Aneurysm Volumes After Endovascular Repair of Ruptured vs Intact Aortic Aneurysms: A Retrospective Observational Study

Abstract

Purpose

To compare changes in abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) sac volume between endovascular aneurysm repairs (EVAR) performed for ruptured (rEVAR) vs intact (iEVAR) AAAs and to determine the impact of early volume shrinkage on future complications.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients undergoing standard infrarenal EVAR from 2002 to 2016 at a tertiary referral institution. Only patients with degenerative AAAs and with 30-day and 1-year computed tomography angiography (CTA) imaging were included. Early sac shrinkage was defined as a volume sac reduction >10% between the first (<30-day) and the 1-year CTA. The primary endpoint was to compare AAA sac volume changes between patients undergoing rEVAR (n=51; mean age 71.0±8.5 years; 46 men) vs iEVAR (n=393; mean age 72.3±7.5 years; 350 men). Results are reported as the mean difference with the interquartile range (IQR Q1, Q3). The secondary endpoint was freedom from aneurysm-related complications after 1 year as determined by regression analysis; the results are presented as the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

At baseline, the rEVAR group had larger aneurysms (p<0.001) and shorter (p<0.001) and more angulated (p=0.028) necks. Aneurysm sac volume decreased more in the rEVAR group during the first year [−26.3% (IQR −38.8%, −12.5%)] vs the iEVAR group [−11.9% (IQR −27.5%, 0); p<0.001]. However, after the first year, the change in sac volume was similar between the groups [−3.8% (IQR −32.9%, 31.9%) for rEVAR and −1.5% (IQR −20.9%, 13.6%) for iEVAR, p=0.74]. Endoleak occurrence during follow-up was similar between the groups. In the overall population, patients with early sac shrinkage had a lower incidence of complications after the 1-year examination (adjusted HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.89, p=0.01).

Conclusion

EVAR patients treated for rupture have more pronounced aneurysm sac shrinkage compared with iEVAR patients during the first year after EVAR. Patients presenting with early shrinkage are less likely to encounter late complications. These parameters may be considered when tailoring surveillance protocols.

Keywords

abdominal aortic aneurysm aneurysm sac complications endovascular aneurysm repair ruptured aneurysm sac shrinkage sac volume

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gupta

Ramanan

Engelbert

, et al. A comparison of open surgery versus endovascular repair of unstable ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2014;60:1439–1445.

Starnes

Quiroga

Hutter

, et al. Management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in the endovascular era. J Vasc Surg. 2010;51:9–18.

Comparative clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of endovascular strategy v open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: three year results of the IMPROVE randomised trial. BMJ. 2017;359:j4859.

Wanhainen

Verzini

Van Herzeele

, et al. Editor’s choice. European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2019 clinical practice guidelines on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019;57:8–93.

Patel

Sweeting

Powell

, et al. Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm in 15-years’ follow-up of the UK endovascular aneurysm repair trial 1 (EVAR trial 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2366–2374.

Moll

Powell

Fraedrich

, et al. Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms clinical practice guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;41(suppl 1):S1–S58.

Powell

Sweeting

Ulug

, et al. Editor’s choice. Re-interventions after repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: a report from the IMPROVE randomised trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018;55:625–632.

IMPROVE Trial Investigators. The effect of aortic morphology on peri-operative mortality of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:1328–1334.

van Beek

Vahl

Wisselink

, et al. Midterm re-interventions and survival after endovascular versus open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015;49:661–668.

10.

Oliveira-Pinto

Soares-Ferreira

Oliveira

NFG

, et al. Comparison of midterm results of endovascular aneurysm repair for ruptured and elective abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2020;71:1554–1563.e1.

11.

Broos

t Mannetje

Stokmans

, et al. A 15-year single-center experience of endovascular repair for elective and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Endovasc Ther. 2016;23:566–573.

12.

Bastos Gonçalves

Baderkhan

Verhagen

, et al. Early sac shrinkage predicts a low risk of late complications after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Brit J Surg. 2014;101: 802–810.

13.

van Prehn

van der Wal

Vincken

, et al. Intra- and interobserver variability of aortic aneurysm volume measurement with fast CTA postprocessing software. J Endovasc Ther. 2008;15:504–510.

14.

van Keulen

Moll

Tolenaar

, et al. Validation of a new standardized method to measure proximal aneurysm neck angulation. J Vasc Surg. 2010;51:821–828.

15.

Balm

Stokking

Kaatee

, et al. Computed tomographic angiographic imaging of abdominal aortic aneurysms: implications for transfemoral endovascular aneurysm management. J Vasc Surg. 1997;26:231–237.

16.

Bastos Gonçalves

van de Luijtgaarden

Hoeks

, et al. Adequate seal and no endoleak on the first postoperative computed tomography angiography as criteria for no additional imaging up to 5 years after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2013;57:1503–1511.

17.

Chaikof

Blankensteijn

Harris

, et al. Reporting standards for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2002;35:1048–1060.

18.

Oliveira-Pinto

Oliveira

NFG

Bastos-Gonçalves

, et al. Long-term results after standard endovascular aneurysm repair with the Endurant and Excluder stent grafts. J Vasc Surg. 2020;71:64–74.

19.

Lee

Aziz

Lee

, et al. Volume regression of abdominal aortic aneurysms and its relation to successful endoluminal exclusion. J Vasc Surg. 2003;38:1254–2363.

20.

Wever

Blankensteijn

van Rijn

, et al. Inter- and intraobserver variability of CT measurements obtained after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175:1279–1282.

21.

van Keulen

van Prehn

Prokop

, et al. Potential value of aneurysm sac volume measurements in addition to diameter measurements after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Endovasc Ther. 2009;16:506–513.

22.

Prinssen

Verhoeven

Verhagen

, et al. Decision-making in follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair based on diameter and volume measurements: a blinded comparison. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2003;26:184–187.

23.

Sidloff

Gokani

Stather

, et al. Type II endoleak: conservative management is a safe strategy. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2014;48:391–399.

24.

Harris

Vallabhaneni

Desgranges

, et al. Incidence and risk factors of late rupture, conversion, and death after endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms: the EUROSTAR experience. European Collaborators on Stent/graft techniques for aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2000;32:739–749.

25.

El Batti

Cochennec

Roudot-Thoraval

, et al. Type II endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm are not always a benign condition. J Vasc Surg. 2013;57:1291–1297.

26.

Quinn

Mehta

Teymouri

, et al. The incidence and fate of endoleaks vary between ruptured and elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2017;65:1617–1624.

27.

Boniakowski

De Martino

Coleman

, et al. The natural history of type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg. 2016;64:1645–1651.

28.

Hahne

Arndt

Herrmann

, et al. Follow-up of abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular aortic repair: comparison of volumetric and diametric measurement. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:1187–1191.