TY - JOUR
T1 - Next generation post EVAR follow-up regime
AU - Ferreira, R.S.
AU - Gonçalves, F.B.
N1 - Cited By :1
Export Date: 18 October 2017
CODEN: JCVSA
Correspondence Address: Ferreira, R.S.; Department of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, CHLC, Santa Marta Hospital, Rua de Santa Marta 50, Portugal; email: [email protected]
Chemicals/CAS: sulfur hexafluoride, 2551-62-4; Contrast Media
Tradenames: Nellix
References: Patel, R., Sweeting, M.J., Powell, J.T., Greenhalgh, R.M., Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm in 15-years' follow-up of the UK endovascular aneurysm repair trial 1 (EVAR trial 1): A randomised controlled trial (2016) The Lancet, 388, pp. 2366-2374; Powell, J.T., Sweeting, M.J., Ulug, P., Blankensteijn, J.D., Lederle, F.A., Becquemin, J.P., 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 (2017) Br J Surg, 104, pp. 166-178; Schanzer, A., Messina, L.M., Ghosh, K., Simons, J.P., Robinson, W.P., III, Aiello, F.A., Follow-up compliance after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in Medicare beneficiaries (2015) J Vasc Surg, 61, pp. 16-22; Hicks, C.W., Zarkowsky, D.S., Bostock, I.C., Stone, D.H., Black, J.H., III, Eldrup-, J.J., Endovascular aneurysm repair patients who are lost to follow-up have worse outcomes (2017) J Vasc Surg, 65, pp. 1625-1635; Lal, B.K., Zhou, W., Li, Z., Kyriakides, T., Matsumura, J., Lederle, F.A., Predictors and outcomes of endoleaks in the veterans affairs open versus endovascular repair (over) trial of abdominal aortic aneurysms (2015) J Vasc Surg, 62, pp. 1394-1404; Nordon, I.M., Karthikesalingam, A., Hinchliffe, R.J., Holt, P.J., Loftus, I.M., Thompson, M.M., Secondary interventions following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and the enduring value of graft surveillance (2010) Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 39, pp. 547-554; Dias, N.V., Riva, L., Ivancev, K., Resch, T., Sonesson, B., Malina, M., Is there a benefit of frequent CT follow-up after EVAR? (2009) Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 37, pp. 425-430; Chisci, E., Setacci, F., Iacoponi, F., De Donato, G., Cappelli, A., Setacci, C., Surveillance imaging modality does not affect detection rate of asymptomatic secondary interventions following EVAR (2012) Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 43, pp. 276-281; De Bruin, J.L., Karthikesalingam, A., Holt, P.J., Prinssen, M., Thompson, M.M., Blankensteijn, J.D., Predicting reinterventions after open and endovascular aneurysm repair using the St George's Vascular Institute score (2016) J Vasc Surg, 63, pp. 1428-1433; Bastos, G.F., Verhagen, H.J., Chinsakchai, K., Van Keulen, J.W., Voute, M.T., Zandvoort, H.J., The influence of neck thrombus on clinical outcome and aneurysm morphology after endovascular aneurysm repair (2012) J Vasc Surg, 56, pp. 36-44; Karthikesalingam, A., Vidal-Diez, A., De Bruin, J.L., Thompson, M.M., Hinchliffe, R.J., Loftus, I.M., International validation of a risk score for complications and reinterventions after endovascular aneurysm repair (2015) Br J Surg, 102, pp. 509-515; Karthikesalingam, A., Holt, P.J., Hinchliffe, R.J., Nordon, I.M., Loftus, I.M., Thompson, M.M., Risk of reintervention after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (2010) Br J Surg, 97, pp. 657-663; Chaikof, E.L., Brewster, D.C., Dalman, R.L., Makaroun, M.S., Illig, K.A., Sicard, G.A., SVS practice guidelines for the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm: Executive summary (2009) J Vasc Surg, 50, pp. 880-896; Moll, F.L., Powell, J.T., Fraedrich, G., Verzini, F., Haulon, S., Waltham, M., Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms clinical practice guidelines of the European society for vascular surgery (2011) Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 41, pp. S1-S58; Erbel, R., Aboyans, V., Boileau, C., Bossone, E., Bartolomeo, R.D., Eggebrecht, H., ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases: Document covering acute and chronic aortic diseases of the thoracic and abdominal aorta of the adult (2014) Eur Heart J, 35, pp. 2873-2926. , The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Aortic Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC); Boos, J., Raptopoulos, V., Brook, A., Brook, O.R., Split-bolus intravenous contrast material injection vs. Single-bolus injection in patients following endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR) (2017) Abdom Radiol (NY); Cantisani, V., Grazhdani, H., Clevert, D.A., Iezzi, R., Aiani, L., Martegani, A., EVAR: Benefits of CEUS for monitoring stent-graft status (2015) Eur J Radiol, 84, pp. 1658-1665; Cornelissen, S.A., Verhagen, H.J., Prokop, M., Moll, F.L., Bartels, L.W., Visualizing type IV endoleak using magnetic resonance imaging with a blood pool contrast agent (2008) J Vasc Surg, 47, pp. 861-864; Sternbergh, W.C., III, Greenberg, R.K., Chuter, T.A., Tonnessen, B.H., Zenith, I., Redefining postoperative surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair: Recommendations based on 5-year follow-up in the US Zenith multicenter trial (2008) J Vasc Surg, 48, pp. 278-284. , discussion 84-5; Karthikesalingam, A., Al-Jundi, W., Jackson, D., Systematic review and meta-Analysis of duplex ultrasonography, contrast- enhanced ultrasonography or computed tomography for surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (2013) J Vasc Surg, 57, p. 1720; Lowe, C., Abbas, A., Rogers, S., Smith, L., Ghosh, J., McCollum, C., Threedimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound improves endoleak detection and classification after endovascular aneurysm repair (2017) J Vasc Surg, 65, pp. 1453-1459; Mazzei, M.A., Guerrini, S., Mazzei, F.G., Cioffi, S.N., Notaro, D., De Donato, G., Follow-up of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: Preliminary validation of digital tomosynthesis and contrast enhanced ultrasound in detection of medium-To long-Term complications (2016) World J Radiol, 8, pp. 530-536; Tanski, W., III, Fillinger, M., Outcomes of original and low-permeability gore excluder endoprosthesis for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (2007) J Vasc Surg, 45, pp. 243-249; Karouki, M., Swaelens, C., Iazzolino, L., McWilliams, R.G., Fisher, R.K., England, A., Clinical outcome after endovascular sealing of ab-dominal aortic aneurysms: A retrospective cohort study (2017) Ann Vasc Surg, 40, pp. 128-135; Carpenter, J.P., Cuff, R., Buckley, C., Healey, C., Hussain, S., Reijnen, M.M., One-year pivotal trial outcomes of the Nellix system for endovascular aneurysm sealing (2017) J Vasc Surg, 65, pp. 330-336; Hilliard, N.J., Hayes, P., Winterbottom, A.P., Appearance of the nellix endoprosthesis on postoperative imaging: Implications for patient and device surveillance (2016) Semin Vasc Surg, 29, pp. 126-134; Oliveira, N.F.G., Bastos, G.F.M., Van Rijn, M.J., De Ruiter, Q., Hoeks, S., De Vries, J.P.M., Standard endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with wide infrarenal aneurysm necks is associated with increased risk of adverse events (2017) J Vasc Surg, 65, pp. 1608-1616; Leurs, L.J., Kievit, J., Dagnelie, P.C., Nelemans, P.J., Buth, J., Collaborators, E., Influence of infrarenal neck length on outcome of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (2006) J Endovasc Ther, 13, pp. 640-648; Aburahma, A.F., Campbell, J., Stone, P.A., Nanjundappa, A., Jain, A., Dean, L.S., The correlation of aortic neck length to early and late outcomes in endovascular aneurysm repair patients (2009) J Vasc Surg, 50, pp. 738-748; Brown, L.C., Greenhalgh, R.M., Powell, J.T., Thompson, S.G., Participants, E.T., Use of baseline factors to predict complications and reinterventions after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (2010) Br J Surg, 97, pp. 1207-1217; Wyss, T.R., Dick, F., Brown, L.C., Greenhalgh, R.M., The influence of thrombus, calcification, angulation, and tortuosity of attachment sites on the time to the first graft-related complication after endovascular aneurysm repair (2011) J Vasc Surg, 54, pp. 965-971; Bastos, G.F., Van Luijtgaarden, K.M., Hoeks, S.E., Hendriks, J.M., Ten, R.S., Rouwet, E.V., Adequate seal and no endoleak on the first postoperative computed tomography angiography as criteria for no additional imaging up to 5 years after endovascular aneurysm repair (2013) J Vasc Surg, 57, pp. 1503-1511; Bastos, G.F., Oliveira, N.F., Josee, V.R.M., Ultee, K.H., Hoeks, S.E., Ten, R.S., Iliac seal zone dynamics and clinical consequences after endovascular aneurysm repair (2017) Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 53, pp. 185-192; Bastos, G.F., Baderkhan, H., Verhagen, H.J., Wanhainen, A., Bjorck, M., Stolker, R.J., Early sac shrinkage predicts a low risk of late complications after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (2014) Br J Surg, 101, pp. 802-810
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Durability of endovascular aneurysm repair is critical, since a significant proportion of patients suffer from procedure-related complications and secondary interventions after repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Therefore, regular follow up including imaging is recommended. The rationale behind current surveillance programs is to allow early detection and elective treatment of complications. However, current recommendations are laborious and resource consuming, may be deleterious to many patients and are largely inefficient. Furthermore, they do not account for novel imaging modalities or for the use of new endovascular devices. The authors review the current recommendations from international societies, and of the evidence for new imaging modalities that could be as alternatives, namely contrast enhanced ultrasound, three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound and digital tomosynthesis. The evidence on surveillance after repair with new devices, specifically with sealing technology, and its imaging specificities is also discussed. Lastly, the authors review the evidence for risk stratification of surveillance. Stratified follow up regimes may be based on preoperative anatomical characteristics or on postoperative imaging results, at different time points. Effective sealing, absence of endoleaks and sac dynamics are the most commonly used factors for stratification. In conclusion, there is still no consensus on surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair, with regard to both modality and timing. Novel devices, and especially those using sealing technology, require more intensive surveillance as the expected results at mid-And long-Term remain undetermined. Risk stratification of followup seems possible but still requires prospective validation before generalization. © 2016 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA.
AB - Durability of endovascular aneurysm repair is critical, since a significant proportion of patients suffer from procedure-related complications and secondary interventions after repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Therefore, regular follow up including imaging is recommended. The rationale behind current surveillance programs is to allow early detection and elective treatment of complications. However, current recommendations are laborious and resource consuming, may be deleterious to many patients and are largely inefficient. Furthermore, they do not account for novel imaging modalities or for the use of new endovascular devices. The authors review the current recommendations from international societies, and of the evidence for new imaging modalities that could be as alternatives, namely contrast enhanced ultrasound, three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound and digital tomosynthesis. The evidence on surveillance after repair with new devices, specifically with sealing technology, and its imaging specificities is also discussed. Lastly, the authors review the evidence for risk stratification of surveillance. Stratified follow up regimes may be based on preoperative anatomical characteristics or on postoperative imaging results, at different time points. Effective sealing, absence of endoleaks and sac dynamics are the most commonly used factors for stratification. In conclusion, there is still no consensus on surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair, with regard to both modality and timing. Novel devices, and especially those using sealing technology, require more intensive surveillance as the expected results at mid-And long-Term remain undetermined. Risk stratification of followup seems possible but still requires prospective validation before generalization. © 2016 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA.
KW - Abdominal
KW - Aortic aneurysm
KW - Endovascular procedures
KW - Follow-up studies
KW - sulfur hexafluoride
KW - contrast medium
KW - abdominal aortic aneurysm
KW - abdominal radiography
KW - aneurysm sealing system
KW - cardiovascular disease assessment
KW - computed tomographic angiography
KW - contrast-enhanced ultrasound
KW - digital breast tomosynthesis
KW - duplex Doppler ultrasonography
KW - endoleak
KW - endovascular aneurysm repair
KW - follow up
KW - human
KW - magnetic resonance angiography
KW - Review
KW - St George Vascular Institute score
KW - stenosis
KW - stent fracture
KW - stent graft
KW - stent migration
KW - three dimensional imaging
KW - thrombus
KW - adverse effects
KW - Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal
KW - aortography
KW - blood vessel prosthesis
KW - blood vessel transplantation
KW - color Doppler flowmetry
KW - devices
KW - diagnostic imaging
KW - endovascular surgery
KW - mortality
KW - postoperative care
KW - Postoperative Complications
KW - predictive value
KW - procedures
KW - reproducibility
KW - risk factor
KW - stent
KW - time factor
KW - treatment outcome
KW - Aortography
KW - Blood Vessel Prosthesis
KW - Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation
KW - Computed Tomography Angiography
KW - Contrast Media
KW - Diagnostic Imaging
KW - Endovascular Procedures
KW - Humans
KW - Imaging, Three-Dimensional
KW - Postoperative Care
KW - Predictive Value of Tests
KW - Reproducibility of Results
KW - Risk Factors
KW - Stents
KW - Time Factors
KW - Treatment Outcome
KW - Ultrasonography, Doppler, Color
U2 - 10.23736/S0021-9509.17.10100-X
DO - 10.23736/S0021-9509.17.10100-X
M3 - Review article
C2 - 28685522
SN - 0021-9509
VL - 58
SP - 875
EP - 882
JO - JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
JF - JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
IS - 6
ER -