Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Abdominal aortic aneurysms: pre- and post-procedural imaging

  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a relatively common, potentially life-threatening disorder. Rupture of AAA is potentially catastrophic with high mortality. Intervention for AAA is indicated when the aneurysm reaches 5.0–5.5 cm or more, when symptomatic, or when increasing in size > 10 mm/year. AAA can be accurately assessed by cross-sectional imaging including computed tomography angiography and magnetic resonance angiography. Current options for intervention in AAA patients include open surgery and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), with EVAR becoming more prevalent over time. Cross-sectional imaging plays a crucial role in AAA surveillance, pre-procedural assessment, and post-EVAR management. This paper will discuss the current role of imaging in the assessment of AAA patients prior to intervention, in evaluation of procedural complications, and in long-term follow-up of EVAR patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Aggarwal S, Qamar A, Sharma V, Sharma A (2011) Abdominal aortic aneurysm: a comprehensive review. Exp Clin Cardiol 16:11–15

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Pearce WH, Zarins CK, Bacharach JM, American Heart Association Writing Group 6 (2008) Atherosclerotic peripheral vascular disease symposium II: controversies in abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Circulation 118:2860–2863

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lederle FA, Johnson GR, Wilson SE, et al. (2002) Rupture rate of large abdominal aortic aneurysms in patients refusing or unfit for elective repair. JAMA 287:2968–2972

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Assar AN, Zarins CK (2009) Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: a surgical emergency with many clinical presentations. Postgrad Med J 85:268–273

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Walker TG, Kalva SP, Yeddula K, et al. (2010) Clinical practice guidelines for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: written by the Standards of Practice Committee for the Society of Interventional Radiology and endorsed by the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe and the Canadian Interventional Radiology Association. JVIR 21:1632–1655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Parodi JC, Palmaz JC, Barone HD (1991) Transfemoral intraluminal graft implantation for abdominal aortic aneurysms. Ann Vasc Surg 5:491–499

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ng TT, Mirocha J, Magner D, Gewertz BL (2010) Variations in the utilization of endovascular aneurysm repair reflect population risk factors and disease prevalence. J Vasc Surg 51:801.e1–809.e1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Schermerhorn ML, O’Malley AJ, Jhaveri A, et al. (2008) Endovascular vs. open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the Medicare population. N Engl J Med Mass Med Soc 358:464–474

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Greenhalgh RM, Brown LC, Kwong GPS, Powell JT, Thompson SG (2004) EVAR trial participants. Comparison of endovascular aneurysm repair with open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1), 30-day operative mortality results: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 364:843–848. http://ac.els-cdn.com.laneproxy.stanford.edu/S0140673604169791/1-s2.0-S0140673604169791-main.pdf?_tid=84198d7a-163d-11e7-a671-00000aacb35f&acdnat=1490984092_f67c8dcf8ef9632bf94ef93619b1067b

  10. Powell JT, Sweeting MJ, Ulug P, et al. (2017) Meta-analysis of individual-patient data from EVAR-1, DREAM, OVER and ACE trials comparing outcomes of endovascular or open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm over 5 years. Br J Surg 104:166–178

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Prinssen M, Buskens E, de Jong SE, et al. (2007) Cost-effectiveness of conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: results of a randomized trial. J Vasc Surg 46:883–890

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. United Kingdom EVAR Trial Investigators, Greenhalgh RM, Brown LC, et al. (2010) Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. N Engl J Med 362:1863–1871

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. White GH, Yu W, May J (1996) Endoleak: a proposed new terminology to describe incomplete aneurysm exclusion by an endoluminal graft. J Endovasc Surg 3:124–125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fontaine V, Jacob M-P, Houard X, et al. (2002) Involvement of the mural thrombus as a site of protease release and activation in human aortic aneurysms. Am J Pathol 161:1701–1710

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Di Martino ES, Vorp DA (2003) Effect of variation in intraluminal thrombus constitutive properties on abdominal aortic aneurysm wall stress. Ann Biomed Eng 31:804–809

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Picel AC, Kansal N (2014) Essentials of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair imaging: postprocedure surveillance and complications. Am J Roentgenol 203:W358–W372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Brown LC, Greenhalgh RM, Powell JT, Thompson SG (2010) EVAR trial participants. Use of baseline factors to predict complications and reinterventions after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Br J Surg 97:1207–1217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Iezzi R, Cotroneo AR (2006) Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: CTA evaluation of contraindications. Abdom Imaging 31:722–731

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Truijers M, Resch T, Van Den Berg JC, Blankensteijn JD, Lönn L (2009) Endovascular aneurysm repair: state-of-art imaging techniques for preoperative planning and surveillance. J Cardiovasc Surg 50:423–438

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. van Keulen JW, van Prehn J, Prokop M, Moll FL, van Herwaarden JA (2009) Potential value of aneurysm sac volume measurements in addition to diameter measurements after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Endovasc Ther 16:506–513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Prinssen M, Verhoeven ELG, Verhagen HJM, Blankensteijn JD (2003) Decision-making in follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair based on diameter and volume measurements: a blinded comparison. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 26:184–187

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Karmacharya J, Parmer SS, Antezana JN, et al. (2006) Outcomes of accessory renal artery occlusion during endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 43:8–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Picel AC, Kansal N (2014) Essentials of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair imaging: preprocedural assessment. Am J Roentgenol 203:W347–W357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bastos Gonçalves F, Verhagen HJM, Chinsakchai K, et al. (2012) The influence of neck thrombus on clinical outcome and aneurysm morphology after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 56:36–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ishibashi H, Ishiguchi T, Ohta T, et al. (2012) Remodeling of proximal neck angulation after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 56:1201–1205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Robbins M, Kritpracha B, Beebe HG, et al. (2005) Suprarenal endograft fixation avoids adverse outcomes associated with aortic neck angulation. Ann Vasc Surg 19:172–177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Donas KP, Torsello G, Bisdas T, et al. (2012) Early outcomes for fenestrated and chimney endografts in the treatment of pararenal aortic pathologies are not significantly different: a systematic review with pooled data analysis. J Endovasc Ther 19:723–728

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lindblad B, Bin Jabr A, Holst J, Malina M (2015) Chimney grafts in aortic stent grafting: hazardous or useful technique? Systematic review of current data. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 50:722–731

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Linsen MAM, Jongkind V, Nio D, Hoksbergen AWJ, Wisselink W (2012) Pararenal aortic aneurysm repair using fenestrated endografts. J Vasc Surg 56:238–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Agag G, Salomon du Mont L, Leclerc B, Behr J, Rinckenbach S (2017) Is suprarenal fixation of aortic stent grafts really without consequence on the renal function? Ann Vasc Surg 39:90–98

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gawenda M, Brunkwall J (2008) Renal response to open and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a prospective study. Ann Vasc Surg 22:1–4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Saratzis A, Sarafidis P, Melas N, Khaira H (2014) Comparison of the impact of open and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair on renal function. J Vasc Surg 60:597–603

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Walsh SR, Boyle JR, Lynch AG, et al. (2008) Suprarenal endograft fixation and medium-term renal function: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Vasc Surg 47:1364–1370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Alsac J-M, Zarins CK, Heikkinen MA, et al. (2005) The impact of aortic endografts on renal function. J Vasc Surg 41:926–930

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lau LL, Hakaim AG, Oldenburg WA, et al. (2003) Effect of suprarenal versus infrarenal aortic endograft fixation on renal function and renal artery patency: a comparative study with intermediate follow-up. J Vasc Surg 37:1162–1168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Parmer SS, Carpenter JP (2006) Endologix Investigators. Endovascular aneurysm repair with suprarenal vs infrarenal fixation: a study of renal effects. J Vasc Surg 43:19–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cayne NS, Rhee SJ, Veith FJ, et al. (2003) Does transrenal fixation of aortic endografts impair renal function? J Vasc Surg 38:639–644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chaikof EL, Fillinger MF, Matsumura JS, et al. (2002) Identifying and grading factors that modify the outcome of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 35:1061–1066

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Choi HR, Park KH, Lee JH (2016) Risk factor analysis for buttock claudication after internal iliac artery embolization with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Vasc Specialist Int 32:44–50

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Chun J-Y, Mailli L, Abbasi MA, et al. (2014) Embolization of the internal iliac artery before EVAR: is it effective? Is it safe? Which technique should be used? Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 37:329–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Naughton PA, Park MS, Kheirelseid EAH, et al. (2012) A comparative study of the bell-bottom technique vs hypogastric exclusion for the treatment of aneurysmal extension to the iliac bifurcation. J Vasc Surg 55:956–962

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Ferreira M, Monteiro M, Lanziotti L (2010) Technical aspects and midterm patency of iliac branched devices. J Vasc Surg 51:545–550 (Discussion 550)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Manunga JM, Gloviczki P, Oderich GS, et al. (2013) Femoral artery calcification as a determinant of success for percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 58:1208–1212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Gupta V, Feng K, Cheruvu P, et al. (2014) High femoral artery bifurcation predicts contralateral high bifurcation: implications for complex percutaneous cardiovascular procedures requiring large caliber and/or dual access. J Invasive Cardiol 26:409–412

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Early H, Atkins M (2012) Technical tips for managing difficult iliac access. Semin Vasc Surg 25:138–143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Maldonado TS, Rockman CB, Riles E, et al. (2004) Ischemic complications after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 40:703–710 (Discussion 709)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Hodgson R, McWilliams RG, Simpson A, et al. (2003) Migration versus apparent migration: importance of errors due to positioning variation in plain radiographic follow-up of aortic stent-grafts. J Endovasc Ther 10:902–910

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Fearn S, Lawrence-Brown MMD, Semmens JB, Hartley D (2003) Follow-up after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: the plain radiograph has an essential role in surveillance. J Endovasc Ther 10:894–901

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Harrison GJ, Oshin OA, Vallabhaneni SR, et al. (2011) Surveillance after EVAR based on duplex ultrasound and abdominal radiography. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 42:187–192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kranokpiraksa P, Kaufman JA (2008) Follow-up of endovascular aneurysm repair: plain radiography, ultrasound, CT/CT angiography, MR imaging/MR angiography, or what? JVIR 19:S27–S36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. http://www.sciencedirect.com.laneproxy.stanford.edu/science/article/pii/S0002914910000822. Accessed 20 March 2016

  52. Wolf YG, Johnson BL, Hill BB, et al. (2000) Duplex ultrasound scanning versus computed tomographic angiography for postoperative evaluation of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 32:1142–1148

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Sprouse LR, Meier GH, Parent FN, et al. (2004) Is ultrasound more accurate than axial computed tomography for determination of maximal abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 28:28–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Beeman BR, Doctor LM, Doerr K, et al. (2009) Duplex ultrasound imaging alone is sufficient for midterm endovascular aneurysm repair surveillance: a cost analysis study and prospective comparison with computed tomography scan. J Vasc Surg 50:1019–1024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Raman KG, Missig-Carroll N, Richardson T, Muluk SC, Makaroun MS (2003) Color-flow duplex ultrasound scan versus computed tomographic scan in the surveillance of endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 38:645–651

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Sato DT, Goff CD, Gregory RT, et al. (1998) Endoleak after aortic stent graft repair: diagnosis by color duplex ultrasound scan versus computed tomography scan. J Vasc Surg 28:657–663

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Arko FR, Filis KA, Siedel SA, et al. (2003) Intrasac flow velocities predict sealing of type II endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 37:8–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Nyheim T, Staxrud LE, Rosen L, et al. (2013) Review of postoperative CT and ultrasound for endovascular aneurysm repair using Talent stent graft: can we simplify the surveillance protocol and reduce the number of CT scans? Acta Radiol 54:54–58

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Sun Z (2006) Diagnostic value of color duplex ultrasonography in the follow-up of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. JVIR 17:759–764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Cantisani V, Grazhdani H, Clevert D-A, et al. (2015) EVAR: benefits of CEUS for monitoring stent-graft status. Eur J Radiol 84:1658–1665

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Napoli V, Bargellini I, Sardella SG, et al. (2004) Abdominal aortic aneurysm: contrast-enhanced US for missed endoleaks after endoluminal repair. Radiology 233:217–225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Ten Bosch JA, Rouwet EV, Peters CTH, et al. (2010) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus computed tomographic angiography for surveillance of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. JVIR 21:638–643

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ashoke R, Brown LC, Rodway A, et al. (2005) Color duplex ultrasonography is insensitive for the detection of endoleak after aortic endografting: a systematic review. J Endovasc Ther 12:297–305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Roos JE, Hellinger JC, Hallet R, et al. (2005) Detection of endograft fractures with multidetector row computed tomography. J Vasc Surg 42:1002–1006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Tam MDBS, Laycock SD, Brown JRI, Jakeways M (2013) 3D printing of an aortic aneurysm to facilitate decision making and device selection for endovascular aneurysm repair in complex neck anatomy. J Endovasc Ther 20:863–867

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Tam MD, Latham T, Brown JRI, Jakeways M (2014) Use of a 3D printed hollow aortic model to assist EVAR planning in a case with complex neck anatomy: potential of 3D printing to improve patient outcome. J Endovasc Ther 21:760–762

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Armerding MD, Rubin GD, Beaulieu CF, et al. (2000) Aortic aneurysmal disease: assessment of stent-graft treatment-CT versus conventional angiography. Radiology 215:138–146

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Bobadilla JL, Suwanabol PA, Reeder SB, et al. (2013) Clinical implications of non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography for follow-up after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Ann Vasc Surg 27:1042–1048

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Macari M, Chandarana H, Schmidt B, et al. (2006) Abdominal aortic aneurysm: can the arterial phase at CT evaluation after endovascular repair be eliminated to reduce radiation dose? Radiology 241:908–914

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Hansen NJ, Kaza RK, Maturen KE, Liu PS, Platt JF (2014) Evaluation of low-dose CT angiography with model-based iterative reconstruction after endovascular aneurysm repair of a thoracic or abdominal aortic aneurysm. Am J Roentgenol 202:648–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Flors L, Leiva-Salinas C, Norton PT, Patrie JT, Hagspiel KD (2013) Endoleak detection after endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysm using dual-source dual-energy CT: suitable scanning protocols and potential radiation dose reduction. Am J Roentgenol 200:451–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Szucs-Farkas Z, Semadeni M, Bensler S, et al. (2009) Endoleak detection with CT angiography in an abdominal aortic aneurysm phantom: effect of tube energy, simulated patient size, and physical properties of endoleaks. Radiology 251:590–598

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Schindera ST, Graca P, Patak MA, et al. (2009) Thoracoabdominal-aortoiliac multidetector-row CT angiography at 80 and 100 kVp: assessment of image quality and radiation dose. Investig Radiol 44:650–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Schoepf UJ, Meinel FG (eds) (2016) Multidetector-row CT of the Thorax, 2nd edn. Cham: Springer, pp 37–57

    Google Scholar 

  75. Ayuso JR, de Caralt TM, Pages M, et al. (2004) MRA is useful as a follow-up technique after endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms with nitinol endoprostheses. J Magn Reson Imaging 20:803–810

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Pandey N, Litt H (2015) Surveillance imaging following endovascular aneurysm repair. Semin Interv Radiol 32:239–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Lookstein RA, Goldman J, Pukin L, Marin ML (2004) Time-resolved magnetic resonance angiography as a noninvasive method to characterize endoleaks: initial results compared with conventional angiography. J Vasc Surg 39:27–33

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Hope TA, Zarins CK, Herfkens RJ (2009) Initial experience characterizing a type I endoleak from velocity profiles using time-resolved three-dimensional phase-contrast MRI. J Vasc Surg 49:1580–1584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Sakata M, Takehara Y, Katahashi K, et al. (2016) Hemodynamic analysis of endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair by using 4-dimensional flow-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging. Circ J 80:1715–1725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. van Bogerijen GHW, van Herwaarden JA, Conti M, et al. (2014) Importance of dynamic aortic evaluation in planning TEVAR. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 3:300–306

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Resta EC, Secchi F, Giardino A, et al. (2013) Non-contrast MR imaging for detecting endoleak after abdominal endovascular aortic repair. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 29:229–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Baum RA, Carpenter JP, Golden MA, et al. (2002) Treatment of type 2 endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: comparison of transarterial and translumbar techniques. J Vasc Surg 35:23–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Rosen RJ, Green RM (2008) Endoleak management following endovascular aneurysm repair. JVIR 19:S37–S43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Shah A, Stavropoulos SW (2009) Imaging surveillance following endovascular aneurysm repair. Semin Interv Radiol 26:10–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Lifeline Registry of EVAR Publications Committee (2005) Lifeline registry of endovascular aneurysm repair: long-term primary outcome measures. J Vasc Surg 42:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Wilt TJ, Lederle FA, Macdonald R, et al. (2006) Comparison of endovascular and open surgical repairs for abdominal aortic aneurysm. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 144:1–113

    Google Scholar 

  87. Stavropoulos SW, Clark TWI, Carpenter JP, et al. (2005) Use of CT angiography to classify endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. JVIR 16:663–667

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Ullery BW, Tran K, Itoga NK, Dalman RL, Lee JT (2017) Natural history of gutter-related type Ia endoleaks after snorkel/chimney endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 65:981–990

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Ueda T, Takaoka H, Petrovitch I, Rubin GD (2014) Detection of broken sutures and metal-ring fractures in AneuRx stent-grafts by using three-dimensional CT angiography after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: association with late endoleak development and device migration. Radiology 272:275–283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Arko FR, Rubin GD, Johnson BL, et al. (2001) Type-II endoleaks following endovascular AAA repair: preoperative predictors and long-term effects. J Endovasc Ther 8:503–510

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. van Marrewijk CJ, Fransen G, Laheij RJF, Harris PL, Buth J (2004) EUROSTAR Collaborators. Is a type II endoleak after EVAR a harbinger of risk? Causes and outcome of open conversion and aneurysm rupture during follow-up. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 27:128–137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Jones JE, Atkins MD, Brewster DC, et al. (2007) Persistent type 2 endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm is associated with adverse late outcomes. J Vasc Surg 46:1–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Veith FJ, Baum RA, Ohki T, et al. (2002) Nature and significance of endoleaks and endotension: summary of opinions expressed at an international conference. J Vasc Surg 35:1029–1035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Liaw JVP, Clark M, Gibbs R, et al. (2009) Update: complications and management of infrarenal EVAR. Eur J Radiol 71:541–551

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Nolz R, Teufelsbauer H, Asenbaum U, et al. (2012) Type II endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: fate of the aneurysm sac and neck changes during long-term follow-up. J Endovasc Ther 19:193–199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Stavropoulos SW, Marin H, Fairman RM, et al. (2005) Recurrent endoleak detection and measurement of aneurysm size with CTA after coil embolization of endoleaks. JVIR 16:1313–1317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Maleux G, Poorteman L, Laenen A, et al. (2017) Incidence, etiology, and management of type III endoleak after endovascular aortic repair. J Vasc Surg 66:1056–1064

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Ricotta JJ (2010) Endoleak management and postoperative surveillance following endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 52:91S–99S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Trocciola SM, Dayal R, Chaer RA, et al. (2006) The development of endotension is associated with increased transmission of pressure and serous components in porous expanded polytetrafluoroethylene stent-grafts: characterization using a canine model. J Vasc Surg 43:109–116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Filippi F, Tirotti C, Stella N, Rizzo L, Taurino M (2013) Endotension-related aortic sac rupture treated by endograft relining. Vascular 21:113–115

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Perry RJT, Martin MJ, Eckert MJ, Sohn VY, Steele SR (2008) Colonic ischemia complicating open vs endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 48:272–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Wald R, Waikar SS, Liangos O, et al. (2006) Acute renal failure after endovascular vs open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 43:460–466 (Discussion 466)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Zettervall SL, Ultee KHJ, Soden PA, et al. (2017) Predictors of renal dysfunction after endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 65:991–996

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Grant SW, Grayson AD, Grant MJ, Purkayastha D, McCollum CN (2012) What are the risk factors for renal failure following open elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 43:182–187

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Belenky A, Atar E, Orron DE, et al. (2014) Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair using transvenous intravascular US catheter guidance in patients with chronic renal failure. JVIR 25:702–706

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Zarins CK, Bloch DA, Crabtree T, et al. (2003) Stent graft migration after endovascular aneurysm repair: importance of proximal fixation. J Vasc Surg 38:1264–1272 (Discussion 1272)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Sampaio SM, Panneton JM, Mozes G, et al. (2005) AneuRx device migration: incidence, risk factors, and consequences. Ann Vasc Surg 19:178–185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Stavropoulos SW, Charagundla SR (2007) Imaging techniques for detection and management of endoleaks after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Radiology 243:641–655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Resch T, Ivancev K, Brunkwall J, et al. (1999) Distal migration of stent-grafts after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. JVIR 10:257–264 (Discussion 265–276)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Spanos K, Karathanos C, Saleptsis V, Giannoukas AD (2016) Systematic review and meta-analysis of migration after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Vascular 24:323–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Pintoux D, Chaillou P, Azema L, et al. (2011) Long-term influence of suprarenal or infrarenal fixation on proximal neck dilatation and stentgraft migration after EVAR. Ann Vasc Surg 25:1012–1019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Rafii BY, Abilez OJ, Benharash P, Zarins CK (2008) Lateral movement of endografts within the aneurysm sac is an indicator of stent-graft instability. J Endovasc Ther 15:335–343

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Hellinger JC (2005) Endovascular repair of thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms: pre- and postprocedural imaging. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 8:2–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Maleux G, Koolen M, Heye S, Nevelsteen A (2008) Limb occlusion after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms with supported endografts. JVIR 19:1409–1412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Fairman RM, Baum RA, Carpenter JP, et al. (2002) Limb interventions in patients undergoing treatment with an unsupported bifurcated aortic endograft system: a review of the Phase II EVT Trial. J Vasc Surg 36:118–126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Mantas GK, Antonopoulos CN, Sfyroeras GS, et al. (2015) Factors predisposing to endograft limb occlusion after endovascular aortic repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 49:39–44

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Maleux G, Koolen M, Heye S, Heremans B, Nevelsteen A (2008) Mural thrombotic deposits in abdominal aortic endografts are common and do not require additional treatment at short-term and midterm follow-up. JVIR 19:1558–1562

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Fatima J, Duncan AA, de Grandis E, et al. (2013) Treatment strategies and outcomes in patients with infected aortic endografts. J Vasc Surg 58:371–379

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Sharif MA, Lee B, Lau LL, et al. (2007) Prosthetic stent graft infection after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 46:442–448

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. van den Berg HR, Leijdekkers VJ, Vahl A (2006) Aortic stent-graft infection following septic complications of a kidney stone. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 29:443–445

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Bergqvist D, Björck M (2009) Secondary arterioenteric fistulation: a systematic literature analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 37:31–42

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Becquemin J-P, Allaire E, Desgranges P, Kobeiter H (2005) Delayed complications following EVAR. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 8:30–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Mehta M, Paty PSK, Roddy SP, et al. (2011) Treatment options for delayed AAA rupture following endovascular repair. J Vasc Surg 53:14–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Hiramoto JS, Reilly LM, Schneider DB, et al. (2007) Long-term outcome and reintervention after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair using the Zenith stent graft. J Vasc Surg 45:461–466 (Discussion 465)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Bashir MR, Ferral H, Jacobs C, McCarthy W, Goldin M (2009) Endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: management strategies according to CT findings. AJR 192:W178–W186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Alerci M, Oberson M, Fogliata A, et al. (2009) Prospective, intra individual comparison of MRI versus MDCT for endoleak detection after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Eur Radiol 19:1223–1231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Eliason JL, Upchurch GR (2008) Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Circulation 117:1738–1744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Cardiovascular Imaging Section, Stanford University Hospital and Clinics, 300 Pasteur Drive, Grant Building, S-072, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA

    Richard L. Hallett & Dominik Fleischmann

  2. St. Vincent Heart Center of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN, USA

    Richard L. Hallett

  3. Northwest Radiology Network, Indianapolis, IN, USA

    Richard L. Hallett

  4. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Providence Heart and Vascular Institute, Portland, OR, USA

    Brant W. Ullery

Authors
  1. Richard L. Hallett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brant W. Ullery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dominik Fleischmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard L. Hallett.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hallett, R.L., Ullery, B.W. & Fleischmann, D. Abdominal aortic aneurysms: pre- and post-procedural imaging. Abdom Radiol 43, 1044–1066 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1520-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1520-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation