Oliveira Nelson F G, Gonçalves Frederico Bastos, Hoeks Sanne E, Josee van Rijn Marie, Ultee Klaas, Pinto José Pedro, Raa Sander Ten, van Herwaarden Joost A, de Vries Jean-Paul P M, Verhagen Hence J M
Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo, Ponta Delgada, Azores, Portugal.
Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, Hospital de Santa Marta, Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal.
J Vasc Surg. 2018 Dec;68(6):1725-1735. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.03.427. Epub 2018 Jun 15.
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.
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.
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.
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.
严重的颈部成角与血管内动脉瘤修复术(EVAR)后的并发症相关。新型血管内移植物可能克服这一局限性,但文献中缺乏长期结果。我们研究了严重颈部成角患者行EVAR的长期结局。
对一个前瞻性多中心数据库进行回顾性病例对照研究。所有测量均使用具有中心腔线重建功能的专用软件进行。将一个研究组与一个在人口统计学和其他颈部形态特征方面相匹配的对照组进行比较,研究组包括颈部长度>15 mm、肾下角度(β)>75度或肾上角度(α)>60度的患者,以及颈部长度为10至15 mm且β>60度或α>45度的患者。主要终点是IA型内漏(EL1A)。次要终点是无颈部相关二次干预、初次临床成功和总生存率。
成角颈部组纳入45例患者,并与65例匹配患者进行比较。中位随访时间为7.4年(四分位间距,4.8 - 8.5年)。在成角颈部组中,平均α为51.4度(±21.1度),平均β为80.8度(±15.6度);在非成角组中,分别为17.9度(±17.0度)和35.4度(±20.0度)。7年时,成角颈部组有5例患者和非成角组有2例患者发生EL1A,EL1A的无发生率分别为86.1%(n = 14;标准误[SE],0.069)和96.6%(n = 34;SE,0.023)(P = 0.056)。排除1例因血管内移植物感染继发EL1A的患者后,这种差异具有统计学意义:成角颈部组为86.1%(n = 14;SE,0.069),非成角组为98.2%(n = 34;SE,0.018)(P = 0.016)。7年时,无颈部相关二次干预的比例分别为91.7%(n = 14;SE,0.059)和91.6%(n = 29;SE,0.029)。成角颈部组和非成角组7年的初次临床成功率估计分别为41.2%(n = 11;SE,0.085)和56.6%(n = 20;SE,0.072)(P = 0.12)。成角颈部组和非成角组7年生存率分别为44.3%(n = 18;SE,0.076)和66.7%(n = 42;SE,0.059)(P = 0.25)。未观察到器械完整性失败。
尽管早期和中期结果令人满意,但长期来看,严重成角颈部患者中EL1A的发生率较高。然而,这种差异并未影响死亡率。这些发现表明,对于近端颈部极度成角的患者,应谨慎使用EVAR,并强调对EVAR进行密切随访的必要性,尤其是长期随访以及对超出使用说明进行治疗的患者。