Endovascular repair of an aorto-left renal vein fistula due to a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after EVAR.

PURPOSE: To report an unusual late complication of endovascular aneurysm repair: an arteriovenous fistula between the aneurysm sac and a retro-aortic left renal vein following sac expansion due to a type III endoleak. CASE REPORT: A 79-year-old man developed an arteriovenous fistula between the aneurysm sac and a retro-aortic left renal vein 67 months after endovascular aneurysm exclusion (EVAR). Aneurysm rupture was due to disconnection between the right iliac limb and an extender cuff. The problem was repaired percutaneously with another endograft bridging the two prostheses. At 16 months, the aneurysm sac diameter was decreased; there was no evidence of the AV fistula, and the patient was free from any complication related to the EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: This case emphasizes the need of close surveillance even in the late postoperative course of these patients. Moreover, this rare event confirmed that endovascular techniques can play an important role in treating emergent complications.

Type II lumbar endoleaks: hemodynamic differentiation by contrast-enhanced ultrasound scanning and influence on aneurysm enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to differentiate type II lumbar endoleaks on the basis of dynamic features identified by contrast-enhanced ultrasound scanning (CUS) and to evaluate the role of this differentiation in detecting abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) enlargement > or =1 mL/mo. METHODS: Eighteen male patients (mean age, 71.8 years) with type II lumbar endoleak suspected at CUS underwent computed tomography angiography (CTA) and digital subtraction angiography (DSA). On CTA, AAA volumes and endoleak visualization and volume were assessed. At CUS, performed after a bolus of 1.5 to 2.4 mL of a second generation blood pool contrast agent, the following parameters were evaluated: presence of contrast material within the aneurysmal sac (endoleak), delay of endoleak detection (wash-in) and disappearance (washout) from the beginning of contrast injection, visualization of inflow and outflow vessels, and presence of cavity filling. Statistical analysis was performed regarding endoleak features at CUS, endoleak detection at CTA, and rate of AAA enlargement. RESULTS: DSA confirmed all the endoleaks. Mean +/- standard deviation wash-in and washout times were 121.9 +/- 132.6 and 337.2 +/- 193.7 seconds, respectively; a significant relation was observed between these two parameters (P < .01, analysis of variance). By Youden plots, endoleaks were classified as hyperdynamic when wash-in was <100 seconds (n = 10, 55.5%) and/or washout was <520 seconds (n = 13, 72.2%). A slower washout was associated with nonvisualized outflow (66.7%) and/or inflow arteries (66.7%) ( P < .05). Eight endoleaks (44.4%) were missed at CTA; it occurred in hypodynamic endoleaks, absence of detectable inflow or outflow vessels, and absence of cavity filling at CUS (P < .05). Overall mean AAA volume increase rate was 1.1 +/- 1.7 mL/mo. By multiple logistic regression model, the washout time > or = 520 seconds was the only independent predictor of AAA volume increase > or = 1 mL/mo (8 patients, 44.4%). CONCLUSION: Type II lumbar endoleaks show different hemodynamic features at CUS, which might influence the rate of aneurysm enlargement, addressing the need for treatment.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm: contrast-enhanced US for missed endoleaks after endoluminal repair.

PURPOSE: To evaluate contrast material-enhanced ultrasonography (US) for depiction of endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (or endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR]) in patients with aneurysm enlargement and no evidence of endoleak. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November 1998 to February 2003, 112 patients underwent EVAR. At follow-up, duplex US and biphasic multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography were performed. In 10 patients (group A), evident aneurysm enlargement was observed, with no evidence of complications, at both CT angiography and duplex US. Group A patients, 10 men (mean age, 69.6 years +/- 10 [standard deviation]), underwent US after intravenous bolus injection of a second-generation contrast agent, with continuous low-mechanical index (0.01-0.04) real-time tissue harmonic imaging. Group B patients, 10 men (mean age, 71.3 years +/- 8.2) with aneurysm shrinkage and no evidence of complications, and group C patients, 10 men (mean age, 73.2 years +/- 6) with CT angiographic evidence of endoleak, underwent contrast-enhanced US. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) was performed in groups A and C. Endoleak detection and characterization were assessed with imaging modalities used in groups A-C; at contrast-enhanced US, time of detection of endoleak, persistence of sac enhancement, and morphology of enhancement were evaluated. RESULTS: In group A, contrast-enhanced US depicted one type I, six type II, one type III, and two undefined endoleaks that were not detected at CT angiography. All leakages were characterized by slow and delayed echo enhancement detected at longer than 150 seconds after contrast agent administration. DSA results confirmed findings in all patients; percutaneous treatment was performed. In group B, contrast-enhanced US did not show echo enhancement; in group C, results with this modality confirmed findings at CT angiography and DSA. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced US depicts endoleaks after EVAR, particularly when depiction fails with other imaging modalities.

Evaluation of the proximal aortic neck enlargement following endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: 3-years experience.

The aim of this study was to evaluate incidence, potential risk factors and effects on stent-graft migration of proximal neck dilatation after endoluminal repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR), and the role of ultrasound (US) in detecting neck enlargement. From November 1998 to October 2001, 90 patients underwent EVAR. On follow-up, US and CT angiography (CTA) were performed, and diameters of the suprarenal and infrarenal aortic necks were monitored. Incidence of significant neck enlargement (> or =2.5 mm) and distal stent-graft migration (>10 mm) was calculated. Several factors were evaluated as predictive of neck enlargement. Ultrasound and CTA measurements were compared. The US and CTA examinations were available in 68, 39, and 11 patients at 1, 2, and 3 years follow-up (mean follow-up 15 months). Incidence of significant neck dilatation was 21.8% at the infrarenal level (13, 33, and 36% at 1, 2, and 3 years follow-up) and 13.8% at the suprarenal level (9, 18, and 27% at 1, 2, and 3 years follow-up). Significant stent-graft migration occurred in 14 of 87 patients (16%) and was associated with neck dilatation in 8 (2 suprarenal and 6 infrarenal). No risk factors were identified. Ultrasound was less accurate than CT in measuring neck diameter, in particular at the suprarenal level. Proximal aortic neck enlargement occurs in up to 30% of patients after EVAR and represents the main risk factor for stent-graft migration. The risk of infrarenal neck dilatation is higher at 2 years follow-up, whereas the suprarenal neck enlarges later. Ultrasound is not useful in monitoring neck diameter.

Noninvasive diagnosis of incomplete endovascular aneurysm repair: D-dimer assay to detect type I endoleaks and nonshrinking aneurysms.

PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that D-dimer (D-D), a cross-linked fibrin degradation product of an ongoing thrombotic event, could be a marker for incomplete aneurysm exclusion after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: In a multicenter study, 83 venous blood samples were collected from 74 AAA endograft patients and controls. Twenty subjects who were >6 months postimplantation and had evidence of an endoleak and/or an unmodified or increasing AAA sac diameter formed the test group. Controls were 10 nondiseased subjects >65 years old, 18 AAA surgical candidates, and 26 postoperative endograft patients with no endoleak and a shrinking aneurysm. Blood samples were analyzed for D-D through a latex turbidimetric immunoassay. The endograft patients were stratified into 5 clinical groups for analysis: no endoleak and decreasing sac diameter, no endoleak and increasing/unchanged sac diameter, type II endoleak and decreasing sac diameter, type II endoleak and increasing/unchanged sac diameter, and type I endoleak. RESULTS: Individual D-D values were highly variable, but differences among clinical groups were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). D-D values did not vary significantly between patients with stable, untreated AAAs and age-matched controls (238 +/- 180 ng/mL versus 421 +/- 400 ng/mL, p > 0.05). Median D-D values increased at 4 days postoperatively (963 ng/mL versus 382 ng/mL, p > 0.05) and did not vary thereafter if there was no endoleak and the aneurysm sac decreased. D-D mean values were higher in patients with type I endoleak (1931 +/- 924 ng/mL, p < 0.005) and those with unchanged/increasing sac diameters (1272 +/- 728 ng/mL) than in cases with decreasing diameters (median 638 +/- 238 ng/mL) despite the presence of endoleak (p < 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Elevated D-D may prove to be a useful marker for fixation problems after endovascular AAA repair and may help rule out type I endoleak, thus excluding patients from unnecessary invasive tests.