These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Definition of Type II Endoleak Risk Based on Preoperative Anatomical Characteristics.
    Author: Piazza M, Squizzato F, Miccoli T, Lepidi S, Menegolo M, Grego F, Antonello M.
    Journal: J Endovasc Ther; 2017 Aug; 24(4):566-572. PubMed ID: 28578623.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To define the risk for type II endoleak (EII) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) based on preoperative anatomical characteristics. METHODS: Between January 2008 and December 2015, 189 patients (mean age 78.4±7.6 years; 165 men) underwent standard EVAR. Mean aneurysm diameter was 5.7±0.7 cm and mean volume 125.2±45.8 cm3. Patients were assigned to the "at-risk" group (n=123, 65%) when at least one of the following criteria was present: patency of a >3-mm inferior mesenteric artery (IMA), patency of at least 3 pairs of lumbar arteries, or patency of 2 pairs of lumbar arteries and a sacral artery or accessory renal artery or any diameter patent IMA; otherwise, patients were entered in the "low-risk" group (n=66, 35%). EII rates and freedom from EII reintervention were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves. Preoperative clinical and anatomical characteristics were evaluated for their association with EII and EII reinterventions using multiple logistic regression analysis; results are presented as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Freedom from endoleak was lower in the at-risk group compared with the low-risk group at 36 months after EVAR (p=0.04). Freedom from EII-related reinterventions was significantly lower in the at-risk group (80% vs 100%, p=0.001) at 48 months. Based on the multiple regression analysis, the at-risk group had a higher likelihood of both EII (OR 9.91, 95% CI 2.92 to 33.72, p<0.001) and EII-related reinterventions (OR 9.11, 95% CI 1.06 to 78.44, p=0.04). These criteria had 89.4% (95% CI 83.9% to 93.2%) sensitivity and 48.0% (95% CI 40.7% to 55.3%) specificity for EII; sensitivity and specificity for EII reintervention were 100% (95% CI 93.8% to 100%) and 38.8% (95% CI 31.9% to 46.2%). Within the at-risk group, a sac thrombus volume <35% was an additional predictor for both EII (OR 5.21, 95% CI 1.75 to 15.47, p=0.003) and EII-related reinterventions (OR 8.33, 95% CI 2.20 to 31.51, p<0.002). CONCLUSION: The selection criteria effectively discriminated between low-risk patients and patients at risk for EII and associated reinterventions. A thrombus volume <35% was an additional predictor for EII and EII-related reintervention among patients at risk. These criteria may be useful for preemptively selecting patients who may benefit from EII prevention procedures or a more aggressive surveillance protocol.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]