Clinical Outcome and Morphologic Analysis after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using the Excluder Endograft

OBJECTIVE: Long-term follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is very scarce, and doubt remains regarding the durability of these procedures. We designed a retrospective cohort study to assess long-term clinical outcome and morphologic changes in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) treated by EVAR using the Excluder endoprosthesis (W. L. Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz). METHODS: From 2000 to 2007, 179 patients underwent EVAR in a tertiary institution. Clinical data were retrieved from a prospective database. All patients treated with the Excluder endoprosthesis were included. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans were retrospectively analyzed preoperatively, at 30 days, and at the last follow-up using dedicated tridimensional reconstruction software. For patients with complications, all remaining CTAs were also analyzed. The primary end point was clinical success. Secondary end points were freedom from reintervention, sac growth, types I and III endoleak, migration, conversion to open repair, and AAA-related death or rupture. Neck dilatation, renal function, and overall survival were also analyzed. RESULTS: Included were 144 patients (88.2% men; mean age, 71.6 years). Aneurysms were ruptured in 4.9%. American Society of Anesthesiologists classification was III/IV in 61.8%. No patients were lost during a median follow-up of 5.0 years (interquartile range, 3.1-6.4; maximum, 11.2 years). Two patients died of medical complications ≤ 30 days after EVAR. The estimated primary clinical success rates at 5 and 10 years were 63.5% and 41.1%, and secondary clinical success rates were 78.3% and 58.3%, respectively. Sac growth was observed in 37 of 142 patients (26.1%). Cox regression showed type I endoleak during follow-up (hazard ratio, 3.74; P = .008), original design model (hazard ratio, 3.85; P = .001), and preoperative neck diameter (1.27 per mm increase, P = .006) were determinants of sac growth. Secondary interventions were required in 32 patients (22.5%). The estimated 10-year rate of AAA-related death or rupture was 2.1%. Overall life expectancy after AAA repair was 6.8 years. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR using the Excluder endoprosthesis provides a safe and lasting treatment for AAA, despite the need for maintained surveillance and secondary interventions. At up to 11 years, the risk of AAA-related death or postimplantation rupture is remarkably low. The incidences of postimplantation sac growth and secondary intervention were greatly reduced after the introduction of the low-permeability design in 2004

Risk Factors, Dynamics, and Clinical Consequences of Aortic Neck Dilatation after Standard Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Objective: Aortic neck dilatation (AND) occurs after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with self expanding stent grafts (SESs). Whether it continues, ultimately exceeding the endograft diameter leading to abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture, remains uncertain. Dynamics, risk factors, and clinical relevance of AND were investigated after EVAR with standard SESs. Methods: All intact EVAR patients treated from 2000 to 2015 at a tertiary institution were included. Demographic, anatomical, and device related characteristics were investigated as risk factors for AND. Outer to outer diameters were measured at a single standardised aortic level on reconstructed computed tomography (CT) images. Results: A total of 460 patients were included (median follow up 5.2 years, interquartile range [IQR] 3.0, 7.7 years; CT imaging follow up 3.3 years, IQR 1.3, 5.4). Baseline neck diameter was 24 mm (IQR 22, 26) and increased 11.1% (IQR 1.5%, 21.9%) at last CT imaging. Endograft oversizing was 20.0% (IQR 13.6, 28.0). AND was greater during the first year (5.2% [IQR 0, 11.7]) decreasing subsequently (two to four years to 1.4%/year [IQR 0.0, 4.5%], p ≤ .001) and was associated with suprarenal fixation endografts (t value = 7.9, p 5 mm (HR 3.1, 95% CI 1.4 - 6.9). Conclusion: AND after EVAR with SES is associated with endograft oversizing and radial force but decelerates after the first post-operative year. Baseline aortic neck diameter and suprarenal stent bearing endografts were associated with an increased risk of AND beyond nominal stent graft diameter. However, it remains unclear whether patient selection, differences in endograft radial force or the suprarenal stent are accountable for this difference.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Anatomic Predictors for Late Mortality after Standard Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Objective: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) management involves a decision process that takes into account anatomic characteristics, surgical risks, patients' preferences, and expected survival. Whereas larger AAA diameter has been associated with increased mortality after both standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open repair, it is unclear whether survival after EVAR is influenced by other anatomic characteristics. The purpose of this study was to determine the importance of baseline anatomic features on survival after EVAR. Methods: All patients treated at a tertiary teaching center with EVAR for intact standard infrarenal AAA from 2000 to 2014 were included. The civil data registry was queried to determine survival status; causes of death were obtained from death certificates. The primary study end point was to determine the impact of baseline morphologic features on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality after EVAR. Results: This study included 404 EVAR patients (12.1% women; mean age, 73 years) with a median follow-up of 5.8 years (interquartile range, 3.1-7.4 years). The 5- and 10-year overall survival rates for the entire population after EVAR were 70% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66%-75%) and 43% (95% CI, 37%-50%), respectively. Only AAA diameter >70 mm (hazard ratio [HR], 1.75; 95% CI, 1.20-3.56) was identified as an independent anatomic predictor of all-cause mortality. Death due to cardiovascular causes occurred in 60 (38.5%) patients. Aneurysm-related mortality was responsible for six of the cardiovascular-related deaths. In multivariable analysis, both neck diameter ≥30 mm (HR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.05-4.43) and AAA diameter >70 mm (HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.34-4.46) were identified as independent morphologic risk factors for cardiovascular mortality, whereas >25% circumferential neck thrombus (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.77) was protective. Conclusions: This study suggests that patients with AAA diameters >70 mm are at increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. In addition, patients with infrarenal neck diameters ≥30 mm have a greater risk of cardiovascular mortality, although AAA-related deaths were not more frequent in this group of patients. Consequently, a more aggressive management of cardiovascular medical comorbidities may be warranted to improve survival after standard EVAR in these patients.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Patients with Large Neck Diameter Have a Higher Risk of Type IA Endoleaks and Aneurysm Rupture after Standard Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Objective: Standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the most common treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). EVAR has been increasingly used in patients with hostile neck features. This study investigated the outcomes of EVAR in patients with neck diameters ≥30 mm in the prospectively maintained Endurant Stent Graft Natural Selection Global Postmarket Registry (ENGAGE). Methods: This is a retrospective study comparing patients with neck diameters ≥30 mm with patients with neck diameters <30 mm. The primary end point was type IA endoleak (EL1A). Secondary end points included secondary interventions to correct EL1A, aneurysm rupture, and survival. Results: This study included 1257 patients (mean age, 73.1 years; 89.4% male) observed for a median 4.0 years (interquartile range, 2.7-4.8 years). A total of 97 (7.7%) patients had infrarenal neck diameters ≥30 mm and were compared with the remaining 1160 (92.3%) with neck diameters <30 mm. At baseline, there were no differences between groups regarding demographics and comorbidities other than cardiac disease, which was more frequent in the ≥30-mm neck diameter group (P = .037). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding neck length, angulation, thrombus, or calcification. Mean preoperative AAA diameter was 64.6 ± 11.3 mm in the ≥30-mm neck diameter group and 60.0 ± 11.6 mm in the <30-mm neck diameter group (P < .001). Stent graft oversizing was significantly less in the ≥30-mm neck diameter group (12.2% ± 8.9% vs 22.1% ± 11.9%; P <. 001). Five patients (5.2%) in the ≥30-mm neck diameter group and 30 (2.6%) with neck diameters <30 mm developed EL1A, yielding a 4-year freedom from EL1A of 92.4% vs 96.6%, respectively (P = .09). Oversizing was 21.8% ± 13.0% for patients developing EL1A and 21.3% ± 12.4% for the remaining cohort (P = .99). In adjusting for neck length, AAA diameter, and device oversizing, patients with neck diameter ≥30 mm were at greater risk for development of EL1A (hazard ratio, 3.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-9.3; P = .05). Secondary interventions due to EL1A did not differ between groups (P = .36). AAA rupture occurred in three patients with neck diameter ≥30 mm (3.1%) and in eight patients with neck diameter <30 mm (0.7%; hazard ratio, 5.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-19.2; P = .016); two cases were EL1A related in each group. At 4 years, overall survival was 61.6% for the ≥30-mm neck diameter group and 75.2% for the <30-mm neck diameter group (P = .009), which remained significant on correcting for sex and AAA diameter (P = .016). Conclusions: In this study, patients with infrarenal neck diameter ≥30 mm had a threefold increased risk of EL1A and fivefold risk of aneurysm rupture after EVAR as well as worse overall survival. This may influence the choice of AAA repair and underlines the need for regular computed tomography-based imaging surveillance in this subset of patients. Furthermore, these results can serve as standards with which new, possibly improved technology, such as EndoAnchors (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, Calif), can be compared.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Total Luminal Volume Predicts Risk after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Objective: Large aneurysm diameter represents a well known predictor of late complications after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). However, the role of the thrombus free lumen inside the abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) sac is not clear. It was hypothesised that greater luminal volume represents a relevant risk factor for late complications after EVAR. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed including all patients undergoing EVAR from 2005 to 2016 at a tertiary referral institution. Pre-operative AAA lumen volume was measured in centre lumen line reconstructions and patients were stratified into quartiles according to luminal volume. The primary endpoint was freedom from AAA related complications. Secondary endpoints were freedom from neck events (type 1A endoleak, migration >5 mm or any pre-emptive neck related intervention), iliac related events (type 1B endoleak or pre-emptive iliac related intervention), and overall survival. Results: Four hundred and four patients were included: 101 in the first quartile (Q1; <61 cm3). Patients with higher luminal volumes had wider, shorter, and more angulated proximal necks. There were more ruptured AAAs, more aorto-uni-iliac implanted devices and patients outside neck instructions for use in the 4th quartile. Five year freedom from AAA related complications was 79%, 66%, 58% and 56%, respectively (p = .007). At five years, freedom from neck related events was 86%, 84%, 73%, and 71%, respectively, for the four groups (p = .009), and freedom from iliac related events was 96%, 91%, 88%, and 88%, respectively (p = .335). On multivariable analysis, luminal volume was an independent predictor of late complications (Q4 vs. Q1 - hazard ratio: 1.91, 95% confidence interval 1.01-3.6, p = .046). Overall survival at five years was not affected by lumen volume (p = .75). Conclusion: AAA luminal volume represents an important risk factor for AAA related complications. This information may be considered when deciding tailoring surveillance protocols after EVAR. However, larger studies are needed to validate this hypothesis.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Long-Term Outcomes of Standard Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Patients With Severe Neck Angulation

Objective: Severe neck angulation is associated with complications after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Newer endografts may overcome this limitation, but the literature lacks long-term results. We studied the long-term outcomes of EVAR in patients with severe neck angulation. Methods: A retrospective case-control study of a prospective multicenter database was performed. All measurements were made with dedicated software with center lumen line reconstruction. A study group including patients with neck length >15 mm, infrarenal angle (β) >75 degrees or suprarenal angle (α) >60 degrees, and neck length 10 to 15 mm with β >60 degrees or α >45 degrees was compared with a control group matched for demographics and other morphologic neck features. The primary end point was type IA endoleak (EL1A). Secondary end points were freedom from neck-related secondary interventions, primary clinical success, and overall survival. Results: Forty-five patients were included in the angulated neck group and compared with 65 matched patients. Median follow-up was 7.4 years (interquartile range, 4.8-8.5 years). In the angulated neck group, mean α was 51.4 degrees (±21.1 degrees) and the mean β was 80.8 degrees (±15.6 degrees); in the nonangulated group, these were 17.9 degrees (±17.0 degrees) and 35.4 degrees (±20.0 degrees), respectively. At 7 years, five patients in the angulated neck group and two nonangulated patients developed EL1A, yielding a freedom from EL1A of 86.1% (n = 14; standard error [SE], 0.069) and 96.6% (n = 34; SE, 0.023), respectively (P = .056). After exclusion of a patient who developed an EL1A secondary to an endograft infection, this difference was significant: 86.1% (n = 14; SE, 0.069) in the angulated neck group and 98.2% (n = 34; SE, 0.018) in the nonangulated group (P = .016). At 7 years, freedom from neck-related secondary interventions was 91.7% (n = 14; SE, 0.059) and 91.6% (n = 29; SE, 0.029), respectively. The 7-year primary clinical success estimates were 41.2% (n = 11; SE, 0.085) and 56.6% (n = 20; SE, 0.072) for the angulated neck and nonangulated groups, respectively (P = .12). The 7-year survival rates were 44.3% (n = 18; SE, 0.076) vs 66.7% (n = 42; SE, 0.059) for the angulated neck and nonangulated groups, respectively (P = .25). Device integrity failure was not observed. Conclusions: Despite satisfactory results early and in the midterm, a higher rate of EL1A was identified among patients with severely angulated necks in the long term. However, mortality was not affected by this difference. These findings suggest that EVAR should be used judiciously in patients with extreme angulation of the proximal neck and highlight the need for close follow-up of EVAR, especially in the long term and in patients treated outside instructions for use.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Morphologic Changes and Clinical Consequences of Wide AAA Necks Treated with 34-36mm Proximal Diameter Evar Devices

Introdução: O tratamento endovascular representa o método de eleição para o tratamento de Aneurismas da Aorta Abdominal (AAA). Existem endopróteses disponíveis com diâmetros do colo proximal até 36mm, que permitem o tratamento de colos proximais até 32 mm. Contudo, a existência de colos largos representa um conhecido preditor de complicações. O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar os resultados a médio-prazo de doentes que requereram endopróteses de 34-36mm. Métodos: Foi realizada uma análise retrospetiva de uma base de dados prospetiva, incluindo todos os pacientes submetidos a EVAR por AAA degenerativo numa instituição terciária na Holanda. Todas as medições foram realizadas em reconstruções center-lumen line em software dedicado. Os pacientes foram classificados como “diâmetro largo” (LD), se a endoprótese implantada tivesse diâmetro superior a 32 mm.. Os restantes pacientes foram classificados como diâmetro normal (ND). O endpoint primário foi complicações relacionadas com o colo (combinação de endoleak tipo IA, migração>5mm ou qualquer intervenção no colo proximal). Alterações morfológicas no colo e sobrevida foram também analisadas. Diferenças entre grupos foram ajustadas por regressão multivariável. Resultados: O estudo incluiu 502 pacientes (90 no grupo LD e 412 no grupo ND). O follow-up mediano foi de 3.5 anos IQR (1.5–6.2) e 4.5 anos IQR (2.1–7.3) para os grupos LD e ND, respetivamente, P=.008. Relativamente às características basais, os doentes no grupo LD, apresentavam maior incidência de hipertensão arterial (83% vs 69.7%, P=.012) e tabagismo (86% vs 84.1%, P=.018). Além de colos mais largos (colo Proximal Ø > 28 mm: 75% vs 3.3%, P45º: 21% vs 9%, P=.002), cónicos (39.8% vs 20.3%, P25%: 42% vs 32.3%, P5 mm ocorreu similarmente entre grupos (7.8% vs 5.1%, P=.32). Reintervenções relacionadas com colo o foram também mais frequentes no grupo LD (13.3% vs 8.7%, P=.027).info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Aneurysm Sac Dynamics and its Prognostic Significance Following Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Objective: This study aimed to assess aneurysm sac dynamics and its prognostic significance following fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR). Methods: Patients undergoing F/BEVAR for degenerative complex aortic aneurysm from 2008 to 2020 at two large vascular centres with two imaging examinations (30 day and one year) were included. Patients were categorised as regression and non-regression, determined by the proportional volume change (&gt; 5%) at one year compared with 30 days. All cause mortality and freedom from graft related events were assessed using Kaplan–Meier methods. Factors associated with non-regression at one year and aneurysm sac volume over time were examined for FEVAR and BEVAR independently using multivariable logistic regression and linear mixed effects modelling. Results: One hundred and sixty-five patients were included: 122 FEVAR, of whom 34% did not regress at one year imaging (20% stable, 14% expansion); and 43 BEVAR, of whom 53% failed to regress (26% stable, 28% expansion). Following F/BEVAR, after risk adjusted analysis, non-regression was associated with higher risk of all cause mortality within five years (hazard ratio [HR] 2.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09 – 5.37; p = .032) and higher risk of graft related events within five years (HR 2.44, 95% CI 1.10 – 5.26; p = .029). Following multivariable logistic regression, previous aortic repair (odds ratio [OR] 2.56, 95% CI 1.11 – 5.96; p = .029) and larger baseline aneurysm diameter (OR/mm 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 – 1.09; p = .037) were associated with non-regression at one year, whereas smoking history was inversely associated with non-regression (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04 – 0.96; p = .045). Overall following FEVAR, aneurysm sac volume decreased significantly up to two years (baseline vs. two year, 267 [95% CI 250 – 285] cm 3 vs. 223 [95% CI 197 – 248] cm 3), remaining unchanged thereafter. Overall following BEVAR, aneurysm sac volume remained stable over time. Conclusion: Like infrarenal EVAR, non-regression at one year imaging is associated with higher five year all cause mortality and graft related events risks after F/BEVAR. Following FEVAR for juxtarenal aortic aneurysm, aneurysm sacs generally displayed regression (66% at one year), whereas after BEVAR for thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm, aneurysm sacs displayed a concerning proportion of growth at one year (28%), potentially suggesting a persistent risk of rupture and consequently requiring intensified surveillance following BEVAR. Future studies will have to elucidate how to improve sac regression following complex EVAR, and whether the high expansion risk after BEVAR is due to advanced disease extent.</p

Circulating biomarkers of cardiovascular disease are related to aneurysm volume in abdominal aortic aneurysm

Background: Surveillance programs in abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are mainly based on imaging and leave room for improvement to timely identify patients at risk for AAA growth. Many biomarkers are dysregulated in patients with AAA, which fuels interest in biomarkers as indicators of disease progression. We examined associations of 92 cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related circulating biomarkers with AAA and sac volume. Methods: In a cross-sectional analysis, we separately investigated (1) 110 watchful waiting (WW) patients (undergoing periodic surveillance imaging without planned intervention) and (2) 203 patients after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The Cardiovascular Panel III (Olink Proteomics AB, Sweden) was used to measure 92 CVD-related circulating biomarkers. We used cluster analyses to investigate protein-based subphenotypes, and linear regression to examine associations of biomarkers with AAA and sac volume on CT scans. Results: Cluster analyses revealed two biomarker-based subgroups in both WW and EVAR patients, with higher levels of 76 and 74 proteins, respectively, in one subgroup versus the other. In WW patients, uPA showed a borderline significant association with AAA volume. Adjusting for clinical characteristics, there was a difference of −0.092 (−0.148, −0.036) loge mL in AAA volume per SD uPA. In EVAR patients, after multivariable adjustment, four biomarkers remained significantly associated with sac volume. The mean effects on sac volume per SD difference were: LDLR: −0.128 (−0.212, −0.044), TFPI: 0.139 (0.049, 0.229), TIMP4: 0.110 (0.023, 0.197), IGFBP-2: 0.103 (0.012, 0.194). Conclusion: LDLR, TFPI, TIMP4, and IGFBP-2 were independently associated with sac volume after EVAR. Subgroups of patients with high levels of the majority of CVD-related biomarkers emphasize the intertwined relationship between AAA and CVD. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03703947.</p

MORPHOLOGIC CHANGES AND CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WIDE AAA NECKS TREATED WITH 34-36MM PROXIMAL DIAMETER EVAR DEVICES

Introduction: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) became the preferred modality for infrarenal aneurysm (AAA) repair. Several available endografts have main body proximal diameters up to 36mm, allowing for treatment of proximal AAA necks up to 32 mm. However, large neck represents a predictor of proximal complications after EVAR. The purpose of this study is to evaluate mid-term outcomes of patients requiring 34-36mm main body devices. Methods: Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database including all patients undergoing elective EVAR for degenerative AAA in a single tertiary referral hospital in The Netherlands were eligible. All measurements were performed on center-lumen line reconstructions obtained on dedicated software. Patients were classified as large diameter (LD) if the implanted device was >32mm wide. The remaining patients were classified as normal diameter (ND). Primary endpoint was neck-related events (a composite of “endoleak” (EL) 1A, neck-related secondary intervention or migration >5mm). Neck morphology changes and survival were also assessed. Differences in groups were adjusted by multivariable analysis. Results: The study included 502 patients (90 in the LD group; 412 in the ND group). Median follow-up was 3.5 years (1.5–6.2) and 4.5 years (2.1–7.3) for the LD and ND groups, respectively (P = .008). Regarding baseline characteristics, hypertension (83% vs 69.7%, P=.012) and smoking (86% vs 74.1%, P=.018) were more frequent in the LD group. Patients in the LD group had wider (Proximal neck Ø > 28 mm: 75% vs 3.3%, P45º: 21% vs 9%, P=.002), more conical (39.8% vs 20.3%, P25%: 42% vs 32.3%, P 5mm occurred similarly in both groups (7.8% vs 5.1%, P=.32). Neck-related secondary interventions were also more common among LD patients (13.3% vs 8.7%; P = .027). On multivariable regression analysis, LD group was an independent risk factor for neck-related adverse events (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 2.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37–3.83, P=0.002). Neck dilatation was greater among LD patients (median, 3 mm [IQR, 0–6] vs 2mm [IQR, 0–4]; P =.034) On multivariable analysis, LD was an independent predictor for neck dilatation > 10 % (HR: 1.61 CI 95% 1.08–2.39, P=.020). Survival at 5-years was 66.1% for LD and 71.2% for SD groups, P=.14. Conclusion: Standard EVAR in patients with large infrarenal necks requiring a 34- to 36-mm proximal endograft is independently associated to increased rate of neck related events and more neck dilatation. This subgroup of patients could be considered for more proximal seal strategies with fenestrated or branched devices, if unfit for open repair. Tighter surveillance following EVAR in these patients in the long term is also advised