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

Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Managed with the EndurantTM Endograft under Elective Setting

Background/Objectives: Device selection during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remains an important issue for ensuring endograft durability. This study evaluated the early and follow-up outcomes of elective EVAR with the Endurant platform. Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted including consecutive elective EVAR procedures with the Endurant II/IIs (2008 to 2024) device. Primary outcomes were technical success, mortality and major complications at 30 days. Survival, endoleak I/III and freedom from reintervention were secondary outcomes. Cox proportional hazards models were employed for risk-adjusted follow-up outcomes. Results: In total, 361 patients were included (72.7 ± 7 years; 96% males; mean AAA diameter 62 ± 14 mm); 92% received a bifurcated device, and 89% conformed to the instructions for use. Technical success was 99.7%. Intra-operative adjunctive procedures included 4.4% proximal cuffs and 1.7% endoanchors. The thirty-day mortality rate was 0.6%, and the major complication rate was 4.1%. Survival was 81% (SE 4.8%), 72% (SE 6.4%) and 52% (SE 9.2%) at 4, 6 and 8 years, with aneurysm-related mortality at 1.7%. Freedom from endoleak Ia was 76% (SE 7.3%) at 6 years, freedom from endoleak Ib was 79% (SE 7.4%) at 7 years and freedom from endoleak III was 94% (SE 3.7%) at 5 years. Freedom from reintervention was 71% (SE 6.1%) and 55% (SE 7.9%) at 5 and 7 years, respectively. No device-related co-factor affected long-term outcomes. Conclusions: Endurant II/IIs endograft is a safe and effective EVAR solution with excellent early outcomes and low long-term aneurysm-related mortality. The need for reintervention in the long term affected less than 50% of cases.

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.

Transition from Open Repair to Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Rupture Aortic Aneurysms throughout a 16-Year Period of Time in a Single Tertiary Center

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is recommended as the first option for both elective and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) with suitable anatomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the gradual adoption of ruptured EVAR (rEVAR) as first option in the management of rAAAs in a reference tertiary center over a 16 year-period.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data was undertaken, including all patients that were treated for rAAA infrarenal or juxtarenal either with open surgical repair (OSR) or EVAR from 2006-2023. Three periods were identified and analyzed: Initial (2006-2011); intermediate (2012-2017); and current (2018-2023). The primary outcomes were the 30-day mortality rate in relation to the changing pattern of treatment. Secondary outcomes were re-intervention and mortality during the follow up period.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients were treated for rAAA; 52% by endovascular means [EVAR (94), Ch-EVAR (9), and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (1)] and 48% by OSR (96). In the initial period, 61 patients were treated for rAAA (21% EVAR vs. 79% OSR), 68 in intermediate patients (47% EVAR vs. 53% OSR), and 71 in current period (83% EVAR vs. 17% OSR). Only in the current period juxta -renal rAAAs were treated by endovascular means (14%). The 30-day mortality rate was 46% in initial period (31% for EVAR vs. 50% for OSR), 64% in second period (46% in EVAR vs. 80% for OSR), and 35% in third period (25% for EVAR vs. 83% for OSR). The mean follow up did not differ between the groups, (EVAR 28.3 ± 2 months, vs. OSR 33.1 ± 3 months, P = 0.56). The survival rate did not differ between the groups; in rEVAR was 82% (SE 5%), 74% (SE 6%), 68% (SE 6.5%), and 63% (SE 7.7%) at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months, respectively, and in OSR was 76% (SE 7%), 66% (SE 8%), and 56% (SE 9.5%) at 6, 24, and 48 months, respectively (P = 0.544).

CONCLUSIONS

Through a 16-year period, the implementation of EVAR as treatment of choice for rAAAs over OSR resulted in a noticeable reduction in the 30-day mortality. rEVAR was feasible in over 80% of rAAA patients.

Mortality and risk factors for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after repair endovascular (rARE)

Objective

The aim of this study was to characterize risk factors for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture after endovascular repair (rARE) and evaluate 30-day mortality in comparison to primary ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA).

Methods

A retrospective review of all adult patients with rAAA at a single tertiary university care center between February 11, 2006, and December 31, 2018, was performed. A total of 267 patients with rAAA were identified, 11 of whom had rARE. Descriptive statistics were applied due to the small sample size.

Results

Overall 30-day mortality was similar between primary rAAA and rARE (31.5% vs 27.3%); however, patients with rARE were more likely to receive palliative care (3.9% vs 18.2%). Mortality of patients who underwent operative intervention was 11.1% for rARE and 28.7% for primary rAAA at 30 days. All patients had an endoleak at the time of rupture. Type 1 and type 3 endoleaks resulting in direct aortic sac pressurization were the primary cause of rARE (9 of 11 patients); however, rupture occurred in two patients with only a type 2 endoleak. There was no sac expansion at the time of rupture in four of 11 patients with rARE. Four of 11 patients were lost to follow-up prior to rARE.

Conclusions

rARE is an uncommon complication following EVAR and contributes to late aneurysm-related mortality following endovascular repair. Although the 30-day mortality rate was similar for rARE and primary rAAA, larger series are required to determine which patients with rARE will benefit from intervention. The presence of endoleak and sac expansion may alert surgeons to increased risk of rARE; however, a subset of patients with rARE did not have sac expansion or surveillance imaging on follow-up. Loss to lifelong imaging surveillance remains a risk factor for rARE.