AI Article Synopsis

  • In this study, researchers compared conventional endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with EVAR using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm.
  • They analyzed data from 221 patients and found that using IVUS resulted in significantly lower use of contrast medium and radiation exposure, without increasing any major complications or affecting kidney function.
  • Both methods showed similar survival rates and freedom from reintervention at 36 months, indicating that IVUS is a safe and effective adjunct in EVAR procedures.

Article Abstract

Background: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been introduced as diagnostic adjunct to provide new insights into the diagnosis and therapy of vascular disease. Herein, we compared the outcomes of conventional endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and EVAR with IVUS in patients presenting with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm using a propensity-matched cohort.

Methods: From May 2013 to August 2017, 221 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Of that, 122 patients were eligible for inclusion and underwent propensity score matching. Perioperative mortality and morbidity, renal function impairment, endoleak incidence, mean contrast medium usage, operative time, radiation exposure (including fluoroscopy time, dose-area product [DAP], and digital subtraction angiography [DSA] runs), survival, and freedom from reintervention were the outcomes measured.

Results: After matching, 52 patients were included, 26 in the conventional EVAR group and 26 in the EVAR with IVUS group. No perioperative mortality or type I/III endoleak were registered. One perioperative lymphatic fistula and one iliac limb occlusion were observed. In the EVAR with IVUS group, a significant reduction of contrast medium (92 [vs. 51 ± 17] vs. 51 [20-68] mL; P = 0.003) and radiation exposure including fluoroscopy time (12 [9-16] vs. 20 [12-25] min; P = 0.001), DAP (15 [9-21] vs. 32 [16-44] G*cm; P = 0.002), and DSA runs (2 [1-3] vs. 3 [2-4]; P = 0.04) was reported. No differences were observed in terms of glomerular filtration rate (86 [45-121] vs. 90 [38-117] mL/min; P = 0.14) and operation time (176 [124-210] vs. 179 [120-210]; P = 0.48). Survival at 36 months was 93% for standard EVAR and 92% for EVAR with IVUS (P = 0.845). Freedom from reintervention at 36 months was 85.5% in both the groups (P = 0.834).

Conclusions: In this preliminary experience, the use of IVUS during EVAR was feasible with no registered postoperative complications. A significant reduction of contrast medium usage and radiation exposure was observed with the use of IVUS. The IVUS is an adjunctive tool to consider in the vascular surgeon armamentarium, especially in centers where advanced radiological tools of imaging fusion are not available.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2018.09.016DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

evar ivus
16
contrast medium
12
radiation exposure
12
intravascular ultrasound
8
endovascular aneurysm
8
aneurysm repair
8
ivus
8
evar
8
perioperative mortality
8
medium usage
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!