The Institute for Vascular Health and Disease, Albany Medical College, The Vascular Group, Albany, NY 12205, USA.
J Vasc Surg. 2010 Dec;52(6):1442-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.06.110. Epub 2010 Aug 17.
This study evaluated the outcomes of secondary procedures after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).
From 2002 to 2009, 1768 patients underwent EVAR for treatment of 1662 elective (94%) and 106 emergent (6%) infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with a variety of Food and Drug Administration-approved and commercially available stent grafts. Postoperative follow-up included clinical examination, pulse volume recording, duplex ultrasound imaging, and computed tomography and magnetic resonance angiography at 1, 6, and 12 months, and yearly thereafter. Patients with type I and III endoleaks, unexplained endotension, limb occlusion, stent graft migration, with and without type I endoleak, and aneurysm rupture underwent secondary interventions. Type II endoleak at >6 months without a decrease in the aneurysm sac underwent translumbar embolization. Data were prospectively collected.
EVAR was performed in 1768 patients. During a mean follow-up of 34 (SD, 30.03) months, 339 patients (19.2%) required additional secondary procedures for aneurysm-related complications, including type I (n = 51, 15.0%), type II (n = 136, 40.1%), and type III (n = 5, 1.5%) endoleaks; endotension (n = 8, 2.4%), stent graft migration proximal fixation site (n = 46, 13.6%), stent graft iliac limb thrombosis or stenosis (n = 25, 7.4%), subsequent iliac aneurysm formation (n = 39, 11.5%), or aneurysm rupture after EVAR (n = 29, 8.6%). The mean age was 74 (SD, 9.15) years. Mean AAA size was 5.7 (SD 3.24) cm. Compared with secondary procedures for AAA rupture, the nonrupture patients had a significantly lower mortality (1.6% vs 17.2%, P < .05) and a higher likelihood of being managed by endovascular means (98.8% vs 44.8%, P < .05). When nonruptured EVAR patients required urgent secondary procedures for type I endoleaks and stent graft migration or limb thrombosis, the mortality was 6.0% vs 0.5% for elective procedures (P < .05).
Our long-term EVAR experience indicates that 18% of patients require additional secondary procedures, and most of these patients can be managed by endovascular means with an acceptable overall mortality of 2.9%. Most type I and II endoleaks can be successfully treated by transluminal embolization, and most patients with delayed aneurysm rupture after EVAR can be successfully managed by endovascular or open surgical repair.
本研究评估了血管内动脉瘤修复术(EVAR)后二次手术的结果。
2002 年至 2009 年,1768 例患者接受 EVAR 治疗 1662 例(94%)和 106 例(6%)择期和紧急(III 型)肾下腹主动脉瘤(AAA),使用了各种获得美国食品和药物管理局批准和商业销售的支架移植物。术后随访包括临床检查、脉搏容积记录、双功超声成像以及术后 1、6、12 个月和每年的计算机断层扫描和磁共振血管造影。对 I 型和 III 型内漏、无法解释的内张力、肢体闭塞、支架移植物迁移、伴有和不伴有 I 型内漏以及动脉瘤破裂的患者进行了二次干预。>6 个月无瘤囊缩小的 II 型内漏行经皮穿刺栓塞治疗。数据为前瞻性收集。
1768 例患者接受了 EVAR。平均随访 34(标准差 30.03)个月后,339 例(19.2%)患者因动脉瘤相关并发症需要额外的二次手术,包括 I 型(51 例,15.0%)、II 型(136 例,40.1%)和 III 型(5 例,1.5%)内漏;内张力(8 例,2.4%)、支架移植物近端固定部位迁移(46 例,13.6%)、支架移植物髂支血栓或狭窄(25 例,7.4%)、随后的髂动脉瘤形成(39 例,11.5%)或 EVAR 后动脉瘤破裂(29 例,8.6%)。平均年龄为 74(标准差 9.15)岁。平均 AAA 大小为 5.7(标准差 3.24)cm。与动脉瘤破裂患者的二次手术相比,非破裂患者的死亡率显著降低(1.6%比 17.2%,P <.05),并且更有可能通过血管内方式治疗(98.8%比 44.8%,P <.05)。对于非破裂 EVAR 患者,因 I 型内漏和支架移植物迁移或肢体血栓形成需要紧急二次手术时,择期手术的死亡率为 6.0%,而急诊手术的死亡率为 0.5%(P <.05)。
我们的长期 EVAR 经验表明,18%的患者需要额外的二次手术,其中大多数患者可以通过血管内方式治疗,整体死亡率为 2.9%。大多数 I 型和 II 型内漏可以通过经皮穿刺栓塞成功治疗,大多数 EVAR 后延迟性动脉瘤破裂的患者可以通过血管内或开放手术修复成功治疗。