Evolution of fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair complexity and outcomes at an organized center for the treatment of complex aortic disease

J Vasc Surg. 2021 Apr;73(4):1148-1155.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.07.100.


Background: Fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) volume has increased rapidly, with favorable outcomes at centers of excellence. We evaluated changes over time in F/BEVAR complexity and associated outcomes at a single-center complex aortic disease program.

Methods: Prospectively collected data of all F/BEVAR (definition: requiring ≥1 fenestration/branch), procedures performed in an institutional review board-approved registry and/or physician-sponsored investigational device exemption trial (IDE# G130210), were reviewed (11/2010-2/2019). Patients were stratified by surgery date into thirds: early experience, mid experience, and recent experience. Patient and operative characteristics, aneurysm morphology, device types, perioperative and midterm outcomes (survival, freedom from type I or III endoleak, target artery patency, freedom from reintervention), were compared across groups.

Results: For 252 consecutive F/BEVARs (early experience, n = 84, mid experience, n = 84, recent experience, n = 84), 194 (77%) company-manufactured custom-made devices, 11 (4.4%) company-manufactured off-the-shelf devices, and 47 (19%) physician-modified devices, were used to treat 5 (2.0%) common iliac, 97 (39%) juxtarenal, 31 (12%) pararenal, 116 (46%) thoracoabdominal, and 2 (0.8%) arch aneurysms. All patients had follow-up for 30-day events. The mean follow-up time for the entire cohort was 589 days (interquartile range, 149-813 days). On 1-year Kaplan-Meier analysis, survival was 88%, freedom from type I or III endoleak was 91%, and target vessel patency was 92%. When stratified by time period, significant differences included aneurysm extent (thoracoabdominal, 33% early experience, 40% mid experience, and 64% recent experience; P < .001) and target vessels per case (four-vessel case, 31% early experience, 39% mid experience, and 67% recent experience; P < .0001). There was no difference, but a trend toward improvement, in composite 30-day events (early experience, 39%; mid experience, 23%; recent experience, 27%; P = .05). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, there was no difference in survival (P = .19) or target artery patency (P = .6). There were differences in freedom from reintervention (P < .01) and from type I or III endoleak (P = .02), with more reinterventions in the early experience, and more endoleaks in the recent period.

Conclusions: Despite increasing repair complexity, there has been no significant change in perioperative complications, overall survival, or target artery patency, with favorable outcomes overall. Type I or III endoleaks remain a significant limitation, with increased incidence as the number of branch arteries incorporated into the repairs has increased.

Keywords: Complex aortic aneurysm; Fenestrated branched endovascular aneurysm repair; Thoracoabdominal aneurysm.

Publication types

  • Observational Study

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Aorta, Abdominal / surgery*
  • Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal / mortality
  • Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal / surgery*
  • Endoleak / etiology
  • Endovascular Procedures / adverse effects
  • Endovascular Procedures / methods*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Iliac Artery / surgery
  • Intraoperative Complications
  • Kaplan-Meier Estimate
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Postoperative Complications
  • Prospective Studies
  • Registries
  • Renal Artery / surgery
  • Survival Rate
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Vascular Patency