Endovascular Repair of Small Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Paradigm Shift?

Abstract

Recent reports have documented poor long-term results following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of large abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). EVAR of small AAAs may result in improved long-term results compared to large AAAs. It is not known whether the frequency of anatomic suitability for EVAR is increased for small compared to large AAAs. This study compared the anatomic suitability of large and small AAAs for EVAR in an unselected patient population. Radiology reports for all computed tomography (CT) scans in a single hospital over a recent 3-year period were reviewed. AAAs diagnosed by contrasted CT scans with cuts >7 mm were excluded. Suitability for EVAR was determined by neck diameter, length, and angulation. In addition, iliac diameters and common iliac distal landing zone lengths were determined. Computerized 3-dimensional (3D) reconstruction was used to measure neck angulation and total aortic tortuosity. One hundred ninety-one patients were found to have AAAs with adequate CT scans for evaluation. Suitability for EVAR was highest in patients with AAA diameters of 3–4 cm and declined with increasing size of the AAA. Dividing AAAs into sizes greater than or less than 5.5 cm revealed that small AAAs had significantly longer necks, less neck angulation, longer common iliac landing zones, and less total aortic tortuosity. Multivariable analysis revealed that maximal aortic diameter was the only independent predictor of suitability for EVAR (p = 0.005, odds ratio 1.67, CI 95% = 1.17 to 2.38). The odds ratio predicts that with each 1 cm increase in size, the likelihood of suitability decreased by 5.3-fold. Small AAAs have less complex anatomy with longer aortic necks, less neck angulation, and less tortuosity. The poor outcomes following the treatment of large AAAs is thought to be due to complex anatomy. EVAR of less anatomically challenging small AAAs may improve longterm outcomes.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Peppelenbosch N , Buth J , Harris PL , et al: Diameter of abdominal aortic aneurysm and outcome of endovascular aneurysm repair: Does size matter? A report from EUROSTAR. J Vasc Surg 39:288-297, 2004.

Greenberg RK , Clair D , Srivastava S , et al: Should patients with challenging anatomy be offered endovascular aneurysm repair? J Vasc Surg 38:990-996, 2003.

Ouriel K , Srivastava SD , Sarac TP , et al: Disparate outcome after endovascular treatment of small versus large abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 37: 1206-1212, 2003.

Sampram ES , Karafa MT , Mascha EJ , et al: Nature, frequency, and predictors of secondary procedures after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 37:930-937, 2003.

Rockman CB , Lamparello PJ , Adelman MA , et al: Aneurysm morphology as a predictor of endoleak following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: Do smaller aneurysms have better outcomes? Ann Vasc Surg 16:644-651, 2002.

Arko FR , Filis KA , Hill BB , et al: Morphologic changes and outcome following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair as a function of aneurysm size. Arch Surg 138:651-655, 2003.

Bayle O , Branchereau A , Rosset E , et al: Morphologic assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysms by spiral computed tomographic scanning. J Vasc Surg 26: 238-246, 1997.

Armon MP , Yusuf SW , Whitaker SC , et al: Influence of abdominal aortic aneurysm size on the feasibility of endovascular repair. J Endovasc Surg 4:279-283, 1997.

Simons P , van Overhagen H , Nawijn A , et al: Endovascular aneurysm repair with a bifurcated endovascular graft at a primary referral center: Influence of experience, age, gender, and aneurysm size on suitability. J Vasc Surg 38:758-761, 2003.

10.

Sternbergh WC III , Carter G , York JW , et al: Aortic neck angulation predicts adverse outcome with endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 35:482-486, 2002.

11.

Wolf YG , Tillich M , Lee WA , et al: Impact of aortoiliac tortuosity on endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: Evaluation of 3D computer-based assessment. J Vasc Surg 34:594-599, 2001.

12.

Resch T , Ivancev K , Lindh M , et al: Abdominal aortic aneurysm morphology in candidates for endovascular repair evaluated with spiral computed tomography and digital subtraction angiography. J Endovasc Surg 6:227-232, 1999.

13.

Armon MP , Wenham PW , Whitaker SC , et al: Common iliac artery aneurysms in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 15:255-257, 1998.

14.

White RA , Donayre CE , Walot I , et al: Computed tomography assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysm morphology after endograft exclusion. J Vasc Surg 33:S1-S10, 2001.

15.

Mortality results for randomised controlled trial of early elective surgery or ultrasonographic surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms. The UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants. Lancet 352:1649-1655, 1998.

16.

Lederle FA , Wilson SE , Johnson GR , et al: Immediate repair compared with surveillance of small abdominal aortic aneurysms. N Engl J Med 346:1437-1444, 2002.

17.

Velazquez OC , Larson RA , Baum RA , et al: Genderrelated differences in infrarenal aortic aneurysm morphologic features: Issues relevant to Ancure and Talent endografts. J Vasc Surg 33:S77-S84, 2001.