A single-centre experience of 200 consecutive unselected patients in percutaneous EVAR
- 234 Downloads
This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (P-EVAR) in an “unselected” population of patients using Prostar XL closure device, comparing our results with the literature data reported for open EVAR (O-EVAR) and P-EVAR in selected populations.
Materials and methods
We prospectively enrolled 200 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms to be treated with the P-EVAR procedure, without any selection criteria. Four hundred percutaneous femoral accesses using the Prostar XL closure device were performed. The early follow-up protocol consisted of a Doppler ultrasound (US) examination. Later evaluations were performed with US and computed tomography.
Technical success was achieved in all percutaneous accesses (100 %). Ten early complications related to access site were recorded (10/400; 2.5 %): four pseudoaneurysms and six cases of lower limb ischaemia. Five of ten complications occurred in patients presenting calcification of the common femoral arteries, whereas 4/10 were in patients with “complex” groin anatomy. Eight of ten complications occurred at the access site of the main body of the prosthesis using a sheath size >20 Fr.
Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair in “unselected” patients is safe and efficient, with a very low risk of access-related complications, comparable to P-EVAR in selected populations and to the best O-EVAR series.
KeywordsProstar XL EVAR Percutaneous access Endovascular treatment
Common femoral artery
Endovascular aneurysm repair
Open endovascular aneurysm repair
Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair
Conflict of interest
All the authors, Sergio Petronelli, Maria Teresa Zurlo, Silvia Giambersio, Lucia Danieli, Mariaelena Occhipinti, declare no conflict of interest.
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.
- 5.Singh N, Adams E, Neville R et al (2005) Percutaneous endovascular AAA repair. Endovascular Today, pp 39–44Google Scholar
- 6.Can A, Torsello G, Umscheid T (2008) The arterial approaches for endovascular aortic grafting. In: Jacobs M, Branchereau A (eds) Endovascular aortic repair: the state of the art. Oxford Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp 57–61Google Scholar
- 29.Chuter TAM, Lukaszewicz GC, Kerlan RB et al (2000) Is percutaneous endovascular AAA repair feasible? J Endovasc Ther 7:1–6Google Scholar
- 33.Haulon S, HassenKhodja R, Proudfoot CW et al (2011) A systematic literature review of the efficacy and safety of the Prostar XL device for the closure of large femoral arterial access sites in patients undergoing percutaneous endovascular aortic procedures. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 41:201–213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar