Endoleak following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Implications for duration of screening

Matthew A. Corriere, Irene D. Feurer, Stacey Y. Becker, Jeffery Dattilo, Marc A. Passman, Raul J. Guzman, Thomas C. Naslund, Eric D. Endean, William D. Jordan, L. D. Britt, Ali F. Aburahma

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    48 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Objective: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EAR) requires long-term surveillance for endoleak or increase in aneurysm diameter. We analyzed the natural history of and risk factors for endoleak development. Summary Background Data: Endoleak is a common complication of EAR that can lead to aneurysm enlargement and even rupture. Following EAR, imaging studies are used to identify leaks since patients with endoleak may require additional endovascular interventions or conversion to open repair. No criteria currently exist for cessation or reduction in frequency of screening imaging studies. Methods: Data on 220 patients undergoing EAR were retrospectively reviewed. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression were used with the end point being new endoleak development. Potential risk factors included preoperative aneurysm diameter, number of negative surveillance studies, and postoperative increase in diameter. Results: A total of 52 patients (24%) who underwent EAR had endoleak detected during postoperative follow-up, which averaged 19 months (range, 0.4-101 months). One, 6-, 12-, and 24- month endoleak-free survival was 90%, 80%, 77%, and 73%, respectively. Three leaks occurred after year 2, at postoperative months 24, 48, and 85. Increasing number of negative screening studies was negatively associated with risk for endoleak development (B = -3.122, P < 0.001), while increase in aneurysm diameter was positively associated with risk for endoleak (B = 0.072, P = 0.04). Conclusion: Risk for endoleak declines as the number of negative postoperative scans increases, but new endoleaks are identified as late as 7 years following EAR. Reduction in screening frequency cannot be uniformly recommended at this time. Patients with documented aneurysm expansion should be monitored carefully and endoleak should be suspected.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)800-807
    Number of pages8
    JournalAnnals of surgery
    Volume239
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jun 1 2004

    Fingerprint

    Endoleak
    Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
    Aneurysm
    Kaplan-Meier Estimate
    Survival Analysis
    Natural History
    Rupture

    All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

    • Surgery

    Cite this

    Corriere, M. A., Feurer, I. D., Becker, S. Y., Dattilo, J., Passman, M. A., Guzman, R. J., ... Aburahma, A. F. (2004). Endoleak following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: Implications for duration of screening. Annals of surgery, 239(6), 800-807. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000128300.60156.ab

    Endoleak following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair : Implications for duration of screening. / Corriere, Matthew A.; Feurer, Irene D.; Becker, Stacey Y.; Dattilo, Jeffery; Passman, Marc A.; Guzman, Raul J.; Naslund, Thomas C.; Endean, Eric D.; Jordan, William D.; Britt, L. D.; Aburahma, Ali F.

    In: Annals of surgery, Vol. 239, No. 6, 01.06.2004, p. 800-807.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Corriere, MA, Feurer, ID, Becker, SY, Dattilo, J, Passman, MA, Guzman, RJ, Naslund, TC, Endean, ED, Jordan, WD, Britt, LD & Aburahma, AF 2004, 'Endoleak following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: Implications for duration of screening', Annals of surgery, vol. 239, no. 6, pp. 800-807. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000128300.60156.ab
    Corriere, Matthew A. ; Feurer, Irene D. ; Becker, Stacey Y. ; Dattilo, Jeffery ; Passman, Marc A. ; Guzman, Raul J. ; Naslund, Thomas C. ; Endean, Eric D. ; Jordan, William D. ; Britt, L. D. ; Aburahma, Ali F. / Endoleak following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair : Implications for duration of screening. In: Annals of surgery. 2004 ; Vol. 239, No. 6. pp. 800-807.
    @article{8c2ae8c77dd94dfa856b1ccc9341fe71,
    title = "Endoleak following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: Implications for duration of screening",
    abstract = "Objective: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EAR) requires long-term surveillance for endoleak or increase in aneurysm diameter. We analyzed the natural history of and risk factors for endoleak development. Summary Background Data: Endoleak is a common complication of EAR that can lead to aneurysm enlargement and even rupture. Following EAR, imaging studies are used to identify leaks since patients with endoleak may require additional endovascular interventions or conversion to open repair. No criteria currently exist for cessation or reduction in frequency of screening imaging studies. Methods: Data on 220 patients undergoing EAR were retrospectively reviewed. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression were used with the end point being new endoleak development. Potential risk factors included preoperative aneurysm diameter, number of negative surveillance studies, and postoperative increase in diameter. Results: A total of 52 patients (24{\%}) who underwent EAR had endoleak detected during postoperative follow-up, which averaged 19 months (range, 0.4-101 months). One, 6-, 12-, and 24- month endoleak-free survival was 90{\%}, 80{\%}, 77{\%}, and 73{\%}, respectively. Three leaks occurred after year 2, at postoperative months 24, 48, and 85. Increasing number of negative screening studies was negatively associated with risk for endoleak development (B = -3.122, P < 0.001), while increase in aneurysm diameter was positively associated with risk for endoleak (B = 0.072, P = 0.04). Conclusion: Risk for endoleak declines as the number of negative postoperative scans increases, but new endoleaks are identified as late as 7 years following EAR. Reduction in screening frequency cannot be uniformly recommended at this time. Patients with documented aneurysm expansion should be monitored carefully and endoleak should be suspected.",
    author = "Corriere, {Matthew A.} and Feurer, {Irene D.} and Becker, {Stacey Y.} and Jeffery Dattilo and Passman, {Marc A.} and Guzman, {Raul J.} and Naslund, {Thomas C.} and Endean, {Eric D.} and Jordan, {William D.} and Britt, {L. D.} and Aburahma, {Ali F.}",
    year = "2004",
    month = "6",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1097/01.sla.0000128300.60156.ab",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "239",
    pages = "800--807",
    journal = "Annals of Surgery",
    issn = "0003-4932",
    publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
    number = "6",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Endoleak following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

    T2 - Implications for duration of screening

    AU - Corriere, Matthew A.

    AU - Feurer, Irene D.

    AU - Becker, Stacey Y.

    AU - Dattilo, Jeffery

    AU - Passman, Marc A.

    AU - Guzman, Raul J.

    AU - Naslund, Thomas C.

    AU - Endean, Eric D.

    AU - Jordan, William D.

    AU - Britt, L. D.

    AU - Aburahma, Ali F.

    PY - 2004/6/1

    Y1 - 2004/6/1

    N2 - Objective: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EAR) requires long-term surveillance for endoleak or increase in aneurysm diameter. We analyzed the natural history of and risk factors for endoleak development. Summary Background Data: Endoleak is a common complication of EAR that can lead to aneurysm enlargement and even rupture. Following EAR, imaging studies are used to identify leaks since patients with endoleak may require additional endovascular interventions or conversion to open repair. No criteria currently exist for cessation or reduction in frequency of screening imaging studies. Methods: Data on 220 patients undergoing EAR were retrospectively reviewed. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression were used with the end point being new endoleak development. Potential risk factors included preoperative aneurysm diameter, number of negative surveillance studies, and postoperative increase in diameter. Results: A total of 52 patients (24%) who underwent EAR had endoleak detected during postoperative follow-up, which averaged 19 months (range, 0.4-101 months). One, 6-, 12-, and 24- month endoleak-free survival was 90%, 80%, 77%, and 73%, respectively. Three leaks occurred after year 2, at postoperative months 24, 48, and 85. Increasing number of negative screening studies was negatively associated with risk for endoleak development (B = -3.122, P < 0.001), while increase in aneurysm diameter was positively associated with risk for endoleak (B = 0.072, P = 0.04). Conclusion: Risk for endoleak declines as the number of negative postoperative scans increases, but new endoleaks are identified as late as 7 years following EAR. Reduction in screening frequency cannot be uniformly recommended at this time. Patients with documented aneurysm expansion should be monitored carefully and endoleak should be suspected.

    AB - Objective: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EAR) requires long-term surveillance for endoleak or increase in aneurysm diameter. We analyzed the natural history of and risk factors for endoleak development. Summary Background Data: Endoleak is a common complication of EAR that can lead to aneurysm enlargement and even rupture. Following EAR, imaging studies are used to identify leaks since patients with endoleak may require additional endovascular interventions or conversion to open repair. No criteria currently exist for cessation or reduction in frequency of screening imaging studies. Methods: Data on 220 patients undergoing EAR were retrospectively reviewed. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression were used with the end point being new endoleak development. Potential risk factors included preoperative aneurysm diameter, number of negative surveillance studies, and postoperative increase in diameter. Results: A total of 52 patients (24%) who underwent EAR had endoleak detected during postoperative follow-up, which averaged 19 months (range, 0.4-101 months). One, 6-, 12-, and 24- month endoleak-free survival was 90%, 80%, 77%, and 73%, respectively. Three leaks occurred after year 2, at postoperative months 24, 48, and 85. Increasing number of negative screening studies was negatively associated with risk for endoleak development (B = -3.122, P < 0.001), while increase in aneurysm diameter was positively associated with risk for endoleak (B = 0.072, P = 0.04). Conclusion: Risk for endoleak declines as the number of negative postoperative scans increases, but new endoleaks are identified as late as 7 years following EAR. Reduction in screening frequency cannot be uniformly recommended at this time. Patients with documented aneurysm expansion should be monitored carefully and endoleak should be suspected.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2442706638&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=2442706638&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1097/01.sla.0000128300.60156.ab

    DO - 10.1097/01.sla.0000128300.60156.ab

    M3 - Article

    VL - 239

    SP - 800

    EP - 807

    JO - Annals of Surgery

    JF - Annals of Surgery

    SN - 0003-4932

    IS - 6

    ER -