Comparative clinical study of short-term outcomes between table fenestrated and chimney endovascular aneurysm repair for hostile neck aneurysms.

OBJECTIVES

Hostile neck abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is challenging for standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). We sought to compare fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (fEVAR) and chimney endovascular aneurysm repair (chEVAR) for hostile neck AAA.

METHODS

Patients were identified retrospectively. Hostile neck anatomy was defined as a proximal neck length of <15 mm or angulation >60°. The choice of fEVAR or chEVAR was based on neck anatomy and physician preference. Type I endoleak (T1EL) was the primary outcome. Other outcomes included type III endoleak (T3EL), visceral stent occlusion, renal insufficiency, reintervention, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were included from April 2012 to December 2021. fEVAR and chEVAR patients were 48 and 36 cases, respectively. Both groups showed similar rate of T1EL, T3EL, visceral stent occlusion, renal insufficiency, reintervention, and mortality. However, chEVAR patients had a more tortuous neck (61.1% vs. 16.7%, < 0.001), while fEVAR patients had a greater neck size (29.5 ± 6.3 mm vs. 24.5 ± 4.8 mm, < 0.001) and more reconstructing target arteries (2.2 ± 1.1 vs 1.3 ± 0.6, < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

fEVAR and chEVAR show similar safe and effective outcomes in well-selected hostile neck. fEVAR might be able to reconstruct multiple visceral arteries, and chEVAR seems justified in patients with poor anatomical suitability for fEVAR.