Johannes T Boersen1, Esme J Donselaar2, Erik Groot Jebbink3, Roeliene Starreveld3, Simon P Overeem4, Cornelis H Slump5, Jean-Paul P M de Vries6, Michel M P J Reijnen2. 1. Department of Surgery, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands; Department of Vascular Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands; MIRA Research Institute for Biomedical Technology and Technical Medicine, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. Electronic address: j.boersen@antoniusziekenhuis.nl. 2. Department of Surgery, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Surgery, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands; MIRA Research Institute for Biomedical Technology and Technical Medicine, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Vascular Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands; MIRA Research Institute for Biomedical Technology and Technical Medicine, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 5. MIRA Research Institute for Biomedical Technology and Technical Medicine, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Vascular Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The chimney technique has been successfully used to treat juxtarenal aortic aneurysms. The two main issues with this technique are gutter formation and chimney graft (CG) compression, which induce a risk for type Ia endoleaks and stent thrombosis, respectively. In this benchtop study, the geometry and renal artery flow of chimney endovascular aneurysm repair configurations were compared with chimney configurations with endovascular aneurysm sealing (ch-EVAS). METHODS: Seven flow phantoms were constructed, including one control and six chimney endovascular aneurysm repairs (Endurant [Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn] and AFX [Endologix Inc, Irvine, Calif]) or ch-EVAS (Nellix, Endologix) configurations, combined with either balloon-expandable or self-expanding CGs with an intended higher positioning of the right CG in comparison to the left CG. Geometric analysis was based on measurements at three-dimensional computed tomography angiography and included gutter volume and CG compression, quantified by the ratio between maximal and minimal diameter (D-ratio). In addition, renal artery flow was studied in a physiologic flow model and compared with the control. RESULTS: The average gutter volume was 343.5 ± 142.0 mm3, with the lowest gutter volume in the EVAS-Viabahn (W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) combination (102.6 mm3) and the largest in the AFX-Advanta V12 (Atrium Medical Corporation, Hudson, NH) configuration (559.6 mm3). The maximum D-ratio was larger in self-expanding CGs than in balloon-expandable CGs in all configurations (2.02 ± 0.34 vs 1.39 ± 0.13). The CG compression had minimal influence on renal volumetric flow (right, 390.7 ± 29.4 mL/min vs 455.1 mL/min; left, 423.9 ± 28.3 mL/min vs 410.0 mL/min in the control). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that gutter volume was lowest in ch-EVAS in combination with a Viabahn CG. CG compression was lower in configurations with the Advanta V12 than with Viabahn. Renal flow is unrestricted by CG compression.
BACKGROUND: The chimney technique has been successfully used to treat juxtarenal aortic aneurysms. The two main issues with this technique are gutter formation and chimney graft (CG) compression, which induce a risk for type Ia endoleaks and stent thrombosis, respectively. In this benchtop study, the geometry and renal artery flow of chimney endovascular aneurysm repair configurations were compared with chimney configurations with endovascular aneurysm sealing (ch-EVAS). METHODS: Seven flow phantoms were constructed, including one control and six chimney endovascular aneurysm repairs (Endurant [Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn] and AFX [Endologix Inc, Irvine, Calif]) or ch-EVAS (Nellix, Endologix) configurations, combined with either balloon-expandable or self-expanding CGs with an intended higher positioning of the right CG in comparison to the left CG. Geometric analysis was based on measurements at three-dimensional computed tomography angiography and included gutter volume and CG compression, quantified by the ratio between maximal and minimal diameter (D-ratio). In addition, renal artery flow was studied in a physiologic flow model and compared with the control. RESULTS: The average gutter volume was 343.5 ± 142.0 mm3, with the lowest gutter volume in the EVAS-Viabahn (W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) combination (102.6 mm3) and the largest in the AFX-Advanta V12 (Atrium Medical Corporation, Hudson, NH) configuration (559.6 mm3). The maximum D-ratio was larger in self-expanding CGs than in balloon-expandable CGs in all configurations (2.02 ± 0.34 vs 1.39 ± 0.13). The CG compression had minimal influence on renal volumetric flow (right, 390.7 ± 29.4 mL/min vs 455.1 mL/min; left, 423.9 ± 28.3 mL/min vs 410.0 mL/min in the control). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that gutter volume was lowest in ch-EVAS in combination with a Viabahn CG. CG compression was lower in configurations with the Advanta V12 than with Viabahn. Renal flow is unrestricted by CG compression.
Authors: Theodorus G van Schaik; Jorn P Meekel; Vincent Jongkind; Rutger J Lely; Maarten Truijers; Arjan W J Hoksbergen; Willem Wisselink; Jan D Blankensteijn; Kak Khee Yeung Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Jorn P Meekel; Theodorus G van Schaik; Rutger J Lely; Gerie Groot; Bram B van der Meijs; Willem Wisselink; Jan D Blankensteijn; Kak K Yeung Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2020-04-21 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Aleksandra C Zoethout; Arshad Sheriff; Clark J Zeebregts; Michel M P J Reijnen; Andrew Hill; Andrew Holden Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2020-09-10 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Albert Chong; Zhonghua Sun; Lennart van de Velde; Shirley Jansen; Michel Versluis; Michel M P J Reijnen; Erik Groot Jebbink Journal: Artif Organs Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 3.094