View clinical trials related to Endoleak.
Filter by:A single site cross-sectional comparison of paired diagnostic imaging modalities. This study will show the sensitivity and specificity of CEUS in detecting the various types of endoleaks, in comparison to tCTA, following EVAR. It will collect data to allow comparison of diagnostic accuracy across modalities including CDU, CEUS and tCTA. It will collect time taken to perform the various types of scan, to allow healthcare costs to be calculated for each imaging modality.
The study is a non-randomized, multi-center safety and feasibility trial of Aneufix ACP-T5 to treat patients with Isolated type II endoleak in the presence of a non-shrinking AAA sac following an EVAR procedure.
The purpose of the study is to compare the accuracy of the diagnosis of endoleak in patient with EVAR comparing Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) CTA and Model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR- VEO TM).
Re-hospitalization or re-intervention is sometimes necessary to treat type I and type III endoleaks after EVAR for its persistent increasing of pressure in aneurysm lumen. Color-coded quantitative digital subtraction angiography (CQDSA) provides an easy and quick way to post-process the traditional digital subtraction angiography (DSA) which converts the peak time of the maximal contrast medium intensity into a single polychromatic image. With the help of CQDSA, a quantitative evaluation of the endoleak hemodynamics and a risk analysis of the type I or type III endoleak could be performed during the EVAR procedure. This approach may offer an objective assessment of the needs for immediate re-intervention, conservative therapy or treatment endpoint in the future.
Endovascular procedures already brought enormous revolution in the process of treatment of patient with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). It is well defined that early mortality and morbidity is significantly reduced comparing to open repair. The persistent concern is long term durability of devices and their success of aneurysm exclusion in order to prevent rupture. At the moment the best armament to prevent rupture after endovascular exclusion is the watchful waiting and timely reintervention. The main complication that follows this procedure and causing catastrophic long term complications is endoleak. The ideal algorithm to follow up patients after aneurysm exclusion has not been found. In order to reveal endoleak ultrasound is used more than before, however frequent computerized tomography is wasting a lot of costs and exposing patients to irradiation and nephrotoxic contrast. Matrix metalloproteinase activity has been demonstrated in the process of aneurysm development. Imbalance between MMP and its inhibitors TIMP provokes collagenolytic and elastolytic activity that is inducing aneurysmatic degeneration of aortic wall. Due to the previously described connection between aneurysm and MMP activity, it was proved that serum level of MMP-9 is significantly higher in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Also, higher levels of MMP-9 were discovered in patients with inadequate aneurysm exclusion after endovascular procedure suggesting that degradation of the aortic wall is still ongoing process, not being the case with successfully excluded aneurysm. There might be a potential role of MMP-9 serum level as a biomarker of present endoleak after endovascular aneurysm exclusion. All published trials have shown correlation between MMP 9 activity and presence of endoleak, however, no correlation was made between specific types of endoleak and necessity to reoperation (clinical significance). Additionally there were only four trials presented in the literature investigating low number of patients. Since there is possible value of MMP-9 serum level as biomarker of present endoleak, further studies are necessary. This why we are organizing multicentre trial, that will cover significant number of patients in order to define - Value of MMP-9 as a biomarker of successful initial exclusion - Value of MMP-9 level as predictor of aneurysm shrinkage - Value of MMP-9 level in patients with increased aneurysm diameter and no visible endoleak - Correlation of the MMP -9 serum level with different type of enoleak - Value of MMP-9 as biomarker of successful treatment of endoelak Material and methods Patient with AAA greater then 55 mm in diameter that are candidates for endovascular repair will be selected. Demographic, anatomical and data regarding the procedure will be gathered prospectively. Also serum levels of MMP-9 will be measured before procedure, during the first week before discharge, and after 1,6,12,18,24,36,48 months. On the same day of measuring MMP-9 level control MSCT and ultrasonography exam will be performed in order to collect data regarding the success of exclusion and presence of any endoleak with the accurate measurement of aneurysm diameter changes. Ultrasonography and MSCT exam will be performed by experienced physicians, also preoperative evaluation of anatomical data. In case of reintervention additional questionnaire will be filled regarding anatomical and procedure related data using pre and postoperative ultrasound and MSCT examination, while MMP-9 levels will be measured before procedure and after the procedure using the same protocol as for primary procedure. Statistical analysys Levels of MMP-9 in serum with presence of different types of endoleak will be correlated one week and 1,6,12,18,24,36 48 months after the procedure Anatomical data will be correlated with the decrease in MMP-9 level before and after procedure Levels of MMP-9 in serum after one week and one month will be correlated with further aneurysm shrinkage Level of MMP-9 in serum with type of endoleak will be correlated Level of MMP-9 before and after reoperation will be compared Level of MMp-9 in serum of patients with disappearing endoleaks will be followed Level of MMP-9 in serum of patients with new endoleaks will be followed
Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) continue to be a leading cause of death in older age groups. In the 60-85 year-old population, AAA represents the 14th-leading cause of death. Federal funding through Medicare has been allocated for early detection using abdominal ultrasound screening programs. Despite these more aggressive screening programs and concerted efforts by surgeons for timely repair, the incidence of ruptured AAA has continued to increase. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been the most common type of repair since 2006. Multiple studies reflecting decreased perioperative morbidity and mortality over open repair make this an attractive option for patients. EVAR requires more intensive follow-up than standard open surgical repair, however. Secondary interventions are more common to maintain "seal" of the endograft within the aorta and subsequent exclusion of the aneurysmal component. The term endoleak is specific to EVAR, and describes the primary means by which endografts fail. Type I endoleaks occur because of inadequate graft seal proximally or distally, resulting in perigraft flow and aneurysm sac pressurization. Type II endoleaks occur when branch arteries arising from the aneurysmal aorta back-bleed into the aneurysm sac due to collateral flow. Type III endoleaks occur when flow persists between segments of a modular graft. Type IV endoleaks occur when flow persists through endograft material (graft porosity). Type V endoleaks have also been called "endotension", and occur when pressurization of the sac occurs in the absence of any demonstrable endoleak. Type I and Type III endoleaks are most concerning for rupture, although persistent Type II endoleaks can also lead to aneurysm rupture and premature death. The most common method of EVAR follow-up is computed tomographic angiography (CTA). These studies allow accurate measurement of aneurysm sac diameters and volumes. They also are highly sensitive and specific for endoleaks. Type II endoleaks are treated if they remain persistent and are present in the setting of aneurysm sac enlargement. Type I and III endoleaks are immediately treated when identified. Type IV endoleaks are rarely seen with current endograft technology.
X-ray computed tomography imaging (CT) is routinely used in follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has been shown to give accurate information about endoleak after EVAR. Benefits of CEUS over CT include less radiation exposure, avoidance of renal function deterioration due to repeated X-ray contrast agent application and decrease in the cost of EVAR follow-up. This study is designed to investigate if results from literature are reproducible in St Olavs Hospital in Trondheim (Norway), to gain experience with the technique and to introduce CEUS as an alternative for detection of endoleak in this hospital.
The study is aimed at investigating whether repair of endoleak type II can be improved by adding navigation technology. Can this technology increase precision by guiding the needle that punctures through the skin as used during the repair procedure? Can the procedure logistics be improved by using navigation technology instead of computed tomography (CT) guidance of the needle puncture? Parameters logged during the procedure: - was the needle placement successful? - number of needle punctures? - time used on guidance procedure - X-ray exposure dose
The purpose of the study is to compare two different types of imaging techniques to identify endoleaks. Following the endovascular procedure, subjects are seen at one month to have computed tomographic angiography (CTA) to confirm the graft is not leaking (endoleak). CTA is the standard imaging technique used to identify endoleaks. This study will investigate if the image technique color duplex ultrasound with contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is a good tool to identify endoleaks too.
This study will be a cross-sectional survey of interobserver variability associated with contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to detect endoleaks using computed tomographic angiography (CTA) as the practice standard. The investigators will enroll 40 consecutive patients undergoing endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). At the first follow-up visit after the procedure, participants will undergo two abdominal ultrasound examinations with and without contrast, and one CTA. Analyses will be conducted to examine interobserver variability in the detection and characterization of endoleaks using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Other endpoints include examination of sensitivity and specificity of CEUS compared to CTA, and characterization of the number and types of endoleaks detected.