Endovascular therapy is a new evolving method. Due to its less invasive nature, fewer complications, and shorter hospital stay, ET is getting more and more popular among patients and health service providers (
4). On the other hand, according to the trans-atlantic intersociety consensus (TASC) II recommendations concerning type C and D lesions, the first choice of treatment should be surgery (aortofemoral bypass) as the gold standard (
1). The aforementioned procedure might not always be feasible, in as much as, patients are mostly aged and there are several contraindications for surgery. Therefore, a smaller number of people can benefit from surgery compared to endovascular therapy. Moreover, there are different studies that confirm safety, efficacy, and promising outcomes of endovascular therapy, although the number of studies is limited and insufficient (
2,
8). Different methods such as using bare stents, covered stents or different placement methods have been studied but more thorough evaluations are yet suggested (
3,
8,
13-
17). As mentioned before, the rate of utilizing this method among different centers has been ascending during the past few years (
18).
The first thing that matters in view of some experts is the possibility of using endovascular method instead of surgery to meet the need of more patients and to decrease mortality and morbidity of the treatment, yet achieving acceptable results. So, comparing these two methods is crucial to our study. In our study, we found a 83.3% primary patency rate in one year. Lun et al. reported a 93.6% patency rate for the similar time period (
19). However, our result does not have a significant difference from theirs (83.3% vs. 93.6%; P value = 0.409). In another study conducted by Psacharopulo et al., a comparison was made between two groups who underwent either endovascular repair (EVR) or open surgery repair (OSR) for TASC II type D lesions (
8). Two-year patency rate for EVR and OSR was 94% and 97%, respectively, meaning that no significant (P = 0.50) difference was present between the groups. However, what drew attention was the frequency and diversity of complications in the two groups. In EVR group, in the 33 limbs that were treated, only two cases faced unilateral occlusion after the procedure, both of which were managed and treated well with no serious problems afterwards (at 19 months). In the OSR group, two self-limited acute renal failures were seen out of 36 limbs, one unilateral occlusion at 19 months, and one bilateral occlusion at 33 months, and one case of pneumonia at the second day after surgery was seen. Two patients who were on double anti-platelet therapy underwent surgery again due to hemoperitoneum and one incisional hernia happened at 18 months that needed surgery. Just like the EVR group, in our study, there were no major complications but one acute unilateral thrombosis which we believe happened due to the presence of distal disease and insufficient outflow. The deceased cases all had severe concomitant diseases and surgery was a contraindication for them and as mentioned before ET was a limb-saving treatment for them. The mortality, in fact, was not a result of the procedure but it seemed to be a result of the patient’s bad cardiac status and it could have happened with higher chances if patients underwent surgery.
| Study | Lesion Type | Stent Type | Number of Cases | Primary Patency Rate |
|---|
| | Bare | Covered | | |
|---|
| Lammer et al. (26), 2000 | TASCII B, C, D | | + | 61 L | 91% / 12 months |
| Ali et al. (27), 2003 | TASCII C, D | | + | 22 L | 84% / 24 months |
| Rzucidlo et al. (13), 2003 | TASCII B, C, D | | + | 34 L | 70% / 12 months |
| Wiesinger et al. (28), 2005 | TASCII A, B, C, D | | + | 60 L | 90.7% / 12 months |
| Chang et al. (14), 2008 | TASCII C, D | | + | 193 L | 87% / 5 years |
| Sabri et al. (15), 2010 | TASCII A, B, C, D | | + | 26 L | 92 / 24 months |
| Mwipatayi et al. (29), 2011 | TASCII B, C, D | | + | 81 L | 92% / 18 months |
| Bosiers et al. (30), 2013 | TASCII C, D | | + | 91 L | 91.1% / 12 months |
| Humphries et al. (16), 2014 | TASCII A, B, C, D | | + | 64 L | 72% / 3 years |
| Aihara et al. (2), 2014 | TASCII C, D | + | | 190 P | 87% / 12 months |
| Shen et al. (18), 2015 | TASCII D | + | + | 60 L | 93.6% / 12 months |
| Psacharopolo et al. (3), 2015 | TASCII D | | + | 33 L | 90.9% / 24 months |
| Grimme et al. (4), 2015 | TASCII B, C, D | | + | 70 P | 90.2% / 6 month |
| | | | 49 P | 87.3% / 12 months |
| Kasemi et al. (9), 2015 | TASCII D | + | + | 21 P | 95.2% / 12 months |
| | | | 21 P | 90.5% / 3 years |
| This study | TASCII D | + | | 24 L | 92.3% / 3 months |
| | | | 22 L | 90.9% / 6 months |
| | | | 18 L | 83.3% / 12 months |
Abbreviations: L, Limbs; P, Patients; TASC, trans-atlantic intersociety consensus.
In studies formerly performed, the 2-year patency rates reported varied between 58 and 95% (
20-
25). Aihara et al. reported an 87% patency rate for one year of follow-up that shows no significant difference with our result, although the complication rate in their study was 6.3%. Moreover, their patients suffered from different types of lesions with a dominancy of TASC II C and D, which can lead to better results due to complexity of type D lesions (
10). Another study conducted by Shen et al. demonstrated a 93.6% patency rate for one-year post-endovascular therapy (
11). The study population they used had a similar sexual and smoking distribution with our population; however, 53% of our patients had diabetes mellitus versus 28% in their study. It should be mentioned again that outcome differences could be a result of the fact that both studies involved a limited number of cases. Finally, in a study carried out by Grimme et al. using covered endovascular reconstruction of the aortic bifurcation (CERAB) technique to treat aortoiliac occlusive disease, they reported 90.2 and 87.3 % patency rates for 6 months and 1 year of follow-up, compared to 90.9% and 83.3%, respectively in our study (
13). Other comparable results are major complications which were lower in their case [1.9% vs 6%] and technical success that was higher in our study [95% vs 100%]. Resembling most other studies, their lesions were not exclusively TASC II type D and some were type B and C that could similarly end in higher patency rates. Finally, Kasemi et al. used a different ET technique and stents for 22 patients (bare metal stents in kissing configuration in nine cases, covered stents in kissing configuration in nine patients and the aortic bifurcation reconstruction with the Y-guidewire configuration technique in four patients). He reported 95.2% at 1 year and 90.5% at 3 years as primary patency rates and states that different stent types and configurations used for the aortoiliac endovascular treatment offer all the benefits of these materials for treatment on a case-by-case basis. A comparison and list of studies on endovascular treatment for aortoiliac lesions can be found in
Table 3.
One last topic that is of importance is to understand the factors that have an impact on the chance of re-occlusion of the lesion at the stent site. Although due to the limited number of cases in our study, a comparison could not be performed, other studies found interesting results that are attention worthy. Yilmaz et al., according to acquired data, believe that comparable results to surgery can be achieved in patients over 50 years of age who had an appropriate stent configuration and placement (
30). However, Aihara et al. mentioning the latter study, states that they found that independent influencing factors are female gender and percentage of patent diameter in comparison to proximal aorta diameter after the procedure, not the stent type and configuration. Moreover, Aihara et al. brought to attention that their population of study was older patients and it might have caused the difference (
2). Another study could not find a correlation between patency rate and diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, renal disease, coronary artery diseases or carotid disease among patients who underwent CRAB (
3).
Patients suffering from aortoiliac occlusive disease and generally, peripheral arterial disease are older patients with a background of HLP, smoking and due to a similar pathophysiology, concomitant cardiac disease is prevalent among them (
1). Open surgery has been shown to have a higher mortality risk in older individuals or those with congestive heart failure, ischemic heart disease, pulmonary insufficiency, ischemic ulcers or gangrene (
31). Therefore, aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) patients are at high risk for surgery. In addition, many patients have low life expectancy due to medical conditions especially cardiac diseases and the need for longer patency might lose importance which can introduce endovascular therapy as the first choice specifically in older patients with comorbidities. Even though primary patency rates can be lower in aortoiliac stenting compared to surgery (
32), since re-intervention and further surgeries remain feasible, endovascular treatment could be considered valuable.
Endovascular therapy seems pretty attractive and safe since it contains a small number of complications most of which are minor and can be easily managed and the length of hospital stay is significantly lower. From another perspective, the non-invasive nature of procedure assures that re-intervention remains an option for occlusions (
33). The latter is probably one of the reasons that secondary patency rates are higher than primary patency rates (
3,
5,
8). Any other interventions for several purposes could be undertaken very soon. Of the issues that might make surgeons think twice when deciding to re-open a patient with a previous bypass surgery are adhesions in the abdomen and pelvis. This issue is minimal in endovascular therapy and could be counted as privilege. However, there is not much documented evidence concerning the issue, but it seems pretty obvious to most of the surgeons. Endovascular therapy also has better short-term economic results compared to surgery (
4).
The small number of cases that were analyzed alongside not long follow-up can be considered as the limitations of this study. However, since the number of total aortoiliac occlusion cases is low, even small studies could be guiding. Furthermore, the nature of the study that did not involve control groups or open surgical groups is another factor. Finally, since different studies have been carried out in different population groups with different genetics and environmental backgrounds sometimes comparisons could be misleading.
In conclusion, according to the current study and other similar studies, it could be concluded that endovascular therapy is a viable treatment choice for patients suffering from total infra-renal bilateral aortoiliac occlusion lesions. Since fewer and less threatening complications are present, less morbidity and mortality and acceptable patency rate is expected, this treatment option can be specifically considered for high-risk patients medical status wise. Further and more thorough evaluations of the clinical outcomes, with clinical trials and cohort studies, are suggested.