Advanced

Anatomic suitability for endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms and possible benefits of low profile delivery systems.

Kristmundsson, Thorarinn LU ; Sonesson, Björn LU ; Dias, Nuno LU ; Malina, Martin LU and Resch, Timothy (2014) In Vascular 22(2). p.112-115
Abstract
The aim of the study was to evaluate the anatomic suitability for endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR) according to instructions for use (IFUs) of three commercially available bifurcated stent graft devices and explore the possible benefits of low-profile delivery systems. Computed tomography scans of 241 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were evaluated for suitability of Zenith Flex(®), Gore Excluder(®) and Endurant(®) bifurcated stent graft systems according to their IFUs. The most common exclusion criteria and possible benefits of smaller diameter delivery systems were analyzed. When choosing the most suitable graft model for each patient, the overall suitability was 49.4%. By brand, the suitability was 28.6% for... (More)
The aim of the study was to evaluate the anatomic suitability for endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR) according to instructions for use (IFUs) of three commercially available bifurcated stent graft devices and explore the possible benefits of low-profile delivery systems. Computed tomography scans of 241 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were evaluated for suitability of Zenith Flex(®), Gore Excluder(®) and Endurant(®) bifurcated stent graft systems according to their IFUs. The most common exclusion criteria and possible benefits of smaller diameter delivery systems were analyzed. When choosing the most suitable graft model for each patient, the overall suitability was 49.4%. By brand, the suitability was 28.6% for Zenith(®), 25.7% for Gore Excluder(®) and 48.1% for Endurant(®). By step wise accepting iliac diameters of ≥6 mm, ≥5 mm and ≥4 mm the overall suitability increased to 56.7, 58.9 and 60.2%, respectively (P < 0.001). Diameters below 4 mm had no additional effect on suitability as combinations of other anatomical features, with or without narrow iliacs, accounted for the remaining excluding factors. In conclusion, Less than half of patients with AAAs are suitable for EVAR according to current IFUs. Low-profile delivery systems may allow for endovascular treatment in up to 60% of patients. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Vascular
volume
22
issue
2
pages
112 - 115
publisher
BC Decker
external identifiers
  • pmid:23518837
  • wos:000332846400006
  • scopus:84898921228
ISSN
1708-539X
DOI
10.1177/1708538112473980
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
3d8b771f-ad5a-4af1-8d50-bdd273b4353e (old id 3627806)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23518837?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2013-04-07 15:55:04
date last changed
2017-11-05 03:20:17
@article{3d8b771f-ad5a-4af1-8d50-bdd273b4353e,
  abstract     = {The aim of the study was to evaluate the anatomic suitability for endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR) according to instructions for use (IFUs) of three commercially available bifurcated stent graft devices and explore the possible benefits of low-profile delivery systems. Computed tomography scans of 241 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were evaluated for suitability of Zenith Flex(®), Gore Excluder(®) and Endurant(®) bifurcated stent graft systems according to their IFUs. The most common exclusion criteria and possible benefits of smaller diameter delivery systems were analyzed. When choosing the most suitable graft model for each patient, the overall suitability was 49.4%. By brand, the suitability was 28.6% for Zenith(®), 25.7% for Gore Excluder(®) and 48.1% for Endurant(®). By step wise accepting iliac diameters of ≥6 mm, ≥5 mm and ≥4 mm the overall suitability increased to 56.7, 58.9 and 60.2%, respectively (P &lt; 0.001). Diameters below 4 mm had no additional effect on suitability as combinations of other anatomical features, with or without narrow iliacs, accounted for the remaining excluding factors. In conclusion, Less than half of patients with AAAs are suitable for EVAR according to current IFUs. Low-profile delivery systems may allow for endovascular treatment in up to 60% of patients.},
  author       = {Kristmundsson, Thorarinn and Sonesson, Björn and Dias, Nuno and Malina, Martin and Resch, Timothy},
  issn         = {1708-539X},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {112--115},
  publisher    = {BC Decker},
  series       = {Vascular},
  title        = {Anatomic suitability for endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms and possible benefits of low profile delivery systems.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1708538112473980},
  volume       = {22},
  year         = {2014},
}