PURPOSE: To investigate the midterm results of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and compare the endoleak (EL) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) prognoses between instruction-for-use (IFU) patients and non-IFU patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 124 patients (104 men, 20 women; mean age 76.2 years; age range 58-93 years) with AAA who underwent EVAR with the Zenith (68 patients) or Excluder device (56) and were analyzed, 86 were IFU and 38 non-IFU. RESULTS: The mean absorbed dose of radiation exposure was 1907 mGy in the IFU group and 2283 mGy in the non-IFU group (p = 0.013). Thirty-five patients experienced EL: 8 (6.5 %) type I and 27 (21.8 %) type II. Type I ELs were observed in 3 patients in the IFU group (3.5 %) and 5 patients in the non-IFU group (13.2 %). Of the 14 patients with AAA diameter expansion of ≥ 5 mm, 6 (6/86, 7.0 %) belonged to the IFU group and 8 (8/38, 21.1 %) to the non-IFU group (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: The frequency of AAA expansion ≥ 5 mm was higher in non-IFU patients than in IFU patients. Therefore, careful follow-up is necessary for non-IFU patients rather than IFU patients.
PURPOSE: To investigate the midterm results of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and compare the endoleak (EL) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) prognoses between instruction-for-use (IFU) patients and non-IFU patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 124 patients (104 men, 20 women; mean age 76.2 years; age range 58-93 years) with AAA who underwent EVAR with the Zenith (68 patients) or Excluder device (56) and were analyzed, 86 were IFU and 38 non-IFU. RESULTS: The mean absorbed dose of radiation exposure was 1907 mGy in the IFU group and 2283 mGy in the non-IFU group (p = 0.013). Thirty-five patients experienced EL: 8 (6.5 %) type I and 27 (21.8 %) type II. Type I ELs were observed in 3 patients in the IFU group (3.5 %) and 5 patients in the non-IFU group (13.2 %). Of the 14 patients with AAA diameter expansion of ≥ 5 mm, 6 (6/86, 7.0 %) belonged to the IFU group and 8 (8/38, 21.1 %) to the non-IFU group (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: The frequency of AAA expansion ≥ 5 mm was higher in non-IFU patients than in IFU patients. Therefore, careful follow-up is necessary for non-IFU patients rather than IFU patients.
Authors: David C Brewster; John E Jones; Thomas K Chung; Glenn M Lamuraglia; Christopher J Kwolek; Michael T Watkins; Thomas M Hodgman; Richard P Cambria Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: F J Criado; E P Wilson; O C Velazquez; J P Carpenter; C Barker; E Wellons; O Abul-Khoudoud; R M Fairman Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Alfio Carroccio; Peter L Faries; Nicholas J Morrissey; Victoria Teodorescu; James A Burks; Edwin C Gravereaux; Larry H Hollier; Michael L Marin Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Janice J Yeung; Tina M Hernandez-Boussard; Tae K Song; Ronald L Dalman; Jason T Lee Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Salvatore T Scali; Michael M McNally; Robert J Feezor; Catherine K Chang; Alyson L Waterman; Scott A Berceli; Thomas S Huber; Adam W Beck Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2014-03-27 Impact factor: 4.268