Felice Pecoraro1, Umberto M Bracale2, Arduino Farina3, Giovanni Badalamenti3, Francesca Ferlito3, Mario Lachat4, Ettore Dinoto3, Vincenzo Asti3, Guido Bajardi3. 1. Department of Surgical Oncological and Oral Sciences (DICHIRONS), University of Palermo, Vascular Surgery Unit, Palermo, Italy. Electronic address: felice.pecoraro@unipa.it. 2. Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Federico II of Naples, Naples, Italy. 3. Department of Surgical Oncological and Oral Sciences (DICHIRONS), University of Palermo, Vascular Surgery Unit, Palermo, Italy. 4. Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, Zurich University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been introduced as diagnostic adjunct to provide new insights into the diagnosis and therapy of vascular disease. Herein, we compared the outcomes of conventional endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and EVAR with IVUS in patients presenting with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm using a propensity-matched cohort. METHODS: From May 2013 to August 2017, 221 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Of that, 122 patients were eligible for inclusion and underwent propensity score matching. Perioperative mortality and morbidity, renal function impairment, endoleak incidence, mean contrast medium usage, operative time, radiation exposure (including fluoroscopy time, dose-area product [DAP], and digital subtraction angiography [DSA] runs), survival, and freedom from reintervention were the outcomes measured. RESULTS: After matching, 52 patients were included, 26 in the conventional EVAR group and 26 in the EVAR with IVUS group. No perioperative mortality or type I/III endoleak were registered. One perioperative lymphatic fistula and one iliac limb occlusion were observed. In the EVAR with IVUS group, a significant reduction of contrast medium (92 [vs. 51 ± 17] vs. 51 [20-68] mL; P = 0.003) and radiation exposure including fluoroscopy time (12 [9-16] vs. 20 [12-25] min; P = 0.001), DAP (15 [9-21] vs. 32 [16-44] G*cm2; P = 0.002), and DSA runs (2 [1-3] vs. 3 [2-4]; P = 0.04) was reported. No differences were observed in terms of glomerular filtration rate (86 [45-121] vs. 90 [38-117] mL/min; P = 0.14) and operation time (176 [124-210] vs. 179 [120-210]; P = 0.48). Survival at 36 months was 93% for standard EVAR and 92% for EVAR with IVUS (P = 0.845). Freedom from reintervention at 36 months was 85.5% in both the groups (P = 0.834). CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary experience, the use of IVUS during EVAR was feasible with no registered postoperative complications. A significant reduction of contrast medium usage and radiation exposure was observed with the use of IVUS. The IVUS is an adjunctive tool to consider in the vascular surgeon armamentarium, especially in centers where advanced radiological tools of imaging fusion are not available.
BACKGROUND: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been introduced as diagnostic adjunct to provide new insights into the diagnosis and therapy of vascular disease. Herein, we compared the outcomes of conventional endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and EVAR with IVUS in patients presenting with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm using a propensity-matched cohort. METHODS: From May 2013 to August 2017, 221 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Of that, 122 patients were eligible for inclusion and underwent propensity score matching. Perioperative mortality and morbidity, renal function impairment, endoleak incidence, mean contrast medium usage, operative time, radiation exposure (including fluoroscopy time, dose-area product [DAP], and digital subtraction angiography [DSA] runs), survival, and freedom from reintervention were the outcomes measured. RESULTS: After matching, 52 patients were included, 26 in the conventional EVAR group and 26 in the EVAR with IVUS group. No perioperative mortality or type I/III endoleak were registered. One perioperative lymphatic fistula and one iliac limb occlusion were observed. In the EVAR with IVUS group, a significant reduction of contrast medium (92 [vs. 51 ± 17] vs. 51 [20-68] mL; P = 0.003) and radiation exposure including fluoroscopy time (12 [9-16] vs. 20 [12-25] min; P = 0.001), DAP (15 [9-21] vs. 32 [16-44] G*cm2; P = 0.002), and DSA runs (2 [1-3] vs. 3 [2-4]; P = 0.04) was reported. No differences were observed in terms of glomerular filtration rate (86 [45-121] vs. 90 [38-117] mL/min; P = 0.14) and operation time (176 [124-210] vs. 179 [120-210]; P = 0.48). Survival at 36 months was 93% for standard EVAR and 92% for EVAR with IVUS (P = 0.845). Freedom from reintervention at 36 months was 85.5% in both the groups (P = 0.834). CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary experience, the use of IVUS during EVAR was feasible with no registered postoperative complications. A significant reduction of contrast medium usage and radiation exposure was observed with the use of IVUS. The IVUS is an adjunctive tool to consider in the vascular surgeon armamentarium, especially in centers where advanced radiological tools of imaging fusion are not available.