Outcomes Of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Research Articles

Meta-Analysis of the Crossed Versus Standard Limb Configuration in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

To investigate whether the crossed-limb technique confers better or worse clinical outcomes compared to the standard straight limb configuration in standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). We conducted a systematic review to identify studies comparing outcomes of EVAR with the crossed versus standard limb configuration. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL were searched in March 2021 using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search interface developed by the National Institute for Heath and Care Excellence. The risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Summary estimates were calculated using the odds ratio (OR), risk difference (RD), or mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI), applying the Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance statistical method. Random-effects models were employed. Four observational studies qualified for inclusion, reporting a total of 1132 patients. All presented contemporary experiences. Baseline clinical characteristics were largely similar between patients with and without the crossed-limb configuration, but the anatomy tended to be less favourable in patients treated with the crossed-limb technique. No statistically significant difference was found in the primary outcomes: limb occlusion (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.65 - 3.19), type Ib endoleak (RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.03 - 0.04), type III endoleak (RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 - 0.03); or secondary outcomes: perioperative mortality (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 - 0.03), type Ia endoleak (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 - 0.02), type II endoleak (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.51 - 3.74), procedure duration (MD 18.07 min, 95% CI -1.14-37.29). Inconsistency across studies was low for all outcomes. The studies were judged to be of high quality on the NOS. The main bias identified using the ROBINS-I tool was due to confounding. The crossed-limb technique was not found to confer inferior clinical outcomes in the medium term compared to the standard limb configuration in patients who undergo standard EVAR.

Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair with Adjunctive Stenting

Endovascular aneurysm repair is the standard of care for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, however data regarding adjunctive stenting at the time of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are limited. The study aims to evaluate outcomes of patients undergoing EVAR with and without adjunctive stenting. Patients undergoing EVAR with stenting (EVAR-S) and without stenting (EVAR) (2008 - 2017) were selected from Cerner HealthFacts database using ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes. Chi-square analysis and multivariable logistic regression were used to evaluate the association of patient characteristics with medical and vascular outcomes. 4,957 patients undergoing EVAR procedures were identified (3,816 EVAR and 1,141 EVAR-S). Demographic analysis revealed that patients who underwent EVAR-S had higher Charlson comorbidity scores (2.35 vs. 2.13, P=0.0001). EVAR-S was associated with a greater frequency of vascular complications such as thrombolysis/percutaneous thrombectomy (0.9% vs. 0.2%; P < 0.0004). There were no differences seen in access complications between EVAR and EVAR-S. Multivariable analysis revealed that EVAR-S was associated with prolonged length of stay (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03-1.82), readmission < 30 days (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.11-1.68), major adverse cardiac events (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.09-2.32), respiratory complications (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.16-1.88) and renal failure (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.16-2.11). Endovascular aneurysm repair with adjunctive stenting (EVAR-S) was associated with vascular complications requiring reintervention, although the overall rate was very low. As well, readmission within 30 days, cardiac complications, respiratory problems and renal failure were more likely when compared to standard EVAR. The need for adjunctive stenting acts as a marker for an overall sicker and more complex population, not just in terms of vascular complications but across all medical complications as well. Staging the procedure may be helpful in terms of spreading out the operative risk into smaller portions. Furthermore, consideration of a non-operative strategy should be discussed with the patient if the risk of the procedure outweighs the risk of aneurysm rupture in high-risk groups.

Effect of Anticoagulation on Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Outcomes and Development of Endoleaks

Effect of Anticoagulation on Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Outcomes and Development of Endoleaks

Use of Chimney Technique Does Not Improve the Outcome of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Patients With a Hyperangulated and Short Proximal Aortic Neck

Purpose: We hypothesized that extending the proximal landing zone with the chimney technique could be beneficial in patients with a hyperangulated proximal aortic neck, defined as more > 60 degrees. Material and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the outcome of prospectively collected data of patients treated by endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal aortic aneurysm with a hyperangulated proximal aortic neck. In all, 104 out of 130 patients were treated without (Group A) and 24 with the chimney endovascular aortic repair (ChEVAR, Group B). Primary outcome was technical and clinical success according to the reporting standards of the Society of Vascular Surgery. Results: The use of the chimney technique was associated with a significantly longer operation duration (167 vs. 93 min, p < .001), longer fluoroscopy time (44 vs.30 min, p = < .001), and larger amount of contrast medium used (149 vs. 127 ml, p = .03) but did not significantly improve technical (79.2% vs. 87.7%) and clinical success (54.2% vs. 68.9%). Aneurysm-related mortality was higher in group B (8.3% vs. = 0%, p < .001). Type IA endoleak was high in both groups at completion angiography (11.3% in Group A vs. 12.5% in Group B) and at follow-up (10.4% in Group A vs. 4.5% in Group B) without significant difference between the groups. Conclusions: Our data did not show a benefit of the primary use of the chimney technique in patients with a hyperangulated and short neck, although more studies are required to support this conclusion. Other strategies or new technologies are required for improving EVAR results in aneurysm patients with severe angulated proximal and short neck.

Prognostic Role of Severe Infrarenal Aortic Neck Angulation in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

To investigate whether patients with severe infrarenal aortic neck angulation have worse outcomes than those without severe angulation after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The HDAS (Healthcare Database Advanced Search) interface developed by NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) was used to search electronic bibliographic databases. Studies comparing outcomes of standard EVAR in patients with and without severe neck angulation were considered. Pooled outcome estimates were calculated using the odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), using the Mantel–Haenszel or inverse variance method, as appropriate. Random effects models of meta-analysis were applied. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Ten studies reporting a total of 7 371 patients (1 576 with severe neck angulation and 5 795 without) were included. The studies reported medium term follow up. No statistically significant difference was found for the primary outcomes (overall mortality: HR 1.27, 95% CI 0.88 – 1.85, low certainty; aneurysm related mortality: HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.80 – 1.44, moderate certainty; aneurysm rupture: HR 1.41, 95% CI 0.66 – 2.99, low certainty). The hazard of type Ia endoleak (HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.32 – 2.61) and re-intervention was higher in patient with severe angulation (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.01 – 1.54), but there was no significant difference in the odds of adjunctive procedures (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.48 – 3.11), or the hazard of sac expansion (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.44 – 1.55) or stent migration (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.78 – 1.92). Meta-analysis of studies that conducted multiple Cox regression analysis showed no significant difference for any of the primary outcomes. Severe neck angulation may not be a poor prognostic indicator for overall/aneurysm related mortality and rupture in the medium term after EVAR but may increase the risk of late type 1 endoleaks and re-intervention; therefore, patients require close surveillance.

Survival and durability after endovascular aneurysm repair reflect era-related surgical judgement

ObjectiveAbdominal aortic aneurysm management guidelines from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in 2020, based heavily on randomized controlled trials in an early era of infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), suggested that the long-term outcomes after EVAR jeopardize its use in elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. We hypothesized that, in a rapidly evolving surgical field, the era of aneurysm repair may have a significant influence on long-term patient outcomes. MethodsUsing a single-center retrospective cohort design, we identified two EVAR cohorts, the early cohort (n = 166) who underwent EVAR from 2008 to 2010, and a contemporary late cohort (n = 129) from 2015 to 2017. We assessed patient preoperative demographics and era of repair against the primary outcomes of reinterventions, reintervention-free survival, and mortality, addressing their relationships to anatomic selection criteria, graft durability, endoleak, and aneurysm diameter to 5 years after the procedure. ResultsEarly cohort patients had decreased reintervention-free survival (early 80.1% vs late 93.3%) and decreased overall survival (early 71.3% vs late 81%) at 3 years and throughout follow-up. The preoperative anatomy judged suitable for EVAR in early cohort patients was more variable than for late cohort patients, including 104% larger proximal and 106% larger distal landing zone diameters, with a mean 11.6-mm shorter length infrarenal aortic and 13.3-mm shorter length iliac sealing zones in the early group. Early cohort patients had more complications during follow-up, including graft kinking and endoleaks, and 24.4% of early vs 8.5% of late patients underwent one or more reinterventions. ConclusionsAlthough technical skill in EVAR implantation may not evolve significantly after a threshold of cases, surgical judgement, relating to anatomic selection and device sizing, requires feedback from long-term sequalae and significantly impacted EVAR outcomes by era. EVAR patients from an early repair era had significantly worse outcomes, with more complications, reinterventions, and a decrease in survival.

Early and Long-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Repair in Young and Low Surgical Risk Patients in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment

Purpose: To investigate early- and long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in young and low surgical risk patients. Methods: The global registry for endovascular aortic treatment (GREAT) was queried for all patients with AAA undergoing standard EVAR; patients were excluded if had previous AAA repair or underwent concomitant procedures. Young patients were defined if age <60; surgical risk was assessed through the validated Medicare perioperative risk score (MPRS) based on age, sex, renal function, heart failure, and peripheral vascular disease. Patients were classified as low (MPRS<3), average (MPRS 3–11), or high (MPRS>11) risk. Young versus older patients and low-risk versus average/high-risk patients were compared. The primary endpoints were early (30 days) major adverse events (MAEs), 5-year freedom from overall mortality, aortic-related mortality, and freedom from device-related reinterventions. Time-to-event endpoints were calculated by Kaplan–Meier curves. Results: Of 3217 included patients, 182 (6%) were <60 years old, 956 (30%) had a low surgical risk, 1561 (49%) an average risk, 700 (22%) a high risk. Young patients had a less angulated proximal neck (27.2±18.4° vs 30.9±21.5°; p=0.05); in low-risk compared to average/high-risk patients, a longer neck length (3±1.8 vs 2.8±1.4 cm; p=0.01) and lower neck angulation (29.7±21.8° vs 33.2±22.2°; p=0.01) were present. Young age alone had no significant impact on early mortality (0% vs 0.6%; p=0.62.) and MAEs (3.9% vs 6.1%; p=0.20), while these were significantly lower in low-risk compared to average/high-risk patients (early mortality: 0.1% vs 0.7%, p=0.04; MAEs: 4.1% vs 6.7%, p=0.005). At 5 years, overall survival was significantly higher in young (88% vs 76%; p<0.001) and lower-risk (77% vs 54%; p<0.001) patients; low-risk patients also had significantly decreased aortic-related mortality (0% vs 2%; p=0.04) and reintervention rates (6% vs 11%; p=0.007). There were no statistically significant differences in mortality (0% vs 2%; p=0.42) and reintervention rate (10% vs 10%; p=1.00) between young and older patients. Conclusion: In this real-world registry, EVAR was more often offered in cases with suitable anatomy in young and low-risk patients. Low operative risk, rather than young age alone, predicted excellent early outcomes and low 5-year mortality, aortic-related mortality, and reintervention rates.

Infrarenal Aortic Neck Angulation Falls Short as a Sole Prognostic Factor for EVAR Outcomes

Qayyum and colleagues performed a meta-analysis on studies comparing outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with and without severe infrarenal aortic angulation. Although higher type Ia endoleak and re-intervention rates were demonstrated in patients with severe infrarenal angulation, no increased mortality, aneurysm related mortality or rupture rates were found.1 They concluded that severe infrarenal angulation may not be associated with an adverse midterm prognosis following EVAR as previously thought.

Ten-year single center experience in elective standard endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the treatment of choice for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), demonstrating excellent early outcomes. However, EVAR durability has been questioned in the long-term period. The aim of this study was to assess EVAR outcomes in terms of survival and freedom from re-intervention during a long-term period. All consecutive patients being treated, with elective standard EVAR, in a single tertiary center, were included between 2008 and 2018. Outcomes were defined as survival and freedom from re-intervention and were reported using Kaplan-Meyer lifetables. In subgroup analyses, sex, age (threshold at 65 and 80 years), neck diameter>28mm and type of fixation were also analyzed. Type of re-intervention and endoleak type I (ETIa) were also reported. Five hundred and eight patients (94% males, mean age 72±7.3, mean AAA diameter 59±9mm) were included. The median follow-up was 3 years (range 0-10 years). The survival rate was 92.8% (SE 1.5%), 76.5% (SE 3.1%) and 41.6% (SE 6%), at 2, 5 and 10 years of follow-up, respectively. In total, 78 patients died; 8 deaths (8/75, 10%) were aneurysm related. In multivariate regression analysis, age (CI. 1.02-1.14; p=0.006) and ever tobacco use (CI. 1.02-6.12, P=0.045) were associated with the long-term mortality. Freedom from re-intervention was 96% (SE 1.1%), 93% (SE 1.8%), 85.5% (SE 5%) at 2, 5 and 9 years of follow-up. Limb occlusion was a common complication (n/n; 30% of re-intervention), particularly within the first 2 postoperative years. Six patients presented with rupture and were treated with open conversion. EVAR cases with supra-renal fixation graft presented lower rates of ETIa (CI. 76-87.27, P<0.001). Elective standard EVAR is associated with good long-term survival showing low aneurysm-related mortality. Common risk factors such as advanced age and smoking are associated to higher mortality. The procedure presents low re-intervention rates, while limb occlusion is a complication presented within the first 2 postoperative years.

The Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Japan in 2017: A Report from the Japanese Committee for Stentgraft Management.

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) was first approved in Japan a decade ago, and approximately 10,000 EVAR procedures are performed annually.1) The short-term outcomes of EVAR in Japan were reported to be acceptable; however, several issues were revealed. Half of the cases violated the instructions for use, and a quarter of post-EVAR aneurysm sacs dilated by more than 5 mm in 5 years.2) In addition, new devices have emerged, generating a learning curve for their use. Therefore, updating the real-world EVAR data from Japan will serve as a database for physicians to refer to during preoperative sizing or when considering procedural steps. This report demonstrated the number of EVAR procedures and the mortality and complication rates in 2017 in Japan using data from the Japanese Committee for Stentgraft Management (JACSM) nationwide registry, which includes outcome data for nearly all stent grafts shipped to Japan.2,3)

Anatomical feature and early outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair from King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital

Anatomical feature and early outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair from King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital

Early and midterm outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair with an ultra-low-profile endograft from the Triveneto Incraft Registry

ObjectiveWe evaluated the early and midterm outcomes of the Incraft (Cordis Corp, Bridgewater, NJ) ultra-low-profile endograft by analyzing data from the Triveneto Incraft Registry (TIR). MethodsTIR is an independent multicenter cohort registry of 10 vascular surgery units in the Triveneto area (Northeast Italy). A prospective analysis of patients electively treated with Incraft from September 2014 to June 2019 was performed. The main outcomes were technical success, major 30-day complications, 30-day aneurysm-related death, freedom from reintervention, and mortality rate during follow-up and were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves. Univariable Cox regression was used to evaluate the associations between anatomic complexity factors and reintervention. ResultsDuring the study period, 209 patients were included in the registry. Their mean age was 76.9 ± 7.7 years and the Society for Vascular Surgery comorbidity score was 0.97 ± 0.52. Most patients (n = 181; 86.6%) had presented with at least one complex anatomic factor: aortic neck angle α <135° in 31 patients (14.8%), conic neck in 17 patients (8.2%), iliac tortuosity index τ >1.5 in 102 (48.8%), iliac artery calcification >50% in 106 (50.7%), and external iliac artery <6 mm in 45 (21.5%). The concurrent presence of two or more complex iliac anatomic factors was present in 67 patients (32.1%). The technical success rate was 99.5%, and the early major complication rate was 1.5% (one limb occlusion, one iliac branch stenosis, one type III endoleak [EL]). No 30-day mortality was recorded. The mean follow-up period was 18.5 ± 13.2 months. The overall mortality was 9.5% (n = 18), none related to the aneurysm. The freedom from reintervention rate was 92.1%. Of these patients, six (3.2%) had been treated for type II EL embolization, one (0.5%) for type IA EL, four (2.1%) for iliac branch occlusion, and one (0.5%) for flow-limiting external iliac artery dissection. None of the single anatomic factors analyzed were predictive of reintervention. However, the association of two or more complex iliac anatomic factors was predictive of related reintervention (hazard ratio, 7.25; P = .014). The crude reintervention rate in this complex subgroup of patients was low (4 of 67; 6%). ConclusionsData from the TIR have demonstrated excellent early and midterm outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair using the Incraft stent graft in patients with complex anatomy. The concurrent presence of two or more complex iliac anatomic factors still represent an issue for endovascular aneurysm repair success. However, the technical characteristics of this device resulted in low intervention rates, even for patients with these challenging issues.

Mid- and long-term results of endovascular aneurysm repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms: a single center's experience for 10 years

Objective: To examine the mid- and long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of 540 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm who received EVAR at Department of Vascular Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University from January 2009 to December 2018. There were 503 males and 37 females, aged of (69±8) years (range: 44 to 87 years). Clinical data including concomitant disease, aneurysm size and surgical data were collected and patients were followed up after operation. The cumulative survival rate was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and multivariate Cox regression was used to analyze the independent prognosis factors. Results: The technical success rate was 91.1% (492/540). The perioperative mortality rate was 1.3% (7/540) and the follow-up rate was 91.7% (489/533). The median follow-up time was 45(63) months (range: 1 to 133 months). The all-cause mortality rate was 21.3% (104/489) and the aneurysm-related mortality rate was 6.3% (31/489) during follow-up period. The overall cumulative survival rate of 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year were 95.1%, 84.0%, 69.5% and 38.6%, respectively, while freedom from aneurysm-related death were 98.4%, 93.3%, 88.4% and 84.4%. During the follow-up period, the complications rate was 9.0% (44/489), and the re-intervention rate was 4.9% (24/489). Cox regression analysis showed that elder age (HR=2.15, 95%CI: 1.41 to 3.26, P<0.01), preoperative aneurysm rupture (HR=2.72, 95%CI: 1.78 to 4.15, P<0.01) and short neck aneurysm (HR=1.97, 95%CI: 1.07 to 3.61, P=0.029) were independent prognosis factors for long-term survival after EVAR. Connclusion: EVAR has low perioperative mortality, high technical success rate, and satisfactory mid-and long-term outcomes.

Retrograde branched extension limb assembling stent of pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm: A longitudinal hemodynamic analysis for stent graft migration.

Pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (PRAAAs) are a life-threatening disease, and hemodynamic analysis may provide greater insight into the effectiveness and long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). However, the lack of patient-specific boundary conditions on the periphery compromises the accuracy. Windkessel (WK) boundary conditions coupled to hemodynamic follow-up models of a PRAAA patient, aims to provide insights into the link between hemodynamics and poor prognosis. One PRAAA patient underwent EVAR and reintervention after one branch of stent-graft (SG) had migrated. Totally five computational follow-up models were studied. Patient-specific flow data acquired via ultrasound were used to define the boundary conditions in the ascending aorta and the following three branches. Coupled zero-dimensional WK models representing the distal vasculature were used to define the outlet boundary conditions under the abdomen. Flow divisions of the main SG branches were 40.7% and 24.7%, respectively. Time-averaged wall shear stress and oscillatory shear index (OSI) increased at the junction connected the SG branch and the stent leading to the right common iliac artery (RCIA) where the stent migrated. The OSI and relative residence time (RRT) value in superior mesenteric artery increased notably after the migration, the RRT continuously increased following the reintervention. Unbalanced flow, resulting in locally high-speed flow, high WSS and OSI might significantly affect stent stability. Results suggest that diameters and interconnection design of stents in complex cases should take the flow division into consideration and computational simulations might be considered as a tool for intervention protocol design.

Analysis of Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Octogenarians From the ENGAGE Registry

Data from a prospective, observational, international, multicenter, single-arm registry (Endurant Stent Graft Natural Selection Global postmarket registry [ENGAGE]) enlisted between March 2009 and April 2011 In patients >80 years (290 [23%]) vs <80 years (973 [77%]) who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), there were no significant differences in 30-day mortality (1.4% vs 1.2%), major adverse event rates (5.2% vs 3.6%), or freedom from secondary intervention during 5 years (89% vs 83%). However, age >80 years, pulmonary disease, large aneurysm diameter, and renal insufficiency were significantly associated with all-cause mortality. Freedom from all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the group >80 years (53%) than in the younger group (72%). EVAR can be performed in patients >80 years with no significant difference in midterm aneurysm-related deaths compared with younger patients. EVAR can be safely performed with acceptable morbidity rates in octogenarians.

A Novel Hybrid Drug Delivery System for Treatment of Aortic Aneurysms.

Ongoing aortic wall degeneration and subsequent aneurysm exclusion failure are major concerns after an endovascular aneurysm repair with a stent-graft. An ideal solution would be a drug therapy that targets the aortic wall and inhibits wall degeneration. Here, we described a novel drug delivery system, which allowed repetitively charging a graft with therapeutic drugs and releasing them to the aortic wall in vivo. The system was composed of a targeted graft, which was labeled with a small target molecule, and the target-recognizing nanocarrier, which contained suitable drugs. We developed the targeted graft by decorating a biotinylated polyester graft with neutravidin. We created the target-recognizing nanocarrier by conjugating drug-containing liposomes with biotinylated bio-nanocapsules. We successfully demonstrated that the target-recognizing nanocarriers could bind to the targeted graft, both in vitro and in blood vessels of live mice. Moreover, the drug released from our drug delivery system reduced the expression of matrix metalloproteinase-9 in mouse aortas. Thus, this hybrid system represents a first step toward an adjuvant therapy that might improve the long-term outcome of endovascular aneurysm repair.

Nationwide Analysis of Patients Undergoing Iliac Artery Aneurysm Repair in the Netherlands

Objective The new 2019 guideline of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) recommends consideration for elective iliac artery aneurysm (eIAA) repair when the iliac diameter exceeds 3.5 cm, as opposed to 3.0 cm previously. The current study assessed diameters at time of eIAA repair and ruptured IAA (rIAA) repair and compared clinical outcomes after open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods This retrospective observational study used the nationwide Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) registry that includes all patients who undergo aorto-iliac aneurysm repair in the Netherlands. All patients who underwent primary IAA repair between 1 January 2014 and 1 January 2018 were included. Diameters at time of eIAA and rIAA repair were compared in a descriptive fashion. The anatomical location of the IAA was not registered in the registry. Patient characteristics and outcomes of OSR and EVAR were compared with appropriate statistical tests. Results The DSAA registry comprised 974 patients who underwent IAA repair. A total of 851 patients were included after exclusion of patients undergoing revision surgery and patients with missing essential variables. eIAA repair was carried out in 713 patients, rIAA repair in 102, and symptomatic IAA repair in 36. OSR was performed in 205, EVAR in 618, and hybrid repairs and conversions in 28. The median maximum IAA diameter at the time of eIAA and rIAA repair was 43 (IQR 38–50) mm and 68 (IQR 58–85) mm, respectively. Mortality was 1.3% (95% CI 0.7–2.4) after eIAA repair and 25.5% (95% CI 18.0–34.7) after rIAA repair. Mortality was not significantly different between the OSR and EVAR subgroups. Elective OSR was associated with significantly more complications than EVAR (intra-operative: 9.8% vs. 3.6%, post-operative: 34.0% vs. 13.8%, respectively). Conclusion In the Netherlands, most eIAA repairs are performed at diameters larger than recommended by the ESVS guideline. These findings appear to support the recent increase in the threshold diameter for eIAA repair.

Long Term Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Repair in Patients With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm and Ectatic Common Iliac Arteries

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long term results of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and ectatic common iliac arteries (CIAs). In a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database in two high volume centres, patients with AAAs undergoing elective standard EVAR were divided into two groups: those with both CIA diameters <18mm, and those with at least one ectatic iliac artery (CIA≥18mm). Patients with an intentional external iliac artery landing zone were excluded. Primary outcomes were survival and freedom from re-intervention. Secondary end points were EVAR failure and iliac related endoleak and iliac re-intervention. From 2000 to 2015, 648 patients were included in the study, 277 (43%) had at least one CIA≥18mm. Pre-operative risk factors were similar between the two groups, with the exception of chronic renal insufficiency (p=.010) and cerebrovascular events (p=.040), which were higher in the ectatic CIA group. At 30 days from primary procedure, there was a higher rate of type Ib endoleak in patients with ectatic iliacs (p=.020). A statistically significant increase in the incidence of late type Ib endoleak in patients with ectatic iliac arteries was confirmed at a mean follow up of 74.8 months (p=.01). The need for iliac related re-intervention was higher in patients with CIAs ≥18mm (odds ratio 1.94; 95% confidence interval 1.1-3.2). Ectatic iliac arteries are considered suitable landing zones for EVAR, although there is an increased risk of secondary interventions in time mainly due to late CIA dilation and secondary type Ib endoleak. Patients receiving EVAR with flared iliac limbs may benefit a more intensive surveillance to avoid late failures.

Early and Long-term Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Repair in Young and Low-Surgical-Risk Patients in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment

The objective was to investigate early and long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm in young and low-surgical-risk patients in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT).

Treatment Results of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using the Parallel Stent Graft Double D Technique for Distal Aortic and Common Iliac Aneurysms

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using a bifurcated stent graft may involve technical challenges when asymmetric distal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) and iliac artery aneurysms (IAAs) are encountered, especially with inferior renal artery aortic bifurcation <70 mm or narrow aortic bifurcation. We use EVAR with the double D technique (DDT-EVAR) for such cases. This involves a stent graft limb with the same diameter as the left and right diameters that is deployed parallel to an aortic cuff that has been previously placed (Fig).