Use of physician-modified inverted limb in conjunction with Zenith fenestrated stent graft to rescue failed previous endovascular and open repair.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes and performance of inverted limbs (ILs) when used in conjunction with Zenith fenestrated stent grafts (Zfens) to treat patients with short distance between the lowest renal artery (RA) and aortic or graft bifurcation (A/GB). METHODS: This study was a multicenter, retrospective review of prospectively maintained database of patients with complex aortic aneurysms, failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), or open surgical repair (OSR) with short distance between LRA and A/GB treated using a combination of Zfen and an IL between 2013 and 2023. Endpoints included technical success, aneurysm sac regression, long-term device integrity, and target vessel patency. We defined technical success as implantation of the device with no endoleak, conversion to an aorto-uni-iliac or OSR. RESULTS: During this time, 52 patients underwent endovascular rescue of failed repair. Twenty (38.5%) of them required relining of the failed repairs using IL due to lowest RA to A/GB length restrictions. Two patients had undergone rescue with a fenestrated cuff alone but developed type III endoleaks. One patient with no previous implant had a short distance between the lowest RA and aortic bifurcation to accommodate the bifurcated distal device, and two patients had failed OSR or anastomotic pseudoaneurysms. The majority (94%) were men with a mean age of 76.8 ± 6.1 years. The mean aortic neck diameter and aneurysm size were 32 ± 4 cm and 7.2 ± 1.3 cm, respectively. The median time laps between initial repair and failure was 36 months (interquartile range [IQR], 24-54 months). Sixteen patients (80%) were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists class III, whereas four were class IV. Seventy-eight vessels were targeted and successfully incorporated. Technical success was 100%, and median estimated blood loss was 100 mL (IQR, 100-200 mL). Mean fluoroscopy time and dose were 61 ± 18 minutes and 2754 ± 1062 mGy, respectively. Average hospital length of stay was 2.75 ± 2.15 days. Postoperative complication occurred in one patient who required lower extremity fasciotomy for compartment syndrome. At a median follow-up of 50 months (IQR, 18-58 months), there were no device migration, components separation, aneurysmal related mortality, and type I or type III endoleak. Aneurysm sac regression (95%) or stabilization (5%) was observed in all patients, including in four patients (25%) with type II endoleak. CONCLUSIONS: The use of IL in conjunction with Zfen to treat patients with short distance between the lowest RA and A/GB is safe, effective, and has excellent long-term results. The technique expands the indication of Zfen, especially in patients with failed previous EVAR.

Techniques and Limitations of Gore Thoracoabdominal Multibranch Endoprosthesis (TAMBE) for Type 1A Endoleak After Failed Endovascular Aortic Repairs.

PURPOSE: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the dominant treatment modality over open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms. However, a higher rate of reinterventions remains the Achilles heel of EVAR. Although type 1A endoleak from proximal seal zone failure of EVAR remains one of the leading causes for reintervention, fenestrated branched devices suitable for proximal extension of failed EVAR are not widely available in the United States. Gore Thoracoabdominal Multibranch Endoprosthesis (TAMBE) is an off-the-shelf investigational device that provides supraceliac seal by incorporating 4 visceral and renal arteries via preloaded inner branches. CASE REPORT: In this article, we describe 2 cases of type 1A endoleak from previous EVAR devices repaired using TAMBE. Both cases were performed under the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) compassionate use exemption. Considerations on the case planning and implantation techniques of TAMBE specific to previous EVAR devices are reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Gore TAMBE can be utilized to repair a type 1A endoleak of a previous infrarenal EVAR device. Greater supraceliac coverage necessary for TAMBE relative to the minimal seal zone should be considered when applying this device for a type 1A endoleak. CLINICAL IMPACT: This report demonstrates the feasibility of applying off-the-shelf TAMBE device to treat one of the most common failure modes of EVAR, type1A endoleak.

Comparative outcomes of physician-modified fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in the setting of prior failed endovascular aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysms involving renal-mesenteric arteries, especially in the setting of prior failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) typically requires fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) with a custom-made device (CMD). CMDs are limited to select centers, and physician-modified endografts are an alternative treatment platform. Currently, there is no data on the outcomes of physician-modified F/BEVAR (PM-F/BEVAR) in the setting of failed prior EVAR. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of PM-F/BEVAR in patients with prior failed EVAR. METHODS: A prospective database of consecutive patients treated at a single center with PM-F/BEVAR between March 2021 and November 2022 was retrospectively reviewed. The cohort was stratified by presence of a failed EVAR (type Ia endoleak or aneurysm development proximal to a prior EVAR) prior to PM-F/BEVAR. Demographics, operative details, and postoperative complications were compared between the groups using univariate analysis. One-year survival and freedom from reintervention were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients underwent PM-F/BEVAR during the study period; 27 (26%) were in the setting of prior EVAR. Patients with prior failed EVAR had similar age (75.2 ± 7.7 vs 71.5 ± 8.8 years; P = .058), male gender (n = 24 ; 89% vs n = 57 ; 75%; P = .130), and comorbid conditions except higher incidence of moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 7 ; 26% vs n = 7 ; 9%; P = .047). Overall, aneurysm diameter was 65.5 ± 13.9 mm with aneurysms categorized as juxta-/pararenal in 43% and thoracoabdominal in 57%, with no differences between the groups. Twelve patients (14%) presented with symptomatic/ruptured aneurysms. The average number of target arteries incorporated per patient was 3.8. Four different aortic devices were modified with a greater proportion of Terumo TREO devices used in the failed EVAR group (P = .03). There was no difference in procedure time, radiation dose, or iodinated contrast use between groups. Overall technical success was 99%. Rates of 30-day mortality (n = 0 ; 0% vs n = 3 ; 4%; P = .565) and major adverse events (n = 6 ; 22% vs n = 16 ; 21%; P = 1.0) were similar between groups. For the overall cohort, rates of type 1 or 3 endoleak, branch vessel stenosis/occlusion, and reintervention were 2%, 1%, and 8%, respectively, with no difference between groups. One-year survival (failed EVAR 94% vs no EVAR 82%; P = .756) was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: PM-F/BEVAR is a safe and effective treatment for patients with aneurysms involving the renal-mesenteric arteries in the setting of prior failed EVAR where additional technical challenges may be present. Additional follow-up is warranted to demonstrate long-term efficacy, but early results are encouraging and similar to those using CMDs.

Multicenter Comparative Analysis of Late Open Conversion in Patients With Adherence and Nonadherence to Instructions for Use Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

PURPOSE: The widespread adoption of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) as preferred treatment modality for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has enlarged the number of patients needing open surgical conversion (OSC). The relationship between adherence to Instructions For Use (IFU) and EVAR long-term outcomes remains controversial. The aim of this study is to compare preoperative differences and postoperative outcomes between EVAR patients not adjusted to IFU and adjusted to IFU who underwent OSC. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study reviewed 33 explanted EVARs between January 2003 and December 2019 at 14 Vascular Units. Patients were included if OSC occurred >30 days after implantation and excluded if explantation was performed to treat an endograft infection, aortic dissection, or traumatic transections. Variables analyzed included baseline characteristics, adherence to IFU, implant and explant procedural details, secondary reinterventions, and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Fifteen explanted patients (15/33, 45.5%) were identified not accomplished to IFU (out-IFU) at initial EVAR vs 18 explanted patients adjusted (in-IFU). During follow-up, a mean of 1.73±1.2 secondary reinterventions were performed, with more type I endoleaks treated in the subgroup out-IFU: 16.7% vs 6.3% in-IFU patients and more type III endoleaks (8.3% vs 0%). Patients out-IFU had shorter mean interval from implant to explant: 47.60±28.8 months vs 71.17±48. Type II endoleak was the most frequent indication for explantation. Low-flow endoleaks (types II, IV, V) account for 44% of indications for OSC in subgroup of patients in-IFU, compared with 13.3% in patients out-IFU and high-flow endoleaks (types I and III) were the main indication for patients out-IFU (33.3% vs 16.7% in-IFU). Total endograft explantation was performed in 57.5% of cases (19/33) and more suprarenal clamping was required in the subgroup out-IFU. Overall, 30-day mortality rate was 12.1% (4/33): 20% for patients out-IFU and 5.6% in-IFU. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, type II endoleak is the most common indication for conversion and differences have been found between patients treated outside IFU with explantation taking place earlier during follow-up, mainly due to high-flow endoleaks and with higher mortality in comparison with patients adjusted to IFU. Ongoing research is required to delve into these differences.

Multicenter comparison between open conversions and semi-conversions for late endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare early and follow-up outcomes of late open conversions (LOC, with complete or partial endograft explantation) and semi-conversions (SC, with endograft preservation) after endovascular aneurysm repair in a multicenter experience. METHODS: All LOC and SC performed from 1997 to 2020 in 11 vascular centers were compared. Endograft infections or thrombosis were excluded. Primary endpoints were early mortality and long-term survival estimates. Secondary endpoints were differences in postoperative complication rates and conversion-related complications during follow-up. RESULTS: In the considered period, 347 patients underwent surgery for endovascular aneurysm repair complications. Among these, 270 were operated on for endoleaks (222 LOC, 48 SC). The two groups were homogeneous in terms of American Society of Anesthesiologists score (LOC, 3.2 ± 0.7; SC, 3 ± 0.5; P = .128) and main endograft characteristics (suprarenal fixation, bifurcated/aorto-uni-iliac configuration). The mean age was 75 ± 8 years for LOC and 79 ± 7 years for SC (P = .009). Reasons for LOC were: 62.2% (138/222) type I endoleak, 21.6% (48/222) type II endoleak, 7.7% (17/222) type III endoleak, and 8.5% (19/222) endotension. Indications for SC were: 64.6% (31/48) type II endoleak, 33.3% (16/48) type I endoleak, and 2.1% (1/48) type III endoleak. Thirty-day mortality was 12.2% (27/222) in the LOC group, and 10.4% (5/48) in the SC group (P = .73). Postoperative complication rate was higher in the LOC group (45.5% vs 29.2%; P = .04). The estimated survival rate after LOC was 80% at 1 year and 64% at 5 years; after SC, it was 72% at 1 year and 37% at 5 years (log-rank P = .01). During the median follow-up of 21.5 months (interquartile range, 2.4-61 months), an endoleak after SC was found in the 38.3% of the cases; sac growth was recorded in the 27.7% of SC patients. CONCLUSIONS: SC has an early benefit over LOC in terms of reduced postoperative complications but has a significantly inferior mid-term survival. The high rates of persistent and/or recurrent endoleaks reduce SC durability.

Twenty-two Year Multicentre Experience of Late Open Conversions after Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to report indications, technical aspects, and outcomes of a multicentre experience of late open conversions (LOCs) after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR), in order to identify risk factors which may influence early morbidity and mortality rates, and long term survival. METHODS: Ten vascular centres retrospectively reviewed all patients requiring LOC (≥30 days from initial EVAR, undergoing total or partial endograft explantation) from 1996 to 2017. Baseline characteristics, endograft data, indications, procedural details, post-operative outcomes, and follow up data were reviewed and analysed. RESULTS: Included patients totalled 232 (90.1% males, mean age 74.3 ± 7.9 years). The number of LOC per year significantly increased during the study period, reaching 22 in 2017 (correlation r = 0.867, p < .0001). Reasons for LOC were 80.2% endoleak (186/232), 15.5% endograft infection (36/232), and 9.9% endograft thrombosis (23/232). Sixty-nine patients (29.7%) were operated on urgently; rupture was present in 18.5% (43/232). Eighty-nine patients (38.4%) underwent endovascular re-interventions prior to LOC. The proximal aortic cross clamp site was infrarenal in 40.5% (94/232), suprarenal in 25.4% (59/232), supracoeliac in 32.8% (76/232), and thoracic in 1.3% (3/232). Endograft explantation was total in 164/232 patients (70.7%), and partial in the remaining 68/232 (29.3%). The overall 30 day mortality was 11.2% (26/232). Early mortality was significantly higher for patients operated on urgently (26.1% vs. 4.9%, p < .001). Suprarenal clamping (odds ratio (OR) 2.34, 95% CI 1.12-4.88) and pre-existing renal insufficiency (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.03-4.31) were independent risk factors for post-operative renal failure on multivariable analysis. Median follow up was 24.1 months (IQR 4.4-60.6). The estimated overall one and five year survival rates were 79.7% and 58.6%, respectively. Survival estimates were significantly lower for patients with endograft infection (83.8% vs. 59% at one year, 65.2% vs. 28.9% at five years; log rank p = .005), as well as for urgent patients (87.2% vs. 62.1% at one year, 65.1% vs. 43.7% at five years; log rank p < .0001). CONCLUSION: The annual number of LOC increased over time. LOCs performed urgently or for endograft infection are associated with poor survival. Infrarenal aortic clamping has lower post-operative complication rates.

Technical approach and outcomes of failed infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repairs rescued with fenestrated and branched endografts.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular rescue of failed infrarenal repair (EVAR) has emerged as an attractive option to stent graft explantation. The procedure, however, is underutilized due to limited devices accessibility and the challenges associated with their implantation in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to report our outcomes and discuss our approach to rescuing previously failed infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repairs (EVAR) with fenestrated/branched endografts (f/b-EVAR). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of consecutive patients with failed EVAR rescued with f/b-EVAR at our institution from November 2013 to March 2019 was conducted. The study primary end point was technical success; defined as the implantation of the device with no type I a/b or type III endoleak or conversion to open repair. Secondary endpoints included major adverse events (MAEs), graft patency and reintervention rates. RESULTS: During this time, 202 patients with complex aortic aneurysms were treated with f/b-EVAR. Of these, 19 patients (Male: 17, mean age 79 ± 7 years) underwent repair for failed EVAR. The median time from failed repair to f/b-EVAR was 48 (30, 60) months. Treatment failure was attributed to stent graft migration in 9 (47.4%) patients, disease progression in 5 (26.3%), short initial neck in 3 (15.8%) and unable to be determined in 2 (10.5%). Three patients were treated urgently with surgeon modified stent graft. Technical success was achieved in 18 patients (95%), including two who had undergone emergent repair for rupture. Seventy-two targeted vessels (97.3%) were successfully incorporated. Sixteen (84.2%) patients required a thoracoabdominal repair to achieve a durable seal. Major adverse events (MAEs) occurred in 3 patients (15.7%) including paralysis and death in one (5.3%), compartment syndrome and temporary dialysis in another and laparotomy with snorkeling of one renal and bypass of the other in the third patient. Median (IQR) hospital length of stay was 3 (2, 4) days. Late reintervention, primary target vessel patency and primary assisted patency rates were 5.3%, 98.6% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Implantation of f/b-EVAR in patients with failed previous EVAR is a challenging undertaking that can be performed safely with a high technical success and low reintervention rates.

Outcomes of Surgical Explantation of Infected Aortic Grafts After Endovascular and Open Abdominal Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVES: Infection of the vascular graft represents one of the most threatening complications after aortic repair. It is rare and associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. The aim of this study was to present short-term outcomes after surgical treatment of infected aortic grafts after endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). METHODS: Data of all patients affected by aortic graft infection after aneurysm repair who underwent an explantation of a conventional or endovascular aortic graft between January 2008 and December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent in situ reconstruction using a rifampicin soaked synthetic graft. The primary endpoint of this study was 30 day mortality; secondary endpoints were major post-operative complications. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included in the cohort, 16 with an infected endograft (iEVAR) and 10 patients with an infected conventional graft (iOAR). Thirty-day mortality was 23.1% overall, 37.5% for iEVAR and 0% (p = .027) for iOAR. Post-operative major complications occurred in eight (50%) patients from the iEVAR group and in four (40%) patients from the iOAR group (p = .619). The supravisceral clamping rate was higher in patients with infected iEVAR (93.8 vs. 20%, p = .001), furthermore a greater incidence of post-operative acute kidney injury was observed (50 vs. 0%, p = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Explantation of the graft and in situ reconstruction for aortic graft infection is accepted as the therapy of choice. However, re-operation for iEVAR is related to significantly higher mortality and morbidity rates. The need for suprarenal aortic clamping seems to be a possible explanation for worse outcomes in iEVAR.

Late open conversions after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair in an urgent setting.

OBJECTIVES: We report a multicenter experience of urgent late open conversion (LOC), with the goal of identifying the mode of presentation, technical aspects, and outcomes of this cohort of patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) requiring LOC (>30 days after implantation) from 1996 to 2016 in six vascular centers was performed. Patients with aneurysm rupture or other conditions requiring urgent surgery (<24 hours) were included. Patient demographics, time interval between EVAR and LOC, endograft characteristics, previous attempts at endovascular correction, indications, operative technique, 30-day mortality and morbidity, and long-term survival were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 42 patients (88.1% men; mean age, 75.8 ± 9.0 years) included. Among the 42 explanted grafts, 33 were bifurcated, 1 tube, 6 aortouni-iliac, and 2 side-branch devices. Suprarenal fixation was present in 78.6%. Twelve patients (28.6%) underwent endovascular reintervention before LOC. Indications for urgent LOC were aneurysm rupture in 24 of the 42 cases (57.1%), endograft infection in 11 (26.2%), endoleak associated with aneurysm growth and pain in 6 (14.3%), and recurrent endograft thrombosis in 2 (4.8%). The proximal aortic cross-clamping site was infrarenal in 38.1% of cases, suprarenal in 19.1%, and supraceliac in 42.9%. Complete removal of the endograft was performed in 32 patients (76.2%) and partial removal in 10 (proximal preservation in 7 of 10). Reconstructions were performed with Dacron grafts in 33 of the 42 cases, cryopreserved arterial allografts in 5, and endograft removal associated with prosthetic axillobifemoral bypass in 4. The 30-day mortality was 23.8%; hemorrhagic shock was an independent risk factor of early mortality (odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-73.7; P = .018). During a mean follow-up of 23.9 ± 36.0 months, two late aneurysm-related deaths occurred. The estimated 1- and 5-year survival rates were 62.1% and 46.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Urgent LOC after EVAR are associated with high postoperative mortality rates and poor long-term survival. Further studies are necessary to define the timing and the best treatment option for failing EVAR.

Management of failed endovascular aortic aneurysm repair with explantation or fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is increasing, and understanding the different methods of management and repair is paramount. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical management and rescue of failed EVAR by either explantation or fenestrated-branched EVAR (F/B-EVAR). METHODS: A retrospective analysis (1999-2016) of 247 patients who underwent either explantation (n = 162) or F/B-EVAR (n = 85) for failed EVAR was performed. F/B-EVAR was performed under a physician-sponsored investigational device exemption. Demographics of the patients, clinical presentation and failure etiology, perioperative management, rate of reinterventions, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed. Those undergoing surgical explantation were compared with those undergoing F/B-EVAR conversion. Statistical analysis included multivariable logistic regressions, Fisher exact test, and χ2 test. RESULTS: The majority of patients were male (n = 216 [87%]), with a mean age of 75 years (range, 50-93 years). The mean time from primary EVAR was higher in F/B-EVAR (46 ± 7 months vs 69 ± 41 months; P < .001). Graft manufacturer did not differ between those requiring explantation and those having endovascular rescue (P = .170). All emergencies (n = 24 [10%]) and infections (n = 28 [11%]) were treated with open conversion. Endoleak was the most common reason for failure in both explantation and F/B-EVAR groups (75% vs 64%, respectively; P = .052). Type I endoleak was the most common endoleak reported in both groups, occurring more frequently in F/B-EVAR (64% vs 40%; P < .001); type II endoleak was more common in those undergoing open repair (28% vs 2%; P < .001). Graft migration (12% vs 26%; P = .005) and neck degeneration/disease progression (14% vs 59%; P < .001) were more prevalent in F/B-EVAR, but aneurysm enlargement was more common in explantation (68% vs 33%; P < .001). Thirty-day reintervention rates did not differ between F/B-EVAR and explantation (odds ratio, 0.6258; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.86; P = .4115); however, 30-day mortality was lower in the F/B-EVAR group (5% vs 10%; P = .0192). Similarly, aneurysm-related mortality was also lower in the F/B-EVAR group (hazard ratio, 0.0683; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.44; P = .0048). A subset analysis excluding emergencies and infections did not alter the lack of difference in terms of freedom from reinterventions (P = .1175), 30-day mortality (P = .6329), or aneurysm-related mortality (P = .7849). CONCLUSIONS: Explantation and F/B-EVAR are necessary options in treating patients with failed EVAR, and both techniques have competitive results. Different modes of failure may point to a preferred method of treatment; consequently, rescue of failed EVAR should be individualized according to each patient's presentation and resources available.

Open Conversion After Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair: An 8 year Single Centre Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To report experience with open conversion (OC) after previous failed EVAR and to compare outcomes of patients undergoing elective OC with those operated on in an urgent setting. METHODS: Patients undergoing OC after EVAR between August 2008 and September 2016 were included in this retrospective and observational single institution study. Indications, demographic, anatomical, intra-operative and post-operative data were collected prospectively. Primary endpoints were 30 day and in hospital mortality. Secondary endpoints included moderate to severe complications, secondary interventions, length of intensive care unit, and hospital stay. RESULTS: OC was performed in 31 patients over the study period: 19 elective and 12 emergency OC, including six ruptures. Median time from index EVAR to delayed OC was 35 months (0-228 months). The most common indications for OC were endoleaks (n = 24, 77%), followed by stent graft infection (n = 3, 10%), thrombosis (n = 3, 10%) and kinking (n = 1, 3%). Eight of the removed stent grafts were Endurant, two were Talent, five Excluder, six Nellix, two AFX, five Zenith, one Vanguard, one Anaconda, and one Seta. Overall in hospital mortality was 10%, with significantly increased in hospital mortality in the emergency group compared with the elective group (25% vs. 0%, p = .049). Renal and pulmonary complications were significantly higher in the emergency group (42% vs. 5%, p = .02 and 42% vs. 0%, p = .005, respectively). No late complication or death was recorded after a mean follow-up of 18 ± 13 months. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency OC is associated with significantly increased in hospital mortality and morbidity compared with elective OC. Elective OC appears to be safer and effective, and should be considered as the best option in cases of EVAR failure to avoid further emergency OC procedures.

Surgical infrarenal "neo-neck" technique during elective conversion after EVAR with suprarenal fixation.

OBJECTIVES: Conversion of a previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with suprarenal fixation is a challenging situation even in the elective setting. The outcomes of a technique based on preservation of the first proximal covered stent of the endograft, used as a "neo-neck" for proximal anastomosis, are presented. METHODS: From 2001 to 2014, nine patients underwent elective conversion of a previous suprarenally fixed EVAR. After supraceliac clamping, the aneurysm sac was opened and the endograft identified; the fabric was cut beyond the first covered stent together with its native aortic wall in order to create a "neo-neck." An aortic balloon was inflated into the visceral aorta to avoid back bleeding. A Dacron bifurcated tube graft (Intergard, Maquet) was then sutured to the neo-neck mimicking endobanding, passing the stitches into the aortic wall and the first covered stent. RESULTS: The mean age was 68 years (range, 52-84 years). The stent grafts removed were four Zenith (Cook Medical), three Endurant (Medtronic), and two E-vita (Jotec). The indication for conversion was type 1A (n = 2), type 2 (n = 2), and type 3 (n = 1) endoleak, complete endograft thrombosis (n = 2), and abdominal pain with sac enlargement with no radiological sign of endoleak (n = 2). Blood loss was 1,428 mL (range 500-3,000 mL); the visceral ischemic time to perform the proximal anastomosis was 23.5 min ± 2.3 min). The post-operative complication rate was 11% (n = 1/9) related to a case of sac wall bleeding requiring re-intervention; mortality at 30 days was 0%. At 22 months (range, 8-41) the computed tomography angiogram demonstrated no signs of leaks or anastomotic pseudoaneurysm. CONCLUSION: Preservation of the proximal covered stent of an endograft with suprarenal fixation used as an infrarenal "neo-neck" with incorporation of the aorta to the suture line during elective surgical explantation simplifies the procedure, and can be achieved with very low early morbidity and mortality; furthermore, it seems to be durable over mid-term follow up.