PubMed2004
Technological advancements have lead to dramatic improvements in stentgraft device design resulting in more trackable delivery systems and transrenal uncovered stents and barbs for better fixation. Transrenal bare-stents may limit stentgraft migration, particularly in patients with short or flared proximal aortic necks. However, potential disadvantages might be in worsening renal function, particularly in patients with preexisting renal insufficiency. We retrospectively analyzed our recent 7 year experience of patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using a variety of stentgrafts with and without transrenal bare-stent fixation. Patients were divided into 2 groups; infrarenal fixation (IRF) vs transrenal fixation (TRF), or patients with preoperative serum Cr values that were normal (= or <1.5 mg/dl) vs slightly elevated (1.6-2 mg/dl), vs markedly elevated (2.1- 3.5 mg/dl). The exclusion criteria included patients with chronic renal insufficiency (CRI) on hemodialysis, and preoperative high-grade renal artery stenoses requiring angioplasty and stenting. Of 705 patients that underwent EVAR, 496 (IRF: 385 [78%], and TRF: 111 [22%]) were available with routine evaluations of serum Cr and CT scans. Preexisting comorbidities, mean procedure contrast volume, and postprocedure follow-up were similar in both groups. In the immediate postoperative period, mean serum Cr did not change significantly in either the IRF group (1.3+/-0.7 mg/dl to 1.2+/-0.9 mg/dl) or the TRF group (1.3+/-0.5 mg/dl to 1.3+/-0.6 mg/dl). Mean serum Cr did, however, significantly increase over longer follow-up in both groups: 1.4+/-0.8 mg/dl for IRF (P<0.03), and 1.5 +/- 0.8 mg/dl for TRF (P<0.01). Cr clearance was similarly unchanged in the immediate postoperative period (58+/-23 to 61+/-25 ml/min/1.73 m2 for IRF group, 53+/-17 to 55+/-17 ml/min/1.73 m2 for TRF group), but was significantly decreased in longer follow-up (53+/-23 ml/min/1.73 m2 for IRF, p<0.02: and 48+/-16 ml/min/1.73 m2 for TRF, P<0.01). There were no significant differences in serum Cr increase (p=0.19) or Cr clearance decrease (p=0.68) between the IRF and TRF groups. Small renal infarcts were noted in 6 patients (1.6%) in the IRF group, and in 8 patients (7%) in the TRF group (p=0.37). Of patients with normal preoperative renal function, renal dysfunction developed in 7.7% of IRF group and 6.1% of TRF group (p=0.76). In patients with preexisting CRI, renal dysfunction developed in 18.2% of IRF group, and 17.1% of TRF group (p=0.95). Eight patients with postoperative renal dysfunction, 5 (1.3%) from IRF group and 3 (2.7%) from TRF group subsequently required hemodialysis, and this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.91). We also analyzed 200 consecutive patients undergoing EVAR with intra-arterial contrast agents with and without preexisting CRI not on dialysis. The groups were identified on the basis of preprocedure serum Cr: group 1 (n=108), Cr less than 1.5 mg/dL (normal range); group 2 (n=65), Cr 1.5 to 2.0 mg/dL; group 3 (n=27), Cr 2.1 to 3.5 mg/dL. Routine precautions in patients with CRI included preoperative intravenous hydration with 2 L of normal saline solution, discontinuation of all nephrotoxic drugs, intraoperative administration of mannitol (0.5 g/kg intravenously), and use of nonionic, low osmolar intra-arterial contrast agent (Omnipaque 350). One-hundred and eight patients had normal renal function (group 1), and 92 patients had preexisting CRI with baseline Cr 1.5 to 2.0 mg/dL (group 2, n=65) or 2.1 to 3.5 mg/dL (group 3, n=27). Comorbid conditions included coronary artery disease (group 1, 51%; group 2, 49%; group 3, 59%), hypertension (group 1, 39%; group 2, 46%; group 3, 52%), and diabetes mellitus (group 1, 25%; group 2, 35%; group 3, 48%). In groups 1, 2, and 3, the mean volume of low osmolar contrast agent used was 210 cc, 160 cc, 130 cc, respectively; hemodynamic instability developed in 3, 1, and 1 patient, respectively. The incidence of postoperative complications between the 3 study groups was not statistically different. In grications between the 3 study groups was not statistically different. In group 1 a transient increase in serum Cr (>30% over baseline and >1.4 mg/dL) was noted in 3 patients (2.7%), 2 of whom (1.9%) required temporary hemodialysis and 1 (0.9%) who died of renal failure. In group 2 a transient increase in serum Cr was noted in 2 patients (3.1%); both patients (3.1%) required temporary hemodialysis, and 1 patient (1.5%) died of renal failure. In group 3 a transient increase in serum Cr was noted in 2 patients (7.4%); 1 patient (3.7%) required temporary hemodialysis, and 1 patient (3.7%) died of renal failure. Perioperative hypotension significantly increased the risk for elevated serum Cr and death (p<0.05), and larger contrast volume was associated with an increase in serum Cr (p<0.05) during the postoperative period. Following EVAR renal function declines slightly with both IRF and TRF. Our data show no overall difference between patients with IRF and TRF with respect to infarcts, decline in renal function, or onset of dialysis. There were a slightly greater number of renal infarcts in the TRF group, but these infarcts were clinically inconsequential. In patients with CRI, EVAR with intra-arterial radiographic contrast agents is believed to impair renal function, and CRI is considered a relative contraindication to the procedure. Results of our investigation indicate that risk for worsening renal insufficiency, dialysis, and death is only slightly and not significantly greater in patients with CRI compared with patients with normal renal function. With appropriate precautions of avoiding perioperative hypotension and limiting the volume of nonionic contrast agents, CRI need not be a contraindication for EVAR with intra-arterial contrast agents.