Purpose: To compare the use of the Ovation stent-graft according to the ≥7-mm neck length specified by the original instructions for use (IFU) vs those treated off-label (OL) for necks <7 mm long. Methods: A multicenter retrospective registry (TriVascular Ovation Italian Study) database of all patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair with the Ovation endograft at 13 centers in Italy was interrogated to identify patients with a minimum computed tomography (CT) follow-up of 24 months, retrieving records on 89 patients (mean age 76.4±2.4 years; 84 men) with a mean follow-up of 32 months (range 24–50). Standard CT scans (preoperative, 1-month postoperative, and latest follow-up) were reviewed by an independent core laboratory for morphological changes. For analysis, patients were stratified into 2 groups based on proximal neck length ≥7 mm (IFU group, n=57) or <7 mm (OL group, n=32). Outcome measures included freedom from type Ia endoleak, any device-related reintervention, migration, and neck enlargement (>2 mm). Results: At 3 years, there was no aneurysm-related death, rupture, stent-graft migration, or neck enlargement. There were no differences in terms of freedom from type Ia endoleak (98.2% IFU vs 96.8% OL, p=0.6; hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.02 to 9.71 or freedom from any device-related reintervention (92.8% IFU vs 96.4% OL, p=0.4; HR 2.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 12.99). In the sealing zone, the mean change in diameters was −0.05±0.8 mm in the IFU group and −0.1±0.5 mm in the OL group. Conclusion: Use of the Ovation stent-graft in patients with neck length <7 mm achieved midterm outcomes similar to patients with ≥7-mm-long necks. These midterm data show that the use of the Ovation system for the treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm is not restricted by the conventional measurement of aortic neck length, affirming the recent Food and Drug Administration–approved changes to the IFU.
LeursLJKievitJDagneliePCInfluence of infrarenal neck length on outcome of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Endovasc Ther. 2006;13:640–648.
2.
StatherPWWildJBSayersRDEndovascular aortic aneurysm repair in patients with hostile neck anatomy. J Endovasc Ther. 2013;20:623–637.
3.
JordanWDJrOurielKMehtaMAneurysm Treatment using the Heli-FX Aortic Securement System Global Registry ANCHOR. Outcome-based anatomic criteria for defining the hostile aortic neck. J Vasc Surg. 2015;61:1383–1390.
4.
AbuRahmaAFCampbellJEMousaAYClinical outcomes for hostile versus favorable aortic neck anatomy in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair using modular devices. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:13–21.
5.
StatherPWSayersRDCheahAOutcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with hostile neck anatomy. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012;44:556–561.
6.
SpanosKKarathanosCSaleptsisVSystematic review and meta-analysis of migration after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Vascular. 2016;24:323–336.
7.
GeorgakarakosEIoannouCVGeorgiadisGSThe Ovation abdominal stent graft for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms: current evidence and future perspectives. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2016;13:253–262.
8.
PepeMSMoriM. Kaplan-Meier, marginal or conditional probability curves in summarizing competing risks failure time data?Stat Med. 1993;12:737–751.
9.
PintilieM. Analysing and interpreting competing risk data. Stat Med. 2007;26:1360–1367.
10.
PutterHFioccoMGeskusRB. Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi-state models. Stat Med. 2007;26:2389–2430.
11.
ParodiJCFerreiraLM. Ten-year experience with endovascular therapy in aortic aneurysms. J Am Coll Surg. 2002;194(1 Suppl):S58–S66.
12.
DalainasINanoGBianchiPAortic neck dilatation and endograft migration are correlated with self-expanding endografts. J Endovasc Ther. 2007;14:318–323.
13.
MalasMBOhkiTVeithFJAbsence of proximal neck dilatation and graft migration after endovascular aneurysm repair with balloon-expandable stent-based endografts. J Vasc Surg. 2005;42:639–644.
14.
de DonatoGSetacciFBresadolaL, on behalf of the TriVascular Ovation Italian Study. Aortic neck evolution after endovascular repair with TriVascular Ovation stent graft. J Vasc Surg. 2016;63:8–15.
15.
AbbruzzeseTAKwolekCJBrewsterDCOutcomes following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR): an anatomic and device-specific analysis. J Vasc Surg. 2008;48:19–28.
16.
HoboRKievitJLeursLJInfluence of severe infrarenal aortic neck angulation on complications at the proximal neck following endovascular AAA repair: a EUROSTAR study. J Endovasc Ther. 2007;14:1–11.
17.
AntoniouGAGeorgiadisGSAntoniouSAA meta-analysis of outcomes of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients with hostile and friendly neck anatomy. J Vasc Surg. 2013;57:527–538.
18.
SchanzerAGreenbergRKHeveloneNPredictors of abdominal aortic aneurysm sac enlargement after endovascular repair. Circulation. 2011;123:2848–2855.
19.
MehtaM. Rethink the neck. How the Ovation Prime System is revolutionizing the way we approach EVAR. Endovascular Today. 2014;Sept(Suppl):3–6.
20.
NanoGMazzaccaroDStegherSEarly experience with Ovation endograft system in abdominal aortic disease. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2014;9:48.
21.
CarpenterJPBaumRABarkerCFImpact of exclusion criteria on patient selection for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2001;34:1050–1054.
22.
KristmundssonTSonessonBDiasNAnatomic suitability for endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms and possible benefits of low profile delivery systems. Vascular. 2014;22:112–115.
