Early and midterm outcomes after transcatheter embolization of type I endoleaks in 25 patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study reports the technical success and follow-up results of transcatheter embolization of type I endoleak (ELI) in 25 patients after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). METHODS: Twenty-five patients with ELI (20 men, five women; mean age 80 years; range, 64-96 years) underwent embolization of abdominal ELI (23 proximal, 2 distal endoleaks) after EVAR. All patients were unsuitable for standard endovascular methods for treatment of ELI. The average aneurysm sac size before embolization was 8.2 cm (range, 5.3-12.9 cm). The average time between EVAR and endoleak diagnosis was 685 days (range, 1-4220 days) and from endoleak diagnosis to embolization was 27 days (range, 2-94 days). Onyx (ev3 Endovascular, Inc, Plymouth, Minn) alone or with detachable coils was used for embolization. RESULTS: A total of 27 embolization procedures were performed, with two patients having undergone a repeat procedure. Onyx alone was used in 16 cases and Onyx and coils were used in 11. Immediate technical success with complete isolation of the endoleak on completion angiography was achieved in all procedures. Six procedural complications occurred: three puncture site hematomas and three cases of non-target Onyx embolization. None of the complications had long term sequelae. During the follow-up period (average, 311 days; range, 1-1357 days), seven patients (28%) developed endoleak recurrence, and two underwent a second embolization procedure. Of these, one has had no further endoleak recurrence, but the other developed a recurrent endoleak and died of sac rupture. Two of the other five cases of endoleak recurrence were successfully managed by other procedures, one had a persistent endoleak despite aortic cuff placement, and the other two were deemed unsuitable for further intervention. Three of the four patients with persistent endoleaks died of sac rupture. At the average follow-up time of 311 days, freedom from endoleak recurrence was 80%, and freedom from sac growth was 85%. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter embolization of ELI offers a safe, feasible, and sustainable treatment option for patients who are unsuitable for standard methods of ELI treatment. Additional coil embolization before Onyx injection may result in better outcome.

Long-Term Outcomes Following Transarterial Embolisation of Proximal Type I Endoleaks Post-EVAR.

PURPOSE: To describe the long-term outcomes following transarterial embolisation for type Ia endoleaks (ELIa) in patients who failed or were unsuitable for standard endovascular/surgical options. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-centre observational study was performed between October 2010 and April 2018. Technical success rates and long-term outcomes were evaluated. A sub-analysis was performed comparing outcomes of covered aortic endografts and Nellix endovascular aneurysm sealing systems. RESULTS: A total of 34 transcatheter embolisations were performed for ELIa in 27 patients (13 endografts and 14 patients with Nellix systems). A combination of Onyx and coils was used most frequently (18/34), followed by Onyx alone (14/34) and coils alone (2/34). Technical success was achieved in 33/34 (97%) procedures . Seven early complications occurred with no immediate mortality, 5 of which involved migration/reflux of embolic into the endograft-all successfully managed via endovascular approach. Following the surveillance period (mean 25 months), 13/26 (50%) of patients were free from recurrent endoleak. Sac expansion occurred in 42% (11/26). 21/26 patients died; 6 due to aneurysm sac rupture, 10 due to unrelated causes, and 5 had no cause of death available. No significant difference in survival was found between patients with an endograft or Nellix graft-Chi-squared value - 0.011 (p < 0.05 = 3.84). CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter embolisation for type Ia endoleaks is a safe and effective option in a select patient cohort-where traditional endovascular and surgical options are unsuitable or have failed. The procedure may prevent recurrence in some whilst delaying rupture and death in others.

Outcome of endovascular treatment of internal iliac artery aneurysms: a single center retrospective review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the technical feasibility and clinical outcomes of endovascular treatment for internal iliac artery (IIA) aneurysms. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 25 patients with 32 IIA aneurysms (mean diameter: 39.1 ± 12.6 mm) who underwent endovascular treatment over a 10-year period, and were available for follow-up. Univariate analysis was used to determine the association between variables (including aortoiliac involvement and technique) and outcome. RESULTS: The IIA inflow was covered with an iliac stent graft (N = 29) or embolized with a plug (N = 3). The IIA outflow was embolized in all but one case in which there was thrombotic occlusion of outflow branches. Outflow embolization using plugs or coils was performed in the distal IIA or anterior/posterior trunks in 9 cases and distal IIA branches in 22 cases. During a mean follow-up period of 39.9 months, 31.2% of aneurysms demonstrated endoleak and 12.5% demonstrated enlargement. Univariate analysis revealed that endoleak was associated with technical failure (p = 0.01) and that endoleak rate was higher in patients who underwent distal IIA branch embolization (p = 0.03). No variable was associated with sac expansion. Major complication occurred in one patient who died from aneurysm rupture. Minor complications were reported in six patients who developed femoral pseudoaneurysm (N = 2, 8%), buttock claudication (N = 3, 12%), and limb graft occlusion (N = 1, 4%). CONCLUSION: Endovascular treatment of IIA aneurysms effectively prevents sac expansion. Endoleak was more frequently observed in cases of technical failure and those in which distal IIA branches were embolized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3b, retrospective cohort study.

Secondary Endoleak Management Following TEVAR and EVAR.

Endovascular abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysm repair and are widely used to treat increasingly complex aneurysms. Secondary endoleaks, defined as those detected more than 30 days after the procedure and after previous negative imaging, remain a challenge for aortic specialists, conferring a need for long-term surveillance and reintervention. Endoleaks are classified on the basis of their anatomic site and aetiology. Type 1 and type 2 endoleaks (EL1 and EL2) are the most common endoleaks necessitating intervention. The management of these requires an understanding of their mechanics, and the risk of sac enlargement and rupture due to increased sac pressure. Endovascular techniques are the main treatment approach to manage secondary endoleaks. However, surgery should be considered where endovascular treatments fail to arrest aneurysm growth. This chapter reviews the aetiology, significance, management strategy and techniques for different endoleak types.