Key result
Endoleaks occurred in 44% of patients following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair, but all resolved without additional intervention within 6 months.
Observational (n=25)
No
Endoleaks occurred in nearly half of EVAR procedures but all resolved spontaneously within 6 months, supporting observation as a viable initial strategy for minor endoleaks.
May support observation for post-EVAR endoleaks; leaves open need for prospective validation before broader adoption.
Purpose: Endoleak is a common complication following endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs (EVAR). The aim of this study was to discover the frequency and characteristics after EVAR with on-label use. Methods: A retrospective review was performed on 25 patients who underwent EVAR in Inha University Hospital between December 2005 and February 2009. The data included in this study accounted for patient characteristics, anatomic features, operative technical details, and types of devices used. The results of EVAR were analyzed for clinical success, technical success and endoleak. Results: Endoleaks were observed during 11 (47.8%) procedures. Type Ⅰ endoleaks were observed in 2 (18.2%) cases. A total of 6 type Ⅱ intraoperative endoleaks (54.5%) were observed. 3 type Ⅲ endoleaks (27.3%) occurred. But all endoleaks were resolved without additional intervention CT scan after 6 months. Conclusion: Although the endovascular management of AAAs is less invasive than open surgery, many complications including endoleak were still the most common adverse event during the first postoperative month. However, observation may be a good treatment for minor endoleak after EVAR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Park et al. (2010) conducted an observational in Abdominal aortic aneurysm (n=25). Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) was evaluated on Frequency of endoleak. Endoleaks occurred in 44% of patients following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair, but all resolved without additional intervention within 6 months.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: