Endovascular aneurysm repair in the elderly: First do no harm

Vascular ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-114
Author(s):  
Mahim I Qureshi ◽  
Alun H Davies
Keyword(s):  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Endovascular Intervention ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Ageing Population ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Do No Harm ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Aneurysm Repair

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the intervention of choice for supra-threshold aortic aneurysms due to the lower 30-day mortality of EVAR as compared with open surgery, despite no long-term longevity gains. Trials such as EVAR-1 that established the current status of endovascular aortic intervention often excluded participants over the age of 80, and specific studies of EVAR in the elderly reveal higher mortality than accepted averages. Analyses of the cost-effectiveness of EVAR have not demonstrated superiority of endovascular intervention over open repair, in particular when considering complications such as endoleak. Post-intervention surveillance and the frequent need for re-intervention following EVAR has a detrimental impact on quality of life. Taking these factors into consideration, combined with an ageing population and the likely increase in octogenarian endovascular intervention, there is a clear clinical need for appropriate risk-stratification of elderly patients with supra-threshold aneurysms to determine who will benefit from endovascular repair.

scholarly journals Percutaneous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Current Status and Future Trends

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (04) ◽  
pp. 339-345
Author(s):  
Micah M. Watts
Keyword(s):  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Outpatient Setting ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Future Trends ◽  
Percutaneous Access ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
The Common ◽  
Aneurysm Repair

AbstractEndovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a common, safe, and effective method of treating abdominal aortic aneurysms. Traditionally treated via surgical cutdown over the common femoral arteries, many recent studies demonstrate percutaneous access techniques to avoid the surgical cutdown. Developing familiarity with these percutaneous techniques, including risks, complications, adjuncts, and alternative accesses, can help improve the outcomes and availability of EVAR. As these techniques become increasingly common, it is not unlikely that they can be practiced safely in select patients in an outpatient setting.

The Clinical Utility and Assessment of Renal Biomarkers in Acute Kidney Injury After Abdominal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair. A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (44) ◽  
pp. 4695-4701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgios Karaolanis ◽  
Zachary F. Williams ◽  
Chris Bakoyiannis ◽  
Dimitrios Hadjis ◽  
Mitchell W. Cox ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Kidney Injury ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Binding Protein ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Renal Biomarkers ◽  
Aneurysm Repair

: The widespread adoption of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) is due to the obvious advantages of the procedure compared to the traditional open repair. However, these advantages have to be weighed against the increased risk of renal dysfunction with EVAR. The evaluation of the perioperative renal function after EVAR has been hampered by the lack of sensitive and specific biochemical markers of acute kidney injury (AKI). The purpose of this study was to summarize all novel renal biomarkers and to evaluate their clinical utility for the assessment of the kidney function after EVAR. A systematic review of the current literature, as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines, was performed to identify relevant studies with novel renal biomarkers and EVAR. Pubmed and Scopus databases were systemically searched. Studies reporting on thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), case reports, case series, letters to the editor, and systematic reviews were excluded. Neutrophil-Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin, Cystatin C, Liver-type fatty-acid-binding protein were the most common among the eligible studies while Interleukin-18, Retinol binding protein, N-acetyle-b-D-glucosaminidase and microalbumin have a sparse appearance in the literature. These biomarkers have been assessed in plasma as well as urine samples with each sample material having its own advantages and drawbacks. Which of these biomarkers has the most potential for assessing postoperative renal failure after EVAR, remains to be proved. The few studies presented in the literature show the potential clinical utility of these biomarkers, but larger studies with longer follow-up are required to determine the precise relationship between these biomarkers and postoperative acute kidney injury.

scholarly journals Outcomes of Advanta V12 Covered Stents After Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

2021 ◽  
pp. 152660282110164
Author(s):  
Claire van der Riet ◽  
Richte C. L. Schuurmann ◽  
Eric L. G. Verhoeven ◽  
Clark J. Zeebregts ◽  
Ignace F. J. Tielliu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Stent Fracture ◽  
Covered Stents ◽  
Significant Stenosis ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
Visceral Arteries ◽  
Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Type 3

Purpose: Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) is a well-established endovascular treatment option for pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms in which balloon-expandable covered stents (BECS) are used to bridge the fenestration to the target vessels. This study presents midterm clinical outcomes and patency rates of the Advanta V12 BECS used as a bridging stent. Methods: All patients treated with FEVAR with at least 1 Advanta V12 BECS were included from 2 large-volume vascular centers between January 2012 and December 2015. Primary endpoints were freedom from all-cause reintervention, and freedom from BECS-associated complications and reintervention. BECS-associated complications included significant stenosis, occlusion, type 3 endoleak, or stent fracture. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality in-hospital and during follow-up. Results: This retrospective study included 194 FEVAR patients with a mean age of 72.2±8.0 years. A total of 457 visceral arteries were stented with an Advanta V12 BECS. Median (interquartile range) follow-up time was 24.6 (1.6, 49.9) months. The FEVAR procedure was technically successful in 93% of the patients. Five patients (3%) died in-hospital. Patient survival was 77% (95% CI 69% to 84%) at 3 years. Freedom from all-cause reintervention was 70% (95% CI 61% to 78%) at 3 years, and 33% of all-cause reinterventions were BECS associated. Complications were seen in 24 of 457 Advanta V12 BECSs: type 3 endoleak in 8 BECSs, significant stenosis in 4 BECSs, occlusion in 6 BECSs, and stent fractures in 3 BECSs. A combination of complications occurred in 3 BECSs: type 3 endoleak and stenosis, stent fracture and stenosis, and stent fracture and occlusion. The freedom from BECS-associated complications for Advanta V12 BECSs was 98% (95% CI 96% to 99%) at 1 year and 92% (95% CI 88% to 95%) at 3 years. The freedom from BECS-associated reinterventions was 98% (95% CI 95% to 100%) at 1 year and 94% (95% CI 91% to 97%) at 3 years. Conclusion: The Advanta V12 BECS used as bridging stent in FEVAR showed low complication and reintervention rates at 3 years. A substantial number of FEVAR patients required a reintervention, but most were not BECS related.

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.

Endovascular Aortic Repair in Patients of Advanced Age

2021 ◽  
pp. 152660282110493
Author(s):  
Mitri K. Khoury ◽  
Micah A. Thornton ◽  
Christopher A. Heid ◽  
Jacqueline Babb ◽  
Bala Ramanan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Current Data ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Advanced Age ◽  
The Impact

Purpose: Treatment decisions for the elderly with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are challenging. With advancing age, the risk of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) increases while life expectancy decreases, which may nullify the benefit of EVAR. The purpose of this study was to quantify the impact of EVAR on 1-year mortality in patients of advanced age. Materials and Methods: The 2003–2020 Vascular Quality Initiative Database was utilized to identify patients who underwent EVAR for AAAs. Patients were included if they were 80 years of age or older. Exclusions included non-elective surgery or missing aortic diameter data. Predicted 1-year mortality of untreated AAAs was calculated based on a validated comorbidity score that predicts 1-year mortality (Gagne Index, excluding the component associated with AAAs) plus the 1-year aneurysm-related mortality without repair. The primary outcome for the study was 1-year mortality. Results: A total of 11 829 patients met study criteria. The median age was 84 years [81, 86] with 9014 (76.2%) being male. Maximal AAA diameters were apportioned as follows: 39.6% were <5.5 cm, 28.6% were 5.5–5.9 cm, 21.3% were 6.0–6.9 cm, and 10.6% were ≥7.0 cm. The predicted 1-year mortality rate without EVAR was 11.9%, which was significantly higher than the actual 1-year mortality rate with EVAR (8.2%; p<0.001). The overall rate of perioperative MACE was 4.4% (n = 516). Patients with an aneurysm diameter <5.5cm had worse actual 1-year mortality rates with EVAR compared to predicted 1-year mortality rates without EVAR. In contrast, those with larger aneurysms (≥5.5cm) had better actual 1-year mortality rates with EVAR. The benefit from EVAR for those with Gagne Indices 2–5 was largely restricted to those with AAAs ≥ 7.0cm; whereas those with Gagne Indices 0–1 experience a survival benefit for AAAs larger than 5.5 cm. Conclusion: The current data suggest that EVAR decreases 1-year mortality rates for patients of advanced age compared to non-operative management in the elderly. However, the survival benefit is largely limited to those with Gagne Indices 0–1 with AAAs ≥ 5.5 cm and Gagne Indices 2–5 with AAAs ≥ 7.0 cm. Those of advanced age may benefit from EVAR, but realizing this benefit requires careful patient selection.

Comparing polymer-filled versus self-expanding endografts in Chinese patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 667-676
Author(s):  
Yuk Law ◽  
Yiu Che Chan ◽  
Stephen Wing-Keung Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
The Self ◽  
Chinese Patients ◽  
Type Ii ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Type Ia ◽  
One Year ◽  
Aneurysm Repair

Introduction We performed a single-center nonrandomized study on patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair using polymer-filled or other self-expanding endografts. Methods Consecutive patients with asymptomatic infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms who underwent endovascular repair were retrospectively reviewed. They were divided into a polymer-filled ( n = 20) or self-expanding group ( n = 42). Baseline characteristics, operative mortality and morbidity, and follow-up data were compared. Results Aneurysm diameter, neck and iliac morphologies did not differ between the two groups. Technical success was 100%. The 30-day mortality was 0% and 2.4% in the polymer-filled and self-expanding group, respectively. At a mean follow-up of 17 months, the changes in sac size were −2.1 mm and −5.1 mm ( p = 0.144) at one year, and −3.5 mm and −7.7 mm ( p = 0.287) at 2 years in the polymer-filled and self-expanding group, respectively. The polymer-filled group had 7 (35%) type II endoleaks, and the self-expanding group had 1 (2.4%) type Ia and 13 (31%) type II endoleaks. Neck diameter remained stable in the polymer-filled stent-grafts whereas there was progressive neck degeneration in the self-expanding group. The rates of reintervention and overall survival were similar in both groups. The presence of an endoleak was the only predictor of non-regression of the aneurysm (odds ratio = 17.00, 95% confidence interval: 4.46–64.88, p < 0.001). Conclusion Polymer-filled endografts had similar safety, effectiveness, and durability to other self-expanding endografts. The major advantage is the small iliofemoral access. They also have the potential long-term benefit of a more stable neck.

Endovascular Aneurysm Sealing (EVAS) and Chimney EVAS in the Treatment of Failed Endovascular Aneurysm Repairs

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marwan Youssef ◽  
Sebastian Zerwes ◽  
Rudolf Jakob ◽  
Oroa Salem ◽  
Fritz Dünschede ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Multiple Organ ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Technical Success ◽  
Graft Thrombosis ◽  
Type Ia ◽  
Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Chimney Graft ◽  
Bifurcated Graft

Purpose: To assess the technical success and clinical outcome of reinterventions using the Nellix Endovascular Aneurysm Sealing (EVAS) System to treat complications after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: Fifteen consecutive patients (mean age 79 years; 14 men) with prior EVAR were treated with EVAS between March 2014 and December 2015 at 2 institutions. The failed prior EVARs included 13 bifurcated endografts, 1 bifurcated graft plus fenestrated cuff, and 1 tube endograft. Endoleaks were the predominant indications: type Ia in 10 and type III in 5 (3 type IIIa and 2 type IIIb). All patients presented with progressive aortic aneurysms (median 7.85-cm diameter; range 6.5–11). Eight patients were treated on an urgent or emergency basis (6 symptomatic aneurysms and 2 contained ruptures). All patients underwent Nellix relining of the failed stent-graft; 10 had chimney (Ch) procedures in combination with EVAS (chEVAS) because the proximal landing zones were inadequate. Results: Technical success was 100%. All endoleaks were successfully sealed, and no additional intervention was required. No further endoleak after EVAS or chEVAS was recorded. Endobag protrusion occurred in 1 case without sequelae. One elderly patient with ruptured aneurysm died from multiple organ failure 2 months postoperatively. One renal artery guidewire injury led to nephrectomy because of active bleeding. No reinterventions, aneurysm-related mortalities, graft thrombosis, endoleaks, or chimney graft occlusions were observed during a median follow-up of 8 months (range 3–24). Conclusion: The present preliminary experience demonstrates that the use of EVAS/chEVAS is feasible for treatment of failed EVAR. This technique may be used as bailout or an alternative treatment when other established methods are infeasible or not available.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document