PURPOSE: Hypogastric artery (HA) revascularization during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is still open to debate. Moreover, exclusion-related complication rates reported in literature are not negligible. The aim of this study is to present and analyze the outcomes in patients undergoing EVAR with exclusion of 1 or both HAs at our academic center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our results in patients submitted to EVAR and needing HA exclusion, in terms of perioperative (30-day) and follow-up rates of intestinal and spinal cord ischemia, buttock claudication, buttock skin necrosis, and sexual dysfunction. RESULTS: From January 2008 to December 2014, a total of 527 patients underwent elective standard infrarenal EVAR; among those 104 (19.7%) had iliac involvement needing HA exclusion. In 73 patients with unilateral iliac involvement (70.1%, group UH), many single HAs were excluded. Thirty-one patients (29.9%) had bilateral iliac involvement (group BH), of which 16 (51.6%) had 1 HA excluded with revascularization of the contralateral one (group BHR); in the remaining 15 patients (48.4%) both HAs were excluded (group BHE). No 30-day or follow-up aneurysm-related mortality, intestinal, or spinal cord ischemia were recorded. At 30 days, skin necrosis was observed in 2 patients. Buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction rates were significantly greater in group BHE than in group BHR (P < .05). At a mean 18.6 months follow-up (range: 4-47), buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction rates in group BHE were persistently higher than that in groups UH and BHR (P < .05); HA coil embolization was significantly associated with buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Whenever anatomically feasible, at least 1 HA should be salvaged in case of bilateral involvement. In case of unilateral HA exclusion, the rate of complications is not negligible. Coil embolization is related to a higher complication rate.

PURPOSE: Hypogastric artery (HA) revascularization during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is still open to debate. Moreover, exclusion-related complication rates reported in literature are not negligible. The aim of this study is to present and analyze the outcomes in patients undergoing EVAR with exclusion of 1 or both HAs at our academic center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our results in patients submitted to EVAR and needing HA exclusion, in terms of perioperative (30-day) and follow-up rates of intestinal and spinal cord ischemia, buttock claudication, buttock skin necrosis, and sexual dysfunction. RESULTS: From January 2008 to December 2014, a total of 527 patients underwent elective standard infrarenal EVAR; among those 104 (19.7%) had iliac involvement needing HA exclusion. In 73 patients with unilateral iliac involvement (70.1%, group UH), many single HAs were excluded. Thirty-one patients (29.9%) had bilateral iliac involvement (group BH), of which 16 (51.6%) had 1 HA excluded with revascularization of the contralateral one (group BHR); in the remaining 15 patients (48.4%) both HAs were excluded (group BHE). No 30-day or follow-up aneurysm-related mortality, intestinal, or spinal cord ischemia were recorded. At 30 days, skin necrosis was observed in 2 patients. Buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction rates were significantly greater in group BHE than in group BHR (P < .05). At a mean 18.6 months follow-up (range: 4-47), buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction rates in group BHE were persistently higher than that in groups UH and BHR (P < .05); HA coil embolization was significantly associated with buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Whenever anatomically feasible, at least 1 HA should be salvaged in case of bilateral involvement. In case of unilateral HA exclusion, the rate of complications is not negligible. Coil embolization is related to a higher complication rate.

Clinical and functional impact of hypogastric artery exclusion during EVAR / Mansour, WASSIM AHMAD; Capoccia, Laura; Sirignano, Pasqualino; Montelione, Nunzio; Pranteda, Chiara; Formiconi, Martina; Sbarigia, Enrico; Speziale, Francesco. - In: VASCULAR AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY. - ISSN 1538-5744. - STAMPA. - 50:7(2016), pp. 484-490. [10.1177/1538574416665968]

Clinical and functional impact of hypogastric artery exclusion during EVAR

MANSOUR, WASSIM AHMAD;CAPOCCIA, LAURA;SIRIGNANO, PASQUALINO;MONTELIONE, NUNZIO;PRANTEDA, CHIARA;FORMICONI, MARTINA;SBARIGIA, Enrico;SPEZIALE, Francesco
2016

Abstract

PURPOSE: Hypogastric artery (HA) revascularization during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is still open to debate. Moreover, exclusion-related complication rates reported in literature are not negligible. The aim of this study is to present and analyze the outcomes in patients undergoing EVAR with exclusion of 1 or both HAs at our academic center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our results in patients submitted to EVAR and needing HA exclusion, in terms of perioperative (30-day) and follow-up rates of intestinal and spinal cord ischemia, buttock claudication, buttock skin necrosis, and sexual dysfunction. RESULTS: From January 2008 to December 2014, a total of 527 patients underwent elective standard infrarenal EVAR; among those 104 (19.7%) had iliac involvement needing HA exclusion. In 73 patients with unilateral iliac involvement (70.1%, group UH), many single HAs were excluded. Thirty-one patients (29.9%) had bilateral iliac involvement (group BH), of which 16 (51.6%) had 1 HA excluded with revascularization of the contralateral one (group BHR); in the remaining 15 patients (48.4%) both HAs were excluded (group BHE). No 30-day or follow-up aneurysm-related mortality, intestinal, or spinal cord ischemia were recorded. At 30 days, skin necrosis was observed in 2 patients. Buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction rates were significantly greater in group BHE than in group BHR (P < .05). At a mean 18.6 months follow-up (range: 4-47), buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction rates in group BHE were persistently higher than that in groups UH and BHR (P < .05); HA coil embolization was significantly associated with buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Whenever anatomically feasible, at least 1 HA should be salvaged in case of bilateral involvement. In case of unilateral HA exclusion, the rate of complications is not negligible. Coil embolization is related to a higher complication rate.
PURPOSE: Hypogastric artery (HA) revascularization during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is still open to debate. Moreover, exclusion-related complication rates reported in literature are not negligible. The aim of this study is to present and analyze the outcomes in patients undergoing EVAR with exclusion of 1 or both HAs at our academic center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our results in patients submitted to EVAR and needing HA exclusion, in terms of perioperative (30-day) and follow-up rates of intestinal and spinal cord ischemia, buttock claudication, buttock skin necrosis, and sexual dysfunction. RESULTS: From January 2008 to December 2014, a total of 527 patients underwent elective standard infrarenal EVAR; among those 104 (19.7%) had iliac involvement needing HA exclusion. In 73 patients with unilateral iliac involvement (70.1%, group UH), many single HAs were excluded. Thirty-one patients (29.9%) had bilateral iliac involvement (group BH), of which 16 (51.6%) had 1 HA excluded with revascularization of the contralateral one (group BHR); in the remaining 15 patients (48.4%) both HAs were excluded (group BHE). No 30-day or follow-up aneurysm-related mortality, intestinal, or spinal cord ischemia were recorded. At 30 days, skin necrosis was observed in 2 patients. Buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction rates were significantly greater in group BHE than in group BHR (P < .05). At a mean 18.6 months follow-up (range: 4-47), buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction rates in group BHE were persistently higher than that in groups UH and BHR (P < .05); HA coil embolization was significantly associated with buttock claudication and sexual dysfunction (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Whenever anatomically feasible, at least 1 HA should be salvaged in case of bilateral involvement. In case of unilateral HA exclusion, the rate of complications is not negligible. Coil embolization is related to a higher complication rate.
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Mansour_VES_2016.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 954.37 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
954.37 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/912368
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 3
  • Scopus 14
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 12
social impact