| 1. |
- Bogdanovic, Marko, et al.
(author)
-
Limb Graft Occlusion Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm with the Zenith Alpha, Excluder, and Endurant Devices : a Multicentre Cohort Study
- 2021
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 62:4, s. 532-539
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: Limb graft occlusion (LGO) is a serious complication after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and while device development enables treatment of increasingly complex aortic anatomy, little is known about how endograft type affects the risk of occlusion. This observational study aimed to explore the incidence of LGO after EVAR for three major endograft systems.Methods: All patients with standard EVAR as the primary intervention for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), between January 2012 and December 2018, at five Swedish vascular surgery centres, were included in this multicentre retrospective cohort study. LGO was defined as a total limb occlusion regardless of symptoms, or a treated significant stenosis. A nested case control (NCC) design with incidence density sampling of 1:3 was used for analysis of potential per-operative and morphological risk factors. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate multivariable odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI)Results: A total of 924 patients were included. The majority were male (84%), the mean age was 76 years (+/- 7.5 SD), and median AAA diameter was 59 mm (IQR 55, 67). Patients were treated with Zenith Alpha (n = 315, ZISL limbs), Excluder (n = 152, PLC/PXC limbs), and Endurant (n = 457, ETLW/ ETEW limbs). During median follow up of 37 months (IQR 21, 62), 55 occlusions occurred (5.9%); 39 with Zenith Alpha (12.4%), one with Excluder (0.7%), and 15 with Endurant (3.3%). In the NCC analysis, the Zenith Alpha device (OR 5.31, 95% CI 1.97 - 14.3), external iliac artery (EIA) landing (OR 5.91, 95% CI 1.30 - 26.7), and EIA diameter < 10 mm (OR 4.99, 95% CI 1.46 - 16.9) were associated with an increased risk of LGO.Conclusion: Endograft device type is an independent risk factor for LGO after EVAR. Specifically, the Zenith Alpha demonstrated an increased risk of LGO compared with the Endurant and Excluder devices. In addition, a narrow EIA and landing zone in EIA are also risk factors for LGO.
|
|
| 2. |
- Liljeqvist, Moritz Lindquist, et al.
(author)
-
Geometric and biomechanical modeling aided by machine learning improves the prediction of growth and rupture of small abdominal aortic aneurysms
- 2021
-
In: Scientific Reports. - : Springer Nature. - 2045-2322. ; 11:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- It remains difficult to predict when which patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) will require surgery. The aim was to study the accuracy of geometric and biomechanical analysis of small AAAs to predict reaching the threshold for surgery, diameter growth rate and rupture or symptomatic aneurysm. 189 patients with AAAs of diameters 40-50 mm were included, 161 had undergone two CTAs. Geometric and biomechanical variables were used in prediction modelling. Classifications were evaluated with area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and regressions with correlation between observed and predicted growth rates. Compared with the baseline clinical diameter, geometric-biomechanical analysis improved prediction of reaching surgical threshold within four years (AUC 0.80 vs 0.85, p = 0.031) and prediction of diameter growth rate (r = 0.17 vs r = 0.38, p = 0.0031), mainly due to the addition of semiautomatic diameter measurements. There was a trend towards increased precision of volume growth rate prediction (r = 0.37 vs r = 0.45, p = 0.081). Lumen diameter and biomechanical indices were the only variables that could predict future rupture or symptomatic AAA (AUCs 0.65-0.67). Enhanced precision of diameter measurements improves the prediction of reaching the surgical threshold and diameter growth rate, while lumen diameter and biomechanical analysis predicts rupture or symptomatic AAA.
|
|
| 3. |
- Siika, Antti, et al.
(author)
-
Peak wall rupture index is associated with risk of rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms, independent of size and sex
- 2024
-
In: British Journal of Surgery. - : Oxford University Press. - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 111:5
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Information on the predictive determinants of abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture from CT angiography are scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate biomechanical parameters in abdominal aortic aneurysms and their association with risk of subsequent rupture. Methods: In this retrospective study, the digital radiological archive was searched for 363 patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. All patients who underwent at least one CT angiography examination before aneurysm rupture were included. CT angiography results were analysed to determine maximum aneurysm diameter, aneurysm volume, and biomechanical parameters (peak wall stress and peak wall rupture index). In the primary survival analysis, patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms less than 70mm were considered. Sensitivity analyses including control patients and abdominal aortic aneurysms of all sizes were performed. Results: A total of 67 patients who underwent 109 CT angiography examinations before aneurysm rupture were identified. The majority were men (47, 70%) and the median age at the time of CTA examination was 77 (71-83) years. The median maximum aneurysm diameter was 56 (interquartile range 46-65) mm and the median time to rupture was 2.13 (interquartile range 0.64-4.72) years. In univariable analysis, maximum aneurysm diameter, aneurysm volume, peak wall stress, and peak wall rupture index were all associated with risk of rupture. Women had an increased HR for rupture when adjusted for maximum aneurysm diameter or aneurysm volume (HR 2.16, 95% c.i. 1.23 to 3.78 (P = 0.007) and HR 1.92, 95% c.i. 1.06 to 3.50 (P = 0.033) respectively). In multivariable analysis, the peak wall rupture index was associated with risk of rupture. The HR for peak wall rupture index was 1.05 (95% c.i. 1.03 to 1.08) per % (P < 0.001) when adjusted for maximum aneurysm diameter and 1.05 (95% c.i. 1.02 to 1.08) per % (P < 0.001) when adjusted for aneurysm volume. Conclusion: Biomechanical factors appear to be important in the prediction of abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture. Women are at increased risk of rupture when adjustments are made for maximum aneurysm diameter alone.
|
|
| 4. |
- Siika, Antti, et al.
(author)
-
Three-dimensional growth and biomechanical risk progression of abdominal aortic aneurysms under serial computed tomography assessment
- 2023
-
In: Scientific Reports. - : Springer Nature. - 2045-2322. ; 13:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Growth of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is often described as erratic and discontinuous. This study aimed at describing growth patterns of AAAs with respect to maximal aneurysm diameter (Dmax) and aneurysm volume, and to characterize changes in the intraluminal thrombus (ILT) and biomechanical indices as AAAs grow. 384 computed tomography angiographies (CTAs) from 100 patients (mean age 70.0, standard deviation, SD = 8.5 years, 22 women), who had undergone at least three CTAs, were included. The mean follow-up was 5.2 (SD = 2.5) years. Growth of Dmax was 2.64 mm/year (SD = 1.18), volume 13.73 cm3/year (SD = 10.24) and PWS 7.3 kPa/year (SD = 4.95). For Dmax and volume, individual patients exhibited linear growth in 87% and 77% of cases. In the tertile of patients with the slowest Dmax-growth (< 2.1 mm/year), only 67% belonged to the slowest tertile for volume-growth, and 52% and 55% to the lowest tertile of PWS- and PWRI-increase, respectively. The ILT-ratio (ILT-volume/aneurysm volume) increased with time (2.6%/year, p < 0.001), but when adjusted for volume, the ILT-ratio was inversely associated with biomechanical stress. In contrast to the notion that AAAs grow in an erratic fashion most AAAs displayed continuous and linear growth. Considering only change in Dmax, however, fails to capture the biomechanical risk progression, and parameters such as volume and the ILT-ratio need to be considered.
|
|
