Key result
Volume measurement detected negative remodeling in 94.1% of cases compared to 78.4% using maximum transverse diameter, demonstrating higher sensitivity for screening after EVAR (p<0.001).
Why the study?
The study aimed to investigate the relationship between maximum transverse diameter and volume measurements in patients who underwent reoperations after EVAR, and their association with endoleaks.
Does volumetric assessment improve the detection of negative remodeling compared to maximum transverse diameter in patients undergoing EVAR surveillance?
Observational (n=51)
Does volumetric assessment improve the detection of negative remodeling compared to maximum transverse diameter in patients undergoing EVAR surveillance?
Absolute Event Rate: 94.1% vs 78.4%
p-value: p=<0.001
Volumetric assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysms after EVAR is more sensitive than maximum transverse diameter for detecting negative remodeling, though it does not predict endoleak type.
This study aimed to investigate the relationship between maximum transverse diameter (MTD) and volume measurements in patients who underwent reoperations after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), and their association with the occurrence of endoleaks. The study included 51 patients who underwent EVAR and subsequent re-operations caused by endoleaks type I–III. In some number of events, multiple re-operations were needed. MTD was measured using the Horos software, and segmentations of the AAA were performed using 3D Slicer. This study first evaluated post-operative computed tomography angiography (CTA) to measure MTD and volume. Then, similar measurements were made in the control scan for re-operation qualification. Negative remodeling (increase in MTD and/or volume) was observed in 40 cases using MTD, and 48 cases using volume measurements. The volume measurement showed lower missed negatives than MTD, indicating its effectiveness in screening for negative remodeling (p < 0.001). Combining both methods identified 51 negative remodeling cases and 8 positive changes, with a higher sensitivity compared to MTD alone. The volume of the sac did not predict specific endoleak types. Decreases in MTD were observed in smaller sacs, with smaller volume changes. Volume measurement is a valuable screening tool, and combining MTD and volume enhances sensitivity. However, sac volume does not predict endoleak type.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kargul et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Endoleaks type I-III after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) (n=51). Volume measurement vs. Maximum transverse diameter (MTD) measurement was evaluated on Detection of negative remodeling (increase in MTD and/or volume) (p=<0.001). Volume measurement detected negative remodeling in 94.1% of cases compared to 78.4% using maximum transverse diameter, demonstrating higher sensitivity for screening after EVAR (p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: