Outcomes of Anterior Versus Posterior Divisional Branches of the Hypogastric Artery as Distal Landing Zone for Iliac Branch Devices: The International Multicentric R3OYAL Registry

D'Oria, Mario; Lima, Guilherme B. B.; Dias, Nuno; Parlani, Giambattista; Farber, Mark; Tsilimparis, Nikolaos; DeMartino, Randall; Timaran, Carlos; Kolbel, Tilo; Gargiulo, Mauro; Milner, Ross; Melissano, Germano; Maldonado, Thomas; Mani, Kevin; Tenorio, Emanuel R.; Oderich, Gustavo S.; Karelis, Angelos; Sonesson, Bjorn; Lepidi, Sandro; Simonte, Gioele; Isernia, Giacomo; Motta, Fernando; Oz, Tugce; Stana, Jan; Mendes, Bernardo; Scott, Carla; Haack, Kirsten; Gallitto, Enrico; Logiacco, Antonino; Babrowski, Trissa; Bertoglio, Luca; Grandi, Alessandro und Wanhainen, Anders (2022): Outcomes of Anterior Versus Posterior Divisional Branches of the Hypogastric Artery as Distal Landing Zone for Iliac Branch Devices: The International Multicentric R3OYAL Registry. In: Journal of Endovascular Therapy

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this multicentric registry was to assess the outcomes of anteRior versus posteRior divisional bRanches Of the hYpogastric artery as distAl landing zone for iLiac branch devices (R3OYAL). Methods: The main exposure of interest for the purpose of this study was the internal iliac artery (IIA) divisional branch (anterior vs posterior) that was used as distal landing zone. Early endpoints included technical success and adverse events. Late endpoints included survival, primary/secondary IIA patency, and IIA branch instability. Results: A total of 171 patients were included in the study, of which 50 received bilateral implantation of iliac branch devices (IBDs). This resulted in a total of 221 incorporated IIAs included in the final analysis, of which 40 were anterior divisional branches and 181 were posterior divisional branches. Technical success was high in both groups (anterior division: 98% vs posterior division: 100%, P = .18). Occurrence of any adverse event was noted in 14% of patients in both groups (P = 1.0). The overall rate of freedom from the composite IBD branch instability did not show significant differences between patients receiving distal landing in the anterior or posterior division of the IIA at 3 years (79% vs 87%, log-rank test = .215). The 3-year estimates of IBD patency were significantly lower in patients who received distal landing in the anterior divisional branch than those who received distal landing in the posterior divisional branch (primary patency: 81% vs 96%, log-rank test = .009;secondary patency: 81% vs 97%, log-rank test < .001). Conclusions: The use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the IIA as distal landing zone for IBD implantation shows comparable profiles in terms of immediate technical success, perioperative safety, and side-branch instability up to 3 years. However, IBD patency at 3 years was higher when the distal landing zone was achieved within the posterior divisional branch of the IIA. Clinical Impact The results from this large multicentric registry confirm that use of the anterior or posterior divisional branches of the internal iliac artery (IIA) as distal landing zone for implantation of iliac branch devices (IBD) shows comparable profiles of safety and feasibility, thereby allowing to extend the indications for endovascular repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms to cases with unsuitable anatomy within the IIA main trunk. Although mid-term rates of device durability and branch instability seem to be similar, the rates of primary and secondary IBD patency at three years was favored when the distal landing zone was achieved in the posterior divisional branch of the IIA.

• Dokumententyp: Zeitschriftenartikel
• Fakultät: Medizin
• Themengebiete: 600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften > 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
• ISSN: 1526-6028
• Sprache: Englisch