Three-dimensional analysis of enlarging aneurysms after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the Gore Excluder Pivotal clinical trial.
OBJECTIVE
Recent reports have raised concern about the percentage of enlarging abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) after endovascular repair with the Gore Excluder device. As part of the investigation into this issue, a morphologic analysis was performed on enlarging aneurysms in the Excluder Pivotal clinical trial.


METHODS
Computed tomographic scans were evaluated on all patients identified with enlarging aneurysms (5-mm increase by Core laboratory or site) and at least 4 years of follow-up in the Excluder Pivotal clinical trial. Three-dimensional reconstruction, a set of 24 standard morphologic measurements, and analysis of potential enlargement mechanisms were performed.


RESULTS
Of 112 trial patients with 4 years of follow-up, 38 AAAs (34%) were identified as enlarging. Data were obtained from 196 computed tomographic scans (the mean interval was 47 months from first to last scan). Of the 158 scans with a prior scan for comparison, 41% demonstrated growth relative to the initial scan by diameter criteria, but 79% demonstrated growth relative to the initial scan by 3-dimensional volume criteria (P < .0001 vs diameter; chi2 analysis). This difference was most evident at early time points: at 1 year, diameter criteria indicated that 8% of these AAAs were enlarging, but 56% were already enlarging by volume criteria. On average, enlargement was detected by volume 18 months before it was detected by diameter (P < .0001), and at a smaller diameter (55 +/- 1 mm vs 60 +/- 1 mm; P < .0001). Only 19% of scans (39% of patients) had apparent endoleaks. Scans with apparent endoleaks demonstrated a greater interval rate of growth as compared with those without apparent endoleak (3.6 +/- 0.8 mm vs 1.9 +/- 0.3 mm [P < .02] by diameter; 23 +/- 4 cm3 vs 11 +/- 1 cm3 [P < .001] by volume). Although the etiology of enlargement may be endotension or device permeability in up to 74% of patients, other potential causes of aneurysm enlargement included neck apposition length less than 15 mm (15 patients; 39%), large aortic diameter relative to device (18%), large iliac diameter (5%), and iliac apposition length less than 15 mm (20%). Multiple potential etiologies of enlargement were present in 53% of AAAs.


CONCLUSIONS
The etiology of aneurysm enlargement in the Excluder Pivotal trial is likely multifactorial, including endoleak, inadequate attachment site length, and endotension or device permeability. Even by conservative criteria, a substantial percentage of aneurysm growth with the original device is likely due to material permeability. Three-dimensional volume criteria detected aneurysm enlargement more frequently, at a smaller diameter, and on average 18 months sooner than standard diameter criteria, thus suggesting a role in further investigation of this issue.
Fillinger
Mark
M
Section of Vascular Surgery, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA. marl.fillinger@hitchcock.org