Comparison of Type II Endoleak Embolizations: Embolization of Endoleak Nidus Only versus Embolization of Endoleak Nidus and Branch Vessels
Hyeon Yu1, Hemant Desai2, Ari J Isaacson1
1Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Purpose:
To compare outcomes of type II endoleak embolization involving embolization of the endoleak nidus only vs embolization of the endoleak nidus and branch vessels in patients treated with endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty-nine consecutive patients (mean age, 77.9 y; range, 63-88 y) with type II endoleak who underwent embolization from 2004 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into 2 groups: embolization of endoleak nidus only (group A) and embolization of endoleak nidus and branch vessels (group B). Mean follow-up intervals were 20.5 months ± 14.7 in group A and 24.3 months ± 18.5 in group B. Outcomes were compared between groups by Mann-Whitney U and Pearson χ2 tests.
Results:
Mean interval from endovascular aneurysm repair to embolization was 47.6 months ± 42.9, and mean presentation time of endoleak before embolization was 23.1 months ± 25.8. Coils (n = 28) and liquid embolic agents (n = 23) were used for embolization. There were no significant differences in rates of residual endoleak (50% vs 53.8%; P = .96) or sac decrease/stabilization (62.5% vs 61.5%; P = .64). Procedure time and radiation exposure in group B (132.3 min ± 78.1; 232.4 Gy·cm2 ± 130.7) were greater than in group A (63.4 min ± 11.9; 61.5 Gy·cm2 ± 35.5; P < .01). There were no procedure-related complications.
Conclusions:
Embolization of the endoleak nidus and branch vessels is not superior to embolization of only the nidus in terms of occlusion of type II endoleak and change in sac size despite requiring longer procedure times and resulting in greater patient radiation exposure.
