共 50 条
Outcomes of the Gore® Excluder® Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis Using Self Expanding or Balloon-Expandable Stent Grafts for the Internal Iliac Artery Component
被引:3
|作者:
Cortolillo, Nicholas S.
[1
]
Guerra, Andres
[1
]
Murphy, Eric
[1
]
Hoel, Andrew W.
[1
]
Eskandari, Mark K.
[1
]
Tomita, Tadaki M.
[1
]
机构:
[1] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Dept Surg, Div Vasc Surg, 676 North St Clair St,Suite 650, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
关键词:
iliac artery;
balloon-expandable stents;
self-expanding stent;
abdominal aortic aneurysm;
endograft;
endoleak;
ENDOVASCULAR ANEURYSM REPAIR;
AORTOILIAC ANEURYSMS;
PRESERVATION;
EMBOLIZATION;
CONFORMABILITY;
BIFURCATION;
EXPERIENCE;
D O I:
10.1177/15266028231169177
中图分类号:
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号:
摘要:
Objective: The GORE((R)) EXCLUDER (R) Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis (IBE; W.L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Arizona) was developed to be used in combination with a self-expanding stent graft (SESG) for the internal iliac artery (IIA) bridging stent. Balloon-expandable stent grafts (BESGs) are an alternative for the IIA, offering advantages in sizing, device tracking, precision, and lower profile delivery. We compared the performance of SESG and BESG when used as the IIA bridging stent in patients undergoing EVAR with IBE. Methods: This is a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent EVAR with IBE implantation at a single center from October 2016 to May 2021. Anatomic and procedural characteristics were recorded via chart review and computed tomography (CT) postprocessing software (Vitrea((R)) v7.14). Devices were assigned to SESG vs. BESG groups based on the type of device landing into the most distal IIA segment. Analysis was performed per device to account for patients undergoing bilateral IBE. The primary endpoint was IIA patency, and secondary endpoint was IBE-related endoleak. Results: During the study period, 48 IBE devices were implanted in 41 patients (mean age 71.1 years). All IBE devices were implanted in conjunction with an infrarenal endograft. There were 24 devices in each of the self-expanding internal iliac component (SE-IIC) and balloon-expandable internal iliac component (BE-IIC) groups. The BE-IIC group had smaller diameter IIA target vessels (11.6 +/- 2.0 mm vs. 8.4 +/- 1.7 mm, p<0.001). Mean follow-up was 525 days. Loss of IIA patency occurred in 2 SESG devices (8.33%) at 73 and 180 days postprocedure, and in zero BESG devices, however, this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.16). There was 1 IBE-related endoleak requiring reintervention during the study period. A BESG device required reintervention due to Type 3 endoleak at 284 days. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in outcomes between SESG and BESG when used for the IIA bridging stent in EVAR with IBE. The BESGs were associated with using 2 IIA bridging stents and were more often deployed in smaller IIA target arteries. Retrospective study design and small sample size may limit the generalizability of our findings.
引用
收藏
页码:1227 / 1233
页数:7
相关论文