Cargando…

8-Year Long-Term Outcome Comparison: Two Ways to Exclude the Internal Iliac Artery during Endovascular Aorta Repair (EVAR) Surgery

PURPOSE: To evaluate the 8-year long-term outcome after internal iliac artery (IIA) coverage with or without embolization in EVAR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2006 to December 2013, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) subjects that underwent EVAR and IIA exclusion were recruited and analyzed retr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luo, Han, Huang, Bin, Yuan, Ding, Yang, Yi, Xiong, Fei, Zeng, Guojun, Wu, Zhoupeng, Chen, Xiyang, Du, Xiaojiong, Wen, Xiaorong, Liu, Chuncheng, Yang, Hongliu, Zhao, Jichun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4507853/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26193113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0130586
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To evaluate the 8-year long-term outcome after internal iliac artery (IIA) coverage with or without embolization in EVAR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2006 to December 2013, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) subjects that underwent EVAR and IIA exclusion were recruited and analyzed retrospectively. All the subjects were divided into group A or B based on the presence or absence of intraoperative IIA embolization before coverage (group A: without embolization; group B: with embolization). The 30-day mortality, stent patency, and the incidences of endoleaks and ischemia of the buttocks and lower limbs were compared. The follow-up period was 96 months. RESULT: There were 137 subjects (A: 74 vs. B: 63), 124 male (91.1%) and 13 female (9.5%), with a mean age of 71.6 years. There were no significant differences in the early outcomes of intraoperative blood loss (87.23±14.07 ml; A: 86.53±9.57 ml vs. B: 88.06±18.04 ml, p = .545) and surgery time (87.13±9.25 min; A: 85.99±7.07 min vs. B: 88.48±11.19 min, p = .130). However, there were significant differences in contrast consumption (65.18±9.85 ml; A: 61.89±7.95 ml vs. B: 69.05±10.50 ml, p<.001) and intraoperative X-ray time (5.9±0.86 min; A: 5.63±0.49 min vs. B: 6.22±1.07 min, P<.001). The 30-day mortality was approximately 0.73%. In the follow-up analysis, no significant differences were identified in the incidence of endoleak (22 subjects; type I: A: 2 vs. B: 2, p = 1.000; type II: A: 8 vs. B: 4, p = .666; type III: A: 4 vs. B: 3, p = 1.000), occlusion (5 subjects; 4.35%; A: 1 vs. B: 4, p = .180), or ischemia (9 subjects; 7.83%; A: 3 vs. B: 6, p = .301). In the analysis of group B, although there were no significant differences between subjects with unilateral and bilateral IIA embolization, but longer hospital stays were required (P<.001), and a more severe complication (skin and gluteus necrosis) occurred in 1 subject with bilateral IIA embolization. CONCLUSION: IIA could be excluded during EVAR. IIA coverage without embolization had a good surgical and prognostic outcome, and this procedure was not different significantly from coverage with embolization in terms of endoleaks, patency and ischemia.