https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8731-0954
Figures
Abstract
Objectives
A growing number of abdominal aortic aneurysms with severe angulated neck anatomy is treated by endovascular means. However, contradictory early and late outcomes have been reported. Our review and outcome analysis attempted to evaluate the available literature and provide clinicians with a base for clinical implementation and future research.
Materials and methods
A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify the outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with severe infrarenal neck angulation (SNA ≥ 60°) vs non-severe neck angulation (NSNA). Outcome measures included perioperative complications, type 1a endoleak, neck-related secondary procedures, stent graft migration, aneurysm rupture, increase (>5mm) in sac diameter, all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality (PROSPERO Nr.: CRD42021233253).
Results
Six observational studies reporting on 5981 patients (1457 with SNA and 4524 with NSNA) with a weighted mean follow-up period of 1.8 years were included. EVAR in SNA compared with NSNA was associated with a higher rate of type 1a endoleak at 30 days (4.0% vs 1.8%; p< 0.00001), at 1 year (2.8% vs 1.9%; p<0.03), at 2 years (4.9% vs 2.1%; p< 0.0002), at 3 years (5.6% vs 2.6%; p< 0.0001). The rate of neck-related secondary procedures was significantly higher at 1 year (6.6% vs 3.9%; p<0.05) and at 3 years (13.1% vs 9%; p<0.05). Graft migration, aneurysm sack increase, aneurysm rupture and all-cause mortality were not statistically different at mid-term.
Conclusions
The use of EVAR in severely angulated infrarenal aortic necks is associated with a high rate of early and mid-term complications. However, aortic related and all-causes mortality are not higher compared to patients with NSNA. Therefore, EVAR should be cautiously used in patients with SNA.
Citation: Bernardini G, Litterscheid S, Torsello GB, Torsello GF, Beropoulis E, Özdemir-van Brunschot D (2022) A meta-analysis of safety and efficacy of endovascular aneurysm repair in aneurysm patients with severe angulated infrarenal neck. PLoS ONE 17(2): e0264327. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264327
Editor: Athanasios Saratzis, NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, UNITED KINGDOM
Received: July 10, 2021; Accepted: February 8, 2022; Published: February 24, 2022
Copyright: © 2022 Bernardini et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Abbreviations: AAA, aortic abdominal aneurysm; CAD, coronary artery disease; CI, confidence interval; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CRF, chronic renal failure; CVD, cerebrovascular disease; DM, diabetes mellitus; ESAR, endosuture aneurysm repair; EVAR, endovascular aneurysm repair; HTN, hypertension; IFU, instructions for use; NSNA, non severe neck angulation; SNA, severely neck angulation
Introduction
Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) with severe angulated infrarenal necks is point of discussion since its introduction as a feasible procedure [1].
Infrarenal aortic angulation has a negative impact on proximal graft fixation and in patients with severe neck angulation (SNA) it can lead to type 1a endoleak [2–4]. Adjunctive procedures including an aortic extension, bare metal stent (BMS), or endoanchors are used intra-operatively to avoid or treat a type 1a endoleak while fenestrated grafts or chimney’s may be used to treat a type 1a endoleak postoperatively [5]. Other suprarenal solutions like use of fenestrated grafts and the chimney technique have been described for treating persistent type 1a endoleak.
Often, proximal aortic neck angulation is evaluated as one of several hostile neck criteria but rarely as stand-alone risk factor in severe angulated proximal neck. To our knowledge only a few studies with small sample sizes and with conflicting results have been published [6–11].
Considering the lack of systematic evaluations on this specific topic, the aim of this meta-analysis was to analyse the influence of severe infrarenal neck angulation as main hostile neck parameter on the short and mid-term outcome after EVAR.
Materials and methods
Search strategy and selection criteria
Objectives, methodology of systematic review, and inclusion criteria for study enrollment were specified and documented in a protocol, registered in the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42021233253). The review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines [12].
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Central and Scopus including articles from January 2000 until February 2021. The following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) algorithm was used: (angulated neck OR hostile neck) AND aortic aneurysm. The search was conducted by two independent investigators (GB and SL) and any disagreement was resolved by a third investigator (DÖ). Data were recorded in a web-based specialized software [13].
Studies concerning EVAR comparing patients with severe neck angulation (SNA) with patients with a non-severe neck angulation (NSNA) were considered eligible. SNA was defined as an angle ≥ 60° of intersection between lines of the long axis of the aneurysm and the long axis of the infrarenal neck.
The predefined inclusion criteria were full text English written studies, publications from January 2000 to February 2021, single center or multicenter, randomized control studies and retrospective comparative studies. Case series with less than 5 patients pro study arm were excluded. Exclusion criteria included dissected, ruptured, or mycotic AAA, primary treatment with open surgery or fenestrated and branched endovascular treatment.
For each included study we extracted year of publication, single or multi center design, first author, study design, total number of patients and number of patients in each treatment arm. Demographic characteristics and accessory hostile parameters were extracted. Both suprarenal and infrarenal fixation devices were included. Need of adjunctive procedures at proximal aortic neck, defined as chimney EVAR (ch-EVAR), use of BMS, endovascular suture by EndoAnchors (ESAR) were also extracted.
The quality of non-randomized trials was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). This scale was developed to assess the quality of studies using a “star system” (maximum nine stars), in which a study is judged on three broad perspectives: (1) the selection of the study groups, (2) the comparability of the groups, and (3) the ascertainment of outcome of interest [14].
Endpoints
Outcome measures included perioperative complications, early and late type 1a endoleak, neck-related secondary procedures, stent graft migration, increase (>5mm) in sac diameter, aneurysm rupture, aneurysm-related and all-cause mortality, according to the reporting standards [15].
Statistical analysis
The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager (version 5.4 The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Data were pooled using the random effects model, as proposed by DerSimonian and Laird, and presented using odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) [16]. To assess for heterogeneity, the I2 statistic was used. A I2 > 75% was used as a threshold in indicating significant heterogeneity. In cause of heterogeneity, reasons were explored. Funnel plots were used to assess publication bias. A p value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant.
Results
Study characteristics and quality assessment
Six studies of initially 445 publications retrieved from our data base search fulfilled the inclusion criteria [6–11]. (Fig 1) The selected publications reported on the outcome of 5981 patients who underwent EVAR for AAA of which 1457 SNA patients presented with an infrarenal angle ≥ 60° and 4524 patients with NSNA. The follow-up period reached from 1 to 7 years with a weighted mean of 1.8 ± 2.4 years per followed patient.
Evaluation of analysed studies according to the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale revealed a high score of ≥ 6 for all included studies as presented in Table 1.
Demographics
Demographics and comorbidities of the study populations are depicted in Table 2. Mean age was 2.2 years higher in the SNA population (74.5±7.6 vs 72.3±8.1 years in NSNA). ASA III-IV classification and COPD were more frequent in the SNA patient population. Additional data for each study are shown in Table 2.
Perioperative complications
Four studies reported on perioperative complications comparing the rates for both SNA and NSNA groups [6–11]. With 16.2% there was a higher rate in the SNA than in the NSNA with 7.3% but the difference was not significant (p<0.08).
Type 1a endoleak
The rate of early type 1a endoleak was reported in all selected studies and was significantly higher in the SNA group at 30 days (4.0% vs. 1.8%; p< 0.00001; OR 2.52 95% CI 1.80–3.54) (Fig 2A). The rate of type 1a endoleak was significantly higher in the SNA group at 1 year (2.8% vs 1.9%; p< 0.03; OR 1.59 95% CI 1.03–2.44), at 2 years (4.9% vs 2.1%; p< 0.0002; OR 2.45 95% CI 1.53–3.92) and at 3 years (5.6% vs 2.6%; p< 0.00001; OR 2.57 95% CI 1.62–4.07). At 4 and 5 years type 1a endoleak was higher but not statistically significant (at 4 years 6.5% vs 3.6%; p< 0.17; at 5 years 5.2% vs 3.3%; p< 0.08; Fig 2B–2F).
Rate of endoleak type 1A at 30 days (a), 1 year (b), 2 years (c), 3 years (d), 4 years (e) and 5 years (f).
Neck-related secondary procedures
The rate of neck-related secondary procedures was higher in the SNA group at 1 year (6.6% vs 3.9%; p< 0.05; OR 1.55 95% CI 1.13–2.11) and at 3 years (13.1% vs 9%; p<0.05; OR 1.42 95% CI 1.04–1.96). (Fig 3A–3C) Data regarding longer follow-up were only presented in the study by Malas et al [9].
Rate of neck related secondary procedures at 30 days (a), 1 year (b) and 2 years (c).
Migration
Migration rates at 30 days (1.4% vs 0.8%; p< 0.05; OR 1.88 95% CI 1.07–3.30) (S1 Fig) and at 1 year (5.4% vs 4.0%; p< 0.05; OR 1.41 95% CI 1.03–1.94) (S2 Fig) were significantly higher in the SNA group. At 2,3 and 5 years migration rates were not statistically significant.
Aneurysm sac increase and rupture
At 1 year no difference in sac increase between the groups (1.8 vs 1.7%) was detected. Reported aneurysm rupture was rare and without changes between the groups from 30 days to 5 years. (S3 Fig).
Aneurysm-related and all-cause mortality
Aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the SNA group at 1 year (6.4% vs. 4.3%; p< 0.05; OR 1.51 95% CI 1.16–1.98) but statistically not different at the other time points. (S4 Fig) No statistically different all-cause mortality rate was depicted from 30 days to 5 years. (S5 Fig).
A summary of outcomes is described in Table 3.
Discussion
This meta-analysis shows that EVAR for AAA with severely angulated neck is associated with higher rate of type 1a endoleak and need for neck-related reinterventions.
The growing experience in EVAR and the introduction of improved technologies encouraged the expansion of indications, especially for patients at significant risk for open surgery [17,18]. However, the liberal adoption of EVAR in hostile neck anatomies increases the risk of endoleak. AbuRahma et al. reported high rate of endoleak in their patients with SNA [19]. Also Tsilimparis et al. suggested that infrarenal angulation is an independent predictor of secondary interventions [20]. Antoniou et al. found that hostile neck anatomy (HNA) was associated with a twofold increased risk of 30-day morbidity, a nine-fold increased risk of aneurysm-related mortality within 1 year, higher rate of proximal neck dilation, type 1a endoleak and reintervention [21]. Also our meta-analysis confirms the higher rate of type 1a endoleaks and secondary interventions within 1 year. Despite the high-risk profile of the SNA group patients, the aneurysm-related mortality and rupture did not show a statistical difference between severe angulated and non-angulated necks at mean follow up period. However, this might be explained by the low number of cases and limited follow up.
In the present meta-analysis patients in the SNA group had a higher incidence of COPD and a higher operative risk based on ASA classification. These results are in accordance with previous reports underling an association between the clinical status, ASA status and anatomic complexity of aorta [22,23].
The patient based mean follow-up period was 21.6 ± 29 months and only 3 studies had a follow up longer than 2 years [6,9,11]. Long-term results beyond five years were presented only by Oliveira et al [11]. After a median follow-up of 7.4 years freedom from type 1a endoleak was 86.1% in the SNA group vs 96.6.2% in the NSNA group. Their experience underlines the role of closed follow-up also on mid- and long-term treating patients with severe angulated neck anatomy.
Concerning quality assessment, no randomized controlled studies have been found; however, the methodological quality of four out of six multicenter studies included in this review was high as evaluated with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale [7,9–11]. Nevertheless, the use of different devices created some heterogeneity among the study populations examined. (Table 1) One of those (Talent®, Medtronic Cardiovascular, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) is not commercially available anymore and two (Zenith®, Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA and Excluder® WL Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, AZ, USA) have been modified from earlier generation devices. Recent design modifications have been introduced to overcome limitations regarding proximal neck anatomy and thereby expanding indications [24]. The current suprarenal fixation platforms, Treovance® (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FLA, USA) and Endurant II® (Medtronic Cardiovascular, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) are currently indicated to treat infrarenal necks up to 75° [25,26]. Moreover, the indication is expanded up to 90° with infrarenal platforms as Anaconda® (Terumo Aortic, Glasgow, UK), Aorfix® (Lombard Medical, Didcot, UK) and Conformable C3 device® (WL Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, AZ, USA). However, the infrarenal neck length should be at least 15 mm [27–29].
Finally, alternative endovascular options like parallel endograft techniques or use of fenestrated endografts may be technically challenging to perform, and long-term outcomes in severely angulated necks are lacking [30].
Adjunctive fixation with EndoAnchor during primary repair has been reported in patients with hostile neck to improve endograft apposition to the outer aortic curve, thus increasing proximal seal length [5,31,32]. Chaudhuri et al. reported on an incidence of type 1a endoleak of 2.4% (1/42) without neck related interventions [33]. However, reports directly comparing SNA with and without EndoAnchor are still lacking, and long-term durability is not known.
Limitations
The results of the present study should be interpreted in the context of some limitations. First, the paucity number of studies available should be considered. The population weight was not equally distributed, with one study counting with more than 80% of the study population [12]. Additionally, the small studies have wide confidence intervals. Second, in current literature details are missing regarding the distance between the lowest renal artery and the maximum infrarenal angulation. Severe infrarenal angulation just below the ostium of the renal arteries will be of greater influence on outcomes compared to the same angulation 40 mm below the take-off of the renal arteries. Third, a wide range of endoprostheses, with both supra (81.4%) and infrarenal (18.6%) fixation and different IFU was analyzed, affecting study heterogeneity.
Conclusions
The use of infrarenal EVAR devices in severely angulated aortic necks is associated with a high rate of early and mid-term complications. However, aortic-related and all-cause mortality is not higher compared to patients with NSNA at mid-term. From the present analysis, it may be concluded that an accurate patient selection and a careful morphometric assessment in SNA patients should be recommended. Prospective, multicenter registries with long-term data are urgently needed to identify the best treatment option in patients presenting with an infrarenal AAA with severe neck angulation, considered to be fit for treatment.
Supporting information
S4 Fig. Rate of aneurysm related mortality at 5 years.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264327.s005
(DOCX)
S5 Fig. Rate of all causes mortality at 5 years.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264327.s006
(DOCX)
S1 Dataset. Data set and statistical analysis.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264327.s007
(DOCX)
References
- 1. de Vries JP. The proximal neck: the remaining barrier to a complete EVAR world. Semin Vasc Surg. 2012 Dec;25(4):182–6. pmid:23206563.
- 2. Karathanos C, Spanos K, Kouvelos G, Athanasoulas A, Koutsias S, Matsagkas M, et al. Hostility of proximal aortic neck anatomy in relation to abdominal aortic aneurysm size and its impact on the outcome of endovascular repair with the new generation endografts. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2020 Feb;61(1):60–66. Epub 2018 Jan 9. pmid:29327561.
- 3. Troisi N, Torsello G, Weiss K, Donas KP, Michelagnoli S, Austermann M. Midterm results of endovascular aneurysm repair using the Endurant stent-graft according to the instructions for use vs. off-label conditions. J Endovasc Ther. 2014 Dec;21(6):841–7. pmid:25453888.
- 4. Jordan WD Jr, Mehta M, Varnagy D, Moore WM Jr, Arko FR, Joye J, et al. Aneurysm Treatment using the Heli-FX Aortic Securement System Global Registry (ANCHOR) Workgroup Members. Results of the ANCHOR prospective, multicenter registry of EndoAnchors for type Ia endoleaks and endograft migration in patients with challenging anatomy. J Vasc Surg. 2014 Oct;60(4):885–92.e2. Epub 2014 Jul 31. pmid:25088739.
- 5. Muhs BE, Jordan W, Ouriel K, Rajaee S, de Vries JP. Matched cohort comparison of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with and without EndoAnchors. J Vasc Surg. 2018 Jun;67(6):1699–1707. Epub 2017 Dec 18. pmid:29248241.
- 6. Chinsakchai K, Suksusilp P, Wongwanit C, Hongku K, Hahtapornsawan S, Puangpunngam N, et al. Early and late outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair to treat abdominal aortic aneurysm compared between severe and non-severe infrarenal neck angulation. Vascular. 2020 Dec;28(6):683–691. Epub 2020 May 14. pmid:32408856.
- 7. Hobo R, Kievit J, Leurs LJ, Buth J; EUROSTAR Collaborators. Influence of severe infrarenal aortic neck angulation on complications at the proximal neck following endovascular AAA repair: a EUROSTAR study. J Endovasc Ther. 2007 Feb;14(1):1–11. pmid:17291144.
- 8. Le TB, Moon MH, Jeon YS, Hong KC, Cho SG, Park KM. Evaluation of Aneurysm Neck Angle Change After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Clinical Investigations. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016 May;39(5):668–675. Epub 2015 Dec 3. pmid:26634739.
- 9. Malas MB, Hicks CW, Jordan WD Jr, Hodgson KJ, Mills JL Sr, Makaroun MS, et al; Five-year outcomes of the PYTHAGORAS U.S. clinical trial of the Aorfix endograft for endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with highly angulated aortic necks. J Vasc Surg. 2017 Jun;65(6):1598–1607. Epub 2017 Feb 9. pmid:28190716.
- 10. Murray D, Szeberin Z, Benevento D, Abdallah F, Palasciano G, Lescan M, et al. A comparison of clinical outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm patients with favorable and hostile neck angulation treated by endovascular repair with the Treovance stent graft. J Vasc Surg. 2020 Jun;71(6):1881–1889. Epub 2019 Nov 2. pmid:31690524.
- 11. Oliveira NFG, Gonçalves FB, Hoeks SE, Josee van Rijn M, Ultee K, Pinto JP, et al. Long-term outcomes of standard endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with severe neck angulation. J Vasc Surg. 2018 Dec;68(6):1725–1735. Epub 2018 Jun 15. pmid:29914837.
- 12. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 2009;339:b2700. pmid:19622552
- 13.
Covidence systematic review software, Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia. Available at www.covidence.org.
- 14.
Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Available at: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed June 21, 2012.
- 15. Chaikof EL, Blankensteijn JD, Harris PL, White GH, Zarins CK, Bernhard VM et al; Ad Hoc Committee for Standardized Reporting Practices in Vascular Surgery of the Society for Vascular Surgery. Reporting standards for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2002;35:1048–60. pmid:12021727.
- 16. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177–88. pmid:3802833
- 17. Wanhainen A, Verzini F, Van Herzeele I, Allaire E, Bown M, Cohnert T, et al 2019 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-iliac Artery Aneurysms. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019 Jan;57(1):8–93. Epub 2018 Dec 5. Erratum in: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2020 Mar;59(3):494. pmid:30528142.
- 18. Marone EM, Freyrie A, Ruotolo C, et al. Expert opinion on hostile neck definition in endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (a Delphy consensus). Ann Vasc Surg. 2020 Jan; 62:173–182. Epub 2019 Aug 6. pmid:31394211.
- 19. AbuRahma AF, Campbell J, Stone PA, Nanjundappa A, Scott Dean L, Keiffer T, et al. Early and late clinical outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair in patients with an angulated neck. Vascular. 2010 Mar-Apr;18(2):93–101. pmid:20338133.
- 20. Tsilimparis N, Dayama A, Ricotta JJ 2nd. Remodeling of aortic aneurysm and aortic neck on follow-up after endovascular repair with suprarenal fixation. J Vasc Surg. 2015 Jan;61(1):28–34. Epub 2014 Aug 19. pmid:25153490.
- 21. Antoniou GA, Georgiadis GS, Antoniou SA, Kuhan G, Murray D. A meta-analysis of outcomes of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients with hostile and friendly neck anatomy. J Vasc Surg. 2013 Feb;57(2):527–38. Epub 2012 Dec 21. pmid:23265584.
- 22. Georgiadis GS, Trellopoulos G, Antoniou GA, Gallis K, Nikolopoulos ES, Kapoulas KC, et al. Early results of the Endurant endograft system in patients with friendly and hostile infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm anatomy. J Vasc Surg. 2011 Sep;54(3):616–27. Epub 2011 Jul 29. pmid:21802890.
- 23. Perdikides T, Georgiadis GS, Avgerinos ED, Fotis T, Verikokos C, Hopkinson BR, et al. The Aorfix stent-graft to treat infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms with angulated necks and/or tortuous iliac arteries: midterm results. J Endovasc Ther. 2009 Oct;16(5):567–76. Erratum in: J Endovasc Ther. 2009 Dec;16(6):A6. pmid:19842737.
- 24. Pintoux D, Chaillou P, Azema L, Bizouarn P, Costargent A, Patra P, et al. Long-Term Influence of Suprarenal or Infrarenal Fixation on Proximal Neck Dilatation and Stentgraft Migration After EVAR. Annals of Vascular Surgery, 25(8), 1012–1019. pmid:22023937
- 25. Uberoi R, Setacci C, Lescan M, Lorido A, Murray D, Szeberin Z, et al. Global Post-Market Clinical Follow-up of the Treovance Stent-Graft for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: One-Year Results From the RATIONALE Registry. J Endovasc Ther. 2018 Dec;25(6):726–734. Epub 2018 Oct 3. pmid:30280649; PMCID: PMC6238168.
- 26. Teijink JAW, Power AH, Böckler D, Peeters P, et al. Editor’s Choice e Five Year Outcomes of the Endurant Stent Graft for Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in the ENGAGE Registry. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg (2019) 58, 175e181. Published:June 21, 2019. pmid:31235305
- 27. Rödel SGJ, Zeebregts CJ, Huisman AB, Geelkerken RH. Results of the Anaconda™ endovascular graft in abdominal aortic aneurysm with a severe angulated an infrarenal neck. J Vasc Surg. 2014;59(6): 1495–1501. pmid:24507824
- 28. Khan A, Khoo E, Hansrani V, Banihani M, Qayyum H, Antoniou G.A, et al.Technical success and outcomes using a flexible bifurcated stent graft (Aorfix TM) in abdominal aortic aneurysms: a systematic reviewExpert Rev Med Devices. 2021 Mar 4;1–9. pmid:33618596
- 29. Rhee R, Peterson B, Moore E, Lepore M, Oderich G. Initial human experience with the GORE EXCLUDER Conformable AAA Endoprosthesis. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech. 2019 Jun 29;5(3):319–322. pmid:31334409; PMCID: PMC6614708.
- 30. Morikage N., Mizoguchi T., Takeuchi Y., Nagase T., Samura M., Ueda K.,et al. (2019). Chimney Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using Endurant Stent-Grafts With Bare Balloon-Expandable Stents for Patients With Juxtarenal Aortic Aneurysms. Journal of Endovascular Therapy, 152660281983731. pmid:30900510
- 31. Tassiopoulos AK, Monastiriotis S, Jordan WD, Muhs BE, Ouriel K, De Vries JP. Predictors of early aortic neck dilatation after endovascular aneurysm repair with EndoAnchors. J Vasc Surg. 2017 Jul;66(1):45–52. Epub 2017 Mar 6. pmid:28274751.
- 32. Valdivia A. R., Beropoulis E., Pitoulias G., Pratesi G., Marcos F. A., Barbante M, et al. (2019). Multicenter registry about the use of EndoAnchors in the endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms with hostile neck showed successful but delayed endograft sealing within intraoperative type IA endoleak cases. Annals of Vascular Surgery. pmid:31028850
- 33. Chaudhuri A, Kim HK, Valdivia AR. Improved Midterm Outcomes Using Standard Devices and EndoAnchors for Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Hyperangulated Necks. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020 Jul;43(7):971–980. Epub 2020 May 8. pmid:32385611.