Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Short-term outcomes of the C3 excluder for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms and unfavorable proximal aortic seal zones.
Smeds, Matthew R; Jacobs, Donald L; Peterson, Gary J; Peterson, Brian G.
Afiliación
  • Smeds MR; Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, Saint Louis University, 3635 Vista Avenue at Grand Boulevard, Saint Louis, MO 63110, USA. msmeds@slu.edu
Ann Vasc Surg ; 27(1): 8-15, 2013 Jan.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22981019
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with unfavorable proximal seal zones remains challenging. The purpose of this study was to identify the incidence of proximal extension cuff usage for type I endoleaks in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms and unfavorable necks treated with the C3 Excluder repositionable endoprosthesis compared with the traditional Excluder stent-graft.

METHODS:

This is a retrospective review of patients undergoing EVAR with unfavorable neck anatomy from January 2010 to October 2011 using the Excluder endoprosthesis on the traditional deployment system or the C3 repositionable system. Seventy-seven patients were treated with the Excluder device, with 44 (57%) having unfavorable neck anatomy defined as proximal aortic neck length of <15 mm, neck diameter of >28 mm, neck angulation of >60°, circumferential thrombus of >50% or calcification at the proximal seal zone, or a "reverse taper" on computed tomographic angiography. Of the 44 patients with unfavorable neck anatomy, 24 patients received the C3 Excluder and 20 received the traditional Excluder.

RESULTS:

The groups' comorbidities, aneurysm characteristics, and high-risk neck criteria were comparable. Initial success was 100% in both groups. Sixteen of the 44 patients (36%) with high-risk neck criteria required proximal extension cuffs for type I endoleaks, with 3 of the 24 patients (13%) in the C3 group compared with 13 of the 20 patients (65%) in the traditional Excluder group requiring proximal extension (P = 0.0005). Operative variables between the two groups were similar. At mean follow-up of 2 months (range 1-6 months), there were no type I endoleaks or renal artery occlusion, and sac size regression was similar.

CONCLUSIONS:

The C3 Excluder endoprosthesis significantly reduces the need for proximal extension cuffs in patients with unfavorable aortic neck anatomy compared with the traditional Excluder with identical short-term clinical outcomes. Repositionable grafts could increase the number of patients who can effectively be treated with EVAR.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Prótesis Vascular / Stents / Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal / Implantación de Prótesis Vascular / Procedimientos Endovasculares Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Ann Vasc Surg Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA Año: 2013 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Prótesis Vascular / Stents / Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal / Implantación de Prótesis Vascular / Procedimientos Endovasculares Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Ann Vasc Surg Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA Año: 2013 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos