G N Kouvelos1, A Katsargyris2, G A Antoniou3, K Oikonomou2, E L G Verhoeven2. 1. Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University Nuremberg, Germany. Electronic address: geokouv@gmail.com. 2. Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University Nuremberg, Germany. 3. Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, The Royal Oldham Hospital, Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, Manchester, UK.
Abstract
AIM: The aim was to conduct a systematic review of the literature investigating outcomes after interruption or preservation of the internal iliac artery (IIA) during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to identify studies reporting IIA management during EVAR. The search identified 57 articles: 30 reported on IIA interruption (1468 patients) and 27 on IIA preservation (816 patients). RESULTS: The pooled 30 day buttock claudication (BC) rate was 29.2% (95% CI 24.2-34.7). Patients undergoing bilateral IIA interruption had a higher incidence of BC than patients with unilateral IIA interruption (36.5% vs. 27.2%, OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.11-2.6, p = .01). During a median follow up of 17 months, the pooled rate of persistent BC was 20.5% (95% CI 15.7-26.2). Of the patients, 93.9% underwent an endovascular revascularization procedure for IIA preservation. Most patients (87.6%) had an iliac branched device, and technical success was 96.2%. Within 30 days of EVAR, 4.3% of internal iliac branches occluded. During a median follow up of 15 months, the pooled occlusion rate at the site of IIA revascularization was 8.8% (95% CI 6.8-11.3). In patients treated with an iliac-branched device, 5.2% of internal iliac branches and 1.7% of external iliac arteries occluded. The pooled BC rate on the side of the IIA revascularization during follow up was 4.1% (95% CI 2.9-5.9). Pooled rates of late device related endoleak type I or III and secondary procedures on the side of the previous IIA revascularization were 4.6% (95% CI 3.2-6.5) and 7.8% (95% CI 5.7-10.7) respectively. CONCLUSION: Unilateral or bilateral IIA occlusion during EVAR seems to carry a substantial risk of significant ischemic complications in nearly one quarter of patients. Bilateral IIA occlusion was related to a significantly higher rate of BC. IIA preservation techniques represent a significant improvement in the treatment of aorto-iliac aneurysms and have been associated with high technical success and low morbidity.
AIM: The aim was to conduct a systematic review of the literature investigating outcomes after interruption or preservation of the internal iliac artery (IIA) during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to identify studies reporting IIA management during EVAR. The search identified 57 articles: 30 reported on IIA interruption (1468 patients) and 27 on IIA preservation (816 patients). RESULTS: The pooled 30 day buttock claudication (BC) rate was 29.2% (95% CI 24.2-34.7). Patients undergoing bilateral IIA interruption had a higher incidence of BC than patients with unilateral IIA interruption (36.5% vs. 27.2%, OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.11-2.6, p = .01). During a median follow up of 17 months, the pooled rate of persistent BC was 20.5% (95% CI 15.7-26.2). Of the patients, 93.9% underwent an endovascular revascularization procedure for IIA preservation. Most patients (87.6%) had an iliac branched device, and technical success was 96.2%. Within 30 days of EVAR, 4.3% of internal iliac branches occluded. During a median follow up of 15 months, the pooled occlusion rate at the site of IIA revascularization was 8.8% (95% CI 6.8-11.3). In patients treated with an iliac-branched device, 5.2% of internal iliac branches and 1.7% of external iliac arteries occluded. The pooled BC rate on the side of the IIA revascularization during follow up was 4.1% (95% CI 2.9-5.9). Pooled rates of late device related endoleak type I or III and secondary procedures on the side of the previous IIA revascularization were 4.6% (95% CI 3.2-6.5) and 7.8% (95% CI 5.7-10.7) respectively. CONCLUSION: Unilateral or bilateral IIA occlusion during EVAR seems to carry a substantial risk of significant ischemic complications in nearly one quarter of patients. Bilateral IIA occlusion was related to a significantly higher rate of BC. IIA preservation techniques represent a significant improvement in the treatment of aorto-iliac aneurysms and have been associated with high technical success and low morbidity.
Authors: Bongyeon Sohn; Hak Ju Kim; Hyoung Woo Chang; Jae Hang Lee; Dong Jung Kim; Jun Sung Kim; Cheong Lim; Kay Hyun Park Journal: Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2020-12-05