4.5 Article

The incidence and fate of endoleaks vary between ruptured and elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Journal

JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY
Volume 65, Issue 6, Pages 1617-1624

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.10.092

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The number of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (r-AAA) patients who are treated by endovascular means is increasing as ruptured endovascular aneurysm repair (r-EVAR) enters the mainstream. However, even today, data on the incidence and behavior of endoleaks after r-EVAR are scarce. This study analyzed whether endoleaks behave differently after EVAR for rupture vs elective AAA repair. Methods: From 2002 to 2013, there were 2052 patients who underwent EVAR for treatment of rupture (n = 166 [8.1%]) and elective repair (n = 1886 [91.9%]) of infrarenal AAA. Follow-up included computed tomography angiography at 1 month, at 6 months, and yearly thereafter. All type I and type III endoleaks were treated at the time of or shortly after the diagnosis. Persistent type II endoleaks at >6 months after EVAR without a decrease in AAA sac underwent translumbar or transfemoral embolization procedures. Data were prospectively collected in a vascular database. Results: During a mean follow-up of 30 months, patients had a significantly lower incidence of type II endoleaks after r-EVAR compared with elective endovascular aneurysm repair (e-EVAR; n = 15 [9.0%] vs n = 380 [20.2%]; P < .01). Although the incidence of type I endoleaks is similar after r-EVAR (n = 9 [5.4%] and e-EVAR (n = 83 [4.4%]; P = .68), the r-EVAR patients required stent graft explantation more frequently (n = 9 [5.4%] vs n = 20 [1.1%]; P < .01). Whereas the need for secondary intervention was comparable in both r-EVAR (n = 33 [19.9%]) and e-EVAR (n = 439 [23.3%]; P = .37) groups, patients undergoing percutaneous embolization procedures trended toward significance between the two groups (n = 11 [6.6%] vs n = 216 [11.5%]; P = .06) with endoleaks. Conclusions: Compared with e-EVAR, patients who undergo r-EVAR experience a similar incidence of type I endoleaks and a significantly lower incidence of type II endoleaks. The endoleaks in both e-EVAR and r-EVAR patients can frequently be managed by endovascular means. However, r-EVAR patients with type I and type II endoleaks are at a significantly higher risk for stent graft explantation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available