Home > Journals > International Angiology > Past Issues > International Angiology 2019 December;38(6) > International Angiology 2019 December;38(6):494-501

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

REVIEW  AORTIC DISEASE Editor’s choice • Freefree

International Angiology 2019 December;38(6):494-501

DOI: 10.23736/S0392-9590.19.04215-9

Copyright © 2019 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Endovascular treatment of iliac aneurysmal disease with internal iliac artery preservation: a review of two different approaches

José OLIVEIRA-PINTO , Pedro MARTINS, Armando MANSILHA

Department of Surgery and Physiology, Faculty of Medicine of Porto, Porto, Portugal



INTRODUCTION: The feasibility of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is often challenged by the concurrent presence of common iliac artery aneurysms, which prevent the attainment of a successful distal sealing. The present review aims to portray the safety and efficacy of two internal iliac artery (IIA) preservation strategies in the endovascular treatment of aortoiliac aneurysms: the iliac branch extension device (IBED) and the parallel graft - “sandwich” technique (PG-ST).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify publications on endovascular treatment of iliac aneurysmal disease using IBED or PG-ST. Primary endpoints were freedom from endoleak, IIA branch occlusion and secondary interventions.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twenty-eight studies were selected for analysis describing a total of 1316 patients, 1169 in the IBED group and 147 in the PG-ST group. The technical success rates were akin for IBED and PG-ST (83.9-100% versus 81.3-100%). The defined primary endpoints were reported by fourteen articles. Freedom from endoleak, IIA branch occlusion and reintervention, at 6 months, were as follows: 82-100% versus 86%, 90-94% versus 88%, and 90-98% versus 87%, respectively for IBED and PG-ST. Later outcomes were only recorded in the IBED group, and freedom from endoleak, IIA branch occlusion and reintervention, at 9 years, were 83%, 81-90%, and 64-75%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Both IBED and PG-ST have proven to be safe and valid approaches. However, while IBED has established as a durable procedure, mid-term data lacks on PGs performance and further studies are required to attest durability of the latter procedure.


KEY WORDS: Iliac aneurysm; Vascular grafting; Endoleak; Graft occlusion, vascular

top of page