Search

Objective: Occupational exposure is a growing concern among the endovascular specialist community. Several types of imaging equipment are available, such as mobile C arms or hybrid rooms, and some have been shown to deliver higher levels of radiation. A literature review was conducted to identify studies reporting dose data during standard (EVAR) and complex abdominal aortic endovascular repair (fenestrated/branched EVAR [F/BEVAR])., Methods: A search of the MEDLINE and the Cochrane databases was performed by two independent investigators using the medical subject heading terms "aortic aneurysms", "radiation", and "humans" over a search period of 10 years. Studies with full text available in English and reporting radiation data independently from the imaging equipment type were included. Experimental studies were excluded., Results: The lowest dose-area product levels during EVAR and F/BEVAR were identified in hybrid rooms, while the highest were with fixed systems. When adherence to the as low as reasonably achievable principles was stipulated by the authors, dose reports tended to be among the lowest. Several studies, especially of F/BEVAR, report concerning levels of radiation for both patients and staff., Conclusion: Modern imaging equipment type, team involvement with radiation management, and the support of recent imaging technologies such as fusion help to reduce the dose delivered during standard and complex EVAR. Investment in modern imaging technology should be considered in every centre providing endovascular management of aortic aneurysms., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Persistent type II endoleaks (T2Ls) with sac enlargement after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair are still of concern in view of the potential for rupture. Current treatments (embolization and stent graft [SG] explantation) are associated with lack of efficacy or high perioperative morbidity and mortality. This study evaluated an alternative technique that combines sacotomy, ligation of patent back-bleeding vessels, and SG preservation for T2L or unspecified endoleak repair., Methods: This multicenter study in France included 28 patients (27 men; median age, 78 years). Twenty-one patients (75%) had a bifurcated SG (including 3 fenestrated SGs) and seven (25%) had an aortouni-iliac SG (2 for ruptured aneurysm). Unsuccessful embolization had been performed in 10 patients (36%). Four patients (14%) presented sac enlargement with no endoleak visible on computed tomography. The origin of the endoleak remained unspecified in three patients 3 (11%). The median diameter of the aneurysmal sac was 78 mm (vs 55 mm at the time of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair) after a median follow-up of 24 months., Results: A transperitoneal approach was used in 21 patients (75%) and a retroperitoneal approach was used in seven (25%). A guidewire was placed in the supraceliac aorta in 14 patients, and an occlusion balloon was temporarily inflated in six. Aortic cross-clamping was performed in five patients. T2Ls were identified in 26 patients, and associated with a distal type I endoleak in 1 patient, a type III endoleak in 3, and a type IV endoleak in 1. Two patients presented with endotension. All the endoleaks were treated successfully, with a mean operating time of 120 minutes and a mean blood loss of 450 mL. One SG was explanted 12 days after the procedure because of early infection. One patient died during SG explantation for an aortoduodenal fistula 26 months after the endoaneurysmorrhaphy. During a median follow-up of 24 months, the control computed tomography scan showed shrinkage of the aneurysmal sac with stable diameters in all patients. No missed T2Ls, no recurrence of T2L, and no SG migration or disjunction was observed., Conclusions: Obliterating endoaneurysmorrhaphy with SG preservation can be considered as an alternative to SG removal in cases of persistent T2L responsible for aneurysmal sac enlargement after embolization failure. By avoiding extensive dissection for surgical aortic cross-clamping, minimizing hemodynamic changes, and reducing blood loss and operating time, this procedure can be performed even in patients initially considered unfit for surgery., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This study compared early and mid-term results of endovascular treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) and pararenal aneurysms (PRAs)., Methods: Using data from a prospective database, patients treated with endografts for AAA and PRA between January 2007 and December 2009 were analyzed. In both groups, mortality, endoleak rates, evolution of renal function, reintervention rate at 30 days and at mid-term follow-up, and aneurysmal sac evolution at 1 year were compared., Results: In total, 379 patients were included: 264 treated for AAA and 115 for PRA. Median follow-up was 24 months (range 12-46 months) in both groups. Risk factors and medical history were comparable in both groups, except for chronic renal failure (higher in the PRA group; P = 0.003). The mortality rates at 30 days were 1% and 3% in the AAA and APR groups, respectively (P = 0.10). During follow-up, the mortality rates were 11.1% and 12.8% in the AAA and PRA groups, respectively (P = 0.72). The reoperation rates at 30 days were 8% and 10% in the AAA and PRA groups, respectively (P = 0.72). During follow-up, the reoperation rates were 9.2% and 9.9% in the AAA and PRA groups, respectively (P = 0.85). At 1 year, retraction of the aneurysmal sac was diagnosed in 48% of the patients in the AAA group and in 56% of the patients in the PRA group (P = 0.41). The incidence rates of new postoperative cases of renal insufficiency were 19.3% and 8.1% in the AAA and PRA groups, respectively (P = 0.008). At 30 days, the endoleak rates were 27.5% and 12.7% in the AAA and PRA groups, respectively (P = 0.001). At 1 year, the endoleak rates were 19.4% and 7.3% in the AAA and PRA groups, respectively (P = 0.007). When type II endoleaks were excluded, the endoleak rates were comparable in both groups (P = 0.5). At 1 year, in both groups, a retraction of the aneurysmal sac was significantly correlated to the absence of endoleak (P = 0.001)., Conclusion: Early and mid-term results of AAA treatment with standard endografts and PRA treatment with fenestrated endografts are comparable., (Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To evaluate the medium-term outcomes following aortic aneurysm repair utilizing fenestrated endografts performed in 13 French academic centers., Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. All patients had asymptomatic aneurysms involving or close to the visceral-bearing abdominal aorta and were judged to be at high-risk for open surgical repair. Fenestrated endografts were designed using computed tomography reconstructions performed on three-dimensional workstations. The procedures were conducted under fluoroscopic control by experienced endovascular teams. All patients were evaluated with computed tomography, duplex ultrasound, and plain film radiograph at discharge, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, and annually thereafter., Results: Eighty patients (78 males) were treated over 44 months (May 2004-January 2008). Median age and aneurysm size were 78 years (range: 48-90 years) and 59 mm (range: 47-82 mm), respectively. A total of 237 visceral vessels were perfused through a fabric fenestration (median of 3 per patient). One early conversion to open surgery was required. Completion angiography showed that 234 of 237 (99%) target vessels were patent. Two patients (2.5%) died within 30 days of device implantation. Predischarge imaging identified 9 (11%) endoleaks: 3 type I, 5 type II, and 1 type III. The median duration of follow-up was 10 months (range: 1-38 months). No aneurysms ruptured or required open conversion during the follow-up period. Four of 78 (5%) died during follow-up (actuarial survival at 24 months 92%), none of these deaths were aneurysm related. Aneurysm sac size decreased by more than 5 mm in 33%, 53%, and 58% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively. One patient had sac enlargement within the first year, associated with a persistent type II endoleak. In-stent stenoses or occlusion affected 4 renal arteries. Secondary procedures were performed in 8 patients (10%) during follow-up, 5 to correct endoleaks and 3 to correct threatened visceral vessels., Conclusions: The use of endovascular prostheses with graft material incorporating the visceral arteries is safe in high risk patients with high risk aneurysms. In the medium-term it is effective in preventing rupture. However, meticulous follow-up to assess sac behavior and visceral ostia is critical to ensure optimal results.