A cross-sectional study on the anatomic feasibility of iliac side branch grafts in a real-world setting

The aim of this cross-sectional, single-center study was to analyze the feasibility of different commercially available iliac branch devices in Europe in a cohort of patients with aorto-iliac aneurysms.

All patients with aorto-iliac or iliac aneurysms that required iliac aneurysm repair, between 2017 and 2021, were included. Morphologic data was analyzed using computed tomography angiograms. The main outcome was the feasibility of each endoprosthesis (Cook ZBIS, Gore Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis [IBE], and JOTEC E-Iliac) according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. Secondary outcomes were feasibility in all three devices, in any device, and with adjunctive procedures (liberal criteria). Additionally, a comparative analysis of all three grafts was performed to analyze differences in feasibility.

Overall, 119 iliac aneurysms in 101 patients were included. The mean age was 71 ± 11 years, and 91.6% were male. Feasibility was 52.9% for Cook ZBIS, 33.6% for Gore IBE, and 26.9% for the JOTEC E-Iliac device. A total of 65.5% of patients were feasible with at least one device, whereas only 10.1% complied with all three devices. The main reasons for lack of feasibility were a short common iliac artery length (Cook ZBIS), a narrow common iliac artery diameter (Gore IBE), and a >50° angulation between the external and internal iliac arteries (JOTEC E-Iliac). There was a significant difference between the feasibility of the three devices (P < .001). Cook ZBIS was the graft with the higher feasibility, with 3.3 and 4.4 higher odds when compared with Gore IBE and JOTEC E-Iliac devices, respectively. There was no significant difference between the Gore IBE and the JOTEC E-Iliac. By using liberal criteria, the overall feasibility increased to 95.8%.

We found that only 65.5% of patients were feasible with one of the available devices according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. The Cook ZBIS was the device with the overall highest feasibility. Extending the use of these devices with adjunctive measures and a more liberal approach increased feasibility to 95.8%.