Mid-Term Results of EVAR in Severe Proximal Aneurysm Neck Angulation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if mid-term outcome following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with the Endurant Stent Graft (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) is influenced by severe proximal neck angulation. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was performed using data from a prospective multicenter database. All measurements were obtained using dedicated reconstruction software and center-lumen line reconstruction. Patients with neck length >15 mm, infrarenal angle (β) >75°, and/or suprarenal angle (α) >60°, or neck length >10 mm with β >60°, and/or α >45° were compared with a matched control group. Primary endpoint was primary clinical success. Secondary endpoints were freedom from rupture, type 1A endoleak, stent fractures, freedom from neck-related reinterventions, and aneurysm-related adverse events. Morphological neck variation over time was also assessed. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were included in the study group and were compared with a matched control group with 65 patients. Median follow-up time was 49.5 months (range 30.5-58.4). The 4-year primary clinical success estimates were 83% and 80% for the angulated and nonangulated groups (p = .42). Proximal neck angulation did not affect primary clinical success in a multivariate model (hazard ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval 0.55-4.41). Groups did not differ significantly in regard to freedom from rupture (p = .79), freedom from type 1A endoleak (p = .79), freedom from neck-related adverse events (p = .68), and neck-related reinterventions (p = .68). Neck angle reduction was more pronounced in patients with severe proximal neck angulation (mean Δα -15.6°, mean Δβ -30.6°) than in the control group (mean Δα -0.39°, mean Δβ -5.9°) (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Mid-term outcomes following EVAR with the Endurant Stent Graft were not influenced by severe proximal neck angulation in our population. Despite the conformability of the device, moderate aortic neck remodeling was identified in the group of patients with angulated neck anatomy on the first computed tomography scan after implantation with no important further remodeling afterwards. No device integrity failures were encountered.

State-of-the-art of imaging detecting endoleaks post-EVAR with special focus on low-flow endoleaks.

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) necessitates lifelong surveillance for the patient, in order to detect complications timely. Endoleaks (ELs) are among the most common complications of EVAR. Especially type II ELs can have a very unpredictable clinical course and this can range from spontaneous sealing to aortic rupture. Subgroups of this type of EL need to be identified in order to make a proper risk stratification. Aim of this review is to describe the existing imaging techniques, including their advantages and disadvantages in the context of post-EVAR surveillance with a particular emphasis on low-flow ELs. Low flow ELs cause pressurization of the aortic aneurysm sac with a low velocity filling, leading to difficulty of detection by routine imaging protocols for EVAR surveillance, e.g. bi- or triphasic multislice computed tomographic angiography, magnetic resonance imaging and contrast enhanced ultrasound. In this article, we review the imaging possibilities of ELs and discuss the different imaging strategies available for depicting low flow ELs.

A Bayesian neural network algorithm identifies patients in whom post-EVAR surveillance may be unnecessary

Lifelong surveillance is not cost-effective after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), but is required to detect aortic complications which are fatal if untreated (type 1/3 endoleak, sac expansion, device migration). Aneurysm morphology determines the probability of aortic complications and therefore the need for surveillance, but existing analyses have proven incapable of identifying patients at sufficiently low risk to justify abandoning surveillance. This study aimed to improve the prediction of aortic complications, through the application of machine-learning techniques. Patients undergoing EVAR at 2 centres were studied from 2004–2010. Aneurysm morphology had previously been studied to derive the SGVI Score for predicting aortic complications. Bayesian Neural Networks were designed using the same data, to dichotomise patients into groups at low- or high-risk of aortic complications. Network training was performed only on patients treated at centre 1. External validation was performed by assessing network performance independently of network training, on patients treated at centre 2. Discrimination was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis to compare aortic complications in predicted low-risk versus predicted high-risk patients. 761 patients aged 75 +/− 7 years underwent EVAR in 2 centres. Mean follow-up was 36+/− 20 months. Neural networks were created incorporating neck angu- lation/length/diameter/volume; AAA diameter/area/volume/length/tortuosity; and common iliac tortuosity/diameter. A 19-feature network predicted aor- tic complications with excellent discrimination and external validation (5-year freedom from aortic complications in predicted low-risk vs predicted high-risk patients: 97.9% vs. 63%; p < 0.0001). A Bayesian Neural-Network algorithm can identify patients in whom it may be safe to abandon surveillance after EVAR. This proposal requires prospective study.

CO2-EVAR: An innovative approach to Automated Carbon Dioxide Angiography during Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm repair

Objectives CO2-EVAR was proposed for treatment of AAA especially in patients with CKD. Issues regarding standardization, such as visualization of lowest renal artery (LoRA) and quality image in angiographies performed from pigtail or introducer-sheath, are still unsolved. Aim of the study was to analyze different steps of CO2-EVAR to create an operative protocol to standardize the procedure. Methods Patients undergoing CO2-EVAR were prospectively enrolled in 5 European centers (2018-2021). CO2-EVAR was performed using an automated injector. LoRA visualization and image quality (1-4) were analyzed and compared at different procedure steps: preoperative CO2-angiography from Pigtail/Introducer-sheath (1st Step), angiographies from Pigtail at 0%,50%,100% main body (MB) deployment (2nd Step), contralateral hypogastric artery (CHA) visualization with CO2 injection from femoral Introducer-sheath (3rd Step) and completion angiogram from Pigtail/Introducer-sheath (4th Step). Intra-/postoperative adverse events were evaluated. Results Sixty-five patients undergoing CO2-EVAR were enrolled, 55/65(84.5%) male, median age 75(11.5) years. Median ICM was 20(54)cc; 19/65(29.2%) procedures were performed with 0-iodine. 1st Step: median image quality was significantly higher with CO2 injected from femoral introducer [Pigtail2(3)vs.3(3)Introducer,p=.008]. 2nd Step: LoRA was more frequently detected at 50% (93%vs.73.2%, p=.002) and 100% (94.1%vs.78.4%, p=.01) of MB deployment compared with first angiography from Pigtail; image quality was significantly higher at 50% [3(3)vs.2(3),p=<.001] and 100% [4(3) vs.2(3),p=.001] of MB deployment. CHA was detected in 93% cases (3rd Step). Mean image quality was significantly higher when final angiogram (4th Step) was performed from introducer (Pigtail2.6±1.1vs.3.1±0.9Introducer,p=<.001). Rates of intra-/postoperative adverse events (pain,vomit,diarrhea) were 7.7% and 12.5%. Conclusions Preimplant CO2-angiography should be performed from Introducer-sheath. MB steric bulk during its deployment should be used to improve image quality and LoRA visualization with CO2. CHA can be satisfactorily visualized with CO2. Completion CO2-angiogram should be performed from femoral Introducer-sheath. This operative protocol allows to perform CO2-EVAR with minimal ICM and low rate of mild complications.

Clinical Outcome and Morphologic Analysis after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using the Excluder Endograft

OBJECTIVE: Long-term follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is very scarce, and doubt remains regarding the durability of these procedures. We designed a retrospective cohort study to assess long-term clinical outcome and morphologic changes in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) treated by EVAR using the Excluder endoprosthesis (W. L. Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz). METHODS: From 2000 to 2007, 179 patients underwent EVAR in a tertiary institution. Clinical data were retrieved from a prospective database. All patients treated with the Excluder endoprosthesis were included. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans were retrospectively analyzed preoperatively, at 30 days, and at the last follow-up using dedicated tridimensional reconstruction software. For patients with complications, all remaining CTAs were also analyzed. The primary end point was clinical success. Secondary end points were freedom from reintervention, sac growth, types I and III endoleak, migration, conversion to open repair, and AAA-related death or rupture. Neck dilatation, renal function, and overall survival were also analyzed. RESULTS: Included were 144 patients (88.2% men; mean age, 71.6 years). Aneurysms were ruptured in 4.9%. American Society of Anesthesiologists classification was III/IV in 61.8%. No patients were lost during a median follow-up of 5.0 years (interquartile range, 3.1-6.4; maximum, 11.2 years). Two patients died of medical complications ≤ 30 days after EVAR. The estimated primary clinical success rates at 5 and 10 years were 63.5% and 41.1%, and secondary clinical success rates were 78.3% and 58.3%, respectively. Sac growth was observed in 37 of 142 patients (26.1%). Cox regression showed type I endoleak during follow-up (hazard ratio, 3.74; P = .008), original design model (hazard ratio, 3.85; P = .001), and preoperative neck diameter (1.27 per mm increase, P = .006) were determinants of sac growth. Secondary interventions were required in 32 patients (22.5%). The estimated 10-year rate of AAA-related death or rupture was 2.1%. Overall life expectancy after AAA repair was 6.8 years. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR using the Excluder endoprosthesis provides a safe and lasting treatment for AAA, despite the need for maintained surveillance and secondary interventions. At up to 11 years, the risk of AAA-related death or postimplantation rupture is remarkably low. The incidences of postimplantation sac growth and secondary intervention were greatly reduced after the introduction of the low-permeability design in 2004.

Familial Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Is Associated With More Complications After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVE: A familial predisposition to abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is present in approximately one-fifth of patients. Nevertheless, the clinical implications of a positive family history are not known. We investigated the risk of aneurysm-related complications after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for patients with and without a positive family history of AAA. METHODS: Patients treated with EVAR for intact AAAs in the Erasmus University Medical Center between 2000 and 2012 were included in the study. Family history was obtained by written questionnaire. Familial AAA (fAAA) was defined as patients having at least one first-degree relative affected with aortic aneurysm. The remaining patients were considered sporadic AAA. Cardiovascular risk factors, aneurysm morphology (aneurysm neck, aneurysm sac, and iliac measurements), and follow-up were obtained prospectively. The primary end point was complications after EVAR, a composite of endoleaks, need for secondary interventions, aneurysm sac growth, acute limb ischemia, and postimplantation rupture. Secondary end points were specific components of the primary end point (presence of endoleak, need for secondary intervention, and aneurysm sac growth), aneurysm neck growth, and overall survival. Kaplan-Meier estimates for the primary end point were calculated and compared using log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test of equality. A Cox-regression model was used to calculate the independent risk of complications associated with fAAA. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients were included in the study (88.6% men; age 72 ± 7 years, median follow-up 3.3 years; interquartile range, 2.2-6.1). A total of 51 patients (20.0%) were classified as fAAA. Patients with fAAA were younger (69 vs 72 years; P = .015) and were less likely to have ever smoked (58.8% vs 73.5%; P = .039). Preoperative aneurysm morphology was similar in both groups. Patients with fAAA had significantly more complications after EVAR (35.3% vs 19.1%; P = .013), with a twofold increased risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-3.7). Secondary interventions (39.2% vs 20.1%; P = .004) and aneurysm sac growth (20.8% vs 9.5%; P = .030) were the most important elements accounting for the difference. Furthermore, a trend toward more type I endoleaks during follow-up was observed (15.6% vs 7.4%; P = .063) and no difference in overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows that patients with a familial form of AAA develop more aneurysm-related complications after EVAR, despite similar AAA morphology at baseline. These findings suggest that patients with fAAA form a specific subpopulation and create awareness for a possible increase in the risk of complications after EVAR.

Early Sac Shrinkage Predicts a Low Risk of Late Complications After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND: Aneurysm shrinkage has been proposed as a marker of successful endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Patients with early postoperative shrinkage may experience fewer subsequent complications, and consequently require less intensive surveillance. METHODS: Patients undergoing EVAR from 2000 to 2011 at three vascular centres (in 2 countries), who had two imaging examinations (postoperative and after 6-18 months), were included. Maximum diameter, complications and secondary interventions during follow-up were registered. Patients were categorized according to early sac dynamics. The primary endpoint was freedom from late complications. Secondary endpoints were freedom from secondary intervention, postimplant rupture and direct (type I/III) endoleaks. RESULTS: Some 597 EVARs (71.1 per cent of all EVARs) were included. No shrinkage was observed in 284 patients (47.6 per cent), moderate shrinkage (5-9 mm) in 142 (23.8 per cent) and major shrinkage (at least 10 mm) in 171 patients (28.6 per cent). Four years after the index imaging, the rate of freedom from complications was 84.3 (95 per cent confidence interval 78.7 to 89.8), 88.1 (80.6 to 95.5) and 94.4 (90.1 to 98.7) per cent respectively. No shrinkage was an independent risk factor for late complications compared with major shrinkage (hazard ratio (HR) 3.11; P < 0.001). Moderate compared with major shrinkage (HR 2.10; P = 0.022), early postoperative complications (HR 3.34; P < 0.001) and increasing abdominal aortic aneurysm baseline diameter (HR 1.02; P = 0.001) were also risk factors for late complications. Freedom from secondary interventions and direct endoleaks was greater for patients with major sac shrinkage. CONCLUSION: Early change in aneurysm sac diameter is a strong predictor of late complications after EVAR. Patients with major sac shrinkage have a very low risk of complications for up to 5 years. This parameter may be used to tailor postoperative surveillance.

Clinical Outcome and Morphologic Determinants of Mural Thrombus in Abdominal Aortic Endografts

OBJECTIVE:Endograft mural thrombus has been associated with stent graft or limb thrombosis after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aimed to identify clinical and morphologic determinants of endograft mural thrombus accumulation and its influence on thromboembolic events after EVAR. METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of patients treated by EVAR at a tertiary institution from 2000 to 2012 was analyzed. Patients treated for degenerative infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms and with available imaging for thrombus analysis were considered. All measurements were performed on three-dimensional center-lumen line computed tomography angiography (CTA) reconstructions. Patients with thrombus accumulation within the endograft's main body with a thickness >2 mm and an extension >25% of the main body's circumference were included in the study group and compared with a control group that included all remaining patients. Clinical and morphologic variables were assessed for association with significant thrombus accumulation within the endograft's main body by multivariate regression analysis. Estimates for freedom from thromboembolic events were obtained by Kaplan-Meier plots. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (16.4%) presented with endograft mural thrombus. Median follow-up time was 3.54 years (interquartile range, 1.99-5.47 years). In-graft mural thrombus was identified on 30-day CTA in 22 patients (32.4% of the study group), on 6-month CTA in 8 patients (11.8%), and on 1-year CTA in 17 patients (25%). Intraprosthetic thrombus progressively accumulated during the study period in 40 patients of the study group (55.8%). Overall, 17 patients (4.1%) presented with endograft or limb occlusions, 3 (4.4%) in the thrombus group and 14 (4.1%) in the control group (P = .89). Thirty-one patients (7.5%) received an aortouni-iliac (AUI) endograft. Two endograft occlusions were identified among AUI devices (6.5%; overall, 0.5%). None of these patients showed thrombotic deposits in the main body, nor were any outflow abnormalities identified on the immediately preceding CTA. Estimated freedom from thromboembolic events at 5 years was 95% in both groups (P = .97). Endograft thrombus accumulation was associated with >25% proximal aneurysm neck thrombus coverage at baseline (odds ratio [OR], 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.3), neck length ≤ 15 mm (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.2), proximal neck diameter ≥ 30 mm (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.6), AUI (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.8-5.5), or polyester-covered stent grafts (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 2.2-7.3) and with main component "barrel-like" configuration (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.7-28.3). CONCLUSIONS: Mural thrombus formation within the main body of the endograft is related to different endograft configurations, main body geometry, and device fabric but appears to have no association with the occurrence of thromboembolic events over time.

In situ introducer sheath dilatation for complex aortic access.

Aortic access problems due to diseased or small peripheral vessels are a major issue in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). In the emergency setting, like aortic rupture after blunt trauma, or in patients with a hostile abdomen, a more proximal access to the aorta is not a pleasant perspective. We developed in situ introducer sheath dilatation as a bail-out technique for patients with difficult aortic access under various circumstances including EVAR, intra-aortic balloon pump insertion and cannulation for perfusion. The method described allows to increase the access vessel diameter by 50% (from 6 to 9 mm) or the luminal circumference from 18 to 27 F. We have used this technique in five patients without complication, very much in contrast to the traditionally practiced 'forced device insertion'.