Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Mass.
Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Mass; Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J Vasc Surg. 2019 Aug;70(2):381-390. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.09.066. Epub 2018 Dec 21.
The Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) consider the presence of a type I or type III endoleak a technical failure. However, the nature and implications of these endoleaks in fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) are not well understood.
We performed a single-center retrospective review of 53 patients who underwent FEVAR with the Zenith Fenestrated AAA Endovascular Graft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) from 2013 to 2018. We excluded one patient without contrast-enhanced postoperative imaging who was lost to follow-up after discharge. Small, slow, type I and type III endoleaks on completion angiography were routinely observed. We identified patients with completion type I or type III endoleaks by angiography review and characterized endoleak type, location, and rate of resolution on initial postoperative imaging.
Fifty-two patients were included; mean age was 75 ± 8 years, 75% were male, and 91% were white. Of 146 visceral vessels (100 renal arteries and 46 superior mesenteric arteries), 145 (99%) were preserved with 103 fenestrations and 43 scallops; 102 (70%) target vessels were stented. After implantation of all device components, 31 patients (60%) had evidence of type I or type III endoleak. Twelve patients (39%) underwent further intervention at the index procedure, and three endoleaks resolved completely. Twenty-eight patients (54%) had a type I or type III endoleak on completion angiography. There were no differences between patients with and without completion endoleaks in baseline demographics, graft design, neck anatomy, or proportion of cases performed within the instructions for use of the device. Perioperative mortality was 1.9%. On initial postoperative imaging, 27 of 28 (96%) endoleaks resolved spontaneously. One small, persistent type IA or type III endoleak was identified on postoperative day 27 and was observed. This endoleak had resolved completely on computed tomography angiography 6 months postoperatively. In patients without a completion endoleak, one type IA endoleak secondary to graft infolding was discovered on postoperative imaging and was successfully treated with placement of endoanchors and Palmaz stent. Median follow-up was 269 days. No additional type I or type III endoleaks were identified in any patient for the duration of follow-up.
Whereas completion type I and type III endoleaks are common after FEVAR with the ZFEN device, nearly all of these endoleaks resolve spontaneously by the initial postoperative imaging. These results suggest that select completion endoleaks after FEVAR with the ZFEN device do not require intervention at the index procedure.
血管外科学会的血管内动脉瘤修复术(EVAR)报告标准将 I 型或 III 型内漏视为技术失败。然而,在分支型血管内动脉瘤修复术(FEVAR)中这些内漏的性质和意义尚不清楚。
我们对 2013 年至 2018 年间使用 Zenith Fenestrated AAA 血管内移植物(库克医疗,印第安纳州布鲁明顿)进行 FEVAR 的 53 例患者进行了单中心回顾性研究。我们排除了一名术后无增强对比的患者,该患者在出院后失访。在完成血管造影时,常规观察到小而缓慢的 I 型和 III 型内漏。我们通过血管造影复查确定了完成 I 型或 III 型内漏的患者,并在初始术后影像学上确定了内漏的类型、位置和缓解率。
52 例患者入选;平均年龄为 75±8 岁,75%为男性,91%为白人。146 个内脏血管(100 个肾动脉和 46 个肠系膜上动脉)中,145 个(99%)得以保留,其中 103 个为开窗,43 个为扇贝形;102 个(70%)目标血管被支架置入。所有装置组件植入后,31 例(60%)存在 I 型或 III 型内漏证据。12 例(39%)在指数手术中进行了进一步干预,3 例内漏完全缓解。28 例(54%)在完成血管造影时存在 I 型或 III 型内漏。在基线人口统计学、移植物设计、颈部解剖或在设备使用说明范围内进行的病例比例方面,有和无完成内漏的患者之间没有差异。围手术期死亡率为 1.9%。在初始术后影像学上,28 例(96%)中的 27 例内漏自发缓解。术后第 27 天发现并观察到一个小的、持续的 I 型或 III 型内漏。该内漏在术后 6 个月的 CT 血管造影上完全缓解。在无完成内漏的患者中,术后影像学发现一个继发于移植物折叠的 I 型内漏,并成功地通过放置内锚和 Palmaz 支架进行了治疗。中位随访时间为 269 天。在随访期间,没有任何患者出现新的 I 型或 III 型内漏。
在使用 ZFEN 装置进行 FEVAR 后,完成 I 型和 III 型内漏很常见,但几乎所有这些内漏在初始术后影像学上都会自发缓解。这些结果表明,在使用 ZFEN 装置进行 FEVAR 后,选择的完成内漏可能不需要在指数手术中进行干预。