Outcomes of balloon-expandable versus self-expandable stent graft for endovascular repair of iliac aneurysms using iliac branch endoprosthesis

Guilherme B. Lima, Emanuel R. Tenorio, Giulianna B. Marcondes, Mohammad A. Khasawneh, Bernardo C. Mendes, Randall R. DeMartino, Fahad Shuja, Jill J. Colglazier, Manju Kalra, Gustavo S. Oderich

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of internal iliac artery (IIA) stenting using balloon-expandable (BESG) or self-expandable stent grafts (SESG) during endovascular repair of aortoiliac aneurysms with iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE; W. L. Gore, Flagstaff, Ariz). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive patients treated for aortoiliac aneurysms using IBE between 2014 and 2020. IIA stenting was performed using either the IIA side branch SESG or a Gore VBX BESG (W. L. Gore). Indications for use of BESGs were “up-and-over” IBE technique for type IB endoleak after prior endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), short IIA length, and need for IIA extension into divisional branches (outside instructions for use). End points included technical success, freedom from buttock claudication, primary IIA patency, and freedom from IIA branch instability (eg, branch-related death or rupture, occlusion, disconnection, or reintervention for stenosis, kink, or endoleak), freedom from type IC/IIIC endoleak, and freedom from secondary interventions. Results: There were 90 patients (86 males and 4 females) with a mean age of 74 ± 7 years treated by EVAR with 108 IBEs. Choice of stent was BESG in 43 and SESG in 65 targeted IIAs. BESGs were used more frequently in patients with prior EVAR (22% vs 2%; P =.003,), isolated IBEs (31% vs 2%; P <.001), and in patients with IIA aneurysms requiring stenting into divisional branches (36% vs 5%; P <.001). Technical success was similar for BESGs and SESGs (97% vs 100%; P =.40), respectively. The mean follow-up was 25 ± 16 months (range, 11-34 months). At 2 years, freedom from buttock claudication was 100% for BESG and 95 ± 3% for SESG (Log-rank 0.26), with no difference in primary patency (BESG, 100% vs SESG, 94 ± 4%; Log-rank 0.94). There were four (9%) IIA-related endoleaks in the BESG group and one (2%) in the SESG group (P =.08). Freedom from IIA branch instability was 87 ± 6% for BESG and 96 ± 3% for SESG at 2 years (Log-rank 0.043). Freedom from type IC/IIIC endoleak was 87 ± 7% for BESG and 98 ± 2% for SESG at the same interval (Log-rank 0.06). There was no difference in freedom from reinterventions for BESG and SESG (92 ± 6% vs 98 ± 2%; Log-rank 0.34), respectively. Conclusions: BESGs were used more frequently during IBE procedures indicated for failed EVAR, isolated common iliac aneurysms, and IIA aneurysms requiring extension into divisional branches. Despite these differences and BESG being used outside instructions for use, both stent types had similar primary patency, freedom from buttock claudication, and freedom from reinterventions. However, BESGs were associated with higher rates of IIA-related branch instability.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1616-1623.e2
JournalJournal of vascular surgery
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 2022


  • Balloon-expandable stent graft
  • Endovascular repair
  • Iliac aneurysms
  • Iliac branch endoprosthesis
  • Self-expandable sent-graft

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'Outcomes of balloon-expandable versus self-expandable stent graft for endovascular repair of iliac aneurysms using iliac branch endoprosthesis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this