Outcomes of persistent intraoperative type Ia endoleak after standard endovascular aneurysm repair

Proximal sealing in the aortic arch for inner curve disease using the custom Relay scalloped and fenestrated stent graft

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze early and midterm results of custom-made proximal scallop and fenestrated stent grafts for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with a proximal landing zone (PLZ) in the aortic arch.

METHODS

All consecutive patients treated with the custom made proximal scalloped and fenestrated Relay stent grafts (Terumo Aortic Bolton Medical Inc.) in 10 Italian centers between January 2014 and December 2022 were included. The primary end points were technical success, incidence of intraoperative major adverse events, deployment accuracy, and rate of early neurological complications, endoleaks (ELs) and retrograde aortic dissection.

RESULTS

During the study period, 49 patients received TEVAR with Relay custom-made endograft in Italy were enrolled. The median patient age was 70.1 years (interquartile range, 23-86 years) and 65.3% were male. The indication for treatment was atherosclerotic aneurysms in 59.2% of cases and penetrating aortic ulcer in 22.4%. The endograft configuration was proximal fenestration in 55.1% and scallop in 44.9%. The proximal landing zone was zone 0 in 25 cases (51%), zone 1 in 14 cases (28.6%), and zone 2 in 10 cases (20.4%). The supra-aortic debranching procedures were 38 (77.5%). Technical success was 97.9% (48/49) owing to one case (2.0%) of inaccurate deployment. Intraoperatively, one (2.0%) type Ia and one (2.0%) type III EL were detected. There were no cases of in-hospital mortality, major adverse events, or retrograde dissection. Three minor strokes (6.1%) (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of ≤4) were observed. At a mean follow-up time of 36.3 ± 21.3 months the rate of types I to III ELs and reintervention was 4.1%, respectively. Four patients (8.2%) died during the follow-up period, one (2.1%) from abdominal aortic rupture and three (6.1%) from nonaortic causes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our early and midterm outcomes suggest that scalloped and fenestrated TEVAR may provide an acceptable alternative treatment option for aortic arch pathologies. Large-scale studies are needed to assess the long-term durability of this technique.

Monocentric Evaluation of Physician-Modified Fenestrations or Parallel Endografts for Complex Aortic Diseases

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the demographic and anatomic characteristics, as well as perioperative and follow-up results of fenestration and parallel techniques for the endovascular repair of complex aortic diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 67 consecutive patients underwent endovascular treatment for complex aortic diseases including abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), thoracoabdominal aneurysm (TAAA), aortic dissection, or prior endovascular repair with either fenestrated and parallel endovascular aortic repair (f-EVAR or ch-EVAR) at a single institute from 2013 to 2021. Choices of intervention were made by the disease' emergency, patients' general condition, the anatomic characteristics, as well as following the recommendation from the devices' guidelines. Patients' clinical demographics, aortic disease characteristics, perioperative details, and disease courses were discussed. Short- and mid-term follow-up results were obtained and analyzed. Endpoints were aneurysm-related and unrelated mortality, branch instability, and renal function deterioration.

RESULTS

Totally, 34 and 27 patients received f-EVAR and ch-EVAR, while 6 patients received a combination of both. Fenestrated endovascular aortic repair was conducted mainly in AAA affecting visceral branches and TAAA, whereas ch-EVAR was normally utilized for infrarenal AAA. Regarding the average number of reconstructed arteries per patient, there was a significant difference among f-EVAR, ch-EVAR, and the combination group (mean = 2.3 ± 0.9, 1.4 ± 0.6, 3.5 ± 0.5, p<0.001). Primary technical success was achieved in 28 (82.4%), 22 (81.5%), and 3 (50.0%) patients for each group. Besides operational time (5.77 ± 2.58, 4.47 ± 1.44, p=0.033), no significant difference was observed for blood transfusion, intensive care unit (ICU) or hospital stay, blood creatinine level, 30-day complications, or follow-up complications between patients undergoing f-EVAR or ch-EVAR. Patients receiving combination of both techniques had a higher rate of blood transfusion (p=0.044), longer operational time (p=0.008) or hospital stay (p=0.017), as well as more stent occlusion (p=0.001), endoleak (p=0.004) at short-term and a higher rate of endoleak (p=0.023) at mid-term follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study demonstrated that f-EVAR and ch-EVAR techniques had acceptable perioperative and follow-up results and should be considered viable alternatives when encountering complex aortic diseases.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study sought to investigate the baseline and pathological characteristics, as well as perioperative and follow-up results of f-EVAR and ch-EVAR at a single Chinese institution. F-EVAR (mostly physician-modified f-EVAR) was applied in patients with a wide range of etiologies and disease types, while ch-EVAR was preferred for AAA in older patients with an average higher ASA grade. Our experience suggested acceptable safety and efficacy both for techniques, and no significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding any short or mid-term adverse events.

Reinterventions after TEVAR

Thoracic cardiovascular aortic repair is an alternative procedure to open surgery for degenerative thoracic aortic aneurysm and thoracic aortic dissection. The advancements in graft design and imaging techniques have expanded its utility. However, the long-term patency of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) graft is still a concern. This review delves into the literature on re-intervention following TEVAR, highlighting factors that influence the re-intervention rate.

The Correlation of Aortic Neck Angle and Length in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm with Severe Neck Angulation for Prediction of Intraoperative Neck Complications and Postoperative Outcomes after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in a hostile neck has been associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to determine the association of infrarenal aortic neck angle and length and establish an optimal cutoff value to predict intraoperative neck complications and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of patients with an intact infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with severe neck angulation (>60 degrees) who underwent EVAR from October 2010 to October 2018. Demographic data, aneurysm morphology, and operative details were collected. The ratio of neck angle and length was calculated as the optimal cutoff value of the aortic neck angle-length index. The patients were categorized into two distinct groups using latent profile analysis, a statistical technique employed to identify concealed subgroups within a larger population by examining a predetermined set of variables. Intraoperative neck complications, adjunct neck procedures, and early and late outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

115 patients were included. Group 1 (G1) had 95 patients with an aortic neck angle-length index ≤ 4.8, and Group 2 (G2) had 20 patients with an aortic neck angle-length index > 4.8. Demographic data and aneurysm morphology were not significantly different between groups except for neck length (p < 0.001). G2 had more intraoperative neck complications than G1 (21.1% vs. 55%, p = 0.005). Adjunctive neck procedures were more common in G2 (18.9% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). The thirty-day mortality rate was not statistically different. G1 patients had a 5-year proximal neck re-intervention-free rate comparable to G2 patients (93.7% G1 vs. 87.5% G2, p = 0.785). The 5-year overall survival rate was not statistically different (59.9% G1 vs. 69.2% G2, p = 0.891).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with an aortic neck angle-length index > 4.8 are at greater risk of intraoperative neck complications and adjunctive neck procedures than patients with an aortic neck angle-length index ≤ 4.8. The 5-year proximal neck re-intervention-free rate and the 5-year survival rate were not statistically different. Based on our findings, this study suggests that the aortic neck angle-length index is a reliable predictor of intraoperative neck complications during EVAR in AAA with severe neck angulation.

Expert opinion: How to treat type IA endoleakage

Type Ia endoleaks due to failed sealing or loss of landing zone and the adequate management thereof remain crucial for long-term therapeutic success following TEVAR. This expert opinion summarizes our institutional experience with endovascular, open surgical, and hybrid techniques in the context of recent scientific publications. The rapid turnover of technical innovations, but most importantly outcome data demonstrate the requirement for increasingly patient-tailored treatment strategies and the need for specialized aortic centers. The latter should offer a complete range of treatment options, an adequate perioperative management, and the highest level of multidisciplinary expertise.

The Challenge of Endoleaks in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR): A Review of Their Types and Management

An abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a dilatation of the abdominal aorta above 3 cm or 50% greater than the segment above. It is a dangerous condition accounting for a substantial number of deaths per year and increasing at an alarming rate. Various factors come into play in the development of AAAs, which this study has elaborated on, including smoking and old age, demographics, and comorbid conditions. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a newer treatment modality used for AAAs in which an endograft device is placed into the aorta, thereby creating a bypass tract from the aneurysm and generating flow mimicking that of the natural aorta. It is minimally invasive and associated with less postoperative mortality and reduced hospital stay. However, EVAR is also associated with significant postoperative complications, including endoleaks, which were reviewed in depth. Endoleaks are postprocedural leaks into the aneurysm sac that are usually identified immediately after graft placement and indicate treatment failure. They are of five subtypes, categorized according to their mechanism of development. The most common type is type II endoleaks, and the most dangerous is type I endoleaks. Each subtype has multiple management options with varying rates of success. Prompt identification along with appropriate treatment of endoleaks can lead to better postoperative outcomes and improved quality of life for patients.

Endovascular Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Mainland China: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, applicability, and outcomes of the endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) technique for patients in mainland China with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) by performing a systematic review.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search using the PubMed, Embase, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chinese Biomedical databases to identify Chinese studies on the management of AAAs using the EVAR technique published in English between January 2000 and December 2020. Two independent observers selected studies for inclusion in the study, assessed the methodological quality of the included studies, and extracted the data. The included studies investigated the clinical outcomes and postprocedural complications of using EVAR techniques.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies reported a total of 3,024 AAA patients. The follow-up period ranged from 1 to 133 months. The mean follow-up time was 38.5 months, the mean age was 69.2 years, and the mean aneurysm diameter was 56.1 mm. The pooled technical success rate was 95% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92-96%). The endoleak rate was 7% (95% CI: 6-8%). The rate of endoleak requiring reintervention was 3% (95% CI: 3-4%). The 30-day morbidity rate was 9% (95% CI: 6-14%). The 30-day mortality rate was 2% (95% CI: 1-3%). The follow-up mortality was 5% (95% CI: 3-8%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study showed that using the EVAR technique for treating patients in mainland China with AAAs produced encouraging mid-term outcomes. Long-term outcomes should be examined in future research.

Risk factors and adverse events related to supra- and infra-renal aortic dilation at twelve months after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Aortic remodeling and its effect on adverse events after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR) remain under investigation. This study aimed to assess aortic diameter alterations after EVAR, related risk factors and consequences to proximal sealing at 12 months.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis of consecutive EVAR patients was undertaken. All patients underwent computed tomography angiography, preoperatively, at 1^st and 12^th month. The infrarenal diameter was measured just below the inferior renal artery, at 7 mm and 15 mm while the suprarenal, just above the superior renal artery (SRA), superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and just below the celiac trunk. Neck-related adverse events included migration and endoleak Ia.

RESULTS

A hundred fifty patients were included. At 1^st month, no significant diameter alteration was recorded at any level. At 12^th month, all infra-renal diameters increased (P<0.001) and diameters at SRA and SMA also augmented (P=0.024 and P=0.007, respectively). Neck diameter >29 mm, supra-renal fixation and oversizing >20% were associated to dilation at 12^th month. Neck adverse events were related to diameter alterations below the inferior renal artery (P=0.017), SRA (P=0.007) and SMA (P=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

During the 12-month follow-up, aortic dilation may be detected from the supra-renal aorta to the total neck length. Neck dilation may be attributed to large neck diameter, supra-renal fixation, and aggressive oversizing. Neck-related adverse events are more common in patients with aortic dilation at 12 months.

Hybrid room: Does it offer better accuracy in the proximal deployment of infrarenal aortic endograft?

PURPOSE

This work aims to evaluate the impact of hybrid rooms and their advanced tools on the accuracy of proximal deployment of infrarenal bifurcated endograft (EVAR).

METHODS

A retrospective single centre analysis was conducted between January 2015 and March 2019 including consecutive patients that underwent EVAR. Groups were defined whether the procedure was performed in a hybrid operating room (HOR group) or using a mobile 2D fluoroscopic imaging system (non-HOR group). The accuracy of the proximal deployment was estimated by the distance (mm) between the bottom of the lowest renal artery (LwRA) origin and the endograft radiopaque markers parallax (LwRA/EDG distance) after curvilinear reconstruction. The impact of HOR on the LwRA/EDG distance was investigated using a multiple linear regression model. A composite "proximal neck"-related complications event was studied (Cox models).

RESULTS

Overall, 93 patients (87 %male, median age 73 years) were included with 49 in the HOR group and 44 in the non-HOR group. Preoperative CTA analysis of the proximal neck exhibited similar median length, but different median aortic diameter (p=0.012) and median beta angulation (p=0.027) between groups. The median LwRA/EDG distance was shorter in the HOR group (multivariate model, p=0.022). No difference in "proximal neck"-related complications was evidenced between the HOR and non-HOR groups (univariate analysis, p=0.620). Median follow-up time was respectively 25 [14-28] and 36 months [23-44] in the HOR group and in the non-HOR group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

HOR offer more accurate proximal deployment of infrarenal endografts, with however no difference in "proximal neck"-related complications between groups.

The impact of type 1a endoleak on the long-term outcome after EVAR

OBJECTIVE

Endoleaks remains a major determinant of outcome after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. The objective of this study is to evaluate the long-term impact of proximal type 1 endoleak encountered at the case end of the EVAR procedure or during follow-up.

METHODS

All patients treated with EVAR between February 2001 and August 2017 in our institution were included. Data were collected retrospectively. A descriptive analysis of subgroups with type 1a endoleak at case end or with type 1a endoleak first encountered during follow-up was performed.

RESULTS

In total, 468 patients were included for analysis. At the case end of the EVAR procedure, in 5.3% (25/468) of patients, a type 1a endoleak was seen. In 72% of cases (18/25) the type 1a endoleak spontaneously disappeared on the first follow-up computed tomography angiography and never recurred. At the end of the follow-up period, no patient in this subgroup died with a type 1a endoleak on follow-up. In 3.4% (16/468) of all cases, a type 1a endoleak was encountered for the first time during follow-up. In 87.5% (14/16) of these cases, reintervention was performed. Two patients died with a persisting type 1a endoleak during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should differentiate between the type 1a endoleak at the case end and the type 1a endoleak first occurring during follow-up. For type 1a endoleak at the case end, expectant management can be adopted. Delayed type 1a endoleak seen during follow-up rarely seals spontaneously and needs reintervention in the majority of cases.

Long-term outcomes and interventions of postoperative type 1a endoleak following elective endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the incidence and long-term outcomes of postoperative type 1a endoleak (PT1a) following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive aorto-iliac EVARs performed at a single institution from June 2006 to June 2012 was conducted. Patients with PT1a were identified by postoperative imaging and compared with those who did not develop a PT1a. Late outcomes were also studied of a subset of patients with PT1a who had persistent intraoperative type 1a endoleak (iT1a) on completion angiogram during EVAR that had resolved on initial follow-up imaging.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty-nine patients underwent EVAR with median follow-up of 87 months (interquartile range, 64-111 months). The incidence of PT1a was 8.2% (n = 32) with a median follow-up of 74 months (interquartile range, 52-138 months). Compared with the total cohort, those who developed PT1a were statistically more likely to be female (32% vs 17%; P = .03) and have a higher all-cause mortality (71% vs 40%; P < .01) and aneurysm-related mortality (15.6% vs 1.7%; P < .01). Median time to presentation was 52 months. Of the 32 patients with PT1a, five (15.6%) presented with aortic rupture, of which three underwent extension cuff placement, one had open graft explant, and one declined intervention. Six patients in total (18.7%) declined intervention; five of these died of nonaneurysmal causes and one remains alive. Of the 26 patients with PT1a who had intervention, 21 (80.7%) showed resolution of PT1a, and five (19.2%) had recurrence. For patients with recurrent PT1a, two had resulting aneurysm-related mortality, two endoleaks resolved after relining with an endograft, and one patient declined intervention but remains alive. Patients with PT1a who had intervention with resolution showed no significant difference in median survival estimates (140.0 months) compared with the remaining EVAR cohort (120.0 months; P = .80). Within the PT1a cohort, 6 (18.7%) had also experienced iT1a with a mean time to presentation of the late PT1a of 45 months. iT1a was associated with a significantly increased likelihood of developing a PT1a (P < .01) and decreased median survival (P < .01), but there was no known aneurysm-related mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Development of PT1a following elective EVAR is associated with increased all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality and presents an average of 52 months postoperatively. This underscores the importance of long-term surveillance. Patients with PT1a who had a successful intervention showed no significant difference in median survival. Those with iT1a had a higher risk for PT1a compared with the EVAR cohort overall and had decreased median survival, without increased aneurysm-related mortality.

Endovascular aortic repair with EndoAnchors demonstrate good mid-term outcomes in physician-initiated multicenter analysis-The PERU registry

OBJECTIVES

We aim to describe real-world outcomes from multicenter data about the efficacy of adjunct Heli-FX EndoAnchor usage in preventing or repairing failures during infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), so-called EndoSutured-aneurysm-repair (ESAR).

METHODS

The current study has been assigned an identifier (NCT04100499) at the US National Library of Medicine (https://ClinicalTrials.gov). It is an observational retrospective study of prospectively collected data from seven vascular surgery departments between June 2010 and December 2019. Patients included in the ANCHOR registry were excluded from this analysis. The decision for the use of EndoAnchors was made by the treating surgeon or multidisciplinary aortic committee according to each center's practice. Follow-up imaging was scheduled according to each center's protocol, which necessarily included either abdominal ultrasound or radiography or computed tomographic scan imaging. The main outcomes analyzed were technical success, freedom from type Ia endoleaks (IaEL), all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality, and sac variation and trends evaluated for those with at least six months imaging follow-up.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-five patients underwent ESAR in participating centers during the study period. After exclusions, 221 patients (184 males, 37 females, mean age 75 ± 8.3 years) were finally included for analysis. Median follow-up for the cohort was 27 (interquartile range 12-48) months. A median 6 (interquartile range 3) EndoAnchors were deployed at ESAR, 175 (79%) procedures were primary and 46 (21%) revision cases, 40 associated with type IaEL. Technical success at operation (initial), 30-day, and overall success were 89, 95.5, and 96.8%, respectively; the 30-day success was higher due to those with subsequent spontaneous proximal endoleak seal. At two years, freedom from type IaEL was 94% for the whole series; 96% and 86% for the primary and revision groups, respectively; whereas freedom from all-cause mortality, aneurysm-related mortality, and reintervention was 89%, 98%, and 87%, respectively. Sac evolution pre-ESAR was 66 ± 15.1 vs. post ESAR 61 ± 17.5 (p < 0.001) and for 180 patients with at least six-month follow-up, 92.2% of them being in a stable (51%) or regression (41%) situation.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world registry demonstrates that adjunct EndoAnchor usage at EVAR achieves high rates of freedom from type IaEL at mid-term including in a high number of patients with hostile neck anatomy, with positive trends in sac-size evolution. Further data with longer follow-up may help to establish EndoAnchor usage as a routine adjunct to EVAR, especially in hostile necks.

Chimney technique with endoanchors in treatment of late type 1a endoleak after endovascular aortic repair

The late type Ia endoleak after endovascular aortic repair could be a challenging issue. Over the last years, in case of short or enlarged neck, fenestrated and branched stent grafts have been increasingly employed with improving results. However, these devices have limited use in urgent/emergent cases as custom graft manufacturing takes long time, and may not be fit in patients with particular anatomic features. In this setting, chimney and relining remain an alternative but sometimes may not be adequate. According to literature, the use of the endoanchors associated to chimney technique can improve the procedure results in primary endovascular aortic repair. We treated two patients with a late type Ia endoleak after endovascular aortic repair with a simultaneous relining, single renal chimney, and endoanchors implant. These patients were valuated unfit for open repair with neck configuration unadapt for a simple relining, ballooning, or stenting. The patient conditions were unfavorable for an endovascular repair with branched endovascular aortic repair–fenestrated endovascular aortic repair. The same procedure was performed in both patients. Postoperative angio-computed tomographic scan demonstrated the resolution of the endoleak with patency of renal graft. Our preliminary experience, in these selected cases, demonstrate the feasibility of the technique in late type Ia endoleak.

Outcomes of type Ia endoleaks after endovascular repair of the proximal aorta

OBJECTIVE

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can be complicated by a type Ia endoleak. However, its natural history remains unclear. This report describes the natural history and midterm outcome of conservatively treated type Ia endoleaks in the proximal aorta.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2015, 395 patients underwent TEVAR at our institution. Only TEVARs landing proximally at landing zones 0, 1, and 2 were included (221/395). Type Ia endoleak's flow was classified as "fast" or "slow" based on the time needed to visualize the aneurysmal sac during arteriogram.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 4.1 years. Aortic dissection, thoracic aortic aneurysm, and traumatic aortic injury were the most common indications for TEVAR; the incidence of type Ia endoleak was not statistically different. Forty-seven patients (21.3%) had a type Ia endoleak. TEVAR landing proximally at zone 1 increased the odds of developing a type Ia endoleak (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-5.9; P = .0072). The 30-day mortality and the overall survival was not influenced by the development of immediate-type Ia endoleak. In 34 (72.3%) patients, the endoleak resolved spontaneously. Ninety-four percent of these patients had a SlowE (n = 32/34). All of spontaneous resolutions occurred before the end of the first postoperative year.

CONCLUSIONS

SlowE tends to resolve within 1 year after TEVAR. Initial conservative treatment seems to be a reasonable approach in patients with SlowE.

Type IA endoleak caused by interlocked suprarenal bare-metal stents after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with successful endovascular rescue

A physically active 90-year-old man underwent endovascular repair of an asymptomatic but enlarging abdominal aortic aneurysm. Postoperative computed tomography demonstrated entanglement of nonadjacent proximal bare-metal stents. This was associated with graft infolding and a type IA endoleak. The patient underwent percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and placement of a Palmaz stent. Subsequent surveillance imaging showed resolution of the type I endoleak >1 year later. This report demonstrates an uncommon cause of stent graft infolding, an already rare complication of endovascular aneurysm repair, and highlights the need to carefully assess the morphologic appearance of the proximal fixation stents after graft deployment.

Early and late outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair to treat abdominal aortic aneurysm compared between severe and non-severe infrarenal neck angulation

Background

Abdominal aortic aneurysm with severe infrarenal neck angle (>60°) has long been thought to be an obstacle to endovascular aneurysm repair. However, some previous studies reported endovascular aneurysm repair to be safe and efficacious for treating abdominal aortic aneurysm in patients with severe neck angulation. The aim of this study was to investigate the early and late outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair to treat abdominal aortic aneurysm compared between patients with severe and non-severe infrarenal neck angulation.

Methods

Fifty-four severe and 144 non-severe neck angulation patients who were treated at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand) during January 2010–October 2013 were recruited. The primary endpoints were intraoperative neck complications (e.g., type 1A endoleak or proximal graft migration) and immediate adjunct aortic neck procedures. The secondary endpoints included perioperative mortality, overall survival, and the proportion of patients that were reintervention-free at five years compared between the severe and non-severe groups.

Results

Severe angulation patients were significantly older than non-severe angulation patients (77 ± 6.3 vs. 74 ± 7.9 years; p =  0.021). The median proximal angle was significantly greater in the severe group (82° vs. 13.5°; p <  0.001). Intraoperative proximal neck complications developed in 29.6% of patients in the severe angulation group compared with 9.0% in the non-severe group ( p <  0.001). Significantly more patients in the severe group required intraoperative adjunct procedures (29.6% vs. 7.6%; p <  0.001). There was no significant difference in perioperative mortality between groups. At the five-year follow-up, there was no significant difference between groups for overall survival or the proportion of patients that remained reintervention-free.

Conclusions

Endovascular aneurysm repair to treat abdominal aortic aneurysm in patients with severe proximal neck angulation is technically feasible and safe Although the severe angulation group had a higher rate of intraoperative neck complications and immediate adjunct neck procedures than the non-severe group, there was no significant difference between groups for 30-day mortality, overall survival or the proportion of patients who remained reintervention-free at five years.

Effectiveness of Intra-Arterial Aneurysm Sac Embolization for Type Ia Endoleak after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and durability of intra-arterial aneurysm sac embolization for the treatment of type Ia endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From February 2011 to December 2016, 22 patients underwent embolization of a type Ia endoleak after EVAR. Four patients (18%) were treated during the index EVAR and 18 (82%) in follow-up. Five patients (23%) were treated urgently and 17 (77%) electively. The embolization was performed with the use of liquid embolic agent, coils, and/or plugs. Adjunctive neck procedures were performed in 55% (n = 12) of the patients. The primary endpoint of this study was freedom from sac enlargement. Key secondary endpoints were technical success and freedom from endoleak-related reinterventions.

RESULTS

Technical success was 100%. The 30-day mortality was 5% (n = 1; acute coronary syndrome). At a mean follow-up of 15.4 months (range 0.1-65.4) the freedom from sac enlargement rate was 76% (16 out of 21). Reintervention-free survival rates at 6, 12, and 24 months were 80%, 68% and 68%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with persistent type Ia endoleak the embolization of the aneurysm sac with or without adjunctive neck procedures can be safely performed, leading to acceptable clinical and radiologic outcomes.

Explant of aortic stent grafts following endovascular aneurysm repair

Background

Failure of endovascular aneurysm repair may require explant of the stent graft in a subset of patients. We sought to assess outcomes in a cohort of patients undergoing explant of endovascular aneurysm repair in both emergency and elective settings.

Methods

Patients undergoing explant of endovascular aneurysm repair were identified from a prospectively maintained database, with additional information obtained through retrospective analysis of medical records.

Results

Over a 21-year period, 1997–2018 (May), there were 597 endovascular aneurysm repair procedures performed in our institution for abdominal aortic aneurysm. There were 19 endovascular aneurysm repair explants; five of these were referrals from other vascular centres. The median age was 73 years (range 46–81). The median length of time from insertion to explant was 39.2 months (range 0–153). Indications for elective explant were type Ia endoleak (n = 4), type 1b endoleak (n = 1), type II endoleak with increasing sac size (n = 1), type I/III endoleak (n = 1), type IV endoleak (n = 1), and increasing sac size without evident endoleak (type V, n = 2). The remaining nine cases were emergency procedures, with four patients presenting with rupture post endovascular aneurysm repair, four patients presenting with acute stent thrombosis, of which one also had a type 1a endoleak and one aorto-enteric fistula. There were no mortalities in the elective group and three mortalities in the emergency group (0 vs 33.3%, p = 0.087). Overall 30-day mortality was 15.8%

Conclusion

Explant of aortic stent grafts can be associated with high mortality and morbidity rates, especially in the emergent setting. Patient and device selection and post-operative surveillance remain vitally important to optimise outcomes post endovascular aneurysm repair.

Outcomes of endovascular treatment of endoleak type Ia after EVAR: a systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular repair of infra-renal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) has become treatment of choice. However, individuals undergoing EVAR have a high re-intervention rate. The aim of this study is to evaluate the current endovascular treatment modalities of endoleak type Ia (ET Ia) treatment after EVAR and their outcome.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched with PRISMA methodology for studies reporting on endovascular treatment of ET Ia after EVAR. Studies presenting treatment of intra-operative ET Ia were excluded.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Two international registries, fourteen non-randomized retrospective and twelve case-report studies were included reporting on 356 patients. Reported endovascular techniques included fenestrated-, branched-, chimney EVAR, endovascular sealing (EVAS), endoanchors, embolization techniques, cuff and/or "giant" Palmaz stents. Technical success rate ranged from 90% to 100%, with intra-operative mortality rate of 0%. During early period, persistence of ET Ia was 3.4% (9/262) and the re-intervention rate was 3.5% (8/227). The 30-day mortality rate was 2% (7/356). Mean follow-up was 22.4 months±18. Presence of ET Ia was 5.9% (21/356), and the reintervention rate was 5.1% (18/349). The mortality rate was 13% (26/203), while the primary patency rate of TVs ranged from 94.3% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

A multitude of techniques for endovascular repair for ET Ia exists. No strong evidence supports one specific technique. The early and mid-term outcomes are encouraging in terms of ET Ia resolution, mortality and morbidity rates.

Select type I and type III endoleaks at the completion of fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair resolve spontaneously

OBJECTIVE

The Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) consider the presence of a type I or type III endoleak a technical failure. However, the nature and implications of these endoleaks in fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) are not well understood.

METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective review of 53 patients who underwent FEVAR with the Zenith Fenestrated AAA Endovascular Graft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) from 2013 to 2018. We excluded one patient without contrast-enhanced postoperative imaging who was lost to follow-up after discharge. Small, slow, type I and type III endoleaks on completion angiography were routinely observed. We identified patients with completion type I or type III endoleaks by angiography review and characterized endoleak type, location, and rate of resolution on initial postoperative imaging.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were included; mean age was 75 ± 8 years, 75% were male, and 91% were white. Of 146 visceral vessels (100 renal arteries and 46 superior mesenteric arteries), 145 (99%) were preserved with 103 fenestrations and 43 scallops; 102 (70%) target vessels were stented. After implantation of all device components, 31 patients (60%) had evidence of type I or type III endoleak. Twelve patients (39%) underwent further intervention at the index procedure, and three endoleaks resolved completely. Twenty-eight patients (54%) had a type I or type III endoleak on completion angiography. There were no differences between patients with and without completion endoleaks in baseline demographics, graft design, neck anatomy, or proportion of cases performed within the instructions for use of the device. Perioperative mortality was 1.9%. On initial postoperative imaging, 27 of 28 (96%) endoleaks resolved spontaneously. One small, persistent type IA or type III endoleak was identified on postoperative day 27 and was observed. This endoleak had resolved completely on computed tomography angiography 6 months postoperatively. In patients without a completion endoleak, one type IA endoleak secondary to graft infolding was discovered on postoperative imaging and was successfully treated with placement of endoanchors and Palmaz stent. Median follow-up was 269 days. No additional type I or type III endoleaks were identified in any patient for the duration of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas completion type I and type III endoleaks are common after FEVAR with the ZFEN device, nearly all of these endoleaks resolve spontaneously by the initial postoperative imaging. These results suggest that select completion endoleaks after FEVAR with the ZFEN device do not require intervention at the index procedure.

Conservative management of type 1A endoleaks at completion angiogram in endovascular repair of infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysms with current generation stent grafts

Purpose

Proximal type 1A endoleaks on completion intra-operative angiography are not infrequently seen following endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR). The natural course of these leaks is not well established. We sought to determine the rate of spontaneous resolution and a conservative treatment approach to these endoleaks.

Methods

All cases involving endovascular repairs of infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysms resulting in proximal type 1A endoleak on final intra-operative completion angiography were retrospectively reviewed from 1 April 2010 and 30 March 2015. Demographic, pre and post-procedural imaging, and clinical outcomes were reviewed. Summarizing descriptive statistics are reported.

Results

Of the 337 patients who underwent an EVAR, 24 patients (7.1%) had a proximal type 1A endoleak on final intra-operative angiography. Twenty-two of 24 patients (92%) with proximal type 1A endoleaks had spontaneous resolution on follow-up imaging without any intervention, while two (8%) patients had a persistent endoleak. One of these patients required intervention. The median follow-up for patients with resolved endoleaks was 2.5 years vs. 4 and 6 years, respectively, for patients that did not resolve spontaneously.

Conclusion

A conservative approach may be used in the management of patients with proximal type 1A endoleaks on completion angiography once maximum proximal seal was achieved intra-operatively as the vast majority of these leaks spontaneously seal.

Collected Transatlantic Experience From the PERICLES Registry: Use of Chimney Grafts to Treat Post-EVAR Type Ia Endoleaks Shows Good Midterm Results

Purpose: The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the performance of the chimney (ch) technique in the treatment of type Ia endoleaks after standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: Between January 2008 and December 2014, 517 chEVAR procedures were performed in 13 US and European vascular centers (PERICLES registry). Thirty-nine patients (mean age 76.9±7.1 years; 33 men) were treated for persistent type Ia endoleak and had computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography follow-up at >1 month. Endurant abdominal stent-grafts were used in the 20 cases. Single chimney graft placement was performed in 18 (46%) patients and multiple in 21 (54%). Overall, 70 visceral vessels were targeted for revascularization. Results: Technical success was achieved in 35 (89.7%) cases; 3 persistent type Ia endoleaks and 1 chimney graft occlusion were detected within the first 30 days. Thirty-day mortality was 2.6%. Two other deaths (not aneurysm related) occurred during a mean follow-up of 21.9 months (0.23–71.3). Primary patency of the chimney grafts was 94.3% at 36 months. In a subgroup analysis comparing Endurant to other stent-grafts, no significant differences were observed regarding persistent endoleak [1/20 (5%) vs 2/19 (11%), p=0.6] or reintervention [1/20 (5%) vs 0/19 (0%)]. Conclusion: The present series demonstrates that chEVAR in the treatment of post-EVAR type Ia endoleaks has satisfactory results independent of the abdominal and chimney graft combinations. Midterm results show that chEVAR is an effective method for treating type Ia endoleaks.

Long-term follow-up of fenestrated endovascular repair for juxtarenal aortic aneurysm

BACKGROUND

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) is increasingly being used for juxtarenal aortic aneurysms. The aim of this study was to review long-term results and assess the importance of changing stent-graft design on outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of all patients who underwent FEVAR within a single unit over 12 years (February 2003 to December 2015). Kaplan-Meier analysis of survival, and freedom from target vessel loss, aneurysm expansion, graft-related endoleak and secondary intervention was performed. Comparison between outcomes of less complex grafts (fewer than 3 fenestrations) and more complex grafts (3 or 4 fenestrations) was undertaken.

RESULTS

Some 173 patients underwent FEVAR; median age was 76 (i.q.r. 70-79) years and 90·2 per cent were men. Median aneurysm diameter was 63 (59-71) mm and median follow-up was 34 (16-50) months. The adjusted primary technical operative success rate was 95·4 per cent. The in-hospital mortality rate was 5·2 per cent; there was no known aneurysm-related death during follow-up. Median survival was 7·1 (95 per cent c.i. 5·2 to 8·1) years and overall survival was 60·1 per cent (104 of 173). There was a trend towards an increasing number of fenestrations in the graft design over time. In-hospital mortality appeared higher when more complex stent-grafts were used (8 versus 2 per cent for stent-grafts with 3-4 versus fewer than 3 fenestrations; P = 0·059). Graft-related endoleaks were more common following deployment of stent-grafts with three or four fenestrations (12 of 90 versus 6 of 83; P < 0·001).

CONCLUSION

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair for juxtarenal aneurysm is associated with few aneurysm-related deaths in the long term. Significant numbers of secondary interventions are required, but the majority of these can be performed using an endovascular approach.

Management of Immediate Post-Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Type Ia Endoleaks and Late Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Post-endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) endoleaks and the need for reintervention are challenging. Additional endovascular treatment is advised for type Ia endoleaks detected on post-EVAR completion angiogram. This study analyzed management and late outcomes of these endoleaks.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from EVAR patients during a 10-year period. All post-EVAR type Ia endoleaks on completion angiogram were identified (group A) and their early (30-day) and late outcomes were compared with outcomes of patients without endoleaks (group B). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for survival analysis, sac expansion, late type Ia endoleak, and reintervention.

RESULTS

Seventy-one of 565 (12.6%) patients had immediate post-EVAR type Ia endoleak. Early intervention (proximal aortic cuffs and/or stenting) was used in 56 of 71 (79%) in group A vs 31 of 494 (6%) in group B (p < 0.0001). Late type Ia endoleak was noted in 9 patients (13%) in group A at a mean follow-up of 28 months vs 10 patients (2%) in group B at a mean follow-up of 32 months (p < 0.0001). Late sac expansion and reintervention rates were 9% and 10% for group A vs 5% and 3% for group B (p = 0.2698 and p = 0.0198), respectively. Freedom rates from late type Ia endoleaks at 1, 3, and 5 years for group A were 88%, 85%, and 80% vs 98%, 98%, and 96% for group B (p < 0.001); and for late intervention, were 94%, 92%, and 77% for group A, and 99%, 97%, and 95% for group B (p = 0.007), respectively. Survival rates were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate post-EVAR type Ia endoleaks are associated with higher rates of early interventions, late endoleaks and reintervention, which will necessitate strict post-EVAR surveillance.

Persistent Type I Endoleak after Endovascular Treatment with Chimney Technique

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is increasingly used in the treatment of acute type B aortic dissection. Type Ia endoleaks are a common complication of the procedure, but its clinical significance and the best treatment strategy remain poorly defined. We present a case of a type Ia endoleak following TEVAR in the treatment of acute type B aortic dissection. Chimney technique approach was used in an attempt to seal the endoleak. Although technical success was suboptimal, the patient remained clinically stable and event free. Data regarding the natural course and management of type Ia endoleaks following TEVAR for aortic dissection are sparse. Future research is required to establish the clinical and technical determinants of the need to treat these endoleaks and the best treatment strategy.

Endovascular Management of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: the Year in Review

OPINION STATEMENT

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the predominant method of treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). The use of conscious sedation with local anesthesia and percutaneous femoral access has further decreased the morbidity of the procedure. Current devices can more effectively manage increasingly "hostile" aneurysm necks, while chimney grafts or dedicated fenestrated stent-grafts can be used for juxta-renal disease with favorable results. However, endovascular repair does present a new set of challenges, and endoleaks remain an area of concern. While there is general consensus that type I and type III endoleaks require treatment, type II endoleaks are the topic of ongoing research and debate. Development of devices and techniques to prevent and treat endoleak continues to progress. Advances in contrast-enhanced ultrasound are reducing reliance on computed tomography for post-operative monitoring. This is an important step in this population at high risk for the development of kidney failure. Despite these many innovations, further research is needed to optimize the care of patients with AAA.

Intervention after endovascular aneurysm repair: Endosalvage techniques including perigraft arterial sac embolization and endograft relining

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has revolutionized the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). However, persistent AAA sac endoleak following EVAR can result in sac diameter increase requiring re-intervention in up to one-third of cases and even result in aneurysm rupture. In this case review, we summarize and detail endovascular re-interventions for each type of endoleak. We also detail specific options including stent-graft relining for indeterminate, Type III, and Type IV endoleaks and perigraft arterial sac embolization to induce thrombosis and resolve acute Type I, II, or III endoleaks. Endograft relining involves placement of a new stent-graft-elevating the bifurcation and extending the repair from renal artery to hypogastric arteries; perigraft arterial sac embolization involves placement of a catheter into the excluded sac from common femoral artery access, characterization of the inflow and outflow of the endoleak, and inducing cessation of the blood flow into the sac by the administration of thrombogenic material. Endoleaks range from low-pressure endoleaks, which can be safely monitored in a surveillance program to high-pressure endoleaks, which mandate intervention when associated with AAA sac diameter increase to protect from rupture. The evaluation of new devices and techniques to treat endoleak after EVAR remains an important issue in patient care after EVAR.

Spontaneous Sealing of a Type Ia Endoleak after Ovation Stent Graft Implantation in a Patient with On-Label Aortic Neck Anatomy

We report a case of an early type Ia endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of an abdominal aortic aneurysm by Ovation Stent Graft implantation and spontaneously resolved without further reintervention. The patient presents a conical aortic neck, but EVAR was performed within the instruction for use proposed by manufactory. At completion angiography, a low-flow type Ia endoleak was present and left untreated. Computed tomographic angiography performed on the third postoperative day showed infolding of the 2 sealing rings. The patient was dismissed without further treatment. At 3-month follow-up, the leak appeared spontaneously sealed with partial expansion of the 2 rings.