Title :

Management of type ia endoleak after evar by explantation or custom made fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Author(s) :

Doumenc, Benoit [Auteur]
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [CHU Lille] [CHRU Lille]
Mesnard, Thomas [Auteur]
Advanced Drug Delivery Systems (ADDS) - U1008
Patterson, Benjamin Oliver [Auteur]
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Azzaoui, Richard [Auteur]
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [CHU Lille] [CHRU Lille]
De Preville, Agathe [Auteur]
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire [CHU Lille] [CHRU Lille]
Haulon, Stephan [Auteur]
Hôpital Marie-Lannelongue
Sobocinski, Jonathan [Auteur]
Advanced Drug Delivery Systems (ADDS) - U1008

Journal title :

European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

Abbreviated title :

Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg

Volume number :

61

Pages :

571-578

Publication date :

2021-01-04

ISSN :

1532-2165

English keyword(s) :

Fenestrated endograft: F-EVAR
Open conversion
Endoleak

HAL domain(s) :

Sciences du Vivant [q-bio]

English abstract : [en]

OBJECTIVE: Proximal type 1 endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysmal repair (EVAR) remains challenging to solve with no existing consensus. This work aims to compare two different surgical strategies to remedy ...
Show more >OBJECTIVE: Proximal type 1 endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysmal repair (EVAR) remains challenging to solve with no existing consensus. This work aims to compare two different surgical strategies to remedy type IA endoleak: endograft explantation (EXP) and aortic reconstruction or relining by custom made fenestrated EVAR (F-EVAR). METHODS: A retrospective single centre analysis between 2009 and 2018 was conducted including patients treated for type IA endoleak after EVAR with either EXP or F-EVAR. The choice of surgical technique was based on morphological factors (F-EVAR eligibility), sac growth rate, emergency presentation and/or patient symptoms. Technical success, morbidity, secondary interventions, 30 day mortality, and long term survival according to Kaplan-Meier were determined for each group and compared. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (91% male, mean age 79 years) underwent either EXP (n = 26) or F-EVAR (n = 33) during the study period. The two groups were equivalent in terms of comorbidity and age at the time of procedure. The median time from initial EVAR was 60.4 months (34-85 months), with no difference between groups. The maximum aneurysm diameter was greater in the EXP group compared with the F-EVAR group, 86 mm (65-100) and 70 mm (60-80), respectively (p = .008). Thirty day secondary intervention (EXP: 11.5% vs. F-EVAR: 9.1%) and mortality (EXP: 3.8% vs. F-EVAR: 3.3%) rates did not differ between groups, while major adverse events at 30 days, defined by the current SVS guidelines, were lower in the F-EVAR group (2.4% vs. 13.6%; p = .016). One year survival rates were similar between the groups (EXP: 84.0% vs. F-EVAR: 86.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Open explantation and endovascular management with a fenestrated device for type IA endoleak after EVAR can be achieved in high volume centres with satisfactory results. F-EVAR is associated with decreased early morbidity. Open explantation is a relevant option because of acceptable outcomes and the limited applicability of F-EVAR.Show less >

Language :

Anglais

Audience :

Internationale

Popular science :

Non

Administrative institution(s) :

CHU Lille
Inserm
Université de Lille

Collections :

• Advanced Drug Delivery Systems (ADDS) - U1008

Research team(s) :

U1008

Submission date :

2022-04-13T07:12:11Z
2024-02-19T10:23:18Z