Safety and Validity of the Proposed European Society for Vascular Surgery Infrarenal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance Protocol: A Single Centre Evaluation

Long term surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is essential to detect late complications, but there is variation in practice. The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) made a recommendation for a new surveillance protocol; one element involves risk stratifying patients depen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery 2021-12, Vol.62 (6), p.879-885
Hauptverfasser: Kirkham, Emily N., Nicholls, Jonathan, Wilson, W Richard W., Cooper, David G., Paravastu, Sharath C.V., Kulkarni, Sachin R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 885
container_issue 6
container_start_page 879
container_title European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery
container_volume 62
creator Kirkham, Emily N.
Nicholls, Jonathan
Wilson, W Richard W.
Cooper, David G.
Paravastu, Sharath C.V.
Kulkarni, Sachin R.
description Long term surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is essential to detect late complications, but there is variation in practice. The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) made a recommendation for a new surveillance protocol; one element involves risk stratifying patients depending on sac size reduction and presence of endoleak at their 30 day computed tomography angiogram into low risk groups (delayed imaging to five years) or higher risk groups (continue with the current protocol). The aim was to test this suggested protocol retrospectively within an EVAR patient cohort. Data on EVARs performed from October 2009 to October 2019 were collected. Information gathered from an existing surveillance programme was used to assess the proposed ESVS protocol. All patients who underwent re-intervention were reviewed to see whether adopting the proposed ESVS protocol would have detected these events. In total, 309 procedures were included. Altogether, 219 of these patients had no endoleak (70.9%) and 86 had a type II (27.8%) endoleak. Only four developed a type I or III endoleak. No patient in the low risk cohort (no initial endoleak or sac shrinkage > 1 cm) required secondary intervention. Five year follow up data were available for 103 patients. In the type II endoleak group, there were 28 secondary interventions in 22 patients. No patient experienced a ruptured aneurysm within five years post-operatively. Had the proposed ESVS protocol been followed, all patients requiring a secondary intervention or with increasing sac size would have been detected/captured. Further, adherence to the ESVS guidelines would have resulted in 103 patients with a five year follow up history qualifying for reduced surveillance. A further 120 patients who had reached the three and four year follow up timepoints could have qualified for a reduced surveillance, reducing imaging cost further. Adopting the proposed ESVS EVAR surveillance protocol safely identified “low risk” patients who did not go on to require a secondary intervention. These patients could benefit from reduced surveillance scanning.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.09.008
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2597489771</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1078588421007048</els_id><sourcerecordid>2597489771</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-629d6c837e6960d9438bf92cfb8a9dcd6b7bfab9688cd2969a0c133e679ba0d73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9u1DAQxiMEon_gBTggH7kk2E7i2IjLarWUSpWKWOBqOfakeOW1FzuJtM_TF8Xptj32NDPyb77xzFcUHwiuCCbs866C3ZwqiimpsKgw5q-Kc9LWtKSEta9zjjtetpw3Z8VFSjuMcUvq9m1xVjcdazCm58X9Vg0wHpHyBv1RzhqbizCg8S-gHzEcQgKDNlPOQHm0Ddou9BBippOenIpoO8U7iEd07YeoInjl0MabMD-9rzxM8Zj26CcclH3gZ7DOKa8fZoxBB_cFrdDW-jsHaA1-jIA2s3KTGm3w74o3g3IJ3j_Gy-L3t82v9ffy5vbqer26KXXeZSwZFYZpXnfABMNGNDXvB0H10HMljDas7_pB9YJxrg0VTCisSV0D60SvsOnqy-LTSfcQw78J0ij3NmlYfgphSpK2omu46DqSUXpCdQwpRRjkIdq9ikdJsFzMkTu5mCMXcyQWMpuTmz4-6k_9Hsxzy5MbGfh6AiBvOVuIMuV75zMZG0GP0gT7kv5_bFekTQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2597489771</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Safety and Validity of the Proposed European Society for Vascular Surgery Infrarenal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance Protocol: A Single Centre Evaluation</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Kirkham, Emily N. ; Nicholls, Jonathan ; Wilson, W Richard W. ; Cooper, David G. ; Paravastu, Sharath C.V. ; Kulkarni, Sachin R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kirkham, Emily N. ; Nicholls, Jonathan ; Wilson, W Richard W. ; Cooper, David G. ; Paravastu, Sharath C.V. ; Kulkarni, Sachin R.</creatorcontrib><description>Long term surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is essential to detect late complications, but there is variation in practice. The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) made a recommendation for a new surveillance protocol; one element involves risk stratifying patients depending on sac size reduction and presence of endoleak at their 30 day computed tomography angiogram into low risk groups (delayed imaging to five years) or higher risk groups (continue with the current protocol). The aim was to test this suggested protocol retrospectively within an EVAR patient cohort. Data on EVARs performed from October 2009 to October 2019 were collected. Information gathered from an existing surveillance programme was used to assess the proposed ESVS protocol. All patients who underwent re-intervention were reviewed to see whether adopting the proposed ESVS protocol would have detected these events. In total, 309 procedures were included. Altogether, 219 of these patients had no endoleak (70.9%) and 86 had a type II (27.8%) endoleak. Only four developed a type I or III endoleak. No patient in the low risk cohort (no initial endoleak or sac shrinkage &gt; 1 cm) required secondary intervention. Five year follow up data were available for 103 patients. In the type II endoleak group, there were 28 secondary interventions in 22 patients. No patient experienced a ruptured aneurysm within five years post-operatively. Had the proposed ESVS protocol been followed, all patients requiring a secondary intervention or with increasing sac size would have been detected/captured. Further, adherence to the ESVS guidelines would have resulted in 103 patients with a five year follow up history qualifying for reduced surveillance. A further 120 patients who had reached the three and four year follow up timepoints could have qualified for a reduced surveillance, reducing imaging cost further. Adopting the proposed ESVS EVAR surveillance protocol safely identified “low risk” patients who did not go on to require a secondary intervention. These patients could benefit from reduced surveillance scanning.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1078-5884</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-2165</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.09.008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34764002</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Abdominal aortic aneurysm ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging ; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - surgery ; Aortography ; Blood Vessel Prosthesis ; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects ; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - instrumentation ; Clinical Decision-Making ; Clinical Protocols ; Computed Tomography Angiography ; Decision Support Techniques ; Endoleak ; Endoleak - diagnostic imaging ; Endoleak - etiology ; Endoleak - therapy ; Endovascular procedure ; Endovascular Procedures - adverse effects ; Endovascular Procedures - instrumentation ; Female ; Humans ; Iliac Aneurysm - diagnostic imaging ; Iliac Aneurysm - surgery ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Retreatment ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Factors ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery, 2021-12, Vol.62 (6), p.879-885</ispartof><rights>2021</rights><rights>Crown Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-629d6c837e6960d9438bf92cfb8a9dcd6b7bfab9688cd2969a0c133e679ba0d73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-629d6c837e6960d9438bf92cfb8a9dcd6b7bfab9688cd2969a0c133e679ba0d73</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1591-1221</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078588421007048$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34764002$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kirkham, Emily N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nicholls, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, W Richard W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooper, David G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paravastu, Sharath C.V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Sachin R.</creatorcontrib><title>Safety and Validity of the Proposed European Society for Vascular Surgery Infrarenal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance Protocol: A Single Centre Evaluation</title><title>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery</title><addtitle>Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg</addtitle><description>Long term surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is essential to detect late complications, but there is variation in practice. The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) made a recommendation for a new surveillance protocol; one element involves risk stratifying patients depending on sac size reduction and presence of endoleak at their 30 day computed tomography angiogram into low risk groups (delayed imaging to five years) or higher risk groups (continue with the current protocol). The aim was to test this suggested protocol retrospectively within an EVAR patient cohort. Data on EVARs performed from October 2009 to October 2019 were collected. Information gathered from an existing surveillance programme was used to assess the proposed ESVS protocol. All patients who underwent re-intervention were reviewed to see whether adopting the proposed ESVS protocol would have detected these events. In total, 309 procedures were included. Altogether, 219 of these patients had no endoleak (70.9%) and 86 had a type II (27.8%) endoleak. Only four developed a type I or III endoleak. No patient in the low risk cohort (no initial endoleak or sac shrinkage &gt; 1 cm) required secondary intervention. Five year follow up data were available for 103 patients. In the type II endoleak group, there were 28 secondary interventions in 22 patients. No patient experienced a ruptured aneurysm within five years post-operatively. Had the proposed ESVS protocol been followed, all patients requiring a secondary intervention or with increasing sac size would have been detected/captured. Further, adherence to the ESVS guidelines would have resulted in 103 patients with a five year follow up history qualifying for reduced surveillance. A further 120 patients who had reached the three and four year follow up timepoints could have qualified for a reduced surveillance, reducing imaging cost further. Adopting the proposed ESVS EVAR surveillance protocol safely identified “low risk” patients who did not go on to require a secondary intervention. These patients could benefit from reduced surveillance scanning.</description><subject>Abdominal aortic aneurysm</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - surgery</subject><subject>Aortography</subject><subject>Blood Vessel Prosthesis</subject><subject>Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - instrumentation</subject><subject>Clinical Decision-Making</subject><subject>Clinical Protocols</subject><subject>Computed Tomography Angiography</subject><subject>Decision Support Techniques</subject><subject>Endoleak</subject><subject>Endoleak - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Endoleak - etiology</subject><subject>Endoleak - therapy</subject><subject>Endovascular procedure</subject><subject>Endovascular Procedures - adverse effects</subject><subject>Endovascular Procedures - instrumentation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Iliac Aneurysm - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Iliac Aneurysm - surgery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Retreatment</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1078-5884</issn><issn>1532-2165</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9u1DAQxiMEon_gBTggH7kk2E7i2IjLarWUSpWKWOBqOfakeOW1FzuJtM_TF8Xptj32NDPyb77xzFcUHwiuCCbs866C3ZwqiimpsKgw5q-Kc9LWtKSEta9zjjtetpw3Z8VFSjuMcUvq9m1xVjcdazCm58X9Vg0wHpHyBv1RzhqbizCg8S-gHzEcQgKDNlPOQHm0Ddou9BBippOenIpoO8U7iEd07YeoInjl0MabMD-9rzxM8Zj26CcclH3gZ7DOKa8fZoxBB_cFrdDW-jsHaA1-jIA2s3KTGm3w74o3g3IJ3j_Gy-L3t82v9ffy5vbqer26KXXeZSwZFYZpXnfABMNGNDXvB0H10HMljDas7_pB9YJxrg0VTCisSV0D60SvsOnqy-LTSfcQw78J0ij3NmlYfgphSpK2omu46DqSUXpCdQwpRRjkIdq9ikdJsFzMkTu5mCMXcyQWMpuTmz4-6k_9Hsxzy5MbGfh6AiBvOVuIMuV75zMZG0GP0gT7kv5_bFekTQ</recordid><startdate>202112</startdate><enddate>202112</enddate><creator>Kirkham, Emily N.</creator><creator>Nicholls, Jonathan</creator><creator>Wilson, W Richard W.</creator><creator>Cooper, David G.</creator><creator>Paravastu, Sharath C.V.</creator><creator>Kulkarni, Sachin R.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1591-1221</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202112</creationdate><title>Safety and Validity of the Proposed European Society for Vascular Surgery Infrarenal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance Protocol: A Single Centre Evaluation</title><author>Kirkham, Emily N. ; Nicholls, Jonathan ; Wilson, W Richard W. ; Cooper, David G. ; Paravastu, Sharath C.V. ; Kulkarni, Sachin R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-629d6c837e6960d9438bf92cfb8a9dcd6b7bfab9688cd2969a0c133e679ba0d73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Abdominal aortic aneurysm</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - surgery</topic><topic>Aortography</topic><topic>Blood Vessel Prosthesis</topic><topic>Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - instrumentation</topic><topic>Clinical Decision-Making</topic><topic>Clinical Protocols</topic><topic>Computed Tomography Angiography</topic><topic>Decision Support Techniques</topic><topic>Endoleak</topic><topic>Endoleak - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Endoleak - etiology</topic><topic>Endoleak - therapy</topic><topic>Endovascular procedure</topic><topic>Endovascular Procedures - adverse effects</topic><topic>Endovascular Procedures - instrumentation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Iliac Aneurysm - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Iliac Aneurysm - surgery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Retreatment</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kirkham, Emily N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nicholls, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, W Richard W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooper, David G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paravastu, Sharath C.V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Sachin R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kirkham, Emily N.</au><au>Nicholls, Jonathan</au><au>Wilson, W Richard W.</au><au>Cooper, David G.</au><au>Paravastu, Sharath C.V.</au><au>Kulkarni, Sachin R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Safety and Validity of the Proposed European Society for Vascular Surgery Infrarenal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance Protocol: A Single Centre Evaluation</atitle><jtitle>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg</addtitle><date>2021-12</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>62</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>879</spage><epage>885</epage><pages>879-885</pages><issn>1078-5884</issn><eissn>1532-2165</eissn><abstract>Long term surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is essential to detect late complications, but there is variation in practice. The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) made a recommendation for a new surveillance protocol; one element involves risk stratifying patients depending on sac size reduction and presence of endoleak at their 30 day computed tomography angiogram into low risk groups (delayed imaging to five years) or higher risk groups (continue with the current protocol). The aim was to test this suggested protocol retrospectively within an EVAR patient cohort. Data on EVARs performed from October 2009 to October 2019 were collected. Information gathered from an existing surveillance programme was used to assess the proposed ESVS protocol. All patients who underwent re-intervention were reviewed to see whether adopting the proposed ESVS protocol would have detected these events. In total, 309 procedures were included. Altogether, 219 of these patients had no endoleak (70.9%) and 86 had a type II (27.8%) endoleak. Only four developed a type I or III endoleak. No patient in the low risk cohort (no initial endoleak or sac shrinkage &gt; 1 cm) required secondary intervention. Five year follow up data were available for 103 patients. In the type II endoleak group, there were 28 secondary interventions in 22 patients. No patient experienced a ruptured aneurysm within five years post-operatively. Had the proposed ESVS protocol been followed, all patients requiring a secondary intervention or with increasing sac size would have been detected/captured. Further, adherence to the ESVS guidelines would have resulted in 103 patients with a five year follow up history qualifying for reduced surveillance. A further 120 patients who had reached the three and four year follow up timepoints could have qualified for a reduced surveillance, reducing imaging cost further. Adopting the proposed ESVS EVAR surveillance protocol safely identified “low risk” patients who did not go on to require a secondary intervention. These patients could benefit from reduced surveillance scanning.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>34764002</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.09.008</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1591-1221</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1078-5884
ispartof European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery, 2021-12, Vol.62 (6), p.879-885
issn 1078-5884
1532-2165
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2597489771
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
subjects Abdominal aortic aneurysm
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - surgery
Aortography
Blood Vessel Prosthesis
Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects
Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation - instrumentation
Clinical Decision-Making
Clinical Protocols
Computed Tomography Angiography
Decision Support Techniques
Endoleak
Endoleak - diagnostic imaging
Endoleak - etiology
Endoleak - therapy
Endovascular procedure
Endovascular Procedures - adverse effects
Endovascular Procedures - instrumentation
Female
Humans
Iliac Aneurysm - diagnostic imaging
Iliac Aneurysm - surgery
Male
Middle Aged
Retreatment
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
title Safety and Validity of the Proposed European Society for Vascular Surgery Infrarenal Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance Protocol: A Single Centre Evaluation
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T02%3A41%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Safety%20and%20Validity%20of%20the%20Proposed%20European%20Society%20for%20Vascular%20Surgery%20Infrarenal%20Endovascular%20Aneurysm%20Repair%20Surveillance%20Protocol:%20A%20Single%20Centre%20Evaluation&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20vascular%20and%20endovascular%20surgery&rft.au=Kirkham,%20Emily%20N.&rft.date=2021-12&rft.volume=62&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=879&rft.epage=885&rft.pages=879-885&rft.issn=1078-5884&rft.eissn=1532-2165&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.09.008&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2597489771%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2597489771&rft_id=info:pmid/34764002&rft_els_id=S1078588421007048&rfr_iscdi=true