1 / 17

A multicentre investigation into migration of the Zenith fenestrated aortic stent-graft

A multicentre investigation into migration of the Zenith fenestrated aortic stent-graft. England A , García-Fiñana M, McWilliams RG & British Society for Endovascular Therapy (BSET) Collaborators. Financial Disclosure. Funding – NIHR grant. BACKGROUND. Complications AAA reperfusion

toki
Download Presentation

A multicentre investigation into migration of the Zenith fenestrated aortic stent-graft

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A multicentre investigation into migration of the Zenith fenestrated aortic stent-graft England A, García-Fiñana M, McWilliams RG & British Society for Endovascular Therapy (BSET) Collaborators.

  2. Financial Disclosure • Funding – NIHR grant.

  3. BACKGROUND • Complications • AAA reperfusion • Vessel occlusion • Rupture • Maintaining fixation • Radial force • Hooks & barbs • Longitudinal columnar support • Suprarenal component • Target vessel stents • Displacement (drag) force

  4. AIM To report using multicentre data the:- • Incidence • Timings • Related complications/reinterventions Proximal & distal(Iliac limb) migration of Zenith fenestrated AAA stent-graft.

  5. METHODS • Nine UK Centres approached • Inclusion Criteria • FEVAR – Zenith (Cook) • CT Follow-up • 1st post-op CT scan (baseline) • +1 additional CT scan (> 6 months) • Endovascular databases • Sample description • Follow-up events (+CT data) • Ethics, R&D approvals • Retrieval of CT data to Liverpool

  6. MIGRATION DEFINITION • Movement of the device by ≥ 4 mm at either proximal or distal (iliac) landing zones1. England et al., J VascSurg 2012;55:895-905

  7. PROXIMAL DISTAL 1-MONTH CT (Baseline) 1-MONTH CT (Baseline) SAGITTAL CLL TOP STENT SMA BOTTOM STENT 6 mm EIA 24 mm 2 mm CRANIAL CAUDAL 2-YEAR CT ANNUAL CT 7 mm SAGITTAL CLL TOP STENT BOTTOM STENT SMA 8 mm 17 mm

  8. RESULTS 154 59%

  9. DEVICES

  10. PROXIMAL MIGRATION ≥ 4 mm • In 33 patients (21%) - caudal • Median migration +6 mm (range, +4.1 to +10.0 mm) • One migration per 10 person-years of follow-up • Median time to migration = 12 months (range 6 to 89 months) ≥

  11. FREEDOM FROM PROXIMAL MIGRATION 82% 77% 77% 64%

  12. DISTAL (iliac) MIGRATION ≥ 4 mm • Out of 259 iliac limbs assessed • 34 (13%) showed migration (cranial) • Median migration -6.1 mm (range, -4.1 to -17.8 mm) • One limb migration per 9.9 person-years of follow-up • Median time to migration = 23 months (range 6 to 89 months)

  13. RESULTSFREEDOM FROM DISTAL MIGRATION IPSILATERAL LIMB CONTRALATERAL LIMB

  14. RESULTSFREEDOM FROM ANY DISTAL MIGRATION 85% 82% 65% 65%

  15. COMPLICATIONS REINTERVENTIONS

  16. CONCLUSIONS • Based on this multicentre analysis:- • Migration • Proximal, • Distal (iliac), • Movements • Minor (< 7 mm) • Consequences • Minimal } patients at 4years

  17. COLLABORATORS This project would not have been possible without the support from:- • St. George’s Vascular Institute • Cambridge University Hospitals • Manchester Royal Infirmary • University Hospitals of South Manchester • Newcastle University Hospitals • Royal Liverpool University Hospital • Royal United Hospital Bath • University Hospitals of Leicester • Royal Free Hospital

More Related