Yukihisa Ogawa1, Hiroshi Nishimaki2, Keigo Osuga3, Osamu Ikeda4, Norio Hongo5, Shinichi Iwakoshi6, Ryota Kawasaki7, Reiko Woodhams8, Masato Yamaguchi9, Mika Kamiya10, Masayuki Kanematsu11, Masanori Honda12, Toshio Kaminou13, Jun Koizumi14, Kimihiko Kichikawa6. 1. Department of Radiology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, 2-16-1 Sugao, Miyamae-ku, Kawasaki, 216-8511, Japan. yukky.oct.22@gmail.com. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kawasaki, Japan. 3. Department of Radiology, Osaka University, Suita, Japan. 4. Department of Radiology, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan. 5. Department of Radiology, Oita University, Yufu, Japan. 6. Department of Radiology, Nara Medical University, Kashihara, Japan. 7. Department of Radiology, Hyogo Brain and Heart Center at Himeji, Himeji, Japan. 8. Department of Radiology, Kitasato University, Sagamihara, Japan. 9. Department of Radiology, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan. 10. Department of Radiology, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Japan. 11. Department of Radiology, Gifu University, Gifu, Japan. 12. Department of Radiology, Saiseikai Utsunomiya Hospital, Utsunomiya, Japan. 13. Department of Radiology, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan. 14. Department of Radiology, Tokai University, Isehara, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the current status of interventional radiology (IR) procedures for a type II endoleak (T2EL) in Japan, and to identify the technical aspects that affect treatment results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective survey was conducted by distributing questionnaires to 25 institutions. The eligibility criteria were endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) performed using commercial stent grafts and IR performed for T2EL between January 2007 and December 2013. Technical success was defined as disappearance of the EL on digital subtraction angiography immediately after embolization, and imaging success was defined as no EL on contrast-enhanced computed tomography within 6 months. Statistical comparisons of the number of involved branches, embolization level, embolic material, and changes in aneurysm size were made between the imaging success and imaging failure groups. The technical and imaging success rates were also compared between the initial therapy and repeat groups. RESULTS: A total of 166 cases were investigated. Initial therapy was performed in 147 cases (88.6 %), with repeat therapy in 19 cases (11.4 %). Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) was used most frequently, in 161 cases (97 %), with direct puncture (DP) used in 5 cases (3 %). Both coil embolization for the branches and NBCA embolization for the sac were frequently chosen. The technical success rate was 83.2 % (TAE group), and the imaging success rate was 46.5 % (TAE + DP groups). Branch + sac embolization was performed more frequently in the imaging success group. There was no significant difference in the number of involved branches or embolic material between the imaging success and imaging failure groups. Enlargement of the aneurysm was more frequently seen in the imaging failure group. There were no significant differences in the technical success and imaging success rates between the initial therapy and repeat groups. CONCLUSION: This is the first report of a multi-institutional questionnaire survey of IR procedures for T2EL after EVAR in Japan that was conducted to determine the current status. Enlargement of aneurysm size after embolization was more frequently seen in the imaging failure group. It is important to embolize both branch and sac to achieve imaging success, regardless of embolic material. Long-term outcomes need to be investigated.
PURPOSE: To investigate the current status of interventional radiology (IR) procedures for a type II endoleak (T2EL) in Japan, and to identify the technical aspects that affect treatment results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective survey was conducted by distributing questionnaires to 25 institutions. The eligibility criteria were endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) performed using commercial stent grafts and IR performed for T2EL between January 2007 and December 2013. Technical success was defined as disappearance of the EL on digital subtraction angiography immediately after embolization, and imaging success was defined as no EL on contrast-enhanced computed tomography within 6 months. Statistical comparisons of the number of involved branches, embolization level, embolic material, and changes in aneurysm size were made between the imaging success and imaging failure groups. The technical and imaging success rates were also compared between the initial therapy and repeat groups. RESULTS: A total of 166 cases were investigated. Initial therapy was performed in 147 cases (88.6 %), with repeat therapy in 19 cases (11.4 %). Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) was used most frequently, in 161 cases (97 %), with direct puncture (DP) used in 5 cases (3 %). Both coil embolization for the branches and NBCA embolization for the sac were frequently chosen. The technical success rate was 83.2 % (TAE group), and the imaging success rate was 46.5 % (TAE + DP groups). Branch + sac embolization was performed more frequently in the imaging success group. There was no significant difference in the number of involved branches or embolic material between the imaging success and imaging failure groups. Enlargement of the aneurysm was more frequently seen in the imaging failure group. There were no significant differences in the technical success and imaging success rates between the initial therapy and repeat groups. CONCLUSION: This is the first report of a multi-institutional questionnaire survey of IR procedures for T2EL after EVAR in Japan that was conducted to determine the current status. Enlargement of aneurysm size after embolization was more frequently seen in the imaging failure group. It is important to embolize both branch and sac to achieve imaging success, regardless of embolic material. Long-term outcomes need to be investigated.
Entities:
Keywords:
Endovascular abdominal aortic repair; Interventional radiology; Multi-institutional survey; Questionnaire; Type II endoleak
Authors: F L Moll; J T Powell; G Fraedrich; F Verzini; S Haulon; M Waltham; J A van Herwaarden; P J E Holt; J W van Keulen; B Rantner; F J V Schlösser; F Setacci; J-B Ricco Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 7.069
Authors: P De Rango; F Verzini; G Parlani; E Cieri; G Simonte; L Farchioni; G Isernia; P Cao Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2014-01-18 Impact factor: 7.069
Authors: Kristina A Giles; Mark F Fillinger; Randall R De Martino; Andrew W Hoel; Richard J Powell; Daniel B Walsh Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Matthias Biebl; Albert G Hakaim; W Andrew Oldenburg; Josef Klocker; Louis L Lau; Beate Neuhauser; J Mark McKinney; Ricardo Paz-Fumagalli Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Abdulhameed Aziz; Christine O Menias; Luis A Sanchez; Daniel Picus; Nael Saad; Brian G Rubin; John A Curci; Patrick J Geraghty Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2012-02-08 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Joy Walker; Lue-Yen Tucker; Philip Goodney; Leah Candell; Hong Hua; Steven Okuhn; Bradley Hill; Robert W Chang Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2015-06-06 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: G A J Fransen; S R Vallabhaneni; C J van Marrewijk; R J F Laheij; P L Harris; J Buth Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 7.069