Publication:
A systematic review of the current status of interventions for type II endoleak after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms

dc.contributor.authorMarethania M. Akmalen_US
dc.contributor.authorDara R. Pabitteien_US
dc.contributor.authorTossapol Prapassaroen_US
dc.contributor.authorRaden Suhartonoen_US
dc.contributor.authorFrans L. Mollen_US
dc.contributor.authorJoost A. van Herwaardenen_US
dc.contributor.otherSiriraj Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversitas Indonesia, RSUPN Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumoen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity Medical Center Utrechten_US
dc.contributor.otherHasanudin Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-04T09:08:21Z
dc.date.available2022-08-04T09:08:21Z
dc.date.issued2021-11-01en_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: To study the mid- and long-term outcomes of type II endoleak treatment after EVAR and the technical aspects of different techniques to exclude endoleaks which different embolic agents. Methods: A systematic review was performed using the approach recommended by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for meta-analyses of interventional studies. The comprehensive search was conducted using the following database: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Patient characteristic, intervention approaches, embolic agents, and results at mid and long term follow up were studied. Results: A total of 6 studies corresponding to a total of 141 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria with a mean age of 73–78.6 years and a mean duration of follow up varying from 25 to 42 months. There were different techniques for embolization used (translumbar, transarterial, and transcaval approach) with various types of embolic agents. In all studies, the indication for embolization of the type II endoleaks was sac enlargement of more than 5 mm. A wide range of technical success rate was reported regardless of the intervention strategy being used (17,6%–100%). The overall technical success rate of all studies was 62%. Conclusion: This systematic review shows that there is a wide variety of techniques to exclude a persistent type II endoleak. Different kinds of embolic agents have be used. Due to a lack of peer reviewed data on longterm follow-up, it was not possible to come to recommendations what treatment would be the best for a durable exclusion of a persistent type II endoleak after an initially successful EVAR. There remains an urgent need for proper executed studies, either randomized or with close observation in relation to longer follow-up.en_US
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Surgery. Vol.95, (2021)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106138en_US
dc.identifier.issn17439159en_US
dc.identifier.issn17439191en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85117194344en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/77720
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85117194344&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleA systematic review of the current status of interventions for type II endoleak after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysmsen_US
dc.typeReviewen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85117194344&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections