Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
Published in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology 4/2016

01-04-2016 | Clinical Investigation

Systolic Sac Pressure Index for the Prediction of Persistent Type II Endoleak for 12 Months After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Authors: Akira Ikoma, Motoki Nakai, Morio Sato, Hirotatsu Sato, Hiroki Minamiguchi, Tetsuo Sonomura, Yoshiharu Nishimura, Yoshitaka Okamura

Published in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology | Issue 4/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the relationship between the systolic sac pressure index (SPI) and the presence of endoleaks 12 months after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).

Materials and Methods

We performed a single-center prospective trial of consecutively treated patients. SPI (calculated as systolic sac pressure/systolic aortic pressure) was measured by catheterization immediately after EVAR. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography was scheduled 12 months after EVAR to detect possible endoleaks.

Results

Data were available for 34 patients who underwent EVAR for an AAA. Persisting type II endoleak was found in 8 patients (endoleak-positive group) but not in the other 26 patients (endoleak-negative group). The mean ± standard deviation SPI was significantly greater in the endoleak-positive group than in the endoleak-negative group (0.692 ± 0.048 vs. 0.505 ± 0.081, respectively; P = .001). Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that an SPI of 0.638 was the optimum cutoff value for predicting a persistent endoleak at 12 months with high accuracy (0.971; 33/34), sensitivity (1.00), and specificity (0.962) values. The mean change in AAA diameter was −4.28 ± 5.03 mm and 2.22 ± 4.54 mm in patients with SPI of <0.638 or ≥0.638, respectively (P = .002).

Conclusion

Patients with an SPI of ≥0.638 immediately after EVAR were more likely to have a persistent type II endoleak at 12 months with an accuracy of 0.971, and showed increases in aneurysm sac diameter compared with patients with an SPI of <0.638.
Literature
1.
EVAR trial participants. Endovascular aneurysm repair and outcome in patients unfit for open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 2): randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9478):2187–92.CrossRef
2.
Prinssen M, Verhoeven EL, Buth J, Cuypers PW, van Sambeek MR, Balm R, et al. Dutch randomized endovascular aneurysm management (DREAM) trial group. A randomized trial comparing conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(16):1607–18.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Haider SE, Najjar SF, Cho JS, Rhee RY, Eskandari MK, Matsumura JS, et al. Sac behavior after aneurysm treatment with the Gore Excluder low-permeability aortic endoprosthesis: 12-month comparison to the original Excluder device. J Vasc Surg. 2006;44(4):694–700.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Hinchliffe RJ, Goldberg J, Macsweeney ST, Zenith Users Group. A UK multi-centre experience with a second-generation endovascular stent-graft: results from the Zenith Users Group. Eur J Endovasc Surg. 2004;27(1):51–5.CrossRef
5.
Laheij RJ, Buth J, Harris PL, Moll FL, Stelter WJ, Verhoeven EL. Need for secondary interventions after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (Intermediate-term follow-up results of a European collaborative registry (EUROSTAR)). Br J Surg. 2000;87(12):1666–73.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Gelfand DV, White GH, Wilson SE. Clinical significance of type II endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Ann Vasc Surg. 2006;20(1):69–74.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Jones JE, Atkins MD, Brewster DC, Chumg TK, Kwolek CJ, LaMuraglia GM, et al. Persistent type 2 endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm is associated with adverse late outcomes. J Vasc Surg. 2007;46(1):1–8.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zarins CK, Bloch DA, Crabtree T, Matsumoto AH, White RA, Fogarty TJ. Aneurysm enlargement following endovascular aneurysm repair: AneuRx clinical trial. J Vasc Surg. 2004;39(1):109–17.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Nakai M, Sato H, Sato M, Tanba Y, Noda Y, Ikoma A, et al. Clinical significance of endoleaks characterized by computed tomography during aortography performed immediately after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: prediction of persistent endoleak. Jpn J Radiol. 2013;31(1):16–23.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Schlösser FJ, Gusberg RJ, Dardik A, Lin PH, Verhagen HJ, Moll FL, et al. Aneurysm rupture after EVAR: can the ultimate failure be predicted? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2009;37(1):15–22.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Nakai M, Sato M, Sato H, Sakaguchi H, Tanaka F, Ikoma A, et al. Midterm results of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: comparison of instruction-for-use (IFU) cases and non-IFU cases. Jpn J Radiol. 2013;31(9):585–92.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Stanley BM, Semmens JB, Mai Q, Goodman MA, Hartley DE, Wilkinson C, et al. Evaluation of patient selection guidelines for endoluminal AAA repair with the Zenith Stent-Graft: the Australasian experience. J Endovasc Ther. 2001;8(5):457–64.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Greenberg RK. Abdominal aortic endografting: fixation and sealing. J Am Coll Surg. 2002;194(1 Suppl):S79–87.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Ishibashi H, Ishiguchi T, Ohta T, Sugimoto I, Iwata H, Yamada T, et al. Intraoperative sac pressure measurement during endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol. 2010;33(5):939–42.CrossRef
15.
Golzarian J, Dussaussois L, Abada HT, Gevenois PA, Van Gansbeke D, Ferreira J, et al. Helical CT of aorta after endoluminal stent-graft therapy: value of biphasic acquisition. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171(2):329–31.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Gorich J, Rilinger N, Sokiranski R, Soldner J, Kaiser W, Kramer S, et al. Endoleaks after endovascular repair of aortic aneurysm: are they predictable? -initial results. Radiology. 2001;218(2):477–80.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Ohki T, Ouriel K, Silveira PG, Katzen B, White R, Criado F, et al. Initial results of wireless pressure sensing for endovascular aneurysm repair: the APEX trial-acute pressure measurement to confirm aneurysm sac exclusion. J Vasc Surg. 2007;45(2):236–42.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Ellozy SH, Carroccio A, Lookstein RA, Jacobs TS, Addis MD, Teodorescu VJ, et al. Abdominal aortic aneurysm sac shrinkage after endovascular aneurysm repair: correlation with chronic sac pressure measurement. J Vasc Surg. 2006;43(1):2–7.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Dias NV, Ivancev K, Resch TA, Malina M, Sonesson B. Endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair lead to nonuniform intra-aneurysm sac pressure. J Vasc Surg. 2007;46(2):197–203.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Gawenda M, Hechenkamp J, Zaehringger M, Brunkwall J. Intraaneurysm sac pressure–the Holy grail of endoluminal grafting of AAA. Eur J Endovasc Surg. 2002;24(2):139–45.CrossRef
21.
Veith FJ, Baum RA, Ohki T, Amor M, Adiseshiah M, Blankensteijn JD, et al. Nature and significance of endoleaks and endotension: summary of opinions expressed at an international conference. J Vasc Surg. 2002;35(5):1029–35.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Systolic Sac Pressure Index for the Prediction of Persistent Type II Endoleak for 12 Months After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
Authors
Akira Ikoma
Motoki Nakai
Morio Sato
Hirotatsu Sato
Hiroki Minamiguchi
Tetsuo Sonomura
Yoshiharu Nishimura
Yoshitaka Okamura
Publication date
01-04-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology / Issue 4/2016
Print ISSN: 0174-1551
Electronic ISSN: 1432-086X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-015-1191-3

Other articles of this Issue 4/2016

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology 4/2016 Go to the issue

Clinical Investigation

Long-Term Results of Stent Placement in Patients with Outflow Block After Living-Donor-Liver Transplantation

Clinical Investigation

The Effect of Stent Cell Geometry on Carotid Stenting Outcomes

Clinical Investigation

Stentgraft Implantation for the Treatment of Postoperative Hepatic Artery Pseudoaneurysm

Letter to the Editor

Percutaneous Transhepatic Embolization of a Bronchobiliary Fistula Developing Secondary to a Biloma After Conventional Transarterial Chemoembolization in a Patient with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Clinical Investigation

Comparison of Technical and Clinical Outcome of Transjugular Portosystemic Shunt Placement Between a Bare Metal Stent and a PTFE-Stentgraft Device

Clinical Investigation

The Introduction of an Undergraduate Interventional Radiology (IR) Curriculum: Impact on Medical Student Knowledge and Interest in IR