An assessment of the current applicability of the EVT endovascular graft for treatment of patients with an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the percentage of elective abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs)/aortoiliac aneurysms that currently can be repaired with endovascular grafts (EVGs), the reasons for rejection of EVGs, and the future role of EVG in the treatment of AAA.


METHODS
From January 1997 to May 1998, patients at three hospitals (a university hospital, a university-affiliated teaching hospital, and a Veterans Administration hospital with university faculty and residents) were evaluated for EVGs as part of a national clinical trial with grafts manufactured by Endovascular Technologies (EVT, Menlo Park, Calif). All patients at two hospitals and patients treated by the participating surgeons at the third hospital were screened for EVG. Patients with AAAs that were ruptured, symptomatic, or involved renal or mesenteric arteries and patients who declined treatment were excluded from the study. Evaluation included clinical examination, computed tomography scan, and selective arteriography. The decision to proceed with EVG was made by the vascular surgeon, with input and concurrence of medical personnel from a company with extensive experience in endograft repair. The main outcome measures were the determination of the percentage of elective AAAs currently being treated with an EVG and the reasons for exclusion of patients from EVG placement.


RESULTS
A total of 162 patients underwent elective treatment of an AAA, 22 (14%) with an EVG (14 bifurcated, eight tube) and 140 (86%) with traditional resection. Indications for not proceeding with an EVG included insufficient proximal cuff in 29 patients (21%), distal common iliac aneurysm or insufficient distal iliac neck in 29 patients (21%), proximal neck too large for an EVG in 24 patients (17%), symptomatic iliac stenosis in 23 patients (16%), iliac stenosis precluding introducer passage in 17 patients (12%), patient preference in 11 patients (8%), and calcification, kink, or extensive thrombus involving the proximal neck precluding safe graft attachment in seven patients (5%). Of the 22 patients treated with an EVG, three were converted to open resection, because of iliac stenosis in two patients and premature stent deployment in one patient (initial technical success rate, 86%).


CONCLUSIONS
Based on currently available technology, 80% of patients were not candidates for an EVG because of proximal calcification, short aortic or distal cuff, coexisting distal iliac aneurysm, and stenotic iliac disease. Even with the use of adjunctive procedures, most patients still require open repair. Significant changes in design will be necessary to apply these devices to most patients with an AAA.
Treiman
G S
GS
Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA.
Lawrence
P F
PF
Edwards
W H
WH
Galt
S W
SW
Kraiss
L W
LW
Bhirangi
K
K
D017544:Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal / Q000601:surgery*; D001807:Blood Vessel Prosthesis; D019917:Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation / Q000379:methods; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D017543:Iliac Aneurysm / Q000601:surgery; D008297:Male; D018579:Patient Selection; D015607:Stents