Endovascular stent-graft repair of failed endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Despite high initial technical success, the long-term durability of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) continues to be a concern. Following EVAR, patients can experience endoleaks, device migration, device fractures, or aneurysm growth that may require intervention. The purpose of this study was to review all patients treated with secondary endovascular devices at our institution for failed EVAR procedures. Over an 8-year period, 988 patients underwent EVAR, of whom 42 (4.3%) required secondary interventions involving placement of additional endovascular devices. Data regarding patient characteristics, aneurysm size, initial device type, time until failure, failure etiology, secondary interventions, and outcomes were reviewed. The mean time from initial operation until second operation was 34.1 months. Failures included type I endoleaks in 38 patients (90.5%), type III endoleaks in two patients (4.8%), and enlarging aneurysms without definite endoleaks in two patients (4.8%). The overall technical success rate for secondary repair was 92.9% (39/42). Perioperative complications occurred in nine patients (21.4%), including wound complications (n = 6), cerebrovascular accident (CVA) (n = 1), foot drop (n = 1), and death (n = 1). Mean follow-up following secondary repair was 16.4 months (range 1-50). Eighty-six percent of patients treated with aortouni-iliac devices had successful repairs compared to 45% of patients treated with proximal cuffs. Ten patients (23.8%) had persistent or recurrent type I or type III endoleaks following revision. Of these, four had tertiary interventions, including two patients who had additional devices placed. Failures following EVAR occur in a small but significant number of patients. When anatomically possible, endovascular revision offers a safe means of treating these failures. Aortouni-iliac devices appear to offer a more durable repair than the proximal cuff for treatment of proximal type I endoleaks. Midterm results indicate that these patients may require additional procedures but have a low rate of aneurysm-related mortality. Longer-term follow-up is necessary to determine the durability of these endovascular revisions.     

Endovascular stent-graft repair of pararenal and type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms with adjunctive visceral reconstruction

OBJECTIVE: Pararenal and type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) are not currently considered as indications for endovascular repair given unfavorable neck anatomy or aneurysm involvement of the visceral vessels. Open repair of these aneurysms is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, particularly postoperative renal dysfunction. In selective high-risk patients, debranching of the visceral aorta to improve the proximal neck region can be used to facilitate endovascular exclusion of the aneurysm. METHODS: Between October 2000 and July 2003, 10 patients were treated with open visceral revascularization and endovascular repair of pararenal and type IV TAAAs at a single institution. Patient demographics and procedural characteristics were obtained from medical records. RESULTS: Overall 13 visceral bypasses were performed in 10 patients: 6 patients with a single iliorenal bypass, 3 with a hepatorenal bypass, and 1 patient with complete visceral revascularization. Juxtarenal aneurysms occurred in 5 patients (50%), suprarenal aneurysms in 3 patients (30%), and type IV TAAAs in 2 patients (20%). All patients had successful endovascular aneurysm exclusion. Mean follow-up was 8.7 months. There were no perioperative deaths, neurologic deficits coagulopathies, or renal dysfunction. Follow-up spiral computed tomography scans demonstrated patency of all bypass grafts with only one patient requiring a secondary intervention for late type I leak which was sealed with placement of a proximal cuff. CONCLUSION: These initial results suggest that are similar to infrarenal AAA endovascular repair. This combined approach to repair of pararenal and type IV TAAAs reduces the morbidity and mortality of open repair, and represents an attractive option in high-risk patients while endoluminal technology continues to evolve.     

Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: device-specific outcome

OBJECTIVES: Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms, while advantageous because of its minimally invasive nature, falls short of achieving the long-term durability of traditional open surgical repair. Problems such as device migration, continued sac pressurization from endoleak, and graft limb thrombosis culminate in a high rate of secondary procedures and failure to protect against aneurysm rupture. While prior studies hint at a correlation between these postprocedural events and specific device design, a single comparative analysis that correlates device attributes with clinical outcome has not been performed. METHODS: Over 6 years ending in 2002, 703 patients underwent endovascular treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. During this time, five devices were used, ie, Ancure, AneuRx, Excluder, Talent, and Zenith, and six device-specific groups were analyzed; the Zenith group was subdivided into those placed as part of the multicenter trial (Zenith-MCT) and those under a sponsor-investigator investigational device exemption trial (Zenith-SIT). Results were assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method for censored data, and the log-rank test was used to ascertain differences between device groups. RESULTS: While overall survival was diminished in the Zenith-SIT group (P =.046), risk for aneurysm-related death was similar in all groups (P =.336), averaging 2% or less at 12 months. Among the total cohort of patients, freedom from rupture was 98.7% +/- 0.9% at 24 months, without demonstrable differences between groups (P =.533). There were no statistically significant differences in rate of secondary procedures, conversion to open repair, or migration. There were, however, significant differences in risk for graft limb occlusion and rate of endoleak between groups. Limb occlusion occurred most often with Ancure devices (11% +/- 4.6% at 12 months, P =.009). Endoleak of any type was most common with Excluder devices (64% +/- 11% at 12 months, P =.003), a finding directly related to increased frequency of type II leaks in that group (58% +/- 11% at 12 months, P =.001). While there were no differences in frequency of type I or type III endoleak, a trend toward increased risk for microleak was observed with AneuRx devices (4.0% +/- 1.3%, P =.054), and more modular separations were observed with Zenith devices (3.5% +/- 2.3%, P =.032). Shrinkage at 12 months correlated with frequency of endoleak in the device groups, and was most common in the two Zenith groups (54% +/- 7.3% in the Zenith-MCT group and 56% +/- 7.8% in the Zenith-SIT group) and the Talent group (52% +/- 9.7%) and was least in the Excluder group (15% +/- 7.9% at 12 months, P <.001). By contrast, sac growth occurred most often in the Zenith-SIT group (13% +/- 4.5% at 12 months, P =.034), possibly as a result of the challenging aortoiliac anatomy frequently present in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences in frequency of limb occlusion and endoleak between groups with different endovascular devices. Knowledge of these and other differences is instructional in development of next-generation endovascular devices, incorporating design features linked to satisfactory outcome while abandoning those associated with device failure.     

腔内支架人工血管治疗主动脉弓部动脉瘤

目的 探讨腔内支架人工血管治疗主动脉弓部动脉瘤的基本方法。方法 采用国产腔内支架人工血管治疗主动脉弓部动脉瘤患者46例,其中主动脉瘤累及主动脉弓中部23例(50％),单纯累及弓降部22例(48％),累及胸降主动脉1例(2％)。选择支架直径是夹层破裂口或瘤口近端相应部位主动脉直径宽的1．15～1．20倍。支架近端直径34～38mm,长度90～120mm。支架材料为国产形状记忆镍钛合金。结果 支架释放成功45例(98％),无远端动脉并发症发生。支架释放后即刻封闭瘤口或破裂口43例(96％),早期内漏2例(4％)。夹层真腔全部恢复正常。急性期患者中转手术1例,死亡2例。术后43例患者获随访,随访时间1～23个月,远期内漏3例(7％),但所有随访患者均恢复正常生活。结论 腔内支架人工血管可用于主动脉弓部动脉瘤的治疗,其治疗的长期效果还需进一步观察。     

腹主动脉瘤的腔内修复治疗

腹主动脉瘤 (abdominalaorticaneurysms ,AAA)是血管外科常见的严重疾病 ,发病高峰年龄在 6 0～ 70岁之间 ,发病率男性是女性的 4～ 6倍 ,95 %的病例位于肾动脉平面以下。AAA最大的危险是瘤体破裂引起的致死性出血。通常认为 :瘤体 <5cm的AAA破裂发生率每年约 3% ;直径在 5～ 6cm的破裂发生率每年上升 10 %。一旦发生破裂 ,病死率高达 90 % ,手术死亡率 4 1%～ 70 % ,而择期手术死亡率仅 3%～ 5 %。因此只要无心、肺、肾功能不全等手术禁忌 ,本病均有手术适应证。最近的文献报告 ,AAA直径≥ 5 5cm是手术适应证[1] 。195 2年 ,Dubost[…     

Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: risk stratified outcomes

OBJECTIVE: The impact of co-morbid conditions on early and late clinical outcomes after endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) was assessed in concurrent cohorts of patients stratified with respect to risk for intervention. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: As a minimally invasive strategy for the treatment of AAA, endovascular repair has been embraced with enthusiasm for all prospective patients who are suitable anatomical candidates because of the promise of achieving a durable result with a reduced risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. METHODS: From April 1994 to March 2001, endovascular AAA repair was performed in 236 patients using commercially available systems. A subset of patients considered at increased risk for intervention (n = 123) were categorized, as such, based on a preexisting history of ischemic coronary artery disease, with documentation of myocardial infarction (60%) or congestive heart failure (35%), or due to the presence of chronic obstructive disease (21%), liver disease, or malignancy. RESULTS: Perioperative mortality (30-day) was 6.5% in the increased-risk patients as compared to 1.8% among those classified as low risk (P = NS). There was no difference between groups in age (74 +/- 9 years vs. 72 +/- 6 years; mean +/- SD), surgical time (235 +/- 95 minutes vs. 219 +/- 84 minutes), blood loss (457 +/- 432 mL vs. 351 +/- 273 mL), postoperative hospital stay (4.8 +/- 3.4 days vs. 4.0 +/- 3.9 days), or days in the ICU (1.3 +/- 1.8 days vs. 0.5 +/- 1.6 days). Patients at increased risk of intervention had larger aneurysms than low-risk patients (59 +/- 13 mm vs. 51 +/- 14 mm; P <.05). Stent grafts were successfully implanted in 116 (95%) increased-risk versus 107 (95%) low-risk patients (P = NS). Conversion rates to open operative repair were similar in increased-risk and low-risk groups at 3% and 5%, respectively. The initial endoleak rate was 22% versus 20%, based on the first CT performed (either at discharge or 1 month; P = NS). To date, increased-risk patients have been followed for 17.4 +/- 15 months and low-risk patients for 16.3 +/- 14 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis for cumulative patient survival demonstrated a reduced probability of survival among those patients initially classified as at increased risk for intervention (P <.05, Mantel-Cox test). Both cohorts had similar two-year primary and secondary clinical success rates of approximately 75% and 80%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Early and late clinical outcomes are comparable after endovascular repair of AAA, regardless of risk-stratification. Notably, 2 years after endovascular repair, at least one in five patients was classified as a clinical failure. Given the need for close life-long surveillance and the continued uncertainty associated with clinical outcome, caution is dictated in advocating endovascular treatment for the patient who is otherwise considered an ideal candidate for standard open surgical repair.     

腔内修复术治疗胸腹主动脉夹层动脉瘤

目的 介绍血管内支架技术治疗胸腹主动脉夹层动脉瘤的经验。方法 对2000年10月－2001年6月间6例胸腹主动脉夹层动脉瘤的治疗经过进行回顾性分析。结果 6例均为男性,年龄42－72岁。Standford A型胸腹主动脉夹层动脉瘤1例,B型5例。其中5例经行腔内人工血管支架修复成功,1例中转腹主动脉夹层开窗手术。术后1例发生髂外动脉夹层破裂,行腹主动脉夹层开窗人工血管移植术;1例术后3d因严重心肌梗塞抢救无效死亡。5例随访1－9个月,情况良好。结论 腔内人工血管治疗主动脉夹层动脉瘤简化了手术操作,减小了手术风险。腹主动脉夹层开窗手术是治疗主动脉夹层的辅助手段。     

Endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms in high-risk-surgical patients.

PURPOSE: Following the publication of a prospective randomized trial (EVAR2) that questioned the benefit of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) for high-surgical-risk patients, we evaluated our own initial and long-term results with endovascular AAA repair for this patient population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between January 2000 and December 2005, 115 patients with an AAA managed by an aortic endograft were entered in a registry. Data concerning diagnosis, operative risk, treatment, and follow-up were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis for all patients considered to be poor candidates for surgery. Patients with a ruptured AAA and those who were good surgical candidates were excluded from analysis. The main goal was evaluation of the operative mortality and the long-term survival of these patients. Secondary goals were determination of the frequency of secondary operations, the outcome of the aneurysm sac, and primary and secondary patency rates after aortic endograft placement. RESULTS: A total of 92 high-surgical-risk patients treated by an endograft were entered in this study. Sixty-seven patients (73%) were classed ASA III and 18 (20%) were ASA IV (20%). Mean aneurysm diameter was 58 mm+/-9 mm. The technical success rate was 99%. Operative mortality was 4.3% (4 cases). Four patients required re-intervention during the mean follow-up of 18 months. The survival rate at 3 yr was 85%. One type I endoleak (1%) and 9 type II endoleaks (9.7%) occurred during the follow-up period. Primary and secondary patency rates at 3 yr were respectively 96% and 100%. CONCLUSION: Our initial and long-term results with endograft repair of AAA in high-surgical-risk patients were satisfactory. These results appear to justify endovascular repair for this patient population.     

Endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: systematic literature review

Endovascular repair is increasingly used for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs). This study estimated the mortality rate for this approach. A review of 307 publications in English was performed. Thirty-four publications representing 1,200 patients with RAAA were deemed appropriate for analysis by weighted least squares regression. Of the 1,200 patients, 531 (44.3%) underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The average age was 74 years, and 13% were female. Aortouni-iliac grafts were used in 49.4% of patients, and 50.6% received bifurcated grafts. The technical success rate was 94.9%, with a mortality rate of 30.2%. The ratio of endovascular cases to the total number of cases strongly predicted the mortality rate (weighted coefficient -0.378, p< .0003). The mortality rate following EVAR of RAAA is 30%. A 3.8% reduction in mortality was found for each 10% increase in the percentage of ruptures repaired endovascularly at each center. These results are suggestive of a learning curve.     

经股动脉带膜支架腔内搭桥治疗动脉瘤的初步应用

目的 探讨带膜支架腔内治疗动脉瘤的临床意义。方法 应用进口及自制带膜支架,在透视下经股动脉放置在动脉瘤的恰当位置上,实现动脉瘤的腔内搭桥。结果 ４例胸主动脉瘤,１例累及肾动脉、肠系膜上动脉及腹腔动脉的腹主动脉瘤及１例髂动脉瘤应用直筒状带膜支架;５例肾动脉下腹主动脉瘤应用分叉状带膜支架腔内治疗,即刻效果满意。随访３～１９个月,定期ＣＴ及ＭＲＡ检查。５例术后５～８ｄ出现延迟性发热。１例术后３个月发现有     

Endovascular stent graft repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms after liver transplantation.

It is estimated that 1.7% of orthotopic liver transplant recipients will develop abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) after transplantation. It has been observed that these aneurysms expand faster in transplant recipients; therefore, aggressive surveillance for AAAs in transplant recipients is required. Endovascular aneurysm repair is rapidly becoming the standard of care, especially in patients with previous abdominal surgery and other significant comorbidities. This article describes our experience with AAAs in orthotopic liver transplant recipients treated successfully by endovascular stent graft repair.     

Endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to briefly review the historical aspects and outcome of endoluminal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair and summarise two studies presented at the 1997 and 1998 meetings of the Society for Vascular Surgery. PATIENTS: Between May 1992 and September 1998 the endoluminal method was used to repair arterial aneurysms in 304 patients at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, a tertiary referral teaching hospital. The study focuses on 243 patients with true AAA who underwent primary repair. There were 17 females and 226 males with a mean age of 72 years. Co-morbidities leading to rejection for conventional open repair were present in 83 patients. The criteria for inclusion included a segment of thrombus-free aorta between the lowermost renal artery and the commencement of the aneurysm of 1.5 cm or greater and iliac arteries that allowed access to the aorta from the groin. The technique involved the delivery of an endograft into the abdominal aorta by means of a sheath inserted through the femoral or iliac artery. Laparotomy associated with conventional open repair was avoided. Outcome measures included clinical examination and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) within 10 days, at 6, 12, 18 months after operation and then annually thereafter. RESULTS: Endografts were successfully deployed in 226 patients. In the remaining 17 patients endoluminal repair was converted to open repair. There were 8 deaths within 30 days of operation giving a perioperative mortality rate of 3.3%. The two studies presented to the Society for Vascular Surgery concern: (i) a concurrent comparison of the endoluminal versus open methods of treating AAA; and (ii) a comparison of adverse events following endoluminal repair of AAA during two consecutive periods of time.     

Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms and other arterial lesions

Purpose: This report describes our experience with endovascular stented graft repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms and other arterial lesions.Methods: Between September 1990 and April 1994, 57 patients were treated with endovascular stented grafts (50 with abdominal aortic aneurysms or iliac aneurysms; five with traumatic arteriovenous fistulas; one with an infected femoral false aneurysm; and one with a false aneurysm of the proximal right common carotid artery). The devices consist of either a Dacron or an autogenous vein graft sutured to a balloon-expandable stent. The stented grafts are placed through remote arteriotomies, advanced under fluoroscopic guidance to their predetermined sites, and secured into position.Results: Forty of the 50 endovascular stented graft procedures used to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms or iliac aneurysms were considered successful, even though some secondary treatment was required in six patients (two open operations; four secondary endovascular procedures). The 10 failures include four early procedural deaths, one late procedural death, and five leaks. All five arteriovenous fistulas and the two false aneurysms were successfully treated with endovascular stented grafts.Conclusions: Although our experience with endovascular stented grafts has been promising, remaining problems require resolution, and further follow-up is needed. However, the potential advantages of these endovascular grafts warrant their continued evaluation. (J VASC SURG 1995;21:549-57.)     

腹主动脉瘤的血管腔内治疗

目的 探讨腹主动脉瘤(AAA)血管腔内治疗后的短期临床效果.方法 回顾性分析2009年4月～2010年7月我科收治的8例AAA患者的临床资料.结果 患者均接受血管腔内治疗,手术成功率7/8,死亡1人.5例植入分叉型支架,2例植入直型支架,1例支架释放不成功.1例术后第2天右髂动脉支架折叠成角,远端血栓形成,给予局部溶栓成功后第3天血栓再次形成,急诊行左股－右股动脉旁路转流术.1例术后第2天出现急性肾功能不全,2个月后出现结肠缺血表现,给予对症治疗后好转.1例术中主体支架释放不成功,急诊行开腹手术,取出支架,行AAA修补术,术后第2天因呼吸循环衰竭死亡.随访1～16个月,中位随访时间5个月,至最后一次随访(死亡)时止,无内漏发生,无支架明显移位及动脉瘤腔内血栓形成.结论 AAA血管腔内治疗后的短期临床疗效满意,远期疗效有待进一步随访.     

Endovascular repair of Salmonella-infected abdominal aortic aneurysms: a word of caution

Over the last several years, treatment modalities have changed for infected aortic aneurysms. Surgical treatment has undergone a paradigm shift from débridement and extra-anatomic bypass to direct reconstruction to, most recently, endovascular repair. Although many reports of endovascular repair of such aneurysms are favorable, the following two cases highlight some of the concerns with endografts in an infected field. Specifically, we urge caution when considering endovascular repair of Salmonella-infected arterial pathologies.