Systematic Review on Abdominal Penetrating Atherosclerotic Aortic Ulcers: Outcomes of Endovascular Repair

Purpose: To systematically review existing evidence on outcomes of endovascular repair of abdominal atherosclerotic penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs). Material and Methods: Cochrane Central Registry of Registered Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Web of Science databases were systematically...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of endovascular therapy 2024-12, Vol.31 (6), p.1027-1040
Hauptverfasser: Hatzl, Johannes, Böckler, Dittmar, Fiering, Jonathan, Zimmermann, Samuel, Biscshoff, Moritz Sebastian, Kalkum, Eva, Klotz, Rosa, Uhl, Christian
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose: To systematically review existing evidence on outcomes of endovascular repair of abdominal atherosclerotic penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs). Material and Methods: Cochrane Central Registry of Registered Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. The systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol (PRISMA-P 2020). The protocol was registered in the international registry of systematic reviews (PROSPERO CRD42022313404). Studies reporting on technical and clinical outcomes of endovascular PAU repair in 3 or more patients were included. Random effects modeling was used to estimate pooled technical success, survival, reinterventions, and type 1 and type 3 endoleaks. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Pooled results are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study quality was assessed using an adapted version of the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Results: Sixteen studies including 165 patients with a mean/median age ranging from 64 to 78 years receiving endovascular therapy for PAU between 1997 and 2020 were identified. Pooled technical success was 99.0% (CI: 96.0%-100%). In all, 30-day mortality was 1.0% (CI: 0%-6.0%) with an in-hospital mortality of 1.0% (CI: 0.0%-13.0%). There were no reinterventions, type 1, or type 3 endoleaks at 30 days. Median/mean follow-up ranged from 1 to 33 months. Overall, there were 16 deaths (9.7%), 5 reinterventions (3.3%), 3 type 1 (1.8%), and 1 type 3 endoleak (0.6%) during follow-up. The quality of studies was rated low according to the Modified Coleman score at 43.4 (+/- 8.5) of 85 points. Conclusion: There is low-level evidence on outcomes of endovascular PAU repair. While in the short-term endovascular repair of abdominal PAU seems safe and effective, mid-term and long-term data are lacking. Recommendations with regard to treatment indications and techniques in asymptomatic PAU should be made cautiously. Clinical Impact This systematic review demonstrated that evidence on outcomes of endovascular abdominal PAU repair is limited. While in the short-term endovascular repair of abdominal PAU seems safe and effective, mid-term and long-term data are lacking. In the context of a benign prognosis of asymptomatic PAU and lacking standardization in current reporting, recommendations with regard to treatment indications and techniques in asymptomatic PAUs
ISSN:1526-6028
1545-1550
1545-1550
DOI:10.1177/15266028231157636