Results of transcaval embolization for sac expansion from type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair

Kristina A. Giles, Mark F. Fillinger, Randall R. De Martino, Andrew W. Hoel, Richard J. Powell, Daniel B. Walsh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

29 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: Management of type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair can be problematic. This study reports our experience with a relatively novel strategy to treat this complication, transcaval coil embolization (TCCE) of the aneurysm sac. Methods: We reviewed 29 consecutive patients undergoing TCCE from 2010 to 2013. Demographics, operative details, and outcomes were assessed. Results: Since 2006, 29 TCCEs have been performed at our institution in 26 patients for sac expansion from type II endoleaks. Patients were male (83%) and former or current smokers (88%), with an average age of 78 ± 7.1 years. TCCE was performed a mean of 4.2 ± 4 years after initial endovascular aneurysm repair. Endoleaks resulted in a mean sac growth of 1.2 ± 1 cm in diameter and 37% ± 32% by volume. Forty-six percent had prior procedures (5 translumbar, 3 transarterial, 3 transcaval, 1 aortic cuff, and 1 iliac limb extension). Two patients had no flow identified in the aneurysm sac after puncture was successful, and one was found to have a hygroma rather than arterial flow. An additional two patients had ultimate embolization from sac access between the endograft iliac limb and arterial wall after transcaval puncture failed, for a 90% procedural success (83% for transcaval technical success). Mean fluoroscopy time was 27 ± 13 minutes with 29 ± 21 mL of contrast material used and a median of 10 coils per case. Additional adjuncts included thrombin injection (17%), intravascular ultrasound (14%), sac pressure measurements (28%), and on-table integrated computed tomography (17%). Median length of stay was 1 day (range, 0-5 days). There were no procedural adverse events. Reintervention was required in five cases (three repeated TCCEs, two graft relinings). One-year freedom from reintervention was 95%. At a mean 16.5 months of follow-up, 70% experienced no further endoleak and had stable or decreasing sac diameters. There have been no ruptures during follow-up. Conclusions: In this series, TCCE for treatment of aneurysm enlargement due to type II endoleaks was safe and relatively effective despite prior failed interventions in nearly half of the cases. TCCE is a useful alternative in cases in which the anatomy makes other approaches difficult or impossible.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1129-1136
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of vascular surgery
Volume61
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2015

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Results of transcaval embolization for sac expansion from type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this