Percutaneous and Endovascular Embolization-Based Treatments of Type 1A and Type 1B Endoleaks after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

IF 0.7
Mustafa Mehmet Incesu, Mehmet Koray Akkan, Berrak Barutcu Asfuroglu, Umut Asfuroglu, Nesrin Erdogan Kaydu, Abdullah Ozer, Huseyin Demirtas, Gursel Levent Oktar, Erhan Turgut Ilgit
{"title":"Percutaneous and Endovascular Embolization-Based Treatments of Type 1A and Type 1B Endoleaks after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.","authors":"Mustafa Mehmet Incesu, Mehmet Koray Akkan, Berrak Barutcu Asfuroglu, Umut Asfuroglu, Nesrin Erdogan Kaydu, Abdullah Ozer, Huseyin Demirtas, Gursel Levent Oktar, Erhan Turgut Ilgit","doi":"10.1177/15385744261501888","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveThis retrospective, observational study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of embolization-based treatments for Types 1A and 1B endoleaks following endovascular aneurysm repair.DesignA total of 26 patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair between January 2005 and September 2023 and subsequently received embolization therapy for Types 1A or 1B endoleak, either at the end of the procedure or during follow-up, were retrospectively reviewed.MethodsEmbolization was performed in 16 patients with Type 1A endoleaks and 10 with Type 1B. Eight of the 16 patients who underwent embolization for Type 1A endoleaks required additional treatments such as aortic cuff placement or a chimney graft. Similarly, six out of the 10 patients treated with embolization for Type 1B endoleaks underwent adjunctive procedures such as iliac stent-graft extension. The primary endpoint was the absence of aneurysm sac enlargement. Secondary endpoints included technical success and the avoidance of endoleak-related reintervention.ResultsAneurysm sac regression or stabilization was observed in 68.7% of Type 1A and 70% of Type 1B endoleak cases over mean follow-up periods of 43.1 and 22.3 months, respectively.ConclusionEmbolization-based endovascular treatment, alone or combined with adjunctive endograft procedures, may achieve aneurysm sac stabilization or regression in a substantial proportion of patients with Types 1A and 1B endoleaks. However, the possibility of recurrence and reintervention, particularly in Type 1A endoleaks, remains an important limitation of this approach and warrants continued imaging surveillance.</p>","PeriodicalId":94265,"journal":{"name":"Vascular and endovascular surgery","volume":" ","pages":"15385744261501888"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular and endovascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15385744261501888","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveThis retrospective, observational study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of embolization-based treatments for Types 1A and 1B endoleaks following endovascular aneurysm repair.DesignA total of 26 patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair between January 2005 and September 2023 and subsequently received embolization therapy for Types 1A or 1B endoleak, either at the end of the procedure or during follow-up, were retrospectively reviewed.MethodsEmbolization was performed in 16 patients with Type 1A endoleaks and 10 with Type 1B. Eight of the 16 patients who underwent embolization for Type 1A endoleaks required additional treatments such as aortic cuff placement or a chimney graft. Similarly, six out of the 10 patients treated with embolization for Type 1B endoleaks underwent adjunctive procedures such as iliac stent-graft extension. The primary endpoint was the absence of aneurysm sac enlargement. Secondary endpoints included technical success and the avoidance of endoleak-related reintervention.ResultsAneurysm sac regression or stabilization was observed in 68.7% of Type 1A and 70% of Type 1B endoleak cases over mean follow-up periods of 43.1 and 22.3 months, respectively.ConclusionEmbolization-based endovascular treatment, alone or combined with adjunctive endograft procedures, may achieve aneurysm sac stabilization or regression in a substantial proportion of patients with Types 1A and 1B endoleaks. However, the possibility of recurrence and reintervention, particularly in Type 1A endoleaks, remains an important limitation of this approach and warrants continued imaging surveillance.

经皮和血管内栓塞治疗动脉瘤修复后1A型和1B型内漏。
目的本回顾性观察性研究旨在评价栓塞治疗血管内动脉瘤修复后1A型和1B型内漏的疗效。设计回顾性分析了2005年1月至2023年9月期间接受血管内动脉瘤修复并随后在手术结束或随访期间接受1A或1B型动脉瘤栓塞治疗的26例患者。方法对16例1A型内漏患者和10例1B型内漏患者行阻断术。16例1A型内漏患者中有8例需要额外的治疗,如主动脉袖带放置或烟囱移植。同样,10名接受1B型内漏栓塞治疗的患者中有6名接受了辅助手术,如髂支架扩展。主要终点为无动脉瘤囊增大。次要终点包括技术成功和避免与内漏相关的再干预。结果在平均43.1个月和22.3个月的随访中,68.7%的1A型和70%的1B型内漏患者动脉瘤囊消退或稳定。结论基于栓塞的血管内治疗,单独或联合辅助的血管内移植手术,可以使相当比例的1A型和1B型内漏患者的动脉瘤囊稳定或消退。然而,复发和再干预的可能性,特别是1A型内漏,仍然是该方法的一个重要限制,需要继续进行影像学监测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书