Abstract OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate midterm clinical and morphologic outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with large (≥28 mm) infrarenal neck. METHODS: From 2009 to 2012, we prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed clinical, morphologic, and intraoperative and postoperative data of patients undergoing EVAR for wide-neck AAA at three European vascular surgery units. All patients had computed tomography angiography follow-up of ≥24 months. The early end points were technical success and proximal type I endoleak at 30 days. The midterm end points were type Ia endoleak, freedom from reintervention (FFR), survival, AAA-related mortality, and infrarenal and suprarenal aortic diameter progression. The aortic diameters were measured on three-dimensional workstation center lumen line reconstructions, 1 cm below the lowest renal artery, at the level of the renal arteries, at the superior mesenteric artery, and at the celiac trunk. Preoperative and 24-month aortic diameters were compared by paired t-test. Survival and FFR were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: During the study period, 118 patients (74 ± 8 years) were enrolled. The mean aneurysm diameter was 61 ± 10 mm. Suprarenal and infrarenal fixation endografts were implanted in 102 (86%) and 16 (14%) patients, respectively. The mean main body oversizing was 17% ± 9%. Technical success rate was 98% (three type Ia endoleaks at 30 days). The mean follow-up was 38 ± 12 months. Fourteen type Ia endoleaks (12%) were detected during follow-up. Survival at 3 years and 5 years was 89% and 70%, respectively. Four deaths (3.4%) were type Ia endoleak related. FFR at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years was 96%, 83%, and 82%, respectively. Eight reinterventions (7%) were proximal neck related. All infrarenal and suprarenal aortic diameters increased at 24 months. The mean increase was 11% for the lowest renal artery (29.1 ± 1.1 mm preoperatively vs 32.3 ± 4.5 mm at 24 months; P < .001), 3% to 5% at the level of the renal arteries, and <3% for the superior mesenteric artery and the celiac trunk. Neck length <15 mm (P = .032), stainless steel endograft (P = .003), and type Ia endoleak at 24 months (P = .001) were associated with infrarenal neck enlargement on multivariate logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR performed in AAAs with large necks is associated with a significant infrarenal aortic neck enlargement at 24 months as well as with a high risk of proximal type I endoleak and proximal neck-related reinterventions. In this subgroup of patients, main body oversizing >15% and suprarenal sealing should be considered.

Outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair performed in abdominal aortic aneurysms with large infrarenal necks

Verzini F;
2017-01-01

Abstract

Abstract OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate midterm clinical and morphologic outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with large (≥28 mm) infrarenal neck. METHODS: From 2009 to 2012, we prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed clinical, morphologic, and intraoperative and postoperative data of patients undergoing EVAR for wide-neck AAA at three European vascular surgery units. All patients had computed tomography angiography follow-up of ≥24 months. The early end points were technical success and proximal type I endoleak at 30 days. The midterm end points were type Ia endoleak, freedom from reintervention (FFR), survival, AAA-related mortality, and infrarenal and suprarenal aortic diameter progression. The aortic diameters were measured on three-dimensional workstation center lumen line reconstructions, 1 cm below the lowest renal artery, at the level of the renal arteries, at the superior mesenteric artery, and at the celiac trunk. Preoperative and 24-month aortic diameters were compared by paired t-test. Survival and FFR were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: During the study period, 118 patients (74 ± 8 years) were enrolled. The mean aneurysm diameter was 61 ± 10 mm. Suprarenal and infrarenal fixation endografts were implanted in 102 (86%) and 16 (14%) patients, respectively. The mean main body oversizing was 17% ± 9%. Technical success rate was 98% (three type Ia endoleaks at 30 days). The mean follow-up was 38 ± 12 months. Fourteen type Ia endoleaks (12%) were detected during follow-up. Survival at 3 years and 5 years was 89% and 70%, respectively. Four deaths (3.4%) were type Ia endoleak related. FFR at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years was 96%, 83%, and 82%, respectively. Eight reinterventions (7%) were proximal neck related. All infrarenal and suprarenal aortic diameters increased at 24 months. The mean increase was 11% for the lowest renal artery (29.1 ± 1.1 mm preoperatively vs 32.3 ± 4.5 mm at 24 months; P < .001), 3% to 5% at the level of the renal arteries, and <3% for the superior mesenteric artery and the celiac trunk. Neck length <15 mm (P = .032), stainless steel endograft (P = .003), and type Ia endoleak at 24 months (P = .001) were associated with infrarenal neck enlargement on multivariate logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR performed in AAAs with large necks is associated with a significant infrarenal aortic neck enlargement at 24 months as well as with a high risk of proximal type I endoleak and proximal neck-related reinterventions. In this subgroup of patients, main body oversizing >15% and suprarenal sealing should be considered.
2017
66
4
1065
1072
http://www.elsevier.com/inca/publications/store/6/2/3/1/5/2/index.htt
Surgery; Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Gargiulo M; Gallitto E; Wattez H; Verzini F; Bianchini Massoni C; Loschi D; Freyrie A; Haulon S
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
oucomes JVS 2017.pdf

Accesso riservato

Tipo di file: PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione 482.52 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
482.52 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1689774
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 9
  • Scopus 41
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 36
social impact