2018 Volume 11 Issue 1 Pages 91-95
Objective: We evaluated early and mid-term results of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) using crossed-limb and non-crossed-limb techniques.
Material and Methods: From December 2011 to October 2013, 37 patients (31 men; mean age 75.4 years) were treated with EVAR (crossed-limb, 21 and non-crossed-limb, 16). We compared technical success, maximum short-axis diameter of abdominal aortic aneurysm, iliac angulation, time for catheterization of the short contralateral limb gate of the main body (SCT), and complications between the groups.
Results: The mean follow-up period was 810±230 days. The technical success rate was 100%. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of mean short-axis diameter. Iliac angulation was significantly wider in the crossed-limb group (53.3±14.6 vs. 39.4±13.0, p=0.0049). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of SCT. Limb occlusion occurred in two cases (one crossed-limb and one non-crossed-limb). There were no aneurysm-related deaths.
Conclusion: There were no differences between the crossed-limb and non-crossed-limb techniques in terms of early and mid-term results of EVAR. A crossed-limb technique can be performed safely without prolonged SCT even in severely splayed iliac angulation cases.
