Blog
About

5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Late type III endoleak after thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair and previous infrarenal stent graft implantation – a case report and review of the literature

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) effectively improved the results of thoracic aortic aneurysm treatment. TEVAR is a less invasive procedure that can be performed under local anesthesia with shorter hospital stay. The perioperative morbidity and mortality rates are lower for endovascular than open repair, but the rate of secondary interventions is higher for TEVAR. We report a case of an elderly man with synchronous abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysms. A type III dangerous endoleak was recognized 3 years after TEVAR. It was successfully repaired during an endovascular procedure. There were no new endoleaks after 12 months of follow-up. TEVAR may be the only option of treatment for risky and elderly patients. However, postoperative monitoring is necessary to exclude different types of endoleaks. Most of them undergo effective endovascular repair.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

          Few data are available on the long-term outcome of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm as compared with open repair. From 1999 through 2004 at 37 hospitals in the United Kingdom, we randomly assigned 1252 patients with large abdominal aortic aneurysms (> or = 5.5 cm in diameter) to undergo either endovascular or open repair; 626 patients were assigned to each group. Patients were followed for rates of death, graft-related complications, reinterventions, and resource use until the end of 2009. Logistic regression and Cox regression were used to compare outcomes in the two groups. The 30-day operative mortality was 1.8% in the endovascular-repair group and 4.3% in the open-repair group (adjusted odds ratio for endovascular repair as compared with open repair, 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.87; P=0.02). The endovascular-repair group had an early benefit with respect to aneurysm-related mortality, but the benefit was lost by the end of the study, at least partially because of fatal endograft ruptures (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.49; P=0.73). By the end of follow-up, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of death from any cause (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.23; P=0.72). The rates of graft-related complications and reinterventions were higher with endovascular repair, and new complications occurred up to 8 years after randomization, contributing to higher overall costs. In this large, randomized trial, endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm was associated with a significantly lower operative mortality than open surgical repair. However, no differences were seen in total mortality or aneurysm-related mortality in the long term. Endovascular repair was associated with increased rates of graft-related complications and reinterventions and was more costly. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN55703451.) 2010 Massachusetts Medical Society
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Long-term comparison of endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

            Whether elective endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm reduces long-term morbidity and mortality, as compared with traditional open repair, remains uncertain. We randomly assigned 881 patients with asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms who were candidates for both procedures to either endovascular repair (444) or open repair (437) and followed them for up to 9 years (mean, 5.2). Patients were selected from 42 Veterans Affairs medical centers and were 49 years of age or older at the time of registration. More than 95% of the patients underwent the assigned repair. For the primary outcome of all-cause mortality, 146 deaths occurred in each group (hazard ratio with endovascular repair versus open repair, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.22; P=0.81). The previously reported reduction in perioperative mortality with endovascular repair was sustained at 2 years (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.98; P=0.04) and at 3 years (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.00; P=0.05) but not thereafter. There were 10 aneurysm-related deaths in the endovascular-repair group (2.3%) versus 16 in the open-repair group (3.7%) (P=0.22). Six aneurysm ruptures were confirmed in the endovascular-repair group versus none in the open-repair group (P=0.03). A significant interaction was observed between age and type of treatment (P=0.006); survival was increased among patients under 70 years of age in the endovascular-repair group but tended to be better among those 70 years of age or older in the open-repair group. Endovascular repair and open repair resulted in similar long-term survival. The perioperative survival advantage with endovascular repair was sustained for several years, but rupture after repair remained a concern. Endovascular repair led to increased long-term survival among younger patients but not among older patients, for whom a greater benefit from the endovascular approach had been expected. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Research and Development; OVER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094575.).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Transluminal placement of endovascular stent-grafts for the treatment of descending thoracic aortic aneurysms.

              The usual treatment for thoracic aortic aneurysms is surgical replacement with a prosthetic graft, but the associated morbidity and mortality are considerable. We studied the use of transluminally placed endovascular stent-graft devices as an alternative to surgical repair. We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of transluminally placed stent-graft to treat descending thoracic aortic aneurysms in 13 patients over a 24-month period. Atherosclerotic, anastomotic, and post-traumatic true or false aneurysms and aortic dissections were treated. The mean diameter of the aneurysms was 6.1 cm (range, 5 to 8). The endovascular stent-grafts were custom-designed for each patient and were constructed of self-expanding stainless-steel stents covered with woven Dacron grafts. Endovascular placement of the stent-graft prosthesis was successful in all patients. There was complete thrombosis of the thoracic aortic aneurysm surrounding the stent-graft in 12 patients, and partial thrombosis in 1. Two patients initially had small, residual patent proximal tracts into the aneurysm sac, but both tracts thrombosed within two months after the procedure. In four patients, two prostheses were required to bridge the aneurysm adequately. There have been no deaths or instances of paraplegia, stroke, distal embolization, or infection during an average follow-up of 11.6 months. One patient with an extensive chronic aortic dissection required open surgical graft replacement four months later because of progressive dilatation of the arch. These preliminary results demonstrate that endovascular stent-graft repair is safe in highly selected patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. This new method of treatment will, however, require careful long-term evaluation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne
                Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne
                WIITM
                Videosurgery and other Miniinvasive Techniques
                Termedia Publishing House
                1895-4588
                2299-0054
                31 July 2017
                September 2017
                : 12
                : 3
                : 320-324
                Affiliations
                Department of General and Endocrine Surgery, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
                Author notes
                Address for correspondence Jerzy Leszczyński MD, PhD, Department of General and Endocrine Surgery, Medical University of Warsaw, 1a Banacha St, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland. phone: +48 603 606 962. e-mail: jleszczynski@ 123456wum.edu.pl
                Article
                30379
                10.5114/wiitm.2017.69239
                5649506
                Copyright: © 2017 Fundacja Videochirurgii

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.

                Categories
                Case Report

                Comments

                Comment on this article