Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm sealing: A systematic review of early outcomes

Objectives There has been a clear move towards endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms owing to better peri-operative outcomes compared with open surgical repair. However, follow-up has continued to reveal relatively high rates of endoleaks and re-interventions. Improvements in endovascular stent-grafts aim to decrease these complications. This systematic review aims to determine the early outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm sealing. Methods Standard PRISMA guidelines were followed. A literature search was performed with the aim to extract any publication related to the endovascular aneurysm sealing device. Results The total number of patients in this systematic review of 11 studies is 684, with a mean age of 73.2 years, and 587 (88.0%) males. The majority were undergoing elective procedures ( n = 606, 91.0%), the remainder as emergencies ( n = 30, 4.5% as ruptures, n = 30, 4.5% as symptomatic). Technical success rate including emergency cases was 99.1%. Thirty-day mortality rate was 2.6% ( n = 17) including all cases, and 1.0% ( n = 6) including elective cases only. Thirty -day endoleak detection rate was 4.7% ( n = 31) including all cases, and 4.8% ( n = 29) including elective cases only. Thirty-day aneurysm-related re-intervention rate was 5.7% ( n = 38) including all cases, and 4.6% ( n = 28) including elective cases only. There was no conversion to open surgery within 30 days post-op in the elective cases. There were three delayed conversions to open surgery within 30 days and one report of stent migration causing rupture in the emergency setting. Conclusions This novel endovascular aneurysm-sealing device for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair has shown respectable early outcomes. Good technical success rates, in both elective and emergency settings, low rates of all-type endoleaks and low re-intervention rates have all been demonstrated. It is proving to be a safe alternative to open and endovascular aneurysm repair; however, longer term follow-up results are needed to assess the safety and effectiveness of the device in the long term.