Esquetini-Vernon, Camila

Introduction Extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) aneurysms are rare (<1% of arterial aneurysms) yet clinically significant due to risks of distal embolization, local compressive symptoms, and, less commonly, rupture. High-quality evidence is limited, and no consensus guidelines exist, management is therefore individualized to aneurysm morphology, cervical segment involvement, vessel tortuosity, and operator expertise. Flow diversion with Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) achieves aneurysm exclusion while reconstructing the parent artery and is especially useful in tortuous cervical segments. Clinical Summary A 60-year-old woman with incidentally discovered bilateral cervical ICA aneurysms (left 2.3 cm mid-ICA; right 0.5 cm) and a type III bovine arch underwent PED diversion of the lesion. Via femoral access, a long 6-F Fubuki sheath (Asahi Intecc, Irvine, USA) with Sofia catheter (Micro-Vention, Tustin, USA) support and systemic heparinization (ACT >250 s) enabled deployment of a 5.0 × 25 mm Pipeline Flex (Medtronic Neurovascular, Irvine, USA) across the aneurysm neck. Immediate angiography showed intra-aneurysmal stasis while preserving parent-artery flow . At 12 months, she is asymptomatic with a 70% reduction in the contrast-opacified aneurysm component to 7 mm, and the contralateral small aneurysm remains stable. Conclusion Flow diversion with a PED provided an effective, artery-preserving solution for a mid-cervical ICA aneurysm in tortuous anatomy, achieving immediate flow stasis with parent-artery patency. At 12 months, the patient is asymptomatic with a contrast-opacified component reduced to 7 mm. This case supports using flow diversion for extracranial ICA aneurysms when anatomy is favorable, alongside careful antiplatelet therapy and planned imaging follow-up.

Introduction Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the primary treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Despite favorable early outcomes, lifelong surveillance is essential as endoleaks remain a major cause of reintervention. Among these, type II endoleaks (T2E) remain controversial regarding optimal management. This study aimed to identify factors associated with intervention for T2E using time-to-event analysis and predefined anatomic thresholds. Secondary objectives included comparing outcomes between T2E patients with (intT2E) and without (nointT2E) intervention. Methods A retrospective review of EVAR procedures from 2011-2024 was performed. Patients with newly diagnosed or persistent T2E were identified on completion and follow-up CT angiography. Patients were categorized as intT2E or nointT2E. Multivariable Cox regression evaluated time to first intervention, and logistic regression served as sensitivity analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves assessed freedom from intervention by inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) size. Results Among 207 EVAR patients, 78 (37.6%) developed T2E over a mean 3.4 ± 2.4 years. Nineteen (24.3%) required intervention. IntT2E patients were younger (74.9 ± 6.8 vs 78.3 ± 7.9 years, P = 0.02), had more frequent anticoagulation use (47.4% vs 20.3%, P = 0.02), larger IMAs (4.2 ± 0.6 vs 3.3 ± 0.7 mm, P < 0.01), and more lumbar arteries (6.0 ± 1.2 vs 5.0 ± 1.3, P = 0.02). IMAs >4 mm occurred in 68.4% of intT2E vs 8.5% of nointT2E ( P < 0.01). Mean sac growth was greater in intT2E (9.7 ± 5.3 mm vs −1.9 ± 6.5 mm, P < 0.01). Thirty-day complications following the index EVAR procedure, mid-term reinterventions, and overall mortality were similar between groups. Post-embolization, T2E resolved in 36.9%, with sac regression in 63.1%. Among embolized patients, 26.3% required a second embolization and one patient required 3 attempts without achieving resolution. IMA >4 mm independently predicted intervention (HR 7.18, 95% CI 1.97-26.16, P < 0.01). Logistic regression confirmed IMA >4 mm (OR 23.4, 95% CI 6.17-88.6, P < 0.01), >6 lumbar arteries (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.10-15.98, P = 0.02), and anticoagulation (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.17-10.6, P = 0.02) as predictors. Conclusions Approximately one-quarter of T2E patients required embolization. IMA >4 mm was the strongest predictor of intervention, while anticoagulation and increased lumbar artery number also increased risk. Management should prioritize risk-stratified surveillance and selective intervention.

Objective To evaluate outcomes in patients with type 2 endoleak (T2E) and the impact of treatment outside the device instructions for use (IFU). Methods This retrospective single-center study included abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) patients who underwent EVAR (2011- 2024). Primary outcomes were 30-day and mid-term complications, reintervention, and mortality by T2E status. Propensity score matching was applied and secondary analysis stratified outcomes by IFU compliance, comparing within ( in IFU) or outside( out IFU) IFU in each T2E group. Results Among 154 EVAR patients (137 men (89.1%) and 17 women (11.0%); mean age 77.5 ± 7.6 years), 77 were T2E(−), and 77 were T2E(+). Baseline characteristics were similar. Thirty-day complications were comparable (T2E(−): 5, 6.4% vs T2E(+): 2, 2.56%, P = 0.72). The mean follow-up duration was 2.7 ± 2.4 years. Sac diameter change (Δ) decreased in the T2E(−) (7.7 ± 8.4 mm) and enlarged in the T2E(+) (1.79 ± 12.5 mm; P < 0.01). Mid-term graft-related complications (T2E(−): 3, 3.8% vs T2E(+): 49, 62.8%, P < 0.01) and reinterventions (T2E(−): 3, 3.8%, vs T2E(+): 20, 25.6% P < 0.01) were higher in the T2E(+) with no difference in mortality ( P = 1.00). These findings remained after excluding type 1 endoleaks. Among the T2E(+), those treated out IFU had longer hospital stays ( out IFU: 3.0 ± 2.8 days vs in IFU: 1.8 ± 2.0 days, P = 0.03), higher T1E ( out IFU: 3, 33.3% vs in IFU: 1, 4.34%, P < 0.01), higher rates of reintervention ( out IFU: 9, 100.0% vs in IFU:17; 24.6%, P < 0.01) and higher all-cause mortality than those within IFU criteria ( out IFU: 5, 55.0% vs in IFU: 13, 18.8%, P < 0.01). IFU status did not significantly affect outcomes in T2E(−) patients. Conclusions T2E is associated with sac growth and increased reinterventions, but not higher mortality. On subgroup analysis, those T2E(+) treated out IFU had longer hospitalizations, higher T1E rates, more reinterventions, and higher all-cause; but not aneurysmal-related mortality.