Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Treatment for Type II Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Objectives: The efficacy and need for secondary interventions for type II endoleaks following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) remain controversial. This systematic review aimed at investigating the clinical outcomes of different type II endoleak treatments in patients with a persistent type II endoleak after EVAR. Data sources: Embase, Medline via Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar. Review methods: This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA Statement. Outcomes of interest were technical and clinical success, change in sac diameter, complications, need for additional interventions, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture, and (AAA related) mortality. Meta-analyses were performed with random effects models. Results: A total of 59 studies were included, with a cumulative cohort of 1073 patients with persistent type II endoleak. Peri-operative complications following treatment of type II endoleaks occurred in 3.8% of patients (95% CI 2.7–5.2%), and AAA related mortality was 1.8% (95% CI 1.1–2.7%). Overall technical success was 87.9% (95% CI 83.1–92.1%), while clinical success was 68.4% (95% CI 61.2–75.1%). Among studies detailing sac dynamics, decrease or stable sac, with or without resolution, was achieved in 78.4% (95% CI 70.2–85.6%). Changes in sac diameter following type II endoleak treatment were documented in 157 patients to at least 24 months. Within this group an actual decrease in sac diameter was reported in only 27 of 40 patients. Conclusion: There is little evidence supporting the efficacy of secondary intervention for type II endoleaks after EVAR. Although generally safe, the lack of evidence supporting the efficacy of type II endoleak treatment leads to difficulty in assessing its merits.

• View at Publisher
• View at Scopus