Literature DB >> 24093314

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in patients with hostile neck anatomy.

Philip W Stather1, John B Wild, Robert D Sayers, Matthew J Bown, Edward Choke.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To report a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with hostile neck anatomy (HNA) vs. those with favorable neck anatomy (FNA).
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of data on EVAR in patients with HNA and FNA was performed by 2 reviewers in February 2013. An eligible study was required to have at least 50 participants and to incorporate one or more of the HNA criteria of neck length <15 mm, neck diameter >28 mm, and/or angulation >60°. Of the 24 full-length articles ultimately reviewed, 8 were excluded, resulting in 16 articles that were suitable for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The study size ranged from 55 to 5183 participants, with a total of 8920 patients in the FNA group and 3039 patients in the HNA group. Mean follow-up ranged from 9 to 49 months.
RESULTS: Analysis of the pooled data revealed a significant increase in 30-day mortality (2.4% FNA vs. 3.5% HNA; OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.27; p<0.01), intraoperative adjuncts (8.8% FNA vs. 15.4% HNA; OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.07; p=0.01), and 30-day migration (0.9% FNA vs. 1.6% HNA; OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.62; p=0.009) in patients with HNA. A decrease in primary technical success (97.5% FNA vs. 93.8% HNA; OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.93; p=0.03) was significant when all 3 criteria were used to define HNA. For outcomes at >30 days, the increase in secondary interventions (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.66; p=0.05) approached significance, but aneurysm-related mortality, all-cause mortality, migration, and aortic rupture did not achieve statistical significance. There was no difference in rates of sac expansion. Analysis of endoleak rates revealed a significant increase in 30-day type I endoleaks (OR 2.92, 95% CI 1.61 to 5.30; p<0.001) and late type I endoleaks (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.23; p<0.0001) in patients with HNA.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that performing EVAR in patients with HNA increases the technical difficulty and results in poorer short-term outcomes. The higher rates of early and late type I endoleaks, along with secondary interventions, suggest that increased monitoring should be performed in this category of patient to ensure rapid treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24093314     DOI: 10.1583/13-4320MR.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endovasc Ther        ISSN: 1526-6028            Impact factor:   3.487


  18 in total

1.  Editor's Choice - Renal complications after EVAR with suprarenal versus infrarenal fixation among all users and routine users.

Authors:  S L Zettervall; S E Deery; P A Soden; K Shean; J J Siracuse; M Alef; V I Patel; M L Schermerhorn
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 7.069

2.  Aortic Neck Anatomic Features and Predictors of Outcomes in Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Following vs Not Following Instructions for Use.

Authors:  Ali F AbuRahma; Michael Yacoub; Albeir Y Mousa; Shadi Abu-Halimah; Stephen M Hass; Jenna Kazil; Zachary T AbuRahma; Mohit Srivastava; L Scott Dean; Patrick A Stone
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2016-01-13       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  Comparison of Renal Complications between Endografts with Suprarenal and Infrarenal Fixation.

Authors:  S L Zettervall; P A Soden; S E Deery; K Ultee; K E Shean; F Shuja; R L Amdur; M L Schermerhorn
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  2017-03-06       Impact factor: 7.069

4.  Comparative study of clinical outcome of endovascular aortic aneurysms repair in large diameter aortic necks (>31 mm) versus smaller necks.

Authors:  Ali F AbuRahma; Trevor DerDerian; Zachary T AbuRahma; Stephen M Hass; Michael Yacoub; L Scott Dean; Shadi Abu-Halimah; Albeir Y Mousa
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 4.268

5.  Defining risk and identifying predictors of mortality for open conversion after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Authors:  Salvatore T Scali; Adam W Beck; Catherine K Chang; Dan Neal; Robert J Feezor; David H Stone; Scott A Berceli; Thomas S Huber
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2015-11-21       Impact factor: 4.268

6.  Outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair conversion and primary aortic repair for urgent and emergency indications in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative.

Authors:  Salvatore T Scali; Sara J Runge; Robert J Feezor; Kristina A Giles; Javairiah Fatima; Scott A Berceli; Thomas S Huber; Adam W Beck
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 4.268

7.  An Artificial Neural Network Stratifies the Risks of Reintervention and Mortality after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair; a Retrospective Observational study.

Authors:  Alan Karthikesalingam; Omneya Attallah; Xianghong Ma; Sandeep Singh Bahia; Luke Thompson; Alberto Vidal-Diez; Edward C Choke; Matt J Bown; Robert D Sayers; Matt M Thompson; Peter J Holt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Outcomes over Time in Patients with Hostile Neck Anatomy Undergoing Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

Authors:  Yolanda Bryce; Wonho Kim; Barry Katzen; James Benenati; Shaun Samuels
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 3.682

9.  All dangerous types of endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair in a single patient.

Authors:  Tomasz Synowiec; Marcin Warot; Paweł Burchardt; Paweł Chęciński
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 1.195

10.  Endovascular aneurysm repair in emergent ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm with a 'real' hostile neck and severely tortuous iliac artery of an elderly patient.

Authors:  Nan Wu; Changwei Liu; Qining Fu; Rong Zeng; Yu Chen; Genhuan Yang; Bao Liu
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.