Onyx versus coil embolization for the treatment of type II endoleaks

Little evidence is available supporting the optimal treatment of type II endoleaks associated with aortic sac growth. Previous studies have lacked comparisons between treatment methods and long-term follow-up. The purpose of the present study was to review our center's experience with the treatment of type II endoleaks comparing Onyx (a liquid embolization agent consisting of ethylene vinyl alcohol; Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn) embolization and coil embolization.

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a vascular surgery database was performed to identify all patients who had undergone embolization of a type II endoleak for aortic sac growth after endovascular aneurysm repair from 2005 to 2018. The Onyx and coil embolization groups were compared using univariate statistics.

A total of 58 patients had undergone 77 embolization procedures for type II endoleaks with either Onyx (27 patients; 37 procedures) or coils (31 patients; 40 procedures). The average aneurysm size at embolization was larger in the Onyx group (77.9 ± 15.1 mm) compared with coil embolization (73.4 ± 11.9 mm). The mean follow-up was 57 months for the Onyx group and 74 months for the coil embolization group. Of the 27 patients who had undergone Onyx embolization, 2 (7.4%) had required graft explantation compared with 5 of the 31 patients (16.1%) who had undergone coil embolization (P = .33). The results of the per-patient analysis showed that the coil embolization group had a significantly greater rate of the need for further reintervention compared with the Onyx group (55% vs 19%; P < .01). Clinical success was observed in 13 patients (48%) in the Onyx embolization group compared with 10 patients (32%) in the coil embolization group (P = .04). Two patients in each group had presented with secondary rupture of the aneurysm sac after attempted embolization.

Type II endoleaks associated with sac growth treated with Onyx were less likely to require further reinterventions than were those treated with coil embolization. A trend was found toward a greater need for endovascular aneurysm repair explant after coil embolization. With a high rate of further reintervention and potential for sac rupture, diligent follow-up is required after attempted type II embolization, regardless of the technique used.