Retrograde catheterization of the inferior mesenteric artery to treat endoleaks: anatomic and technical considerations

Percutaneous transabdominal approach for the treatment of endoleaks after endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and clinical efficacy of percutaneous transabdominal treatment of endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair.

Materials and Methods

Between 2000 and 2007, six patients with type I (n = 4) or II (n = 2) endoleaks were treated by the percutaneous transabdominal approach using embolization with N-butyl cyanoacrylate with or without coils. Five patients underwent a single session and one patient had two sessions of embolization. The median time between aneurysm repair and endoleak treatment was 25.5 months (range: 0-84 months). Follow-up CT images were evaluated for changes in the size and shape of the aneurysm sac and presence or resolution of endoleaks. The median follow-up after endoleak treatment was 16.4 months (range: 0-37 months)

Results

Technical success was achieved in all six patients. Clinical success was achieved in four patients with complete resolution of the endoleak confirmed by follow-up CT. Clinical failure was observed in two patients. One eventually underwent surgical conversion, and the other was lost to follow-up. There were no procedure-related complications.

Conclusion

The percutaneous transabdominal approach for the treatment of type I or II endoleaks, after endovascular aneurysm repair, is an alternative method when conventional endovascular methods have failed.

Type II endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: effectiveness of embolization

The purpose of this study was to report our experience in treating type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Two hundred eighteen patients underwent EVAR with a Zenith stent-graft from January 2000 to December 2005. During a follow-up period of 4.5 + or - 2.3 years, solely type II endoleak was detected in 47 patients (22%), and 14 of them underwent secondary interventions to correct this condition. Ten patients had transarterial embolization, and four patients had translumbar/transabdominal embolization. The embolization materials used were coils, thrombin, gelatin, Onyx (ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer), and glue. Disappearance of the endoleak without enlargement of the aneurysm sac after the first secondary intervention was achieved in only five of these patients (5/13). One patient without surveillance imaging was excluded from analyses of clinical success. After additional interventions in four patients and the spontaneous disappearance of type II endoleak in two patients, overall clinical success was achieved in eight patients (8/12). One patient did not have surveillance imaging after the second secondary intervention. Clinical success after the first secondary intervention was achieved in two patients (2/9) in the transarterial embolization group and three patients (3/4) in the translumbar embolization group. The results of secondary interventions for type II endoleak are unsatisfactory. Although the small number of patients included in this study prevents reliable comparisons between groups, the results seem to favor direct translumbar embolization in comparison to transarterial embolization.

Imaging Techniques for Detection and Management of Endoleaks after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair1

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is evolving into a viable alternative to open surgical repair for many patients with abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysms. Endoleak development is a complication of EVAR and represents one of the limitations of this procedure. Endoleaks represent blood flow outside the stent-graft lumen but within the aneurysm sac. Lifelong imaging surveillance of patients after EVAR is critical to detect endoleaks for the patient's benefit and to determine the long-term performance of the stent-graft. Although computed tomographic angiography is the most commonly used examination for imaging surveillance, magnetic resonance angiography, ultrasonography, and digital subtraction angiography all have a role in endoleak detection and management. This review will focus on imaging techniques used for endoleak detection and the role imaging surveillance plays in the overall care of the post-EVAR patient.

Embolization of Type 2 Endoleaks after Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Use of Cyanoacrylate with or without Coils

Translumbar embolization was used to treat 11 type 2 endoleaks in nine patients with the liquid embolic agent n-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA). Nine of the embolizations were performed with a combination of stainless-steel coils and NBCAJ and the other two were performed with NBCA alone. There was complete occlusion on initial computed tomographic (CT) angiography in six of nine patients (66%), including the two cases treated with NBCA alone. Persistent endoleak on initial CT angiography occurred in three of nine patients (33%). Two of these patients underwent successful repeated embolization with NBCA. Aneurysm size remained unchanged in four patients (44%), decreased in four patients (44%), and increased in one patient (11%). No complications occurred. Initial results with the use of NBCA for endoleak embolization are encouraging.

Inferior vena cava traversal for translumbar endoleak embolization after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

When embolization of a collateral (type II) endoleak after endovascular repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm is indicated, endoleak embolization with a translumbar approach is often the procedure of choice. Because of the position of the endoleak, it is sometimes necessary to use a right-sided translumbar approach and traverse the inferior vena cava when accessing the endoleak. Twelve type II endoleaks in nine patients were treated with transcaval translumbar embolization during a 34-month period. No clinically significant hemorrhage occurred. Embolizing type II endoleaks with a right translumbar approach is feasible. Long-term follow-up with more patients is necessary to fully evaluate the durability of this procedure.

Type II endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: a conservative approach with selective intervention is safe and cost-effective

OBJECTIVES

The conservative versus therapeutic approach to type II endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) has been controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and cost-effectiveness of the conservative approach of embolizing type II endoleak only when persistent for more than 6 months and associated with aneurysm sac growth of 5 mm or more.

METHODS

Data for 486 consecutive patients who underwent EVAR were analyzed for incidence and outcome of type II endoleaks. Spiral computed tomography (CT) scans were reviewed, and patient outcome was evaluated at either office visit or telephone contact. Patients with new or late-appearing type II endoleak were evaluated with spiral CT at 6-month intervals to evaluate both persistence of the endoleak and size of the aneurysm sac. Persistent (>or=6 months) type II endoleak and aneurysm sac growth of 5 mm or greater were treated with either translumbar glue or coil embolization of the lumbar source, or transarterial coil embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery.

RESULTS

Type II endoleaks were detected in 90 (18.5%) patients. With a mean follow-up of 21.7 +/- 16 months, only 35 (7.2%) patients had type II endoleak that persisted for 6 months or longer. Aneurysm sac enlargement was noted in 5 patients, representing 1% of the total series. All 5 patients underwent successful translumbar sac embolization (n = 4) or transarterial inferior mesenteric artery embolization (n = 4) at a mean follow-up of 18.2 +/- 8.0 months, with no recurrence or aneurysm sac growth. No patient with treated or untreated type II endoleak has had rupture of the aneurysm. The mean global cost for treatment of persistent type II endoleak associated with aneurysm sac growth was US dollars 6695.50 (hospital cost plus physician reimbursement). Treatment in the 30 patients with persistent type II endoleak but no aneurysm sac growth would have represented an additional cost of US dollars 200000 or more. The presence or absence of a type II endoleak did not affect survival (78% vs 73%) at 48 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective intervention to treat type II endoleak that persists for 6 months and is associated with aneurysm enlargement seems to be both safe and cost-effective. Longer follow-up will determine whether this conservative approach to management of type II endoleak is the standard of care.

Endoleaks after Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms shows promising initial results. Endoleaks represent one of the unique causes of endovascular repair failure not seen with traditional abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Endoleaks occur when there is blood flow outside the stent-graft lumen but within the aneurysm sac. They can be difficult to diagnose and treat, and their management is a source of continued controversy. This review further defines endoleaks and the clinical challenges that they create. Current methods for endoleak detection, classification, and management are reviewed.

Treatment of type 2 endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: comparison of transarterial and translumbar techniques

OBJECTIVE

The exact significance of collateral endoleaks is unknown and a topic of great debate. Because of this uncertainty, some physicians choose to watch and wait while others aggressively treat these leaks. The purpose of this investigation was the evaluation of the efficacy of the two techniques used in the treatment of collateral endoleaks that occur after endovascular aneurysm repair.

METHODS

Patients with 33 angiographically proven type 2 endoleaks underwent treatment with either transarterial inferior mesenteric artery embolization (n = 20) or direct translumbar embolization (n = 13) during an 18-month period. Embolization success was defined as resolution of endoleak on all subsequent computed tomography angiogram results. The likelihood of embolization failure between the two treatments was expressed as a risk ratio and was compared with Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

Sixteen of 20 transarterial inferior mesenteric artery embolizations (80%) failed with recanalization of the original endoleak cavity over time. A single failure (8%) in the direct translumbar embolization group occurred in a patient in whom a new attachment site leak developed. The remaining 12 translumbar endoleak embolizations (92%) were successful and durable, with a median follow-up period of 254 days. The patients who underwent transarterial inferior mesenteric artery embolization were significantly more likely to have persistent endoleak than were the patients who underwent treatment with direct translumbar embolization (risk ratio, 4.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.9 to 11.2; P =.0001).

CONCLUSION

The transarterial embolization of inferior mesenteric arteries for the repair of type 2 endoleaks is ineffective and should not be performed. Direct translumbar embolization of the endoleak is effective in the elimination of type 2 leaks and should be the therapy of choice when aggressive endoleak management is indicated.

Embolization of type II endoleaks after aortic stent-graft implantation: technique and immediate results

PURPOSE

We report the procedural details and immediate results of treatment of type II endoleaks after aortic stent-graft implantation.

METHODS

In a consecutive series of patients who had either Vangard (n = 53) or Talent (n = 7) aortic stent-grafts implanted, type II endoleaks were confirmed by means of angiography in 18 patients, with a mean (+/- SD) age of 69 +/- 11 years; 16 patients had Vangard stent-grafts, and two patients had Talent stent-grafts. After superselective catheterization of the feeding vessel, with 3F microcatheters, and liberal injections of vasodilators, embolization was performed with either a mixture of biologic glue and Lipiodol (n = 16) or Microcoils (n = 2).

RESULTS

The procedure was performed through the femoral artery in 16 patients and through the brachial artery in the remaining two patients. Overall, superselective catheterization and embolization were successfully undertaken in 17 (94.4%) of 18 patients. In the remaining patient, superselective catheterization proved impossible. This patient was treated with an injection of microparticles completed by means of embolization of biologic glue more proximally in an iliolumbar branch. During follow-up (mean, 13.3 months) after embolization, the aneurysm sac shrank in 13 (72.2%) of 18 patients. A new type II endoleak was diagnosed on helical computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging in two (11.1%) of 18 patients.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous embolization is a safe and effective technique for treatment of type II endoleaks. However, despite these initially promising results, large long-term follow-up studies will be required to confirm its efficiency.

Treatment of type II endoleaks with Onyx

Endoleaks are defined as persistent perfusion of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) after endovascular stent-graft deployment. The authors describe their experience treating six endoleaks with the liquid embolic agent Onyx (ethylene-vinyl-alcohol copolymer). Complete endoleak occlusion was achieved in five of six cases. Follow-up imaging has demonstrated decreased aneurysm diameter in all patients 7-29 weeks (mean = 19.2 weeks) after treatment.

Aortic side branch embolization before endovascular aneurysm repair: incidence of type II endoleak

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility of embolization of aortic side branches and its impact on the incidence of type II endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Endovascular aneurysm repair was performed in 74 patients. Aortic side branch vessels were evaluated on the preoperative angiogram and computed tomography (CT) and, where embolization of lumbar and inferior mesenteric vessels was considered technically possible, this was attempted prior to endovascular repair. Follow-up CT was used to assess the presence of type II endoleak.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were followed up for longer than 1 month. Embolization was attempted in 25 cases, successfully in 10, with partial success in 11, and failure in four. Twenty patients with successful or partly successful preoperative embolization were discharged and followed-up. Four (20%) had demonstrable type II endoleak during follow-up, with two of these persisting at latest follow-up. Of 43 patients without previous embolization, there were 10 (23.3%) type II endoleaks during the follow-up period, four of these persisting. In cases with type II endoleak, mean sac diameter change was -0.5 mm in the cases with previous embolization and +3.1 mm without. The mean period to onset of type II endoleak was 6.9 months without, and 15.3 months with, previous embolization.

CONCLUSION

Although the cohort size is below a level that would confer significance, the trend of these findings is such as to suggest a lack of influence of aortic side branch embolization on the incidence of type II endoleak during the follow-up period.

Aneurysm sac pressure measurements after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVES

The goal of endovascular grafting of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is to exclude the aneurysm sac from systemic pressure and thereby decrease the risk of rupture. Unlike conventional open surgery, branch vessels in the sac (eg, lumbar artery and inferior mesenteric artery [IMA]) are not ligated and can potentially transmit pressure. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the feasibility of various interventional techniques for measuring pressure within the aneurysm sac in patients who had undergone endovascular repair of AAAs.

METHODS

Sac pressure measurements were performed in 21 patients who had undergone stent graft repair of AAAs. Seventeen of 21 patients had endoleaks demonstrated on 30-day computed tomographic (CT) scans. Access to the aneurysm sac in these patients was through direct translumbar sac puncture (5 patients), through a patent IMA accessed via the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) (9 patients), or by direct cannulation around attachment sites (3 patients). Four patients had perioperative pressure measurements obtained through catheters positioned along side of the endovascular graft at the time of its deployment. Two of these catheters were left in position for 30 hours during which time CT and conventional angiography were performed. Pressures were determined with standard arterial-line pressure transduction techniques and compared with systemic pressure in each patient.

RESULTS

Elevated sac pressure was found in all patients. The sac pressure in patients with endoleaks was found to be systemic (15 patients) or near systemic (2 patients) and all had pulsatile waveforms. Elevated sac pressures were also found in patients without CT or angiographic evidence of endoleak (2 patients). Injection of the sacs in two of these patients revealed a patent lumbar artery and an IMA.

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible to measure pressures from within the aneurysm sac in patients with stent grafts with a variety of techniques. Patients may continue to have pressurized AAA sacs despite endovascular AAA repair. Endoleaks transmit pulsatile pressure into the aneurysm sac regardless of the type. It is possible to have systemic sac pressures without evidence of endoleaks on CT or angiography.