Clinical Research|Articles in Press

Prophylactic Perigraft Arterial Sac Embolization During EVAR: Minimizing Type II Endoleaks and Improving Sac Regression

Published:March 09, 2023DOI:


      • Type of Research: Retrospective comparison between a single-center prospectively maintained database cohort and an IDE trial cohort.
      • Key Findings: In this study including patient who underwent EVAR with the Ovation stent graft, the use of prophylactic perigraft sac embolization was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of type II endoleak and sac expansion.
      • Take Home Message: Prophylactic perigraft sac embolization proves to be safe and effective in the prevention of type II endoleak and sac expansion.



      Type II endoleaks (ELII) are the most common complication following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Persistent type II endoleaks require continual surveillance and have been shown to increase the risk of Type I and III endoleaks, sac growth, need for intervention, conversion to open or even rupture directly or indirectly. These are often difficult to treat following EVAR and there are limited data regarding the effectiveness of prophylactic treatment of ELII. The aim of this study is to report midterm outcomes of prophylactic perigraft arterial sac embolization (pPASE) performed in patients undergoing EVAR.


      This is a comparison of two elective cohorts of those undergoing EVAR using the Ovation stent graft with and without prophylactic branch vessel and sac embolization. Patients who underwent pPASE at our institution had data collected in a prospective, IRB approved database. These were compared against the core lab adjudicated data from the Ovation IDE trial. Prophylactic PASE was performed at the time of EVAR with thrombin, contrast and gelfoam if lumbar or mesenteric arteries were patent. Endpoints included freedom from ELII, reintervention, sac growth, all-cause mortality (ACM) and aneurysm-related mortality (ARM).


      Thirty-six patients (13.1%) underwent pPASE, while 238 patients (86.9%) had standard EVAR. Median follow-up was 56 months (IQR 33-60). The 4-year freedom from ELII estimates were 84% for the pPASE vs 50.7% for the standard EVAR group (P=0.0002). All aneurysms in the pPASE group remained stable in size or demonstrated regression, whereas aneurysm sac expansion was seen in 10.9% of the standard EVAR group, P=0.03. At 4 years, mean AAA diameter decreased by 11mm (95% CI 8-15) in the pPASE group vs 5mm (95%CI 4-6) for the standard EVAR group, P=0.0005. There were no differences in the 4-year freedom from ACM and ARM. However, the difference in reintervention for ELII trended toward significance (0.0% vs 10.7%, P=0.1). On multivariable analysis, pPASE was associated with a 76% reduction in ELII [aHR(95%CI): 0.24 (0.08-0.65), P=0.005].


      These results suggest that pPASE in those undergoing EVAR is safe and effective in the prevention of EII and significantly improves sac regression over standard EVAR while minimizing the need for reintervention.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Annals of Vascular Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Dua A
        • Kuy S
        • Lee CJ
        • Upchurch GR
        • Desai SS
        Epidemiology of aortic aneurysm repair in the United States from 2000 to 2010.
        J Vasc Surg. 2014; 59: 1512-1517
        • Prinssen M
        • Verhoeven ELG
        • Buth J
        • et al.
        A randomized trial comparing conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms.
        N Engl J Med. 2004; 351: 1607-1618
        • Greenhalgh R
        Comparison of endovascular aneurysm repair with open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1), 30-day operative mortality results: randomised controlled trial.
        The Lancet. 2004; 364: 843-848
        • Lederle FA
        Outcomes Following Endovascular vs Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic AneurysmA Randomized Trial.
        JAMA. 2009; 302: 1535
        • Schaik TG van
        • Yeung KK
        • Verhagen HJ
        • et al.
        Long-term survival and secondary procedures after open or endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms.
        J Vasc Surg. 2017; 66: 1379-1389
        • Patel R
        • Sweeting MJ
        • Powell JT
        • Greenhalgh RM
        Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm in 15-years’ follow-up of the UK endovascular aneurysm repair trial 1 (EVAR trial 1): a randomised controlled trial.
        The Lancet. 2016; 388: 2366-2374
        • Lederle FA
        • Kyriakides TC
        • Stroupe KT
        • et al.
        Open versus Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.
        N Engl J Med. 2019; 380: 2126-2135
        • Avgerinos ED
        • Chaer RA
        • Makaroun MS
        Type II endoleaks.
        J Vasc Surg. 2014; 60: 1386-1391
        • Madigan MC
        • Singh MJ
        • Chaer RA
        • Al-Khoury GE
        • Makaroun MS
        Occult type I or III endoleaks are a common cause of failure of type II endoleak treatment after endovascular aortic repair.
        J Vasc Surg. 2019; 69: 432-439
        • Jones JE
        • Atkins MD
        • Brewster DC
        • et al.
        Persistent type 2 endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm is associated with adverse late outcomes.
        J Vasc Surg. 2007; 46: 1-8
        • Ultee KHJ
        • Büttner S
        • Huurman R
        • et al.
        Editor’s Choice – Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Treatment for Type II Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018; 56: 794-807
        • Li Q
        • Hou P
        Sac Embolization and Side Branch Embolization for Preventing Type II Endoleaks After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: A Meta-analysis.
        J Endovasc Ther. 2020; 27: 109-116
        • Fabre D
        • Mougin J
        • Mitilian D
        • et al.
        Prospective, Randomised Two Centre Trial of Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm With or Without Sac Embolisation.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2021; 61: 201-209
        • Mathlouthi A
        • Guajardo I
        • Al-Nouri O
        • Malas M
        • Barleben A
        Prophylactic Aneurysm Embolization during EVAR Is Safe, Improves Sac Regression and Decreases the Incidence of Type II Endoleak.
        Ann Vasc Surg. Published online February. 2021; 4 (00124-2): S0890-5096
        • Mehta M
        • Valdés FE
        • Nolte T
        • et al.
        One-year outcomes from an international study of the Ovation Abdominal Stent Graft System for endovascular aneurysm repair.
        J Vasc Surg. 2014; 59 (e1-3): 65-73
      1. Barleben A, Mathlouthi A, Mehta M, et al. Long-term outcomes of the Ovation Stent Graft System investigational device exemption trial for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. Published online April 2, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.01.066

        • AbuRahma AF
        • Campbell JE
        • Mousa AY
        • Hass SM
        • Stone PA
        • Jain A
        • et al.
        Clinical outcomes for hostile versus favorable aortic neck anatomy in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair using modular devices.
        J Vasc Surg. 2011 Jul; 54: 13-21
        • Ronsivalle S
        • Faresin F
        • Franz F
        • Rettore C
        • Zanchetta M
        • Olivieri A
        Aneurysm sac “thrombization” and stabilization in EVAR: A technique to reduce the risk of type II endoleak.
        Journal of Endovascular Therapy. 2010;
        • Van Marrewijk C. J
        • et al.
        Is a type II endoleak after EVAR a harbinger of risk? Causes and outcome of open conversion and aneurysm rupture during follow-up.
        European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery. 2004; 27: 128-137