Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Endovascular Treatment of Delayed Type 1 and 3 Endoleaks

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 16 December 2010

Abstract

Purpose

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has revolutionized the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Type I and III endoleaks require prompt, definitive repair or explantation. We review a single center experience of endovascular treatment of type I and III endoleaks.

Materials and Methods

Retrospective review of 22 patients who underwent endovascular intervention for remediation of proximal or distal seal zone endoleaks.

Results

Median age was 77 years. Median time interval from EVAR to reintervention was 4 years (range, 1 month–11 years). Sixteen patients (73%) had radiological evidence of endoleak and/or expanding sac size and 6 (27%) had contained rupture. Nine patients underwent a total of 12 endovascular reinterventions before this salvage procedure. Stent grafts used at the original procedure were: AneuRx (n = 10), Excluder (n = 7), Ancure (n = 3), Zenith (n = 1), and custom made (n = 1). Endoleaks treated were type Ia (n = 11), Ib (n = 12), and type III (n = 3). Interventions included: proximal cuff insertion with or without Palmaz stent insertion (n = 8), distal limb extension (n = 2), stent graft relining (n = 6), embolization of hypogastric artery and iliac limb extension (ILE) (n = 5), and aorto-uni-iliac stent graft (AUI) with femoral–femoral crossover (n = 1). One patient who had a rupture died of multiorgan failure. Two patients needed additional reinterventions for endoleaks. Median length of hospital stay was 1 day.

Conclusion

Lifelong surveillance after EVAR is advocated because of the potential of delayed type I or III endoleaks, which mandate definitive treatment. Fortunately, most delayed type I and III endoleaks can be successfully corrected with endoluminal interventions rather than resorting to explantation of the endograft.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. EVAR Trial Participants (2004) 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Prinssen M, Verhoeven ELJ, Buth J et al (2004) A randomized trial comparing conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. N Engl J Med 351:1607–1618

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bush RL, Johnson ML, Collins TC et al (2006) Open versus endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in VA hospitals. J Am Coll Surg 202:577–587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. 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 

  6. Harris PL, Vallabhaneni SR, Desgranges P et al (2000) Incidence and risk factors of late rupture, conversion, and death after endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms: the EUROSTAR experience. European Collaborators on Stent/graft Techniques for Aortic Aneurysm Repair. J Vasc Surg 32:739–749

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. van Marrewijk C, Buth J, Harris PL et al (2002) Significance of endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: the EUROSTAR experience. J Vasc Surg 35:461–473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lederle FA, Freischlag JA, Kyriakides TC et al (2009) Outcomes following endovascular vs open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a randomized trial. JAMA 302:1535–1542

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Becquemin JP, Kelley L, Zubilewicz T et al (2004) Outcomes of secondary interventions after abdominal aortic aneurysm endovascular repair. J Vasc Surg 39:298–305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Conrad MF, Adams AB, Guest JM et al (2009) Secondary intervention after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Ann Surg 250:383–389

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Baum RA, Stavropoulos SW, Fairman RM et al (2003) Endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14(9 pt 1):1111–1117

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Matsumura JS, Moore WS (1998) Clinical consequences of periprosthetic leak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Endovascular Technologies Investigators. J Vasc Surg 27:606–613

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Cronenwett J (2010) Rutherford’s vascular surgery, 7th edn, vol 2. Saunders Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 1972–1994

  14. Morasch MD, Kibbe MR, Evans ME et al (2004) Percutaneous repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 40:12–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Resnick SA, Eskandari MK (2008) Outcomes of Amplatzer vascular plugs for occlusion of internal iliacs during aortoiliac aneurysm stent grafting. Ann Vasc Surg 22:613–617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zarins CK, White RA, Hodgson KJ et al (2000) Endoleak as a predictor of outcome after endovascular aneurysm repair: AneuRx multicenter clinical trial. J Vasc Surg 32:90–107

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lumsden AB, Allen RC, Chaikof EL et al (1995) Delayed rupture of aortic aneurysms following endovascular stent grafting. Am J Surg 170:174–178

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Malina M, Ivancev K, Chuter TA et al (1997) Changing aneurysmal morphology after endovascular grafting: relation to leakage or persistent perfusion. J Endovasc Surg 4:23–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Zayed HA, Attia R, Modarai B et al (2010) Predictors of reintervention after endovascular repair of isolated iliac artery aneurysm. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00270-010-9876-0

  21. Sampaio SM, Panneton JM, Mozes GI et al (2004) Proximal type I endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: predictive factors. Ann Vasc Surg 18:621–628

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. White GH, May J, Petrasek P et al (1999) Endotension: an explanation for continued AAA growth after successful endoluminal repair. J Endovasc Surg 6:308–315

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sternbergh WC 3rd, Money SR, Greenberg RK et al (2004) Influence of endograft oversizing on device migration, endoleak, aneurysm shrinkage, and aortic neck dilation: results from the Zenith Multicenter Trial. J Vasc Surg 39:20–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sampaio SM, Shin SH, Panneton JM et al (2009) Intraoperative endoleak during EVAR: frequency, nature, and significance. Vasc Endovascular Surg 43:352–359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zayed HA, Bell RE, Clough RE et al (2009) Results of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms with an unfavorable proximal neck using large stent-grafts. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 32:1161–1164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cao P, Verzini F, Zannetti S et al (2002) Device migration after endoluminal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: analysis of 113 cases with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. J Vasc Surg 35:229–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Matsumura JS, Pearce WH, McCarthy WJ et al (1997) Reduction in aortic aneurysm size: early results after endovascular graft placement. EVT Investigators. J Vasc Surg 25:113–123

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Harris P, Brennan J, Martin J et al (1999) Longitudinal aneurysm shrinkage following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: a source of intermediate and late complications. J Endovasc Surg 6:11–16

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Tsang JS, Naughton PA, Wang TT et al (2009) Endovascular repair of para-anastomotic aortoiliac aneurysms. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 32:1165–1170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kim JK, Noll RE Jr, Tonnessen BH et al (2008) A technique for increased accuracy in the placement of the “giant” Palmaz stent for treatment of type IA endoleak after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 48:755–757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Riga CV, Bicknell CD, Wallace D et al (2009) Robot-assisted antegrade in-situ fenestrated stent grafting. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 32:522–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kelso RL, Lyden SP, Butler B et al (2009) Late conversion of aortic stent grafts. J Vasc Surg 49:589–595

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Carrafiello G, Laganà D, Recaldini C et al (2006) Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and computed tomography in classifying endoleaks after endovascular treatment of abdominal aorta aneurysms: preliminary experience. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 29:969–974

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Vascular Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 676 N St. Clair Street, #650, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Peter A. Naughton, Manuel Garcia-Toca, Heron E. Rodriguez & Mark K. Eskandari

  2. Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 676 N St. Clair Street, #650, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Aoife N. Keeling & Scott A. Resnick

Authors
  1. Peter A. Naughton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Manuel Garcia-Toca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heron E. Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aoife N. Keeling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Scott A. Resnick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mark K. Eskandari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark K. Eskandari.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00270-010-0089-3

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Naughton, P.A., Garcia-Toca, M., Rodriguez, H.E. et al. Endovascular Treatment of Delayed Type 1 and 3 Endoleaks. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 34, 751–757 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-010-0020-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-010-0020-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation