Endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms

Heart ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. heartjnl-2020-318288
Author(s):  
Samuel Debono ◽  
Jennifer Nash ◽  
Andrew L Tambyraja ◽  
David E Newby ◽  
Rachael O Forsythe
Keyword(s):  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Term Outcome ◽  
Long Term Outcome ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Risk Of Rupture ◽  
Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Selection Of

Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms has been the subject of rigorous scientific scrutiny. Prevalence studies have directed the formation of screening programmes, and observational studies and randomised controlled trials have defined aneurysm growth and treatment thresholds. Pre-emptive intervention with traditional open surgical repair has been the bedrock of improving long-term outcome and survival in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms but it is associated with a significant procedural morbidity and mortality. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has substantially reduced these early complications and has been associated with promising results in both elective and emergency aneurysm repair. However, the technique has brought its own unique complications, endoleaks. An endoleak is the presence of blood flow within the aneurysm sac but outside the EVAR graft. Although in randomised control trials EVAR was associated with a reduced early mortality compared with open repair, its longer-term morbidity and mortality was higher because endoleak development is associated with a higher risk of rupture. These endoleak complications have necessitated the development of postoperative imaging surveillance and re-intervention. These contrasting benefits and risks inform the selection of the mode of repair and are heavily influenced by individual patient factors. An improved strategy to predict endoleak development could further help direct treatment choice for patients and improve both early and late outcomes. This article reviews current EVAR practice, recent updates in clinical practice guidelines and the potential future developments to facilitate the selection of mode of aneurysm repair.Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04577716.

scholarly journals Unfavorable iliac artery anatomy causing access limitations during endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: application of the endoconduit technique

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 318-324
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Gibin Jaldin ◽  
Marcone Lima Sobreira ◽  
Regina Moura ◽  
Matheus Bertanha ◽  
Jamil Víctor de Oliveira Mariaúba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Iliac Artery ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Arterial Access ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is already considered the first choice treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Several different strategies have been used to address limitations to arterial access caused by unfavorable iliac artery anatomy. The aim of this report is to illustrate the advantages and limitations of each option and present the results of using the internal endoconduit technique and the difficulties involved.

scholarly journals EndoAnchors Minimize Endoleaks in Chimney-Graft Endovascular Repair of Juxtarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 183-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edgar Luis Galiñanes ◽  
Eduardo A. Hernandez-Vila ◽  
Zvonimir Krajcer
Keyword(s):  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Graft Thrombosis ◽  
Complex Anatomy ◽  
Aortic Neck ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Type Ia ◽  
Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Chimney Graft

Juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are difficult to treat because they often have little or no proximal aortic neck. Patients with this complex anatomy are not usually candidates for an endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Chimney-graft EVAR has been introduced, but type Ia endoleak is a typical risk. We have begun using EndoAnchors to determine whether this risk can be reduced. From July 2013 through July 2014, we used the chimney-graft EVAR technique in 5 patients whose juxtarenal AAAs had a short or no proximal aortic neck. During the procedure, we implanted EndoAnchors as needed. Postprocedurally, at 30 days, and through end of follow-up (duration, 11–18 mo), all patients had patent endografts without type Ia endoleak (our primary endpoint), visceral stent-graft thrombosis, or renal complications. One patient who received 4 chimney grafts had a postprocedural type II endoleak, which was treated with embolization. We found it feasible to use EndoAnchors with the chimney-graft technique to prevent type Ia endoleaks in the treatment of juxtarenal AAAs. Further studies are needed to validate this adjunctive technique and to determine its durability.

scholarly journals Endovascular repair of thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms by fenestrated and branched endografts†

2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (5) ◽  
pp. 993-1000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrico Gallitto ◽  
Gianluca Faggioli ◽  
Rodolfo Pini ◽  
Chiara Mascoli ◽  
Stefano Ancetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Endovascular Repair ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Aneurysm Repair

Abstract OBJECTIVES Our objective was to report the outcomes of fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair of thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) with endografts. METHODS Between January 2010 and April 2018, patients with TAAAs, considered at high surgical risk for open surgery and treated by Cook-Zenith fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair, were prospectively enrolled and retrospectively analysed. The early end points were 30-day/hospital mortality rate, spinal cord ischaemia and 30-day cardiopulmonary and nephrological morbidity. Follow-up end points were survival, patency of target visceral vessels and freedom from reinterventions. RESULTS Eighty-eight patients (male: 77%; mean age: 73 ± 7 years; American Society of Anesthesiologists 3/4: 58/42%) were enrolled. Using Crawford’s classification, 43 (49%) were types I–III and 45 (51%) were type IV TAAAs. The mean aneurysm diameter was 65 ± 15 mm. Custom-made and off-the-shelf endografts were used in 60 (68%) and 28 (32%) cases, respectively. Five (6%) patients had a contained ruptured TAAA. The procedure was performed in multiple steps in 42 (48%) cases. There was 1 (1%) intraoperative death. Five (6%) patients suffered spinal cord ischaemia with permanent paraplegia in 3 (3%) cases. Postoperative cardiac and pulmonary complications occurred in 7 (8%) and 12 (14%) patients, respectively. Worsening of renal function (≥30% of baseline level) was detected in 11 (13%) cases, and 2 (2%) patients required haemodialysis. The 30-day and hospital mortality rates were 5% and 8%, respectively. The mean follow-up was 36 ± 22 months. Survival at 12, 24 and 36 months was 89%, 75% and 70%, respectively. The patency of target visceral vessels at 12, 24 and 36 months was 92%, 92% and 92%, respectively. Freedom from reinterventions at 12, 24 and 36 months was 85%, 85% and 83%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The endovascular repair of TAAAs with fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair is feasible and effective with acceptable technical/clinical outcomes at early/midterm follow-up.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document