The Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Automated Angiography in Type II Endoleaks Detection: Comparison with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound

الملخص EN

Introduction.

Iodinated contrast media completion angiography (ICM-A) may underestimate the presence of type II endoleak (ELII) after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), particularly if they are at low flow.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has been proposed as the gold standard in ELII detection during EVAR follow-up.

Intraprocedural carbon dioxide (CO2) angiography has been shown to be useful in this setting; however no comparative studies including these three techniques are currently available.

Our aim was to investigate the accuracy of a new automated CO2 angiographic (CO2-A) system in the detection of ELII, by comparing it with ICM-A and CEUS.

Methods.

A series of consecutive patients undergoing EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were enrolled and submitted to ICM-A and CO2-A during the procedure.

The iodinated contrast media were delivered through an automatic injector connected to a pigtail catheter in the suprarenal aorta.

CO2 was delivered through a recently available automatic injector connected to a 10 F sheath positioned in the external iliac artery.

All patients were blindly evaluated by CEUS within postoperative day 1.

The ICM-A and CO2-A ability to detect ELII was compared with that of CEUS through Cohen’s concordance Index (K).

Results.

Twenty-one patients were enrolled in the study.

One (5%), seven (33%), and four (19%) ELII were detected by ICM-A, CO2-A, and CEUS, respectively.

The only ELII detected by ICM-A was also detected by CO2-A and CEUS.

Three cases of ELII detected by CO2-A were not detected by CEUS.

All ELII detected by CEUS were visualized by CO2-A.

CEUS and ICM-A showed a poor agreement (Cohen’s K: 0.35) while CEUS and CO2-A showed a substantial agreement (Cohen’s K: 0.65) for ELII detection.

Conclusion.

CO2-A is safe and effective method for ELII detection in EVAR, with a significantly higher agreement with CEUS if compared with ICM-A.

This trial is registered with 155/2015/U/Oss.