Early and Mid-Term Outcomes of Isolated Type 2 Endoleak Refractory to an Embolization Procedure
Francesca Miceli1, Ada Dajci1, Alessia Di Girolamo1
1Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Division, Department of General Surgery and Surgical Specialties, Policlinico Umberto I, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico 155, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Abstract:
Introduction: A type 2 endoleak (EL2) remains the most prevalent complication of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Methods: We conducted a retrospective, single-center analysis, including patients who underwent embolization for an isolated EL2 after EVAR. The study population was stratified into two groups: Group A, consisting of patients whose EL2 resolved after the first embolization procedure, and Group B, consisting of those with refractory EL2 (rEL2). The indication for EL2 treatment was aneurysmal sac growth amounting to >10 mm from the index EVAR. The indications for endograft explantation were the absence of high comorbidities and persisting aneurysmal sac expansion. Those with high comorbidities were subjected to another endovascular procedure or a conservative approach, the latter being preferred. The primary endpoint was EL2 resolution. The secondary endpoints were mid-term outcomes in terms of aneurysmal sac shrinkage, stability and expansion rates, and aneurysm-related complications. Results: Among 57 patients, 19 patients (33.3%) showed signs of EL2 after the first embolization, whereas 38 (66.6%) presented rEL2. Of these, 14 (36.8%) presented significant aneurysmal sac expansion: 8 patients underwent a secondary embolization, while an open conversion was performed in the remaining 6 patients (42.8%), 4 of whom, in an elective setting, showed a complete resolution of EL2, while 2 patients treated in an urgent setting died from a ruptured aneurysm. Among the patients treated with a secondary embolization, only 2 patients presented EL2 resolution, while the other 6 patients (75%) showed rEL2. Out of the 38 patients with rEL2, 24 patients did not undergo further interventions; of these, 11 (45.8%) presented sac expansion, and 16% developed type IA EL. Conclusions: A strict follow-up and possibly a more aggressive treatment should be considered in an elective setting for patients with rEL2.
