Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2016 Nov 23;19(4):281-287.
doi: 10.1007/s40477-016-0222-5. eCollection 2016 Dec.

What is the role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of the endoleak of aortic endoprostheses? A comparison between CEUS and CT on a widespread scale

E David  1 , V Cantisani  2 , H Grazhdani  3 , L Di Marzo  4 , L Venturini  4 , F Fanelli  2 , M Di Segni  2 , N Di Leo  2 , L Brunese  5 , F Calliada  6 , M Ciccariello  2 , A Bottari  1 , G Ascenti  1 , F D'Ambrosio  2
Affiliations
Comparative Study

What is the role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of the endoleak of aortic endoprostheses? A comparison between CEUS and CT on a widespread scale

E David et al. J Ultrasound. .

Abstract
in English, Italian

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in comparison to CT angiography (CTA) to identify and classify endoleaks following abdominal aortic aneurism repair with endoprosthesis.

Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis of 181 patients treated with EVAR, from September 2009 to September 2014, was performed. Patients were evaluated with CEUS, CTA and angiography in the cases requiring treatment. Sac diameter, sac integrity, identification and classification of endoleaks were taken into consideration. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and negative predictive values were considered for each modality of endoleak identification.

Results: Forty-two endoleaks (23.2%; type II: 39 cases, type III: 3 cases) were documented. Sensitivity and specificity of CEUS and CT were, respectively, 97.6 and 90.5, 100 and 100%. In two cases, CEUS was able to better classify endoleaks compared to CT.

Conclusions: CEUS accuracy to identify endoleaks following EVAR is similar to CT. CEUS should be considered as an effective modality for the long-term surveillance of EVAR because of its capability to correctly classify endoleaks with no ionizing radiation exposure.

Obiettivi dello studio: Valutare l’accuratezza dell’eco-contrastografia (CEUS), confrontandola con angiografia con tomografia computerizzata (CT) per l’identificazione degli endoleak dopo trattamento di aneurisma dell’aorta addominale con endoprotesi.

Materiali: Da Settembre 2008 a Dicembre 2014, 181 pazienti consecutivi trattati con EVAR sono stati valutati con CEUS, CTA, ed anche con angiografia nei casi da ritrattare. Sono stati valutati: diametro della sacca, valutazione dell’integrita della sacca, identificazione e classificazione degli endoleaks. Sensibilità, specificità, accuratezza e valore predittivo negativo sono stati valutati per ogni modalita nell’identificazione degli endoleak.

Risultati: Quarantadue endoleak (23.2%; tipo II: 39 casi, tipo III: 3 casi) sono stati documentati. La Sensibilita della CEUS e della TC e stata rispettivamente del 97.6, 90.5%, mentre la specificita per entrambe e stata del 100%. In due casi la CEUS e stata in grado di classificare meglio gli endoleak rispetto alla CT. La sacca aneurismatica presentava alla CEUS e CDUS un diametro massimo compreso tra 39-82 mm, mentre alla TC tra 38 e 78 mm, senza significativa differenza tra le due metodiche.

Conclusioni: L’accuratezza della CEUS nell’identificazione degli endoleak e nella misurazione della sacca dopo EVAR, e simile alla TC con maggiore sensibilita ma analoga specificita. La CEUS e da considerarsi una modalita efficace per la sorveglianza a lungo termine degli EVAR in quanto capace di classificare correttamente gli endoleak senza esposizione a radiazioni ionizzanti.

Keywords: CT; Contrast-enhanced ultrasound; Endoleak.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Compliance with ethical standards Funding This study was not funded. Conflict of interest Vito Cantisani lectured for Bracco, Samsung, Toshiba and Fabrizio Calliada lectured for Hitachi and Mindray but they did not receive funding. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Ethical approval All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Contrast-enhanced CT (CTA) did not reveal any clear sign of endoleak. CEUS showed endoleak (Fig. 2)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
CEUS clearly depicts a case of endoleak
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. United Kingdom EVAR Trial Investigators. Greenhalgh RM, Brown LC, Powell JT, et al. Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(20):1863–1871. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0909305. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Biancari F, Catania A, D’Andrea V. Elective endovascular vs. open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in patients aged 80 years and older: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;42(5):571–576. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2011.07.011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cao P, De Rango P, Verzini F, Parlani G. Endoleak after endovascular aortic repair: classification, diagnosis and management following endovascular thoracic and abdominal aortic repair. J Cardiovasc Surg. 2010;51(1):53–69. - PubMed
    1. Mehta M, Sternbach Y, Taggert JB. Long-term outcomes of secondary procedures after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52(6):1442–1449. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.06.110. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Corriere MA, Feurer ID, Becker SY. Endoleak following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: implications for duration of screening. Ann Surg. 2004;239(6):800–805. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000128300.60156.ab. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources