86) or Medtronic (n = 48) between November 2011 and November 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the type of aortic cuff used. The primary outcome was the occurrence of type 3A endoleaks at the longest available follow-up. Secondary outcomes included any endoleak, reintervention rates, all-cause mortality, and aneurysm-related death.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 41 months, and type 3A endoleaks occurred after a mean 34.8 months in 6 patients (4.5%), which is significantly more frequent in the mixed-device group (12.8%) (P < 0.001). Type 3A endoleak occurred regardless of overlap and developed over time. Endoleaks of any type were reported in 17 patients. Reinterventions were needed in 12 patients. The use of an Endurant cuff was associated with a significantly increased risk of type 3A endoleaks (hazard ratio [HR] 16.5; 95% [CI] 1.9-143; P = 0.011) and reinterventions (HR 9.67; 95% CI 1.9-49.6; P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Combining endografts from different manufacturers, especially those with differing materials and sealing mechanisms, may compromise the long-term integrity of certain EVAR repairs. Clinicians should exercise caution when considering mixed-device configurations and ensure rigorous follow-up for patients with such implants.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Long-term Mortality and Reintervention After Endovascular and Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repairs in Australia, Germany, and the United States

OBJECTIVE

To examine long-term outcomes after endovascular (EVAR) and open repairs (OAR) for intact abdominal aortic aneurysms in Australia, Germany, and the United States, using a unified study design.

BACKGROUND

Similarities and differences in long-term outcomes after EVAR versus OAR across countries remained unclear, given differences in designs across existing studies.

METHODS

We identified patients aged >65 years undergoing intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs during 2010-2017/2018. We compared long-term patient mortality and reintervention after EVAR and OAR using Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox regressions. Propensity score matching was performed within each country to adjust for differences in baseline patient characteristics between procedure groups.

RESULTS

We included 3311, 4909, and 145363 patients from Australia, Germany, and the United States, respectively. The median patient age was 76 to 77 years, and most patients were males (77%-84%). Patient mortality was lower after EVAR than OAR within the first 60 days and became similar at 3-year follow-up (Australia 14.7% vs 16.5%, Germany 18.2% vs 19.7%, United States: 24.4% vs 24.4%). At the end of follow-up, patient mortality after EVAR was higher than OAR in Australia [ hazard ratio (HR) 95% CI: 1.21 (0.96-1.54)] but similar to OAR in Germany [HR 95% CI: 0.92 (0.80-1.07)] and the United States [HR 95% CI: 1.02 (0.99-1.05)]. The risk of reintervention after EVAR was more than twice that after OAR in Australia [HR 95% CI: 2.60 (1.09-6.15)], Germany [HR 95% CI: 4.79 (2.56-8.98)], and the United States [HR 95% CI: 2.67 (2.38-3.00)]. The difference in reintervention risk appeared early in German and United States patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This multinational study demonstrated important similarities in long-term outcomes after EVAR versus OAR across 3 countries. Variation in long-term mortality and reintervention comparisons indicates possible differences in patient profiles, surveillance, and best medical therapy across countries.

Early and Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair With Zenith Alpha Abdominal Stent-Graft: Results From a Multicenter Retrospective Tuscany Registry

PURPOSE

Zenith Alpha Abdominal (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) is one of the new-generation low-profile stent-grafts with demonstrated satisfactory early and midterm clinical outcomes for endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The aim was to evaluate early and midterm results of this device in the framework of a multicenter regional retrospective registry, with the analysis of morphological factors affecting outcomes, including different limb configurations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2016 and November 2021, 202 patients with AAA underwent elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with implantation of a Zenith Alpha Abdominal in 7 centers. Early (30 day) outcomes in terms of technical and clinical success were assessed. Estimated 5 year outcomes were evaluated in terms of survival, freedom from type I/III endoleak, freedom from surgical conversion, freedom from limb graft occlusion, freedom from any device-related reintervention, and graft infection evaluation by life-table analysis (Kaplan-Meier test). A comparative analysis between different limb configurations (Zenith Spiral Z AAA iliac legs, codes ZISL vs ZSLE) was performed in terms of limb graft occlusion.

RESULTS

The 30 day technical and clinical success rates were 97.5% and 99.5%, respectively. Median follow-up period was 25.5 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 12-43.25). The 5 year survival rate was 73.6%. The estimated 5 year outcomes in terms of freedom from type I/III endoleak, freedom from surgical conversion, freedom from limb graft occlusion, freedom from any device-related reintervention, and freedom from graft infection were 88.6% (95% CI [confidence interval]: 83.4%-93.1%), 95.8% (95% CI: 92.7%-97.1%), 93.6% (95% CI: 90.2%-96.8%), 87% (95% CI: 83.3%-91.6%), and 97.7% (95% CI: 95.1%-98.9%), respectively. About limb configuration, no differences were found in terms of 5 year freedom from limb graft occlusion (ZSLE 93.4% [95% CI: 89.8%-95.5%] vs ZISL 94.3% [95% CI: 90.1%-95.9%], p=0.342; log-rank 0.903).

CONCLUSION

Zenith Alpha Abdominal in elective EVAR offered satisfactory early and 5 year outcomes with low complication rates. Limb graft occlusion continued to be an issue. Limb configuration did not affect outcomes.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The authors describe satisfactory early and 5 year outcomes of Zenith Alpha Abdominal in elective endovascular aortic repair in the framework of a multicenter regional retrospective registry. At 5 years freedom from type I endoleak was 88.6%, and rate of endograft infections and conversions to open repair were very low. in the present study. Hot topic about about Zenith stent-graft still remains the limb graft occlusion with a 30-day overall rate of 2%, and estimated 5-year freedom from limb graft occlusion of 93.6%. Limb graft configuration did not affect limb graft occlusion rate. A standardized protocol including iliac stenting should be adopted to reduce kimb graft occlusion.