Home Bratislava Medical Journal Ahead of print Bratislava Medical Journal Vol.125, No.6, p.347–353, 2024

Journal info


Published Monthly, in English
Founded: 1919
ISSN 0006-9248
(E)ISSN 1336-0345

Impact factor 1.564


Aims and Scope
Editorial Info
Submission Guidelines

Select Journal

Webshop Cart

Your Cart is currently empty.

Info: Your browser does not accept cookies. To put products into your cart and purchase them you need to enable cookies.

Bratislava Medical Journal Vol.125, No.6, p.347–353, 2024

Title: Use of EndoAnchors during index endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in patients with hostile proximal aortic neck anatomy

Abstract: PURPOSE: Standard endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is sometimes the only treatment option for patients with hostile aortic neck anatomy, but it carries an increased risk of both early and late procedure-related complications. The aim of this study was to report on single-center experience with the Heli-FX EndoAnchors (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA) as an adjunctive procedure to endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for prevention and perioperative treatment of proximal neck complications in patients with hostile neck anatomy.  
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-centre, retrospective study evaluating 24 consecutive patients treated with EndoAnchors during the index EVAR procedure between November 2018 and August 2021. EndoAnchor implantation was indicated for cases with hostile proximal aortic neck anatomy characterised by the presence of at least one of the following parameters: length of 28 mm, angle of >60°, circumferential thrombus/calcification involving ≥50%, and reverse taper.
RESULTS: Median follow-up period was 22.5 months (IQR 2–31.5 months) with no aneurysm-related death, rupture, or conversion to open surgical repair during the follow-up. The procedural success rate was 100%, with no type Ia endoleak at the completion angiography. A mean of 7 EndoAnchors was used per patient (range 4–12). There were no EndoAnchor fractures and dislocations or stent graft fabric damage due to anchor implants. Twenty-three patients (95.8%) remained free of type Ia endoleak and migration on follow-up imaging. Aneurysm sac regression was observed in 13 patients (54.1%), while in 8 patients (33.3%) the sac remained stable. Sac enlargement was present in 1 patient (4.2%) due to late type Ia endoleak. Two patients were lost to the follow-up immediately after the procedure. Between two groups of patients (sac regression versus failure to regress), the larger initial diameter of the proximal neck was the only significant independent factor associated with a lower possibility of sac regression (p= 0,021).
CONCLUSIONS: The use of EndoAnchors during the index EVAR procedure in cases with challenging aortic neck anatomy with or without perioperative type Ia endoleak was associated with good midterm results and led to sac regression in most of the patients (Tab. 4, Fig. 3, Ref. 31).

Keywords: abdominal aortic aneurysm, endovascular aneurysm repair, hostile neck anatomy, EndoAnchor, endoleak, sac regression
Published online: 12-Mar-2024
Year: 2024, Volume: 125, Issue: 6 Page From: 347, Page To: 353

download file

© AEPress s.r.o
Copyright notice: For any permission to reproduce, archive or otherwise use the documents in the ELiS, please contact AEP.