BACKGROUND AND AIMS: With any new technology complications are possible, and problems with first-generation aortic stentgrafts have been extensively reported. The longterm outcome of this patient population and the magnitude of additional secondary procedures are, however, less well covered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 1997 and November 1999, 48 patients (44 men and 4 women; mean age 70 years; range 54-85) with AAA (average 57mm, range 40-90mm) were treated with a Vanguard endoprosthesis. Stentgrafts were sized by CT and angiography-based measurements. Results were continuously assessed using contrast-enhanced CT before discharge, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the procedure and thereafter annually. Since 2001 plain abdominal X-rays have been performed annually. RESULTS: The technical implant success rate was 100%. Median follow-up was 91 months (range 7.6-120 months). None of the patients was lost during this period. Hospital mortality was 0%. There were 25 subsequent deaths (52%), the most common cause being coronary artery disease. There were ten late conversions to open surgical repair, including three emergency operations: two due to rupture and one to thrombosis. EVAR-related complications were encountered in 43 patients (90%): 12 primary endoleaks (all type II), 36 late endoleaks (16 type I, 2 type II and 18 type III), 22 migrations, 25 row separations, 20 thromboses, one endotension and 3 ruptures of the AAA. Secondary procedures were required in 39 patients (81%): 1 re-endografting by aortoiliac bifurcated graft and 3 with a uni-iliac graft; 33 limb graft repairs were performed and 19 infrarenal cuffs were placed. There were 4 late embolizations and 4 attempts, and 6 thrombolyses, four of which were successful. Further, 9 femoro-femoral crossover by-pass and 2 axillofemoral by-pass operations and 2 amputations were carried out during the follow-up. Only one patient was alive without complications. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of long-term follow-up of patients treated with the new technology was emphasized in this patient population. A careful surveillance protocol and active endovascular treatment of complications can yield acceptable results and low AAA rupture and aneurysm mortality rates, also with the first-generation endovascular graft. A new technology, however, may involve unpredictable problems which can magnify the workload and incur high costs over several years after the initial procedure.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: With any new technology complications are possible, and problems with first-generation aortic stentgrafts have been extensively reported. The longterm outcome of this patient population and the magnitude of additional secondary procedures are, however, less well covered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 1997 and November 1999, 48 patients (44 men and 4 women; mean age 70 years; range 54-85) with AAA (average 57mm, range 40-90mm) were treated with a Vanguard endoprosthesis. Stentgrafts were sized by CT and angiography-based measurements. Results were continuously assessed using contrast-enhanced CT before discharge, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the procedure and thereafter annually. Since 2001 plain abdominal X-rays have been performed annually. RESULTS: The technical implant success rate was 100%. Median follow-up was 91 months (range 7.6-120 months). None of the patients was lost during this period. Hospital mortality was 0%. There were 25 subsequent deaths (52%), the most common cause being coronary artery disease. There were ten late conversions to open surgical repair, including three emergency operations: two due to rupture and one to thrombosis. EVAR-related complications were encountered in 43 patients (90%): 12 primary endoleaks (all type II), 36 late endoleaks (16 type I, 2 type II and 18 type III), 22 migrations, 25 row separations, 20 thromboses, one endotension and 3 ruptures of the AAA. Secondary procedures were required in 39 patients (81%): 1 re-endografting by aortoiliac bifurcated graft and 3 with a uni-iliac graft; 33 limb graft repairs were performed and 19 infrarenal cuffs were placed. There were 4 late embolizations and 4 attempts, and 6 thrombolyses, four of which were successful. Further, 9 femoro-femoral crossover by-pass and 2 axillofemoral by-pass operations and 2 amputations were carried out during the follow-up. Only one patient was alive without complications. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of long-term follow-up of patients treated with the new technology was emphasized in this patient population. A careful surveillance protocol and active endovascular treatment of complications can yield acceptable results and low AAA rupture and aneurysm mortality rates, also with the first-generation endovascular graft. A new technology, however, may involve unpredictable problems which can magnify the workload and incur high costs over several years after the initial procedure.