Top

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

Published in:

Open Access 01-01-2019 | Clinical Investigation

Long-Term Evaluation of Percutaneous Groin Access for EVAR

Authors: Krit Dwivedi, John Mark Regi, Trevor J. Cleveland, Douglas Turner, Dan Kusuma, Steven M. Thomas, Stephen D. Goode

Published in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology | Issue 1/2019

Abstract

Background

Percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) has been shown to have high success rates, shorter operating times and length of stay compared to open access. However, there exists a lack of long-term follow-up data on these patients, and questions remain regarding longer-term outcomes. This study aims to assess the long-term complications and evolution of accessed vessels post-PEVAR.

Methods

Sixty-one cases of bilateral PEVAR (122 groins) with > 36 months follow-up were analysed. Vessel diameter, calcification, dissection, lymphocele, pseudoaneurysm and thrombus formation were reviewed at 30th day and at the most recent follow-up CT. Notes were reviewed for groin infections, haematomas and nerve injury. Complications were considered ‘major’ if they required intervention or treatment.

Results

Mean follow-up time from procedure to most recent scan was 49.9 months. There were no major short- or long-term complications. The early complication rate was 9.8%, with six pseudoaneurysms, four dissections, one thrombus, one nerve injury and no lymphoceles, haematomas or groin infections. The long-term complication rate was 0.8%, with only one pseudoaneurysm. The remainder of early complications resolved naturally without intervention. Accessed vessel showed significantly (P ≤ 0.05) increased diameter and calcification between 30th day and last follow-up scan.

Conclusion

This study provides the largest clinical cohort and the longest mean follow-up time reported in the literature and demonstrates the long-term safety of PEVAR. PEVAR has a very low long-term complication rate, without any major complications in our cohort. The accessed common femoral arteries do not show stenosis or thrombosis. Minor short-term complications appear to gradually resolve without intervention. Larger multi-centre studies are recommended.

Giles KA, Pomposelli F, Hamdan A, Wyers M, Jhaveri A, Schermerhorn ML. Decrease in total aneurysm-related deaths in the era of endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2009;49:543–50 Discussion 550–1.CrossRef

Brown LC, Powell JT, Thompson SG, Epstein DM, Sculpher MJ, Greenhalgh RM. The UK EndoVascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) trials: randomised trials of EVAR versus standard therapy. Health Technol Assess. 2012 Feb; 16.

Lönn L, Larzon T, Van Den Berg JC. From puncture to closure of the common femoral artery in endovascular aortic repair. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2010;51:791–8.

Hajibandeh S, Hajibandeh S, Hajibandeh S, Antoniou SA, Child E, Torella F, et al. Percutaneous access for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Vascular. 2016;24:638–48.CrossRef

Haas PC, Krajcer Z, Diethrich EB. Closure of large percutaneous access sites using the Prostar XL Percutaneous Vascular Surgery device. J Endovasc Surg. 1999;6:168–70.CrossRef

Lee WA, Brown MP, Nelson PR, Huber TS. Total percutaneous access for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (‘Preclose’ technique). J Vasc Surg. 2007;45:1095–101.CrossRef

Nelson PR, Kracjer Z, Kansal N, Rao V, Bianchi C, Hashemi H, et al. A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of totally percutaneous access versus open femoral exposure for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (the PEVAR trial). J Vasc Surg. 2014;59:1181–93.CrossRef

Cao Z, Wu W, Zhao K, Zhao J, Yang Y, Jiang C, et al. Safety and efficacy of totally percutaneous access compared with open femoral exposure for endovascular aneurysm repair. J Endovasc Ther. 2017;1(24):246–53.CrossRef

Ashrafi M, Al-Jarrah Q, Anandarajah M, Ashleigh R, Welch M, Baguneid M. Single-center experience following the introduction of a percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair first approach. Angiology. 2016;68:119–23.CrossRef

10.

Jaffan AAA, Prince EA, Hampson CO, Murphy TP. The preclose technique in percutaneous endovascular aortic repair: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013;13(36):567–77.CrossRef

11.

Timaran DE, Soto M, Knowles M, Modrall JG, Rectenwald JE, Timaran CH. Safety and effectiveness of total percutaneous access for fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2016;64:896–901.CrossRef

12.

Jahnke T, Schäfer JP, Charalambous N, Trentmann J, Siggelkow M, Hümme T-H, et al. Total percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair with the dual 6-F perclose-AT preclosing technique: a case-control study. J Vasc Intervent Radiol. 2017;20:1292–8.CrossRef

13.

de Souza LR, Oderich GS, Banga PV, Hofer JM, Wigham JR, Cha S, et al. Outcomes of total percutaneous endovascular aortic repair for thoracic, fenestrated, and branched endografts. J Vasc Surg. 2015;62(1442–9):e1443.

14.

Manunga JM, Gloviczki P, Oderich GS, Kalra M, Duncan AA, Fleming MD, et al. Femoral artery calcification as a determinant of success for percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2013;58:1208–12.CrossRef

15.

Eisenack M, Umscheid T, Tessarek J, Torsello GF, Torsello GB. Percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: a prospective evaluation of safety, efficiency, and risk factors. J Endovasc Ther. 2009;16:708–13.CrossRef

16.

Bent CL, Fotiadis N, Renfrew I, Walsh M, Brohi K, Kyriakides C, et al. Total percutaneous aortic repair: midterm outcomes. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2009;32:449–54.CrossRef

17.

Rijkée MP, Statius van Eps RG, Wever JJ, van Overhagen H, van Dijk LC, Knippenberg B. Predictors of failure of closure in percutaneous EVAR using the Prostar XL PErcutaneous vascular surgery device. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015;49:45–9.CrossRef

18.

Lee WA, Brown MP, Nelson PR, Huber TS, Seeger JM. Midterm outcomes of femoral arteries after percutaneous endovascular aortic repair using the Preclose technique. J Vasc Surg. 2008;47:919–23.CrossRef

Title: Long-Term Evaluation of Percutaneous Groin Access for EVAR
Authors: Krit Dwivedi
John Mark Regi
Trevor J. Cleveland
Douglas Turner
Dan Kusuma
Steven M. Thomas
Stephen D. Goode
Publication date: 01-01-2019
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology / Issue 1/2019
Print ISSN: 0174-1551
Electronic ISSN: 1432-086X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-018-2072-3

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Long-Term Evaluation of Percutaneous Groin Access for EVAR

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Don’t Call It “Hemangioma”

Safety and Short-Term Efficacy of Irreversible Electroporation and Allogenic Natural Killer Cell Immunotherapy Combination in the Treatment of Patients with Unresectable Primary Liver Cancer

Feasibility of Helical I-125 Seed Implant in the Portal Vein

Hydrodissection of the Retrohepatic Space: A Technique to Physically Separate a Liver Tumour from the Inferior Vena Cava and the Ostia of the Hepatic Veins

The Safety and Efficacy of Oxycodone Versus Fentanyl in Percutaneous Microwave Ablation of a Liver Tumour Abutting the Capsule

Reiterative Radiofrequency Ablation in the Management of Pediatric Patients with Hepatoblastoma Metastases to the Lung, Liver, or Bone