Systematic review of type IIIb endoleak after elective endovascular aneurysm repair.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this article is to investigate the presentation. etiology, management and outcomes of type IIIb endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Electronic bibliographic databases were searched to identify published reports of type IIIb endoleak after EVAR, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In total 33 articles were identified reporting on a total of 50 patients spanning 19 years of EVAR (1998-2017). Some 11 device-types were used. The median time from implantation to intervention was 27 months (0-168). There was a significant aneurysm sac expansion in 69% of reported cases. Thirteen patients (26%) presented with aneurysm rupture. A definitive diagnosis of type IIIb endoleak made on computed tomographic angiography (CIA) in only 20% of cases. Proposed failure modes included suture breakage, graft erosion by stems, iatrogenic, graft infection and presumed manufacturing faults. Endoleak location was in the main body in 81% of reported cases. Almost one third (31 %) of patients were treated with open repair. The remaining patients were treated with endovascular techniques or hybrid procedures. Some novel off-label endovascular solutions were proposed to maintain a bifurcated configuration. Thirty-day mortality in patients treated for aneurysm rupture was 50%. The 30-day mortality rate in non- rupture cases was 2% (endovascular 0% treatment, open 2%). CONCLUSIONS: Type IIIb endoleak is a serious condition associated with a significant risk of rupture. Definitive diagnosis is challenging and has been described in almost all conventional devices. Most patients can be treated successfully by endovascular means, though maintaining a bifurcated configuration may require non-standard techniques or off-label use.